Good Practice, Better Finance: Environmental and Social Baseline Report

Report Prepared for ISEAL Alliance

Report Number 539084/Baseline

Report Prepared by

December 2019

SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page i

Good Practice, Better Finance: Environmental and Social Baseline Report This project has been made possible thanks to a grant from the ISEAL Innovation Fund which is supported by:

The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the ISEAL Secretariat, ISEAL and do not necessarily represent those of the ISEAL Secretariat, ISEAL members, or donor entities to the ISEAL Innovations Fund.

SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd. Bonsucro (SADC) Section A Second Floor, Suite 02/B1 PO Box 52197 Norfolk House Waterfront 8002 54 Norfolk Terrace, off Blair Atholl Drive Cape Town Westville 3630 South Africa South Africa Website: www.bonsucro.com website: www.srk.co.za Tel: +27 (0) 78 290 4034 Tel: +27 (0) 31 279 1200 Fax: +27 (0) 31 279 1204

SRK Project Number 539084

December 2019

Compiled by: Peer Reviewed by:

Roanne Sutcliffe, Cand.Eng Wouter Jordaan, Pr.Sci.Nat. Bioresources Engineer Principal Scientist/Partner

Email: [email protected] Authors: R. Sutcliffe; W. Jordaan

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page ii

Table of Contents

Disclaimer ...... vi List of Abbreviations ...... vii 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background to the Project ...... 1 1.2 Scope of the Project ...... 1 1.2.1 Phase 1: Inception ...... 1 1.2.2 Phase 2: Scoping ...... 1 1.2.3 Phase 3: Development ...... 1 1.2.4 Phase 4: Pilot ...... 2 1.2.5 Phase 5: Sharing and Learning ...... 2 1.3 Scope of this Report...... 2 2 Environmental Baseline ...... 3 2.1 Climate ...... 6 2.1.1 Rainfall...... 6 2.1.2 Temperature ...... 9 2.1.3 Relative Humidity ...... 10 2.2 Hydrology ...... 11 2.2.1 Catchments and Strategic Water Source Areas ...... 11 2.2.2 Rivers and Wetlands within the Study Area ...... 15 2.2.3 Water Quality and Monitoring within the WMA ...... 25 2.3 Geology, Topography and Landcover...... 29 2.3.1 Geology and Soils ...... 29 2.3.2 Ecoregions based on Topography and Vegetation ...... 32 2.3.3 Land Use ...... 35 2.4 Biodiversity ...... 39 2.4.1 Mining Risks ...... 39 2.4.2 Areas of Biodiversity Importance ...... 41 2.4.3 Threatened Ecosystems...... 47 2.4.4 Cultural Heritage Sites ...... 56 3 Social Baseline ...... 57 3.1 Structure of the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area ...... 57 3.2 Structure of the Nkomazi Local Municipality ...... 59 3.3 Demographics of the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area ...... 59 3.4 Demographics of the Nkomazi Local Municipality ...... 59 3.4.1 Households ...... 60 3.4.2 Education Levels ...... 61 3.4.3 Access to Basic Services ...... 62

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page iii

3.4.4 Agricultural Activities of Households ...... 63 4 Conclusion ...... 65 5 References ...... 67

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page iv List of Tables Table 2-1: Drainage Regions Falling within the IU WMA ...... 11 Table 2-2: SWSAs with Areas Falling within the IU WMA (after Le Maitre et al., 2018) ...... 13 Table 2-3: SWSAs with Areas Falling within the IU WMA that have Significant Baseflow Contributions to MAR (after Le Maitre et al., 2018) ...... 13 Table 2-4: PES Score of Different Rivers within the IU WMA ...... 15 Table 2-5: River Systems within the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area (after Selepe et al., 2018) ...... 17 Table 2-6: Reported Water Quality Variables and ranges of TWQGs (Selepe et al., 2018)...... 25 Table 2-7: Ecoregions within the IU WMA and the Nkomazi Local Municipality ...... 32 Table 2-8: Percentage of Total Land Use within the IU WMA and the Nkomazi Local Municipality ...... 36 Table 2-9: Areas of Biodiversity Importance ...... 41 Table 2-10: Protected and Conservation Areas within Study Area ...... 42 Table 2-11: Threatened Ecosystems within Study Area ...... 48 Table 3-1: Traditional Authorities within Pilot Area (after Nkomazi, 2019)...... 59 Table 3-2: Distribution of People Aged between 5 and 24 Years attending an Educational Institution (StatsSA Community Survey, 2016) ...... 61 Table 3-3: Distribution of People Aged Older than 20 Years by Highest Level of Education Completed (StatsSA Community Survey, 2016) ...... 62 Table 3-4: Main Source of Water for Drinking (StatsSA Community Survey, 2016) ...... 62 Table 3-5: Main Source of Electrical Energy (StatsSA Community Survey, 2016) ...... 63 Table 3-6: Percentage of Agricultural Households by Age Group (after Stats SA, 2016) ...... 65 Table 3-7: Main Source of Water for Agricultural Use (after Stats SA, 2018) ...... 65

List of Figures Figure 2-1: Percentage of the Total Water Use in the Inkomati-Usuthu WMA per Sector ...... 4 Figure 2-2: Locality of study area ...... 5 Figure 2-3: Important features of the surface atmospheric circulation over southern Africa (Source: Preston- Whyte et al., 2000) ...... 6 Figure 2-4: Meteorological Stations used within the Nkomazi Local Municipality ...... 8 Figure 2-5: Long term monthly mean rainfall across the Nkomazi Local Municipality (Source:SASRI WeatherWeb, 2019) ...... 9 Figure 2-6: Long term monthly mean minimum and maximum temperatures across the Nkomazi Local Municipality (Source:SASRI WeatherWeb, 2019) ...... 10 Figure 2-7: Long term monthly mean minimum and maximum relative humidity across the Nkomazi Local Municipality (Source:SASRI WeatherWeb, 2019) ...... 11 Figure 2-8: Drainage Regions of Study Area ...... 12 Figure 2-9: Strategic Water Source Areas of Study Area...... 14 Figure 2-10: River Systems of Study Area ...... 19 Figure 2-11: Status of the Sabie and Sand Catchments’ Rivers ...... 20 Figure 2-12: Status of the Crocodile (East) Catchment Rivers ...... 21

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page v

Figure 2-13: Status of the Komati and Lomati Catchments’ Rivers ...... 22 Figure 2-14: Status of the Usuthu Catchment Rivers ...... 23 Figure 2-15: Wetlands within Study Area ...... 24 Figure 2-16: Water Quality Monitoring Network within Study Area ...... 26 Figure 2-17: Water Quality Status within the Sabie Catchment ...... 27 Figure 2-18: Water Quality Status within the Crocodile (East) Catchment ...... 27 Figure 2-19: Water Quality Status within the Komati Catchment ...... 28 Figure 2-20: Water Quality Status within the Usuthu Catchment ...... 28 Figure 2-21: Geology of Study Area ...... 30 Figure 2-22: Dominant Soils within Study Area ...... 31 Figure 2-23: Ecoregions and Topography of Study Area ...... 34 Figure 2-24: Land Use within the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area ...... 37 Figure 2-25: Land Use within the Nkomazi Local Municipality ...... 38 Figure 2-26: Areas of High Biodiversity Importance and Subsequent Risk to Mining within Study Area ...... 40 Figure 2-27: Site Locality of the Barberton Makhonjwa Mountains World Heritage Site ...... 45 Figure 2-28: Areas of Biodiversity Importance within Study Area ...... 46 Figure 2-29: Threatened Ecosystems within Study Area ...... 55 Figure 3-1: Structure of the Inkomati-Usuthu Catchment Management Agency ...... 58 Figure 3-2: Population Distribution by Age (StatsSA Community Survey, 2016) ...... 60 Figure 3-3: Number of Members per Household (StatsSA Community Survey, 2016) ...... 61 Figure 3-4: Average Income of Households within the Nkomazi Local Municipality (StatsSA Community Survey, 2016) ...... 63 Figure 3-5: Average Income of Agricultural Households within the Nkomazi Local Municipality (StatsSA Community Survey, 2016)...... 64

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page vi Disclaimer The opinions expressed in this Report have been based on the information supplied to SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (SRK) by Client Name (abbr). The opinions in this Report are provided in response to a specific request from abbr to do so. SRK has exercised all due care in reviewing the supplied information. Whilst SRK has compared key supplied data with expected values, the accuracy of the results and conclusions from the review are entirely reliant on the accuracy and completeness of the supplied data. SRK does not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions in the supplied information and does not accept any consequential liability arising from commercial decisions or actions resulting from them. Opinions presented in this report apply to the site conditions and features as they existed at the time of SRK’s investigations, and those reasonably foreseeable. These opinions do not necessarily apply to conditions and features that may arise after the date of this Report, about which SRK had no prior knowledge nor had the opportunity to evaluate.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page vii List of Abbreviations

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Background to the Project The Good Practice, Better Finance project is an ISEAL Alliance (ISEAL) funded project that aims to develop and test methodologies, as well as improve monitoring tools, which would allow for improved access to affordable finance for farmers. This improved access would be through reward systems based on the integration of farmers’ risk management and sustainability strategies with financial institutions’ own risk assessment frameworks.

As part of these sustainability strategies, three ISEAL member standards – viz. Bonsucro, Better Cotton Initiative (BCI), and the Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS) – will look to implement their standard’s criteria within selected pilot areas of the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area (IU WMA) during the project. This implementation will be focused on developing a practical methodology and support tools to enable access better financing opportunities for farmers who produce sustainably.

1.2 Scope of the Project

1.2.1 Phase 1: Inception The purpose of the inception phase is to plan how the project would be conducted and ensure all the participants were aligned regarding purpose of the project, expected outcomes, project scheduling and resourcing. Deliverables for this phase include:  Draft and final project schedule and resourcing  Draft sustainability standard matrix  Terms of Reference  Reviewed Monitoring and Evaluation criteria  Signed Grant Agreement and Due Diligence Checklist

1.2.2 Phase 2: Scoping The purpose of the scoping phase will be to describe the current environmental and social environment in the study area and then identify the key issues or gaps that require consideration during the development phase. Deliverables for this phase include:  Environmental and Social baseline study report including the Data Register  Status Quo Report to include: o Selection criteria for farms o Methodologies and Tools map o Updated standard matrix  Gap Analysis Report to include an Information Needs List  Updated monitoring and evaluation framework that includes measures of the success of the methodology

1.2.3 Phase 3: Development The development phase will include the development of the methodology to piloted in the next phase. Deliverables for this phase include:  Product Framework  Draft Product Methodology and associated procedures and protocols  Data capture, visualisation and extraction tools

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 2

1.2.4 Phase 4: Pilot The pilot phase will include the use of the methodology and tools to collect the required information from farms in the pilot area. Deliverables for this phase include:  Pilot feedback report  Amended product methodology, protocols and procedures or tools  Benchmark Report  Pilot Report to include: o Outline of how the product methodology was implemented in the pilot area. o Key Results o Issues identified and opportunities for improvement o Recommendations for widespread implementation o Conclusion on whether the product methodology can leverage better finance.

