DOCSLIB.ORG

Preliminary Biodiversity Conservation Plan for Limpopo

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Preliminary Biodiversity Conservation Plan for Limpopo Preliminary Limpopo Conservation Plan Report April 2011 Contact Person : Lizanne (E.J.) Nel. Plot 187 Tweefontein, Polokwane, Limpopo. Postnet Suite 123, Private Bag X 9676, Polokwane, 0700. Fax: (088015) 263 6274. E-mail : [email protected] INDEX CONTEXT OF THE REPORT ...................................................................................... 3 4.6.2 Species data ........................................................................................ 24 4.6.3 Data integrity and management ........................................................ 24 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... 4 4.6.4 Regional integration ............................................................................ 25 CONTRIBUTORS ..................................................................................................... 4 5 SPATIAL ASSESSMENT ................................................................................. 25 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS............................................................. 5 5.1 AQUATIC RESULTS ........................................................................................ 25 1 PURPOSE OF A PROVINCIAL CONSERVATION PLAN ....................................... 6 5.2 TERRESTRIAL RESULTS ................................................................................... 32 2 LEGAL MANDATE AND FRAMEWORK ............................................................ 6 6 PROTECTED AREA ASSESSMENT .................................................................. 36 3 SYSTEMATIC CONSERVATION PLANNING ...................................................... 8 6.1 PROTECTION LEVELS OF VEGETATION TYPES....................................................... 36 6.2 THE PROTECTED AREA NETWORK .................................................................... 37 4 PLANNING APPROACH FOR LIMPOPO ........................................................... 9 6.3 CORRIDORS ................................................................................................. 38 4.1 LIMPOPO PLANNING DOMAIN ........................................................................ 11 6.4 KEY FINDINGS .............................................................................................. 40 LANNING NITS 4.2 P U ......................................................................................... 12 6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................... 40 4.3 BIODIVERSITY FEATURES ................................................................................ 14 4.3.1 Biodiversity Pattern Features .............................................................. 14 7 LANDUSE PLANNING ................................................................................... 41 4.3.2 Biodiversity Process Features .............................................................. 15 7.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................ 41 4.3.3 Aquatic Ecosystems Features – NFEPA ............................................... 17 7.2 CROSS-CUTTING LAND-USE PRINCIPLES ............................................................ 42 4.3.4 Landuse Pressure Features .................................................................. 17 7.3 TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS ............................................................................. 42 4.4 PROTECTED AREAS ....................................................................................... 17 7.3.1 Land Management Classes.................................................................. 43 4.5 CONSERVATION TARGETS ............................................................................... 18 7.3.2 Land-use Types .................................................................................... 44 4.5.1 Biodiversity Pattern Targets ................................................................ 18 7.3.3 Land-use Guidelines ............................................................................ 46 4.5.2 Biodiversity Process Targets ................................................................ 19 7.4 AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS .................................................................................. 53 4.5.3 Aquatic Ecosystem Targets ................................................................. 19 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................ 61 4.6 CHALLENGES AND CONSTRAINTS IN DATA ......................................................... 24 4.6.1 Data gaps ............................................................................................ 24 LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES FIGURE 1 PLANNING AREA, WITH ALL TRANSFORMED AREAS AND PLANNING UNITS. 