REPUBLIC REPUBLIIEK OF VAN SOUTH AFRICA SUID-AFRIKA
PROVINCE OF THE EASTERN CAPE IPHONDO LEMPUMA KOLONI PROVINSIE OOS-KAAP
Provincial Gazette Igazethi Yephondo Provinsiale Koerant
BISHO/ No. 3362 Vol. 22 3130 MARCH 2015 KING WILLIAM’S TOWN, (Extraordinary)
We oil hawm he power to preftvent kllDc AIDS HEIRINE 0800 012 322
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Prevention is the cure
N.B. The Government Printing Works will not be held responsible for the quality of “Hard Copies” or “Electronic Files” submitted for publication purposes
501128—A 3362—1 2 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
IMPORTANT NOTICE The Government Printing Works will not be held responsible for faxed documents not received due to errors on the fax machine or faxes received which are unclear or incomplete. Please be advised that an “OK” slip, received from a fax machine, will not be accepted as proof that documents were received by the GPW for printing. If documents are faxed to the GPW it will be the sender’s respon- sibility to phone and confirm that the documents were received in good order. Furthermore the Government Printing Works will also not be held responsible for cancellations and amendments which have not been done on original documents received from clients.
CONTENTS • INHOUD Page Gazette No. No. No.
PROVINCIAL NOTICE
13 National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (10/2004): Publishing of the Final Bioregional Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality...... 3 3362
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 3
PROVINCIAL NOTICE
No. 13
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM
PUBLISHING OF THE FINAL BIOREGIONAL PLAN FOR THE NELSON MANDELA BAY MUNICIPALITY AS PER SECTIONS 47 (2), 99 (1), 99 (2)(C), 100 (1)(a) AND 100(2).
I, Sakhumzi Somyo, Member of the Executive Council responsible for Economic Development, Environmental Affairs and Tourism in the Province of the Eastern Cape, acting in terms of section 40 (1) of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No 10 of 2004)hereby publish the Final Bioregional Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality for implementation.
The boundary of the bioregion for the bioregional plan is the boundary of the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (NMBM) in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa in terms of section 40 (1) (a) (b) of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No 10 of 2004), as per Provincial Gazette for Eastern Cape No. 3191, 03 June 2014, Vol. 21.
A copy of NMBM Final Bioregional Plan can be viewed on the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality website at www.nelsonmandelabay.gov.za
- ......
.akh zi Somyo
MEC for Department of Economic Development, Environmental Affairs and Tourism Date: Ul 2-(7/
4 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality Final Bioregional Plan
November 2014
fnelson mandela bay MUNICIPALITY
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 5
Page iii Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality Final Bioregional Plan
Executive Summary This final Bioregional Plan relates to the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. As this is the first Bioregional Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality it does not replace any previously published Bioregional Plan.
The purpose of the final Bioregional Plan is to provide a map of biodiversity priorities and accompanying guidelines to inform land-use planning, environmental assessment and authorisations, and natural resource management by a range of sectors whose policies and decisions impact on biodiversity.
The Bioregional Plan is a spatial plan that shows terrestrial and aquatic features that are critical for conserving biodiversity and maintaining ecosystem functioning. These areas are referred to as Critical Biodiversity Areas and Ecological Support Areas. In addition, the Bioregional Plan provides a profile of priority biodiversity in the bioregion, outlines other measures for effective management of biodiversity, and includes recommendations for review, monitoring and updating. The Bioregional Plan is underpinned by the Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (SRK Consulting, 2010), a systematic biodiversity plan that was developed according to established protocols.
It is important to note that the conservation assessment was developed in a manner that attempts to minimise potential conflict between biodiversity and other forms of land-use to the greatest extent possible. Consequently, the final Bioregional Plan is consistent with the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004), and meets all the requirements of the Guideline regarding the Determination of Bioregions and the Preparation and Publication of Bioregional Plans (DEAT, 2008).
The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA; Act No. 107 of 1998) requires that all organs of state must take biodiversity considerations into account in their decision-making. The Bioregional Plan facilitates this by serving as the official reference for biodiversity priorities within the bioregion, superseding all the previous non-published spatial biodiversity plans.
The plan supports the principles of integrated development planning and sustainable development espoused by the NEMA by identifying the biodiversity conservation priority in the municipal area, as well as other natural areas that could potentially be made available for other land-uses. The plan is consistent with the NEM: Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004), the National Biodiversity Framework (2009), and South Africa’s commitments in terms of international agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (1993) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Furthermore, the plan was developed in an integrated manner with the Municipal Spatial Development Framework (SDF), which is a spatial articulation of the Municipal Integrated Development Plan (IDP), in order to identify an optimal balance between biodiversity conservation and other sector needs.
The objectives of the Bioregional Plan are to:
x Form the primary biodiversity informant for land-use and resource use decision-making;
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
6 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page iv
x Identify a network of Critical Biodiversity Areas that achieve national biodiversity thresholds on the least amount of land possible; and
x Act as the spatial framework and policy for sustainable development and to assist the municipality in complying with environmental and planning legislation requirements which promote the protection and management of biodiversity.
The Bioregional Plan should be used by all sectors that are involved in land-use planning and decision- making and multi-sectoral planning. The users of the Bioregional Plan include mandatory users, i.e. those who are compelled to consider the Bioregional Plan, and other intended users for whom the Bioregional Plan will be a useful planning and developmental tool. The Bioregional Plan has three main uses:
1. Reactive decision-making, such as environmental impact assessment, agricultural land-use decisions and development control decisions through land-use legislation (e.g. rezoning, planning approvals etc.);
2. Proactive forward planning, such as IDPs, SDFs and zoning schemes; and
3. Proactive conservation, such as, biodiversity stewardship initiatives and the expansion of protected areas.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 7
Page v Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...... iii Disclaimer ...... viii Acknowledgements ...... viii List of Abbreviations ...... ix Glossary ...... ix 1 Part A: Introduction and Scope of Report ...... 1 1.1 Purpose and Objectives of the Bioregional Plan ...... 1 1.2 Intended Users and Uses of the Bioregional Plan ...... 2 1.3 Limitations ...... 4 2 Part B: Biodiversity Profile ...... 5 2.1 Significance of the Biodiversity within the Bioregion ...... 5 2.2 Important Terrestrial Features ...... 7 2.3 Important Freshwater Features ...... 10 2.4 Important Coastal Features and Estuaries ...... 11 2.5 Important Ecological Corridors ...... 11 2.6 Patterns of Land-Use ...... 12 2.7 Ecosystem Protection Level within the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipal Area ...... 13 2.8 Description of Critical Biodiversity Areas ...... 13 3 Part C: Critical Biodiversity Areas Map ...... 16 4 Part D: Guidelines ...... 17 5 Part E: Other measures for effective management ...... 34 5.1 Planning ...... 34 5.1.1 Protected Area Expansion...... 34 5.1.2 Ecosystems and Species Requiring Biodiversity Management Plans ...... 36 5.1.3 Tracking of biodiversity loss ...... 37 5.2 Operation and management ...... 37 5.2.1 Invasive Alien Species Management ...... 37 5.2.2 Priority Areas for Rehabilitation and Restoration ...... 38 5.3 Mainstreaming ...... 38 5.3.1 Institutional Arrangements...... 38 5.3.2 Awareness-raising ...... 39 5.4 Building a Biodiversity Economy ...... 39 5.4.1 Ecotourism ...... 39 5.4.2 Nature-based Development Models ...... 40 5.4.3 Game Reserves and Game Farming ...... 40 5.4.4 Skills Development and Training ...... 40 5.4.5 Natural Resource Use ...... 41 5.4.6 Payment for Ecosystem Services ...... 41
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
8 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page vi
5.4.7 Expanded Public Works Programme ...... 41 6 Part F: Monitoring, reviewing and updating ...... 42 6.1 Review ...... 42 6.2 Monitoring ...... 42 6.2.1 Monitoring instruments ...... 42 6.2.2 Monitoring Indicators ...... 43 6.3 Updating ...... 44 7 Part G: GIS files ...... 45 8 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 46 9 References ...... 47 Appendices ...... 49 Appendix A: Systematic Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (SRK Consulting, 2010) ...... 50 Appendix B: Extended Biodiversity Profile ...... 51 Appendix C: A4 map of Critical Biodiversity Areas ...... 52
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 9
Page vii List of Tables Table 1-1: The mandatory and recommended users of the Bioregional Plan...... 2 Table 2-1: Key to Figure 2-3 vegetation type numbers ...... 7 Table 2-2: An overview of the Ecosystem Threat Status of the vegetation types of the NMBM area (Stewart et al., 2008) ...... 8 Table 2-3: Distribution of conservation areas within the municipal area (SRK Consulting, 2010) ...... 13 Table 2-4: Description of Critical Biodiversity Areas and other categories ...... 14 Table 4-1: Biodiversity-compatible land-use guidelines matrix - Category descriptions and management objectives ...... 17 Table 4-2: Recommended land and resource (water) use management guidelines in Critical Biodiversity Areas and other categories on the CBA map ...... 19 Table 4-3: Definitions of biodiversity-compatible land-use types ...... 27 Table 4-4: Definitions of moderate impact rural land-use types ...... 29 Table 4-5: Definitions of high impact agricultural land-uses ...... 31 Table 4-6: Definitions of high impact urban and industrial land-uses ...... 33 Table 7-1: Outline of the shapefiles included in the data package ...... 45
List of Figures Figure 2-1: Biodiversity hotspots of the world (Conservation International, 2005) ...... 5 Figure 2-2: The biomes within Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (Stewart et al., 2008) ...... 6 Figure 2-3: The historical distribution of natural vegetation types in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (Stewart et al., 2008) ...... 7 Figure 2-4: The Ecosystem Threat Status of vegetation types within the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (Stewart et al., 2008) ...... 9 Figure 2-5: Patterns of land-use in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (SRK Consulting, 2010) ...... 12 Figure 2-6: Implementation sites in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (SRK Consulting, 2010) ...... 15 Figure 3-1: Map of Critical Biodiversity Areas within the municipal area ...... 16
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
10 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page viii Disclaimer The opinions expressed in this Report have been based on the information supplied to SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (SRK) by the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (NMBM). The opinions in this Report are provided in response to a specific request from NMBM to do so. SRK has exercised all due care in reviewing the supplied information. Whilst SRK has compared key supplied data with expected values, the accuracy of the results and conclusions from the report are entirely reliant on the accuracy and completeness of the supplied data. SRK does not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions in the supplied information and does not accept any consequential liability arising from commercial decisions or actions resulting from them. Opinions presented in this report apply to the site conditions and features as they existed at the time of SRK’s investigations, and those reasonably foreseeable. These opinions do not necessarily apply to conditions and features that may arise after the date of this Report, about which SRK had no prior knowledge nor had the opportunity to evaluate.
Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the following contributors to, or reviews of, the Bioregional Plan and Systematic Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality:
Joram Mkosana, Abigail Kamineth, Stuart Beattie, Schalk Potgieter, Jill Miller, Nadia Wessels, Alan de Vries, the late Wesley Berrington, Jeff Manuel, Dr Tammy Smith, Dr Stephen Holness, Wilma Lutsch, Kiruben Naicker, Rob Gardiner, Prof. Richard Cowling, Dr Mandy Lombard, Dr Paul Martin, Dr Dave Balfour, Dr Derek du Preez, Dawn McCarthy, Kithi Ngesi, Adri Scholtz, the NMBM Drawing Office staff, Albert Mfenyana, Phumla Mzazi-Geja, Noluthando Bam, Lulama Macanda, Andries Struwig, Nicholas Scarr, Alan Southwood, the Table Mountain Fund, Dr Matthieu Rouget, Deryk Langman, Denise Davies, Arthur Rump, Eckart Schumann, An van Cauter, Rebecca Sims-Castley, Dr Bill Branch, Werner Conradie, Lloyd Wingate, Fred Kigozi, Jamie Pote, Kristal Maze, Mark Botha, Amrei von Hase, Andrew Knight, Tania Katzschner, Dr Mandy Cadman, Dr Debra Roberts and Richard Boon.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 11
Page ix List of Abbreviations
C.A.P.E. Cape Action for People and the Environment Programme CBA Critical Biodiversity Area CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CDF Conservation Development Framework ESA Ecological Support Area CETT Corporate EIA Task Team DEA Department of Environmental Affairs (National) DEAT former Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (National) DEDEAT Department of Economic Development, Environmental Affairs and Tourism (Eastern Cape Province) DFA Development Facilitation Act, 1995 (Act No. 67 of 1995) DMR Department of Mineral Resources DWS Department of Water and Sanitation ECBCP Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan ECPTA Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIP Environmental Implementation Plan EMF Environmental Management Framework EMP Environmental Management Plan or Programme ESA Ecosystem Support Area EPWP Extended Public Works Programme IDP Integrated Development Plan LUPO Land Use Planning Ordinance, 1985 (Ordinance No. 15 of 1985) MDTTT Multi-Disciplinary Technical Task Team MPRDA Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act NEMA National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998) NEM: BA National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act, 2004 (Act No. 10 of 2004) NEM: PA National Environmental Management Protected Areas Act, 2003 (Act No. 57 of 2003) NMBM Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SDF Spatial Development Framework SPLUMA Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, 2013 (Act No. 16 of 2013) STEP Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Programme Glossary
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
12 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page x
Biodiversity The variability among living organisms from all sources including, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part and also includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems.
Biome A biome is a regional-scale ecosystem characterized by distinct types of vegetation, animals, and microbes that have developed under specific soil and climatic conditions.
C.A.P.E. Cape Action for People and the Environment Programme is a multi-party government and civil society initiative to conserve biodiversity, while creating benefits for all the people of the Cape Floristic Region.
CoastCare The CoastCare programme consists of projects and products that contribute to the goals and objectives of the coastal policy.
Ecosystem A dynamic system of plant, animal and micro-organism communities and their nonliving environment interacting as a functioning unit.
Ecosystem Protection Level The extent to which the biodiversity target for a vegetation type is conserved via protected areas.
Ecosystem Threat Status The classification of vegetation types based on the extent of remaining area (currently not transformed) of each vegetation type in relation to their biodiversity target.
LandCare LandCare is a community based and government supported approach to the sustainable management and use of agricultural natural resources. The overall goal of LandCare is to optimise productivity and sustainability of natural resources so as to result in greater productivity, food security, job creation and better quality of life for all.
STEP Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Programme is a multi-party government and civil society initiative to conserve biodiversity, while creating benefits for all the people of the Subtropical Thicket biome.
Sustainable development The integration of social, economic and environmental factors into planning, implementation and decision-making so as to ensure that development serves present and future generations.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 13
Page 1
1 Part A: Introduction and Scope of Report The boundary of the bioregion for this Bioregional Plan is the boundary of the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (NMBM) in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Since this is the first Bioregional Plan for the NMBM, it does not replace any previously published Bioregional Plans.
1.1 Purpose and Objectives of the Bioregional Plan The purpose of the final Bioregional Plan is to provide a map of biodiversity priorities and accompanying guidelines to inform land-use planning, environmental assessment and authorisations, and natural resource management by a range of sectors whose policies and decisions impact on biodiversity. The Bioregional Plan is a spatial plan that shows terrestrial and aquatic features that are critical for conserving biodiversity and maintaining ecosystem functioning. These areas are referred to as Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs).
The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA; Act No. 107 of 1998) requires that all organs of state take biodiversity considerations into account in their decision-making. The Bioregional Plan facilitates this by serving as the official reference for biodiversity priorities within the bioregion, superseding all the previous non-published spatial biodiversity plans1.
The plan acts as the spatial framework for sustainable development by identifying the minimum set of areas that are required for biodiversity conservation, the continuation of ecological processes and the provision of ecosystem goods and services. The plan thereby supports the principles of integrated development planning and sustainable development espoused by the NEMA. It is also consistent with the NEM: Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004), the National Biodiversity Framework (2009), and South Africa’s commitments in terms of international agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (1993) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
The objectives of the Bioregional Plan are to:
x Form the primary biodiversity informant for land-use and resource use decision-making;
x Identify a network of Critical Biodiversity Areas that achieve national biodiversity thresholds on the least amount of land possible; and
x Act as the spatial framework and policy for sustainable development and to assist the municipality in complying with environmental and planning legislation requirements which promote the protection and management of biodiversity.
The bioregional is underpinned by the Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (SRK Consulting, 2010). The NMBM conservation assessment is a systematic biodiversity plan that was developed according to established protocols. Systematic biodiversity planning is a rigorous, data-driven approach for assessing the location, status and importance of a range of biodiversity features. It is widely accepted in South Africa, and internationally, as the best available science for identifying spatial biodiversity priority areas. It is important to note that the NMBM conservation assessment was developed in a way that attempts to minimise potential conflict between biodiversity and other forms of land-use.
1 The portions of the following plans pertaining to the NMBM are superseded by the NMBM Bioregional Plan: The Cape Action for People and the Environment (C.A.P.E.) (Cowling et al., 1999 a & b); The Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Plan (STEP) (Cowling et al., 2003); and The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (Berliner & Desmet, 2007).
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
14 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 2
1.2 Intended Users and Uses of the Bioregional Plan The Bioregional Plan should be used by all sectors that are involved in land-use planning and decision- making or multi-sectoral planning. The users of the Bioregional Plan include mandatory users, i.e. those who are compelled to consider the Bioregional Plan, and those who will find it to be a useful planning and developmental tool. The users of the Bioregional Plan are described in Table 1-1.
