North West Province Biodiversity Conservation Assessment Technical Report Final Draft For Comments (10th March 2009)

Philip Desmet, Ray Schaller & Andrew Skowno

1 ce

sessment Technical Report. North West Provin 082 375 9934; Email: [email protected] 352 2955; Email: [email protected] (2008) North West Province Conservation As nservation Assessment Technical Report nservation & Environment – Mafikeng; Cell:

ty rights for the conceptual content of this report reside with the above authors) 082 774 4613; Email: [email protected]

ervation Assessment Technical Report Province Department of Agriculture, Conservation & Environment (NW-DACE) North West Province Biodiversity Co Department of Agriculture, Conservation & Environment. Mafikeng. October 2008 Desmet, P., Schaller, R. and Skowno, A. North West Province Department of Agriculture, Conservation & Environment ECOSOL GIS – Port Elizabeth; Cell: Independent contractor – Pretoria; Cell: 082 North West Department of Agriculture, Co 28 November 2008

Andrew Skowno agent: funding Principle Client: Citation: Date: Authors & contact details: Dr Phillip Desmet Ray Schaller Barac Photo Anuschka Report Title: (Unless otherwise quoted, intellectual proper Cons West Province Biodiversity North 2 wa, Dries Bloem, Bloem, Dries wa, . would like to would len Boshoff, Renier Coetzee, Ernest Mok

The NW Province t Curruthers, Marissa rhard van Dyk, Pieter Nel, Peter Leitner, Richard Newbery, Wil ut the help and support form numerous people. In particular we nts, and sometimes very hard work: Vincen

ervation Assessment Technical Report thank: Tarina Boshoff, Adriaan van Straaten, Tammy Smith and Mikko Jokinen for their support on the project oversight committee As well as the following for inputs and comme Constant van Deventer, Erina Otto, Daan Buijs, Anuschka Barac, Ge Acknowledgements Acknowledgements The completion of this project would not have been possible witho Terblanche, Sarel Cilliers and Henk Bouwman Cons West Province Biodiversity North

1 ...... 61 ROVINCIAL ROVINCIAL P ...... 62 2 ...... 63 LAN ...... 58 ...... 63 P ...... 75 LANNING P SSESSMENT V NG THE CONSERVATION GRICULTURE A SE EVELOPMENT EVELOPMENT A SSESSMENT D SSESSMENTS AND THE -U A A ...... 61 REA AND L A LAN P ...... 74 ...... 75 ...... 75 ONSERVATION ...... 63 ...... 66 C ECTOR S EVEL ONSERVATION ROTECTED ...... 67 L C ...... 62 ...... 66 ...... 66 RREPLACEABILITY RREPLACEABILITY P ...... 66 I IDGES R ...... 66 OR AYERS

ROVINCIAL ROVINCIAL Overview...... Planning Conservation Systematic 76 L SCALE PLANS P -

National-Level Cost Surfaces...... National-Level 67 Critical Biodiversity (LES) and Status Ecosystem Landscape Wetlands ...... 74 Pans...... 74 Priority sub catchments...... 74 CBAsWetland ...... 75 EVELOPMENT OF PROVINCIAL BIODIVERSITY INVENTORY AND INFORMATION AND INFORMATION INVENTORY BIODIVERSITY PROVINCIAL OF EVELOPMENT ILL AND ENERAL ECOMMENDATIONS FOR ECOMMENDATIONS EGETATION ORRIDORS OST QUATIC FEATURES IODIVERSITY IODIVERSITY UILDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH COSYSTEM STATUS YSTEMATIC YSTEMATIC ROVINCIAL BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN STRATEGY AND ACTION BIODIVERSITY ROVINCIAL ROVINCIAL ROTECTION INE AND COVER

R P B P D F B NW G V L H C C A E P S

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TAKI RECOMMENDATIONS REFERENCES ...... 64 AND TECHNICAL NOTES...... APPENDIX 1: GIS METHODS 66 8.6.1 8.6.2 Corridor Linkages ...... 70 8.7.1 8.7.2 8.7.3 8.7.4 8.10.1 MANAGEMENT SYSTEM MANAGEMENT 5.7 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9 8.10 CLUZ/MARXAN

ASSESSMENT FORWARD...... ASSESSMENT 61 6 7 8

...... 8

...... 33 ...... 50 ecosystem? ...... 34 ROJECTS P

tified? ROVINCE P

listing an ervation Assessment Technical Report ...... 20 ...... 48 ...... 25 NW ...... 49

tems iden tems ...... 54 rsity Features...... rsity 9 TATUS ?...... 47 SSESSMENTS AND ...... 26 ...... 32 S MAP A ...... 9 AP M S FOR THE 1994-2006 d Pans ...... 16

ents ...... 16 CBA AP TOGETHER TATUS ...... 36 M S

ystems?...... 33 SHAPEFILES ?...... 42 CBA CBA’ S EATURES COSYSTEM

atures ...... 16 COSYSTEMS HANGE F EVEL ...... 8 CBA E E GIS ...... 19 C L IODIVERSITY IODIVERSITY CBA’ B Wetlands an Sub-Catchm COSYSTEM OVER OVER E C C

Vegetation TypesVegetation ...... 9 Expert Mapped Biodive Aquatic Fe ecos Why list ecosys listed How were of implications are the What HAT ARE HAT ARE ON THE HAT IS ESCRIPTION OF OF ESCRIPTION ELEVANT ELEVANT IVER ACKGROUND IODIVERSITY ERRESTRIAL HREATENED UMMARY OF ROTECTION UTTING THE AND AND THE OF IMITATIONS B R B L L T R T P W W P L D S

2.3.3.1 2.3.3.2

SUMMARY...... 5 BIODIVERSITY INFORMATION ...... 8 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.8.1 2.8.2 2.8.3 ANALYSIS GAP AREA NETWORK PROTECTED PROVINCIAL .... 35 LOSS OF BIODIVERSITY DRIVERS ...... 38 AREAS (CBAS)...... CRITICAL BIODIVERSITY 42 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 3.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6

Table of Contents of Contents Table ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS...... 1 1 2 3 4 5 Cons West Province Biodiversity North 2

...... 84

difier

ets ...... 80

als...... 78 OP LIST OF PARTICIPANTS . 94 ervation Assessment Technical Report

y Length Mo y Length

and Targ and

ssment go ssment

it Costit ...... 83

Domain ...... 78 Units...... 79

re...... 81

Systematic asse Systematic Planning Planning Features Biodiversity Softwa Planning Un Boundar Calculating the

8.10.2 8.10.3 8.10.4 8.10.5 8.10.6 8.10.7 8.10.8 STATUSVEGETATION OF 2: SUMMARY APPENDIX ...... 91 WORKSH 3: THREATS APPENDIX COVER LAND PROVINCE NW OF 4: SUMMARY APPENDIX

STATISTICS ...... 95 9 10 11 Cons West Province Biodiversity North

3 shapefile...... 54 ystem status (LES) of points in nk were excludedfrom the final r the NW Ptovince (adapted from yellow where kept as separate the final CBA er 2007)...... 59 ape...... 71 coverage. Layers highlighted in pi CBA map. Layers highlighted in layers and not included in the different CBA categegories fo Ferrar & Lott used to classify the landscape ecos the landsc Table 14: A matrix of recommended land-use activities in relations to Table 15: Thresholds in % of landscape transformed surrounding a site Table 16: Radii and area of search windows used to calculate LES. ...71

as part of the ctives. Adapted non 2008)...... 45 BI 2008)...... 25 tegories used in relation to the the to in relation used tegories layer)...... 27 eas where participants felt that ervation Assessment Technical Report r local municipality in the NW ment objectives and potential initially identified ocess...... 10 dangered (CR), endangered (EN) land-use guidelines...... 44 management obje ional plans(A ystems (SAN sity indicators...... 46 NSBA river e NW province...... 49 mapping pr West Province...... 50 NW Province expert biodiversity-related land manage landscape-level biodiver Province...... 19 categories for the NW Province between 1994 and 2006...... 20 cover categories broken down pe Province...... 21 with thresholds for critically en and vulnerable (VU) ecos the NW (PESC) for State Ecological within each Category Present province (based on the Province as identified by stakeholders. The numbers in parentheses refer to geographic ar a particular threat was greatest or in operation (Figure 17)...... 39 categories and the associated land-use planning and decision-making guidelines based on a set of high-level land biodiversity CBA categories for th (CBAs) in the North information field that were unioned to create the NW CBA from the guideline for bioreg

List of Tables Table 4: A list of biodiversity experts Table 1: The area covered by higher-level land cover classes in the NW Table 2: A summary of the proportional change in land cover Table 3: A summary of the proportion of total provincial change in land Table 6: Criteria used to identify threatened terrestrial ecosystems, Table 5: Percentage of each main stem river type (River Signature) Table 7. A summary of the drivers of biodiversity loss in the NW Table 8: The conceptual steps followed in developing the CBA Table 9: A framework for linking spatial planning categories (CBAs) to Table 10 A summary of the CBA map ca Table 11 A summary of the literature consulted when developing the Table 12 Biodiversity criteria used to define Critical Biodiversity Areas Table 13: This table summarizes the individual GIS shapefiles and key Cons West Province Biodiversity North

4 alysis...... 81 ovince...... 56 ed in the MARXAN irreplaceability therefore irreplaceability=0...... 90 ere cost = 0 and BLM = 1...... 88 corridor network linkages...... 73 aceability map where Pas and Cas where Cost and BLM = 0...... 86 placeability an for the NWfor the Pr study...... 80 tools...... 61 ...... 85 biodiversity sector plan (bioregional plan) and other land use planning used in this targets used in the irre parameters are balanced (cost = cost1 and BLM = 2.15)...... 89 contribute to targets. Clear areas indicate where targets for features have been achieved analysis Figure 20: Aquatic CBAs Figure 21: Ecological support areas (ESAs) for the NW Province...... 57 Figure 22: A diagram illustrating the relationship between the Figure 23: Landscape Ecosystem Status for North West Province...... 72 Figure 24: Critical biodiversity Figure 25. An example of the terrestrial and freshwater planning units Figure 26. A summary of the terrestrial biodiversity features and Figure 27. The cost layer (cost1) us 28: MARXAN outputFigure Figure 29. MARXAN output where cost = cost1 and BLM = 0...... 87 Figure 30. MARXAN output wh Figure 31. Optimised MARXAN conservation score output where scaling Figure 32: C-Plan initial irrepl

cipality...... 24

ervation Assessment Technical Report tegory (PESC) of main stem rivers Status of main-stem rivers in the ver catchments in the NW Province. raphic regions of the provinceregionsraphic of the workshop participants...... 40 network combined...... 36 per local muni in the NW Province...... 37 for the NW Province...... 55 between 1994 and 2006...... 23 (data from NSBA)...... 30 ...... 14 2006...... 20 mbined)...... 29 ge)...... 11 ce...... 31 ssment...... 15 ...... 18 following pa this asse urbanization to the loss of natural vegetation in the NW Province between 1994- natural to other uses total provincial growth degradation co NW Provin by the existing statutory Protected Area network versus the PA and Conservation Area broader set of tools for land use planning and decision making..43 in the NW Province referred to by the threats

List of Figures Figure 1: NW Province vegetation map. (key to vegetation types on Figure 2: Vegetation types endemic to the NW Province...... 13 Figure 3: The complete set of expert mapped features gathered during Figure 4: The selected set of expert features included in the CBA map. Figure 5: Distribution of wetlands and pans in the NW Province...... 17 Figure 6: Priority sub-quaternary ri Figure 7: The proportional contribution of agriculture, mining and Figure 8: Extent of transformation in the NW Province (2006)...... 22 Figure 9: Land cover change - areas that have been converted from Figure 10: Growth in non-natural land type categories - Proportion of Figure 11: Terrestrial ecosystem status (transformation only)...... 28 Figure 12: Terrestrial ecosystem status (transformation and Figure 13: Present ecological state ca Figure 14: The provincial Ecosystem Figure 15: A comparison of the percentage of feature targets achieved Figure 16: Protected areas Figure 17 (following page): Geog Figure 18 A conceptual outline of where bioregional plans fit in the Figure 19: Terrestrial CBAs Cons West Province Biodiversity North 5 on the state of biodiversity the Biodiversity Conservation plan for the province in the the province to gather and s, through the map of critical Key spatial information layers undertaking a stakeholder Advise “the DACE” on how to go about mainstreaming the the mainstreaming about go to how on DACE” “the Advise conservation planning outcomes. disseminate information related to disseminate information related Plan Design and assist DACE in Design and assist participation programme within Assist the department in interpreting the biodiversity conservation assessment results The report is accompanied by an electronic archive of the spatial data used in this study. (protected areas, vegetation types and critical biodiversity areas) will be available on SANBI’s BGIS web site (http://bgis.sanbi.org). This report also forms the basi biodiversity areas, for the development of a biodiversity sector plan document in line with SANBI’s guidelines on the development of bioregional plans. The recommendations coming out of this study need to be incorporated into a conservation form a Provincial Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (PBSAP). The assessment has simply reported in the province and compiled a critical biodiversity map from the datagathered. This project conducted a conservation assessment and not a comprehensive conservation plan. The province does not have a up and running biodiversity informationTherefore system.little therevery is biodiversity data with which to conduct a biodiversity assessment.

• • • • • • • • •

This report: Biodiversity data: effectively manage effectively ervationcomponent. planning ing a Biodiversity Conservation ervation Assessment Technical Report e: Environmental Service’s GIS zes the results of biodiversity develop bioregional plans, and also develop bioregional ince, i.e. the Biodiversity state of biodiversitywithinthe Assessments (SEAs) and in the ssment (EIA) process. process. (EIA) ssment the province’s ability to To capacitate DACE in undertak Plan through support of its cons To create a set of base-line spatial datasets to be used in spatial planning in the Prov Conservation Plan. These GIS datasets will form the backbone of the DACE’s Chief Directorat data-mart. Assist the department in the analysis of datasets to be used in the conservation planningprocess

• • • 1 Summary conservation the biodiversity to finalize of this project was The purpose which will be used to West Province for the North One) (Version assessment the province. These in sector plans of biodiversity inform the development be used to can sector plans biodiversity in the province. This report summari be used as the provincial biodiversity sector’s input into the Spatial input into the Spatial sector’s biodiversity provincial be used as the Frameworks Management Frameworks (SDFs), Environmental Development Environmental Strategic (EMFs), Environmental Impact Asse assessment conducted. Detailedsummariesof the analysesperformed are contained in the appendices. The NW province is very rapidly approaching a critical threshold (60% natural habitat remaining) in the province. Lack of capacity, resources and biodiversity information, and a significantly under representative protected area network in the province is hampering biodiversity in this rapidly changing landscape. This biodiversity assessment through the developmenta criticalof biodiversity area map for the province is aimed at assisting biodiversity and land use managers and decision makes in this demanding task. The projects objectives were: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 6 this figure will need to be l distribution of key drivers of e period spanningthe first and e period tural to other land uses per is not available which makes ately 1% (ca. 100 000 ha) of BA) map has been developed for the province. A critical biodiversity area (C Detailed information on the spatia biodiversity loss such as mining identifying risks in these areas difficult. At the current rate of habitat loss in 60 years time there will be no natural habitat left in the province. The major driver of this change has been agriculturedriver of this change has been major (73%) The with mining only contributing 3% to this change. The remainder (24%) was due to urban expansion. Over the period 1994 to 2006, th current land covers, approxim province was converted from na year. Approximately 30% of the province has been transformed to uses. land non-natural other The PA registry for the Province is incomplete. It is important that such a registry be verified and updated regularly, and linked to a PA management effectiveness tool so that the province can better keep track of status of the formal PA network. increased approximatelyPAnetworkfor the ten-fold to be representative of the province’s biodiversity and for national targets for vegetation types to be achieved. The provincial protected area (PA) network is not representative of the biodiversity in the province. At present only 2.84% of the province is in formal PA’s. Nearly half of the provinces 61 vegetation types do not occur within any protected area. Over the long term

• • • • • • • • Land cover changeloss): (or biodiversity Protected area network: Critical biodiversity areas: as the critical . Data limitations need to be of capacity and political will ies and legislation is viewed nt to ensure that this information such to make informed decision ervation Assessment Technical Report ation was collected, but the ers. Provincial environmental environmental Provincial ers. rmation resource has not been intact landscapes options for biodiversity area map, to on-the-ground land use decision making. Limited expert-mapped inform potential of this excellent info fully realized. There needs to be investment in biodiversity data collection as well as in knowledge manageme information is accessible to us authorities cannot be expected relating to the natural environment in the absence of good or at least some biodiversity data. The current conservation assessment is relying very heavily on coarse-scale biodiversity surrogates such as habitat models that have not yet been ground verified kept in mind when applying the to implement environmental polic by stakeholders as the largest threat to biodiversity. About 40% of the province’s ecosystems are under severe pressure. Eleven of the 61 vegetation types and fourteen of the 18 river types in the province have been classified as threatened in terms of their ecosystem status. These are high production landscapes characterized by already high levels of transformation. Some landscapes experiencing high rates of current transformation are not highlighted as threatened (e.g. Norite koppies). In these relatively achieving conservation goals are rapidly retreating. These are priority areas for environmental management and conservation action. These areas are the eastern Bushveld and south eastern grasslands or Platinum Belt and Gold Highway respectively. Whilst agriculture, mining and urbanization are viewed as the direct drivers of biodiversity loss in the province, the poor institutional environment and lack

• • • • • •

loss: Drivers of biodiversity Cons West Province Biodiversity North 7 the province; of a provincial biodiversity h agriculture in ty areas to address the data

d with national standards for for standards national d with ervation Assessment Technical Report and assessments (e.g. SDF, EMF with this assessment are made regarding: This CBA map is intended to act as the biodiversity sectors input into multi-sectoral plans EIA, IDP, etc.). The CBA map product is aligne in termsbioregionalof terminologyand plans methods. The CBA map has already been integrated into the provincial SDF and is available on SANBI’s BGIS web site (http://bgis.sanbi.org). The development of a Provincial biodiversity strategy and action plan that can give effect to the many recommendations made in this report. Taking this document forward into a Biodiversity Sector Plan The need for the development of a provincial Protected Area Development Plan Guidelines for the development inventory strategy and implementations of a biodiversity (BIMS) system management information Recommendations forroll-outthe conservation of fine-scale assessments and plans in priori limitations confronted Building closer relationships wit and, Planning for the next NW Provincial Conservation Assessment There has beensignificantThere capacity staff building of DACE during the coarse of this project The provincial vegetation map is in digital format and incorporated into the DACE GIS database. An integrated wetland layer for the province mapping nearly 12 000 wetlands has been created that incorporates all previous wetland products plus the new land cover.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • Specific recommendations Other outcomes of this project: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 8 .

et al 2004)

et at. ch informationch can gainedthe on as it is directly and inversely datasets from previous studies discussed here. Whilst land cover is assessment to be conducted in the spatial information on distribution of wetlands and Projects 2.2 Relevant Biodiversity Assessments 2008) National Protected Area Expansion Strategy (Jackelman NW Biodiversity Site Inventory & Database Development (Strategic Environmental Focus 2003). Priority Areas for Combined Conservation and Socio-Economic Development Project (Collinson 2004). Provincial Assessment to Identify Priority Conservation Areas (K2M 2004) National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (Driver

• • • • • Provincial context: This is not the first biodiversity biodiversity first the This is not province. There are numerous national, provincial and regional studies that are relevant and complimentarystudy.Whereverto this possible, relevant ideas, methods, results or have been incorporated into this analysis. National context: Regional context: and pans (Section 2.3.3). 2.3.3). (Section pans and The provincial land cover is also not strictly a biodiversity dataset it is a key information layer in the biodiversity assessment process. Mu as integration of existing state of biodiversity in the province proportional to the extent of non-natural land cover types. NW le with the scale (Strategic Environmental document and the the and document to be compatib be to those biodiversity datasets that that datasets biodiversity those ervation Assessment Technical Report rd’s collection locality description, specifically on this including the including specifically on this e this information for planning, information for e this Africa no conservation assessment assessment. The data must be: e or polygon coverage) 2.1 Background In an electronic format (e.g. spreadsheet or GIS database) Spatial (e.g. point, lin At an appropriate spatial resolution at which the assessment is being conducted Accessible to the people conducting the analyses

2008 State of Environment Outlook 2008 State Biodiversity Site Inventory & Database Focus 2003). Instead we focus only on were used in this assessment. A biodiversity dataset must meet several criteria if it is to be used in a spatial analysis such as this • • 2 Biodiversity Information 2 Biodiversity The NW Province has a great diversity of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. This report does not aim to provide the reader with a comprehensive overview of the province’s biodiversity as there are several existing reports that focus • • The NW Province does not have an operational biodiversity information management system (BIMS) and for all intents and purposes, despite the previous studies, there are no existing spatial biodiversity datasets that meet these criteria apart from the provincial vegetation map (Section 2.3.1). For example, the NW Biodiversity Site Inventory & comprehensiveaDatabasedatabase contains of quarter degree-based species records. To date in South has been able to successfully utiliz to near geo-referencing the QDS refine to attempting first without point scale, by interpreting each reco something beyond the time frame and scope of this project. Additional biodiversity datasets were generated during the course of this project through an expert mapping process (Section 2.3.2) as well Cons West Province Biodiversity North 9 ility in the use of the information the use of in ility representing the accumulated the conservation assessment and of important biodiversity in the oup of biodiversity experts was CE but notCE but fully completed. Areas with high numbers of endemic species and/or rare and/or endangered species