1.2.5 Phase 5: Sharing and Learning A critical outcome of the project is closer collaboration and learning between the ISEAL members. 1.3 Scope of this Report As part of the Scoping Phase (Phase 2) of the project, SRK Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd. (SRK) has been appointed to develop a compilation of environmental and social baseline data within the IU WMA in Mpumalanga, South Africa.

This purpose of this report is to provide a baseline understanding of the IU-WMA in order to characterise the area in terms of its socio-economic and environmental issues. This baseline assessment is based on information acquired through discussions with relevant project partners, review of available literature, and data collection and analysis. This information includes:

 Weather and climate  Hydrology.  Topography, soils and land cover.  Biodiversity concerns.  Population dynamics.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 3 2 Environmental Baseline The IU WMA is one of nine Water Management Areas within South Africa and includes secondary catchments that drain parts of Mpumalanga and Limpopo, as well as three catchments with transnational boundaries with Swaziland and Mozambique. It covers an area of approximately 36 676 km2 and is divided into six drainage areas that are then grouped into four main systems as follows:

 The Sand and Sabie Rivers – located in the northern part of the WMA, large portions of the Sand and Sabie River system fall within the bounds of the Kruger National Park (NWRS, 2012). Further to this, the Sand River catchment has large areas of land that were formerly within the Gazankulu and Lebowa homelands and is heavily reliant on water transfers from the Sabie system owing to very few mountainous catchment areas within the system that generate limited runoff. The Sabie River system, on the other hand, can meet water demands with the water available, although there is no surplus for further water allocations.  Crocodile River (East) – located in the central part of the WMA, just north of the Komati/Lomati system, the Crocodile River catchment is overallocated and available supplies are regularly exceeded by the requirements of water users within the catchment. The Crocodile system is under incredible stress owing to poor water management by users and inefficient systems in place, resulting in an inability to provide for the ecological Reserve and difficulties meeting international obligations (NWRS, 2012).  Komati and Lomati Rivers – located in the central part of the catchment, south of the Crocodile River system, the Komati and Lomati Rivers system water demands can be met although increases in domestic demand have resulted in irrigation allocations being threatened in order to meet these demands. Large-scale abstractions for power generation on the Highveld occur from the upper Komati catchment which, owing to these abstractions having strategic priority, has also contributed to the reaching of the system’s capacity (NWRS, 2012).  Usuthu River – located in the southern part of the WMA, the Usuthu River system is almost at capacity, with only small domestic allocation allowances left (NWRS, 2012). Similar to the Komati catchment, large-scale abstractions from the Usuthu catchment occur for power generation purposes on the Highveld. Forestry plantations are the dominant agricultural land use within the catchment although further expansion of this sector cannot be supported. The distribution of the different water uses identified are reinforced by Figure 2-1, which shows the water usage across the dominant sectors in the catchment. As can be seen from the Figure, almost a quarter (23 %) of the total water usage in the WMA is by the Ecological Reserve which cannot be drawn from under any circumstances. Strategic uses and both inter-basin and cross border transfers account for another 16 % of all water used, whilst domestic and industrial uses account for only 8 %. Within the WMA, agriculture is one of the main water uses which is seen by the 21 % water usage of afforestation and the 31 % of irrigation. Over half of the water used within the WMA is thus for agricultural purposes meaning that such activities have both the greatest impact on water quantity and quality but will also be the most affected should there be water shortages.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 4

ISEAL Project No. WATER USES 539084

Figure 2-1: Percentage of the Total Water Use in the Inkomati-Usuthu WMA per Sector (Source: IUCMA, 2019)

Within the Crocodile and Komati/Lomati systems, much of the dominant land use is that of agriculture. In both systems, the western and central areas are focused on forestry practices whilst the eastern areas are predominantly sugarcane farms with small pockets of subsistence farming scattered throughout. Given that the eastern parts of the Crocodile (East) and Komati/Lomati Rivers support large areas of agricultural cropping land, especially sugarcane, these areas were chosen as the focus area of the project pilot. Most of these eastern areas fall within the Nkomazi Local Municipality, which is the area in which the pilot farms will be situated.

A map showing the locality of the Local Municipality is given in Figure 2-2.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 5

Figure 2-2: Locality of study area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 6

2.1 Climate The IU WMA falls within three major Köppen climate zones (Kottek et al., 2006), namely the BSh to the east of the WMA, and the Cwa and Cwb zones in the central and western parts of the WMA. The BSh climate zone is influenced by the diverging circulation of subtropical high-pressure systems found to the east of South Africa (Figure 2-3). It is a drier, desert climate, with limited rainfall, usually in summer, and highly variable temperature conditions. Rainfall in this region is more convective in nature and presents as short, high intensity thunderstorm activity as opposed to longer duration frontal systems, although in most instances, the annual rainfall of this region is less than the annual potential evaporation.

The Cwa and Cwb zones, on the other hand, are more humid than the BSh climate, with rainfall tending to be throughout the year as opposed to summer and temperatures being relatively high. These zones are characterised by their high humidity levels and subtropical climate. Similar to the BSh climate zone, rainfall tends to be more convective in nature, although the annual rainfall is far higher. Whilst rainfall in this region is not guaranteed during winter, much of the rainfall falling during winter is as a result of cyclonic storms in other regions that push moist air towards the zone.

Similar to the larger WMA, the Nkomazi Local Municipality has the transition from a drier desert climate in the eastern part of the Municipality to a more humid, subtropical climate in the west.

ISEAL Project No. SURFACE ATMOSPHERIC CICULATION 539084

Figure 2-3: Important features of the surface atmospheric circulation over southern Africa (Source: Preston-Whyte et al., 2000)

2.1.1 Rainfall Given the difference in rainfall patterns based on the different climatic zones present within the IU WMA, the mean annual precipitation (MAP) is also highly variable. Within the 3 northern systems of the WMA – viz. the Sabie/Sand, Crocodile East and Komati/Lomati systems – the rainfall ranges from approximately 1200 mm/annum along the Drakensberg escarpment in the south western part of the WMA to as little as 400 mm/annum in the eastern parts of the Lowveld. Whilst not as high as the escarpment rainfall, MAP in the western parts of the catchment can be as high as 1000 mm/annum

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 7

(Botha et al., 2003). The southern system of the WMA – the Usuthu system – has similar rainfall dynamics as the northern parts. The MAP of the eastern parts of the system, which also run along the eastern Drakensberg, is in the region of 850 mm/annum, whilst the eastern parts of the system have a MAP of approximately 550 mm/annum (Van der Berg et al., 2003).

Rainfall for five main meteorological stations was obtained from SASRI’s WeatherWeb Portal and the long-term means compared to determine rainfall patterns in the LM. These stations, shown in Figure 2-4, are located throughout the sugarcane growing areas in the local municipality given the focus on the crop in the area and cover a number of varying micro-climates in the Municipality. Rainfall within the Nkomazi Local Municipality is also highly variable, as can be seen from Figure 2-5

Whilst all five stations show a general trend towards summer rainfall patterns and drier winters, a high level of variability still exists within a relatively small area. The wettest area is that of the Kaalruf0Inala area in the south west of the Municipality with monthly rainfall ranging from approximately 150 mm of summer. rainfall from November to January, and then decreasing to just above 5 mm in June in the middle of winter. Malelane, just north of this area has slightly reduced averages given that the area is not in as close proximity to a mountainous area as is Kaalrug-Inala. The monthly summer rainfall average for Malelane is approximately 115 mm, which reduces to just under 6 mm during winter. Moving to the east, the Komati and Komati Mill stations have lower amounts of rainfall across all months when compared to the Kaalrug-Inala area, these areas average 120 mm of rainfall during the peak summer months which then reduces to just over 4 per month mm during winter. These averages throughout the year are further reduced moving north towards the Komati-Tenbosch station which sits directly in the drier Lowveld area of Mpumalanga. The average rainfall during summer in this area is just over 100 mm per month, which drops to just over 5 mm of rainfall per month in winter.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 8

Figure 2-4: Meteorological Stations used within the Nkomazi Local Municipality

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 9

ISEAL Project No. LONG TERM MONTHLY MEAN RAINFALL 539084

Figure 2-5: Long term monthly mean rainfall across the Nkomazi Local Municipality (Source: SASRI, 2019)

2.1.2 Temperature Similar to rainfall distribution throughout the IU WMA, temperature ranges in a similar manner. In the Usuthu region of the WMA, summer temperatures range from maximums of between 20 to 30 °C in the inland areas whilst minimums range from 10 to 18 °C. Winter temperatures in this region range from maximums between 14 to 24 °C and minimums of between -2 and 8 °C. In the northern parts of the WMA, i.e. the Inkomati regions, summer temperatures range from minimums of between 7.5 and 21.2 °C, whilst maximums range from 16.9 to 32.6 °C. Winter temperatures, on the other hand, range from minimums of between -0.7 and 11.4 °C whilst maximums range from 11.5 to 25.9 °C in the Inkomati region (Botha et al., 2003).

Given the differences in climatic zones of the two areas, these temperature ranges are to be expected as the Usuthu region has more of a sub-tropical, humid climate that has smaller ranges of temperatures during both summer and winter months. The Inkomati region, however, is more variable in terms of temperature as there is a transition from a humid sub-tropical climate through to a far drier desert climate with higher ranges in temperatures during each season, as well as across seasons (Van der Berg et al., 2003).