The Bioregional Plan has three main uses:
1. Reactive decision-making, such as environmental impact assessment and agricultural land-use decisions, water-use licensing, and development control decisions through land-use legislation (e.g. rezoning, planning approvals etc.);
2. Proactive forward planning, such as IDPs, SDFs and zoning schemes; and
3. Proactive conservation, such as biodiversity stewardship initiatives and the expansion of protected areas.
Table 1-1: The mandatory and recommended users of the Bioregional Plan
User Mandatory uses Recommended uses
Must align the Bioregional Should integrate Critical Plan with its Integrated Biodiversity Areas and other Development Plan (IDP) and relevant guidelines and Spatial Development recommendations from the Framework (SDF) and must Bioregional Plan into Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality demonstrate how the Environmental Management Bioregional Plan may be Frameworks (EMFs) developed implemented. in terms of Chapter 8 of the EIA Must also take the Bioregional Regulations, and zoning Plan into account in issuing schemes (also known as planning authorisations. planning or land-use schemes).
Any organ of state that must prepare Must consider the Bioregional an Environmental Implementation Plan Plan in developing the EIP or (EIP) or Environmental Management - Environmental Management Plan (EMP) in terms of Chapter 3 of Plan. NEMA
Should take the Bioregional Plan into account when developing provincial supplements to the NEMA EIA Eastern Cape regulations in terms of section Department of 24A and in developing EMFs Economic Must consider the Bioregional and Provincial Guidelines in Development, Plan before issuing terms of the Chapter 8 EIA Environmental Environmental environmental authorisations. regulations. Affairs and decision-makers Should require that who are required Tourism (DEDEAT) Environmental Assessment by section 2(1)(c) Practitioners (EAPs) refer to the of NEMA to apply Bioregional Plan in Basic the NEMA section Assessment Reports and 2 principles in Environmental Impact Reports. their decision- making Should use the Bioregional Plan to guide their inputs into land-use planning, land-use Eastern Cape decision-making and natural Parks and - resource management and to Tourism Agency inform their management actions and the development of an Eastern Cape Protected Area Expansion Strategy.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 15
Page 3
User Mandatory uses Recommended uses Should take the Bioregional National Plan into account in their Should take the Bioregional Department of authorisations (e.g. for Plan into account in their Agriculture, ploughing virgin land and for planning processes and in their Forestry and the subdivision of agricultural programmes. Fisheries land). National Should take the plan into Department of account in their authorisations - Mineral for prospecting and mining. Resources Should take Bioregional Plan into account in planning and scheduling LandCare activities, and in any other planning activities (such as farm Eastern Cape Should take the Bioregional planning and Area-Wide Department of Plan and identified Critical Planning) Rural Biodiversity Areas into Should take the Bioregional Development and account in their comments on Plan into account in planning Agrarian Reform applications. and implementing land reform programmes, and in the development of policy, legislation or guidelines for land-use planning and management.
Should take the Bioregional Eastern Cape Plan into account when Department of - identifying locations and routes Roads and Public for roads and other Works infrastructure.
Should take the Bioregional Eastern Cape Plan into account in Department of development of the Provincial Local - Growth and Development Government and Strategy and when identifying Traditional Affairs suitable sites for new housing developments. Should take the Bioregional Plan into account in Eastern Cape development of the Provincial Department of - Growth and Development Human Strategy and when identifying Settlement suitable sites for new housing developments. Should integrate the Catchment Bioregional Plan in their Management - decision-making about water Agencies applications
Organs of state preparing guidelines in Should take the Bioregional - terms of Reg. 74 of the EIA regulations Plan into account
Working for Water, Working for Wetlands, LandCare, CoastCare, and Should take the Bioregional other programmes that deal with - Plan into account in planning maintaining and restoring natural and scheduling their activities resources
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
16 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 4
User Mandatory uses Recommended uses Should take the Bioregional Plan into account when undertaking Strategic Environmental and planning Environmental Assessments - consultants and Environmental Impact Assessments or when developing IDPs, SDFs or EMFs for a municipality
Should use the Bioregional Plan to guide comments on planning tools such as SDFs Conservation NGOs - and on development applications, and to direct on- the-ground conservation initiatives
Should use the Bioregional Plan if they want more Private landowners - information about the biodiversity value of their landholdings
1.3 Limitations The following limitations must be considered during the application of the Bioregional Plan:
x The Bioregional Plan does not replace the need for site assessments. Although the systematic biodiversity plan, which underpins the Bioregional Plan, was developed at a fine-scale, on-site verification of the map of Critical Biodiversity Areas is always required. The findings of site assessments must be interpreted based on the associated guidelines for the categories of Critical Biodiversity Areas;
x The systematic biodiversity plan (the Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality), which underpins the Bioregional Plan, represents the best available knowledge at the time of its development – knowledge of some aspects of biodiversity, for example distribution of species of special concern, is not complete. In addition, our understanding of the biophysical features that are required to maintain essential ecological processes and to support the continued provision of important environmental goods and services continues to develop; and
x The landscape is constantly changing – significant changes in the landscape, for example large- scale loss of natural habitat, may impact on the location of areas that are required for conservation, and subsequently on the future configuration of the network of Critical Biodiversity Areas upon revision of the Bioregional Plan.
None of these limitations pose significant constraints to the application of the Bioregional Plan.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 17
Page 5
2 Part B: Biodiversity Profile
2.1 Significance of the Biodiversity within the Bioregion The global significance of the biodiversity of the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area is emphasized by the fact that the area falls within two recognised biodiversity hotspots2 (Myers et al., 2000; Mittermeier, 2004). Biodiversity hotspots are the earth’s richest and most threatened reservoirs of plant and animal life (see Figure 2-1).
madrean Caucasus Mountains of Pore.< Pine-Oak CentIal Asia Pro,no. Woodlands Mediterranean Basin Mountains of Caribbean Southwest China Islands Iran;- Japan Anatolian Philippines
Nie & Sri Lanka B.rMa East Horn of Wallacea Cerrado GuineanForesnr Africa Melanesian Polynesa of Wmt Africa Islands & Micronesia iumbes SundaMnd Choco Mandate Madagascar and the Indian Ocean Islands Atlantic Succulent New Forest Karoo Calendorm Coastal Forests Southweilie of Eastern Africa Cape Australia a Chilean Floristic Winter Region MPcluo'ratc.'Albany Rainfall Valdivian Forests rew Zealand
Hotspots Figure 2-1: Biodiversity hotspots of the world (Conservation International, 2005) The rich biological diversity of the Nelson Mandela Bay is partly attributed to the fact that it is an area of convergence of five of South Africa’s nine biomes3 (see Figure 2-2): the Fynbos, Subtropical Thicket, Forest, Nama Karoo, and Grassland biomes (Low & Rebelo, 1998). Such a juxtaposition of biomes within a metropolitan municipality is unparalleled in the world (Conservation International, 2009).
2 The Cape Floristic Region and the Maputaland-Pondoland-Albany Centre of Endemism 3 A biome is a regional-scale ecosystem characterized by distinct types of vegetation, animals, and microbes that have developed under specific soil and climatic conditions.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
18 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 6
Sundays River Valley Municipality
Cacadu District Municipality
Kouga Municipality
Algoa Bay
10 15 20 A IDIOM tors Legend Fynbos / Thicket Mosaic Grassland / Thicket Mosaic MR Forest MP Wetland Fynbos Subtropical Thicket Succulent Karoo / Thicket Mosaic Azonal
Figure 2-2: The biomes within Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (Stewart et al., 2008)
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 19
Page 7
2.2 Important Terrestrial Features The NMBM Conservation Assessment identified a total of 58 vegetation types within the municipal area (see Figure 2-3 and Table 2-2).
Sundays River Valley Municipality
Cacadu District Municipality
Kouga Municipality
Algoa Bay
N
0 2.5 5 10 15 20 A Kilometers Figure 2-3: The historical distribution of natural vegetation types in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (Stewart et al., 2008) Table 2-1: Key to Figure 2-3 vegetation type numbers
No. Vegetation Type No. Vegetation Type No. Vegetation Type 1 Albany Dune Thicket 21 Groendal Fynbos Thicket 41 Sundays Doringveld Thicket 2 Algoa Dune Thicket 22 Humewood Dune Fynbos 42 Sundays River 3 Baakens Forest Thicket 23 Intermediate Beach 43 Sundays River Floodplain Koedoeskloof Karroid 4 Baakens Grassy Fynbos 24 44 Sundays Spekboom Thicket Thicket Baviaans Spekboom Kragga Kamma Indian 5 25 45 Sundays Thicket Thicket Ocean Forest Lady Slipper Mountain 6 Bethelsdorp Bontveld 26 46 Sundays Valley Thicket Fynbos Bushy Park Indian Ocean Lorraine Transitional Grassy Swartkops Escarpment 7 27 47 Forest Fynbos Valley Thicket Cape Recife Bypass Swartkops Estuarine 8 28 Maitlands Dunefield 48 Dunefield Floodplain
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
20 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 8
No. Vegetation Type No. Vegetation Type No. Vegetation Type Chelsea Forest Thicket 9 29 Malabar Grassy Fynbos 49 Swartkops Estuary Mosaic 10 Coastal 30 Motherwell Karroid Thicket 50 Swartkops River 11 Coastal Hummock Dunes 31 Pan 51 Swartkops River Floodplain Rocklands Renoster 12 Coega Estuary 32 52 Swartkops Salt Marsh Bontveld Coega Estuary Thornhill Forest and 13 33 Rocklands Valley Thicket 53 Floodplain Thornveld Van Stadens Afro. Ind. 14 Colchester Strandveld 34 Rocky Beach 54 Ocean Forest Colleen Glen Grassy Rowallan Park Grassy 15 35 55 Van Stadens Forest Thicket Fynbos fynbos Driftsands Bypass 16 36 Sandy Beach 56 Van Stadens River Dunefield 17 Driftsands Dune fynbos 37 Sardinia Bay Forest Thicket 57 Walmer Grassy Fynbos Schoenmakerskop Rocky 18 Goudini Grassy Fynbos 38 58 Wetland Shelf Fynbos 19 Grass Ridge Bontveld 39 Skurweberg Grassy Fynbos St Francis Dune Fynbos 20 Groendal Fynbos 40 Thicket Mosaic A high proportion of the vegetation types within the municipal area are threatened (twenty-three are Critically Endangered and a further ten are Endangered)4 and now face collapse unless efforts are made to ensure their persistence (Stewart et al., 2008) (see Table 2-2 and Figure 2-4).
Table 2-2: An overview of the Ecosystem Threat Status of the vegetation types of the NMBM area (Stewart et al., 2008)
Ecosystem Threat Status Number of Vegetation Types Critically Endangered 23 Endangered 10 Vulnerable 15 Least Threatened 10 Total 58
The threatened status of these habitats is mirrored by the number of threatened species within the municipal area – the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality has the highest number of red listed species of all the municipalities in the Eastern Cape (CSIR, 2004).
The most threatened vegetation types within the NMBM area are Lowland Fynbos, Subtropical Thicket mosaic and Forest vegetation types.
The Lowland Fynbos vegetation types in the NMBM area are predominantly grassy fynbos systems. Due to the fact that much of the urban expanse of Port Elizabeth was developed on these ecosystems, they are also some of the most threatened vegetation types within the municipal area. The most threatened Lowland Fynbos vegetation types within the municipal area are Critically Endangered Colleen Glen Grassy Fynbos, Lorraine Transitional Grassy Fynbos, Baakens Grassy Fynbos and Walmer Grassy Fynbos. Threatened plant species in these systems include South Africa’s national
4 The Ecosystem Threat Status of the vegetation types in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area was assessed using biodiversity targets, which were based on the species-area curve method (Desmet & Cowling, 2004). The Ecosystem Threat Status of the vegetation types specify above for the NMBM (Stewart et al., 2008) differs from the National List of Threatened Ecosystems in Notice 1002 of 2011 in Government Gazette No. 34809 dated 9 December 2011. This difference is due to the fine-scale spatial mapping of the NMBM vegetation types, as opposed to broader level mapping that informed the national listing.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 21
Page 9
flower, the king protea Protea cynaroides (Critically Endangered), Cyclopia pubescens (Critically Endangered) and Brunsvigia litoralis (Endangered). Pressures on the Lowland Fynbos within the NMBM area include invasion by alien vegetation, urban expansion, inappropriate fire regimes, habitat fragmentation and global climate change (Pierce-Cowling, 2009).
Sundays River Valley Municipali v
Cacadu District Municipality
Kouga Municipality
Algoa Bay
N
0 2.5 5 10 20 A Kilometers Legend I= Critically Endangered Vulnerable Developed Endangered Least Threatened High density invasive alien plants
Figure 2-4: The Ecosystem Threat Status of vegetation types within the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (Stewart et al., 2008) The most threatened Subtropical Thicket vegetation types occurring within the municipal area are those that form mosaics with vegetation that have affinities to other biomes and include Endangered Sundays Doringveld Thicket, Bethelsdorp Bontveld and Motherwell Karroid Thicket. Coastal Fynbos Thicket mosaics within the municipal area are confined to the southern coastline and are a mixture of fynbos and large-leaved subtropical shrubs. They include Critically Endangered Humewood Dune Fynbos and Endangered Schoenmakerskop Rocky Shelf Fynbos, Driftsands Bypass Dunefield, Driftsands Dune Fynbos and St Francis Dune Fynbos Thicket Mosaic. Threatened plant species in the Subtropical Thicket mosaics include Critically Endangered Aspalathus recurvispina, Orthopterum coegana and Aloe bowiea. The Albany adder Bitis albanica (Critically Endangered) also occurs in
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
22 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 10
thicket and thicket mosaic habitat types. The mosaics are threatened by the development of informal and formal housing, industrial development, plant harvesting for medicinal and cultural use, overgrazing and mining.
Forest in Nelson Mandela Bay occurs in a solid form and in a mosaic with thicket. The solid forest within the NMBM is mostly confined to steep riverine gorges, which are sheltered from fire, and confined to a band along the wetter southern portion of the municipal area. Threatened forest types within the municipal area include Critically Endangered Chelsea Forest Thicket Mosaic, Bushy Park Indian Ocean Forest, Van Stadens Afromontane Indian Ocean Forest, Van Stadens Forest Thicket, Kragga Kamma Indian Ocean Forest and Thornhill Forest and Thornveld. The protected milkwood Sideroxylon inerme, dwarf Cape Beach Rapanea gilliana, and yellowwood Afrocarpus falcatus trees are prominent in many of the forest types. The southern population of blue duiker Philantomba monticola, which is confined to the Maputaland-Pondoland-Albany hotspot, occurs in the southern forested portions of Nelson Mandela Bay. The forest within the municipality is threatened by increased prevalence of fire, harvesting of forest products and the development of informal and formal housing.
2.3 Important Freshwater Features Nelson Mandela Bay has ten main rivers, each with a unique ecosystem (Roux et al., 2002), of which four are deemed to no longer be intact (SRK Consulting, 2010). Since all of the main rivers in Nelson Mandela Bay are unique, they all require some degree of safe-guarding.
Of particular importance is the Swartkops River system. The Swartkops River catchment contains two main rivers systems, the Elands and the Kwazunga, and two subsidiary tributaries, the Brak and Chatty. The Groendal Wilderness Area constitutes almost a third of the catchment of this river system, and the Groendal Dam supplies almost two-thirds of Uitenhage’s domestic water. A number of threatened and rare species occur in Groendal, including the Cape redfin minnow Pseudobarbus afer, which is restricted to the area, and the possible presence of Hewitt’s ghost frog Heleophryne hewitti (Critically Endangered) (Cunningham et al., 2003; Conradie et al., 2013).
Cultivation and invasive alien plants along this river system have impacted on its functioning by respectively increasing sedimentation and reducing the volume of water within the river. Alien species, such as the largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, are a threat to the survival of indigenous fish species.
A number of small vleis and pans occur within the municipal area, particularly in grassy Fynbos, Subtropical Thicket, and coastal areas. These provide distinct habitats for species, including both threatened and common amphibian species such as the African bullfrog Pyxicephalus adspersus5 and the yellow-striped reed frog Hyperolius semidiscus6. In addition to providing habitat, these wetlands are also important for the functions that they provide, such as flood attenuation, water filtration and erosion reduction. The main pressures on wetlands are through infilling or draining (e.g. for urban development and grazing), erosion, water abstraction and diversion (e.g. through dams and weirs).
5 Regionally the African Bullfrog is regarded as rare and of conservation concern. Its current official IUCN Red List rating is Least Concern (Measey, 2011). The population in the Bridgemead area is of conservation concern as this is the most southern distribution of the species (Minter et al., 2004). 6 The Yellow Striped Reed Frog is common and widespread along the east coast of South Africa (Minter et al., 2004). The reach a most southern/western distribution in the Port Elizabeth area. They are sensitive to disturbance and only occur in deep wetlands/streams with dense vegetation.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 23
Page 11
2.4 Important Coastal Features and Estuaries The coastal zone of Nelson Mandela Bay provides an array of recreational and sustainable resource utilisation opportunities and underpins a substantial segment of the municipality’s economy.