11 TABLE 1. DATASETS USED FOR THE TRANSFORMED LAYER. .......................................... 12 FIGURE 2: FORESTRY AREAS COMPARED WITH HIGH WATER YIELD AREAS ................. 13 TABLE 2: CATEGORIES OF PROTECTED AREAS BASED ON LEVEL OF PROTECTION. ....... 17 FIGURE 3: PLANNING UNITS – HEXAGONS VS. GEOGRAPHICAL PLANNING UNITS ....... 14 TABLE 3 BIODIVERSITY PATTERN FEATURES AND TARGETS. ......................................... 20 FIGURE 4: COMPOSITE OF SPECIES DISTRIBUTION DATA. ............................................. 15 TABLE 4 BIODIVERSITY PROCESS FEATURES AND TARGETS. ......................................... 20 FIGURE 5: AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE USE OF SURROGATES IN MODELLING ................ 16 TABLE 5. AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM FEATURES AND TARGETS . ......................................... 21 FIGURE 6. RIVER STATUS AS PER THE NFEPA PROCESS. ................................................ 26 TABLE 6. GENERAL ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES NOT SPECIFICALLY MODELLED ............... 23 FIGURE 7: FEPAS FOR THE LIMPOPO WATER MANAGEMENT AREA. ............................ 28 TABLE 7. STATUS OF THE BIOMES IN LIMPOPO ............................................................ 36 FIGURE 8: FEPAS FOR THE LEVHUVHU & MUTALE WATER MANAGEMENT AREA ........ 29 TABLE 8: VEGETATION TYPES (< 50% OF TARGET PROTECTED INSIDE PAS) .................. 37 FIGURE 9: FEPAS FOR THE CROCODILE & MARICO WATER MANAGEMENT AREA ........ 30 TABLE 9: SUMMARY OF THE CURRENT PROTECTION OF VEGETATION TYPES .............. 37 FIGURE 10: FEPAS FOR THE OLIFANTS WATER MANAGEMENT AREA ........................... 31 TABLE 10. LEVEL OF PROTECTION OF THE PLANNING AREA IN LIMPOPO .................... 38 FIGURE 11. PERCENTAGE OF THE PLANNING AREA ALLOCATED TO EACH OF THE TABLE 11. AREAS UNDER PROTECTION BY DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROTECTED AREAS ... 38 BIODIVERSITY ASSESSMENT CATEGORIES. ................................................. 32 TABLE 12 BIODIVERSITY PROCESS CORRIDORS WITH THEIR DESCRIPTIONS. ................ 41 FIGURE 12. VEGETATION TYPES IN LIMPOPO. ............................................................... 33 TABLE 13: SUMMARY OF TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION CATEGORIES... 42 FIGURE 13. PROTECTED AREA CATEGORIES IN RELATION TO IRREPLACEABLE AREAS. 34 TABLE 14. LAND MANAGEMENT CLASSES FOR TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS. ................. 43 FIGURE 14. RESULT OF THE BIODIVERSITY SPATIAL ASSESSMENT ................................ 35 TABLE 15.LAND-USE CATEGORIES AND LAND-USE TYPES.............................................. 44 TABLE 16. LAND-USE TYPES SUITED TO EACH LAND MANAGEMENT CLASS ................. 46 TABLE 17. LAND-USE GUIDELINES FOR EACH LAND MANAGEMENT CLASS. ................. 47 TABLE 18. AQUATIC LAND MANAGEMENT CLASSES WITH GUIDELINES........................ 54 1 Project team Lizanne Nel (4Life Promotions), Dawie Jansen Van Vuuren and Deon de Witt (MetroGIS) and Samantha Taljaart & Paul Claassen (Environomics) Copyright © 2010 Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environmental and Tourism (Government of the Republic of South Africa) All rights reserved by the Government of the Republic of South Africa in the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environmental and Tourism. No part of this report may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environmental and Tourism (LEDET). The information contained in this report is subject to change without notice. Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environmental and Tourism 20 Hans van Rensburg Street Private Bag X 9484 Polokwane 0700 Disclaimer and Warranty While every endeavour has been made to ensure the accuracy of the P-LCP, neither the Limpopo Department of Economic Development, Environmental and Tourism, 4Life Promotions, Environomics, MetroGIS, nor the authors accept any legal responsibility, direct or indirect, resulting from the use of the information contained in this report for any purpose whatsoever. Trademark Acknowledgement ARC/INFO™ and ArcView™ are registered trademarks of Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). All text and tables were produced with Microsoft Word™ and Microsoft Excel™, registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. The endemic Euphorbia sekhukhuniensis 2 CONTEXT OF THE REPORT The Department of Economic Development, Environment and Tourism (LEDET) is Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) identified. Data and analyses that are not directly related mandated to develop a Conservation Plan for Limpopo by the South African to the objective, and that have been reported on elsewhere, are omitted. Constitution and the National Biodiversity
Recommended publications
  • Meso-Archaean and Palaeo-Proterozoic Sedimentary Sequence Stratigraphy of the Kaapvaal Craton