• It creates opportunities capacity building around “knowing your biodiversity” within state agencies that are tasked with managing this biodiversity. It provides an opportunity to build relationships between state and scientific institutions. It promotes confidence and credib It can provide a rapidly gathered source of biodiversity information especially where no other electronic spatial biodiversity databases exist. The process serves as a cross reference (and ‘reality check’) to the predominantly data driven, mathematical/mechanistic process of irreplaceability analysis. system. expertisean‘institutional of biologists, memory’stored, can be updated and replicated. By recording and electronically

identified by the Departmental Botanist, Ms. Anuschka Barac, and DACE’s Conservation Planner, Ray Schaller (Table 1). The basic methodology involves interviewing experts and interactively mapping in a GIS, the location and extent province based on their knowledge and experience. Criteria for areas can include: these defining To begin the process an initial gr • • • • • 2.3.2 2.3.2 Features Biodiversity Mapped Expert As part of the NW Province biodiversity assessment an expert mapping process was initiated by NW DA Incorporatingexpert knowledge into systematic conservation assessment is an essential part of planning process that is widely used in South Africa. It can serve a number of important functions: •

ervation Assessment Technical Report le to re-construct this map from vegetation map originally created 2006)

et al. 2.3 Biodiversity Features 2.3 Biodiversity Pilanesberg-Vaalkop-Borakolalo Corridor Study (Desmet, Egoh and Skowno 2006) Taung (Desmet VredefortSEA Dome Magaliesberg EMF Crocodile (West) and Marico WMA Freshwater Conservation Plan CSIR (2006) Vegetation & Soil of the Madikwe & Pilanesberg Expansion Areas (Stahlmans & De Wet, 2003) Gauteng conservation plan Dwarsberg-Swartruggens Mountain Bushveld Klerksdorp Thornveld Norite Koppies Bushveld Bushveld Pilanesberg Mountain Schweizer-Reneke Bushveld Vaal Reefs Dolomite Sinkhole Woodland Western Highveld Sandy Grassland

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2.3.1 Vegetation Types Types Vegetation 2.3.1 provincial assessment used the This by George Bredenkamp and published in the NW Biodiversity Site Inventory & Database study (Figure 1). This vegetation map is a refinementnationalvegetationmap, of the therefore provincial vegetation types nest within national types. Despite the original spatial dataset being lost by SEF we were ab secondary sources. Limited refinement of the map was conducted in polygons. and adding edges neatening of terms There are 61 provincial vegetation types (41 South African vegetation types) with seven considered endemic to the province (Figure 2, Appendix 2: Summary of vegetation status): Cons West Province Biodiversity North 10 Gauteng Province 2006).

et al. Reptiles Johannesburg Reptiles Johannesburg (Arachnida) Fish Limpopo Reptiles Johannesburg rmation gathered (Figure 3) only a t expertise in South Africa knowing up and is presented here. As an d the resulted integrated with the 10 000ha in extent were used in into the CBA map (Figure 4). Only Experience for previous studies has shown cc Writer Invertebrates Vendor University of Witwatersrand Dippenaar Alexander 15 Johan Marais Consultant/ 15 Johan Ansie 16 Dr. 17 Paul Fouche 18 Graham University of Additional expert information for aquatic ecosystems was obtained form the CSIR Croc-Marico study (Smith-Adan info expert of set complete the From incorporated was subset of this expert mapped features less than compiling the CBA map. that small expert features tend to be more accurately mapped. Smaller features also represent rarer features and are thus more important from a conservation perspective. Given the almost total lack of spatial biodiversity databases for conservation planning and biodiversity management in the province the importance of an expert mapping process cannot be stressed enough. The process initiated during this project needs to be continued with greater intensity an province’s BIMS. An initial list of experts was drawn ongoing exercise this list needs to be added to and updated. Given the general lack of biodiversity specialis who the relevant experts are; drawing on their expertise especially for capacity building; and, developing better professional relationships with them is essential if our conservation objectives are to be achieved. WHERE LOCATED Groot Marico Johannesburg Potchefstroom Potchefstroom Potchefstroom Potchefstroom Johannesburg Johannesburg Pretoria FIELD OF KNOWLEDGE invasives Mapping Plants/ Reptiles/ Small mammals? Lepidoptera/ Plants Plants Birds Amphibians Vegetation Mapping

itially identified as part of the NW itially ervation Assessment Technical Report le 1). No interactive mapping was iews Ray Schaller gave basic GIS d the resultant expert layer was NWP&TB NWU Consultant/ NWU NWU UCT? Birds Cape Town Town Birds UCT? Cape Plants/ Consultant University of Pretoria GDACE Reptiles Johannesburg Unique or good examples of particular habitats Ecological support areas or corridors important for maintaining landscape scale processes Aesthetic values such as scenic landscapes Demographic Unit (Bird Atlas) Carruthers Bredenkamp Jones Richard Newbery Renier Terblanche Sarel Cilliers Henk Bouwman

• • • NO. NAME NO. NAME INSTITUTION Table 1: A list of biodiversity experts in experts A list of biodiversity Table 1: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Avian du Preez Louis Consultant 7 NWU Koekemoer Fishes Alf Sephton 8 Uno 9 Vincent Parys 10 George DWAF Amphibians Brown UNISA 11 Lesly Whitten Potchefstroom 12 Craig Engelbrecht GDACE Plants/ Alien Vegetation 13 Ian 14 Invertebrates Etienne Marais Johannesburgh Birding Indicator Birds Johannesburg Province expert mapping process. process. expert mapping Province training to Anuschka Barac so that she could perform the expert interviews. Due to time constraints only fourexpertsinterviewedwere between the 14th to 17th July (Tab conducted during the interviews an reproduced from the interview notes taken Anuschka Barac. Before beginning with expert interv Cons West Province Biodiversity North 11

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 1: NW Province vegetation map. (key to vegetation types on following page) on following page) types to vegetation map. (key vegetation NW Province Figure 1: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 12

ervation Assessment Technical Report

North West Province Biodiversity Cons West Province Biodiversity North 13

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 2: Vegetation types endemic to the NW Province. endemic to the NW Province. types Figure 2: Vegetation Cons West Province Biodiversity North 14

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 3: The complete set of expert mapped features gathered during this assessment. assessment. during this mapped features gathered of expert complete set Figure 3: The Cons West Province Biodiversity North 15

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 4: The selected set of expert features included in the CBA map. in the included features of expert selected set Figure 4: The Cons West Province Biodiversity North 16 2008). To improve the

et al. tional sub-catchment prioritization ovincial terrestrial biodiversity ovincial terrestrial arepriorities for conservationand igure 6). The sub-catchment layer loped by the CSIR (J. Nel pers pers Nel (J. CSIR the by loped this assessment. Sub-Catchments

analysis done by Jeanne Nel as part of the National Protected Area Expansion Strategy (NPAES, Jackelman Wetlands in better ecological state in better ecological Wetlands land use management. 2.3.3.2 sub-catchmentssub-quaternaryPriority (i.e. in catchments) the NW province were extracted from the na connectivity between high priority sub-catchments, additional sub- pr the catchments that aligned with corridor network were selected (F comm.). No province-specific sub-quaternary catchment layer was of as part developed used in this study was that deve

ervation Assessment Technical Report e analysis was used to categorise sformation/degradation immediately sses except the sewage class were tland and pan layer for the NW t we integrated several available rtant wetlands for the CBA map. rmation into a single wetland layer for the Wetlands and Pans

2.3.3 Aquatic Features Features 2.3.3 Aquatic 2.3.3.1 There is no single complete we Province. As part of this projec sources of wetland info province. The 2008 land cover produced by GeoTerraImage included natural water bodies, wetland vegetation, artificial water, dry pans, and sewage as classes. All these cla used as the starting point for creating a wetland layer. Due to high resolution of the land cover many wetland features were fragmented and various GIS techniques were used to “smooth” and aggregate the raster layer into polygon objects or features (described in the GIS methodology in Section 8.7). The wetland and pan layer compiled as part of this project represents the most up to date and comprehensive wetland coverage for the province (Figure 5). There are a total of 11949 wetland features mapped comprising 5345 wetlands (125 451ha) and 6604 pans (50 306ha). Additionally, no information on the ecological status or health of the wetlands is available. To develop a proxy for the PES category used for rivers we applied the technique described by Amis et al. (in press) in which the level of terrestrial tran surrounding a wetland was used as a proxy of wetland health. Each wetland feature was buffered by 500m and the percentage transformation in each of the buffered areas was calculated. Wetlands with low levels of transformation in their buffer zone are assumed to be in a better ecological state that wetlands with high levels of transformation. This ecological stat wetlands into critical and impo Cons West Province Biodiversity North 17

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 5: Distribution of wetlands and pans in the NW Province. NW Province. pans in the wetlands and of Distribution Figure 5: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 18

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 6: Priority sub-quaternary river catchments in the NW Province. in the NW Province. river catchments sub-quaternary Figure 6: Priority Cons West Province Biodiversity North 19 % 36151 0.3 488262 4.6 (ha) Area vegetated vegetated er dataset are supplied, in order d NLC94 National Land-Cover ied land-cover legends, as well % Level-1 24519 0.3 obscured Cloud 24520 0.2 (ha) Area Status Transformation Water (natural) 57853 0.5 57853 12.2 19.9 30.8 1.9 0.3 20.9 (natural) 2.9 non- 1298023 0.4 2119484 3284711 207373 classes in the NW land cover higher-level by area covered Table 2: The non- Province. 31509 7495386Untransformed 70.2 Bush 2226979 Tree Shrub Grass 4.9 308282 Water 0 Wetlands 525389 2715 42197 Natural grass 3133540Transformed 29.5 Plantation Improved Artifical Cultivated Built-up Mines Cloud obscured data) (i.e. No Total area 10653447 100 10653447 100 Various formats of the same land-cov to facilitate alternate use of simplif comparisonsto previous NLC2000 an products. Land cover statistics with respect to the area of the province occupied by the different land classes are summarized in Appendix 4: Summary of NW Province Land Cover Statistics. Just less than 30% of the province has been transformed from natural ecosystems to other land uses.

ervation Assessment Technical Report feature identification, as and ant information layers used in a between levels of transformation and where this is located. There discernable on the satellite imagery. suitable for 1:30,000 / 1:40,000 or inform decisions on land use. rms of information content with the intactness (e.g. Scholes and Biggs ansformed areas are generally in developing a strategy for the 2.4 Land Cover 2.4 Land Land cover is one of the most import conservation assessment. As tr considered to have no or very little biodiversity value a land cover map tells us how much biodiversity is left generally a good inverse relationship in a landscape and biodiversity make still we can actual biodiversity data any absence of 2005). In the inferences about the state of the natural environment based purely on the land cover. For example, the ecosystem status index for South African vegetation types is such an index. Therefore an up-to-date representation of current land-cover is of key importance to the conservation and planning fraternity in the province, who require a detailed land cover map to help Ultimately this layer is critical conservation of biodiversity in the province. This project used the latest NW Province land cover created by GeoTerraImage (GeoTerraImage 2008) from 2005-2006 SPOT5 imagery. The provincial Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment contracted GeoTerraImage (GTI) Pty Ltd to generate a GIS compatible land cover dataset of the whole of the North West Province based on single-date, 10m resolution, multi-spectral SPOT5 image dataset, acquired in late 2005 – early 2006. The land cover classification is compatible in te South African National Land-Cover Classification Scheme (SANS 1977) and the FAO Land-Cover Classification Scheme (LCCS) nomenclature. The final land-cover database is coarser digital mapping applications based on a theoretical 0.1 ha minimum mapping unit for landscape spectrally such features are where Cons West Province Biodiversity North

Rate of Change Change of Rate

20

% Change Change %

2006 (%) (%) 2006

1994 (%) (%) 1994

2006 (ha) (ha) 2006 1994 (ha) (ha) 1994 Category Land Cover Land Cover Table 3: A summary of the proportional change in land cover categories categories land cover change in of the proportional A summary Table 3: 2006. and 1994 between NW Province for the mining and of agriculture, contribution proportional Figure 7: The Cultivated 2045000Mines 18300 2782975Natural 8420275No Data 19.2 50150 7115375 30550Plantations 0.03 0.58 Urban 135525 26.1-1.03 79.1 0.2Water Bodies 0.0 35.9 13650Wetlands 66.8 382500 0.5Grand Total 0.3 -15.5 0.19 150.0 15325 10648075 208400 1.3 106480750.16 100.0 0.1 3.6 100.0 59775 176.9 18350 2.0 0.1 1900.0 0.0 0.6 0.2 500.0 0.04 alysis did not form part of the the results of the analysis. Just re. Due to inherent limitations in ervation Assessment Technical Report through the conversion of veld to y which comprises mostly Western the headline results in this report analysis the figures reported here analysis ral vegetation left in the NW felt that as the information was nservation assessment as well as the nservationas assessment as well ributed about 3% of this change this 3% of about ributed r change between the 1994, 2001 and with further refinement of the the of refinement with further the Platinum Belt and the Golden r about 73% of this change over the time 2.5 Land Cover Change 1994-2006 2006 land covers. Land cover change an we however, this project, for TOR available we would include some of to stress the importance of this co recommendations made in this report. Ray Schaller performed the GIS analysis of matching and comparing the three land covers, and joining the attribute tables. In due coarse he will write a full report summarizing some preliminary results are report he landthe various inthe covers used are not 100% accurate, however, the main findings of the analyses are unlikely to change significantly calculations. Between 1994 and 2006 about 1% (approx. 106 000 ha./year) of the total NW Province was converted to non-natural land uses. At this rate of conversion there will be no natu Province within 60 years! Agriculture cultivation accounted fo period whilst mining has only cont (Figure 7). Whilst there is a definite concentration of transformation taking place in the east of the province in Highway, and generally close to Gauteng, there is significant loss of natural habitat taking place across the entire province (Figure 9). The highest levels of transformation are taking place in the Maize Belt (Figure 10). The Tswaing Municipalit Highveld Sandy Grassland (Critically Endangered) shows the highest levels of transformation.10,(Figure4) Table The updated land cover afforded a good opportunity to examine the landand patterns of cove extent Cons West Province Biodiversity North

21

RANK Urban Urban RANK

Urban Urban

RANK Natural Natural RANK

Natural Natural RANK Mines Mines RANK

ervation Assessment Technical Report Mines Mines RANK Cultivated Cultivated RANK

16 0.007 12 -0.328 17 0.161 3 Cultivated Cultivated Local Municipality urbanization to the loss of natural vegetation in the NW Province in the NW Province of natural vegetation to the loss urbanization between 1994-2006. change in land of total provincial of the proportion A summary Table 4: in municipality down the NW Province. per local broken categories cover 0.01770.00415 -0.948 -1.093 44 0.0099 2 0.1210.02150.007100.0354 0.1312 9 -0.415 6 -0.336 -0.262 0.662 Ditsobotla 13 -0.44814 0.0631 16 0.126 20Greater Taung 21 18 11 0.1070.0158Kagisano 0.909 0.22 0.053 8 12 10 11 0.152 Kgetlengrivier -0.463021 20 1 0.233 Lekwa-Teemane 0.073 0.0186 -0.496 10 17 020 Madibeng -0.048 0.034 -0.599 0.007 99 Mafikeng 0.05 21 -1.033 11 66 -0.186 0.09 0.258 Mamusa 0.00514 -0.312 0.12620 21 3 14 Hills Maquassi 18 0.103 0.091 0.285 Matlosana 7 -0.592 0.1353 12 13 City Merafong 0.002190.00613 7 5 0.473 Molopo 0.491 0.0432 0.075Moretele 0.003 -0.3897 5 17 11 -1.68Moses Kotane 0.035 0.144 14 -0.348Naledi 0.675 15 0.0790.00318 1 3 0.003 1519 0.241 Potchefstroom 1 0.117 15 -0.765 0.213 17 Moiloa Ramotshere -0.569 10 0.157 -0.263 5 0.454 Ratlou 13 2 0.115 8 19 8 0.004 0.069Rustenburg 0.022 0.078 0.058 16 18 Tswaing 1.275 16 19 -0.425 0.426 Ventersdorp 12Grand Total 0.15 4 7.05 Cons West Province Biodiversity North 0.30 -12.0 2.34 22

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 8: Extent of transformation in the NW Province (2006). (2006). in the NW Province transformation of Figure 8: Extent Cons West Province Biodiversity North 23

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 9: Land cover change - areas that have been converted from natural to other uses between 1994 and 2006. 1994 and 2006. between to other uses from natural been converted have that change - areas cover Figure 9: Land Cons West Province Biodiversity North 24

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 10: Growth in non-natural land type categories - Proportion of total provincial growth per local municipality. municipality. growth local per provincial of total - Proportion categories type land Growth in non-natural Figure 10: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 25 6 ≤ 60% of 20% of 40 Remaining natural habitat ≤ of original area ecosystem ≥ ecosystem significantly degraded ≥ Red threatened plant Data List species Very high irreplaceability and low threat Ecosystem Ecosystem extent 000ha, and imminent threat 3 ≤ (biodiversity 40% of 60 Remaining natural habitat ≤ target + 15%) ≥ ecosystem significantly degraded extent ≥ Red threatened plant Data List species Very high irreplaceability and medium threat 000ha, and imminent threat

A2 and C have been applied to forests been applied A2 and C have does not applytovegetation types biodiversity biodiversity 60% of 80 Remaining natural habitat ≤ target ≥ ecosystem significantly degraded -- ≥ Ecosystem Red threatened plant Data List species Very high irreplaceability and high threat Criterion CR EN VU EN Criterion CR Table 5: Criteria used to identify threatened terrestrial ecosystems, with ecosystems, terrestrial threatened Criteria used to identify Table 5: and (EN) (CR), endangered endangered for critically thresholds 2008). (SANBI (VU) ecosystems vulnerable loss of A1: Irreversible natural habitat A2: Ecosystem and loss degradation of integrity* of of loss B: Rate natural habitat** C: Limited extent and imminent threat* plant D1: Threatened associations species animal D2: Threatened species associations** areas for E: Priority meeting explicit as biodiversity targets defined in a systematic biodiversity plan F: Fragmentation** is this criteria relaxed, but this within the NW Province. Criteria data constraints, * Because of types. vegetation other but not to Endangered will

ervation Assessment Technical Report ince only criterion A (Table 5) was system that uses a suite of ction 2.8). For example, Critically ation of ecological structure, of a vegetation type. From a provinceinneighboring and not Endangered or 2.6 Terrestrial Ecosystem Status Endangered ecosystems are defined in the act as being “ecosystems that have undergone severe degrad function or composition as a result of human intervention and are subject to an extremely high risk of irreversible transformation”. Importantly, any land-use change application occurring within an ecosystem listed as Critically Ecosystem status classification refers to the likelihood of an ecosystem, avegetationthis case defined as in the type, persistinginto future given the current amount of that ecosystem that has already been transformed to other land uses. Ecosystems that are Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable can be listed in terms of the Section 52 of the Biodiversity Act as threatened ecosystems at both national and provincial level (see Se automaticallyrequire environmental authorization. SANBI has developed a classification biodiversity loss indicators or criteria to assign national ecosystem status to South African vegetation types. For the provincial level classification for the North West Prov used to determine ecosystem status of vegetation types. For criteria B- F, the provincial level analyses have not been done yet. A provincial level ecosystem status is presented here that differs from the national assessment in two key areas. Firstly, the calculations consider only the extent of a vegetation type that occurs within the province and not the global extent provincial environmental management perspective the focus is on the state of biodiversity within the provinces. This difference helps identify ecosystems (vegetation types) that are threatened within the province. Only in cases where less than 5% of the global extent of a vegetation types occurs within a province Cons West Province Biodiversity North 26 the measure the of transformation of ngered with only three rivers types river systems was calculated using ered to be in a completely natural the province’s river systems are 2.7 River Ecosystem Status 40-60% in class A and B = Vulnerable 20-40% in class A and B = Endangered <20% in category A and B = Critically Endangered Stella Sparse Woodland (Vryburg Sparse Woodland)

• • • • Ecosystem statusEcosystem of the province’s river signatures as the “vegetation type” equivalent and the Present Ecological State category (PESC) as river systems (Figure 13). The following thresholds for Ecosystem Status of Rivers based on PESC were used: Note that there are no A-class main-stem rivers in the province. That is to say that no major river is consid state any more. The majority of threatened (Figure 14, Table 6). Fourteen of the provinces 18 river types are considered Critically Enda not consideredthreatened.

alien species or alien

ervation Assessment Technical Report ). The second calculation gives a due to overgrazing, able ecosystems in the province:

ether it is a workable criterion for ether it is a workable as cover land 2006 the in fied

r these criteria. Further testing of testing Further r these criteria. Western Highveld Sandy Grassland Schweizer-Reneke Bushveld Soweto Highveld Grassland Moot Plains Bushveld Rand Highveld Grassland Vaal-Vet Sandy Grassland Marikana Thornveld Vredefort DomeGrassland Granite Western Sandy Bushveld Pienaarsrivier Thornveld