As seen in Figure 2-5, all five stations within the Nkomazi Local Municipality have similar maximum temperature ranges throughout the year, although the Kaalrug-Inala area is consistently lower throughout the year whilst the Komati region has higher maximum temperatures in every month. However, the minimum temperatures across all stations show a different pattern, especially in winter months. Similar to the rainfall patterns of the area, the areas in the western part of the Municipality display a more sub-tropical climate with smaller ranges of temperatures whilst those areas in the east display a desert climate with far greater fluctuations in temperature. Whereas the mean range of temperatures for the Kaalrug-Inala area is approximately 10-11 °C during the summer months and 16- 17 °C in winter, the range for the Komati station is far greater. The mean ranges in this area are

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 10

approximately 13-14 °C in summer and 18- 20 °C in winter, although the maximum temperatures are higher even during winter in this part of the Municipality.

ISEAL Project No. LONG TERM MONTHLY MEAN MIN AND MAX 539084 TEMPERATURES

Figure 2-6: Long term monthly mean minimum and maximum temperatures across the Nkomazi Local Municipality (Source: SASRI WeatherWeb, 2019)

2.1.3 Relative Humidity Given that the rainfall pattern in the Inkomati systems of the IU WMA favour summer rain over winter, the relative humidity in these systems follows a similar pattern. The relative humidity is higher during summer months (especially during January and February) and averages 69.8 % per day during these months. During winter, owing to the reduced rainfall amounts, this daily average drops to 58.6 % relative humidity in the system, as there is less water available to evaporate into the atmosphere (Botha et al., 2003).

The Usuthu system, on the other hand, has higher average daily relative humidity during both summer and winter periods based on the rainfall received. Whilst having a similar pattern to the Inkomati system of relative humidity peaks during summer and lower humidity during winter, the Usuthu system has its highest relative humidity later in summer with daily averages of approximately 70 % during February. Winter relative humidity, however, is lower than that of the Inkomati system, as the Usuthu system winter daily average is 55 % from June to August (Van der Berg et al., 2003)

The Nkomazi Local Municipality stations display similar trends in terms of relative humidity throughout the year as the larger IU WMA. During the summer months, all stations tend to have similar maximum relative humidity, ranging from 78 to 84 %, and the minimum relative humidity follows a similar trend throughout the year for all stations. However, the winter months show a difference for the two western areas when compared to those in the east of the Municipality, as the maximum relative humidity is far less at Kaalrug-Inala and Malelane from May to August. Similar to the larger Inkomati system, this decrease in relative humidity could be attributed to a greater decrease in rainfall during these months in the two areas which then means that less water is available for evaporation in the atmosphere.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 11

ISEAL Project No. LONG TERM MONTHLY MEAN MIN AND MAX 539084 RELATIVE HUMIDITY

Figure 2-7: Long term monthly mean minimum and maximum relative humidity across the Nkomazi Local Municipality (Source: SASRI WeatherWeb, 2019)

2.2 Hydrology Given that the IU WMA is delineated based on hydrological attributes and drainage regions of the main Inkomati and Usuthu system rivers, the hydrology of the area plays a vital role in determining the activities within the IU WMA. Owing to the reliance of agriculture on water (Figure 2-1), the quality and quantity of available water plays a role in determining the location of such agricultural activities. In turn, agricultural activities, if not regulated and monitored, can have wide-spread impacts on water resources through both a reduction in available water as well as damaging aquatic ecosystems through poor management practices.

2.2.1 Catchments and Strategic Water Source Areas The IU WMA consists of five secondary drainage regions, namely X1, X2, X3, X4 and W5 (Figure 2-8). Whilst a small portion of the W6 drainage region exists in the southernmost tip of the Nkomazi LM, the catchment drains across the South African border into Mozambique. An overview of these drainage regions is given in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1: Drainage Regions within the IU WMA

Number of Quaternary Drainage Region Area (km2) Main River System Catchments X1 8 639 32 (X11A-K, X12A-K, X13J-L, Komati and Lomati X14A-B and X14F-H) X2 10 447 36 (X21A-K, X22A-K, X23A-H and Crocodile (East) X24A-H) X3 6 321 25 (X31A-M, X32A-J, X33A-D) Sabie X4 3 195 4 (X40A-D) Sand W5 7 843 28 (W51A-F, W52A-D, W53A-F, Usuthu W54A-E, W55A-E, W56A-B)

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 12 Figure 2-8: Drainage Regions of Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 13

Within the IU WMA, areas falling within seven of the Strategic Water Source Areas (SWSAs) identified during the study by Nel et al., 2013 and expanded upon by Le Maitre et al. (2018) are present. Whilst seven SWSAs are present within the greater WMA, only the Mbabane Hills and Lebombo SWSAs fall within the bounds of the Nkomazi LM. These SWSAs, shown in Figure 2-9 and details provided in Table 2-2 below, are areas in which the mean annual runoff contribution from the area is above 50 % of the regional mean annual runoff. As such, these areas are those which produce a disproportionately greater volume of water per unit area than other parts of South Africa and can have direct impact on national and sub-national development needs and water availability.

Of the areas falling within the bounds of the IU WMA, the Ekangala Grassland, Upper Usuthu, and Mbabane Hills SWSAs have transnational boundaries, meaning that inter-governmental measures need to be implemented to ensure over-exploitation or contamination of the water resources within these areas do not occur. Further to this, the SWSAs given in Table 2-3 all have significant contributions to MAR from baseflow. Whilst there are no groundwater SWSAs within the IU WMA, the number of SWSAs that have high baseflow contributions suggests that aquifer systems within the areas are providing a significant amount of water to the surface water areas and thus also need to be monitored.

Table 2-2: SWSAs with Areas Falling within the IU WMA (after Le Maitre et al., 2018)

Percentage of Coal Fields Strategic Name of SWSA Area (km2) MAR (m3/ha) Total National Present within Level MAR (%) SWSA Lebombo Sub-national 36 1 141 0.01 No Ekangala National 8582 1 646 2.85 Yes (Ermelo, Grassland Highveld, Utrecht and Vryheid coal fields) Mbabane Hills National 10 015 2 234 4.52 No Mpumalanga National 8 374 2 304 3.90 Yes (Highveld Drakensberg and and Klip River Northern coal fields) Lowveld Escarpment Upper Usuthu National 6 191 1 166 1.46 Yes (Ermelo coal fields) Upper Vaal National 1 401 872 0.25 Yes (Ermelo, Highveld and Witbank coal fields)

Table 2-3: SWSAs with Areas within the IU WMA that have Significant Baseflow Contributions to MAR (after Le Maitre et al., 2018)

Percentage of MAR from Name of SWSA Baseflow Contributions (%)

Ekangala Grassland 12.1

Mbabane Hills 17.6 Mpumalanga Drakensberg and 20.6 Northern Lowveld Escarpment

Upper Usuthu 18.9 Upper Vaal 7.4

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 14 Figure 2-9: Strategic Water Source Areas of Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 15

2.2.2 Rivers and Wetlands within the Study Area Within the IU WMA, four main river systems are drained, namely the Sabie and Sand, Crocodile (East), Komati and Lomati, and the Usuthu system. Based on the recent Present Ecological Status (PES) study conducted, all but the Sand River catchment have undergone moderate to high levels of modification (Kleynhans et al. (2015), Diedricks et al. (2016) Roux et al. (2017), and Roux et al. (2018)). These levels of modification are summarised in Table 2-4.

Table 2-4: PES Score of Different Rivers within the IU WMA

PES Score Description

A Unmodified and within the range of natural functioning for the river ecosystem. The habitats and species are considered to be close to natural and the resilience of the ecosystem remains uncompromised. B Mostly unmodified and within the range of natural functioning for the river ecosystem. The habitats and species are considered to have only changed somewhat and the resilience of the ecosystem remains uncompromised. C Moderately modified but basic natural functioning of the river ecosystem is still unchanged. The habitats and species are considered to changed and the resilience of the ecosystem allows for the system to recover. D Largely modified with a significant loss/changes to the natural functioning of the ecosystem. The habitats and species, whilst changed, still have some level of resilience. E Severely modified with the change in natural functioning of the river ecosystem being extensive. The habitats and species are considered to be severely compromised, along with the resilience of the ecosystem.

An overview of these systems (shown in Figure 2-10), as well as their associated tributaries, location and land uses are given in Table 2-5below.

Whereas the Sand catchment rivers (Figure 2-11) are mostly unmodified/natural and still maintain their resilience to adapt to changes within the system (having mostly A or B category rivers), the Sabie river (Figure 2-11) has a greater number of C and D category rivers in the headwaters of the catchment that then improve as the rivers continue east. In the western part of the Sabie catchments, a number of towns and malfunctioning WWTWs are found resulting in changes to the upper reaches in which some basic ecosystem functions are maintained but are threatened increasing modifications and a decrease in the resilience of the river system.

Both the Crocodile (East) (Figure 2-12) and Komati (Figure 2-13) rivers have undergone moderate to high levels of modification in terms of ecosystem services and reduced resilience. In addition to these moderate to high levels of modification, a number of rivers have been severely modified meaning that there is little resilience in the river system and invasive species are beginning to dominate. The Wit River in the Crocodile (East) system and the Lomati and Mambane Rivers in the Komati system have all been severely modified with their ability to sustain natural biota and ecosystem services compromised. These modifications within these rivers could be attributed to the high levels of agriculture in the Komati east area, whilst malfunctioning WWTWs and urbanisation could be responsible for these modifications in the natural river systems.

The Usuthu catchment (Figure 2-14), whilst also modified, is not as severely threatened as parts of the Crocodile (East) and Komati systems. Many of the river systems within the Usuthu catchment sit between a B and D category in terms of the PES study, meaning that in most instances the river systems are still able to support their ecosystem services and have some resilience to change.

Within these four drainage systems, numerous wetland areas are present along both the major rivers and the many tributaries. These wetlands, shown in Figure 2-15, account for approximately 2.24 % of

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 16

the total land area of the IU WMA and 0.32 % of the Nkomazi Local Municipality land area. This difference in areas can be attributed to the differing climates of the two areas, with the Municipality featuring a more desert-like climate whereas large areas of the WMA fall within a sub-tropical climate and thus favour wetland areas. This can be seen in Figure 2-15, as much of the wetland area within the WMA falls within the western parts of the WMA which are located within a sub-tropical climate.