The Swartkops Estuary lies about 8 km north of the Port Elizabeth city centre and is an important nursery for marine fish, including several angling species. The estuary forms the basis of an informal bait collecting industry and is ranked as South Africa’s top temperate estuary in terms of subsistence value (Turpie & Clark, 2007). The bait collecting industry is also, however, responsible for destruction of the mudflats, leading to significant impacts on the functioning of the system (Baird et al., 1988). The functioning of the estuary is also threatened by pollution, enrichment, sand mining, overfishing, insufficient inflow of freshwater due to damming, and inappropriate development. Relevant sections of the Swartkops River and Estuary are currently proposed for declaration as either a Protected Environment or Nature Reserve in terms of the NEM: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (Act No. 57 of 2003). Declaration thereafter as a RAMSAR site is also being considered. Under the auspices of the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS), a Catchment Management Forum has been formed with the objective of safeguarding the welfare of the Swartkops River and Estuary from source to sea (T Potts 2014, pers. comm., 30 Oct).
The foredune vegetation along the Nelson Mandela Bay coastline helps to buffer against the high energy influences of the tides, wind and waves. These systems are sensitive to disturbance and are susceptible to the formation of blow-outs. The coastal area is often targeted for development, primarily due to the desirability of ocean views. The protection of the coastal foredune system is important in order to safeguard the scenic attributes of the coastal zone and to provide protection against the natural coastal agents of change, particularly in light of the implications of global sea-level rise.
The Alexandria Dunefield has its beginnings at the north-eastern extent of the municipal area. The dunefield is considered to be one of the largest and most pristine active coastal dunefields in the world. Larger and more extensive dunefields are only found in desert areas. As such, it has been incorporated into the Addo Elephant National Park and was nominated by South African National Parks as a World Heritage Site (UNESCO, 2009).
The Maitlands Dunefield, between the resort villages of Beachview and Blue Horizon Bay on the south- western part of the Nelson Mandela Bay coastline, supports what is believed to be the highest density of black oystercatcher in the country (Bornman & Klages, 2003). The black oystercatcher is Near Threatened and is highly susceptible to disturbance during its breeding cycle. The Maitland area, in general, is one of the most visually spectacular areas in the municipality and has significant value in terms of recreation and tourism.
Although the prohibition of off-road vehicles on the dunefields has substantially reduced threats to these systems, they continue to be threatened principally by encroachment of invasive alien plants and are vulnerable to insensitive recreational use.
2.5 Important Ecological Corridors A number of ecological corridors were identified as part of the NMBM conservation assessment. These corridors were designed to promote connectivity between natural areas in order for ecological processes (such as migration and seed dispersal) to continue.
While all of the identified corridors are important, the Baakens River Valley, which forms an east-west corridor through the urban expanse of the municipal area, deserves a special mention. It is the municipality’s most extensive corridor through fynbos habitats and is of critical importance for the continuation of ecological processes that sustain biodiversity. The area also provides numerous
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
24 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 12
ecosystem services, playing an important role in flood attenuation, storm water management, environmental education and nature-based recreation.
2.6 Patterns of Land-Use A large proportion (62 %) of Nelson Mandela Bay is in a natural state (SRK Consulting, 2010), making it the metropolitan municipality with the highest proportion of natural habitat in the country.
Sundays R.ver Valley Mun.,pal.ty
Cicadu District MunicIpslity
Algoa Bay
0 2.5 5 10 15 20 KilorneS,
Legend Cultivation 11 Dumping Recreational open space Urban formal Dams MI High density alien plants Roads Urban informal Mines MP Plantations Rail Waste sites
Figure 2-5: Patterns of land-use in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (SRK Consulting, 2010) This creates opportunities that most metropolitan municipalities no longer have for capitalising on ecological infrastructure and for natural ecosystems to support human well-being (e.g. through maintenance of ecosystem goods and services and ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change).
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 25
Page 13
Urban development is primarily concentrated on the coastal and inland lowlands in the east and north- west of the municipal area. Cultivation is concentrated on the ancient dunes in the south of Nelson Mandela Bay and the inland Fynbos and Subtropical Thicket lowlands (see Figure 2-5).
From 2003 development within the coastal zone has increased substantially. The extent of habitat loss within the coastal zone is of concern not only due to impacts on ecological processes and biodiversity but also due to the impacts on the natural character of this zone, which is a key component of the municipality’s tourism economy (SRK Consulting, 2010).
2.7 Ecosystem Protection Level within the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipal Area The existing network of conservation areas within the NMBM area totals approximately 10,500 ha, or approximately 5 % of the municipal area. Of this, only 4,700 ha (2 % of the municipal area) is recognised as protected areas in terms of the NEM: PA Act. The remaining conservation areas (approximately 5,800 ha in extent) have weak legal protection and are not necessarily managed for biodiversity conservation purposes.
The current protected area system in the municipal area is therefore highly deficient, particularly in terms of its limited size and connectivity, and urgently requires expansion in order to achieve biodiversity targets (SRK Consulting, 2010). Due to the extent of remaining natural habitat, the NMBM is unique amongst the metropolitan municipalities in terms of opportunities for expanding the protected area network to the benefit of biodiversity as well as its people (see Table 2-3).
Table 2-3: Distribution of conservation areas within the municipal area (SRK Consulting, 2010)
Area Protected Areas Conservation Areas Area (ha) (ha) Greater Addo Elephant National Park 752 Grassridge Private Nature Reserve 1,320 Groendal Wilderness Area 14 NMMU Private Nature Reserve 840 Island Forest Nature Reserve 496 Witteklip Private Nature Reserve 29 Cape Recife Nature Reserve 323 Van Stadensberg Natural Heritage Site 579 Lady Slipper Nature Reserve 365 Seaview Game Park 31 Maitland Nature Reserve 132 Kragga Kamma Game Park 203 Sardinia Bay Nature Reserve 249 Paardekop Game Farm 679 Settlers Park Nature Reserve 75 Tregathlyn Game Farm 2,099 Swartkops Valley Nature Reserve 940 Total 2462 Sylvic Nature Reserve 91 The Springs Nature Reserve 929 Van Stadens Nature Reserve 339 Total 4705
2.8 Description of Critical Biodiversity Areas Critical Biodiversity Areas within the municipal area are the portfolio of sites that are required to meet the municipality’s biodiversity targets7. Such areas should be maintained in their natural state in
7 The biodiversity targets for each of the vegetation types in the municipal area were assigned according to the targets for corresponding broad habitat units or vegetation types as identified in the C.A.P.E. and STEP Programmes.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
26 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 14
perpetuity. A map of CBAs8 was produced as part of the NMBM’s Conservation Assessment and Plan (SRK Consulting, 2010) and sites were assigned to CBA categories based on their biodiversity characteristics and Ecosystem Threat Status (see Figure 3-1 and Table 2-4Error! Reference source not found.).
Table 2-4: Description of Critical Biodiversity Areas and other categories
Land Management Category Code Description Objective
Protected areas managed by SAN Parks, To be maintained as provincial or local authorities, parastatals Protected Areas. Protected Area PA 1 (e.g. NMMU), or the private sector. 1 Includes National Parks, Provincial, Local and Private Nature Reserves.
To be declared and Protected Area National Parks, Provincial, Local, Private PA 2 maintained as Protected 2 Nature Reserves pending declaration. Areas.
All Critically Endangered habitats, Such areas must be Critical ecological process areas, ecological managed for biodiversity Biodiversity CBAs corridors, habitats for Species of Special conservation purposes Areas Concern, and some Endangered, and incorporated into the Vulnerable or Least Threatened habitats. protected area system.
Such areas must be Agricultural or partly degraded land that maintained for extensive Ecological plays an important role in ecosystem agricultural or similar low ESA 1 Support Area 1 functioning and / or provides connectivity intensity purposes and between natural areas. managed to promote ecological connectivity.
Such areas must be restored or rehabilitated to support ecological Areas severely disturbed or transformed by connectivity. Such areas Ecological ESA 2 human activities (e.g. mining), requiring must not be developed or Support Area 2 restoration or rehabilitation. utilised for medium to high intensity purposes (e.g. crop production, residential, industry etc.).
Other Natural Natural areas that are not required to meet As per the Municipal SDF ONA Areas biodiversity targets. or local SDFs.
Areas where no Areas severely disturbed or transformed by As per the Municipal SDF natural habitat DEV human activities with no natural habitat or local SDFs. remains remaining, including airfields, cultivated lands, forestry plantations, industry, mines
8 The CBA network within the Coega Industrial Development Zone and Ngqura Port was designed based on the target requirements for the various components of biodiversity within this area and the Coega Development Corporation’s Open Space Management Plan Version 9 (as approved by DEA at the time of completion of the Final Bioregional Plan). A new version of the Coega OSMP has been submitted by the CDC to DEA, but is still under considered for approval and has therefore not been integrated into the CBA network yet. If approved, it will be incorporated into the next version of the Bioregional Plan.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 27
Page 15
and quarries, severe overgrazing, and urban and rural development.
The CBAs were clustered into twenty-nine implementation sites (see Figure 2-6Error! Reference source not found.) and were prioritised according to their overall Ecosystem Threat Status and current land-use. These implementation areas should form the focus for the investment of the limited resources of the NMBM for the implementation of the Bioregional Plan.
Sundays River Valley Municipali
Cacadu District Municipality
Kouga Municipality
Algoa Bay
0 2.5 5 10 15 20 A Kilometers
Legend
Algoa Dunefield Hopewell-Groendal Corridor North End Lake 24 Springs-Groendal Corridor
6 Baakens Valley MI Hopewell-St Albans-Greenbushes Paardekop-Groendal Corridor Springs-Swartkops Corridor
26 Chatty River Corridor 11.1 Hume River Valley Papenkuils River 19 Sundays River
Coega River 23 Joe Slovo Thicket Corridor Parsonsvlei-VD Kempskloof-Chatty 13 Swartkops River
15 Coega-Grassridge-Tregathlyn Corridor I= Maitland 3 Rural Lowland Fynbos 22 Swartkops-Aloes Reserve Corridor
`= Forest Corridor Maitland-Hopwell Corridor I= Southern Coastal Corridor M Urban Lowland Fynbos
17 Happy Valley NB Motherwell Karroid Thicket Corridor Springs 12 Van Stadens
Figure 2-6: Implementation sites in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area (SRK Consulting, 2010)
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
28 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 16
3 Part C: Critical Biodiversity Areas Map
0 25 5 10 15 20 A Kilometers Legend PA1 CBA -ESA2 High Density Invasive Alien Plants PA2 ESA1 I Developed Other Natural Areas V Figure 3-1: Map of Critical Biodiversity Areas within the municipal area9
9 Discussions and negotiations between the NMBM and PPC are ongoing regarding the re-alignment of part of the CBA and ESA network across the land owned by PPC in the Grassridge area. The intention is to reach agreement on an alternative CBA and ESA network across these properties that achieves equivalent conservation targets to the current network on this land, but presents fewer constraints to PPC’s current and future operations. It is hoped that the negotiations will be finalised during 2015 and the agreed re-alignment reflected in a revision to the NMBM Systematic Conservation Assessment and Plan and proposed revisions to the Bioregional Plan scheduled for 2015.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 29
t
2014 17
y y y
n M e F B
D 2 M 2)
ovember S
Page
es
te N i iversit iversit iversit 2 1 opm u or r d
l or d d d
d
o n e 1
g a v BZ2) BZ1) Ro
Bio Bio Bio
e ate C C l l l BZ1 Zone Zone ( ( N D ate ci icy en l C l o Zone C ( d o ra ritica ritica ritica P ss u C C C A R Gar
the
. . - or
f
ar non tive) tive) l
0 1 p p
or
m m ines d se l es simi u u
e U that
an
iv tive
or d t y i
p d- c u n cons cons re m e - - g u
u oses t t La l bj p f r l u o
(non (non ra .
t pu cons d
era n l y e connectivit n l agric e
l e tive) conservation
m p G e initia m
g u ogica d intensit a l stainab e n l u w onservation onservation xtensive i romote a
o p C C p eco (s l cons E m
d
com
n
t s to a
n
n sites ho e l ll s o
i a
y
n m ses
. w at e u manage o l rotection - or
i d g f t p d
ogica l
n a l riorit or
p
e i n p
an y
te r . orma l existing f . u eco c Parks)
Ma orma f
N es d omm c n . A ines instit itate l d
l e highest conservation S
e d y
La R r , rotection d aci or or i I] conservation p f an conservation management sites connectivit f f Obtain conservation Maintain Maintain extensive o u g g
GR
l e
l [ ate l
ra
or C d d d
t u . . n these -
an an an
e
f here nat ogica ix
restore
l
o m
re re re stainab
e extensive w een een e
u u u nitiative u
or iv atr g
s
w w
I eco t . ct ct ct
a . near d s; s c u u u
m nctioning; nctioning nctioning te g n
. e bet bet A A ment itate u restore restore
to l an fu fu fu
str str str
B B
p y y (e bj itate es Ma
l o grazing) L L L existing C C or or l O aci
Ro
n f
d A A A i
l aci itate n ses l f stem stem stem e
to en u
y y y eve - d La d i d TUR TUR TUR d
jacent jacent nctioning u A A A d d an ivestock g fu a connectivit N state rehabi ecos a connectivit Maintain ecos Maintain l N Maintain ecos l these N
the (Gar
se
, u or f ring
2)
l d d-
reas A
du n y A
l an site
(P a
reas d y
l ar
n l ct l Vromans M: A
ecies
ate e
o u l A l E atic p i
d art t p
s u
essentia .
the p ib
p N
s i d attern r aq artic or aration in A at l
rocess
or p reas
c p , meet tem
the
p Protecte ) l B
an y
A l ,
y or es f ec ,
l
a C es e d to ra d o
d d
d
Deborah p Protecte u D
n
e d omp . t l an l i as d res)
an c
u to ing ogica l - een . l u ire
l sca iversit d d 1) y u w Y d d t terms e A i
N gric eat egra en se f an changes)
A Forma d A req (P p l connectivit bio in Protecte ( (eco bet targets ECA u d
i ers track
gement
iv u ere e
(no 1
d d )
h
e y s t l
w o )
t G reas i a
A p 2 l n wl )
rea Bi A B a o 1 : A
gic Ma ers hich & d C A ic y
( t ovember2014 1 o r
rt i iv S
l te A D N w r o 1: , d c o E A
- B 17 g ( ackno C c o
P - 4 te C ppo (
E reas an o l Bi u e ate ith P A l l S C Pr b W a nitiative Part I T 10 Bioregiona l Fina
MBM 4 N
30 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
,
at
2014 18 ort
y
ort p The F e rban p
; d u i y
ovember SD
Page
u es it
NMBM meeting i s s iversit 2
opment
u trans
l u u G d
trans –
cing ic , eq and BZ2) l
Bio ario ario ated b C d du i l Zone ( N V V Deve cy l li pu an Categor
Re
– y anning ritica Po l
d eviation it C l y ll Assoc services P Rura it
a a an l
,
u y y
eq ork nit
in in
u , ,
w er , tive) orts d p
ccessibi
Povert ication;
f
:
m itions ment ment itions A
omm
upp . y u d p p d sing e l
l d ement’ ement’ s C Gen d o o l l u
l l
d d once Use l l
ensi
sing o - Urban Urban con con an
y e u
ra ra , ,
D l an an cons sett sett
that eve eve
- u u
H F F
to to ; y y : ca d d
name ities;
cease
R R y l
y
ic ic stainab l , se l l Land it SD SD d d l or or non u
u l f f
ses ment; Po Po (s y bject bject an an u
or
p
stainab isabi - have human human u u
o d s s . d l exibi name e e connectivit
MBM MBM l l l sites sites
f Su . l 11 s s
anning tive , l an
y y ment ment d d N N
p ith l Genera f f p d es es eve a a p p ation
l l intensit ication nab nab ication o o m i i f d f o o d
p p l l w
lw lw u an w erre erre ogica e a a l f f
l o
nsi into t t MBM l
p ensi eve eve onservation e u rinci rinci egra u
ements d susta susta l terms b or D existing d cons C ‘ p D eco ‘ p D b Pre terms Pre D eo N e p l
d
the ariation
, ,
economic
F F V
l an
l
ment ment ; ons w has integrate i p p y d
SD SD ing
o MBM MBM o o l l nctiona d
l l oca l rit a a se N N be u fu p p L ogica or
u that age ication ication oa l d d 28
- f f
l once eve eve d
l = d n y an an D D nici nici se n u sec
D or ing eco l l w u u
the u I a f
ensi ensi F F
Management o l d w ,
ra ra . y M M D D
d
o u u . . d sho SD SD
ll y y
orts an er er R R l l ren &cat
y o ic ic p p f rocesses; l l
y d d d 5 b Land l
Recommendat s s p upp that 8
oca oca et
A A l Manage connectivit existing Urban s cease conservation intensit an l Urban an Po Po f = d chi the a
D hic
, I S p . .
y y
.
ic ic
criteria s d d l l
have y , ,
A obtaine y itate l F F an an ll ll ersons Po Po B
stem se&obj
ment; p y ke C
w L emogra
p SD SD be d MBM MBM d ve A l l sha o i
l
a a ing ment ment d bro N N rehabi ecos p p
ication ication p p d d = w f f nit d o o ecte jacent TUR or an can connectivit d eve l l o u
an an d ff nici nici A ll
d
Management
an
a u u
a
y o Object
ensi ensi F F
cm f N eve eve
M M re D D or ?