• • • • • • • • • • bush encroachment. Whilst we are aware of the existence of other degradation maps for the province (e.g. ARC erosion national map [J. le Roux pers. comm.]) we did not incorporate these into the analyses as they have not be field verified yet. For the purposes of reporting the second ecosystem status calculation is one There combined). degradation and (transformation is used Critically Endangered and 10 Vulner Critically endangered: Secondly, theprovincial-level assessment calculatesecosystem status using two methods: transformation only (Figure 11) or transformation and degradation combined (Figure 12 better picture of where ecosystems are threatened as it includes areas that are in the process of undergoing transformation. Degradation here is based only on those areas classi degraded therefore it includes degradation such as soil erosion and “deforestation” in peri-urban areas but does not include components of degradations such as species shifts ** Because of data constraints, Criteria B and D2 are dormant at this stage stage at this dormant B and D2 are Criteria data constraints, of ** Because set fo been have not and thresholds wh needed to determine Criterion F is terrestrial ecosystems. Vulnerable: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 27 Status RSA NW Ecosystem 0.0 CE CE 0.0 CE CE 0.0 EN EN 0.0 CE CE 0.0 LT LT 0.0 CE CE 0.0 CE CE 0.0 LT LT 7.9 CE CE 0.0 CE CE 0.0 CE CE 0.0 CE CE 0.0 LT LT 0.0 CE CE 0.0 CE CE 0.0 VU CE 0.0 EN CE 24.8 EN CE E-F CLASS 5.7 9.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 D 24.5 21.7 33.7 38.5 58.3 97.5 19.0 75.2 25.5 CLASS

ervation Assessment Technical Report PESC 0.0 0.0 2.5 8.3 0.0 94.3 63.8 64.7 78.3 98.5 66.3 33.8 81.0 88.6 74.5 C 100.0 100.0 100.0 CLASS 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.6 25.6 61.5 11.4 91.7 B 100.0 CLASS River Signature

Table 6: Percentage of each main stem river type (River Signature) Signature) type (River river main stem each of Table 6: Percentage NW the (PESC) for Ecological State Category Present within each layer). NSBA river (based on the province Bushveld basin 1 Bushveld basin 2 Bushveld basin 3 Bushveld basin 4 Bushveld basin 6 Bushveld basin 7 Highveld 1 Highveld 2 Highveld 3 Highveld 4 Highveld 6 Highveld 7 7 basin Kalahari Limpopo flats 4 Orange 3 & Vaal Lower Orange 4 & Vaal Lower Orange 6 & Vaal Lower Orange 7 & Vaal Lower Cons West Province Biodiversity North 28

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 11: Terrestrial ecosystem status (transformation only). only). status (transformation ecosystem Terrestrial Figure 11: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 29

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 12: Terrestrial ecosystem status (transformation and degradation combined). degradation and status (transformation ecosystem Terrestrial Figure 12: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 30 stem rivers in the NW Province (data from NSBA). from in the NW Province (data stem rivers

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 13: Present ecological state category (PESC) of main state category ecological Figure 13: Present Cons West Province Biodiversity North 31 of main-stem rivers in the NW Province. in the NW Province. of main-stem rivers

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 14: The provincial Ecosystem Status Ecosystem The provincial Figure 14: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 32 er, estuarine and er, estuarine in the freshwat However, to avoid confusion this working in close collaboration with working ster or an MEC to list ecosystems. threatened ecosystems identified developed and consistently applied ecosystems is both scientifically e realities of implementation, to detailed and comprehensive, using detailed than every five years. although they are not listed as critically endangered, endangeredvulnerable or All stakeholders in the listing process agreed early on that a phased approach should be taken to listing ecosystems, given the complexity with deals The currentlisting process. (first) phase of of the threatened ecosystems in the terrestrial environment. Future phases will deal with threatened ecosystems is discouraged until the process of listing national ecosystems has been well established. The National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (NSBA) 2004 included early attempts to identify threatened ecosystems. However, the identification of threatened terrestrial ecosystems for the current phase of listing has been much more The current list consists of nationalThe currentconsists of list based on national criteria, and is thus listed by the Minister. A province developmay additional provincial criteriaidentify and additional ecosystems to be listed by the MEC. ensure that the list of threatened rigorous and implementable. The Biodiversity Act allows the Mini marine environments and with protected ecosystems in all environments. According to the Biodiversity Act, the list of ecosystems must be reviewed at least every five years. Until ecosystems have been listed across all environments, reviews and additions to the list will take place more frequently At the request of DEAT, SANBI has led the process of identifying threatenedlisted,be ecosystems to provincial conservation authorities,DEAT,Department Affairs of Water and Forestry (DWAF) and relevant experts. All listed ecosystems have been identified based on carefully national criteria. There has been strong emphasis on the use of best available science as well as on th ion of ecologicalstructure, n intervention,n although they osystems that are of high ervation Assessment Technical Report provides for listing of threatened and maps of listed ecosystems. rst provincial-level assessmentrst provincial-level of ms, the implications of listing 2.8 Threatened Ecosystems 2.8 Threatened critically endangered (CR) ecosystems, being ecosystems that have undergone severe degradat function or composition as a result of human intervention and are subject to an extremely high risk of irreversible transformation; endangeredecosystems, (EN) being ecosystems that have undergone degradation of ecologicalstructure, function or composition as a result of huma are not critically endangered ecosystems; vulnerable (VU)being ecosystems, a high ecosystems that have risk of undergoing significant degradation of ecological structure, function or composition as a result of human intervention, although they are not critically endangered endangeredecosystems or ecosystems; protected ecosystems, being ec conservation value or of high national or provincial importance,

• • • • This analysis has provided the fi threatened ecosystems. The present analysis only covers vegetation types and river systems. However, the guidelines developed by SANBI provide for a number of mechanisms for identifying threatened ecosystems (Table 5). For the purposes of applying and further developing the identification of threatened ecosystems in the province, a summary is provided here of the guidelines developed by SANBI in consultation with stakeholders for listing threatened ecosystems 2008).(SANBI This guideline document providesbackground information on the listing of threatened or protected ecosystems, including the purpose and rationale for listing ecosystems, the criteria used to identify listed ecosyste ecosystems, and summary statistics The Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004) or protected ecosystems in one of the following categories: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 33 and simple criteria, which must identified at a finer spatial scale that listed ecosystems be definedlistedthat ecosystems be rtant to consider the purpose and and the purpose to consider rtant an, or high irreplaceability forests public comment in September 2007 e Preparation and Publication of of Publication and e Preparation es were established for identifying es were established for well as the legal implications. These identified by DWAF. For For future by DWAF. identified translate into spatially explicit identification of ecosystems. The identification of ecosystems to be listed must be based on scientifically credible, practical The approach must follow the same logic as the IUCN approach to listing threatened species, whereby a number of criteria are developed and an ecosystem is listed based on its highest ranking criterion; The approach must be target-driven and systematic, especially for threatened ecosystems; The approach must be explicit and repeatable;

• • • • 2.8.2 Howwere listed ecosystems identified? As a starting point, several principl threatened or protected ecosystems: threatened or protected ecosystems. A Guideline Regarding the Determination of Bioregions and th Bioregional Plans was gazetted for and will be finalized during 2008. Biodiversity management plans will be a useful tool for active management of threatened ecosystems. Norms and standards for biodiversity management plans for ecosystems have yet to be developed. In deciding on the appropriate spatial scale for identifying threatened or protected ecosystems, it was impo rationale for listing ecosystems as require two considerations combined at the local rather than the regional scale. For the current phase of listing, threatened terrestrial ecosystems have been delineated based on one of the following: the South African Vegetation Map, national foresttypes recognized DWAF,priority by areas identifiedin a provincial systematic biodiversity pl systematically patches or clusters phases of listing, ecosystems may be ecosystemsas

ystems is primarily to reduce the is primarily ystems ervation Assessment Technical Report this is not the primary purpose ure, function and composition of which are crucial for biodiversity m listing will also play a symbolic t to introduce a suite of new legal include threatened hat little attention had historically protected through listing of features (such as ecologicalas features (such here supersedes the information m services, even though listing 2.8.1 list ecosystems? Why WhiteThe Paper on the ConservationSustainableand South Use of Africa’s Biodiversity (1997) noted t been paid to protection of ecosystems outside protected areas. This laid the basis for the Biodiversity Ac tools for biodiversity conservation outside protected areas, including listed threatened or protected ecosystems, listed threatened or protected species, bioregional plans, biodiversity management plans for ecosystems or species, and biodiversity management agreements. ecos listing threatened of purpose The rate of ecosystem and species extinction. This includes preventing further degradation and loss of struct threatened ecosystems. The purpose of listing protected ecosystems is primarily to preserve witness sites of exceptionally high conservation value. For both threatenedand protectedecosystems,purpose the enablingfacilitatingincludes or management of these proactive ecosystems. It is likely that ecosyste and awareness-raising role; however, of listing ecosystems. The purpose of listing threatened or protected ecosystems is not to ensure the persistence of landscape-scale ecological processes or to ensure the provision of ecosyste contributeecosystems may important towardsgoals. these Bioregional plans published in terms of the Biodiversity Act will identify critical biodiversity areas, which will well as landscape-scale ecological corridors and important catchments) not be conservationbut which will additional criteria and data. This means that the list of threatened terrestrial ecosystems presented regarding terrestrial ecosystem status in the NSBA 2004 Cons West Province Biodiversity North 34 CR or EN ecosystem. ss of natural habitat in CR and EN ations should not be required. if the transformation or removal c assessment report in terms of d in remaining natural habitat within angered or endangered ecosystem ecosystem endangered or angered thelistedof original extent each ssment falls away in a Activities that require scoping and EIA (R387 of 2006) Activities that require a basic assessment (R386 of 2006)

• • Listed ecosystems should be included as sensitive areas in EIA supplementation maps. The EIA regulations include two lists of activities: areas” where environmental authoris where areas” ecosystem has been mapped, a basi The EIA regulations also provide for the development of Environmental Management Frameworks. Listed ecosystems should be incorporated into EMFs, with restrictions on any lo ecosystems. It is important to note that while the EIA regulations is only triggere where natural in portions the ecosystem of and not ecosystem each habitat has already been irreversibly lost. Activity 12 in the list of activities that require a basic assessment (R386 of 2006) is: the transformation or removal of indigenous vegetation of 3 hectares or more OR OF ANY SIZE would occur within a critically end listed in terms of the Biodiversity Act. In other words the 3 hectare threshold for a basic asse , in terms of the Biodiversity ations, in terms of NEMA and ked to the requirement in the er criterion, it should be listed d additional activities that should ervation Assessment Technical Report ranking criterion. For example, if criterion. For example, ranking r vulnerable on one criterion and lications,the in terms of plications are summarised here. entified at a broader spatial scale lications of listing an ecosystem: ations of listing an ecosystem? ecosystem? Planning related implications, lin Biodiversity Act for listed ecosystems to be taken into account in municipal IDPs and SDFs; Environmental authorisation implic EIA regulations; Proactive management implications Act; Monitoring and reporting imp Biodiversity Act.

• • • • The other implications are discussed in the main document. Subsection 24(2) of NEMA allows for provincial EIA supplementation maps which identify sensitive areas an trigger environmental authorisations in those areas, and “exclusion im The environmental authorisation 2.8.3 What are the implic imp of are four main types There than these units, but will not be id than theseunits. The development of criteria for identifying threatened terrestrial done throughecosystems was extensiveengagement and consultation with provincial conservation authorities, DWAF and relevant experts, Thewas basedthresholdsand criteriascience. and on best available for critically endangered,endangered and vulnerable are ecosystems summarized in Table 5. If an ecosystem meets any one of the criteria, it should be listed. If an ecosystem meets more than one criterion, it should be listed based on its highest fo the threshold meets an ecosystem the threshold for endangered on anoth as endangered. Cons West Province Biodiversity North 35 gal status of PAs MCA, specially protected forests rtainly examples of statutory PAs tes solely to the le y 20% of the province, we can province with 236 194 ha (2.22% of province) (CAs) not recognized in the PA act: PA effectiveness. (as recognized in the PA act) These include Biodiversity agreements Conservancies Special Nature Reserves National Parks Provincial Nature Reserves Protected Environments Contract Nature Reserves Also includes are: WHS, MPA, with regards the PA Act. are ce There in the NW Province that have no effective management so they are PA in name only. The institution of a METT (management effectiveness tracking tool) in the province would be required and necessary to assess this aspect of PAs cover 2.84% of the being protected areas and 66 517 ha (0.62% of province) comprising conservationareas.Considering that the average vegetation type target is 20% which would mean that a representative PA network in the province would cover roughl conclude that: Conservation Areas Note that this classification does not take into account PA management effectiveness. This classification rela practically everything: For the classification of PAs according to the PA Act we followed the convention used by the NPAES: Protected Areas

ervation Assessment Technical Report as one of the following types: the national guidelines provides a ster for the province made this a this made province the for ster be under some form of formal al of a fully representative PA the surrounding matrix of production iversity will require the management of biodiversity both in PAs and in landscapes, thereare national clear guidelinestheas to proportion of the province’s surface area should conservation management. Comparing the proportion of the province’s biodiversity representedtargets and achievedin the existing PA network to what is recommended in quantitativeof the conservation measure effectivenesstheof provincial PA network. This also gives an indication of the amount of work still required to reach the go network. The National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act (57 of 2003) defines a ‘protected area’ (PA) Special Nature Reserves; National Parks; Nature Reserves; Protected Environments; World Heritage Sites; Marine Protected Areas; Specially Protected Forest Areas; and Mountain catchment areas. Collectively, the formal terrestrial and marine protected areas comprise the National Protected Area System (National PAS). The protected area (PA) layer for the province was based on that used in the National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy (NPAES). This layer was reviewed by NW DACE and Parks Board staff and modified as appropriate. The incomplete PA regi and location the on with information task drawn-out and frustrating current status of all PA’s based on expert knowledge rather than formal documentation or database. Significant additions that were made to the PA layer notably the Magaliesberg PE, the Leon Taljaard Nature Reserve outside Vryburg and numerous conservancies. 3 Analysis Area Network GAP Provincial Protected Protected areas (PAs) are the primary strategy for ensuring that a representative portion of the province’s biodiversity is conserved as a benchmark for the benefit of current and future generations. Whilst the long term persistence of biod Cons West Province Biodiversity North

36 ted PA expansionplan thatted PA draws the PA network and there is a laid down in the NPAES. on the information gathered for this study and that builds on the principles for PA expansion PA expansion and development in the province cannot happen haphazardly. It requires a dedica clear need to implement a formalized stewardship program in the province. Conservancies play a vital role in

• • Figure 15: A comparison of the percentage of feature targets achieved achieved targets of feature of the percentage comparison A Figure 15: the PA and versus network Area Protected statutory the existing by combined. Area network Conservation

protected area

ervation Assessment Technical Report temperate Forest, WesternSandy w well the existing ess of statutory PA. 3.1 Protection Level The current PA network is highly under representative of the province’s biodiversity Approximately a 10 fold increase in the size of the PA network is require to meet national obligations.

Eight vegetation types have their targets achieved in the PA network (Waterberg-Magaliesberg Summit Sourveld, Pilanesberg Mountain Bushveld, Northern Afro Mixed Bushveld, Makwassie Ridge Bushveld, Gold Reef Mountain Bushveld, Madikwe Dolomite Bushveld and Kalahari Alluvia) Twenty-seven (45%) vegetation types are not represented within the PA network at all! Conservation Areas (i.e. conservancies) play an important role in the PA network and make a significant contribution towards achieving targets. The NW Province PA network is massively under representative of biodiversity.the provinces PA formal Province’s the and update to verify need is a clear There register . There is also a clear need to implement a METT to assess the management effectiven • •

network conservesbiodiversitytheprovince. the of is calculated It as the percentage biodiversity target achievement by the protected area network for each vegetation type. To do these calculations the vegetation layer for the province was unioned with the protected areas layers and the proportion of each vegetation type within PAs 2). Appendix (see summarized Considering both PAs and CAs (Figure 15): • • • In summary: • • • Protection level is measure of ho Cons West Province Biodiversity North 37

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 16: Protected areas in the NW Province. in the NW Province. areas Protected Figure 16: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 38 the highest priority drivers of op can be summarised intosummarised five op can be that institutional and enabling list of workshop participants. y mitigated if the institutions Climate Change Poverty/Socio-economic Development Environmental Degradation Institutional and Enabling Environment Habitat Lossand Landscape Fragmentation[Land-useand Management]Land-use Change

5. 4. 3. 2. 1. Agriculture, mining and urbanisation are viewed as the direct agents of biodiversity loss and degradation; however, participants at the threats agreed workshop overwhelmingly environment issues relating to conservation management and land-use and land-use change management were biodiversity loss in the province. The direct impacts on biodiversity due to competing land-uses result in (a) loss of habitat and landscape fragmentation, and (b) degradation of the natural environment, but significantl be impact could their responsible for environmentalland-use and planningandmanagement operated and applied the law effectively. broad themes. These are listed here in the order of importance as ranked by workshop participants: The outcomes of the threats worksh each threat category based on their perceived understanding of the importanceaddressing of thethreatorder to conserve in biodiversity. a complete 3 contains Appendix

ervation Assessment Technical Report the relative level of impact posed of sites as well as (b) information omic or politicalomic origin. For the site’s “cost” or “vulnerability” in oach. Participants also weighted ainable levels (overgrazing, water ssary to at least identify what what identify least at to ssary in biodiversity structure (e.g. ss can be considered as proximal ss can be considered osystem functioning (e.g. altered ince were identified and discussed ct causes are usually systemic in ss (transformation) or reduction 4 Drivers of Biodiversity Loss Conservation decision making and action needs to be informed by (a) the biodiversity value information on on the likelihood of the biodiversity being lost should there be no intervention and the drivers of this loss. Therefore as part of a conservation assessment it is nece information is available and to assess by these drivers. Drivers of biodiversity loss can also be referred to as simply a “threats to biodiversity” or relation to identified threats. mediated or human-induced as here defined are biodiversity to Threats activities that result in the lo (degradation) of biodiversity pattern and/or processes. The impacts of threats may manifest as changes (e.g. composition encroachment), bush fragmentation, landscape species loss), or as changes in ec hydrology, reduced net primary productivity). loin biodiversity Factors resulting (indirect).Indire (direct) or distal nature and usually have a socio-econ NW Province, rapid economic development and poor institutional capacity have contributed to poor biodiversity planning and land-use management. However, direct causes of biodiversity loss relate predominantly to various forms of land use that either compete directly with biodiversity (urban development, agriculture and mining), or utilise natural resource at non-sust abstraction). At a workshop involving stakeholders from the province the range of threats to biodiversity in the prov using a participatory workshop appr Cons West Province Biodiversity North 39 (legislative) from government (legislative) from ri centre-pivots impact on water on impact ri centre-pivots .g. agriculture vs biodiversity .g. tion – 2 departments (MEC’s) both 2 departments (MEC’s) both tion – ing to landscape fragmentation fragmentation ing to landscape address biodiversity issues biodiversity issues address mining) framework planning Poor cross-sectoral and follow-up Insufficient management side conserva for capacity Institutional mandates with overlapping conservation for responsible necessary funding or poor budgeting for getting Poor institutional funding from state and instability uncertainty leading to Political change governance for effective Lack of capacity officers extension agricultural and under capacitated Unqualified and water electricity sewerage, such as Inadequate infrastructure Conflicting government policies (e Conflicting government policies Unregulated tourism development and pressure and pressure Unregulated tourism development as such development through unsightly landscape Erosion of natural power-lines Crocodile and especially flow regimes of hydrological Modification Rivers Marico e.g. Kalaha Ground water abstraction eyes table and dolomitic and agriculture to mining, urban Pollution due for biofuels for development e.g. Political demand developers exploited by Legal loopholes to commitment Lack of political Legal ignorance knowledge and awareness Lack of information, Poor data management sharing framework/platform data Lack of adequate Resort and estate (e.g. golf) development golf) and estate (e.g. Resort waste dumps Un-registered cutting migration fencing and road networks areas, Urban species lead for routes/corridors

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Rural development Rural development Management Catchment Water Enabling Environment 2. Institutional and Capacity and Institutional Enabling Environment Public Awareness Knowledge Management nesting sites nesting important raptor important r channels (geographic hotspots: (geographic r channels rity agricultural and biodiversity

ervation Assessment Technical Report Cultivation of marginal soils of farm land Sub-division Demand for biofuels courses leading to along river expansion Irrigation agricultural water and unsustainable further habitat transformation 2) demand (area (area expansion agricultural Good soils earmarked for further 5) Small-scale mining activities Small-scale mining transformation Wetland transformation Wetland water abstraction Ploughing of pans and wetlands are trees that of big Removal

o o o o o o o o o o o Increased demand for agricultural land: Increased demand for agricultural Diamonds – alluvial terraces and rive Diamonds 4, 5, 6) of agricultural leading to degradation Improper agricultural land-use resources: vs resettlement vs mining agriculture Conflicting land-use priorities biodiversity province of urban development especially E side Unregulated planning Improper use of biodiversity offsets in development on high Urban sprawl especially prio land Bushveld Complex pgm, chrome, gold (geographic hotspots: 1, 2, 3) 1, 2, (geographic hotspots: gold Bushveld Complex pgm, chrome, Marico) Slate (geographic hotspots: Ghaap Plateau) hotspots: and Lime (geographic Marble Hills) Granite (geographic hotspots: 3 - Norite eastern grasslands) Peat (geographic hotspots:

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Table 7. A summary of the drivers of biodiversity loss in the NW of biodiversity of the drivers Table 7. A summary in parentheses The numbers stakeholders. as identified by Province threat where felt that a particular participants areas to geographic refer (Figure 17). or in operation was greatest Land- and [Land-use Fragmentation Landscape Loss and 1. Habitat Management] use Change Mining Agricultural Development Urban Development Cons West Province Biodiversity North 40 Bio-harvesting for western markets such as devils claw claw as devils markets such for western Bio-harvesting Hunting industry use pressure (reliance on biodiversity) Subsistence resource HIV/Aids Urbanisation populations of rural Migration and localisation Species extinctions disasters in natural Increase