Whilst a number of these wetland areas fall within some form of protected area or environment, only one of the wetland areas is a Ramsar site (Ramsar, 2019). This site, the Verloren Valei Nature Reserve (Ramsar Site No. 1100), comprises 30 wetlands (of which only some fall within the WMA) and has been declared a Ramsar site based on its importance in regulating the hydrological processes of the upper catchment areas, supporting high botanical biodiversity and has been identified as one of only a few areas suitable as breeding grounds for the Wattled Crane.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 17 Table 2-5: River Systems within the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area (after Selepe et al., 2018)

Tributaries of Main Significant Dams within Name of System Location of System Major Towns Dominant Land Uses River Drainage System

Sabie River Originates in upper  Mac-Mac  Inyaka  Sabie Agriculture – pasture, dryland and irrigated reaches of Sabie Town  Klein Sabie  Da-Gama  Hazyview cultivation and flows south east  Noord-Sand  Eidenburg  Mkuhlu Forestry (upper parts of through Hazyview and  Bega  Mahleve  Skukuza the catchment) Mkuhlu before entering  Sand  Swartfontein  Graskop Settlements – rural and the Kruger National Park.  Mutlumuvi  Bushbuckridge urban It confluences with the Sand River within the Kruger before entering Mozambique.

Crocodile (East) River Originates near  Elands  Kwena  Nelspruit Agriculture – pasture, dryland and irrigated Dullstroom and flows  Kaap  Ngodwana  Kaapmuiden cultivation east. It then confluences  Lunsklip  Witklip  Malelane Forestry with the Komati River  Nels  Klipkoppie Settlements – rural and before entering  Houtbosloop  Longmere urban Mozambique at the  Gladdespruit  Primkop Lebombo Border Gate  White River  Besterspruit

Komati and Lomati Originates from the  Crocodile  Nooitgedacht  Carolina Coal mining (upper reaches) outflow of the  Sabie  Vygeboom  Badplaas Agriculture –irrigated Nooitgedacht Dam next to  Lomati  Komatipoort cultivation (lower Carolina and flows east  Maguga (eSwatini) reaches) through eSwatini. It then  Driekoppies flows north east into South Africa at the Mananga Border Gate, before it confluences with the Crocodile (East) RIver at Komatipoort and, later,

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 18

the Sabie River in Mozambique.

Usuthu Originates in the highland  Assegai  Westoe  Chrissiesmeer Agriculture areas surrounding  Hlelo  Heyshope  Sheeopmor Forestry Amsterdam in  Lusushwana  Jericho  Amsterdam Mining Mpumlanga and flows  Mpuluzi  Morgenstand  Piet Retief Settlements – rural and east southeast through  Sandspruit urban eSwatini and  Ngwempisi Mozambique. Tributaries originating in the same highland area flow into eSwatini before confluence with the main Usuthu River.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 19 Figure 2-10: River Systems of Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 20 Figure 2-11: Status of the Sabie and Sand Catchments’ Rivers

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 21 Figure 2-12: Status of the Crocodile (East) Catchment Rivers

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 22 Figure 2-13: Status of the Komati and Lomati Catchments’ Rivers

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 23 Figure 2-14: Status of the Usuthu Catchment Rivers

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 24 Figure 2-15: Wetlands within Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 25

2.2.3 Water Quality and Monitoring within the WMA In line with the National Water Act 36 of 1998 (NWA), systems, overseen by the IU CMA, are in place to monitor in-stream water quality throughout the IU WMA. This monitoring system (Figure 2-16) considers both chemical and microbiological indicators, with variables of concern differing from system to system within the WMA given that there are different activities carried out in each. However, a number of main indicators are used for reporting purposes based on Resource Quality Objectives (RQOs) in line with the NWA, Target Water Quality Guideline (TWQG) limits and International Water Quality Guidelines (IWQGs) in accordance with the Tripartite Interim Agreement.

The purpose of this monitoring is to not only determine water quality trends within the IU WMA, but to also compare the Ecological Water Requirements (EWR) sites with the RQOs and determine compliance with international obligations. As shown in Figure 2-16, numerous water uses occur within the WMA providing for a potentially high level of monitoring of water quality. However, not all of these points are monitored on a regular basis meaning that the majority of the water quality results for the catchment are determined from the IU CMA’s designated monitoring points within each catchment.

Based on the most recent set of water quality results compiled during the 2018/2019 period, it can be seen from Figures 2-17 to 2-20, that, whilst many of the IU CMA monitoring points within the WMA are within the RQO and TWQG limits, a number are not. Of the variables used for reporting purposes in the WMA (Table 2-6), the E.coli variable is the most exceeded of the variables throughout the entire WMA. This issue can be largely attributed to the fact Wastewater Treatment Works throughout the WMA are not treating and discharging wastewater correctly. The high levels of agricultural practices, especially in the Crocodile and Komati systems, can also be contributing to these raised levels of E.coli in the rivers as faecal matter enters watercourses.

Similarly, Phosphate levels are high in places throughout the Crocodile catchment levels are about the TWQGs in parts of the WMA. This could also be attributed to agricultural practices as fertilisers leach/run off into water courses.

Table 2-6: Reported Water Quality Variables and ranges of TWQGs (after Selepe et al., 2018) Variable Target Water Quality Guideline Limits E.coli (cfu/100ml) 130 Electrical Conductivity (mS/m) 40 Phosphate (mg/l) 0.02 to 0.025 (depending on catchment) pH 6.5 – 8.5 Nitrates/Nitrites (mg/l) 6 Ammonia (mg/l) 1

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 26 Figure 2-16: Water Quality Monitoring Network within Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 27

pH

Project ISEAL No. Water Quality within the Sabie System 539084 Figure 2-17: Water Quality Status within the Sabie Catchment (Source: Selepe et al., 2018)

Project ISEAL No. Water Quality within the Crocodile (East) System 539084 Figure 2-18: Water Quality Status within the Crocodile (East) Catchment (Source: Selepe et al., 2018)

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 28

ISEAL Project No. Water Quality within the Komati System 539084

Figure 2-19: Water Quality Status within the Komati Catchment (Source: Selepe et al., 2018)

ISEAL Project No. Water Quality within the Usuthu System 539084

Figure 2-20: Water Quality Status within the Usuthu Catchment (Source: Selepe et al., 2018)

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 29

2.3 Geology, Topography and Landcover

2.3.1 Geology and Soils Within the IU WMA, a number of different geological formations exist throughout the area (Van der Berg et al., 2003 and Botha et al., 2003), with the Inkomati and Usuthu systems having somewhat different geology. The Inkomati system comprises a number of main lithostratigraphic units including areas of the Barberton sequence consisting of a number of sedimentary and volcanic rocks. These areas, in the southern central part of the WMA, is characterised by amphibolite and serpentine rocks, along with siliciclastic rocks. In the western and north-western part of the WMA, acid and intermediate lavas dominate, with felsic and intermediate volcanic rock being present throughout.

Throughout much of the central part of the WMA, intrusive formations such as the Nelspruit, Mpuluzi and Cunning Moore Tonalite series are found, with rock types ranging from granite gneiss and mafic/ultramafic volcanic formations to fine-grained and intermediate felsic rocks. These mafic/ultramafic volcanic rock formations are also present in the eastern part of the WMA, with Andesitic lava and deep residual sandstones dominating. In the area to the west of the central mafic/ultramafic band, carbonate rock – viz. dolomite, chert and subordinate limestone - occurs in a narrow band before changing to compact sedimentary strata in the forms of predominantly siliciclastic rock, with small pockets of mafic/ultramafic volcanic formations and fine-grained and intermediate felsic rocks, in the western part of the WMA.

Similarly, the Usuthu system comprises a number of different formations, although much of the area is underlain by strata from the Karoo Supergroup. Throughout the central part of the system, numerous different formations exist, ranging from mafic/ultramafic volcanic formations to fine-grained and intermediate felsic rocks. Granite gneiss formations are also present in this area, although these formations extend throughout much of the south eastern parts of the WMA whereas the other formations exist in pockets. Much of the north eastern part of the Usuthu system is dominated by intermediate felsic rock formations, which transition to siliciclastic rock in the north west of the system.

Figure 2-21 provides an overview of the main geological formations within the WMA, as well as those found in the Nkomazi LM.

Throughout the IU WMA, a range of dominant soil textures exist although much of the soil in the area is moderate to deep (Van der Berg et al., 2003 and Botha et al., 2003. In a band running from north to south in the eastern part of the WMA, the relief of the area is fairly flat and soils prevalent in the area are clays as well as some clayey sands. To the west of this band is a large area of moderate to deep sandy loam soils that are found towards the undulating central areas of the Inkomati system, as well as being found throughout much of the Usuthu system. Within the Inkomati system, a large area of moderate to deep clayey loam soils exist in the central area of the WMA. These soils are predominantly in the steep areas surrounding the mountains that exist in the area.

Figure 2-22 provides an overview of the main soils found within the WMA, as well as those found in the Nkomazi LM.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 30 Figure 2-21: Geology of Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 31 Figure 2-22: Dominant Soils within Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 32

2.3.2 Ecoregions based on Topography and Vegetation Whilst most of the southern and western parts of the IU WMA has an elevation greater than 1 000 meters above sea level (m.a.s.l), the remainder of the WMA is far flatter and forms part of the Lowveld area of Mpumalanga. Within the Inkomati system, the Great Escarpment divides the area into two distinct areas, namely the Highveld and Transvaal plateau which sits at or above 2 000 m.a.s.l, and the Barberton Makhonjwa Mountain range and Lowveld area that sits below this elevation. To the east of the IU WMA, the Lebombo Mountain range acts as the eastern border.

Within the Nkomazi LM, much of the Municipality forms part of the Lowveld area, with very small elevational changes occurring. However, to the west of the Municipality, the Barberton Makhonjwa Mountains form a natural western boundary to the Municipality whilst the Lebombo Mountains form the Municipality’s eastern boundary.

The ecoregions of South Africa were originally developed to classify the country’s river systems along with the vegetation of the area and relief and geological features (Kleynhans et al., 2005). Within the IU WMA, seven main ecoregions exist (Table 2-7) of which only three are found within the Nkomazi LM. Figure 2-23 provides an overview of the topography and vegetation biomes within the WMA, as well as those found in the Nkomazi LM.