itate
nit D D l u x d ation SD SD l l DS een u er er l l I p p Land the ct p p aci w
ra ra
u f A nctioning
orri / u u s s as to . oca oca
ormation V str Restore A
to fu bet l R A Urban l R Urban C f
er comm in f Partici
HI ,
e – re l
ments .
s that
ment;
): re / u
es d p l u y
rther l d t up mines l o p oc
1s); not . u l e . or
ment; u ar stem
t
l p D F g p
y
. d u itate on gro targets u o stainab etc l o l i
(areas
d
l b .
u eve
(e ESA s economic; . za/
the
y pt s
rbe .
agric d Princi s an i d
d eve u ecos artic eve ; in A
areas)
ing d sites p meet y d
B
ist y rehabi se , areas an or sites gov intact d entit y
nee
f .
l d ud C u e to l str
l d
l l d d
y
i & each p y Descr be l e e d
l d
du ement d d l
n ntensive d ra een ire Urban Waste (exc sca aba ecia u l u w socia d ett that
p an e ,
at evere Mixe egra egra l S s I
I
d rreversib an
changes)
d
cannot d l connectivit x essentia overgraze x bet I d N req x x S s; on track
u
sica
s man y l e ty (no 2
i l oc u
u h h f
- C) AL and t not
. l
I I p
and
sonman 2
H oc l (Dev) f l – ca areas character
envisage ng e
i
on l i e dens
Non Area
l tat &
natura Map ne i oped s; UAT (ONA) , :
l 1
ng is Natura ovember2014 og ants)
y i ud
d l l CBAs Q
l gh
t ory n i estrian 7 N no p i A BA 1
g (ESA2) hab nit
h d of nc - e
C I u . nee e ESA th Eco www. Deve an
en i l stainab Areas g Areas p at wl. I P Other . li l
:// and w Support restorab (TERRESTR degraded rema C a d p part (e ra Su
p 11 an s environment basic htt comm Bioregiona l Fina
MBM N
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 31
Page 19
Table 4-2: Recommended land and resource (water) use management guidelines in Critical Biodiversity Areas and other categories on the CBA map
CRITICAL BIODIVERSTIY AREAS (TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS) INCLUDES: ALL Critically Endangered vegetation types in terms of the NMBM Conservation Plan and Best Design sites of Endangered, Vulnerable & Least Threatened vegetation types, ecological processes and species of special concern that satisfy biodiversity targets Keep in a NATURAL STATE Biodiversity Friendly Land-Use Types (Land-Use Type 1-4) CBA PATTERN General Recommendations
x No further loss of natural habitat should occur i.e. all land in this category should be maintained as natural vegetation cover; x These areas of land can act as possible biodiversity offset receiving areas; x Mimic or maintain natural ecological processes; for example fire in Fynbos and Dune Thicket vegetation types; x Determine the vegetation type and then consult the Fynbos Forum Ecosystem Guidelines (de Villiers et al., 2005) for detailed management guidelines; x Priority for DEDEAT, NMBM and DAFF (Agriculture and Forestry Sections) to carry out regular environmental monitoring and reporting, for biodiversity and / or change of land-use, to prevent unauthorized development or degradation by neglect or ignorance (monitoring guidelines are required); x Prioritise CBAs for land care projects, Working for Water (WfW) and NGOs to direct their conservation projects, programmes and activities; and x An Ecological Management Plan should be compiled by landowner for CBAs. EMP to include alien plant control, fire management etc. Protection
x CBAs under public ownership to be declared in terms of NEM: Protected Areas Act. Privately owned erven to be incorporated into the protected area network through Biodiversity Stewardship Agreements. Privately owned erven to be declared in terms of NEM: Protected Areas Act where landowners are willing to do so. CBAs not formally protected (public or private) should be rezoned to Open Space 312 and title deed restrictions attached where possible. Rates rebates to be provided in return where possible. Fire Management
x An appropriate fire management plan for fire dependant ecosystems must be implemented, namely Fynbos and Dune Thicket. Rehabilitation / Restoration
x Degraded or disturbed CBAs will require restoration or rehabilitation through programmes such as Working for Water, Working for Wetlands etc. In Urban Areas
x Maintain and legally protect the Urban Open Space System that maintains CBAs; and x Compatible land-uses adjacent to and within CBAs & management guidelines could include – o Community projects such as passive recreation for eco-tourism, employment of security officers (visible ‘policing’) etc. o Where necessary, provide fencing or locate institutional / educational ‘barriers’ where high density, high canopy vegetation types create a security risk.
12 Open Space 3 in terms of the proposed NMBM Integrated Zoning Scheme refers to the utilisation and management of an area for nature reserve purposes, irrespective of whether the area has been declared in terms of the NEM: Protected Areas Act. Open Space 1 refers to Public Open Space for recreational or cemetery purposes. Open Space 2 refers to Private Open Space for recreational (sports facility), cemetery or telecommunication purposes.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
32 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 20
Sand Movement (Ecological) Corridors
x No development should be allowed in sand movement corridors (littoral active zone), frontal dunes or dynamic dune systems; x Mobile dunes must not be stabilized, unless where existing development requires it; x Maintain an indigenous vegetation buffer zone between the inland boundary of the youngest fixed dune trough and the seaward boundary of existing development; and x Strict control should be maintained over the use of off-road vehicles on beaches. Coastal Ecological Corridors
x Due to expected sea level rise from climate change, no development should occur within the coastal CBAs and the NMBM Coastal Development Set-back Lines. Development Guidelines Where infrastructure is proposed, the following guidelines should be implemented - x Rezoning of properties to afford additional land-use rights that will result in increased biodiversity loss should not be granted; x Permitted number of units per erf or per ha to be based on existing land-use rights and NMBM Rural Development and Urban Edge Policy; x Developments should be limited to existing developed / degraded footprints, if present and appropriate13; x Units carefully dispersed or clumped to achieve least impact, particularly with regard to habitat loss and fragmentation; x The following minimum buffers are recommended between CBAs and proposed development nodes - o Forest: outside urban edge: minimum of 100 m, urban areas minimum of 30 m; and o Other biomes: minimum of 50 m; x The installation of infrastructure in CBAs is not desirable and should only be considered if all alternative alignment and design options have been assessed and found to be non-viable. Under such conditions, at least a Basic Assessment (BA) should be undertaken, and if approved, a comprehensive EMP must be developed and best-practice restoration efforts strictly implemented; x Protected Area infrastructure to be limited to existing developed or degraded sites, unless determined otherwise via a Conservation Development Framework planning process for the reserve; x Ecological Specialist to conduct the ecological assessment; x Where the infrastructure is within close proximity to aquatic ecosystems refer to ‘CBA – Aquatic Ecosystems’ below to ensure appropriate buffers; x Temporary structures are preferred e.g. raised wooden structures, tents, raised boardwalks or alternatively porous materials / design concepts preferred; and x A site-specific Construction and Operational Environmental Management Plan to be compiled and implemented. Where development proposals other than the preferred biodiversity-compatible land-uses (see definitions below in Table 4-3, Table 4-4, Table 4-5 and Table 4-6) are submitted in terms of the NEMA: EIA regulations or Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act (SPLUMA)/Land Use Planning Ordinance (LUPO)/Development Facilitation Act (DFA)/Black Communities Development Act (Act No. 4 of 1984): x A Screening Exercise should be undertaken by a Biodiversity Specialist/Ecologist to verify the CBA map category on site; x If the site is verified as a CBA, developments other than Conservation Use should be identified as inappropriate; x If an application in terms of the NEMA EIA Regulations or any planning legislation is pursued, it should be informed by a biodiversity specialist study; and x Developments outside of the Urban Edge are also subject to the NMBM Rural Development Policy.
13 Existing disturbance should not be viewed as implying that development of such areas is appropriate, particularly due to the potential for restoration or rehabilitation of such sites.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 33
Page 21
CRITICAL BIODIVERSITY AREAS (AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS) *Critically Endangered and Critical Ecological Process sites – in terms of NMBM pattern & ecological process targets INCLUDES wetland types, river reaches, estuaries and catchments Keep in a NATURAL or NEAR NATURAL state Conservation Resource Use – HIGH resource PROTECTION Adjacent Land-Use – CONSERVATION or buffer to adjacent development BIODIVERSITY OFFSETS
x No realistic biodiversity offsets. ECOLOGICAL RESERVE Water Quantity
x Maintain mean annual run-off as close to natural as possible; x Where abstraction is absolutely necessary, off channel dam construction ONLY with the highest Ecological Reserve possible; x Improve regulation of abstractions from these rivers & encourage efficient water use throughout the area (i.e. demand control, recycling, use of grey water, rainwater tanks); and x Where water abstraction is licensed, all effluent must be treated and returned to natural water courses in order to obtain maximum utilization of scarce water resources. Environmental Flow Requirements
x Flow regimes as close to natural as possible Retaining natural flow regimes (both in terms of magnitude and variability); Management actions to maintain natural flow regime should include: o Abstraction should occur during high flow seasons, not during low flow seasons; o Water release from dams should take note of the ecological requirements of CBA rivers. This includes at least one annual flood release (at most appropriate time of year for each system), even if the dam is not full; and o Optimal use should be made of existing abstractions through demand-management measures. Water must be correctly priced to prevent abuse and wastage. Water Quality
x Water quality as close to NATURAL as possible; x The Target Water Quality Range (TWQR) (range of concentrations or levels) should ensure that no measurable adverse effects are expected on the health of aquatic ecosystems, and should therefore ensure their protection; x All effluent is treated and returned to natural water resources in order to obtain maximum utilization of scarce water resources (as per DWS Policy); and x A precautionary approach is required to protect the health of aquatic ecosystems, which means that active measures are taken to avert or minimise potential risks of undesirable impacts on the environment. Monitoring & Management
x A management plan should developed for each biodiversity feature or site, for example – red data species, specific river reach habitat and x NMBM to investigate establishment of aquatic reserves (e.g. Swartkops Estuary). Buffer Recommendations (CBA Buffers are ‘NO-GO’ areas) Where an aquatic CBA is situated within an Ecological Corridor CBA, the width of the CORRIDOR will apply in concert with the buffers recommended below. UNLESS other land-uses (e.g. Agriculture) exist already OR a conservation land-use is proposed, the buffers recommended below will apply and should be actively enforced.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
34 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 22
It is important to NOTE that the following buffer recommendations DO NOT REPLACE a SITE LEVEL investigation. River Buffers To protect river integrity the following general buffers will apply: x Mountain streams and upper foothills of all 1:500,000 (major) rivers = 50 m (these rivers generally have more confined riparian zones than lower foothills and lowland rivers; and are generally less threatened by agricultural practices); x Lower foothills and lowland rivers of all 1:500,000 rivers = 100 m (these rivers generally have less confined riparian zones than mountain streams and upper foothills; and are more threatened by agricultural practices. These larger buffers are particularly important to lower the amount of pesticides etc. reaching the river); and x All remaining 1:50,000 streams = 32 m (these rivers are generally the smaller upland streams corresponding to mountain streams and upper foothills. They are generally smaller rivers than those designated in the 1:500,000 rivers layer, and are assigned the riparian buffer required under South African legislation). Alternatively x If the 1:100 year flood line (or if flooding has occurred > 1:100 year flood line) is greater than the buffers prescribed above, then these flood lines will apply (i.e. it is important to re-evaluate flood lines to cater for the impact of climate change and reduce flood damage on new developments); and x Enforcing the above riparian buffer zones along aquatic CBAs is crucial. The buffers will apply to crops, since rivers and their associated biota are highly susceptible to crop pesticides. It also applies to excluding livestock, which cause considerable bank erosion, with subsequent degradation of water quality. The access areas for livestock should be demarcated and all alien invasive plants within this zone should also be eradicated. Estuary Buffer x It is recommended that no new development around an estuary be permitted below 500 m from the high water mark or the 1:100 year flood line, whichever is the greatest; x Where known flooding has occurred (e.g. Swartkops River Estuary) the highest flood line will apply (i.e. re- evaluate flood lines to cater for the impact of climate change and reduce flood damage on new developments); and x Estuarine salt marshes should be protected and no activities allowed there. Wetland Buffers x Wetlands classified as CBA and that are largely intact (natural to near natural), namely rank 1 and 2 wetlands, require a minimum buffer of 75 - 200 m; x Ensure that delineation of the wetland boundary is undertaken by a specialist ecologist according to ‘A practical field procedure for identification and delineation of wetlands and riparian areas’ (DWAF, 2003); x No roads should be permitted to traverse these wetlands & their buffers; and x Where a road or other water channelling structure runs close to a wetland and its buffer, and channels water into it, such water should be dispersed via multiple entry points with energy-dispersing structures. These drains must be small, dispersed low-volume, low-velocity structures. They must also be set back from the wetland and its buffer zone and be designed to spill into undisturbed natural vegetation at ground level. These provisions also apply to all urban storm-water outlets that spill into a wetland or up-slope of a wetland. The following buffers are recommended for rank 1 and 2 wetlands, which vary according to size and wetland integrity (rank): Size of Wetland Rank 1 Rank 2 >20 ha 200 m 150 m 5 – 20 ha 150 m 100 m < 5 ha 100 m 75 m
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 35
Page 23
General Recommendations regarding Buffers - x Do not permit infilling, excavation, drainage, hardened surfaces (including buildings and asphalt), intensive agriculture or any new developments within a river, wetland or estuary, their buffers, the 1:100 year flood line or highest flood line of the delineated edge, whichever is the greatest. x The “buffers” may need to be wider than the above recommendations, for example due to the presence of an important amphibian species. This should be determined on a case-by-case basis by a specialist ecologist in consultation with the DWS, NMBM and DEDEAT to reflect site-specific factors. The approach for determining buffer width should consider the current condition of the aquatic ecosystem, as well as the functioning of the system in the broader landscape, plus an assessment of the impacts to the ecosystem of the existing and proposed adjacent land-use and climate change impacts i.e. increased flooding at higher levels than previously recorded. REHABILITATION
x Areas that are degraded or disturbed should be rehabilitated, through programmes such as Working for Water, Working for Wetlands and a systematic alien vegetation eradication programme implemented to improve biodiversity and water supply, especially upstream areas of estuaries and wetlands; x Prohibit the stocking of farm dams (even off-stream dams) with alien fish; x Remove alien fish where possible to allow for natural recovery of indigenous fish in consultation with DWS, DEDEAT, ECPTA and NMBM; x Stock dams with indigenous fish in consultation with DWS, DEDEAT, ECPTA and NMBM; and x Rehabilitate riparian zones to act as a buffer between the river and surrounding agricultural areas in consultation with the DAFF, DWS, DEDEAT and NMBM. MANAGING CUMULATIVE IMPACTS THROUGH TRANSFORMATION THRESHOLDS WITHIN CBA CATCHMENTS
x Development in CBA catchment areas should be biodiversity-friendly land-uses that discourage the following activities in upstream catchment areas to prevent unacceptable transformation levels & impacts on inland wetlands, estuaries and lowland rivers: o Large-scale abstraction, river diversion, impoundments, urban development, extensive woody alien invasion, river diversion / water transfer, Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW) discharges, poorly serviced informal settlements, cultivation, impacts to floodplain hydrology, changes in water table (resulting from catchment-scale water transfers), catchment hardening. x Catchment Developments (e.g. forestry) remain subject to standard DWS requirements regarding limits to reduction in mean annual runoff. OTHER GENERAL MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
x Aquaculture projects associated with aquatic CBAs e.g. off-stream dams, should not be permitted; x Hydrological connections between systems (surface or groundwater) should not be disrupted (includes the need to manage post-development high flow and low flow runoff volumes); x Manage jetties and structures on rivers and estuaries; x Manage bio-physical and recreational carrying capacity of rivers and estuaries; x Manage estuary mouth dynamics as close to natural as possible; x Most of the estuaries & downstream wetlands are highly threatened by loss of freshwater inflows from upstream and by development encroachment. Management of these issues is considered critical; x An Environmental Management Plan to be compiled for adjacent land-uses and should address the following issues: buffers, water quality, water flow, abstraction thresholds, alien fauna control, storm water etc.; and x The Fynbos Forum Ecosystem Guidelines for Environmental Assessment in the Western Cape (de Villiers et al., 2005) includes a section on river, estuary and wetland ecosystems that complements these guidelines.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
36 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 24
ECOLOGICAL SUPPORT AREAS 1 (ESA1 - AGRICULTURAL OR PARTLY DEGRADED LAND) Supporting zone required for maintaining connectivity between CBAs, continued ecosystem functioning within the CBA corridors, and preventing degradation of Critical Biodiversity Areas. These require high protection. INCLUDES extensive agricultural or partly degraded land immediately adjacent to CBAs Maintain agricultural or partly degraded land in an EXTENSIVE state or rehabilitate or restore to a natural or semi-natural state. General Recommendations
x No further loss of natural habitat should occur and all land in this category currently in an extensive agricultural or low intensity use state should be maintained as such, or rehabilitated or restored to a natural or semi-natural state; x The maintenance of connectivity between CBAs, continued ecosystem functioning within the CBA corridors, and the prevention of degradation of adjacent Critical Biodiversity Areas must be achieved; x All natural ecological processes on adjacent CBAs to be maintained e.g. fire in Fynbos, Dune Thicket vegetation types; x No agri-industry, urban residential, mining, or more intensive land-uses (e.g. cultivation, pastures etc.) other than the current state to be permitted; x Development limitations as per the NMBM Rural Development Policy must be applied (e.g. max. subdivision size, max. residential density, maximum cluster footprint size etc.); x Priority for DEDEAT, NMBM and DAFF to carry out regular environmental monitoring and reporting, for biodiversity and / or change of land-use, to prevent unauthorized development or degradation by neglect or ignorance (monitoring guidelines are required); x Prioritise these areas for land care projects, Working for Water, Working for Wetlands and NGOs to direct their rehabilitation / restoration projects, programmes and activities; and x An Environmental Management Plan should be compiled, where possible, to include, e.g. alien plant control, fire management. Development Guidelines Where infrastructure is developed, the following guidelines should apply - x Permitted number of units per erf or per ha to be based on existing land-use rights and NMBM Rural Development Policy and Urban Edge; x Rezoning of properties to afford additional land-use rights that will result in increased biodiversity loss should not be granted, unless significant nett conservation gains can be achieved, ecosystem functioning and connectivity of Ecosystem Support Areas (ESAs) will not compromised, and biodiversity impacts with regard to species and habitats outside of CBAs are also of an acceptable significance; x Developments should be limited to existing developed / degraded footprint, if present14; x Units carefully dispersed or clumped to achieve least impact; x Protected Area infrastructure to be limited to existing developed or degraded sites, unless determined otherwise via a Conservation Development Process for the reserve; x If the cadastre is located partially or entirely outside of a CBA / ESA, development should be located outside the CBA / ESA; x Ecological Specialist to conduct the ecological assessment; x Where the infrastructure is within close proximity to aquatic ecosystems refer to ‘CBA – Aquatic Ecosystems’ below to ensure appropriate buffers; x Temporary structures are preferred e.g. raised wooden structures, tents, raised boardwalks or alternatively porous materials / design concepts; and x A site-specific Construction and Operational Environmental Management Programme to be compiled and implemented.