    Meso-Archaean and Palaeo-Proterozoic Sedimentary Sequence Stratigraphy of the Kaapvaal Craton

    Marine and Petroleum Geology 33 (2012) 92e116 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Marine and Petroleum Geology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpetgeo Meso-Archaean and Palaeo-Proterozoic sedimentary sequence stratigraphy of the Kaapvaal Craton Adam J. Bumby a,*, Patrick G. Eriksson a, Octavian Catuneanu b, David R. Nelson c, Martin J. Rigby a,1 a Department of Geology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa b Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta, Canada c SIMS Laboratory, School of Natural Sciences, University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury Campus, Richmond, NSW 2753, Australia article info abstract Article history: The Kaapvaal Craton hosts a number of Precambrian sedimentary successions which were deposited Received 31 August 2010 between 3105 Ma (Dominion Group) and 1700 Ma (Waterberg Group) Although younger Precambrian Received in revised form sedimentary sequences outcrop within southern Africa, they are restricted either to the margins of the 27 September 2011 Kaapvaal Craton, or are underlain by orogenic belts off the edge of the craton. The basins considered in Accepted 30 September 2011 this work are those which host the Witwatersrand and Pongola, Ventersdorp, Transvaal and Waterberg Available online 8 October 2011 strata. Many of these basins can be considered to have formed as a response to reactivation along lineaments, which had initially formed by accretion processes during the amalgamation of the craton Keywords: Kaapvaal during the Mid-Archaean. Faulting along these lineaments controlled sedimentation either directly by Witwatersrand controlling the basin margins, or indirectly by controlling the sediment source areas. Other basins are Ventersdorp likely to be more controlled by thermal affects associated with mantle plumes.
  • The Geology of the Olifants River Area, Transvaal

    The Geology of the Olifants River Area, Transvaal

    REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA REPUBLIEK VANSUID-AFRIKA· DEPARTMENT OF MINES DEPARTEMENT VAN MYNWESE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIESE OPNAME THE GEOLOGY OF THE OLIFANTS RIVER AREA, TRANSVAAL AN EXPLANATION OF SHEETS 2429B (CHUNIESPOORT) AND 2430A (WOLKBERG) by J. S. I. Sehwellnus, D.Se., L. N. J. Engelbrecht, B.Sc., F. J. Coertze, B.Sc. (Hons.), H. D. Russell, B.Sc., S. J. Malherbe, B.Sc. (Hons.), D. P. van Rooyen, B.Sc., and R. Cooke, B.Sc. Met 'n opsomming in Afrikaans onder die opskrif: DIE GEOLOGIE VAN DIE GEBIED OLIFANTSRIVIER, TRANSVAAL COPYRIGHT RESERVED/KOPIEREG VOORBEHOU (1962) Printed by and obtainable (rom Gedruk deur en verkrygbaar the Government Printer, B(ls~ van die Staatsdrukker, Bosman­ man Street, Pretoria. straat, Pretoria. Geological map in colour on a Geologiese kaart in kleur op 'n scale of I: 125,000 obtainable skaal van I: 125.000 apart ver­ separately at the price of 60c. krygbaar teen die prys van 60c. & .r.::-~ h'd'~, '!!~l p,'-' r\ f: ~ . ~) t,~ i"'-, i CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT ........................ ' ••• no ..........' ........" ... • • • • • • • • •• 1 I. INTRODUCTION........ •.••••••••.••••••••.....••...•.•..••••..• 3 II. PHYSIOGRAPHY................................................ 4 A. ToPOGRAPHY..... • • . • • . • . • • . • • • . • • . • . • • • • • . • • • • • . • • • • • • ... 4 B. DRAINAGE.................................................... 6 C. CLIMATE ..........•.••••.•••••.••....................... ,.... 7 D. VEGETATION .••••.•••••.•.........•..... , ..............•... , . 7 III. GEOLOGICAL FORMATIONS ....................
  • Sequence Stratigraphic Development of the Neoarchean Transvaal Carbonate Platform, Kaapvaal Craton, South Africa Dawn Y

    Sequence Stratigraphic Development of the Neoarchean Transvaal Carbonate Platform, Kaapvaal Craton, South Africa Dawn Y