Table 2-7: Ecoregions within the IU WMA and the Nkomazi Local Municipality

Ecoregion Inkomati-Usuthu WMA Nkomazi Local Municipality Eastern Bankenveld X

Eastern Escarpment X Mountains Highveld X

Lebombo Uplands X X

Lowveld X X

North Eastern Highlands X X

Northern Escarpment X Mountains

These ecoregions consist of similar relief patterns and vegetation as follows (based on Kleynhans et al., 2005):

 Eastern Bankenveld The Eastern Bankenveld area of the WMA is located to the west of the Inkomati system. It is characterised by moderate to high relief in the form of lowlands, hills and mountainous areas, with limited flat expanses of land. Falling within the Grassland biome, the dominant vegetation types are Mixed Bushveld and North Eastern Mountain Grassland with patches of AfroMontane Forest and other grasslands and bushveld. The altitude of the area ranges from 500 to 2 300 m.a.s.l.  Eastern Escarpment Mountains The Eastern Escarpment Mountains area of the WMA is located to the south of the of the Usuthu system. It is characterised by moderate to high relief in the form of lowlands, hills and mountainous areas, with limited plain areas with moderate relief. Falling within the Grassland biome, the dominant vegetation types are AltiMountain Grassland, AfroMontane Grassland and Moist Cold Highveld Grassland, with the remaining areas comprising patches of AfroMontane Forest and other grasslands. The altitude of the area ranges from 1 100 to 3 100 m.a.s.l, although some parts of the region sit between 3 100 and 3 500 m.a.s.l.  Highveld The Highveld area of the WMA is located to the south of the Inkomati system and covers much of the Usuthu system. It is characterised by low to moderate relief in the form of plains (both low and

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 33

moderate relief), lowlands, hills and mountainous areas. Falling within the Grassland biome, the dominant vegetation types are Dry Sandy Highveld Grassland and Moist Cool Highveld Grasslands with patches of AfroMontane Forest and other grasslands comprising the rest of the vegetation type within the area. The altitude of the area ranges from 1 100 to 2 100 m.a.s.l, although some parts of the region sit at 2 100 to 2 300 m.a.s.l.  Lebombo Uplands The Lebombo Uplands area of the WMA is located in the eastern most part of the Inkomati system. It is characterised by moderate to high relief in the form of hills and mountainous areas. Falling within the Savannah biome, the dominant vegetation type is Lebombo Arid Mountain Bushveld, although some Sweet Lowveld Bushveld is found in some areas of the region. The altitude of the area ranges from 0 to 500 m.a.s.l.  Lowveld The Lowveld area of the WMA is located across much of the eastern part of the Inkomati system. It is characterised by low to moderate relief, with much of the area being plains and only limited areas having hilly and mountainous areas. Falling within the Savannah biome, the dominant vegetation types are Mopane Bushveld and Mixed Lowveld Bushveld, with much of the remaining area comprising bushveld types of vegetation. The altitude of the area ranges from 0 to 700 m.a.s.l, although some parts of the region sit between 700 and 1 300 m.a.s.l.  North Eastern Highlands The North Eastern Highlands area of the WMA is located in the central to western parts of the part of the Inkomati system. It is characterised by moderate to high relief, with much of the area being plains, hills and mountainous areas. Falling mostly within the Savannah biome, the dominant vegetation types are North Eastern Mountain Grassland and Sour Lowveld Bushveld, with much of the remaining area comprising bushveld types of vegetation along with a number of patches of Afromontane Forest. The altitude of the area ranges from 300 to 1 300 m.a.s.l, although some parts of the region sit between 1 300 and 1 500 m.a.s.l.  Northern Escarpment Mountains The Northern Escarpment Mountains area of the WMA is located in the central to south western parts of the Inkomati system - to the east of the region lies the Great Escarpment that runs from south to north in the region. It is characterised by moderate to high relief in the form of hills and mountainous areas, with limited plain areas. Falling within the transitional zone from Grassland to Savannah biome, the dominant vegetation type is North Eastern Mountain Grassland with the remaining areas comprising patches of AfroMontane Forest and transitional bushveld areas. The altitude of the area ranges from 900 to 2 300 m.a.s.l, although some parts of the region sit between 500 and 900 m.a.s.l.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 34

Figure 2-23: Ecoregions and Topography of Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 35

2.3.3 Land Use Both the IU WMA and the Nkomazi Local Municipality have similar broad land use patterns, as both areas are dominated by large areas of natural vegetation and agricultural land. Whilst the dominant agricultural practice in the IU WMA is forestry (17.96 % as per Table 2-8 and Figure 2-24), within the Nkomazi LM, much of the land being used by the agricultural sector is under sugarcane (12.18 % of which 2.28 % is irrigated) (Table 2-8 and Figure 2-25). Almost all of the IU WMA’s sugarcane crop is located within the Nkomazi Local Municipality as seen in Figure 2-24., whereas forestry plantations are situated in the central belt of the WMA in the area of the escarpment where rainfall is higher and soils more favourable for deep rooting tree species. Whilst some forestry exists in the Nkomazi Local Municipality (2.68 % of the Municipality), this is located in the higher elevation areas of the Barberton Makhonjwa Mountains and does not extend through the lower lying areas of the Municipality.

Both the greater WMA and the Municipality have subsistence farming and orchards scattered throughout, although there is a relatively larger percentage within the Nkomazi Local Municipality given the increased agricultural focus on no forestry practices. The higher relative percentage of subsistence farming within the Nkomazi Local Municipality can be attributed to the social dynamic of the area, whereby a large percentage of the households in the area are involved in some form of agricultural practice (discussed in more depth in Chapter 3).

Much of the settlement in the WMA is focused in the central to northern parts of the area, with much of the urban area comprising smaller townships and villages as opposed to large metropolitan areas. Within the WMA, the largest metropolitan area is that of Mbombela in the central part of the region. Similarly, much of the settlement within the Nkomazi Local Municipality comprises villages and towns, with main centres such as Malelane and Komatipoort being the largest settlement types found within the Municipality.

However, the natural vegetation of the WMA and Municipality differ to an extent given that they comprise different ecoregions. Whilst much of the Nkomazi Local Municipality is covered in bushveld, both open and dense, the WMA has large areas of grassland. Whilst the WMA is comprised of 38.39 % bushveld and 27.76 % grassland, the Nkomazi Local Municipality comprises 63.05 % bushveld and only 9.29 % grassland. This difference in natural vegetation can be attributed to the differing climates of the two areas. Whereas the Nkomazi Local Municipality is predominantly a drier, more desert-like climate which would encourage hardier, scrub-like bushes, the WMA comprises this desert climate in only its eastern region. Throughout the western and southern parts of the WMA, the climate is more sub-tropical and humid and favours the grasslands.

Given the geology of the WMA, a number of different mineral deposits are present within the area (WRC, 2016). Within the Inkomati system, numerous primary mineral commodities are present, with coal deposits existing throughout the western, central and northern parts of the system. Gold, manganese and ferromanganese are mined in the central to northern parts of the Inkomati system. Along with these central gold deposits, nickel is also mined in the central part of the system, whilst coal and iron ore are mined in the eastern parts of the system – in the Nkomazi LM, an iron ore mining project is located just outside Malelane and four coal mining projects are located throughout the southern and eastern parts of the Municipality. Whilst not as varied as the Inkomati system, the Usuthu system has numerous coal mining projects throughout its region, as well as iron ore in the southern central part of the system.

Whilst the area under mining is relatively small when compared to other land uses (0.07 % of the Nkomazi Local Municipality and 0.14 % of the IU WMA), the impacts of mining can be far more significant in terms of water use and pollution and threats to biodiversity.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 36

Table 2-8: Percentage of Total Land Use within the IU WMA and the Nkomazi Local Municipality (based on NLC 2013/2014 coverage)

Percentage of the total Nkomazi Local Percentage of the total Category Sub-Category Municipality land use IU WMA land use (%) (%) Agriculture Sugarcane 12.18 1.69 Other Irrigated 0.01 0.22 Fields 0.29 4.32 Orchards 2.47 1.15 Forestry Plantations 2.68 17.96 Subsistence 3.41 1.27 Mining 0.07 0.14 Erosion/Degraded Areas 0.11 0.16 Urban Industrial 0.03 0.04 Commercial 0.02 0.03 Residential 4.82 3.14 Water Bodies 0.77 0.56 Wetlands 0.32 2.24 Natural Vegetation Indigenous Forest 0.24 0.66 Bushveld 63.05 38.39 Shrubland 0.22 0.28 Grassland 9.29 27.76

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 37

Figure 2-24: Land Use within the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 38

Figure 2-25: Land Use within the Nkomazi Local Municipality

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 39

2.4 Biodiversity

2.4.1 Mining Risks Given that mining is prevalent throughout the IU WMA and is a contributing industry to the economy on a national level, the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) developed a guide to biodiversity and mining to assist the mining industry in its decision making to ensure that biodiversity issues are identified and categorized. This guideline created a composite dataset based on numerous individual biodiversity spatial dataset and categorized areas throughout South Africa according to the following:

 Category A – legally protected Areas falling within this category are legally protected under South African legislation – both the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act 49 of 2008 (MPRDA) and the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act 57 of 2003 (NEM:PA) - and include National Parks, nature reserves and World Heritage Sites and protected environments. Within these areas, mining activities are prohibited unless approval is given by both the Minister of Mineral Resources and the Minister of Environmental Affairs for mining activities in Protected Environments.  Category B – highest biodiversity importance Areas falling within this category include critically endangered and endangered ecosystems, Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) from the provincial spatial biodiversity plans (SBPs), FEPAs (including a 1 km buffer around these areas) and Ramsar sites. Within these areas, environmental screening, Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and associated specialist studies are required to determine whether such a threat to biodiversity exists in order to inform regulatory decisions made for mining, water use licences and environmental authorisations. Should these threats to biodiversity exist, the chances of a fatal flaw existing in any new mining operation is very high.  Category C – high biodiversity importance Areas falling within this category include Protected Areas’ buffers, Transfrontier Conservation Areas, areas identified in provincial SBPs, and SWSAs. Within these areas, EIAs will determine the level of significance of the impact on biodiversity, meaning that mining is usually limited in these areas as they are important for supporting other biodiversity priority areas.  Category D – moderate risk to mining Areas falling within this category include ecological support areas, vulnerable ecosystems and areas identified for protected area expansion. EIAs conducted within these areas will tend to focus on mitigation of impacts although authorisations may set limits and specify biodiversity offsets that form part of the licence agreements for the mining operations.

Based on these classifications, it can be seen in Figure 2-26 that much of the IU WMA lies within a Category A to C area of risk, with only small parts of the WMA having moderate to no risk of biodiversity impacts should land be developed. Whilst the ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance project is not related to mining activities, the use of a spatial dataset such as the one in Figure 2-26 is of importance given that it shows areas in which impacts on biodiversity need to be considered in-depth.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 40 Figure 2-26: Areas of High Biodiversity Importance and Subsequent Risk to Mining within Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 41

2.4.2 Areas of Biodiversity Importance Following on from the broad classification of biodiversity risks within the IU WMA given in Figure 2-26, the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan (Lötter, 2015) further classifies the land within these areas of biodiversity concern into three main areas, viz. Protected Areas (PAs), Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs), and Ecological Support Areas (ESAs). Of the total IU WMA area, these areas of biodiversity importance cover approximately 66.56 % of land area within the WMA. Table 2-9 gives a breakdown of the areas of each class of biodiversity areas as identified by the Mpumalanga SBP.