14 Existing disturbance should not be viewed as implying that development of such areas is appropriate, particularly due to the potential for restoration or rehabilitation of such sites.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 37
Page 25
ECOLOGICAL RESERVE Water Quantity
x Maintain mean annual run-off to ensure Eco-status depending on the feature or process being protected. Environmental Flow Requirements
x Preferable to abstract during high flow seasons. Water Quality
x Water quality to reflect the recommended Eco-status depending on the feature or process being protected. Monitoring & Management
x Site level studies will need to be conducted to determine what Eco-Status is required to appropriately protect the relevant feature or process. x As per CBA Buffer Recommendation Both the NEMA 32 m buffer and CARA 10 m buffer to be applied. Wetland Buffers Inland wetland (excluding estuaries) buffers were determined according to size and wetland integrity, and are recommended as follows: Wetland Size Rank 3 Rank 4 Rank 5 >20ha 75m 75m 50m 5 – 20ha 75m 50m 50m < 5ha 50m 50m 50m Activities discouraged within the 1: 20 year flood line of inland wetlands: x Creation of berms, roads, culverts, canalisation, channelisation, alien vegetation, impoundment, abstraction, well points, storm-water or other point source inflows, irrigation return flows, grazing / trampling, agriculture, golf courses, suburban gardens, artificial deepening, drainage, aquaculture, recreational activities, salt mining.
Activities discouraged within the 1: 100 year flood line of inland wetlands: x Intensive agriculture, intensive livestock grazing, sports-fields that require draining / infilling, market gardening (where nutrient enrichment is an issue), creation of flood control berms, roads that interrupt flood flows, poorly serviced informal settlements, alien vegetation, suburban gardens, golf course greens, catchment hardening, roads, culverts, raised or lowered water table. General Recommendations regarding buffers: x Do not permit infilling, excavation, drainage, hardened surfaces (including buildings and asphalt), intensive agriculture or any new developments within a river or wetland, their buffers, the 1: 100 year flood line or highest flood line of the delineated edge, whichever is the greatest; and x The “buffers” may need to be wider than the above recommendations. This should be determined on a case-by-case basis by a specialist ecologist in consultation with the DWS, NMBM and DEDEAT to reflect site-specific factors. The approach for determining buffer width should consider the current condition of the aquatic ecosystem and any existing or proposed buffer, as well as the functioning of the system in the broader landscape, plus an assessment of the impacts to the ecosystem of the existing and proposed adjacent land-use and climate change impacts i.e. increased flooding at higher flood lines.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
38 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 26
ECOLOGICAL SUPPORT AREAS 2 (ESA 2 - IMPORTANT DEVELOPED / DEGRADED SITES) Supporting zone required for maintaining connectivity between CBAs, continued ecosystem functioning within the CBA corridors, and preventing degradation of Critical Biodiversity Areas. These sites require high protection. INCLUDES developed / degraded land immediately adjacent to CBAs that was or is presently utilised for intensive purposes (e.g. mining) Management and land-uses that ensure SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; Resource Use – HIGH resource PROTECTION General Recommendations
x No further loss of natural habitat should occur and all land in this category currently in a degraded / developed state must be rehabilitated or restored to a natural or semi-natural state once the current land- use has ceased (e.g. mining operation); x Legal requirements for restoration / rehabilitation must be enforced by the relevant competent authority (e.g. DMR, DEDEAT, DEA) and the NMBM; x The maintenance of connectivity between CBAs, continued ecosystem functioning within the CBA corridors, and the prevention of degradation of adjacent Critical Biodiversity Areas must be achieved; x All natural ecological processes on adjacent CBAs to continue e.g. fire in Fynbos and Dune Thicket vegetation types. x Priority for DMR, DEDEAT, NMBM and DAFF to carry out regular environmental monitoring and reporting, for biodiversity and / or change of land-use, to prevent unauthorized development or degradation by neglect or ignorance; x Prioritise these areas for land care projects, Working for Water, Working for Wetlands and NGOs to direct their rehabilitation / restoration projects, programmes and activities; x A site-specific Environmental Management Plan should be developed and implemented, and should include the following aspects, amongst others: alien plant control, fire management etc. Development Guidelines Where infrastructure is developed, the following guidelines should apply: x Permitted number of units per erf or per ha to be based on existing land-use rights and NMBM Rural Development Policy and Urban Edge Strategy; x Rezoning of properties to afford additional land-use rights should not be granted, unless significant nett conservation gains can be achieved, ecosystem functioning and connectivity of ESA’s will not be compromised, and biodiversity impacts with regard to species and habitats outside of CBAs are also of an acceptable significance; x Developments should be limited to existing developed / degraded footprint, if present15; x Units carefully clustered or dispersed to achieve least impact; x Other degraded areas to be restored / rehabilitated; x Protected Area infrastructure to be limited to the most developed or degraded sites, unless determined otherwise via a Conservation Development Process for the reserve; x If the cadastre is located partially or entirely outside of a CBA / ESA, development should be located outside the CBA / ESA. x Ecological Specialist to conduct the ecological assessment; x Where the infrastructure is within close proximity to aquatic ecosystems refer to ‘CBA – Aquatic Ecosystems’ below to ensure appropriate buffers; x Temporary structures are preferred e.g. raised wooden structures, tents, raised boardwalks or alternatively porous materials / design concepts; and x A site-specific Construction and Operational Environmental Management Plan to be compiled and implemented. ECOLOGICAL RESERVE Water Quantity: Minimum Standards , Environmental Flow Requirements, Rehabilitation etc. Recommendations: same as for ESA 1s
15 Existing disturbance should not be viewed as implying that development of such areas is appropriate, particularly due to the potential for restoration or rehabilitation of such sites.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 39
l . . - d e l in s l
of l
ith
the 14 the ude and and bee 0 The
oos, l
27 2 size,
w
-l 3 are . rates,
game
or &
shou
natura
inc
current to
(for
capacity
terms
ist of captured to of materia ovember Page ines l
ities
l enhancing harvesting l use in
sustainab due
enviro - l
biodiversity
or Space of .
Conservation
w emented
g l atching, stocking o . managed and the and
reserves areas guide l e
scope
specia
forma
carrying l
a
w
&
extends imp natura
Open a harvesting
most N
are
it
on
ude the hunted
l
bird to
This
of er by
ritten via . are
inc w .
use y the riverine
are - w Environment o
t
l
i study concepts extensive
use
s
management in l - use mpacts df appropriate areas
a l
is emented
maintaining i riding, beyond and l hich
. I on
l ers
w and v w advised
at management of , i
imp l
binding, practices oped w
anima
d as design l DEDEAT)
hich
es y
fishing as o o i horse ensure
ll
Protected i t this
conduct stringent
L i determined form or
are
extends process B v
opment w
to
strict and a l i or , of y es, to aimed
l t such
ega
ar
game
l c l
er y
undeve on an architecture, As ist a
l
l ll .
. V on t hiking,
p deve umes e
l
require c hen simi
ECPTA industry),
the v ement
i ll Act
princip impact i as vo
w g
or sm
of management
Reserve er i
w activities)
Areas specia
green
footprints,
& w mpa l the instance, I
a and
use ana
ork o resources,
based specifica
management l MBM, l
f
such l tour w Areas M
N -
for ( ature Good
o
or onsumpt be use
c . N - c such rezoning e activities on
management
a
i require
private t
natura e density reduces Protected
Frame
l body ll a
c ith here, at i
. and
resource inary b as in structures, l v (operationa techniques
on of
w
l
w
must w
.
t e w Protected op e l etc na l
cu l
recreation, i o These
ensure mpa ed . I
l
, . ogy l i l vegetation to l opment onser w
EM:
l , use deve - ll usta aration occurs o C
l
N coup umes nership S L
l ace atching . l w . . and harvesting farming medica Passive compatib Deve techno biodiversity production be
conservation temporary p vo and c a CM b w sustainab sma o harvesting intact l dec the
e )
h d t ts -
h y t g i i rate
per r
3 g
ers as v i nte
use eme I ,
- d Zone g
d o M ch i n
i
S B B an
f l M g on pes o g Space n
i Z y N n e t i e l d
l on st b i i Z Open x use amp - e
d Ex an propose not ompat ( l c e l b i
l l
or as w- as
yet the o
and
and and
MBM l major ready
ompat hiking l .
not c . e, ardship a
inary existing through l l - opment, N icy, such g
l
l w such . icy overnight y the l
t cu
are
i (e
per , points; Po
l is ste
Po
deve
environmenta
either Environmenta SES but examp ers
as
protected;
Where
U v the
.
for i - y footprint and
ll Edge
an be, d D activities for and access demonstrating as
medica
tourism
CBA
o
activities, - N
d i
l
. to
ega A .
b used e l
l the
L
and f
ons eco y biodiversity
ated l i
l Scheme o Y t be Urban conservation footprints opment imited a shou
i
l
L
re
(for l
(EMP)
d n l
D i and imits changes) atching
f
y activities, ith possib recreation l N l
subject ons
e and and
and here i deve e an designated current
w
l
t l track
IE
harvesting D
i
Zoning shou w P
R a
through n (no
here
consumptive of w i
are direct
are f F 14
0 or
w use e or
Y
ity e - harvesting
outdoor l l
T bird D
areas recreation uses:
on
hich hich er i SI industry), densities protected sustainab and
w
ovember2
R w w : at
l y o consumptive impact N l v 3 E integrated ll a - - aration er such l s, -
17
Management l
V df use w - 4 l ithin is - on on i l
o an
DI l l ega e accommodation) Sustainab trai research, intensity education; f Management sustainabi Areas Areas w dec l agreement, P w l l O MBM onser I and b
N N
x but x L exists, N infrastructure Appropriate B C This x Rura x objective: x a T Bioregiona l Fina
MBM N
40 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
ll 14 i
0 28 2
d Any
need l w
. ve
ovember Page areas areas
game
these
These N . of determining
d l .
g . indigenous ve y
e t l
i ith tourism) w ers
v natura i impact
for w
d . o of o
g . i L
B stocking (e y
& er
areas on
negative
V
t c rates opment
l mpa prevent I impacts
extensive
to
stocking
ises overdeve l
or uti
negative
managed use - the capacity,
ll
e and w l be
carrying increase This to intensification
e )
h d t ts -
h y t g i i rate per r
g
ers
as v i nte
use eme I ,
- d Zone g
d o M ch i Zone n D
i
S B B N an
ture l f l A M g on o g n
i Z N n e i Resort e l d l on Agricu st b i i Z x amp e
Ex propose not ompat ( c
l
. y d
l of ll i as ith on for the
and and and
icy . l w an;
l w e other imita
and l l
of -l P
ith Po
tourism
such imits capacity Critica
ong
terms
l l intensified w
use a
y
opment extra and
l l natura in ied,
l Edge ated
as l economic
strict of acceptab
re app ied deve necessary; carrying ecosystems l comp
for
ith
if
hunting
odge benign such Urban Management
w l
app
. and l containing y
l ll portions
consumptive must ons imited and
- i
t criteria are l g i considered
y
n l n conditions undertake i and i non uding ogica nership
l
changes) l f
l ity . measures, l w areas purposes e to
size Endangered
o
inc commercia track arm strict D
l eco and
production
ist
l (no F . e densities or
infrastructure, opment l
of l
Environmenta
14 or
0 y;
l species
Management
ame extensive l and
on deve sustainabi G
specia
Minimum sectiona Game
management l l on ovember2 generating
e capacity;
of reserve,
isted
v or specific l management resources l 7 N Rura
i sustainab
-
1 l
uses consumptive -
- an eve ogica l ndigenous l udes: Endangered Red Avoidance Fire Fauna Site species study; P l l tens l MBM and
I nc the Assumes: L other natura Game accommodation x x Ex I activities eco – x cover; N carrying x revenue x tourism Stringent Bioregiona l Fina
MBM N
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 41
. y it d l l
g
so
. l 14 e 0 a ve 29 2
good
ose
l of
c does,
can negative ith
ovember Page Extensive ity l
uses, not -
w ess qua l and
areas farming and
does the l
have N hereas
on
game These ated
w l . may
re
Production -
t . c farm, Production ture
impact l ranch
mpa extensive e dependent I
l
ivestock y t game i L agricu erate expected are catt
hich higher
d
ivestock y w ers o be l
v and i d L M
l d ight l ar o l . ou i s state, impact
Extensive B
w managed managed a w-
simi of ll
o
y e l l Extensive be nature w
e
l a bad reverse having harvesting .
can e
. impacts a i as l
the
ant
l p
because previous PES
sustainab Y ogica than l
Farming
the T
ever, eco
ude l w recognized
USE - is Game mimic inc indigenous management, management impact The Ho
D
)
AN
g ts e L
n h h i t L g
i f r A on
o
Z proposed
/ d
use
- RUR d terms T rate
an g C n Zone l
A i existing g D
nte g
n I i
N
n ture i l A IMP st
i here on x E pes e w MBM z
y f – t
Agricu
AT N o
d not e ( l
use Zone -
d amp eme x h MODER an E c propose l S Resort
l .
y e rura l e of or
ll as . an
icy t
the l (i and and
c
ogica on Po mixed
l i
banks) of rates); t per
species
such
covered portions ivestock invasive
c
mpa
l eradicate; u eco rates
. production
i as species;
d l sustainab
Edge river ied,
erosion
ien for
l
l
be economica on
farm
ro
grazing . a areas;
- areas degradation indigenous P for uses
l so - stocking necessary; imita to
app ll l an RDB . and l
erate
l
k
sheep -l
a a if y bank
c d l P
Urban
over
areas
d tura based and l ied l
l stocking and ementation l on and l
footprints grazing); and l mo
extra
l and
esto natura and e f et
l tourism v app
i
shou imp size, cause
o ated providing
standard
l ife, from
y
L l
Agricu
. w ll subsequent goat of conditions containing access
d
re
e . g l
- i l . changes)
measures,
e,
can opment b l ith zone ity ons than l
(e l
i
and
t track (rotationa w Management ogica
The w benign ture i options; na
l l er
i l areas sustainab catt abi
n . (no
this
ith areas minimum w hich i
es
deve vi y ife l f
demarcated 14 o l of l
ity y
0 Eco
y l
Management e l areas
w d vegetation, ll ll protected l usta pe w l
y management i D cyc l ithin agricu
y ll be S isation,
t l
and
e
w qua
l Main management ing, w / e
opment l
d
l certain ovember2 l : v
management ogica be Rura ogica i l
l
4 a 7 N mixed
use - 1 . -
natura ants ater - economic 4
l extensive y impact
d f
l udes: Eco potentia Fire Deve p Avoidance and Environmenta Sensitive to permitted; Resting eco destabi shou w tramp an l l tens
e P w- l MBM ith l x an
I
nc o ivestock b and w l above l on sustainab N app Stringent x L E I x x Assumes: x x Densities x x
a T Bioregiona l Fina
MBM N
42 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
.
of
for
the
0 oss 014
type may l 3 2
horse
in be areas,
nature .
require
inators l y the existing
but
e
areas ll ll l
andscape ovember Page es, po l biodiversity l
they sca
natura on Tourism
property
as - prevent
genera attraction beyond
of arge ll
maintain i natura l
vegetab the N Eco and
w destructive,
the often impact important of
the
can tourist
for impacts to
the more but size
ines) and
mpact due l purpose higher
ll of ative
l
s er l are a
fragmentation ity w w I ocated the conserve l
environment sma ll
o
l in a po that to cumu
as impact
t
have l anima L &
of The resources,
to l d . l i natura s
resu
l ines
often areas seeks l Moderate Moderate dings, l sustainabi
ll to w
i the
activities extent
ho
of ative l moderate natura l w
pipe use
of ll
-
anima a re
the tend
tura
ete l
ensure l
and sma dings l l amongst l . to farm have
roads,
.
dep does . ho
integrity
g agricu ll . This
ace do l movement kind increase and opment
l .