    DAWN Y. SUMNER AND NICOLAS J. BEUKES 11 Sequence Stratigraphic Development of the Neoarchean Transvaal carbonate platform, Kaapvaal Craton, South Africa Dawn Y. Sumner Department of Geology, University of California 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616 USA e-mail: [email protected] Nicolas J. Beukes Department of Geology, University of Johannesburg P.O. Box 524, Auckland Park, 2000 South Africa e-mail: [email protected] © 2006 March Geological Society of South Africa ABSTRACT The ~2.67 to ~2.46 Ga lower Transvaal Supergroup, South Africa, consists of a mixed siliciclastic-carbonate ramp that grades upward into an extensive carbonate platform, overlain by deep subtidal banded iron-formation. It is composed of 14 third-order sequences that develop from a mixed siliciclastic-carbonate ramp to a steepened margin followed by a rimmed margin that separated lagoonal environments from the open ocean. Drowning of the platform coincided with deposition of banded iron-formation across the Kaapvaal Craton. The geometry and stacking of these sequences are consistent with more recent patterns of carbonate accumulation, demonstrating that Neoarchean carbonate accumulation responded to subsidence, sea level change, and carbonate production similarly to Proterozoic and Phanerozoic platforms. The similarity of carbonate platform geometry through time, even with significant changes in dominant biota, demonstrates that rimmed margins are localized primarily by physiochemical conditions rather than growth dynamics of specific organisms. Stratigraphic patterns during deposition of the Schmidtsdrift and Campbellrand-Malmani subgroups are most consistent with variable thinning of the Kaapvaal Craton during extrusion of the ~2.7 Ga Ventersdorp lavas. Although depositional patterns are consistent with rifting of the western margin of the Kaapvaal Craton during this time, a rift-to-drift transition is not required to explain subsidence.
  • Article ISSN 1179-3163 (Online Edition)

    Article ISSN 1179-3163 (Online Edition)

    Phytotaxa 408 (1): 069–076 ISSN 1179-3155 (print edition) https://www.mapress.com/j/pt/ PHYTOTAXA Copyright © 2019 Magnolia Press Article ISSN 1179-3163 (online edition) https://doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.408.1.5 Gymnosporia sekhukhuniensis (Celastraceae), a new species from South Africa MARIE JORDAAN1,2 & ABRAHAM E. VAN WYK1,2* 1National Herbarium, South African National Biodiversity Institute, Private Bag X101, Pretoria, 0001 South Africa. 2H.G.W.J. Schweickerdt Herbarium, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0002 South Africa. *Author for correspondence. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Gymnosporia sekhukhuniensis, a new species from north-eastern South Africa, is described, illustrated, mapped, and compared with closely related species. It belongs to Gymnosporia sect. Buxifoliae, more specifically Group 1, the members of which are characterized by the capsules being (2)3(4)-valved, rugose or verrucose, and the seeds partially covered by the aril. The new species has a restricted distribution range and is near-endemic to the Sekhukhuneland Centre of Endemism. This biogeographical region rich in restricted-range plants is more or less congruent with surface outcrops of mafic and ultramafic igneous rocks belonging to the Rustenburg Layered Suite of the eastern Bushveld Complex. The range of the new species shows marginal intrusion into the far northern part of the nearby Wolkberg Centre of Endemism, where it is associated with dolomites of the Malmani Subgroup. Gymnosporia sekhukhuniensis is a suffrutex mainly associated with rocky outcrops in open savannah. Diagnostic characters include its dwarf habit (up to 1.6 m tall), capsules that are relatively small (5–8 mm long), woody, scaly-rugose, with hard pointed apices, and leaves that are very laxly arranged on the stems, with some often present on the thorns.
  • A New Species of Disa (Orchidaceae) from Mpumalanga, South Africa ⁎ D