Table 2-9: Areas of Biodiversity Importance

Type of Biodiversity Area Percentage of Total IU WMA Percentage of Total Area (%) Nkomazi Local Municipality Area (%)

CBA – Irreplaceable 9.43 5.75 CBA – Optimal 6.68 3.04

ESA – Landscape Corridor 0.85 0.00 ESA – Local Corridor 3.10 1.91 ESA – Protected Area Buffer 17.67 24.14 PA – National Parks and Nature Reserves 27.03 34.97 PA – Protected Environment: Modified 0.40 - PA – Protected Environment: Natural 1.39 -

Within the IU WMA, these three classes are further divided into the groupings found in Table 2-9. These classes are used to distinguish between biodiversity areas importance in terms of the roles each type plays in ensuring biodiversity is protected. CBAs can be divided into two main groups – Irreplaceable and Optimal – and are terrestrial and aquatic features that play a critical role in conserving biodiversity and ensures ecosystems function as they should.

Irreplaceable CBAs are defined as areas that are crucial to biodiversity conservation and are only second to protected areas in terms of their importance. Any decline or deterioration of the habitats and ecological functions and services in these areas will lead to a degradation of the ecosystem and potential loss of species. As a result of this, conservation management practices should be the main land use within these areas. Throughout the IU WMA, there are large concentrations of these Irreplaceable CBAs in the western and central parts, as well as a large concentration in the eastern part of the WMA within the Nkomazi LM.

Optimal CBAs, whilst also very important contributors towards the biodiversity of the WMA, are more lenient in terms management practices to ensure that biodiversity is conserved. These areas, located throughout the entire WMA and Nkomazi LM, are suited to meet biodiversity targets as they avoid high-cost areas with competing land uses. However, whilst more lenient than the Irreplaceable CBAs, the Optimal CBAs still require management measures to be implemented to ensure that negative impacts on the local biodiversity are not incurred.

The Ecological Support Areas (ESAs), whilst not critical to the meeting of biodiversity targets, are necessary as they provide support to these targets in the form of ecological functioning and ecosystem services. They need to be maintained in order to allow for ecosystems to remain functional in terms of the ecology of the area, as they provide for climate change resilience measures and support the connectivity between different landscapes within each ecosystem. Three types of these ESAs are present within the IU WMA, namely and provide the following support systems:

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 42

 Landscape corridors – these corridors allow for the development of ecological function support systems as well as ensure that the ecological functioning of CBAs is able to develop resilience towards climate change.  Local corridors – these corridors link the different climate change focal areas and incorporate movement routes between different areas. By connecting different biodiversity zones, these corridors allow for the development of resilience within biodiversity areas and thus need to be maintained.  Protected area buffers – these buffers are put in to allow for mitigation measures to be implemented in response to land use changes surrounding the Protected Areas (PAs) that may have adverse impacts on ecological functioning. These buffers vary depending on the type of PA as per Listing Notice 3 of the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA), with National Parks having a 10 km buffer, Nature Reserves a 5 km buffer, and Protected Environments a 1 km buffer. The Protected Areas and Protected Environments (PAs and PEs) present within the IU WMA are those recognised in terms of NEM:PA and are currently considered to meet all biodiversity targets set for the areas. PEs are considered areas of high biodiversity have been declared in terms of S28 of NEM:PA whilst PAs are those declared in terms of S9 of NEM:PA. Whereas PAs tend to be declared owing to their protected nature in terms of other legislation or their biodiversity importance, PEs can be declared to regulate buffer zones around PAs and ecosystems not necessarily within the PA’s border, enable stakeholders to collectively conserve biodiversity of an area, to protect an area if it is sensitive to development or to ensure sustainable use of natural resources and control land use change. Within the IU WMA, five PEs exist in the western to south western part of the WMA. These five environments, Chrissiesmeer, Greater Lakenvlei, Mabola, Pongola Bush and KwaMandlangampisi Protected Environments, have been declared owing to their important grassland and wetland habitats, along with a number of the PEs being home to threatened species.

A full list of the Protected and Conservation Sites is given in Table 2-10.

Table 2-10: Protected and Conservation Areas within Study Area

Name Type of Area Date Declared

Protected Areas

Nelshoogte Nature Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 07/01/1972

Wonderkloof Nature Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 11/05/1973

Dr Hamilton Nature Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 20/09/1985

Starvation Creek Nature Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 11/10/1985

Makobulaan Nature Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 11/09/1992

Blouswaelvlakte Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 13/09/2013

Hartbeesvlakte Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 13/09/2013

Mac Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 13/09/2013

Nelsberg Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 13/09/2013

Ngodwanakloof Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 13/09/2013

Queensriver Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 13/09/2013

Tweefontein Reserve Forest Nature Reserve 13/09/2013

Sterkspruit Mountain Catchment Area Mountain Catchment Area 11/05/1973

Kruger National Park National Park 26/07/1926 * Bewerwyk Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 17/08/1955

Cecilia Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 11/06/1956

Vertroosting Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 01/05/1957

Vischspruit Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 27/01/1960

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 43

Name Type of Area Date Declared

Red Arces Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/03/1961

Stenson Estate Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/08/1962 * Timbavati Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/08/1962

Zasm Falls Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/08/1962

Ida Doyer Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/01/1964

Paranie Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/01/1964

Uitkyk Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/01/1964

Barberton Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 27/01/1965 * Paulina van Niekerk Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 27/01/1965

Sabie Sands Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 27/01/1965

Blyderivierspoort Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 24/11/1965

Josua Moolman Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/12/1965

Cythna Letty Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/02/1967

Dombeya Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/02/1967

Rocky Drift Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/02/1967

Thorncroft Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/02/1967

Tinie Louw Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/02/1967

Tullach Mhor Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/02/1967

Vlakplaats Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/02/1967

Manyeleti Game Reserve Nature Reserve 15/12/1967

Maffia Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/05/1968

Rentia Kritzinger Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/05/1968

St Louis Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/05/1968

Tobe Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/02/1969

Buffelshoek Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 05/03/1969

Laughing Waters Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 21/05/1969

White River Valley Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 30/12/1970

Nelspruit Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 26/01/1972

Sterkspruit Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 05/08/1981

Songimvelo Game Reserve Nature Reserve 04/03/1983

Bosbokrand Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 21/02/1992

Mount Anderson Catchment Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 09/03/1994

White River Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 09/04/1994

Umhloti Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 08/06/1994

Barberton Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/03/1996 * Flora Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/03/1996

Jericho Dam Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/03/1996

Mahushe Shongwe Game Reserve Nature Reserve 29/03/1996 * Mthethomusha Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/03/1996

Nooitgedacht Dam Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/03/1996

Verloren Vallei Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 29/03/1996

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 44

Name Type of Area Date Declared

Nkomazi Wilderness Nature Reserve 08/10/2001

Buffelskloof Private Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 15/05/2012

Little Joker-Formosa-Mount Prospect Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 19/12/2013

Tafelkop Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 22/01/2014

Angle Ridge Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 07/04/2017

Mount Morgan Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 07/04/2017

Ngodwana Valley Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 07/04/2017

Oosterbeek Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 07/04/2017

KwaMandlangampisi Protected Environment Protected Environment 28/09/2010

Pongola Bush Protected Environment Protected Environment 19/11/2013

Chrissiesmeer Protected Environment Protected Environment 22/01/2014

Mabola Protected Environment Protected Environment 22/01/2014

Greater Lakenvlei Protected Environment Protected Environment 07/04/2017

Conservation Areas

Kruger to Canyons Biosphere Reserve 01/01/2001

Lowveld National Botanical Garden Botanical Garden 29/08/1984

Verloren Valei Nature Reserve Ramsar Site 16/10/2001

* Sites, or portions thereof, present within the boundary Nkomazi Local Municipality

Along with the areas declared under NEM:PA in Table 2-9, a World Heritage Site (WHS) exists in the central part of the IU WMA. The Barberton Makhonjwa Mountains incorporates the whole of the Songimvelo and Nkomazi Nature Reserves, as well as parts of the Queens River and Barberton Nature Reserves, timber plantations running between the PAs and two communal land areas in the Komati Valley. The very north eastern part of this WHS also lies within the Nkomazi Local Municipality and borders on sugarcane growing areas in the Municipality (locality given in Figure 2-27).

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 45

ISEAL Project No. Barberton Makhonjwa Mountains World Heritage Site 539084

Figure 2-27: Site Locality of the Barberton Makhonjwa Mountains World Heritage Site (UNESCO, 2018)

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 46 Figure 2-28: Areas of Biodiversity Importance within Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 47

2.4.3 Threatened Ecosystems Whilst these protected regions aim at ensuring that biodiversity is conserved within their boundary, numerous ecosystems within the IU WMA are threatened is some form. This level of threat is quantified by considering the level of conservation of biodiversity within an area along with the potential for species extinction within the ecosystem. Within the IU WMA, three main levels of threat exist, namely Critical, Endangered and Vulnerable, with all Critical and Endangered ecosystems within the WMA being classified as such owing to their high level of irreplaceability. These areas, identified as priority areas, have been identified based on their ability to meet explicit biodiversity targets within the Mpumalanga BSP. Whilst most of the Vulnerable areas fall within this grouping, albeit at a lower threat level, a number of these areas are also at threat owing to the degradation of the ecosystem and its irreplaceability.