(e p other the
l
sma
of l this or
PES residentia the
deve tura l dings
Y l dings of l l
vegetation, andscape
tura infrastructure T l extensive l
ho ho opments
rura l ll ll
sense the
conserve agricu ll
USE arger - l urban reducing of Sma infrastructure intact paddocks of than sti deve more and Sma Agricu Resorts D
AN 1
L
L dings A l
Zone (RZ1) l 3
ho ll or
RUR 1
dings T l Sma
C :
ho 2 A ll
Zone Zone Residentia
&
TH
I Or ithin: 1 or
IMP
W Sma w
E 1:
Space Resort
Zone Zone
AT
Zone Open ture l l urban - Rura MODER Peri Agricu
. - d l to d, of to to to l ith
for
the
and and and
sub 0 ve w
is
Edge
Open occur edge
urban 7 dings, imited by
nature
- l ose oss shou
l
9
opment opment l existing
y l l . c l l 1
ho
. purposes, attributes,
peri subject areas home conform on ities of
and the
l ll ll
l
of resort further
Urban
d deve deve urban in l 0
or e Private d
l l
purposes occur
are
faci
thereof areas 7
sma
indigenous of l may the the
character the and
Management the purposes,
ities
shou use l
house,
l of Act l
of edge prevent tura of possib often l
of these
and type
edge,
faci
certain ing
e,
househo recreationa
type l dings to Rura near ll
l l
to
e in
prevent
here tourism or w
bui iday agricu urban l this
d terms
l for ages,
residentia
changes) urban
e w protection
MBM ll l fragmentation
possib
ho of
objective in dings DAFF
dings for l N vi a
l accommodation, Management
expansion properties
access track
sca l the criteria ture, ho residentia -
and ho l (no of and
ll icy
the l
s
ll The existing (roads) and from . g 014 and iday here of 2
l
. Po n Such
ic Rura arge and tivation opment
i zoned l
per sma l ications l
l maximum of . sma
d ns l
l these Ho
Agricu
l demarcated dings
w cu l tourist
w
as outside
environmenta ovember
pub of for for
the
encourage ho are of a App to
l
Edge ho tura
l
7 N
Deve
l
MBM
1 ll . - - ll to division N
- udes: udes: icy an
l l l isation l l P ithin hich ote l Sma nc nc imited ocated the w zone conservation Po Space occupation sub cities, promote w specia division l footprints and Some densification infrastructure ensure footprint genera l uti authorization Urban agricu Resort I I Sma N Bioregiona l Fina
MBM N
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 43
l l / . . ll y y A l
y to ll I
l 4 for t ca the i i 1
ar E
and
l 3 201
ssue
often
sma crops i
og l tura
l
ers certain l on erosion to minima v
as
i l
corridors
consume uding l ovember Page
d eco l ecosystem good particu such production o ‘ soi
ace i
l substantia inc agricu l moderate
b such w
p under
based
izers,
the uses l
- y n l . s ater oss, natura i gro opportunities on
e
s l i
i.
uses, ferti w impose N
and l i from to
conservation, ts
genera
l – factors CBAs
c
as friend
- associated
by
other habitat
infestations
and vary process een mpa provide
anting
These protoco and
organic
w
i such for
.
maintaining w ng s e ant
i on l l i bet ant w Production can p
by c o reduced ab
biodiversity
l
i
l f sat fauna f
biodiversity i
y i
cens maintenance users l extensive h impacts
ien n
acement & l ith l li g
g services avai a p i
l y s he Timber w and Hi
tivation
ll ora l e l e l author l stream e
f
conservation, improved Their v and l ). T cu
ex causing
a and connectivity l adopting
.
h
be considerab
ecosystem
by ater
potentia sensitiv es crop
and reduce be above natura i and crops
comp
for
can
t approved
t
. w
i
Crops
a c of
g v incompatib
.
i ater environmenta to on’ can changes
t t, and i and
e
l and
y l c
w
ll l other a types on es of
mpa
l
etion I
dry species l g
resu
required rrigated n y degradation a tab i extract impact
andscape t use - -
of ogica -
i
- . icenses l l w . I dep mutua
. l .
l o and .
l As certain practices f
arm . ater
ers ’
and dispersed f l impacts the etc
l use are v
water
actua quantities i - hydro w erating
l ‘ ontrast d e,
l er ese C o age
i w ithin ater h ll rrigated n o arge heavy B Their minima significant functioning procedures I l and ti (see These I w T sca l husbandry Timber, w reserve movement conditions farming acce They
- e d h t
an f d l o
g n rate i
g 2
st i
terms x )
nte e I n
ts Zone Zone
h i l M g g
not B i ( n ture r
l i
M Rura
N on z use d eme
f ithin Agricu o w ch
uses - S e
l d g n i an propose amp l on Ex Z tura l
l o d u . of ith for c w
i t and and
high r
ate w
most other spp
uding
g
g l i tivated natura and l a
use SES ith
irrigated
rr Modified es) - inc t the conserve l U cu nus
often and
i of
-
c
imited w
ement
if l P & i l D of no
species non but
d
y
N that y l
ett
and oss ll erosion s, mpa l an
S l of l LA l ith
i l
activity crops e y
(vegetab
h l
main . r soi timber - -
variety
erosion; g AL ) w . d ura i pesticides
. l
, inputs annua a h R tree y
ien
on methods ants
l and l - - UR i f l
Genetica
- - soi d t a ayer T
p of tivation
o crops c
l l
on L i on isers, u of
l ate i ogy type
irreversib i cu l
- d at changes) oughing,
orestr antations,
c production l at CU l
season v I ons
ro (f - p v i in p i
. ferti (orchards) i grass t
ture chemica
and t e
track
l t P l against
l - i l
spread u GR age
hydro invasive ts of u n
(no l
production
asso
ll
i er C
A
4 ture irrigated ti f
C orchard l
b
h pe sing
on e agro T t s 201
ien crops u
l year; i timber l and y
ll m use ll y c resu C t D ntensive l
a
(GMOs) i rop ll
w
A protect
A Crop
rop Monocu r
Ti A e and
I
l A C (
C
s, tree l P and ovember l
g) :
y indigenous d per
Ag
d n most 5 use . impact 7 N and i IM
- - 1 e
l - an 4 d ate an H
b l udes: udes: udes: an l l l l g y e i G P l r I ra ater ith l an orestr ropp rr nc nc nc b responsib perennia L H A c F Assumes: heavy irrigated nutrient crops, w I agrochemica Organisms I introduction Assumes: w Assumes: crops aggressive I chemica D habitat I a T Bioregiona l Fina
MBM N
44 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
ien 14 2 l and 0 The than 3 from 2 a
. ll
er ity l a
w ovember Page
o be and
qua l erosion Management
y and
ll l
protected
can
ater be ying: bank
N l w
to
of eradicate; potentia
species;
app
. systems
be e
. cause demarcated (i and
so Environmenta
banks)
l
a
be can an d
l
Database
rates d
river
l of
h degradation
production
g hich pastures shou
Red ar and
l Hi shou
w
zone simi grazing); and stocking anted
ing,
l l l l
p et e
l ementation l this and
subsequent
. w ivestock
containing
g
g tramp t imp . rates); l n
oping ith c i l ithin (e
for (rotationa w w
and and areas
arm sustainab
f mpa deve es
l I
of
y y
ants l areas r ll y stocking i
p t not areas cyc
i a
isation,
l
d
opment by l
grazing
. ogica - ers of l
v i an l d Eco P standard Resting destabi Avoidance access Sensitive invasive over Deve o i
mpact B I x x x reduced x x
- e l d h t
an f d l Rura o
g n rate i ithin g
st i w
terms x )
nte e I n
ts Zone
2 h i
M g g not B i ( n ture r required
l i
M Zone N on use z use
d eme
f Agricu o ch
S e
l g consent
n i propose amp ith on w Ex Z
y y y l in of ll il
and
mar ative use i l usua d
pr systems, re areas pastures,
is
ate the
associated i
ith
ll ll c . a are on w
hich
and uding l
w foodstuffs asso force
that
and of h inc areas
t production
i
l ork g es w i
n
w i g dependent much n
dairy,
i production spec
anima arm
f changes) not
imported for
d’
production arm for
farming il y track
r crops,
w i l F
(no
a ‘ the
14 d on 0 pe ma or i intensive
y opment;
for grain n l t support
ll ement c
ntensive l
i
A I A
e ovember2 . vegetation ett and v deve use i 7 N
l S
- 1 l - d ements l udes: an domest l l P
ura l an ntens nc Assumes: irrigated fodder natura L I R I of dense sett dependent production confinement;
Bioregiona l Fina
MBM N
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 45
l l . . . n a
of g
or
on .
Off 14 the
etc l. I e
33 20 .
ume,
or avoid
l in ogica
l nature soi Where
aquatic vo to
.
services
corridors, terrestria
ovember Page eco
l
routes on and . ay mouths
encourage ater urban restoration
habitats
present w and
conservation
w w
in so
l
e o natura l a
ll as project this designed
as a N the ll ll infrastructure
important
i
estuary impacts
ecosystem
sca
migration to in the w be
vegetation of ll ll
on
nstream l
such d of y . such
l w
l
fish e organisms l
sma
do
existing improve to
maintaining
for species its shou
manner natura
important
ength
opening significant ith .
h l modified
by can
by possib regimes, g ise for
ant w
negative l
l – for
etc
l
the p
protected,
modify
Hi are have barriers ork
y phased y
l here steri
areas w
required igned
l a
over ogica
er w
l a or impact roads stems hich
affected can net V in
/
y
required y
y so l S l l w
urban iberate and creates l - a e
areas
hydro
and ines,
indigenous
c l
de .
estuaries supp andscapes peri footprints pa
events is may
S l & pipe rivers t Areas
negative
e
l .
c or anting biodiversity into undertaken l
ater
g destroy ood . l
p a ho be f
pen disturbed e w changing
ithin w be l
temperature,
o urban O mpa l andscape
of d w
I
l w
for degraded by and l exists uses : can in y
inf
.
-
/ t t
ture
i l tan it
c and li natura construction . creating
shou Biodiversity
and areas l
bui ers itation ater l l l
g
natura v oped
w i l n ontrast i d ation l ocity rastru C n l o
f i etropo i ams n n B biodiversity D iso estuary, These biodiversity Construction Critica rehabi I ve deve thereby channe urban fresh Maintaining I biodiversity reserves, biodiversity more M M
)
g ts e n h h i t g
i
f
r 4 on
3
o
4
Z 3 3
2 ndustry or
or
2 or d I
use
3 or or or - 2
3
,
or d 2 2
, 1 2
terms
1,
rate 1 2
1, 1, an g n 1, Zone
l 1, l
i g nte Zone g
uses n
Zone i Extractive I Zone -
n
tura i Zone Zone l : l Zone
d M st 3 Zone i l
B on x an e M z
f Undetermined Space l N
o
Agricu a Zone
i
d ndustria not e I ( l
Community Transport Transport Business Open Residentia ustr amp d eme ndustry n I Ex ch propose i
S d an
l , USES
an - . ) and and and and
ines,
b mine l uses s ness urban l i l
access ll ll ur nes habitats
d physica
AND birds a of
li
t us
activities, , sites L l
l dams s, c
b
l an
cana
) on pe on
. L excavations
i
l A industria p
I
ephone , , l , aste er visua l l cana mpa R
ays, typica . h ines a te
i T i w these l lw
h ot nes the impact mining reserves;
er
g
US
ent rai li opments
i schemes e
l w
ines, d l us d and l of h l i e er
urban
ND p v po f
an
w ater
. e o er purposes
densities res
impoundments, g pipe , commercia d (
. w l
& I po l roads,
w ,
l e a
, at
i opencast changes) transfer
po
an s
ever ons
b d i g measurab dumps, BAN t track mining);
n impacts i
ustr i and ur hat ater a
n (no y d ground
roa
i UR h uses (
f w l n w
14 t
- uding species i l opment
k e T 20 d l l substantia hardened residentia strip pe i (sand associated w on for
uarr C D refuse
ar y ll ll ll l have
ll ll inc
y,
t bu an ture A
d
t
y A A A A
i l c
ith . ovember deve :
ar & Q ate sites and MP 6 l can 7 N l chemica i and use
- g w
1
- ll ll c use ines, - 4 n particu
l d H I
i an
udes: udes: udes: udes: an l l l l l rastru quarrying e n b G P
f i l ams r hich eirs, aste l an ommun n nc nc nc nc and andfi b w and and particu roads L HI U c asso I tourism I I pipe M I or D I w w l
l a T Bioregiona l Fina
MBM N
46 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 34
5 Part E: Other measures for effective management
5.1 Planning
5.1.1 Protected Area Expansion
Only about 2.4 % (approximately 4,700 ha) of the municipal area enjoys some form of statutory protection. Three additional formal protected areas are proposed for declaration by the NMBM, namely the van der Kempskloof (778 ha), Chatty (1,161 ha), and Aloes (226 ha) Nature Reserves. A large portion of the Hopewell Conservation Estate (2,547 ha) is currently proposed for formal declaration by Hopewell Conservation (Pty) Ltd as a Nature Reserve in terms of the NEM: PA Act. In the interim, Hopewell Conservation (Pty) Ltd entered into a Biodiversity Stewardship Agreement with the ECPTA in February 2012, which is associated with 2,341 ha of Hopewell’s land.
However, the inclusion of these public and private areas will not be a sufficient to secure a representative proportion of all the municipality’s biodiversity. The NMBM owns a relatively limited amount of land (approx. 72,700 ha) within the municipal area, with the majority of its 195,400 ha being under private ownership (62.78 %). Since insufficient funds exist for NMBM to acquire and manage all of the property required for conservation, protected area expansion will require the conservation of a combination of privately-owned and municipally-owned land parcels. A range of mechanisms need to be developed in order to support protected area expansion within the municipal area, including the implementation of biodiversity offsets and the development of biodiversity stewardship agreements with private landowners. The rezoning of municipally and other state-owned properties located within the network of Critical Biodiversity Areas and Ecosystem Support Areas to Open Space 3 is a further priority. Biodiversity Offsets Where development proposals will result in biodiversity impacts after mitigation that range from moderate to severe, biodiversity offsets should be considered to compensate for the residual impacts of the development. To date, biodiversity offsets have only been used in a few cases in the municipality, but due to the extent of habitat loss during the last ten years, the need to consider the application of biodiversity offsets is expected to increase substantially.
For a biodiversity offset to contribute effectively to protected area expansion and biodiversity conservation in the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, biodiversity offsets should be located in a ‘biodiversity offset receiving area’, which in the context of the NMBM will be the Critical Biodiversity Areas.
Biodiversity offsets, where appropriate, can comprise either single or composite areas in order to compensate adequately for residual biodiversity loss. An acceptable measure of the residual loss is obtained as a point of departure for determining an appropriate biodiversity offset. Biodiversity offsets are calculated by multiplying this measure by a basic biodiversity offset ratio linked to the Ecosystem Threat Status of the affected ecosystem.
The following ratios are recommended with regard for biodiversity offsets (DEA&DP, 2008):
x A 30:1 ratio for Critically Endangered ecosystems and Critical Ecosystem Process Areas, where a biodiversity offset would be appropriate in exceptional circumstances only;
x A 20:1 ratio for Endangered ecosystems;
x A 10:1 ratio for Vulnerable ecosystems; and
x No biodiversity offset for Least Threatened ecosystems.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 47
Page 35
The area determined by the basic biodiversity offset ratio should then be adjusted by a range of context-specific considerations, such as:
x The condition of the affected habitat;
x The significance of residual impacts on threatened species;
x The significance of residual impact on special habitats;
x The significance of residual impact on important ecological corridors or process areas; and
x The significance of residual impact on biodiversity underpinning valued ecosystem services. The National Wetland Offset Guideline should also be consulted. The guideline links directly to spatial biodiversity information and includes methodologies for wetland offset site selection, compensation ratios and hectare equivalents used to determine the size and functionality of wetland offset (Macfarlane et al., 2014). Biodiversity Stewardship The NMBM Environmental Services Business Unit has developed and is piloting a biodiversity stewardship programme based on the approach trialled in the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal, and adopted by the National Biodiversity Framework (2009) as a preferred mechanism for protected area expansion. The programme provides for formal, legally-recognised agreements (potentially also linked to declaration of land as Nature Reserve and Protected Environments in terms of the NEM: PA Act) between the municipality and landowners to conserve biodiversity. In order to support this programme, the NMBM has adopted a property rates policy that allows for rebates for private landowners who enter into agreements with the municipality to conserve their land.
Current private landowner conservation initiatives are primarily centred in the Hopewell, Sardinia Bay, Bushy Park area (i.e. Sardinia Bay Conservancy) and Blue Horizon Bay areas. However, in most instances legal protection of natural habitats of high conservation value outside of statutory protected areas in Nelson Mandela Bay is not in place.