• • • • • • • • referred the province regions of Geographic page): Figure 17 (following participants. workshop the threats to by Development 4. Poverty/Socio-economic 5. Climate Change of climate change: Impacts as foot and mount and Newcastle and Newcastle and mount as foot

ervation Assessment Technical Report : 1- 7 especially 5, 6, 7) especially 5, 6, : 1- 7 Pesticides and herbicides - toxic chemicals (air, soil and (air, herbicides - toxic chemicals Pesticides and water) water) (soil and Fertiliser – eutropification Fires (air) (water) Sewerage and water) – landfills (soil management Solid waste Acid mine drainage (water) Smelters (air) Dust (air)

o o o o o o o o Household Household Lack of field survey to ground-truth datasets Lack of field survey to ground-truth about shared or known and not scattered Data materialised not Forum has The NW Scientific protected area network Under representative program in the province stewardship Lack of coherent areas and design of new protected the selection approach to Ad-hoc species Exotic fish species) black wattle, aquatic (e.g. Prosopis, Alien plants species (indigenous) Extra-limital Bush encroachment and firewood for charcoal Deforestation Soil erosion Overgrazing fire regimes Fire management/altered bugs” of “super plants/ selection Genetic pollution from GM Increase incidence of diseases such Disease 4, 5) hotspots: 2, 3, Mining (geographic plants medicinal Muti-trade/traditional Industry (geographic hotspots: 2, 3, 4, 5) 5) 3, 4, 2, Industry (geographic hotspots: Agriculture (geographic hotspots

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Protected Area Network Network Area Protected Degradation 3. Environmental including Alien species Range management Biological risks of pollutants Sources Pollution, Poaching) Species (incl. Trade in Indigenous Harvesting and Cons West Province Biodiversity North 41

2 3 5 4 1 6 6

ervation Assessment Technical Report 7

North West Province Biodiversity Cons West Province Biodiversity North 42 all stakeholders involved in land- d services (SANBI 2007). These nce point for all decision-makers multi-sectoral planning and decision always to be viewed as the ic conservation assessment and are retaining biodiversity and supporting triple bottom line of sustainable land-use planning and decision- eas remaining. The CBA map and s), whilst managing sustainable omic and natural environments"omic and 5.1 What are CBA’s? Critical biodiversity areas (CBA’s) are terrestrial and aquatic features in the landscape that are critical for the biodiversity sectors inputs into making tools (Figure 18). continued ecosystem functioningan form the key output of a systemat The purpose of the critical biodiversity areas (CBA) map and guidelines is to mainstream biodiversity into making by identifying those sites critical for biodiversity persistence. The overall aim is to avoid loss and degradation of natural habitat in critical biodiversity areas (CBA guidelines provide a common refere development in other natural ar within the land-use sector, including development, i.e. social, econ use planning and decision-making processes. Although the CBA maps CBA maps the Although processes. and decision-making planning use constitute the best available biodiversity information, they can never replace a site-assessment and are biodiversity informant only in the 2008)C et al. (Vromans, D. odiversity intact is also vital for

ervation Assessment Technical Report tem services such as production ll-being for all, is therefore iversity is a cornerstone of odiversity provides an important buffered against loss of ecosystem ecosystem loss of against buffered nes, species (plants and animals), hment management, prevention of film industry,non- film commercial and se basic necessities and scarce ecosystems, and landscapes and the ecological and evolutionary processes that allow these elements of biodiversity to persist over time. The North West Province’s bi basis for economic growth and development, in ways such as providing rangelands that support commercial and subsistence farming, horticulture and agriculture industry based on indigenous species, our tourism industry, aspects of our commercialapplications medicinalindigenous of resources,and provision of clean water. Keeping our bi ensuring ongoing provision of ecosys of clean water through good catc erosion, carbonstorage (to counteractwarming) globaland cleanair. Loss of biodiversity puts aspects of our economy and quality of life at risk and reduces socio-economic options for future generations People are ultimately fully dependent on living, functioning ecosystems and the services they provide. Loss of biodiversity leads to ecosystem degradation and subsequent loss of important services, which tends to harm the rural poor more directly - poor people have limited assets and are more dependent on common property resources for their livelihoods, whilst the wealthy are services by being able to purcha commodities. Our path towards sustainable development, poverty reduction and enhanced human we dependent on how effectively we conserve biodiversity. Effective management of biodiversity does not guarantee sustainable development, but sustainable development is not possible without it. Wise use and management of biod sustainable development" (Driver et al. 2005) 5 Areas (CBAs) Critical Biodiversity The term biodiversity refers to ge Cons West Province Biodiversity North 43 critical biodiversity areas. int of impact through the direct scape through the indirect loss sity of a change in land-use vertheless play an importantvertheless play an streamflow at thecatchment’s livering ecosystem services that (e.g. loss of a populations or ical functioning of critical (ESA’s) are areas that are not iversity representation support socio-economic development, such as water provision, flood mitigation or carbon sequestration. The degree of restriction on land use and resource use in these areas may be lower than that recommended for essential for meeting biod essential for targets/thresholdsbut which ne role in supporting the ecolog biodiversity areas and/or in de Ecological support areas In other words, if these areas are not maintained in a natural or near-natural state then biodiversity conservation targets cannot be met. Maintaining an area in a natural state can include a variety of biodiversity-compatible land uses and resource uses. of biodiversitydue to a breakdown, interruptionloss of an or ecological process pathway (e.g. removing a corridor results in a population going extinct elsewhere or a new plantation locally, results in a reduction exit which affects downstream biodiversity). For ESAs a change from the desired ecological state is most land in the significant elsewhere For CBAs theimpactFor CBAs on biodiver that results in a change from the desired ecological state is most significant locally at the po loss of a biodiversity feature habitat).

• • • From a land-use planning perspective it is useful to think of the CBAs and ESAs in terms in the landscape of where between difference the biodiversity impact of any land-use activity action is most significant:

livery of ecosystem services.

ervation Assessment Technical Report nition laid out in the guideline for (CBAs) are areas of the landscape CBA’s aim to promote sustainable Critical biodiversity areas that need to be maintained in a natural or near-natural state in order to ensure the continued existence and functioning of andthespecies de ecosystems and

• Figure 18 A conceptual outline of where bioregional plans fit in the where plans fit bioregional outline of conceptual Figure 18 A making. and decision of tools for land use planning set broader The primary purpose of CBA’s is to inform land-use planning and the guidelines attached to land-use development by avoiding loss or degradation of important natural habitat and landscapes in these areas and the landscape as a whole. CBA’s can also be used to inform protected area expansion and development plans. The use of CBA’s here follows the defi publishing bioregional plants(Anon, 2008): Cons West Province Biodiversity North 44 land or biodiversity or biodiversity standinglandscapes of the spatial requirements for gement objectives which we have biodiversity being lost or threats lost or biodiversity being cation and the attached land-use the criteria used to classify indicate spatially the location of the CBA map. This information, for a given component of biodiversity. desired ecological state ecological composition, structure andfunctioning requirements for persistence interpreted in the form of the biodiversity conservation targets or land management objective thresholds that determine the minimum servicesbiodiversityand ecosystem ecological patterns, process to be adequately represented and persist into the future. Ecological Processes - Our under Complementarity - The spatial relationship between the biodiversity present at the site and neighbouring areas; and, Representation - The biodiversity present at the site;

3. 2. 1. The purpose of CBA’s is simply to however, can be incorporated into biodiversity features into different CBA categories. The guideline for bioregional plans defines three basic CBA categories based on three high-level land mana critical or important areas for biodiversity in the landscape. The CBA, through the underlyinglandmanagement objectivesthat define the CBA, prescribes the desired ecological state in which we would like to keep this biodiversity. Therefore, the desired ecological state or land management objective determines which land-use activities are compatible with each CBA category based on the perceived impact of each activity on biodiversity pattern and process. These are the land- use recommendations attached to the CBA map. Information on the likelihood of this to biodiversity is not contained in Provincefor the NW (Table 9). adapted management objectives The foundations of the CBA classifi guidelines are the biodiversity sector’s understanding and quantification of the areThese objectivesthe basedon fundamental ecological and conservation planning principles of: is based on the to achieve targets for each each targets for achieve to

the landscape should ideally be landscape the ervation Assessment Technical Report ation layers, classify the the classify layers, ation componentbiodiversity of being odiversity information (Table 8). a basis for defining criteria and inform land-use planning and make is recommendation ssifying the landscape into CBA which parts could potentially be parts could potentially which component (i.e. irreplaceability) component (i.e. landscape into CBA categories based on thresholds for each criterion. Gather information on biodiversity patterns and process (biodiversity information layers or CBA criteria) biodiversityDefine conservation targetsthresholds,i.e. or spatial requirements necessary to represent and maintain biodiversity into perpetuity management land or state ecological desired Define to the relate that objectives management land the on based CBA categories Define objectives Using the biodiversity inform Develop land-use recommendations for each CBA category based on each activities perceived impact on biodiversity patterns and process targeted (i.e. pattern or process) and the flexibility in the landscape in terms of being able 1 Set conservation goals 2 3 4 5 6 7 Step Process biodiversity sectors understanding of what constitutes the desired ecological state or land management objective for different CBA categories. These objectives inform how many CBA categories are necessary in a schema and provide thresholds for assessing and cla bi basedcategories on the available Table 8: The conceptual steps followed in developing the CBA in developing followed steps conceptual Table 8: The guidelines. land-use the associated and categories The objective of the CBA map is to recommendations as to which parts of recommendations as retained in a natural state and transformed to other land-uses. Th Cons West Province Biodiversity North 45 : manage land to optimize ctives (natural, near-natural and tually it is relatively easy to to a land management objective. mposition, structure and function al processes and services) in a relates to biodiversity pattern, and structure to relates

Production landscapes Production natural. sustainable utilization of functional) listed in the Table 9 can be further unpacked using the three ecosystem integrity indicators described by Noss (1990) and adapted by O’Conner (2005) for grassland in South Africa. These indicatorsinclude of ecosystem co (Table 10). Composition and function relate to ecological process and services. CBA categories only begin to make practical sense once they are linked to a land management objective that can then be related to land-use activities. The high-level land management obje ONA and Transformed In Table 9 the land management objectives are qualitative statements about the desired level or amount of biodiversity retained (both biodiversityand pattern ecologic landscape or the amount of biodiversity one is prepared to loose in a landscape to other land uses. Concep relation in category CBA each define romising our ability to e are options for loss of loss options for are e : s largely intact and :

ervation Assessment Technical Report : ial planning categories (CBAs) to ial planning categories Land Management Objective Ecosystems and species fully intact and undisturbed These are areas with high irreplaceability or low flexibility in terms of meeting biodiversity pattern targets.biodiversity If the features targetedin these areas are lost then targets will not be met. These are landscape that are at or past their limits of acceptable change Ecosystems moderately to significantly disturbed but still able to maintain basic functionality. Individual species or other biodiversity indicators may be severely disturbed or reduced. These are areas with low irreplaceability with respect to biodiversity pattern targets only. Ecosystems and specieEcosystems and undisturbed. Areas with intermediate irreplaceability or some flexibility in terms of area required to meet Therbiodiversity targets. some components of biodiversity in these complandscapes without targets. achieve These are landscapes that are approaching but have not passed their limits of acceptable change.

• • • • • • • Natural landscapes Near-natural landscapes • • Functional landscapes CBA category Table 9: A framework for linking spat for A framework Table 9: PA & CBA 1 CBA 2 Ecological Support Areas (ESA) land-use planning and decision-making guidelines based on a set of based on a guidelines and decision-making planning land-use the from Adapted management objectives. land biodiversity high-level 2008). bioregional plans (Anon guideline for Cons West Province Biodiversity North 46

: 1 None None None None Some Some Significant ial landscape-level ial landscape-level Functioning Fire grazing regimes processes biogeochemical hydrological functioning & erosion soil formation biotic processes

• • • • • •

nt or degree of change in biodiversity indicator of change in nt or degree Ecological Processes and Services None None Some Some Some Significant Significant Structure transformation transformation fragmentation

• • to the biodiversity-related land management objectives and potent objectives land management to the biodiversity-related Landscape Management Objective Biodiversity Indicators Landscape Management None None Some Significant Significant Significant Significant Composition

Limit of Acceptable Change (LAC): Permitted amou (LAC): Permitted Limit of Acceptable Change Biodiversity Pattern habitat types species populations meta-populations alien plants

• • • • •

ervation Assessment Technical Report iginal extent/amount remaining iginal extent/amount remaining inal extent/amount remaining ONA ESA1 ESA2 CBA 1 CBA 2 PA/CA Transformed Transformed

CBA Category:

of biodiversity: Component Indicator category: Specific Indicators:

Land Management

Objective: Near- Natural Natural Possible quantitative definitions of LACs: Some: Between 60 ad 90% of or Significant: Less than 60% of or None: Greater than 90% of orig biodiversity indicators. indicators. biodiversity Table 10 A summary of the CBA map categories used in relation categories of the CBA map Table 10 A summary 1 Cons West Province Biodiversity North Functional 47 Act [57 of 2003]) and are ss of being proclaimedif ss of being the proclamation will occur calculations can be considered ational Environmental ecological state’ to guide land rred to as Thresholds of Potential ed in the context of adaptive principle close to the concept river of to the concept close principle ans recommend that four major ans recommend that four 5.2 What is on the CBA Map? Areas that are in the proce thatNote areas under voluntary conservation agreements for which there is no long-term security, as conservancies/stewardshipsuch agreements,must not be shown as protected areas, but may be shown as information (see below). context Areas that have been proclaimed in terms of the Protected Areas Act (N Special protected forest areas declared in terms of the National Forest Act; 47 there is high certainty that Management: Protected Areas included in the national protected areas register (these include privately owned contract nature reserves)

• • • • Critical biodiversity(CBAs) areas Protected areas

2. 1. The guidelines for bioregional pl categories need to be clearly identified on the “CBA Map”. These categories are: Concern (TPCs), were originally us Although the application of a ‘desired use is new in South Africa, it is in management class that is part of the National Water Resource Classification System. LACs, also refe management. TPCs are the limits of sets of critical ecosystem indicators that are used to trigger management interventions in protected areas (see for example Du Toit & Biggs, 2007). The national thresholds (targets) for South African vegetation types that are used in the CBA criteria and ecosystem status LACs for levels of transformation.

the desired ecological state that ervation Assessment Technical Report dicators, referred to as Limits to ich have been extensively used to what “natural” and “near natural” and “near what “natural” e South African biodiversity sector a positionfully quantifyLACs. a to research and consultation within the ge for ecosystemindicators in es is based on a qualitative based on a es is potential ecosystem indicators for

Unpacking the high-level objectives in terms of measurable indicators and thresholds is fundamental, if one is to understand the relative impact of different land-uses on biodiversity and formulate a set of land-use guidelines that relate to the CBAs. A land management objective defines an area of land should be kept in so as to ensure biodiversity persistence. Table 10 lists some which ecosystem condition or state in Acceptable Change indicators (or LACs) can be defined. LAC values are assigned to each land management indicator and ultimately each CBA category to describe limits for the degree of acceptable ecological change or impact that any proposed land-use activity (individually or cumulatively) may bring about without compromising the designated ecological state. acceptableof change Limits are quantitativethe thresholdslimit that amount of transformation or the amount of a particular land use that can occur within a CBA category or an area (e.g. water catchment). Quantifying LACs for the various indicators lies beyond the scope of this document, however, the thresholds or targets set for South African vegetation types are LACs wh calculate ecosystem status. At this point recommendations regarding desirable land use activities for the different CBA categories in relation to the land management objectiv interpretation of LACs and not a quantitative assessment. At a fundamental ecological level th still needs to debate the specifics of means in terms of quantitative and measurable indicators. To our knowledge there are no detailed studies in South Africa that attempt to quantify acceptable limits of chan relation to land-use activities. At this stage this discussion has not happened broadly within the ecological community in the country and it will take a significant amount of biodiversity sector before we are in Cons West Province Biodiversity North 48 for for desired or features, such as Natural ssification for all areas in the land management objectives the previous section. or biodiversity These areas include cultivated areas, afforested areas, mined areas, urban areas, and areas under coastal development. 5.3 Putting the CBA Map together

• Other significant natural sites sites natural significant Other Heritage sites or natural sites that are of cultural significance, if spatial information is available for these Areas under voluntary conservation agreements with no long- term security, such as conservancies Labels for rivers and protected areas (recommended) Features included for orientation, such as towns, roads, administrative boundaries, and cadastral boundaries (recommended) Degraded areas of natural habitat, if these have been identified

• • • • • The CBA map can also include context information such as: Once the land management objectives and CBA categories had been defined a set of criteria were developed in order to assess and categorise the available biodiversity information into CBA categories (Table 12). The criteriadrawnthe haveof experiencessimilar on other exercises in South Africa and have been adapted to the available biodiversity information. The overall CBA map at the provincial scale is derived from overlaying multiple biodiversity information layers (viz. criteria) and then summarising the CBA category cla

a given are as discussed in These are the basic categories and the trend with developing CBA products for land-use decision making and planning in South Africa is to subdivide the CBA and ESA categories based on ecological state rved for ecosystems whose

ervation Assessment Technical Report All wetlands All estuaries All riparian zones Groundwater recharge zones Primary water production areas terrestrial ecological corridors aquatic ecological corridors special habitats critical wetlands critical estuaries critical sub-catchments critically endangered ecosystems * endangered ecosystems * important sites irreplaceable sites

i. i. ii. ii. x. v. v. iii. iii. ix. iv. iv. vi. vii. viii. These areas are still subject to the usual authorisation procedures, e.g. EIAs, and still require a site visit to ensure the absence of important biodiversity features before any environmental authorisation in terms of NEMA is given. status has been assessed using the criteria developed for identifying threatened ecosystems in terms of the Biodiversity Act. The ecosystems need not be formally whenis drawnidentifiedup,listed but the plan must be using the criteria developed for listing of ecosystems in terms of the Biodiversity Act. If there is a separate map showing ecological support sub-categories, of a number include also it could areas, such as: Note that this is not an exhaustive list of possible sub- categoriescritical of biodiversityareas * These terms must be rese This category may include several sub-categories, such as:

• • • • • Areas where no natural habitat remains (Transformed) Other natural areas (ONAs) (ONAs) areas natural Other

4. 3.

North West Province Biodiversity Cons West Province Biodiversity North 49 d previously, our our d previously, nherently limited Roller Oosthuysen Rodney Cronwright, Jeff Manuel et al. ion presented is i bases. As discusse ne CBA’s is “coarse-filer” surrogates fine-scale (e.g. 1:50 000 scale 5.4 Limitations of the CBA map Guideline documents documents Guideline Author CAPE STEP Mpumalanga land use guidelines CBA category schemes Mervyn Lotter and Tony Ferrar Eastern Cape Richtersveld Cape Fine-Scale Plans Garden Route Namaqua District Municipality Other related land use Genevieve Pence and Kerry ter Philip Desmet and Enrico category schemes Derek Berliner and Philip Desmet Western Cape Rural Development Philip Desmet and Derek Berliner Guidelines Steve Holness informatspatial accuracy of the The by the accuracy of the biodiversity databases used to develop the map. Mapping accuracy varies from approximately 1:10 000 through to about 1:150 000 scale. More importantly the information content of the CBA map is limited by the depth of knowledge on the distribution of biodiversity in the province captured in electronic data biodiversity knowledge base for the NW Province is very limited. The majority if information used to defi for biodiversity pattern and process. There are no “fine-filer” (e.g. point locality species datasets) or vegetation maps) biodiversity datasets available for the province.

ervation Assessment Technical Report and experts during the course of trial and aquatic CBA’s can differ. Anon, April 2008 Gelderblom 2007 studies (e.g. SITES study) as well ns presented in the ‘Guideline oregions and the Preparation and the CBA categories presented here layers) and can have multiple CBA categories however, in the online version of the CBA map ) the CBA classification for all criteria can be Guideline documents documents Guideline Author http://bgis.sanbi.org viewed when querying a site. The biodiversity criteria used to define the CBA’s draws from experiences with similar exercises elsewhere in South Africa (Table 11), previous provincial biodiversity as from discussions with stakeholders this project. Most importantly, follow the national recommendatio Regarding the Determination of Bi Publication of Bioregional Plans’ (Anon 2008). The CBA categories and criteria used to define these CBA’s are summarised in Table 12. Terrestrial and aquatic CBA’s are presented in separate maps partly for clarity and partly because the land use guideline recommendations for terres Table 11 A summary of the literature consulted when the developing consulted of the literature Table 11 A summary NW province. for the CBA categories Guideline regarding the Determination of Bioregions and the Preparation and Publication of Bioregional Plans Guidelines Production: C.A.P.E Fine-scale Plans. Profile Biodiversity Garden Route Pre-CBA category LU schemes Vromans Debora (e.g. CBA1 and ESA). In the printed map only the highest ranking CBA category is displayed, ( landscape with the highest ranking CBA category taking precedent for display in the final map. Therefore any point or area in the landscape can be classified as a CBA based on one or many biodiversity criteria (biodiversity information Cons West Province Biodiversity North 50 Codes CBA Level T1

the provincialor Name Shp File CBA Field CBA_irr CBA_pa PA CBA_pa CA CBA_saveg T1 CBA_saveg T2 CBA_end T2 NW NW Protected Areas NW Protected Areas NW Vegetation Patches NW Vegetation Patches NW Vegetation Patches

uded in future iterations of

quatic CBA2 respectively. e amount remaining intact of this intact e amount remaining rves or game farms where there is there farms where or game rves

PINK. These criteria may be incl tation target therefore all remaining

uatic CBA1 and terrestrial/a .