Figure 2-29 provides a spatial overview of the location of these ecosystems, whilst Table 2-11 provides background to their classification.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 48 Table 2-11: Threatened Ecosystems within Study Area (after RSA, 2012) Proportion Area Original of Original Remaining Map Threatened Area of Area Species of General Description of Name Biome during Status Ecosystem Protected Concern Ecosystem Ref. Gazetting in (ha) as of 2011 2011 (%) (%) 1 Located within the quartizite and dolomite Four mixed grassland at mammal Kaapsehoop, the species, six ecosystem is delineated bird species, according to the nesting Grassland one reptile Kaapsehoop Quartzite Grasslands Critical 8 000 50 6 area of the Blue Swallow. and forest species, four The ecosystem also plant species, includes important sub- and four catchments, an vegetation escarpment corridor and types is important for vegetative processes. 2 Four Located along the mammal highveld panlands, the species, five ecosystem incorporates bird species, the Chrissiesmeer lake three reptile districts area. The Grassland Blyde Quartzite Grasslands Endangered 33 000 63 51 species, ecosystem also includes and forest sixteen plant important sub- species, and catchments, an five ecological corridor and vegetation important grassland types areas. 3 Located along the grassland plateau Three between Die Berg and mammal Belfast, the ecosystem is species, delineated according to seven bird Grassland the breeding and feeding Chrissiesmeer Panveld Endangered 156 000 72 0 species, two and wetland habitats of cranes and plant species, Rudd's Lark. The and three ecosystem also includes vegetation an escarpment corridor types and important forest patches.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 49

Proportion Area Original of Original Remaining Map Threatened Area of Area Species of General Description of Name Biome during Status Ecosystem Protected Concern Ecosystem Ref. Gazetting in (ha) as of 2011 2011 (%) (%) 4 Located along the Blyde Five mammal escarpment, the species, eight ecosystem is delineated bird species, according to the Black one Reef quartzites on the amphibian Grassland lower escarpment. The Dullstroom Plateau Grasslands Endangered 114 000 85 5 species, and forest ecosystem also includes twenty plant important sub- species, and catchments, an two escarpment corridor and vegetation is important for vegetative types processes. 5 Located from Abel Erasmus Pass south to Pilgrim's Rest, the Five mammal ecosystem is delineated species, six according to the Malmani bird species, mountainous karstlands Grassland, three reptile and threatened species Malmani Karstlands Endangered savanna and 66 000 71 9 species, nine and endemic taxa. The forest plant species, ecosystem also includes and seven important sub- vegetation catchments, an types escarpment corridor and is important for vegetative processes. 6 Two bird Located along the dry species, two clay flats on the northern reptile end of the Southern species, one Lebombo Sourveld, the amphibian ecosystem is delineated Savanna and Mananga-Lebombo Thornveld Endangered 41 000 72 1 species, according to the local forest three plant landtype and topography. species, and The ecosystem also five includes important sub- vegetation catchments and an types ecological corridor.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 50

Proportion Area Original of Original Remaining Map Threatened Area of Area Species of General Description of Name Biome during Status Ecosystem Protected Concern Ecosystem Ref. Gazetting in (ha) as of 2011 2011 (%) (%) 7 Two butterfly Located along the hills species, between Noordkaap and three bird the Barberton Nature species, Reserve, the ecosystem three reptile Noordkaap Greenstone Bushveld Endangered Savanna 4 000 98 23 is delineated according to species, two the local landtypes, plant species, serpentine outcrops and and three serpentine endemic plant vegetation species. types 8 Three mammal Located on the second species, five and higher escarpments, bird species, the ecosystem is one delineated based on amphibian landtypes and species. Grassland species, two Mauchesburg Alpine Grassland Endangered 42 000 84 46 The ecosystem also and forest reptile includes important sub- species, catchments, an thirty-seven escarpment corridor and plant species, is important for vegetative and four processes. vegetation types. 9 Three Located between mammal Luneburg, Volksrust and species, Sheepmoor, the three butterfly ecosystem comprises species, ten escarpment and Wakkerstroom/Luneburg Grassland bird species, grassland mountainlands, Endangered 255 000 90 2 Grasslands and forest one and is delineated amphibian according to the local species, one landtypes, topography reptile and landscape. The species, ecosystem also includes twenty plant important sub- species and catchments, an

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 51

Proportion Area Original of Original Remaining Map Threatened Area of Area Species of General Description of Name Biome during Status Ecosystem Protected Concern Ecosystem Ref. Gazetting in (ha) as of 2011 2011 (%) (%) three escarpment corridor and vegetation is important for vegetative types processes. 10 Located northwest of Badplaas and covering Five mammal large areas of montane species, grassland, the ecosystem seven bird is delineated according to Grassland, species, one the local landtypes and Badplaas Mountainlands Vulnerable savanna and 14 000 91 0 amphibian landscape. The forest species, and ecosystem also includes three important sub- vegetation catchments, an types ecological corridor and is important for vegetative processes. 11 Located along the One mammal mountain range south species, two and east of Barberton, the butterfly ecosystem is delineated species, according to the moist seven bird landscape and Barberton Grassland, species, four Sequence geological Barberton Mountainlands Vulnerable savanna and 70 000 80 52 reptile formation. The forest species, ecosystem also includes twenty-three important sub- plant species, catchments, an and five escarpment corridor and vegetation is important for vegetative types processes. 12 Two mammal Located within a granite species, two boulder gorge along the Croc Gorge Granite Savanna and bird species, Crocodile River, the Vulnerable 9 000 96 23 Mountainlands forest four reptile ecosystem is delineated species, four according to mountain plant species, tops and steep valley and three slopes. The ecosystem

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 52

Proportion Area Original of Original Remaining Map Threatened Area of Area Species of General Description of Name Biome during Status Ecosystem Protected Concern Ecosystem Ref. Gazetting in (ha) as of 2011 2011 (%) (%) vegetation also includes an types escarpment corridor and has important for forest patches. 13 Located throughout the Eastern Highveld Grassland Vulnerable Grassland 1 267 000 55 <1 - plains in the eastern Highveld. 14 Located on the coastal scarp from the Lebombo Two Red Mountains through to Eastern Scarp Forest Vulnerable Forest Unknown 34 000 ha 25 Data plant southern KwaZulu Natal, species the biodiversity of the ecosystem is very important. 15 Located around stagnant water bodies in the Grassland biome, the Eastern Temperate Freshwater One endemic ecosystem is very Vulnerable Azonal 56 000 56 5 Wetlands plant species important as it supports numerous aquatic and hygrophilous vegetation systems. 16 Located along a Three grassland plateau south mammal east of Waterval Boven, species, six the ecosystem is bird species, delineated according to one altitude and landtype. Elandshoek Summit Grasslands Vulnerable Grassland 15 000 83 0 amphibian The ecosystem also species, two includes important sub- plant species, catchments, an and one escarpment corridor and vegetation has important for type grassland processes.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 53

Proportion Area Original of Original Remaining Map Threatened Area of Area Species of General Description of Name Biome during Status Ecosystem Protected Concern Ecosystem Ref. Gazetting in (ha) as of 2011 2011 (%) (%) 17 Two mammal Located around the species, eight Elandshoogte plantation, bird species, the ecosystem is one delineated according to amphibian the mountain summit, Grassland, species, topography and landtype. Elandshoogte Mountainlands Vulnerable savanna and 17 000 73 0 three reptile The ecosystem also forest species, ten includes important sub- plant species, catchments, an and three escarpment corridor and vegetation has important for type grassland processes. 18 Located within the mountain range Two mammal surrounding Kaalrug and species, Kaapmuiden, the three bird ecosystem is delineated species, according to the dry, Grassland, three reptile north-eastern end of the Kaalrug Mountainlands Vulnerable savanna and 25 000 86 0 species, four Barberton Sequence and forest plant species, landtype. The ecosystem and five also includes important vegetation sub-catchments, an types escarpment corridor and is important for forest processes. 19 Located along the lower parts of the Escarpment, Four endemic the ecosystem is a KaNgwane Montane Grassland Vulnerable Grassland 612 000 59 <1 plant species transitional one as it moves from the Highveld to the Escarpment. 20 Located on localised high Two endemic points of the Lebombo Lebombo Summit Sourveld Vulnerable Savanna 12 000 55 4 plant species Mountain range crests, the ecosystem comprises open grasslands with

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 54

Proportion Area Original of Original Remaining Map Threatened Area of Area Species of General Description of Name Biome during Status Ecosystem Protected Concern Ecosystem Ref. Gazetting in (ha) as of 2011 2011 (%) (%) patches of low bushes and trees. 21 Located on along the lower slopes of the north- eastern escarpment, the One endemic ecosystem comprises Legogote Sour Bushveld Vulnerable Savanna 354 000 53 2 plant species dense shrubland as well as short thicket and exposed granite outcrops. 22 Located along the low Drakensberg Escarpment, this Low Escarpment Mistbelt Forest Vulnerable Forest Unknown 5 000 ha 15 - ecosystem comprises large areas of isolated forest. 23 Located along the Lowveld forest areas, this Lowveld Riverine Forest Vulnerable Forest Unknown 11 000 ha 67 Unkown ecosystem is largely found alongside riverine areas. 24 Located on a high-lying band of dolomitic rock Eight running along the Northern Escarpment Dolomite Vulnerable Grassland 94 000 46 2 endemic Escarpment this Grassland plant species ecosystem comprises species-rich grasslands throughout. 25 Located in the upper Phongolo River One endemic catchments, this Paulpietersburg Moist Grassland Vulnerable Grassland 333 000 58 <1 plant species ecosystem comprises mostly undulating relief and tall grasslands.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 55 Figure 2-29: Threatened Ecosystems within Study Area

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 56

2.4.4 Cultural Heritage Sites In addition to the PAs and PEs, numerous cultural and natural heritage sites and monuments are found throughout the IU WMA. The following list heritage sites listed during the water resource situation assessments conducted for the initial the Inkomati and Usuthu WMAs and the Ehlanzeni Spatial Development Framework – this list is not necessarily comprehensive as new sites are continuously added to the South African Heritage Site register and, in many instances, these represent only a small percentage of sites visible within the WMA. The heritage sites include:

 Pilgrim’s Rest  Groblers Bridge, Komati River  Mac Mac Waterfall  Lone Creek Waterfall  Berlin Waterfall  Five Arch Bridge, Waterval Boven  Numerous Cultural Villages throughout the WMA including Matsamo, Langeloop Swati, Mangweni, Pumlani and Rigetani.  Shangana Village  Nelspruit Art Gallery  Lydenburg Museum  Jock of the Bushveld Monument and Trail  Samora Machel Memorial  Barberton Stock Exchange  Potteries at Tonga and Langeloop.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 57

3 Social Baseline The majority of the pilot area of the project lies within the Nkomazi Local Municipality in the of the IU WMA. Similar to the greater WMA, the pilot area has largely rural homesteads and small settlement clusters, with only a number of larger towns scattered throughout the area.

3.1 Structure of the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area Following promulgation of the National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998) (NWA), nineteen initial Water Management Areas were established throughout South Africa based on the main drainage systems within the country. However, in 2012, as part of the revision of the National Water Resource Strategy 2, many of these Areas were merged into one of the nine current, including the merging of the Inkomati and Usuthu WMAs in the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area.