A formal protected area expansion strategy has not been developed for the Nelson Mandela Bay and the NMBM currently has no targets set for protected area expansion. Spatial priority areas for protected areas expansion should be aligned to the network of Critical Biodiversity Areas and associated Implementation Sites map (see Figure 2-6 and Figure 3-1) described in the Bioregional Plan.
The following recommendations are made with regard to protected area expansion:
x A Protected Area Expansion Strategy to be developed for the NMBM, in alignment with the Bioregional Plan and Eastern Cape Protected Area Expansion Strategy;
x The implementation of the NMBM’s Biodiversity Stewardship Programme should be supported as this approach is recognised as being one of the most cost-effective mechanisms for protected areas expansion;
x In order to improve the status of all the current and proposed local authority conservation sites in the municipal area, they should be assessed in terms of their biodiversity value and the requirements of the NEM: Protected Areas Act and then declared as either Nature Reserves or Protected Environments based on this assessment where such declarations are not in place;
x The corridor between the Maitlands Nature Reserve and the Island Nature Reserve should be consolidated;
x The coastal corridor between Sardinia Bay Nature Reserve and Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Private Nature Reserve should be consolidated. The NMMU should be encouraged to seek declaration for their reserve in terms of section 23 of NEM: PA Act;
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
48 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 36
x The entire extent of municipal land within the Baakens Valley should be declared as a Nature Reserve in terms of NEM: PA Act. Private owners of land along the valley should be encouraged to enter into biodiversity stewardship agreements with the NMBM;
x The corridor between the Van Stadens Wildflower Reserve, Lady Slipper Nature Reserve and Van Stadensberg Natural Heritage Site should be consolidated. The Van Stadensberg Natural Heritage Site should be declared as a Nature Reserve in terms of the NEM: PA Act. The Van Stadens River Conservancy initiative should be supported by the NMBM biodiversity stewardship programme in an effort to link the Van Stadens Wildflower Reserve to the coast;
x Protected Environment status should be investigated for the Sardinia Bay, Bushy Park and Horizon Bay area’s to support the efforts of landowners and to restrict certain activities which would be detrimental to the important biodiversity of these areas;
x The NMBM land at Van Der Kemp’s Kloof / Parsonsvlei / Chatty Kloof should be declared as a Nature Reserve. The Anglican Church land should be incorporated into this Nature Reserve through a biodiversity stewardship agreement. This Nature Reserve should link to the Joe Slovo Thicket Corridor and the Hopewell Conservation Estate, which in turn should be linked to the Groendal Wilderness area; and
x The corridor between the Springs Nature Reserve and the Groendal Wilderness area should be consolidated.
5.1.2 Ecosystems and Species Requiring Biodiversity Management Plans
Biodiversity management plans are one of the planning tools provided for by the NEM: Biodiversity Act. The act provides for any person, organisation or organ of state to submit to the Minister a draft biodiversity management plan for an ecosystem or indigenous species which warrants special conservation species. Before approving a draft biodiversity management plan, the Minister must identify a suitable person, organisation or organ or state which is willing to be responsible for the implementation of the plan. Importantly, the existence of a biodiversity management plan for an ecosystem or species enables the Minister to enter into a biodiversity management agreement with a person, organisation or organ regarding its implementation. Landowners that are party to a biodiversity management agreement are eligible for the income tax deductions, as provided for by the Income Tax Act (Act 58 of 1962), as amended by the Revenue Laws Amendment Act (Act 60 of 2008). The development of biodiversity management plans in terms of Biodiversity Act is therefore a useful pursuit to support the NMBM’s emergent biodiversity stewardship programme.
Within the NMBM area the following ecosystems are recommended for the development of biodiversity management plans in terms of the Biodiversity Act:
x The Swartkops River system (Implementation site 13) – due to the value of this system in terms of both the ecological processes that occur and the environmental goods and services that it provides, and due to the threats this system faces; and
x Urban lowland fynbos (Implementation site 2) – including the Critically Endangered Algoa grassy fynbos complex ecosystems: Walmer Grassy Fynbos, Baakens Grassy Fynbos, Lorraine Transitional Grassy Fynbos and Colleen Glen Grassy Fynbos systems. The natural extent of these ecosystems has been severely reduced by urban development and, without appropriate management intervention, these systems may collapse.
Species that are recommended for the development of biodiversity management plans in terms of the Biodiversity Act are:
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 49
Page 37
x Cyclopia pubescens (Critically Endangered) – a rare and highly localised species, occurring from the foot of the Van Stadens Mountains to just west of Port Elizabeth, which is under threat from urban expansion. A management plan for this species was produced by the NMMU Centre for African Conservation Ecology;
x Aloe bowiea (Critically Endangered) – a highly restricted species, only known from three sites near Motherwell, that is threatened by expansion of informal and formal housing, harvesting, overgrazing;
x Aspalathus recurvispina (Critically Endangered) – thought to be extinct. The species rediscovered in the wild near Humewood, but is highly threatened by habitat loss through urban development. Only a single population of this plant is known to occur;
x Orthopterum coegana (Critically Endangered) – a succulent that was restricted to three populations occurring on sandstone outcrops around Coega Kop, east of Port Elizabeth. One of these populations had to be relocated when the western portion of Coega Kop was targeted for mining for the construction of Coega deepwater port;
x FitzSimons’ whip lizard Tetradactylus fitzsimonsi (Vulnerable) – is restricted to the Algoa basin (Bates et al., 2014); and
x Albany adder Bitis albanica (Critically Endangered) – one of South Africa’s rarest snakes. It is restricted to the Algoa basin, threatened by habitat loss, principally due to mining, and has been classified as Critically Endangered (Bates et al., 2014).
Biodiversity management plans should be developed in conjunction with the relevant NMBM and ECPTA Conservation Area Managers, and actions should be incorporated into the key performance indicators for managers and into the NMBM Environmental Management’s Service Delivery Improvement Plan.
5.1.3 Tracking of biodiversity loss
Wise land-use decision making is greatly enabled by the availability of accurate, up-to-date information. The provision of such information to land-use planning and environmental decision- makers in Nelson Mandela Bay is vital.
A system to regularly record changes in land use / rezoning approvals that impact on biodiversity is vital. It is recommended that a "land use / rezoning approval" data base be kept by the Municipality, which should be updated on at least an annual basis, to track the loss of biodiversity and inform day- to-day decision-making
5.2 Operation and management There is a need to increase budgetary provision to enable the NMBM to adequately meet its ecological management obligations.
Management actions that are required to effectively conserve biodiversity within the municipal area include invasive alien species management and rehabilitation and restoration of impacted areas.
5.2.1 Invasive Alien Species Management
An invasive alien plant clearing strategy was developed for the NMBM in April 2009 (SSI, 2009). Areas that were identified as priorities were the Swartkops River, Chatty River, Baakens River, Paapenkuils River, Sardinia Bay and Vans Stadensberg corridor – all Critical Biodiversity Areas. The strategy schedules areas within the priority areas for clearing, and provides an estimate of the cost and effort to clear.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
50 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 38
The following is recommended with regard to invasive alien species management:
x The NMBM should ensure that adequate budget is provided for invasive alien plant control operations on municipal land;
x Private landowners should be encouraged to control invasive alien plants on their properties (e.g. through the provision of property rates rebates for landowners who adequately control invasive alien plants on their properties);
x The NMBM to support invasive alien plant control operations on private land where Biodiversity Stewardship Agreements between the landowners and the NMBM are in place, where possible;
x The NMBM’s invasive alien plant clearing strategy, in alignment with the Bioregional Plan, should be used to direct investment in alien plant control; and
x The NMBM’s invasive alien plant clearing strategy, in alignment with the Bioregional Plan, to be updated every five years.
5.2.2 Priority Areas for Rehabilitation and Restoration
The following areas are recommended as priorities for rehabilitation and restoration in order for these areas to support the network of critical biodiversity sites within the NMBM municipal area:
x The Swartkops River system – areas along the KwaZunga River (upper reaches of the Swartkops River system) have been impacted by sand-mining, which has been described as the second- most significant impact on the river and has downstream impacts on the Swartkops River (IWR, undated);
x The Parsonsvlei / van der Kempskloof / Chatty Kloof / Hopewell area – this area has been impacted by mining, the old and existing quarries, and illegal and/or unapproved grazing will require rehabilitation. Dumping of domestic rubble is particularly problematic in this area and efforts should be made to remove such materials and prevent the reoccurrence of dumping. Illegal and/or unapproved grazing of livestock and occupation of land is also to be controlled by the NMBM;
x The coastal belt, particularly from the Sardinia Bay and Sylvic Nature Reserves to the Cape Recife and NMMU Nature Reserves is highly invaded by invasive alien plants. Active rehabilitation may be required in this area on removal of the invasive alien plants in order to prevent accelerated soil erosion and destabilisation of dunes; and
x The Grassridge area is currently mined for limestone. This area harbours both Grassridge Bontveld and the Albany adder Bitis albanica and will require rehabilitation on completion of mining activities.
5.3 Mainstreaming
5.3.1 Institutional Arrangements
The NMBM has instituted an internal organisational structure, the Corporate EIA Task Team (CETT), to facilitate the coordination of EIA applications and broader environmental issues. CETT enables review by the various directorates within the NMBM of the findings of EIAs and allows for mainstreaming of environmental issues, including the NMBM Conservation Plan, into operations of the directorates. This existing structure can be used to mainstream biodiversity management considerations into the operations of the various municipal directorates for new projects.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 51
Page 39
A Multi-Disciplinary Technical Task Team (MDTTT) also exists to facilitate co-operative decision- making between the relevant municipal directorates on strategic projects. It is recommended that the relevant sub-directorates (e.g. Transportation Planning, Water and Sanitation etc.) be requested to provide quarterly updates at the MDTTT meetings on proposed short, medium and long-term projects that may be in conflict with the Bioregional Plan or result in impacts on the network of Critical Biodiversity Areas. The MDTTT is also an ideal structure to identify opportunities for collaboration between directorates regarding socio-economic projects linked to biodiversity, and construction projects where rehabilitation and / or restoration are required.
Monthly bilateral meetings between the NMBM and DEDEAT also take place and serve as a mechanism for coordination of EIA applications and broader environmental issues. These meetings provide further opportunity to address potential conflicts between proposed land-uses and the Bioregional Plan.
5.3.2 Awareness-raising
The engineering industry as a whole, in particular contractors that undertake site clearing and construction, has illustrated a limit awareness of the important of biodiversity conservation and/or legal requirements associated with the natural environmental and water.
Awareness-raising, training and capacity building amongst this sector, particularly amongst contractors, is essential to minimising construction impacts on CBAs and ESAs within the municipal area.
5.4 Building a Biodiversity Economy Building a biodiversity economy involves promoting economic activity that uses biodiversity in a sustainable way. This includes the creation of opportunities through biodiversity for economic development in previously disadvantaged communities, the promotion of sustainable agriculture and fisheries, and the promotion of land-uses that are compatible with biodiversity (for example, sensitive ecotourism and game farming).
5.4.1 Ecotourism
The NMBM is unique in South Africa in that it is an area of convergence for five of South Africa’s biomes. Thus, by visiting the NMBM, the eco-tourist can experience a small taste of what the country as a whole has to offer from a natural perspective.
The NMBM has undergone a process of developing Conservation Development Frameworks (CDFs) for many of its local authority nature reserves. One of the functions of the CDFs is to identify areas within the reserves that are appropriate for sensitive development, such as ecotourism facilities. The NMBM will look to enter into partnerships with the private sector in order to unlock the economic potential of these reserves. Conservation Development Frameworks have been developed for the proposed Van Der Kemps Kloof / Chatty Nature Reserve, Aloes / Swartkops Nature Reserve, Settlers Park Nature Reserve, the Target Kloof / William Moffet section of the Baakens Valley, Maitlands Nature Reserve, Springs Nature Reserve and the Van Stadens Wildflower Reserve.
The following is recommended with regard to the development of ecotourism within the municipal area:
x The concept of the “Five Biome City” should be further promoted, including the route that was established to guide tourists through the various biomes within the municipal area; and
x The NMBM should implement mechanisms, such as the development of public-private partnerships, to unlock the ecotourism potential of its local authority reserves, specifically through
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
52 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 40
the sensitive and appropriate development (e.g. restaurants, tea-gardens and lodges) of areas identified in the Conservation Development Frameworks.
5.4.2 Nature-based Development Models
During the period between approximately 2002 and 2008, marked growth occurred in the number of actual and proposed rural lifestyle residential developments within the municipal area. These developments have the potential to support biodiversity conservation objectives if they are appropriately planned and managed.
Development models that support the conservation of Critical Biodiversity Areas, in alignment with the NMBM’s land-use policies, and are underpinned by a legitimate conservation management ethic should be encouraged.
5.4.3 Game Reserves and Game Farming
The northern portion of the NMBM is well suited to the development of the game reserve and game farming industry. Farming with game in the thicket biome has the potential to be more ecologically and economically sustainable than farming with livestock. The main activity for which game is utilised is hunting, including both recreational and trophy hunting. With the Eastern Cape being recognised as the most preferred destination for overseas hunters (Smith & Wilson, 2002), this industry has potential to contribute to a biodiversity based economy in the NMBM, provided that it is correctly managed and controlled (for example, preventing or limiting the introduction of non-indigenous species).
The following is recommended with regard to game reserves and game farming:
x Game reserves and game farming should be promoted in areas that are suitable for these activities (areas within the thicket biome) within the NMBM, provided that such operations are managed in a way that supports biodiversity conservation (e.g. stock only indigenous species and appropriate densities).
5.4.4 Skills Development and Training
The development of a biodiversity economy within the municipal area will create a demand for a new set of skills within the workforce. Skills development and training opportunities linked to biodiversity include those associated with the development of indigenous plant nurseries, ecotourism establishments and secondary industries centred on invasive alien plant biomass.
An opportunity for skills development is the creation of indigenous plant nurseries to supply plants for cultural and medicinal use. The nurseries should be linked to the establishment of a training college, potentially supported by the SANBI Green Futures Programme, in order to train previously disadvantaged individuals in horticulture. An additional benefit of the nurseries would be the reduced demand on natural systems for plants of cultural, landscaping and medicinal use.
Ecotourism establishments, such as game lodges, require staff skilled in the hospitality sector and in ecological management. Skills development programmes linked to biodiversity conservation that seek to train and employ youth displaced by HIV / AIDS and poverty should be encouraged.
The development of industries within the municipal area that utilise invasive alien plant material will result in some economic return for the investment spent on control operations and also the development of skills and creation of jobs. Opportunities exist to create new industries and produce various products from invasive alien plant biomass. The following is recommended with regard to skills development and training:
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 53
Page 41
x Skills development models that link biodiversity conservation to improving the capacity of disadvantaged individuals should be encouraged. 5.4.5 Natural Resource Use A proportion of the NMBM’s population makes use of natural resources for cultural and medicinal purposes, as a source of fuel, and as a means to supplement income. Unsustainable use of natural resources will impact on biodiversity and on the ability of the environment to supply goods and services to the population. The following is recommended with regard to natural resource use:
x Areas of natural vegetation, outside of the existing protected area and CBA/ESA network, should be set aside for traditional practises to continue;
x In order to reduce the impact of resource use on natural areas, the development of nurseries for indigenous plants of cultural and medicinal value should be encouraged; and
x The impacts of the bait collecting industry at Swartkops should be monitored and the industry should continue to be regulated to ensure that harvesting is sustainable. 5.4.6 Payment for Ecosystem Services Payment for Ecosystem Services is the practice of offering incentives to farmers or landowners in exchange for managing their land to provide some sort of ecological service. Amongst the ecosystem services receiving the most attention worldwide is climate change mitigation and, related to this, there is an opportunity to develop the carbon sequestration industry within the NMBM. Spekboom Portulacaria afra, which is a dominant species in many thicket types, is being increasingly used to restore plant cover in degraded thicket. This plant has the ability to sprout from replanted cuttings, making it a good candidate for large-scale restoration of degraded land. Furthermore, there is evidence that spekboom has extraordinary carbon storing capabilities. Restoration of degraded subtropical thicket would achieve the combined aims of improving rural livelihoods, restoring biodiversity, and replenishing natural capital and ecosystem services (Powell et al., undated). Already, private companies have begun offering services to support the restoration of thicket by landowners. Opportunities for thicket restoration projects are in the north of the municipal area, in places where subtropical thicket has been degraded or transformed by human activities. The following is recommended with regard to payment for ecosystem services:
x The development of thicket restoration projects within the NMBM should be encouraged 5.4.7 Expanded Public Works Programme The Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) is a government programme to provide poverty and income relief through temporary work for the unemployed to carry out socially useful activities. Programmes active within the municipal area include the Working for Water, the Working for Woodlands and CoastCare Programmes. The Working for Water Programme collaborates with local communities on projects to control invasive alien plants. At the same time, the programme creates an enabling environment for skills training and invests in the development of the communities through the implementation of HIV and AIDS projects and other socio-development initiatives. Short-term contract jobs (with an emphasis on recruiting women, youth, and the disabled) are created through the clearing activities undertaken. The following is recommended with regard to Expanded Public Works Programmes within the NMBM:
x The efforts of the EPWP programmes should be aligned to the network of Critical Biodiversity Areas and Ecological Support Areas, where possible.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
54 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 42
x Where private landowners enter into conservation agreements with the NMBM, these landowners should be prioritised for assistance by EPWP programmes. 6 Part F: Monitoring, reviewing and updating The Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality is the lead implementing agent of the Bioregional Plan for the bioregion. As such, the NMBM is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the plan and future review thereof, including:
x Its application in land-use planning and decision-making;
x Revision and amendment of the underlying systematic biodiversity plan (Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality) at least every five years; and
x An update of the published Bioregional Plan at least every five years. However, it is important to note that SANParks, the Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency (ECPTA), and private landowners (e.g. Mountains to Oceans, PPC, Coega Development Corporation etc.) are responsible for the management of certain protected areas and conservation areas within Nelson Mandela Bay and the above lead agency responsibilities assigned to the NMBM do not in any way remove or transfer existing and future management responsibilities from these management agencies.