A maps appear at the end of the printed report. Figure 21 Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) in the North West Province. Province. North West Areas (CBAs) in the Biodiversity

and on areas not recognised in the Protected areas Act (e.g. (e.g. areas Act Protected in the areas not recognised on Figure 20 ervation Assessment Technical Report , Planning units with high irreplaceability values based on the provincial on the provincial values based Planning units with high irreplaceability conservancies and private nature rese conservancies and private African National Parks and North West Provincial Parks. Provincial Parks. North West and African National Parks areas. Type 1 and 2 protected as known formerly There were no legal agreement). areas. Type 3 protected as known formerly There were endangered of provincially critically than 3ha larger Remaining patches Th i.e. types). (vegetation ecosystems represen is less than type vegetation priority the highest conservation of units are vegetation of these patches avoided be habitat should of natural and further transformation and of provincially endangered than 5ha larger Remaining patches amount remaining The i.e. types), (vegetation vulnerable ecosystems 60%. is less than type vegetation of this intact should be limited to types vegetation of these Any further transformation or heavily degraded areas. existing transformed (>80% of Endemic or Near-Endemic than10ha larger Remaining patches of global distribution the province with a to types in province) vegetation conservation These are vegetation types whose 000ha. than 50 less of extent the small Also, in the NW Province. be achieved only target can transformation. to them vulnerable units makes these vegetation Figure 19 5.5 Description of CBA’s for the NW Province Sub-Category Name Sub-Category CBA category features used to define Description of biodiversity Shp File Name Irreplaceable Sites Protected Areas Areas Protected including South Areas Act in the Protected recognised areas Protected Critical Patches: - Status Ecosystem Critically Endangered Ecosystems - Status Ecosystem Endangered And Vulnerable Ecosystems Endemic Vegetation Types

CBA level codes T1/A1 and T2/A2 refer to terrestrial/aq Criteria not included in the final CBA product are highlighted in regional (e.g. district municipality) conservation assessments. CBA maps appear in NOTE: A3-size District Municipal versions of the CB

• • • • Map Name Category Critical criteria used to define Table 12 Biodiversity Cons West Province Biodiversity North Conservation areas Conservati areas Protected Areas Conservation Critical Biodiversity Patches: Areas (CBAs) Critical Patches: Critical 51 Codes CBA Level Name Shp File CBA Field CBA_sites T2 CBA_sites CBA_links T1 CBA_exp_T T1 CBA_hill T2 CBA_pa1 T2 CBA_node T2 Irreplaceability NW Hyperdiversity NW Biodiversity NW Biodiversity Corridors Critical Linkages NW Expert Terrestrial NW Features and NW Hills CBA_fea Ridges T2 NW PA Development Corridors NW Biodiversity Nodes habitats in the existing provincial existing provincial in the habitats

e CBA map as this information layers this information e CBA map as See layer. the Critical Patches the NW biodiversity sites inventory the NW biodiversity rtant for biodiversity conservation. conservation. rtant for biodiversity scapes to other uses has severely has severely other uses to scapes areas for biodiversity captured in areas for to address the yer was developed biodiversity assessment. Nodes assessment. Nodes biodiversity eas or sites that are mandatory if conservation if conservation are mandatory that sites or eas

ervation Assessment Technical Report MARXAN analysis, i.e. ar MARXAN analysis, to be achieved. are targets See Section 2.3.2 la The hill and ridges SDF dataset. that or intact biodiversity remaining areas of important coincide with Irreplaceable sites not included in th not included sites Irreplaceable is already identified by repeats what irreplaceability analysis. of the provincial a summary for Section 8.10 where network corridor biodiversity in the provincial Critical linkages land of natural existing conversion landscape. in the natural maintaining connectivity for restricted options ha in extent less than 10 000 environments the terrestrial Areas in identified by experts as being impo in areas identified “Hyperdiversity” CBA map as mapping from the final was excluded layer This data Important too coarse. accuracy is areas. expert mapped scenic landscapes) features (habitats, springs, Important natural data SDF identified in the existing sensitive as identified Hills and ridges features in the these topographic significance of special biodiversity the GIS using The layer was re-developed from scratch Province. North for the and modified Gauteng Province in used modelling approach West Province. Park in previous identified corridors protected area development Existing studies: Environment 1. Heritage 2. Protected 3. 4. Highveld Grassland corridor 5. Magaliesberg Site Heritage Dome World Vredefort nodes development industry or nature-based biodiversity Potential Protected Area Transfrontier Kalahari systematic the identified through Sub-Category Name Sub-Category CBA category features used to define Description of biodiversity Shp File Name Corridors Linkages Corridors Linkages Areas Experts Habitats: Hyperdiversity Features and Ridges Protected Area Development Corridors Development Nodes Map Name

Category Cons West Province Biodiversity North Critical Biodiversity Terrestrial Critical Habitats: Important Hills Important Habitats: Habitats: Important Important or Proposed Existing Biodiversity 52 Codes CBA Level Name Shp File CBA Field CBA_corr T2 CBA_exp_A A1 NW Biodiversity NW Biodiversity Corridor NW Expert NW Expert Aquatic kalalo Heritage Park kalalo Heritage to indicate general alignment of owing set of design criteria or owing set of design criteria or y as there are no other options for for options no other are as there y axes of landscape corridor design landscape axes of al indicating broadly areas for al indicating al level. Only areas designated as al level. Only areas designated rtant for biodiversity conservation. conservation. rtant for biodiversity atial Biodiversity Assessment. atial Biodiversity Assessment. iversity corridor network aimed at retaining corridor network aimed iversity Madikwe-Pilanesberg-Bora PNE Magaliesberg

o o The corridor network needs to link core conservation landscapes landscapes conservation to link core network needs The corridor of range the complete covers through a province-wide network that latitudinal zones. and altitudinal where possible incorporate most should network The corridor priority areas. freshwater terrestrial and of on one component not focus should network The corridor all consider but rather in the design biodiversity (e.g. grassland) process. ecological and pattern of biodiversity components Give effect to the principles and Sp National embodied in the The corridor network needs to incorporate all existing identified all existing to incorporate network needs The corridor include: These biodiversity corridors. or landscape

ervation Assessment Technical Report linking the landscape. NOTE: The corridor network is notional The corridor NOTE: provinci at the biodiversity corridors mandator linkages are critical corridor connectivity between all geographic areas in the province. Corridor Corridor all geographic areas in the province. connectivity between path analysis. a least cost following network identified systematic a product of the as network designed The corridor on the foll was based and assessment principles agreed to by the stakeholders and experts involved with this with and experts involved to by the stakeholders principles agreed project: contribute significantly towards achieving biodiversity conservation goals conservation biodiversity towards achieving significantly contribute development). targets, economic achieving (e.g. where landscape areas in the last remaining are the these In most cases areas are heavily as other can be developed reserve networks extensive type conservation. to stewardship better suited and are thus transformed indicated are notion areas Note: the biodiversity development. biodiversity development.

Areas in the aquatic environments less than 10 000 ha in extent the aquatic environments less than 10 000 ha Areas in identified by experts as being impo • • • • • Sub-Category Name Sub-Category CBA category features used to define Description of biodiversity Shp File Name Habitats: Experts Areas Areas Experts Habitats: Map Name

Category Cons West Province Biodiversity North Biodiversity Corridors biod Provincial-level Aquatic Important 53 Codes CBA Level Name Shp File CBA Field Natural ESA_wet ESA_A1/A2 CBA_sq4 A1 CBA_sq4 A2 NW wetlands NW wetlands CBA_wet A2 NW wetlands NW wetlands CBA_wet A1 NW wetland buffers NW Land Cover NW Land Cover Transformed NW Sub Catchments NW Sub Catchments NW Dolomites ESA_dol No Layer ESA_A tlands and pans. A1 refers to A1 refers and pans. tlands others as there is no biodiversity is no biodiversity as there others taining biodiversity pattern or ll Type 1 protected areas 1 protected ll Type NW PA buffers ESA_pa ESA_T ns. No differentiation is made between high made is No differentiation ns. portance individual wetlands or clusters of or clusters wetlands individual portance

ervation Assessment Technical Report information on this at present. The ecological buffer around wetlands is buffer The ecological on this at present. information Support Area. included under the Ecological conservation importance wetlands or wetlands importance conservation wetlands (including pans) based on estimated ecological integrity of integrity ecological on estimated pans) based (including wetlands cover. the NW land feature using in the following section See discussion Extracted from CSIR Croc-Marico study. See Section 2.3.2 See Section study. CSIR Croc-Marico from Extracted The terrestrial habitats adjacent to wetlands are important ecological support areas for the aquatic systems. all we The 500m radius buffer around These are areas that have been transformed and do not contribute significantly to main buffers around critical wetlands and pans whereas A2 are buffers for all are buffers for whereas A2 and pans critical wetlands buffers around and pans remaining wetlands ecological processes and include urban and rural settlements; crop lands; mines and mined areas; and, forest plantations. The coverageland-usesderived of these Province Land NW from the Cover. River sub-Quaternary catchments identified by the CSIR national by the CSIR national identified catchments River sub-Quaternary river or most irreplaceable as being highest priority assessment catchments by the CSIR identified catchments Other important sub-Quaternary assessment. national in the existing aquifers identified associated and their of dolomite Areas SDF data categories. be the CBA and ESA categories should with Degraded areas falling state ecological acceptable to an for rehabilitation earmarked Sub-Category Name Sub-Category CBA category features used to define Description of biodiversity Shp File Name Catchments Catchments Buffer Areas Wetland Aquifers areas: Dolomite CBA or ESA the above not included in areas All remaining natural Map Name Category

Cons West Province Biodiversity North Irreplaceable Sub- Irreplaceable Sub- wetlands Irreplaceable Important im Highest conservation Ecological recharge Pans and Wetlands Support Areas and pa All other wetlands Groundwater Other Natural Areas Protected Area buffers No Natural Habitat a buffer around The 1km radius Remaining 54 coverage. Layers Layers coverage. cluded in the final CBA

T1 Transformed y information field that were unioned to create the NW CBA the NW were to create unioned that information field y highlighted in yellow where kept as separate layers and not in layers highlighted in separate as whereyellow kept CBA_irr CBA_end T2

ervation Assessment Technical Report ical Linkages CBA_links T1 5.6 Summary of GIS shapefiles NW Irreplaceability NW Land Cover Endemic) Shp File Name Shp File CBA Field Name CBA Level Codes shapefile. and ke GIS shapefiles the individual This table summarizes Table 13: 1 2 Areas NW Protected Patches NW Vegetation Hyperdiversity /Near (Endemic Patches NW Vegetation 3 Features 4 NW 5 NW 6 7 NW Hills and Ridges 8 terrestrial NW Expert 9 CBA_saveg CBA_pa aquatic NW Expert 10 CBA_sites Corridors NW PA Development 11 Nodes NW Biodiversity 12 Corridor NW Biodiversity buffers wetlands 13 Corridors Crit NW Biodiversity CBA_fea wetland 14 NW NW Sub Catchments Dolomites 15 NW CBA_pa1 T1/T2 T2 16 NW CBA_hill 17 CBA_exp_T PA/CA 18 NW PA buffers CBA_exp_A CBA_node CBA_corr T2 ESA_wet CBA_sq4 T2 CBA_wet T1 T2 ESA_dol A1 T2 T2 ESA_A1/A2 ESA_pa A1/A2 A1/A2 ESA_A2 ESA_T1

highlighted in pink were excluded from the final CBA map. Layers were from excluded highlighted in pink Cons West Province Biodiversity North 55

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 19: Terrestrial CBAs for the NW Province. the CBAs for Terrestrial Figure 19: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 56

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 20: Aquatic CBAs for the NW Province. Province. NW for the CBAs Aquatic Figure 20: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 57

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 21: Ecological support areas (ESAs) for the NW Province. NW Province. (ESAs) for the areas Ecological support Figure 21: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 58 ovince. This oregional plan document for the document for oregional plan practices within the same land-use line recommendations in relation to detailed land-use guidelines for on the acceptability of different tivities in practice are more province. More detailed guidelines here should be consulted when s of their compatibility with the land several relevant South African r Mpumalanga Pr developing more activity-specificand the different CBA categories in the can also be incorporated into for the provincial land-use management (LUMs) legislation. Table 14 is an example of a basic CBA category by land-use type compatibility table developed fo NW Province the documents listed categorisation of land-uses in term management objectives for each CBA category applies equally to the NW Province. Naturally, land-use ac complicated in terms of their impacts on biodiversity and this table needs to be expanded to qualify assumptions and exceptions as well un-acceptable and acceptable define (e.g.non-organic organiccategory game farming cultivation, vs. with exotic vs. indigenous species) A detailed discussion and guidelines documents discussing land-use guide CBA categories. When compiling the bi land-use activities within the different CBA categories is not presented in this report. There are, however, point of Critical Biodiversity ga Tourism and Parks Agency, ecies (Contact Tilla Raimondo E- velopment Guidelines (currently Day EG, Driver A, Euston-Brown ical Biodiversity Areas in the ervation Assessment Technical Report rating a set of land-use guidelines set of rating a -use activity be assessed in terms Environmental Assessment in the Environmental Assessment in llowing documents that discuss land- that discuss llowing documents atible with one or more of the CBA more of the atible with one or in order to determine whether a planning categories in more detail: detail for the NW Province. Instead land-use planning & decision- 2007. Mpumalanga Biodiversity 2007. Mpumalanga [email protected]) [email protected]) ) 5.7 Recommendations for Land-Use Planning Ferrar, A.A. and Lötter, M.C. Conservation Handbook. Mpumalan Nelspruit (Contact Mervyn Lotter E-mail: [email protected]) De Villiers CC, Brownlie S, Clark B, DIW, Helme NA, Holmes PM, Job N, Rebelo AB (2005) Fynbos Forum Ecosystem Guidelines for Western Cape. Fynbos Forum and Botanical Society of South Africa, Kirstenbosch. (Available from http://bgis.sanbi.org/wces/FF_Ecosystem_Guidelines.pdf) CREW guidelines for threatened sp mail: [email protected]) Western Cape Rural Planning & De being developed by DEA&DP, contact Jeff Manuel E-mail: [email protected] Garden Route Initiative. 2008. Crit Garden Route: A common reference Areas for all sectors involved in making. Garden Route Initiative. Project Management Unit. (Contact Debbie Vromans E-mail: De

for each CBA requires that each land of its known/perceived/anticipated biodiversity impact on the indicators listed in Table 10. This is necessary land-use activity is potentially comp categories given the land management objectives for each category. This process has not been done in fo on information from the draw we use guidelines in relation to spatial • • • • The next step in the process of gene • Cons West Province Biodiversity North 59 ecies localities, heavily degraded areas for d is in most cases not fine studies. In many CBA areas there on concern (e.g. sp (e.g. on concern cts can be avoided or minimized er investigation of the on-site hard-surface development wherever possible consult biodiversity sector planners when planning green- field developments utilize existingtransformed or

o o In areas where biodiversity and development priorities overlap, conflict in land management obje The recommended land-use guidelines do not generally apply to already transformed areas within any CBA category although this does not apply generally especially where critical areas have been transformed such as wetlands where the recommended management is restoration. andthrough environmentally proactive planningsensitive land-use that considers: At the provincial scale the CBA map is intended to flag general areas of conservation concernrequire that impact more detailed assessments when considering land-use changes especially in natural areas. There are inherent limits to interpretation of the CBA map due to available biodiversity information and the scale of data collection. The printed map scale and also that at which the biodiversity mapping was conducte enough for on the ground decision making. Before land-use change decisions are made in all CBA areas data needs to be verified by (a) zooming into the area of impact on a GIS (e.g. BGIS.sanbi.org) to view the available biodiversity information in more detail; and, (b) site visits and impact assessment may be development options for other land-uses that are not currently recommended in the guidelines table. These options can only be established through clos conditions. wetlands and natural spring) are not available for whole province. With better biodiversity information the location and extent of CBAs spatially.defined can be better The CBA map is based on available data sources. Information on all biodiversity features of conservati verified on the ground, preferably by an ecologist with local experience, before a decision about land-use is taken.

• • • •

ONA ONA

ESA ESA

CBA2 CBA2

CBA1 CBA1 PA/CA PA/CA N R Y intervention zones) should be

ervation Assessment Technical Report & controls when unavoidable, not not when unavoidable, & controls planning the following points should ries and associated land-use piggery’s) Guidelines apply only to untransformed land with natural vegetation cover vegetation with natural land only to untransformed Guidelines apply within each category. N = NO, not activity; encouraged and actively Y = YES, permitted to RESTRICTED and, R = activity; discouraged actively permitted, compulsory, site-specific conditions usually permitted. All data and the information on the CBA map, especially in contentious situations (e.g. economic

Table 14: A matrix of recommended land-use activities in relations to the in relations to the activities land-use matrix of recommended A Table 14: Ferrar & from (adapted for the NW Ptovince CBA categegories different Lotter 2007). No Use Type of Land Management Conservation 1 2 3 Farming Extensive Game Y 4 Production Extensive Livestock 5 Recreational Development Rural 6 Settlement Rural (Communal) 7 Dryland Crop Cultivation Production (e.g. Dairy, Farming Intensive Animal 8 Timber 9 R Irrigated Crop Cultivation R 10 Y Y N & Urban Business Development Y N Y R 11 N Y Y 12 R Projects Development Major/Extensive R Y Y 13 Y Linear Engineering Structures N R N R 14 Y Transfers & Projects Water N 15 N R Mining Underground N N Notes: N N Mining, Dumping & Dredging Surface N R 1. N N N Y N R N 2. N R R N R R Y N N R N N R R R R When interpreting the CBA catego R N R N R R R Y guidelines information for land-use be kept in mind: • Cons West Province Biodiversity North 60

s of new developments on ervation Assessment Technical Report consider cumulative impact consider cumulative biodiversity avoid cutting off of natural corridors through ribbon development adhere to defined urban-edge development boundaries keep development compact and minimize the development/natural edge avoid/control unregulated development sprawl

o o o o o

Cons West Province Biodiversity North

61 d in the figure below provision for training program. of the sector plan document. e province is illustrate rating the relationship between the biodiversity biodiversity between the rating the relationship products such as the Garden Route Sector Plan document the provincial LUMS.and The relationship between the biodiversity sector plan and other land use planning tools in th (Figure 22). The sector plan should include a component on developing and rolling-out a municipal training and capacity building. This program should include the development of training material for practitioners around the product as well as make In terms of information content, there is no difference between a biodiversity sector plan and a bioregional plan. A bioregional plan is a biodiversity sector plan that has been officially approved by the provincial MEC. The CBA map will remain the core

Figure 22: A diagram illust Figure 22: A

• • • • d aligned with other similar with other d aligned expanded and essentially be report should be incorporated is in part concerned with laying e planning and decision making. plan for how to implement these n is chosen as this is when we the current state of biodiversity

ns imposed by the lack of a BIMS a BIMS of lack the by ns imposed ervation Assessment Technical Report ate of Environment Outlook product based on this assessment ders the following recommendations 2011 and the next assessment. action plan 6.1 Provincial biodiversity strategy and 6.2 Biodiversity Sector Plan The land use guidelines will be significantly expanded based on stakeholder involvement an The biodiversity profile will be what is included in the St document.

o o All the recommendations made in this into a Provincial Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (PBSAP) for Theyears. the next 3 3 year horizo recommendingare madethat is the next provincial assessment (Section 6.7). Therefore, the PBSAP the road map leading up to This study is just an assessment of in the province. We do not develop a plan for how to address the networklimitatioin the PA or gaps (that is why this is an assessment and not a conservation plan). The PBSAP’s role will be to develop the recommendations. Therefore the PBSAP could be considered the provincial conservation plan. The biodiversity sector plan is a but will be more focused on land us The sector plan will differ from this document in two key areas:

are made for taking the outputs from this study forward: 6 Assessment Forward the Conservation Recommendations for Taking Based on theoutcomes assessmentand of this numerous the discussions with provincial stakehol • • • • Cons West Province Biodiversity North 62 list is to provide a “hit list” of task (e.g. field surveys) is best at the layer is accurate. The bulk BIMS is in place capture data in which areas in the province are the province that should the province form the atures of conservation concern. concern. of conservation atures staff and will be a start to a list of species and habitats of ta-data records for all data. SANBI to curate the information dividuals with experience. There assessment. This update process should link should update process assessment. This In the short term joint fieldtrips should be organized with experts as part of the expert mapping process. In addition to achieving the goals outlined above these fieldtrips will help develop the field knowledge capacityNWPG of the collecting point locality data on fe most vulnerable to habitat loss in the short to medium term. Based on this analysis as well as the current information on the distribution importantin biodiversity features Get the provincial BIMS up and running or else develop a example, relationship with, for Begin a process to assess and refine the provincial vegetation map. This is the single most important biodiversity information layer used thus far in the conservation assessment and therefore it is worth investing resources to make sure th of technicalassociated work with this with the national vegetation map update process Using the data from the conservation assessment, perform a vulnerability analysis to determine Based on (a) the outcomes of the expert mapping process and (b) a detailedbiodiversity analysisof the existing (e.g. databases SITES, PRECIS, atlases, etc,); generate conservation concerns. This list can include threatened species, endemics, charismatic, key-stone species, medicinal and rare or unique habitats. The objective of this immediate focus of the biodiversity inventory. collected. In the mean time until a spreadsheets and keep good me outsourced to universities or in should be an updated vegetation map ready in 3 years for the next provincial conservation Continue with the expert mapping process. This process (a) builds relationshipsbetweenbiodiversity experts and theprovince; (b) identifies who the biodiversity experts are and their level of expertise,identifies existing (c) biodiversity databasesbethat can integrated with the BIMS, (d) maps known important areas for biodiversity, (e) identify species of conservation concern.