    A New Species of Disa (Orchidaceae) from Mpumalanga, South Africa ⁎ D

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector South African Journal of Botany 72 (2006) 551–554 www.elsevier.com/locate/sajb A new species of Disa (Orchidaceae) from Mpumalanga, South Africa ⁎ D. McMurtry a, , T.J. Edwards b, B. Bytebier c a Whyte Thorne, P O Box 218, Carino 1204, South Africa b School of Biological and Conservation Sciences, University of KwaZulu–Natal Pietermaritzburg, Private Bag X01, Scottsville 3209, South Africa c Biochemistry Department, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Stellenbosch 7602, South Africa Received 10 November 2005; accepted 8 March 2006 Abstract A new species, Disa vigilans D. McMurtry and T.J. Edwards, is described from the Mpumalanga Escarpment. The species is a member of the Disa Section Stenocarpa Lindl. Its alliances are discussed in terms of its morphology and its phylogenetic placement is elucidated using molecular data. D. vigilans has previously been considered as an anomalous form of Disa montana Sond. but is more closely allied to Disa amoena H.P. Linder. © 2006 SAAB. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Disa; Draensberg endemic; New species; Orchidaceae; Section Stenocarpae; South Africa; Mpumalanga province 1. Introduction with 3 main veins, margins thickened and translucent. Inflorescence lax, cylindrical, 40–75 mm long; bracts light green suffused pinkish Disa is the largest genus of Orchidaceae in southern Africa (162 with darker green veins, linear-lanceolate, acuminate, 11–29×2– spp.) and has been the focus of considerable taxonomic investigation 3 mm, scarious at anthesis. Flowers white suffused with carmine- (Linder, 1981a,b, 1986; Linder and Kurzweil, 1994).
  • Limpopo Water Management Area

    Limpopo Water Management Area

    LIMPOPO WATER MANAGEMENT AREA WATER RESOURCES SITUATION ASSESSMENT MAIN REPORT OVERVIEW The water resources of South Africa are vital to the health and prosperity of its people, the sustenance of its natural heritage and to its economic development. Water is a national resource that belongs to all the people who should therefore have equal access to it, and although the resource is renewable, it is finite and distributed unevenly both spatially and temporally. The water also occurs in many forms that are all part of a unitary and inter-dependent cycle. The National Government has overall responsibility for and authority over the nation’s water resources and their use, including the equitable allocation of water for beneficial and sustainable use, the redistribution of water and international water matters. The protection of the quality of water resources is also necessary to ensure sustainability of the nation’s water resources in the interests of all water users. This requires integrated management of all aspects of water resources and, where appropriate, the delegation of management functions to a regional or catchment level where all persons can have representative participation. This report is based on a desktop or reconnaissance level assessment of the available water resources and quality and also patterns of water requirements that existed during 1995 in the Limpopo Water Management Area, which occupies a portion of the Northern Province. The report does not address the water requirements beyond 1995 but does provide estimates of the utilisable potential of the water resources after so-called full development of these resources, as this can be envisaged at present.
  • Open Resource

    Open Resource

    PROTECTION AND STRATEGIC USES OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES IN DROUGHT PRONE AREAS OF THE SADC REGION GROUNDWATER SITUATION ANALYSIS OF THE LIMPOPO RIVER BASIN FINAL REPORT This report is the final report on the project Protection and Strategic Uses of Groundwater Resources in the Transboundary Limpopo Basin and Drought Prone Areas of the SADC Region Title of Consulting Services: Groundwater Situation Analysis in the Limpopo River Basin The project was funded through a grant from The Global Environmental Facility (GEF Grant GEF-PDF TF027934 ) At the request of the World Bank a summary of the final report was prepared as a separate document by the Division of Water Environment and Forestry Technology CSIR, Pretoria, South Africa and issued as Report No. ENV-P-C-2003-047 DIVISION OF WATER, ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTRY TECHNOLOGY CSIR FINAL REPORT PROTECTION AND STRATEGIC USES OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES IN DROUGHT PRONE AREAS OF THE SADC REGION GROUNDWATER SITUATION ANALYSIS OF THE LIMPOPO RIVER BASIN Prepared for: Southern African Development Community (SADC) Directorate for Infrastructure and Services Water Division Private Bag 0095 GABERONE Botswanao Prepared by: Environmentek, CSIR P.O. Box 395 0001 Pretoria South Africa Pretoria Project no: JQ390 October 2003 Report no: ENV-P-C 2003-026 Limpopo River Basin Groundwater Situation Analysis – Final Report CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND TO AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY.............................................. 1 2. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE PROJECT........................................................ 3
  • Marakele National Park Park Management Plan