6.1 Review The Bioregional Plan is to be reviewed every five years and following immediately thereafter by a revision process to ensure that it remains appropriately up-to-date. Such reviews and revisions should be linked to the similar process for the NMBM SDF.
Furthermore, the NMBM has put various organisational structures in place to facilitate the integration of the NMBM CBA Network into land-use planning and decision-making (see Section 5.3.1). The effectiveness of these structures in achieving this objective should be reviewed bi-annually. The land- use guidelines (see Section 4Error! Reference source not found.) associated with this Bioregional lan are additional instruments to support the application of the plan in planning and decision-making. The guidelines should be reviewed at the same intervals as the Bioregional Plan.
6.2 Monitoring Various monitoring instruments and indicators were considered, in addition to the availability of necessary resources to measure achievement of the Planning, Operation and Management, Mainstreaming and Building a Biodiversity Economy objectives of the Bioregional Plan. It is recommended that monitoring be undertaken on a five-yearly cycle, in alignment with the revision of the Bioregional Plan.
Implementation of the various recommended measures for effective management and monitoring should commence immediately upon gazetting of the Bioregional Plan. 6.2.1 Monitoring instruments
The following instruments were identified as being viable to generate reliable data for monitoring purposes:
x Previous and future systematic biodiversity plans;
x NMBM Alien Invasive Plant Control Strategy;
x NMBM Environmental Management Sub-Directorate SDIP;
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 55
Page 43
x Biodiversity Management Plans;
x Protected Area Management Plans;
x NMBM State of the Environment Reports;
x Biodiversity Stewardship agreements;
x Development of a system of tracking NEMA EIA Regulations and MPRDA applications that do not correctly refer to the NMBM Bioregional Plan, as well as NMBM project proposals that present conflicts with the Bioregional Plan that have not been evaluated via the MDTTT;
x Future NMBM Protected Area Expansion Strategy; and
x Progress Reports for NMBM and other biodiversity projects in the municipal area. 6.2.2 Monitoring Indicators
Due to the limited number of instruments available to generate reliable data for monitoring purposes, only the following final indicators were selected per category (DEAT, 2005; SANBI, 2009): Planning
x Ecosystem Protection Level of NMBM vegetation types (hectares and percentage protected per vegetation type and associated protected area categories);
x Ecosystem Threat Status of NMBM vegetation types (remaining hectares per vegetation type and percentage thereof requiring protection);
x Terrestrial Habitat Loss (hectares / vegetation type);
x Threatened amphibian species (hectares and number of populations / threatened species);
x Threatened bird species (hectares and number of populations / threatened species);
x Threatened mammal species (hectares and number of populations / threatened species);
x Threatened reptile species (hectares and number of populations / threatened species);
x Biodiversity management plans for ecosystems (number of plans);
x Biodiversity management plans for species (number of plans);
x NMBM Biodiversity Stewardship Policy and Implementation Plan updated; and
x NMBM Protected Area Expansion Strategy developed and updated. Operation and Management
x Budgetary provision for conservation management (percentage in relation to required budget);
x Area of municipal, other state and private land declared in terms of the NEM: PA Act and rezoned to Open Space 3;
x Area of invasive alien species cleared (hectares / Ecosystem Threat Status or CBA-ESA category); and
x Area of natural vegetation restored or rehabilitated (hectares / Ecosystem Threat Status or CBA- ESA category). Mainstreaming
x EIA, Land Use (e.g. LUPO, DFA, SPLUMA etc.) and Mining applications that do not refer to the NMBM Bioregional Plan appropriately (percentage); and
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
56 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 44
x Municipal project proposals that are in conflict with the Bioregional Plan, which have not been reviewed by the MDTTT (percentage). Building a Biodiversity Economy
x Temporary and permanent employment opportunities created through biodiversity initiatives (number of jobs);
x Protection status of ecosystems and species as a direct result of development projects (hectares / vegetation type or species);
x Individuals trained in biodiversity-related industries (number); and
x Areas restored or rehabilitated as a direct result of payment for ecosystem services (hectares / vegetation type or species).
6.3 Updating The updating of a systematic biodiversity plan is a data intensive and time consuming process. In light of the requirement for municipal SDFs to undergo full revisions every five years, it is recommended that the NMBM systematic biodiversity plan also be updated on a five-yearly cycle. The revision should be scheduled such that a draft (revised) biodiversity plan is completed by the commencement date of the SDF revision process; thereby facilitating an integrative planning process and the incorporation of the Critical Biodiversity Areas map into the SDF.
Due to ongoing changes in land-use rights and the implications of development on the NMBM CBA network, a biennial update of the Critical Biodiversity Areas map should also be considered. The revision should be made available as a digital map and in GIS via the NMBM’s website. The revised map must be submitted to the MEC of DEDEAT, in consultation with the SANBI and the Minister of DEA, for gazetting.
Updates of the entire Bioregional Plan should be undertaken on a five-yearly cycle, once the revision of the NMBM systematic biodiversity plan and SDF have been completed. However, more frequent updates to specific components of the Bioregional Plan could be undertaken when necessary.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 57
e
4 d
1 yp an
the
t 45 20 ata
e ,
d l or f the yp Threat
on t
name f i
e create t Page ovember o
d rring
ication ecia
p f meta rocess u i p
r co p s erence stem
area
f S l
c f y I occ assi d o were l
re
G c
es ication
f ication ication f cos N
f f y s D o es s vegetation E ogica l
u l
i erence A f f ecies assi assi e assi l e co tat l l p p The c Protecte E CB c R C concern s The S iversit ease
d sha
For
Bio t _ _ N R . I n T
d The E M M B
s A e . E E
l N 1 V d E rta T T E l R S S M e UMB i 7- SA Y Y A f
e SE S S TYP l N _N mpo N O O the assemb
O ES C PP EG C
Tab V E S C R E
to
in
d
been to
s
e the u
f or orms , f
er f
o not
d ud tat d l has the s) l areas
ata S
or concern f
MBM A
I con d d are l o
MBM
inc n l
an
N l ecies
. I on N p is instea (CB
i es P the conservation
t
ecia Critica s
the f l
y is p
f p yp Threat ecies o the
ogica
i t
es s
l o which rotecte
l p
f r e
MBM MBM f es tor p s reas o d e c
se o l
u d, i
each A y N N yp f u
eco
tab t within co stem
es l
e y
ar the to y tor
p a
stat the the d f D te
- u
mis d concern
f o – u ecies
l
o ication or cos p
f f sha MBM tan Bioregiona
iversit s vegetation critica stat E l non
S d N er
d ecia y MBM assi attrib revent rocesses p l
the a p l The The N p The Fina Bio names the s assigne shown The an The areas c vegetation
ata f d o the
r
r E r y Y T E in y y C C .l 7.l R
I I .l .l T S 9 RO 0 s A
Meta T T 0 9 r I I
O P ment _ d 1 l y
11 R R p RO C EGE Y O 200 I 6 L_ ie o P E V C C 200 7.l f l S _ T 1 es A
220 ______l 0 _ I S i S 1 C
I f 7 R 11 ES eve e 0 TU G 6 E the d er
g EAS 1 MBM MBM MBM MBM MBM A
V O y I ortant L_ a _ T L R to a TYP p
A D _N _N _N _N _N S A O the L ck 0 0 0 0 9 _ O _
IN C I im N_ a 8 8 8 8 1
ing D M F E B in 3 3 3 3 9 p O d d
_ E
E I 7 7 7 7
d ESSES T T L_ L_ 6 6 6 6 00 r an
3 A AS 3 CT S 3 y A 3 C 4 A
ata se , d u r) accor
y _ L L e A P .l A A h ( S 20 ES
IN t es) _
_ C C l F I I UMB C i
were F EAS n f es _
T T p i l I I
l
O i R
f RO _ R R
d sh EAS A p ES m .
N_N es P _ e C C that R x l 0 p er . R
i sh _ _ ES d 1 A ( y f I L_ E
TY u sh _ 7. e I TYP a C l A p C 0 ers D l 7. p S c E C 220 3 y N ata I d E sh a MBM MBM R n P EG 1 . 0 a i 00 d O G h 7 E
9 1 S V 1 l C CT 0 0 0 _ _ _N _N S V O 5 I
3 _ 0 0 0 9 E L es 0 p l L_ L_ D 0 8 8 8 1 T i D _ O meta f 5 atia 3 3 3 9 A A O
sh E I I C 0 7 7 7 e p e R C RO IN 7. 6 6 6 00 B E s p associate L_ E E 3 3 P 3 0 4 _ _ SES F l
a
ud , l a h )
p s p
9 P inc
E es e
sh 20 l V . d h L_ I ( rinci _ i t 200
A D p S _ f an
C changes)
f
O
I es o I l
1 i 0 TU . G f B e
the 1 track
S
EAS A 3
e O 9 n . I f T i L_ R p (no L 20
l er
9 o 4 S t
A A
_ 9 1 O d _ _ l p 200 u G C 20 C I _ sha
o M D O
T E 200 : I F E E EAS _ T R
L_ R ovember . rcMa the S CT C
A G A s ackage 1: f ES
A 7 N Y E I
- C 1 d p o I I L_ ESSES S T
-
7 C
T TY A ar C R an I O I l E e
P d l R S l P C RO IN ine 9 ata l b t ES F P E S C 0 RO R d
a u Part stan T o A in Bioregiona l Fina
MBM 7 N
58 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 46
8 Conclusions and Recommendations The final Bioregional Plan has identified priorities areas for biodiversity conservation in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipal area. Measures for effective management, review, monitoring and updating have also been recommended. Implementation of the various recommended measures for effective management and monitoring should commence immediately upon gazetting of the final Bioregional Plan.
The final Bioregional Plan serves as the official reference for biodiversity priorities within the bioregion, superseding all the previous non-published spatial biodiversity plans for the area. Upon gazetting of the final Bioregional Plan, all organs of state will be required to take the Bioregional Plan into account in their decision-making. The gazetting process will also trigger certain legal requirements in terms of the NEMA EIA Regulations.
This final Bioregional Plan is consistent with the NEM: Biodiversity Act and meets all the requirements of the Guideline regarding the Determination of Bioregions and the Preparation and Publication of Bioregional Plans (DEAT, 2008).
Prepared by
Warrick Stewart M.Sc. Pr.Sci.Nat
Principal Environmental Scientist
Reviewed by
Rob Gardiner M.Sc. Pr.Sci.Nat
Principal Environmental Scientist and Partner
All data used as source material plus the text, tables, figures, and attachments of this document have been reviewed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering and environmental practices.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 59
Page 47
9 References ACE. 2008. Centre for African Conservation Ecology: Annual Report 2008. Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.
ADU. 2009. Seabird sites in southern Africa: Cape Recife, Mandela Bay, Port Elizabeth. Avian Demography Unit website: http://adu.org.za/cprecife.php
Bates, M.F., Branch, W.R., Bauer, A.M., Burger, M., Marais, J., Alexander, G.J. & De Villers, M.S. (eds). Atlas and Red List of the Reptiles of South Africa, Lesotho, and Swaziland. Suricata 1. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
Berliner, D. & Desmet, P. 2007. Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan: Technical Report. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry Project No 2005-012, Pretoria. 1 August 2007.
Bornman, T.G. & Klages, N.T.W. 2003. Maitland River Mouth Strategic Environmental Assessment. Institute for Environmental and Coastal Management. IECM Report No. C81, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth.
Bruton, N. 2006. Nelson Mandela Metropole Business Confidence Indicator: October 2006. Port Elizabeth Regional Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Port Elizabeth.
Conservation International. 2009. Biodiversity Hotspots. Conservation International website: http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/Pages/default.aspx
Conradie, W., Reeves, B & Gerber, L. 2012. The amphibians and reptiles of Groendal Wilderness Area: a report on a rapid biodiversity survey conducted in September 2012. Eastern Cape Parks & Tourism Agency. Unpublished report.
Cowling R.M., Pressey R.L., Lombard A.T., Desmet P.G. & Ellis A. 1999a. From representation to persistence: requirements for a sustainable system of conservation areas in the species-rich mediterranean-climate desert of southern Africa. Diversity and Distributions 5, 1-21.
Cowling R.M., Pressey R.L., Lombard A.T., Heijnis C.J., Richardson D.M. & Cole, N. 1999b. Framework for a conservation plan for the Cape Floristic Region. IPC Report 9902 submitted to WWF:SA.
Cowling, R.M., Lombard, A.T., Rouget, M., Kerley, G.I.H., Wolf, T., Sims-Castley, R., Knight, A., Vlok J.H.J., Pierce, S.M., Boshoff, A.F. & Wilson, S.L. 2003. A Conservation Assessment for the Subtropical Thicket Biome. Report 43 to the Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth, South Africa.
CSIR. 2004. Eastern Cape State of the Environment Report. CSIR Division of Water, Environment and Forestry Technology. Durban, South Africa.
Cunningham, M., Henderson, C.L & Tolley, K. A. 2003.Herpetological Survey: Cockscomb (T’Numqa) mountain. African Herp News 36:22-25.
DEAT. 2005. South Africa's National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism, South Africa.
Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. 2007. Provincial Guideline on Biodiversity Offsets. Republic of South Africa, Provincial Government of the Western Cape, Department of Environmental Affairs & Development Planning, Cape Town.
IWR. Undated. Catchment M: The Swartkops River. Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University, Grahamstown.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
60 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 48
Jenkens, A.R. & Stephenson, A. 1998. Siberian Peregrines in southern Africa. Africa – Birds & Birding 2(4): 63-68.
Lubke, R.A. & de Moor, I. 1998. A Field Guide to the Eastern & Southern Cape Coasts. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town.
Macfarlane, D., Holness, S.D., von Hase, A., Brownlie, S. & Dini, J., 2014. Wetland offsets: a best- practice guideline for South Africa. South African National Biodiversity Institute and the Department of Water Affairs. Pretoria. 69 pages.
Martin, P. 2002. South African Birding: Birding Resources for Southern Africa. SA Birding website: http://www.sabirding.co.za/birdspot/021017.asp
Measey, G.J. (ed.) 2011. Ensuring a future for South Africa’s frogs: a strategy for conservation research. SANBI Biodiversity Series 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.
Minter, L.R., Burger, M., Harrison, J.A., Braack, H.H., Bishop, P.J. & Knoepfer, D. (eds) 2004. Atlas and Red Data Book of the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.
Mittermeier, R. A., Robles Gil, P., Hoffmann, M., Pilgrim, J., Brooks, T., Goettsch Mittermeier, C., Lamoreux, J. & Da Fonseca, G.A.B. 2004. Hotspots Revisited: Earth's Biologically Richest and Most Endangered Terrestrial Ecoregions. Conservation International, Washington
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca, G.A.B. & Kent, J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403, 853-858
Powell M., A. Mills, and C. Marais. Undated. Carbon sequestration and restoration: challenges and opportunities in subtropical thicket. Unpublished document available at: www2.dawf.za.
Roux, D., de Moor, F. Cambray, J. & Barber-James, H. 2002. Use of landscape-level river signatures in conservation planning: a South African case study. Conservation Ecology 6, 6-15.SANBI. 2009. Indicator Report: Terrestrial Habitat Loss 2009/2/4. Unpublished report.
Smith, N. & Wilson, S.L. 2002. Changing land use trends in the thicket biome: pastoralism to game farming. Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit Report 38, University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth.
SRK Consulting. 2010. Final Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality. SRK Consulting Report Number 367380/5, SRK Consulting, Port Elizabeth.
SSI 2009. An invasive alien plant clearing strategy for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality. SSI Engineers & Environmental Consultants Report, Johannesburg.
Stewart, W.I. 2008. A Biodiversity Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality, Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. M.Sc. Dissertation, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.
UNESCO 2009. Alexandria Coastal Dunefields. World Heritage Programme website: http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5453/
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 61
Page 49
Appendices
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
62 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 50
Appendix A: Systematic Conservation Assessment and Plan for the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality (SRK Consulting, 2010)
This appendix can be accessed from www.nelsonmandelabay.gov.za , and is not necessarily included in the gazette.
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015 No. 3362 63
Page 51
Appendix B: Extended Biodiversity Profile
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
64 No. 3362 PROVINCIAL GAZETTE EXTRAORDINARY, 30 MARCH 2015
Page 52
Appendix C: A4 map of Critical Biodiversity Areas
NMBM Final Bioregional Plan - 17 November2014 (no track changes) November 2014
Printed by and obtainable from the Government Printer, Bosman Street, Private Bag X85, Pretoria, 0001. Tel: (012) 748 6052, 748 6053, 748 6058 Also available at the Legal Advisory Services, Province of the Eastern Cape, Private Bag X0047, Bisho, 5605. Tel. (040) 635-0052
3362—1