• • • • • • e following activities as part of that is aligned with the national

ervation Assessment Technical Report should include the development of ersity inventory strategy. Development Plan biodiversity inventory and information management system 6.3 Provincial Protected Area 6.4 Development of provincial Develop a provincial biodiv ImplementBIMS; and, a

2. 1. It is imperative that the province has a PA development strategy that is aligned with the NPAES and based on a systematic conservation plan. This assessment is the first step towards developing this strategy. The plan needs to consider biodiversity priorities and weigh these up against threats to biodiversity and socio-economic imperatives. This plan will be an important document when motivating for further funds from government for the creation and development of new protected areas as well as management of existing protected areas. Included in the plan should be the development and implementation of a METTs (management effectiveness tracking tool) for assessing the management effectiveness of the existing PA network. PA expansion also needs to consider the role that conservancies play. Part of PA expansion plan the provincialconservancy program strategy.

For the following year we recommend th the provincial BI&IMS strategy: sector plan (bioregional plan) and other land use planning tools. planning tools. land use plan) and other sector plan (bioregional • Good biodiversity information underpins the provincial conservation provinceplan. The to: needs • • • • Cons West Province Biodiversity North 63 2011 is coming, start planning plans. Areas where we would t showed that agriculture is ing witnessed in this province we Agriculture Assessment v2 6.6 Building relationships with relationships 6.6 Building 6.7 NW Provincial Conservation Platinum belt Golden Highway Highveld sandy grasslands

o o o conservation assessments and recommend such fine scale plans be conducted are: are: be conducted plans scale fine such recommend Another way of identifying priorities for finer-scale planning could be through the identification of overlaps between critical biodiversity andPSDFareas priority intervention zones. The land cover change analysis could be used to identify which local municipalities should be priorities for fine-scale plans.

now! would recommend a similar life-cycle. The land cover change assessmen The overwhelmingly the major driver of biodiversity loss in the province. Closer relationships need to be built with agriculture especially those responsible for planning and permitting. Some of the fine-scale planning work recommended above could be achieved through area-wide planning initiatives in collaboration with agriculture. Start planning now for the next provincial assessment. Gauteng Province has a 2-3 year cycle on their conservation plan and given the rapid rate of landscape change be

• • t-term land-use decision making. sity value but low threat are not lly with respect to informing on-

for the province is a daunting ervation Assessment Technical Report should cover a range of spatial t localities for species; accurate accurate species; for localities t biodiversity data means this biodiversity inventory should be will make the task easier. g it into a formal BIMS. 6.5 Fine-scale plans 6.5 Fine-scale The spatial resolution and lack of assessment has limitations especia the-ground land use decision making. As a strategy for improving the biodiversity inventory for the province one should focus on areas where land use pressures are greatest through fine-scale of biodiversityfeatures of conservation concern,identifywithin areas the province that should form the immediate focus of the provincial inventory. Areas with high biodiver inventory priorities. Focus on those areas where biodiversity information will need to inform shor Biodiversity inventory information and temporal scales such as: poin maps of habitats (polygons mapped at 1:5 000 scale); repeat fixed- point photography and remote sensed aerial imagery (airborne and satellite – e.g. land cover and SPOT5 series) Impact assessment capture data NW DACE’s role in the provincial more a management and co-ordination role rather than attempting to do everything in-house. There is a wealth of biodiversity experts – use them. in the province inventoryCompiling a biodiversity task. By developing a plan and strategy, and focusing on bite-size chunks rather than attempting to collect information across the whole province simultaneously Capturing biodiversity data from protected areas is not a priority. Concentrate, in the short term, on capturing data for focal biodiversity features, There are no shortcuts to gathering good data! a networksites.Establish of monitoring Regarding data format –agree on a format and keep it simple with a view to later incorporatin

• • • • • • • • • Cons West Province Biodiversity North 64 June 2008. s and ng, North- ce. ruit.

and Wildlife ture, ility visions Pilanesberg, elitzia 17. SANBI. e Ecology Centre, rtment of Pacific Marine Town: Botanical (1), February 1999 ReportWest for North as, Z., Reyers, B. Sink, K. at Integrity Using Land ation goal, its application rationpre-feasib of an Ecological Corridor Between edicting Freshwater Habitedicting Freshwater eas for achieving a conserv lessons from South Africa. Cape on behalf of the Wilderness Foundation. for North West Province Dept of Agriculof West Province Dept for North ersity conservation in South Africa. Str ent Project: The gene et, P., Goodman, P., Harris, J., Jon Spatially Explicit Annealing, a Manual. Th and Publication of Bioregional Plans. Depa ersity of the Thomeng and Taung Dam Sites, Tau Sites, ThomengTaung Dam ersity of the and hern Africa’s succulent Karoo desert. Parks, 9 dination) by GeoTerraImage (Pty) Ltd, Pretoria, South Africa. and Nel, J., in press. Pr ver, BC, Canada. of the irreplaceability ar e Spatial Options for Creating onal Protected Area Expansion Strategy (NPAES): A Framework for Wilderness Foundation for North West Parks & Tourism Board nservation Handbook. Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency, Nelsp rxan Good Practices Handbook. External review version, pp 155. g landscapes: Perspectives and her refinement. Biological Conservation 93(3): 303-325. l, J., Turpie, J.K., Cowling, R.M., Desm rth West Parks & Tourism Board prepared prepared Board & Tourism Parks West rth odiversity Assessment. Priorities for biodiv Province 2006 Land-Cover Project. Report pacmara.org, Vancou W., Kleynhans, C.J., Day, J. AN (V1.8.2): Marine Reserve Design Using Using Design Reserve Marine (V1.8.2): AN ination of Bioregions and the Preparation Preparation the and Bioregions of ination Conservation and Socio-Economic Developm to Identify Potential High Priority Conservation Areas in the North West Province. W. (2000). A new predictor

ervation Assessment Technical Report and Skowno, A (2006). An Assessment of the Biodiv r persistence –systematic reserve design in soutr persistence –systematicdesignin reserve et, M., Lombard, A.T., Ne West Province, South Africa. Report for No Vaalkop and Borakalalo Reserves. Report prepared by the Society of South Africa, Center for Applied Diversity Science and Conservation International. & Strauss, T. 2004. The National Spatial Bi to real-world planning, and a research agenda for furt Conservation and Environment (DACE -Environmental Policy and Coor www.geoterraimage.com Implementation. Report compiled for South African National Biodiversity Institute and National Department of Environment Affair Tourism, Pretoria by K2M prepared Board & Tourism Parks Use/Cover Surrogates.SA. WATER Service, Report. Environmental Affairs and Tourism. Analysis and Research Association, www. University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. through a strategic review of the Protected Areas System and other Biodiversity and cultural heritages of the North West Provin Desmet, P; Anderson, T; Egoh, B Desmet, P.G.; Egoh, B. and Skowno, A. (2006). An Assessment of th Driver, A., Cowling, R.M. & Maze, K.E. (2003). Planning for livin Driver, A., Maze, K., Roug Ferrar, A.A. and Lötter, M.C. (2007). Mpumalanga Biodiversity Co Ferrier, S., Pressey, R. L. and Barrett, T. GeoTerraImage (2008). Final Report: North West Cowling, R.M. (1999). Planning fo Jackelman, J; Holness, S and Lechmere-Oertel, R (2008). The Nati K2M (2004). Strategic Level Spatial Analysis Margules, C.R. & Pressey, R.L. (2000). Systematic conservation planning. Nature, 405. 7 References M.A.,A.,Amis, Thuiller, Rouget, M., Balmford, Anon (2001). C-Plan. Conservation Planning Software User Manual forC-PlanVersion 3.06. Armidale, New South Wales National Parks Anon (2008). Guideline regarding the Determ Ardron, J.A., Possingham, H.P., and Klein, C.J., eds. (2008). Ma Areas for Combined Priority Collinson (2004). Ball, I.R. and Possingham, H.P. (2000). MARX Cons West Province Biodiversity North 65 Pretoria fairs and B tment of ., from from ., and Todd, C (2006). s. March 2007.s. March imate Change.Plant National Biodiversity atial Biodiversity al of the American ity. South African cover metrics. Journ uth African National Sp African Country Study on Cl Publication of Bioregional Plan iversity Institute, Pretoria. iversity Institute, rican National Biodiversity Institute. r maintaining biodiversity Integr L; Roux, H; Kleynhans, CJ; Moolman, JThirion C d by satellite derived land Cowling, R.M. (2004). So sotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African and Allsopp N. (1999). South . Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, Canterbury, UK egions and the Preparation and Madikwe & Pilanesberg Expansion Areas. Report prepared by NWP&T Information. South African Biod on of Compatible Land uses fo terrestrial component. Pretoria: South Af iversity Site Inventory & Database Development Technical Report. North West Depar Powrie, L.W., Roberts, R. sity intactness index. Nature 434, 45-49 ons of floristic endemism in southern Africa. Pretoria: Umdaus Press.

vironment. Mafikeng. May 2003 ervation Assessment Technical Report Adaptation Assessment. NBI. ; Schonegevel, L; Hardwick, D; Maree, G; Hill, , R.K. (2005). Stream health rankings predicte ., Desmet, P., Driver, A., Maze, K., Egoh, B. & ds) (2006). The Vegetation of South Africa, Le for monitoring biodiversity - a hierarchical approach." Conservation Biology 4(4): 355-364. Institute, Pretoria. National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. Assessment 2004: Technical Report. Volume1: Biodiversity:vulnerability and Prepared by the South African National Biodiversity Institute at the request of the Minister and Department of Environmental Af Tourism http://www.mosaic-conservation.org/cluz. Water Resources Association 41, 659-677. Agriculture, Conservation & En A Systematic Conservation Plan for the Freshwater Biodiversity of the Crocodile (West) and Marico Water Management Area. CSIR, O’Connor, T. (2005). National Grasslands Initiative: Identificati Noss, R.F. (1990). "Indicators Rouget, M., Reyers, B., Jonas, Z Mucina L. & Rutherford, M.C. (e Rutherford, M.C., Midgley, G.F., Bond, W.J., SANBI (2008). Threatened Ecosystems in South Africa: General SANBI (2007). Draft Guideline regarding the Determination of Bior Scholes, R.J. & Biggs, R (2005) A biodiver Smith, R.J. (2004). Conservation Land-Use Zoning (CLUZ) software Stern Review (2006). Report on the Economics of Climate Change, World Development Movement, WWF Strategic Environmental Focus (2003). NW Biod Smith-Adan, LB; Nel, JL; Roux, DJ Van Wyk, A. & Smith, G.F. (2001). Regi Stalmans, M. and De Wet, F. (2003). Vegetation and Soils of the Snyder, M.N., Goetz, S.J., Wright Snyder, M.N., Goetz, Cons West Province Biodiversity North 66 ater thanor n for all grids 6). The ich was unioned to l 1 = -25.5°,l 1 s.vegetation The re combined and run e; and, a corridor e = 1 all other values st cost path lines were Spatial Analyst raphic points in the 3km; a corridor “buffer” 6km wid area layer as a starting point. The lea were filled using a background polygon, wh the STRM Dem (90m) using ARCGIS 9.2 Spatial Analyst. Slopes gre ter 5. Cells with TPI greater than 4 were reclassified as Valu st path analysis to link up different key biodiversity/biogeog ESRI ARCGIS (9.2) and ARCVIEW (3.2) environments. The projectio province using the ARCVIEW 3.2 extension TPI_jen.avx (Jennes 200 “core” corridor with a width of with “core” corridor her values were assigned nodata. The TPI grid and slope grids we lly defined using the provincial protected deleted. Holes in the remaining features equal-area projection in the WGS84 Datum [Central meridian = 25.5°, standard paralle

ervation Assessment Technical Report 8.1 General 8.2 Vegetation cover 8.3 Land 8.4 Hill and Ridges 8.5 Corridors were assigned nodata. A separate slope grid was generated from equal to 5° were selected and reclassified as Value = 1, all ot and shapefiles was set to a custom Albers zone” of 12km wide. types were checked and a number of changes were made, such as splitting vegetation types. More… neighborhood settings were: [annulus] with inner radius 1 and ou through a majority filter 4 times to remove small “holes” in the features. The Grid was then converted to polygon layer using (ARCGIS9.2). Features smaller than 5ha were smoothed and then buffered at three spatial scales to create a 8 Appendix 1: GIS methods and technical notes All GIS analyses and processes were conducted by the authors in A vegetation layer provided by NWDACE was “cleaned” using a variety of GIS techniques to remove slivers, holes and null feature GTI produced a 10m grid Land cover for the province based on SPOT 5 imagery from 2005/2006. Details A Topographic Position Index grid (90m) was calculated for the The provincial corridor network was developed by using a least co standard parallel 2 = -27.5]. the feature. The “holes”dissolved were theninto surrounding their polygons. province. These biodiversity nodes were manua Cons West Province Biodiversity North 67 ood) and odified s comp]. comp]. from NDA from ourhood ourhood e NW land ural, 1 = ANBI for the transformation and Mathieu Mathieu and ue to lackue to of data of a cell’s neighbourhood that wa divided by the circle area). Th Ooshuysen, Nacelle Collins h diameter of 1km (local, 5km (neighbourh rhood that was transformed based on the m re also combined into a composite Grid [pro following weighted formula: by Philip Desmet and Andrew Skowno for S ded upon. Not all layers were generated d Leroy, Ray Schaller, Enrico ats was used to calculate the % grated, roads and rail and major dams. Reclassified to 0 = Nat uating to neighbourhood radii of 250, 550 and 1250m. The neighb ansformed (same results as “sum” y of ecological process based on one metric - the percentage of es were summed using the e not included in the dataset as not obtained yet by SANBI of Agricultural areas in NLC2000 [newnlcd].) ral. Circular sample windows were used wit lculate the percentage of a cell’s neighbou lculatecell’s percentage of a the .15*landscape) = [prointact]. The three layers we for the conservation plan were generated set of information layers that were deci ogramme with inputs from Marc

ervation Assessment Technical Report 8.6 Cost Layers 8.6 Cost Definition: NLC2000 with improved provincial land use layers inte Degraded, 2 = Transformed, 3 = Fragmented. Source: Steve Holness’s NPAES data transformed at 3 different spatial scales: 20, 100 and 500 ha eq stat “mean” was used to calculate the % of the search radius tr 20 km (landscape). The three percentage transformed valu transformed percentage The three (landscape). 20 km Method 2 (17 June 2008): For NW province only neighbourhood st cover was reclassified to transformed = 1 and natural = 0, and re-sampled to 50m cell size. The three percentage transformed values were summed using the following weighted formula: (0.6*local)+(0.3*neighbourhood)+(0.1*landscape)[PII_NW]. = Definition: Population density within human settlements (0.5*local)+(0.35*neighbourhood)+(0 NLC reclassified to 1=transformed and 0=natu within the local, neighbourhood and landscape extents around a point Input data: Modified National Land Cover (NLC2000 modified by removing agricultural Classes and replacing them with Agric Layer the general overestimationThis corrects 2006. to ca used stats were Neighbourhood Method: Definition:paper From Source: From Bob Scholes’s group at the CSIR. At this stag Definition: Similar to BII? but is an indication of the integrit Group 1: Ecosystem Integrity 1: Fragmentation Index Rouget. A following is a list of the complete Group 2: Human Footprint 4a: Population Density Provincial Conservation Planner TrainingPr Provincial 3: Process Intactness Index 8.6.1 National-Level Cost Surfaces National-level Cost/Vulnerability Data Layers 2: Biodiversity Intactness Index – not in dataset Cons West Province Biodiversity North 68 l to is lect is meter d2setlli]. Office and Office en2001] lyst, and a and a 100x100 the same methodology as above [ meters in Spatial Analyst, create a GRID where each pixel value is equa in meters in Spatial Analyst, and a 100x100 the urban settlement classes from NLC2000. Th the rural settlement classes from NLC2000. Th ch pixel 1Ha) = [commpopden2]. Note this surface does not ref ttlements was calculated in ll settlements was calculated with stance to settlements was calculated in meters in Spatial Ana e coverage. Distance to roads calculated ed from Benis Egoh, University Stellenbosch ban class (DWAF 2006) was merged with ral class (DWAF 2006) was merged with (R/ha) for South African Vegetation types the analysis. Distance to se taset for farm sales between 2005 and 2007 created from data obtained from the Deeds ssification of rural vs urban in the source data sets is not very accurate. lygon coverage produced by DWAF 2006 was used to rrogate of transformation pressure.

ervation Assessment Technical Report created = [d2ruralli]. off internet Method: ENPAT2001 roads were merged into on Definition: Distance to roads as a su meter integer GRID was ensures that all urban settlements are include in the analysis, Di 100x100 meter integer GRID was created = [d2urballi]. NOTE: An additional GRID was generated in which Distance to a This is a more reliable grid as the cla integer GRID was created = [d2allroadi]. NOTE: An Additional Grid was generated using only the major road classes [d2majroadi]. Definition: Distance to urban human settlements as a surrogate of transformation pressure. ur Method: National communitylayer polygon ensures that all settlements are include in Source: Download Definition: Average and median land price Input Data: SANBI’s national land price da Surveyor General. Method: The National Community po the number of people per Hectare (the grid is 100mx100m; making ea populationrural settlements.side density of out Definition: Population Density at a Sub-Place level extracted from the Census 2001 Database. And converted to a surface = [popd Source: Stats SA 2001. Definition: Distance to rural human settlements as a surrogate of transformation pressure. ru Method: National communitylayer polygon 7: Distance to Roads 6: Distance to Urban Settlement Settlement Urban to 6: Distance Group3: Ecosystem Services - These were obtain s9: Soil Formation 10: Soil retention 11: Carbon Sequestration 12: Water Production ContributionWater to Ground13: Group 4: Development Pressure 14: Land Price 8: Global Human Footprint Index – not in dataset 4b: Population Density from Census 2001 5: Distance to Rural Settlement Cons West Province Biodiversity North 69

cy r Office and Office llite images. llite images.

vel. Below this erson per km2 t is in cents). The culated as follows: tion density is 1 p http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/dmsp/. is at the local municipal le only scored 2. = [rc_93to03] e that the “prices” field in this data se fferent were the popula , based on lights captured by night time sate ity weighted change in population was cal 2003 data sets downloaded from Data Center. DMSP data collected by US Air Force Weather Agen een the 1996 and 2001 census data re scored 1, lights from 2003 of SA vegetation type between 2005 and 2007 population density at the local municipal scale price dataset were converted to R/ha (not as a 100% increase in population size is di taset for farm sales between 2005 and 2007 created from data obtained from the Deeds and 2006 landcovers (See Section 2.5) join the two datasets. The population dens

ervation Assessment Technical Report pansion of human settlements between 1993 and 2003 Definition: Rate of change between 1996 Source: Image and data processing by NOAA's National Geophysical Definition: The number of farm sales per unit area Input Data: SANBI’s national land price da as opposed to 100 people per km2 . Definition: Spatial extent of ex Method: Version 2 DMSP-OLS Nighttime Lights Time Series 1993 and Values reclassified such that lights present in 1993 and 2003 we Surveyor General. Method: See Land Price methodology. Total farm sales per vegetation type were divided by the area of each vegetation (sales/ha) [LandPrice_Veg2006_alw.shp] [(total pop 2001 - total pop 1996)/ total pop 1996]*log [total Pop density 2001] = [popwct] Note: The weighted rate of change is used Source: CSIR GAP dataset or Stats SA/ ENPAT Source: AGIS Source: Geoscience pointmine data Source: Geoscience pointmine data land price cadastral dataset was unioned with the national vegetation map and average and median R/ha values were calculated pe vegetation type. [LandPrice_Veg2006_alw.shp] The number of farm sales over the 3 year period per veg type was also calculated (see 17). Definition: Population density weighted change in level it is not a trivial task to spatially Input Data: Stats SA 1996 and 2001 census statistics Methodology: Unfortunately the only reliable spatial overlap betw Method: The values of land sales in the land 16: Rate of change – Land-cover (NW only) 17: Rate of change – property transactions 15b: Rate of change – population growth – Earth@Nite 22: Urban Development Pressure 18: Social Needs Index – not in dataset in dataset – not Index Needs 18: Social 19: Agricultural Potential – not in dataset 20: Mining Potential: Large-scale – not in dataset 21: Mining Potential: Small-scale – not in dataset 15a: Rate of change – population growth – Stats SA Cons West Province Biodiversity North 70 ral over CBA map we which is yet to be ectivity within the vegetation type. One surrounding. All LES rmed. This is then es in the corridor network. a point in the landscape rather than to a is then able to identify critical linkag vels of transformation are threatening the conn ing them with Agric Layer from NDA 2006. This corrects the gene d calculates the percentage of that landscape that is transfo ansformed within a defined radius (area) surrounding a site s within the provincial corridor network.the provincial corridor s within nd Critical Biodiversity Corridor Linkages Corridor Linkages Biodiversity nd Critical type ecosystem status and applies it to it is overlaid on the corridor network one

ervation Assessment Technical Report and categories as vegetation type ecosystem status (Table 15). nal Capacity – not in dataset s within and surrounding the corridor network where le search window to identifysearch window to criticallinkage 2 Source: unknown Definition: Distance to urban areas (see above) Source: NationalPA database The value of calculating a LES is that when Critical linkages are area corridors. Landscape Ecosystem Status = The percentage of landscape tr estimation of Agricultural areas in NLC2000 [newnlcd]. This Layer could be improved further using the National Field Data layer completedpart for of thecountry. National2: data projectionused Albers Equal Area Central meridian: 24E 1st Parallell: -30s 2nd Parallel: -20s WGS84 can apply the same thresholds in ecosystem functioning used for vegetation types to any point in the landscape relative to its does is look at the surrounding landscape within a given radius an 24: Local Government Institutio 8.6.2 a (LES) Status Ecosystem Landscape LES adapts the thinking behind the vegetation Notes 1:Modified National Land Cover NLC2000 was modified by removing agricultural Classes and replac Group 5: Landowner willingness 23: Type 2&3 conservation areas classified using the same thresholds Various search windows were used to summarize the percentage of transformation in the surrounding landscape (Table 16). For the used the 10km Cons West Province Biodiversity North 71 points in the nerableof greater OR lygon size of 10ha). 10ha). of size lygon ) 2 site used to classify the landscape ecosystem status (LES) of ecosystem the landscape to classify site used entified Core Corridor with a landscape ecosystem status of Vul window (km Status such areas (minimum po Area of majority filter Landscape Ecosystem

ervation Assessment Technical Report Radius of majority filter window (km) site % of landscape transformed within a given area surrounding a Name of Layer <40% Not Threatened Endangered a surrounding of landscape transformed % in Thresholds Table 15: <40% Not 40-59% Vulnerable 60-79% Endangered >80% Critically LES. windowsto calculate used and area of search Radii Table 16: LES2 1LES1 2LES3a 1.8 3.14 12.56 10 landscape. landscape. Not Threatened core corridor areas within 1.5km of Critical Biodiversity Corridor Linkages = All segments of the id Cons West Province Biodiversity North 72