    Marakele National Park Park Management Plan

    Marakele National Park Park Management Plan For the period 2014-2024 This plan was prepared by Dr Peter Novellie and André Spies, with significant input and help from Johan Taljaard, Dr Nomvuselelo Songelwa, Dr Stefanie Freitag- Ronaldson, Dr Sam Ferreira, Dr Mike Knight, Dr Peter Bradshaw, Dr Hugo Bezuidenhout, Dr André Uys, Dr Rina Grant-Biggs, Dr Llewellyn Foxcroft, Dr Danny Govender, Michele Hofmeyr, Mphadeni Nthangeni, Sipho Zulu, Ernest Daemane, Cathy Greaver, Louise Swemmer, Navashni Govender, Robin Peterson, Karen Waterston, Joep Stevens, Sandra Taljaard, Property Mokoena and various stakeholders. MNP MP 2014 – 2024 - i Section 1: Authorisation This management plan is hereby internally accepted and authorised as required for managing the Marakele National Park in terms of Sections 39 and 41 of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act (Act 57 0f 2003). Mr Johan Taljaard Park Manager: Marakele National Park Date: 01 May 2014 Mr Property Mokoena General Manager: Northern Cluster Date: 01 May 2014 Dr Nomvuselelo Songelwa Managing Executive: Parks Date: 01 May 2014 Mr Abe Sibiya Acting Chief Executive: SANParks Date: 18 August 2014 Mr Kuseni Dlamini Date: 19 August 2014 Chair: SANParks Board Approved by the Minister of Environmental Affairs Mrs B.E.E. Molewa, MP Date: 10 November 2014 Minister of Environmental Affairs MNP MP 2014 – 2024 - ii Table of contents No. Index Page Acknowledgements i 1 Section 1: Authorisations ii Table of contents iii Glossary v Acronyms and abbreviations vi Lists of figures, tables and
  • Mus Neavei – Thomas’S Pygmy Mouse

    Mus Neavei – Thomas’S Pygmy Mouse

    Mus neavei – Thomas’s Pygmy Mouse Assessment Rationale This species is listed as Data Deficient in view of continuing uncertainty as to its extent of occurrence, natural history, threats and population size. Within the assessment region there are only a handful of records Photograph from Mkhuze Game Reserve and Wolkberg Nature Reserve. The species appears to be naturally uncommon, wanted and its conservation status and taxonomy are unclear. Further vetting of museum records and field surveys are required to resolve the uncertainty around this species. It should be reassessed when additional data become available. Regional population effects: Isolated and disjunct subpopulations of this species have been recorded in Regional Red List status (2016) Data Deficient* South Africa and Zimbabwe/Zambia, thus no rescue effect is possible. National Red List status (2004) Data Deficient Reasons for change No change Distribution Global Red List status (2008) Data Deficient Thomas’s Pygmy Mouse has a largely unresolved TOPS listing (NEMBA) (2007) None distribution, as it is commonly misidentified as M. minutoides, but is thought to range patchily from CITES listing None northern South Africa northwards to Tanzania (Monadjem Endemic No et al. 2015). Although, further investigation and confirmation is necessary, this species has been reported *Watch-list Data from north-eastern South Africa, southern Zimbabwe, Although its distribution may be more widespread, western and southern Mozambique, Zambia, southern Thomas’s Pygmy Mouse is only known from two Tanzania and the Democratic Republic of Congo (Skinner disjunct localities in South Africa: Wolkberg & Chimimba 2005). Wilderness Area (Limpopo Province) and Mkhuze Within the assessment region, it is only known from two Game Reserve (KwaZulu-Natal).
  • Simplified Geological Map of the Republic of South

    Simplified Geological Map of the Republic of South

    16° 18° 20° 22° 24° 26° 28° 30° 32° D O I SEDIMENTARY AND VOLCANIC ROCKS INTRUSIVE ROCKS N A R a O R E E E P M . Z I M B A B W E u C Sand, gravel, I SANDVELD (%s); Q %-s O 1.8 alluvium, colluvium, Z BREDASDORP (%b); y calcrete, silcrete Text r %k O KALAHARI a ALGOA (%a); i N t r E MAPUTALAND (%m) e C T SIMPLIFIED GEOLOGICAL MAP 65 . t UITENHAGE (J-Ku); ZULULAND (Kz); SUTHERLAND (Ksu); e r C Malvernia (Kml); Mzamba, Mboyti & Mngazana (K1) KOEGEL FONTEIN (Kk) 22° 145 *-J c 22° C i I s KAROO DOLERITE KOMATIPOORT DRAKENSBERG (Jdr); LEBOMBO (Jl); (J-d); (Jk); O s OF Z a Tshokwane Granophyre SUURBERG (Js); BUMBENI (Jb) (Jts) r P-* O u Musina S J Z2 E 200 Molteno, Elliot, Clarens, Ntabeni, Nyoka *-J c M i Z2 Kml s Zme Z4 V4 Jl s C T I a *-J i R V4 O r O Tarkastad *t THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA O T Z P-* O F O Zme P-* 250 R Z2 U R A V4 A E !-d K P-* E n Adelaide Pa N a B i A !s Kml m H r !s P e AND ECCA Pe *-J P Z2 P-* *-J Jl C 300 *-J I DWYKA C-Pd s O P-* !-d u Z !s o !s r O !bl e R4 Zgh f E i THE KINGDOMS OF LESOTHO AND SWAZILAND n A Msikaba Dm WITTEBERG D-Cw o L Louis Trichardt V4 !4 b A r E P Zba a & ti P V4 C Zba V-sy Vsc A BOKKEVELD Db Jl - Z2 C n R4 !w a i Zba r Z1 Zgi M b NATAL On TABLE MOUNTAIN O-Dt Vkd m a !-d C CAPE GRANITE (N-"c); 2008 KLIPHEUWEL "k !4 Vr 545 NAMA (N-"n); KUBOOS-BREMEN (N-"k); P-* *-J Zgh &ti VANRHYNSDORP (N-"v); Yzerfontein Gabbro-monzonite ("y) Zgh Vle O CANGO CAVES, C-Pd Vro R4 KANSA (N-"ck) MALMESBURY (Nm); N KAAIMANS (Nk); GAMTOOS (Nga) Zp Zp Zgh A Ellisras I R4 B I !w Zg Z M GARIEP Ng 1:2 000 000 &6 A N Vle
  • First Published in Bradleya 34: 217-224. 2016

    First Published in Bradleya 34: 217-224. 2016

    Bradleya 34/2016 pages 217-224 Kalanchoe winteri Gideon F.Sm., N.R.Crouch & Mich.Walters (Crassulaceae), a new species from the Wolkberg Centre of Endemism, South Africa Neil R. Crouch 1,2 , Gideon F. Smith 3,4 , Michele Walters 5,6 & Estrela Figueiredo 3,4 1. Biodiversity Research, Assessment and Monitoring, South African National Biodiversity Institute, P.O. Box 52099, Berea Road, 4007 South Africa (email: [email protected]). 2. School of Chemistry and Physics, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041, South Africa. 3. Department of Botany, P.O. Box 77000, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, 6031 South Africa (email: [email protected]; [email protected]). 4. Centre for Functional Ecology, Departamento de Ciências da Vida, Universidade de Coimbra, 3001-455 Coimbra, Portugal. 5. Natural Resources and Environment, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, P.O. Box 395, Pretoria, 0001 South Africa (email: [email protected]). 6. Centre for Wildlife Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa. Summary : A new Kalanchoe species, K. winteri (Eggli et al ., 1995; Descoings, 2003). Most re - Gideon F.Sm., N.R.Crouch & Mich.Walters, is de - cently, Thiede & Eggli (2007) treated Bryophyl - scribed from rocky grasslands of the Wolkberg re - lum as a section of Kalanchoe . Chernetskyy gion of Limpopo province, South Africa. The (2012) argued that the existence of “intermedi - species is closely allied to both K. thyrsiflora ate” species makes it impossible to distinguish Harv. and K. luciae Raym.-Hamet, from which it separate genera, a notion earlier supported by is readily separable on vegetative and reproduc - Mort et al .
  • Sdf Analysis

    Sdf Analysis

    THABAZIMBI MUNICIPALITY INTEGRATED SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FINAL DRAFT FOR COMMENTS MARCH 2007 Compiled by: Thabazimbi Municipality Assisted by: i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK ....................................................................... 1 1.3 PROJECT TEAM........................................................................................................................................... 2 1.4 METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................................................ 3 1.4.1 PHASE 1: CURRENT REALITY ANALYSIS........................................................................................ 3 1.4.2 PHASE 2: ASSESSMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT SITUATION AND DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS/OPTIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4.3 PHASE 3: PROPOSALS, STANDARDS AND IMPLEMENTATION ............................................... 4 1.5 CONTENT OF THE SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK .............................................................. 4 1.6 SDF IN CONTEXT.......................................................................................................................................