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 23: Landscape Ecosystem Status for North West Province. West North Status for Ecosystem Landscape Figure 23: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 73

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 24: Critical biodiversity corridor network linkages. linkages. corridor network Critical biodiversity Figure 24: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 74 er 2 1:50 000 s at least 50% ation was filter, and ns layer” was ritization analysis l other values were l other union and dissolve s were exported to ological province . The wetland buffer ified as CBA1 ified as y between critical sub- o the original wetland is process ensured that is process n as they are in the These additional sub- 2008). These priority sub-catchments

the wetlands layer. The new “pa et al. e criteria were classified as CBA2. ping buffers were not dissolved) and the percentage transform re selectedre from and exported and all those wetlands which contained a “pan” feature which wa conservation priorities in a formal aquatic conservation pla ed river catchments also cover the complete range of geo-hydr on attribute from the vegmap was also added using spatial join at fell in a irreplaceable or important sub catchment were class tlandexcept classesal and “sewerage” = 1, value were assigned NW province were extracted from the national sub-catchment prio ll the other features were classified as “Non Pan Wetlands”.featuresTh other were classifiedas “Non Pan ll the r size to the parent wetland passed on the attribute “Pan”. irreplaceable sub-catchments (CBA1). To improve the connectivit only features that were greater than 0.4 in the circularity measure. These feature atistics (ARCGIS9.2). The resulting percentage transformation attribute was added t major rivers (stream order 3 and above 1:50 000 river stream lines) and 200m (stream ord remaining wetlands not meeting the abov ervation Assessment Technical Report 8.7 Aquatic features 8.7 Aquatic small “pans” did not select large wetlands, only pans of simila assigned nodata. The resulting grid was resampled to 20m, the cells with value =1 were expanded by 30m, run through a majority converted to a polygon feature. The features in the wetland shapefile were cleaned of “holes” using a background feature and a function. The Wetland features were then buffered by 500m (overlap calculated in the buffer area using Zonal St 8.7.1 Wetlands The Land cover 2008 (GTI) grid was reclassified such that all we 8.7.2 Pans Wetlands that were more than 500m from 8.7.3 sub catchments Priority Priority sub-catchments (i.e. sub-quaternary catchments) in the river stream lines) from minor steams, and were larger than 5ha we processed using ET3.6 (ARCVIEW3.2) to select form a new pans layer. The wetland and pans layer were compared of its area, were assigned the Type attribute “Potential Pan”. A required to meet national river type targets were classified as catchments, additional sub-catchments that aligned with the provincial terrestrial biodiversity corridor network were selected. catchments were classified as important sub-catchments (CBA2). done by Jeanne Nel as part of the National Protected Area Expansion Strategy (NPAES, Jackelman shapefile using Spatial Join (ARCGIS9.2). The vegetation bio-regi wetlands. These are the wetlands most the likely to be selected as (estimated) best ecological state and by being aligned with select types encountered in the province.. All

shapefile was renamed [wetland support area]. Wetlands with less than 40% of the buffer areas transformed, th Cons West Province Biodiversity North 75 vegetation ate protection protection ate nd its location nd its nal vegetation is assessment was sub catchments that table is used in Excel vegetation types lculations were iority sub catchment catchment sub iority utherford and Muncia and Muncia utherford n. Targets were set ion type. The union been transformed to ppendix 3). % transformed); % ervation targets)within the ve no equivalent in the natio odiversity assessment. The objective of th odiversity assessment. This ensures that wetlands within priority ee Appendix 3 for details). The Targets for e protected area network for each vegetat pes described in the Province ha ribed in the ecosystem status methods above was used to calcul ments and the Provincial CLUZ/MARXAN or Irreplaceability vegetation, transformation and protected areas layers. A pivot us: Critically endangered vegetation types are those that have eve the target set for its conservation (% intact is less than mation, degradation and protection. Separate ecosystem status ca e remaining vegetation types are considered “Not Threatened” (A is that was conducted as part of this bi ing wetlands were assigned a CBA class 2. re estimated by experts (Philip Desmet) (s entagebiodiversity target achievement by th

ervation Assessment Technical Report ch vegetation type in Appendix 3). (wetlands) were set to 100%. nd are selected as CBA1. Assessment 8.8 Ecosystem status Level 8.9 Protection 8.10 Systematic Conservation Assess between vegetation types, transformation and protected areas desc summary statistics (full details for ea are surrounded by intact la relative to the Priority Sub Catchments. Wetlands with less than 40% of their 500m buffer transformed that were located in a pr were assigned a CBA class of 1. The remain to calculate per vegetation type summary statistics of transfor to identify, at the provincial scale, highly irreplaceable sites (i.e. sites or areas that are definitely required to meet cons 8.7.4 Wetland CBAs 8.7.4 Wetland The Wetlands layer was then classified into CBA1 and CBA2 wetlands based on the percentage transformation of the buffer area a Ecosystem status calculations are based on a union between the Protection level is calculated as the perc This section discusses the CLUZ/MARXAN analys that are protected by legislation by that are protected According to the national norm for calculating Conservation Stat such a degree that their remaining extent is insufficient to achi Endangered vegetation has up to 15 % more vegetation intact than its target; Vulnerable vegetation has between 15 and 60% more intact than its target; 17 vegetation types fit this profile. Th performedusingtransformation transformation only and and degradation together. The biodiversity targets assigned to each vegetation type are essential to calculating ecosystem status and ecosystem protectio for the 61 vegetation types described in the Province. Species-area curve driven Targets set for the National Vegetation Map (R 2005) were used where possible. However, some of the vegetation ty map. Targets for these vegetation types we Cons West Province Biodiversity North 76 rovince or region, ses and long-term long-term and ses ments of biodiversity. ieving a set of agreedset of ieving a a) create a region-wide eability” analysis can be m functioning so that , rather than by trying onservation within

(the principle of fying suitable surrogates surrogates suitable fying sity and conservation keeping natural production ) the viability problem: design of he principlehe of persistence). least four problems: (i) identi on the distribution of biodiver , economic and aesthetic factors s for conservation action; (iii action; s for conservation nt synchronization problem: biodiversity c s; (2) patterns of biodiversity distribution ea networks that are representative of the biodiversity of a p a single layer or map of conservation options. This options. or map of “irreplac layer conservation a single to a large extent by political sulted in protected area networks that under-represent many ele with finding the solutions to at diversity of spatial information sses that sustain these patterns (t priority areas for biodiversity conservation or retention (i.e. biodiversity and (b) retain key ecological processes and ecosyste oblem: selection of priority area assessments as exemplified in South Africa are: planning with regard to biodiversity. res in relation to biodiversity; and rsistence; and, (iv) the multiple constrai tion Planning Overview Overview tion Planning tes can be used to define CBA’s to define tes can be used ervation Assessment Technical Report account (1) vulnerabilities and competing land-use The map of conservation options can be used to inform the provincial protected areas development strategy Identified high irreplaceability si and that are ecologically sustainable; To spatially evaluate land-use pressu land-use for recommendations provide To To identify priority (or critical) biodiversityidentify To areas; To identify and prioritise areas for the creation of protected ar

2. • • 1. • • to conserve a representativeto conserve a sample of biodiversity.Thishas re Moreover, the design of most protected area networks has not taken into account the conservation of important ecological proces persistence of biodiversity. The science of biodiversity conservation planning is concerned 8.10.1 Systematic Conserva Systematic 8.10.1 The location of protected areas in the world has been influenced biodiversity targets within a landscape context of alternative and often competing land-uses. The conservation targets aim to ( protected area network that is representative of the region’s biodiversity and key ecosystem services are able to persist. The objective of any systematic assessment is to examine and articulate options for conserving biodiversity with respect to ach NW Province. Such an analysis is a useful way of integrating a goals expressed as targets, and summarizing this information into or indicators of biodiversity; (ii) the place prioritization pr used in two ways: landscapes natural), taking into representation); and, (3) the ecological and evolutionary proce In short, systematic conservation planning attempts to identify context of multiple competing land uses (Sarkar and Margules 2002). andaims of systematic conservation planning The protected area networks for biodiversity pe Cons West Province Biodiversity North 77 ses). ed m existing m existing ability or the selection selection the d as quantitative ; Driver et al. ; Driver et targets set. rsity targets for pproaches. rly so in developing lst maximising or recognition of the ds emphasising:a) tly on natural resources (2003). fundamental in guiding

et al. order to the meet land use. This is particula steps (Margules and Pressey 2000 eability assessment with outputs fro ured as opportunity costs for other land u rural communities may rely direc rely may communities rural ting quantitative datasets and expert mapp and Pressey (2000) and Driver nserved or retained in prevailing socio-economic context; and, b) ect the explicit goals of the exercise. These goals are expresse ning principles that set this approach apart from previous a context of global climate change. This context has been be competing with other forms of tion units, etc.) for inclusion in the assessment and set biodive tworksby combiningirreplac the acterised by a number of generic on landscapes that promote the maintenance of biodiversity whi ls of rural poverty, and where poverty, and ls of rural people. Conservation planning is a dynamic field with recent tren in this project can be summarised as follows: ive conservation scenarios where options exist. ng see Cowling (1999), Margules lts of systematic selection analyses can be explained in terms of data, goals and ver and land use as well potential use. r the planning region drawing on both exis on goals at minimum cost (cost may be meas nned by a number of defi sation of protected area networks within dors, particularly within the

features within a planning unit will need to be co ervation Assessment Technical Report ted area and ecological corridor ne d economic opportunities of local Identify possible protec conservation plans and the expert assessment of where these should be located. Look at options for achieving the biodiversity targets using dedicated conservation planning software that assess the irreplace likelihood that the biodiversity Review existing protected area coverage; Identify suitable planning units at an appropriate scale; Compile spatial datasets on current land co these features; Identify biodiversity features (e.g. species, habitats, vegeta information; Data-driven. Systematic approaches typically require integration of different datasets. Goal-directed. The areas selected by systematic techniques refl targets for each of the natural features being considered. Efficient. The aim is to achieve conservati Explicit, transparent andExplicit, transparentresu repeatable. The Compile spatial datasets on biodiversity fo rules. Flexible. Systematic approaches allow for alternat

7. 6. 5. 4. 2. 3. • • • • • 1.

Resources for conservation are often limited, and conservation may Systematic conservation planning is underpiSystematic conservation planning is: Systematic conservation planning increased need for the efficiency and optimi importance of identifying ecological corri improving the livelihoods an countries like South Africa which are characterised by high leve for their survival. There is a general need to develop conservati our approach to this project. The process of undertaking a systematic assessment can be char 2003). The steps followed by the systematic assessment planni conservation For furthersystematic discussion on Cons West Province Biodiversity North 78 t that these these t that on of the tected area provincial then prioritise ts as well as conducted by by conducted ired to meet y catchments were eas north and east diversity features logical processes rst analysis informed ironment, the systematic assessment g a simple statistic rial environmentrial these are tic features into a single ry clear advantages as they process stops at the generati tonville and excluding the ar the tonville and excluding odiversity distribution and eco ersity information into providin d for the Mpumalanga, KZN and Eastern Cape ain features that elsewhere have been transformed to the exten ct optimal sites to meet targets (protected area design) and t process or methodology as this g the disputed Khutsong-Carle g the disputed nducted separately and in series so that the results of the fi are areas that are (a) important for biodiversity (i.e. many bio planning. However, patterns of bi the integration of terrestrial and aquatic environments in the assessment: terrestrial assessment: and freshwater. terrestrial For the env integrate a wide array of biodiv biodiversity data to identify those areas of the landscape that are definitely requ e whole province; however, for the aquatic environment the national-level analyses of the NW Province includin udy follows existing methodologies develope

ervation Assessment Technical Report “irreplaceability map”. (Taking this map of options forward to sele those sites for implementation has not been done.) To identify a landscape-level network of biodiversity corridors that integrates terrestrial, freshwater and estuarine assessmen existing mapped biodiversity corridors. To integrate existing studies and available conservation targets (viz. critical biodiversity areas). These occur there or have rare and/or endemic features) and/or (b) cont sites represent the last remaining examples of these features. The objective of this assessment is not to design an optimal pro network for the province. This has implications for the assessmen

• • 8.10.2 8.10.2 goals: systematictwo primary This assessment has assessment goals Systematic Domain Planning 8.10.3 The planning domain is the current extent

in order to promote a more integrated approach to conservation (irreplaceability) of what options there are for achieving biodiversity targets. Using quantitative biodiversity targets has ve provide an explicit measure against which to assess the state or progress of conservation action. A recent trend in conservation planning in South Africa has been The advantage of the systematic approach is that it is able to of Kuruman that were ceded to the Northern Cape Province. conservation plans where analyses of the two environments were co within the terrestrial and aquatic environments differ considerably, making it difficult to integrate both terrestrial and aqua assessment. The approach taken in this st the outputssecond. of the In this study two environments are considered in the systematic assessment was conducted from scratch for th Jeanne Nel and others at the CSIR for the National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy were used. Priority aquatic sub-quaternar used to guide the terrestrial analysis - where there are options for achieving targets and location of corridors in the terrest in favor skewed of aquaticpriorities. Cons West Province Biodiversity North 79 ment. ment. IR (J. Nel.pers. anning studies (e.g. terrestrial planning n equal border length cisions are based on ing comparative r the conservation the whole the catchment ets. All biodiversity he province is still ed in favour of cadastres 2005). Thus, maintaining rivers within a

et al. stres are not equal in area, mak portions) were not used as much of t in press, Snyder irreplaceability analysis tends to be bias

et al. ng units and this information provides the input data fo nt to farm portions. Also cada ter catchments and not river segments as in other freshwater pl the conservationConservation planning context. land-use or de in a planning unit contribute to achieving the biodiversity targ land, lengths of river or volumes of ocean. rized to the level of planni icult. Further, if cadastres are used the ape for corridor design. Cadastres (i.e. farm ngly to that of their catchments (Amis catchments their of that to ngly ervation Assessment Technical Report for contributing to biodiversity targets requires that water and land-use management focus on 2007). The rationale for using catchments is based on the need for the product of this assessment to relate to land-use manage

et al. Ecological integrity of rivers relates stro how the area or numberof biodiversityfeaturesthe area that occurwithhow 8.10.4 Planning Units Planning 8.10.4 Planning units are the units for which decisions are made within information in the planning domain is summa desired ecological state suitable and not just the river channel. The catchments used are the sub-quaternary catchment layer for South Africa developed by the CS comm.). there are a total of xx water catchment planning units that cover the province.

planning software. Planning units can be areas of Two sets of planning units are used in this assessment: a shares square, a unlike a hexagon, as units (grid) square over favored are These - hexagons 50ha comprising units Terrestrial with all its neighbours making it a better sh demarcated as tribal areas, which have no cadastral unit equivale analyses between areas of the province diff province areas of the analyses between with larger areas. The hexagon coverage was combined with the protected area layer (Type 1 or statutory PA’s only) to create a unit layer comprising 211 129 units. The freshwater planning units used in this study are based on wa Nel Cons West Province Biodiversity North 80 on targets. resent the full range South Africa as well as on types are all different ount of area required to rep

tions used in other systematic planning studies conducted in nt, are estimates of the minimum am ematic assessment a distinction needs to be made between representation and retenti ferring to all dimensions of biodiversity. Species, population, habitat or vegetati

ervation Assessment Technical Report Representation targets, the type of target used in this assessme in this used target of type the targets, Representation types of biodiversity features. Targets for features follow conven SANBI guidelines. When applying biodiversity targets in a syst Figure 25. An example of the terrestrial and freshwater planning units used in this study. in this study. units used planning and freshwater Figure 25. An example of the terrestrial 8.10.5 re is a collective term Biodiversity feature and Targets Features Biodiversity Cons West Province Biodiversity North 81 he requirement processes at acts as a user threatened” vs. s). These targets are strict conservation strict conservation and cost when ing landscapes for the representation ining irreplaceability is natural landscape needs uch area is required to andscape management processes (e.g. corridor he creation of a protected creation of creation a province-wide ls into. SA vegetation ls into. SA vegetation es the site closer to an existing considers adjacency considers jacency has in determ managed for retaining ecosystem implications. For example, in eir biodiversity featur eas and potentially sites for the aceability is that it al state in order to maintain ecological ng exercises (e.g. CAPE and STEP) demonstrate t demonstrate STEP) CAPE and (e.g. exercises ng ve influence that ad rams were used: CLUZ/MARXAN and C-Plan ility analyses. CLUZ is an ArcView 8x extension th ssingham et al. 2000, Ball and Possingham, 2000, identical in terms of th objective, whereas in landscapes can have very differentland-use can have t and evolve. Theyuseful for aredefiningand evolve. t t an area goalfor African vegetation type that the provincial vegetation type fal provincial vegetation the type that African vegetation understanding in the determination of the cut-off between “least the cut-off of in the determination understanding fining critical biodiversity ar has been set at 60% of a vegetation type remaining. ures and targets used in the irreplaceability analysis. analysis. in the irreplaceability used ures and targets 10% for all pavement types pavement types 10% for all to be retained in a natural or near-natur e of using CLUZ/MARXAN to calculate irrepl a higher irreplaceability value. The relati two conservationsupport prog decision

ervation Assessment Technical Report saic-conservation.org/cluz/) and MARXAN (Po ssary for this variety to persis Desmet 2004) and systematic conservation planni ersity to persist in perpetuity. target are those used in the NSBA. in the used are those target efore, all else being equal, if two sites are /index.html) were used to conduct the irreplaceab Feature Type Feature Type Target protected area or earmarked site will have 2004, http://www.mo CLUZ (Smith Figure 26. A summary of the terrestrial biodiversity feat of the terrestrial biodiversity summary Figure 26. A types vegetation NW Provincial South the as for target same The Rock pavements Software 8.10.6 In conducting the irreplaceability analysis of A flat target http://www.ecology.uq.edu.au of biological variety within a feature. These targets represent only the variation of biodiversity, but say nothing about how m nece maintain ecological processes area network in the province that is representative of the full range of biodiversity encountered within the province. From a l and biodiversity persistence or ecological process perspective these targets are not sufficient for identifying how much of the to be retained in order for biodiv Numerous ecological studies (see for a much larger area of natural landscape to be retained in order for most biodiversity to persist than the area suggested by targets. The national ecosystem status guidelines embody this “vulnerable” ecosystem status categories. This cut-off The representation targets used in this study are useful for de representative protected area network. Retention targets are not used here unless specifically stated (e.g. migratory catchment useful for identifying which landscapes need friendly front-end for MARXAN. The key valu calculating irreplaceability. Ther network) and are used here in part to set an upper area limit on the size of the provincial corridor network, being 60%. Retain conserving ecosystem process versus biodiversity representation landscapes biodiversity conservation is the primary management biodiversity conservation is a management object but not the only one and not necessarily the primary one. Cons West Province Biodiversity North 82 lative to e target. decision support decision rgets), are . ia). The program ribution to achieving achieving to ribution hen the site with the with the site the hen s and trade-offss the for e minimizing the y (Ferrier et al. 2000). rgules and Pressey ystems. It does,ystems. It rreplaceability (i.e. the duces as an ferent cost and spatial argets are to be met (i.e. utes towards achieving aceability of each ly compare the tradeoffs patial surrogates for wo sites can have the or the level of threat f the planning domain, for y means that there is flexibility in terms of their adjacency t terms of their adjacency in value, namely irreplaceabilit how much that site contrib ArcView (ESRI, Redlands, Californ targets whilst as the same tim aceability which is a function solely of th erent conservation score due to dif hieved). Low site irreplaceabilit that site being required to achieve the goal r to the actual monetary cost of a site portance of that site, in the context o vegetation types, habitats, species or s s towards achieving a set of targets. placeability can be viewed in two ways (Ma irreplaceability. After each decision, the irrepl as it is highly dependent on cost and adjacency. T a target, but a diff unreserved site to reflect to unreserved site the likelihood of ed measure of conservationed measure rough the BLM) and the “cost” of the site. In terms of the rough the BLM) and “cost” of the AN. Also, if two sites are equal and land-use planners to identify and evaluate spatial option which is the number of times a site was selected given it’s cont m with and extension add-in for ility value are essential components of the reserve system if t iguration contribute placeability attempts to achieve conserved sites. Conservation score is not a true measure of i ent analysis we refer to the conservation value that MARXAN pro is unlikely that targets will be ac score is an irreplaceability value weighed by the spatial location of site re as it calculates a true measure of irrepl ed to a planning unit that reflects the im t of biological features. Featurescan be ribute equally to achieving es. Cost is a relative measure and can refe ch of each target is achieved. Thus irre main is recalculated and displayed on screen. Therefore, it is possible to objective hieveconservation a objective) irreplaceability index for each cadastres) based on a comput ervation Assessment Technical Report of informed conservation decisions in terms of The potential contribution of any site to a conservation goal or The extent to which the options for achieving a system of conservation areas, which is representative (i.e. achieves all the ta reduced if that site is lost or made unavailable.

• • other important or selected sites (adjacency incorporated th determined by the boundary length modifier (BLM) variable in MARX faced by biodiversity in that site. MARXAN when calculating irre lower cost has a higher irreplaceability valu summed cost and boundary length. noted thatshoulda conservationscore MARXAN calculates be It targets; the sites cost; and, proximity to existing earmarked or likelihood that a site will be required to ac same irreplaceability because they both cont location of the site relative to existing reserves. For the pres irreplaceability value. The C-Plan program is a software package developed by the New South Wales Parks and Wildlife Service as a conservation planning tool (Anon. 2001). This tool was developed to assist conservation development of conservation systems. It is a standalone progra prioritizes parcels of land or sites (e.g. 2000; Anon. 2001): The irreplaceability index is a measure assign processes. Site irreplaceability is a function of how mu achieving conservation targetsse a given for if that site is not included in the reserve system then it in terms of which sites can be chosen to achieve the target. C-Plan does not provide explicit solutions for conservation area s however, enable the evaluation remaining available site in the planning do As land is “reserved”, C-Plan updates the the remaining conservation target. Sites with a high irreplaceab between different reserve designs by comparing how each conf C-Plan was used in the provincial analysis The Marxan “irreplaceability” or conservation Cons West Province Biodiversity North 83 r setting in terms reats and decreased if this analysis r many non-biodiversity non-biodiversity r many e are no national guidelines fo biodiversity in the province: was felt that as a starting point for d landscape to 10000 = 100% intact landscape) assigned to planning units based on one o C-Plan irreplaceability was value used as this is defensible ersity features. At present ther ngly with most threats facing can be very variable and are much less defensible. a site given it’s geographic location ocess Intactness Index of a planning unit. It odiversity)] * (Desirabilityodiversity)] of planning unit) or [(baseline cost + threat) * 0.1] threat) or [(baseline cost + ility analysis and it refers to a weighting

ervation Assessment Technical Report d has values ranging from 1 = 100% transforme 40% within core 3km wide corridor area, or 20% within 6km wide corridor area, or 10% within 12km wide corridor area

o o o Within corridornetwork An expert-mapped important farm (25%) Within a priority water catchment (25%) the cost of land to purchase for conservation formal reserves, or the likelihood that a site will be transformed, or the level of threat facing biodiversity at

• • • • • • Discounts include: attributes such and could include: transformation and that of neighboring areas correlated stro Threat = (10000 – PII) Process Intactness Index (PII) an 8.10.7 Planning Unit Cost Cost Unit Planning 8.10.7 The term “cost” is used in the irreplaceab irreplaceability criterion for including areas in the CBA map the of the national guidelines set for developing targets for biodiv BLM and cost values in MARXAN therefore outputs

Therefore maximum total discount = 90% For the analyses presented here a baseline cost for each planning unit (equal for all PU’s) was increased if there were high th the PU fell within an already identified priority area: PU Cost = [(Baseline Cost) + (Threats to Bi where baseline cost = 1000 Threat was based primarily on the average Pr Cons West Province Biodiversity North 84 not affected by not affected rmula to estimate an Generally boundary boundary Generally his optimal BLM is ” or “optimized”BLM un are used in the following fo ws a 2-step process of running MARXAN using the ry statistics from the best r cost or the boundary length (compactness) in the analyses. BLM is alysis. As a starting step in the analysis process a “balanced equally to the conservation score of any planning unit. After t (2008) foroptimized estimating anBLM. (2008) It follo

et al.

ervation Assessment Technical Report eds to be re-calculated every time the planning unit cost is changed. length (i.e. perimeter of a planning unit) never changes in an an length contribute and boundary the cost soshould be calculated determined the BLM can be adjusted so as to emphasis the unit targets; however, the optimal BLM ne For the Richtersveld analysis the optimized BLM of 0.002 was used in all scenarios. We applied the recommendations of Ardon 8.10.8 8.10.8 The boundary length modifier (BLM) can be viewed as a scaling factor that balances planning unit cost vs. the boundary length. Length Modifier Boundary the Calculating following input parameters: Step 1 (a): Unit cost = planning unit cost and BLM = 0 1 BLM = and (b): Unit cost = 0 2 Step After each step the total “cost” and summed “boundary length” summa optimized BLM: BLM = (Cost a – Cost b) / (Boundary Length a – Boundary Length b) For the baseline cost variable the BLM = 2.15 Cons West Province Biodiversity North 85

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 27. The cost layer (cost1) used in the MARXAN irreplaceability analysis. (cost1) used in the MARXAN irreplaceability Figure 27. The cost layer Cons West Province Biodiversity North 86

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 28: MARXAN output where Cost and BLM = 0. BLM where and Cost output MARXAN Figure 28: Cons West Province Biodiversity North 87

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 29. MARXAN output where cost = cost1 and BLM = 0. where and = cost1 cost output Figure 29. MARXAN Cons West Province Biodiversity North 88

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 30. MARXAN output where cost = 0 and BLM = 1. whereBLM = 0 and cost output Figure 30. MARXAN Cons West Province Biodiversity North 89 ling parameters are balanced (cost = cost1 and BLM = 2.15). = 2.15). and BLM = cost1 (cost balanced are ling parameters

ervation Assessment Technical Report

Figure 31. Optimised MARXAN conservation score output where sca output score MARXAN conservation Figure 31. Optimised Cons West Province Biodiversity North

90 features have been achieved been achieved have features s. Clear areas indicate where targets for s. Clear areas indicate p wherep to target Pas and Cas contribute

ervation Assessment Technical Report therefore irreplaceability=0. therefore Figure 32: C-Plan initial irreplaceability Figure 32: C-Plan initial irreplaceability ma Cons West Province Biodiversity North

91

Endemic Endemic

CA) CA)

Level (PA & & (PA Level

Protection Protection

only) only)

Level (PA (PA Level

Protection Protection

degradation degradation

Status incl. incl. Status

Ecosystem Ecosystem

Status Status

Ecosystem Ecosystem

(%)

Threshold Threshold

Area Area

Protected

% Degraded Degraded % Transformed Transformed

5 24.0 16 NT NT 105.9 105.9

% % 6.5 0.0 24 NT NT 5.3 5.35.3 3.2 16 NT NT 0.0 0.0

(ha) (ha) Total Area Area Total 253264 19.3 4.3 19 NT NT 52.9 61.6

ervation Assessment Technical Report veld 254683 12.1 3.7 243.7 veld 254683 12.1 NT NT 2.0 7.3 End tlands 1881 3.1 0.2 24NT0.2 1881tlands NT0.0 3.1 0.0 veld 3679 4.2 1.1 19NT16.61.1 NT veld 3679 0.0 4.2 and 628787 26.9 0.8 24NT16.20.8 NT 8.2 and 628787 26.9 174473 33.7 2.1 31NT17.4 NT2.1 17.4 174473 33.7 6981 5.9 0.2 16NT0.0 NT0.2 0.0 6981 5.9 (nwveg08_v3) (nwveg08_v3) Vegetation Type Dwaalboom Thornveld Dwaalboom Mountain Bush Dwarsberg-Swartruggens Freshwater We Eastern Temperate Freshwater Lakes Bushveld Mountain Gauteng Shale Ghaap Plateau Vaalbosveld Mountain Bushveld Gold Reef Highveld Alluvial Vegetation 426404 16.4 47344 26.9 7.5 3.4 19 638059 24 122263 17.4 NT 6.5 1403 NT 1.7 2.1 99.4 24 0.0 16 NT 100 NT NT NT 11.9 CR 0.0 11.9 NT NT 0.0 CR 92.0 0.0 100.0 123.8 100.0 0.9 Highveld Salt Pans Highveld Salt 7657 Central Mixed Bushveld Central Mixed Central Sandy Bushveld 64203 14.2 0.8 Woodland Open Hoopstad 19 Alluvia Kalahari Bushveld Mountain Kalahari NT NT 81.7 18414Lekubu Mixed Thornveld 81.8 28.7 Bushveld Mabeskraal Ridge 0.9 Bushveld Madikwe Dolomite 16 NT 2449 5. NT 24514 2718 57027 0.0 7.7 3.8 5.0 5.8 1.1 2.2 3.1 19 24 19 NT NT NT NT NT NT 0.0 121.7 0.0 121.7 0.0 0.0 9 status Appendix 2: Summary of vegetation Bushveld Andesite Mountain Carletonville Dolomite Grassl Bush Central Broad-leaved Sandy 78140 17.9 2.1 24 NT NT 0.0 Bushveld Plains Kalahari Kimberley Thornveld 37.3 Klerksdorp Thornveld Kuruman Mountain Bushveld Kuruman Vaalbosveld 306155Cons West Province Biodiversity North 2.9 22523 8.5 228864 18.9 392499 2.4 16 34.4 6.7 5.9 1.7 NT 16 75121 16 24 NT NT NT NT NT NT 0.0 NT 12.0 0.0 0.0 10.8 15.9 11.5 0.0 End

92

Endemic Endemic

CA) CA)

Level (PA & & (PA Level

Protection Protection

only) only)

Level (PA (PA Level

Protection Protection

degradation degradation

Status incl. incl. Status

Ecosystem Ecosystem

Status Status

Ecosystem Ecosystem

(%)

Threshold Threshold

Area Area

Protected

% Degraded Degraded % Transformed Transformed

8 2.2 19 VU VU 0.0 0.5 % %

49.8 3.2 24 VU VU 44.8 1.3 16 0.1 2.3 VU VU 0.0 0.0 End 50.8 1.0 24 VU VU 0.3 2.6 (ha) (ha)

194 1.6 0.0 24 NT NT 0.0 0.0 Total Area Area Total 26659 15.5 1.4 24 NT33114 2.9 1.8 24 NT NT 0.9 0.9 NT 398.9 398.913434 54.8 2.6 End 24 VU VU 0.0 0.0 532917 38.6 2.8 16 NT VU 0.0 0.0

ervation Assessment Technical Report land 24351 21.8 0.3 16NT0.3 0.0 NTland 24351 0.0 21.8 ds 2211 0.5 1.0 24NT0.0 NT 1.0 0.0 ds 2211 0.5 st 634 2.8 0.6 31NT NT 188.9 282.431NT NT 188.9 0.6 st 634 2.8 22807 5.8 3.7 24NT8.3 NT3.7 8.3 22807 5.8 ns 1225 16.8 0.1 24NT0.0 NT0.1 0.0 1225ns 16.8 (nwveg08_v3) (nwveg08_v3) Vegetation Type Mogosane Mountain Bushveld Mogosane Mountain Bushveld Bushveld Molopo Bushveld Moot Plains Norite Koppies Bushveld 41891 8.0 Rustenburg Gabbro Thornveld 1.8 Schmidtsdrif Thornveld Wood Schweizer Reneke Kalahari 19 1258036 Schweizer-Reneke Bushveld 106423 51.3 NT Mekgacha Southern Kalahari 5.2 13.5 1.8 Pa Salt Southern Kalahari 16 19 NT 67919 27.7 NT VU 4.3 24.2 19 44773 30.3 202725 VU NT 19.4 19.4 NT 12.5 11.3 16 48.3 11.3 Dome Granite Grassland Vredefort NT NT 23.2 NT 23.2 0.0 5358 46.6 0.0 1.7 24 VU VU 0.0 0.0 Mafikeng Bushveld Mafikeng Bushveld Bushveld Mafikeng Dolomite Bushveld Makwassie Ridge Marikana Thornveld 75896 4.9 493458 3366 2.3 30.6 2.0 2.6 19 0.0 148518 16 47. NT 24 NT NT NT NT NT Grassland Soweto Highveld 8.8 0.1 0.0 8.8 148.4 0.1 Northern Afrotemperate Fore Thornveld Pienaarsrivier Mountain Bushveld Pilanesberg Grassland Rand Highveld 142769 36.7 6.3 318908 Springbokvlakte Thornveld Woodland Stella Sparse 19Wetlan Subtropical Freshwater NTSubtropical Salt Pans Taung Tuff Shrubveld Woodland Sinkhole Vaal Reefs Dolomite VU Grassland Vaal-Vet Sandy 1.7 6700 29879 21.2 Cons West Province Biodiversity North 3.5 30.7 5.5 1.4 19 24 NT 20077 NT 785085 18.0 4.6 NT NT 16 0.0 NT 0.0 0.0 0.0 NT End 0.0 0.0

93

Endemic Endemic

CA) CA)

Level (PA & & (PA Level

Protection Protection

only) only)

Level (PA (PA Level

Protection Protection

degradation degradation

Status incl. incl. Status

Ecosystem Ecosystem

Status Status

Ecosystem Ecosystem

(%)

Threshold Threshold

Area Area

Protected

% Degraded Degraded %

Transformed Transformed

% %

(ha) (ha) Total Area Area Total

ervation Assessment Technical Report veld 2061 0.3 0.1 24NT0.1 2061veld 416.7 NT 0.3 416.7 (nwveg08_v3) (nwveg08_v3) Vegetation Type Vryburg Thornveld Vryburg Thornveld Sour Waterberg-Magaliesberg Summit 689433 29.6 3.5 16 NT NT 0.0 0.0 Western Dry Sandy Grassland Sandy Grassland Western Dry Highveld Sandy Grassland Western Bushveld Western Sandy Mixed Bushveld Western Sandy Thornveld Western Transvaal Zeerust Mountain Bushveld 854797 Zeerust Thornveld 213300 75.0 29.4 1.3 1.8 24 59524 16 8.1 EN 8497 67939 NT 4.1 43.5 11.7 153614 1.9 9.2 19 12.9 CR 19 NT 3.6 19 NT 19 VU 0.2 20.3 NT 353213 22.0 NT NT 20.3 0.2 4.8 VU NT 217.6 End 19 NT 217.6 0.0 78.3 NT 78.3 0.0 0.9 19.3 NT 2.22 Cons West Province Biodiversity North 11.9 94 011-4824131 082-8000718 082-8000718 011-4824131 014-5697444 082-7889497 082-7889497 014-5697444 082-3522955 018-3895054 082-9412228 082-9412228 018-3895054 018-3895646 018-3895646 018-3895324 082-3759934 082-3759934 018-3895324 049-8421113 084-5802836 084-5802836 049-8421113 014-5551600 082-7815708 082-7815708 014-5551600 018-3895746 083-3202727 083-3202727 018-3895746 018-3895332 083-6962011 083-6962011 018-3895332 083-6548415 083-6548415 011-4632390 082-4118083 082-4118083 011-4632390 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ity Management & Conservation) & Conservation) ity Management earch) 018-2996594 083-3796540 083-3796540 018-2996594 earch) but were unable to attend the workshop: esearch) 018-2996704 082-2164419 082-2164419 018-2996704 esearch)

ervation Assessment Technical Report Consultant (UrbanDynamics) Name Company E-mail Tel (W) Cell workshop list of participants Appendix 3: Threats 10 Name Company (W) Vincent Curruthers Coetzee Marissa Ernest Mokwa Dries Bloem Mikko Jokinen VCMS Deventer Constant van Daan Buijs DoA-GADI E-mail Barac Anuschka PSDF - Dyk Gerhard van NWDACE (R Tel Pieter Nel NWDACE (Res Adriaan van Straaten SYKE (SESDNW) Ray Schaller Peter Leitner NWDACE (Biodivers Dr. Phillip Desmet Impala Platinum & Conservation) NWDACE (Biodiversity Management NWDACE Petrus Venter Retief Francois (NWP&TB) Board & Tourism Parks West North Mr. Reiner Terblanche cordination) NWDACE (Environmental Planner) Consultant (Conservation Independent Mr. Hugo Bezuidenhout (NWP&TB) Board & Tourism Parks West North Richard Newberry Mr. Mulder Suan Ms. University of the North West SANPARKS Pfab Michelle Ms. DWAF North of University Venter Mr. Petrus Board and Tourism North West Parks Plessis Du Mr. Dannie Brower Mr. Chris de Cilliers Mr. Sarel Impala Platinum GDACE Jonas Zuziwe Ms. K2M Technologies DWAF DACE Visser Susan Ms. Munzhedzi Mr. Eric Malan Mr. Jacobus DACE SANBI Madamalala Mr. Eric Alloys Xstrata for Wetlands SANBI –Working Anglo Platinum Board and Tourism North West Parks shop: participants attended the work The following tendered their apologies: stakeholders The following sent invitations that we Invitees List of Cons West Province Biodiversity North 95 RE & SUB-SURFACE RE & SUB-SURFACE MINES 4887.6 0.0 AND ANNUAL CROPS AND ANNUAL CROPS 155638.4 1.5 PITS & TAILINGS PITS 37309.0 0.4 FIELDS 898.2 0.0 898.2 FIELDS obscured 24519.8 0.2 24519.8 obscured TATION & WOODLOTS 31508.9 0.3 TLANDS VEGETATED 151351.9 1.4 BAN / BUILT-UP / BUILT-UP BAN 144975.1 1.4 NATURAL NON-VEGETATED DUNES NATURAL NON-VEGETATED 43.6 0.0 9 LOW SHRUB SHRUB 9 LOW 705495.1 6.6 20.9 ORCHARDS 3310.0 0.0 6 4.6 EROSION FEATURES FEATURES EROSION 6 4.6 0.9 98176.7 a) % ORIGINAL % (Ha) Area 525388.8 4.9 BUSH TREE & 166113.7 1.6 SS 2714.9 0.0 SPORTS SPORTS 0.0 SS 2714.9 ed 24519.8 0.2 cloud cloud 0.2 ed 24519.8 (total) - WATER ARTIFICIAL 33513.0 0.3 NATURAL 0.2 ARTIFICIAL 33513.0 24255.7 WATER WATER 0.5 57853.1 (total) - (total) 10653447.2 100.0 10653447.2 100.0 10653447.2 100.0 10653447.2 ervation Assessment Technical Report Area (Ha) % LEVEL-1 Area (H STATUS TRANSFORATION

NATURAL NON-VEGETATED 36151.4 0.3 36151.4 19. 488261. NON-VEGETATED 2119484.3 SHRUB NON-VEGETATED NATURAL 2226979.3 TREE Appendix 4: Summary of NW Province Land Cover Statistics 11 ARTIFICAL 70.4 UNTRANSFORMED 7495387.0 CULTIVATED GRA water only natural includes IMPROVED 29.4 3133540.5 TRANSFORMED WATER water only man-made includes BUSH GRASS WETLANDS WATER 1298022.8 BUSH 12.2 OPEN 3284711.4 PLANTATION 30.8 GRASSLAND 207372.6 1.9 WE BUSH BUSH SPARSE SHRUB SPARSE obscured cloud 31508.9 GRASSLAND SPARSE 0.3 PLAN (check) totals NON-VEGETATED WETLANDS 655623.9 24519.8 Cons West Province Biodiversity North ROCK NON-VEGETATED 6.2 10653447.2 NATURAL BUILT-UP 0.2 100.0 COURSES obscur cloud 3090126.5 GOLF 29.0 SODIC / SAND NATURAL NON-VEGETATED SEWAGE WATER 642398.9 MINES 1413989.2 6.0 194584.9 359275.1 56020.7 13.3 26057.9 LAND-FILLS FEEDLOTS 1.8 3.4 0.5 308281.8 AGRICULTURAL 0.2 2.9 UR 10049.9 / DEGRADED DISTURBED LAND DRYL 0.1 SUBSISTENCE FIELDS OLD (PLOTS) DRYLAND ANNUAL CROPS COMMERCIAL SMALLHOLDINGS (CULTIVATED) 42196.6 ANNUAL CROPS IRRIGATED (NON-PIVOT) COMMERCIAL SMALLHOLDINGS COMMERCE 1816.6 0.4 EXTRACTION ANNUAL CROPS IRRIGATED (PIVOT) COMMERCIAL / DWELLINGS 0.0 INDUSTRY RURAL 47385.7 TRACKS SCATTERED & ROADS 84.4 197.7 FEEDLOTS 0.4 ANIMAL 63684.3 0.0 0.0 389618.5 GREENHOUSES 1863045.3 INFRASTRUCTU 0.6 17.5 3.7 SURFACE 11161.0 268.7 14852.6 0.1 0.0 55889.4 0.1 0.5 6862.1 67902.0 0.1 0.6 99257.1 0.9 1198.8 0.0 99.3 0.0