Within the IU WMA is the Inkomati-Usuthu Catchment Management Agency (CMA) which oversees the water resources of the four systems present within the IU WMA. The functions of this CMA are the following:

 Water resource planning and operations

 River operations

 Water quality monitoring and auditing

 Authorizations of water uses and compliance monitoring and enforcement

 Creation and maintenance of public participation measures.

As part of the CMA’s mandate, it must develop the Catchment Management Strategy (CMS) as well as oversee, and ensure compliance of, all water users within its jurisdiction. Practical measures assist this CMS through continuous water quality and ecological monitoring, stakeholder engagement platforms and water use authorizations and compliance audits in line with the NWA.

The IU CMA comprises two main divisions, viz. Corporate Services and Water Resource Management, of which the Water Resource Management is responsible for all stakeholder engagement, compliance, authorization and monitoring done within the WMA (Figure 3-1).

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: 539084:ISEAL Good Practice, Better Finance Page 58

ISEAL Project No. IU CMA Structure 539084

Figure 3-1: Structure of the Inkomati-Usuthu Catchment Management Agency (Source: IU CMA, 2019)

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 59

3.2 Structure of the Nkomazi Local Municipality The Nkomazi Local Municipality is located in the eastern part of the Mpumalanga province and shares a southern border with Swaziland and an eastern border with Mozambique. Large portions of the northern part of the Municipality fall within the Kruger National Park, with the much of the remaining area being under sugarcane farming and the associated settlements. The Municipality covers an area of approximately 3 240 km2 and is situated within the Enhlanzeni District Municipality, with main urban areas including Malelane, Komatipoort and Hectorspruit.

Within the Nkomazi Local Municipality are eight Traditional Authorities (TA), given in Table 3-1, located in the southern parts of the municipality. These TAs are headed by either an Inkosi, Kgoshi or Hosi, the senior traditional leader of the TA who heads up the Traditional Council within the area.

Table 3-1: Traditional Authorities within Pilot Area (after Nkomazi, 2019)

Traditional Authority Settlement Area under their Control Mlambo Tribal Authority Mabidozini, Samora Park, Emacambeni, Mbangwane, Ekusulukeni, Khombaso, Tsambokhulu, Mananga, Masibekela, MAndulo, Mthatha, New Village and Hlahleya Hhoyi Tribal Authority Hhoyi, Ericsville and Goba Siboshwa Tribal Authority Part of KaMaqhekeza, Block A (KwaZibukwane), Block B (KwaSibhejane), Block C (Esibayeni), Tonga and Los My Cherry, Ngwenyeni and Dludluma Kwa-Lugedlane Tribal Authority Mangweni and Steenbok Mawewe Tribal Authority Magudu, Mgobodzi, Madadeni, Sibange and Phakama Matsamo Tribal Authority Jeppes Reef, Schoemansdal, Buffelsdrift, Driekoppies, Middelplaas, Schulzendal, Mzinti, Ntunda, Phiva, Mdladla, Phosaville, Langeloop, Ekuphumuleni and Sikhwahlane Mhlaba Tribal Authority Magogeni, Boschfontein and Skoonplaas Lomshiyo Tribal Authority Louisville, Shiyalongubo and Sincobile

3.3 Demographics of the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area Based on estimates done in the Draft Business Case for the IU CMA (IRR, 2012), the population of the WMA was extrapolated to be 2 153 500 people in 2012, using population statistics from the original WMA overview reports developed in 2003 (Van der Berg et al., 2003 and Botha et al., 2003). Using a similar growth rate, it could be estimated that the current population within the WMA is approximately 2 800 000 people, with the majority living in the three northern systems – over 85 % of the total WMA population lives within the Inkomati area. Of this population estimate, the urban and semi-urban population is approximately 62.3 % of the total population whilst the rural population accounts for the remaining 36.7 %.

3.4 Demographics of the Nkomazi Local Municipality Based on the most recent Community Survey conducted by Stats SA (2018), the main racial group within the Nkomazi Local Municipality is the Black African community (98.8 %) followed by the white (0.9 %), Coloured (0.2 %) and Indian/Asian (0.1 %) communities. Within the region, Siswati (29.1 %) and isiZulu (28.8 %) are the most commonly spoken languages, followed by IsiNdebele (10.1 %) and Xitsonga (9.6 %).

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 60

The annual population growth rate of the Local Municipality (1.01) is lower than the provincial average of Mpumalanga (1.61), based on the change in population between 2011 and 2016, with the Municipality having the fourth highest number of people across the province (410 907). This distribution of population can be broken down according to age in five-year gaps and is given in Figure 3-2.

Much of the population within the Local Municipality is below the age of 19 years, meaning that the population distribution structure is bottom-heavy and tending towards an overall young population. This large youth group is also reflected in the migration statistics for the province, as it was found that of those living in Mpumalanga, 84.8 % were born in the province.

ISEAL Project No. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY AGE 539084

Figure 3-2: Population Distribution by Age (Source: Stats SA, 2018)

3.4.1 Households The average number of members per household within the Nkomazi Local Municipality is 4 persons, although as Figure 3-3 indicates, there can be as many as ten or more people in a household. Of these households, there is a relatively even split between male (56.3 %) and female (43.7 %) headed households, although male-headed households are still more prevalent.

Within the Nkomazi area, most households live in formal dwellings (91.7 %) as opposed to traditional dwellings (1.0 %), informal dwellings (6.4 %) or other types of dwellings (0.9 %). This is the second highest number of households living in formal dwellings in the province and is 7 % greater than the provincial average. Of these households living in formal dwellings, 13.6 % are living in some form of low-cost or government-subsidised housing.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 61

ISEAL Project No. SIZE OF HOUSEHOLD 539084

Figure 3-3: Number of Members per Household (Stats SA, 2016)

3.4.2 Education Levels Given the largely young population present within the LM, it would be expected that all would be receiving some form of schooling. However, despite an increase of 1.4 % from the Census 2011 dataset, only 78.3 % of the population aged between 5 and 24 years is attending an educational institution. From Table 3-2, it can be seen that this percentage of people attending some form of educational institution is focused mostly at the primary and secondary school levels – few people between the ages of 5 and 24 years attend pre-school or some form of tertiary education within the area.

Table 3-2: Distribution of People Aged between 5 and 24 Years attending an Educational Institution (after Stats SA, 2018)

Type of Educational Institution Percentage of People between the Ages of 5 and 24 Years (%) Preschool 1.8 Primary school 57.2 Secondary school 37.5 Technical vocational education and training 1.3 Other college 0.4 Higher educational institution 1.5 Community education and training college 0.3 Home-based education/home schooling 0.0 Other 0.1 Total 100

These low education levels present within the Local Municipality are further shown in Table 3-3. Within the area, only 30.1 % of people over the age have completed secondary schooling, with only 6.6 %

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 62

having gone on to complete some form of tertiary education. Given that almost a third of the entire population in the area have only got up to primary school education, with over half of that number having no schooling whatsoever, education remains a critical issue within the area.

Table 3-3: Distribution of People Aged Older than 20 Years by Highest Level of Education Completed (after Stats SA, 2018)

Level of Schooling Percentage of People Older than 20 Years (%) No schooling 18.0 Some Primary 11.8 Primary Completed 4.4 Some secondary 29.1 Secondary completed 30.1 Higher 6.6 Total 100

3.4.3 Access to Basic Services Overall, access to basic services is relatively high in the Nkomazi Local Municipality such as water and electrical energy, although indicators such as health and sanitation could be impacted by the low access to proper toilet and refuse removal facilities.

Within the Municipality, over half of the households have access to drinking water from a tap either inside or outside the dwelling, or on a community stand (Table 3-4). Much of the remainder has access to drinking water from a number of different sources, although it is of concern that 3.4 % of households make use of flowing water to meet their drinking water requirements.

Table 3-4: Main Source of Water for Drinking (after Stats SA, 2018)

Main Source of Water for Drinking Percentage of Households (%) Piped (tap) water inside the dwelling/house 5.6 Piped (tap) water inside yard 51.7 Piped water on community stand 7.1 Neighbour's tap 11.0 Public/communal tap 9.9 Borehole in the yard - Borehole outside the yard 3.8 Rain-water tank in yard 0.7 Water-carrier/tanker 6.8 Flowing water/stream/river - Other 3.4 Total 100

Of the households within the Municipality, most have access to an electrical energy source, although 3.7 % of households have no access to an electrical energy source in any form (Table 3-5). Most households obtain their electricity from Eskom, either as pre-paid or billed, with the Municipality providing much of the remaining electricidal supply to those who are connected to the electricity grid.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 63

Table 3-5: Main Source of Electrical Energy (after Stats SA, 2018)

Main Source of Electrical Energy Percentage of Households (%) In-house conventional meter 4.1 In-house pre-paid meter 90.7 Connected to another source for which household pays 0.8 Connected to another source for which household is not paying 0.3 Solar home system 0.0 Generator/Battery - Other 0.4 No access to electricity 3.7 Total 100

3.4.4 Agricultural Activities of Households Within the Nkomazi LM, it was estimated during the 2011 Census that 34.2 % of the economically active population within the municipality was unemployed. That means that for the 110 469 people falling between the ages of 15 and 64 years, over a third had no form of employment. Further to this, it was determined during the 2011 Census that 16.8 % of the Nkomazi Local Municipality fell within the no income (R 0) bracket of average household income, whilst 42.7 % fell within the minimum to low bracket (R 1 to R 19 200). The middle-income bracket (R 19 201 to R 307 200) within the Municipality amounted to 38.3 % of the population, with high income households (R 307 201 or more) accounting for only 2 % of the entire population in the area (see Figure 3-4).

ISEAL Project No. AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD INCOME 539084

Figure 3-4: Average Income of Households within the Nkomazi Local Municipality (Source: Stats SA, 2018)

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 64

Given the large number of no- to low-income households within the LM, a large percentage of households (29.3 %) are involved in some form of agricultural activity. Over 87 % of the households engaged in some form of agricultural activity fall below an average household income of R 38 400 (Figure 3-5), with 36.1 % of those having no income at all. Only 10.3 % of households involved in some form of agriculture have a household income of above R38 400, meaning that much of the agricultural activity carried out by households in the Nkomazi is done so by households living at, or below, the poverty line.

Of these households, 98.61 % fall within the Black African population group, 0.15 % fall within each of the Coloured and Indian or Asian population group, 0.05 % falls within other groups, and 1.04 % of the agricultural households are White. The age groups of these agricultural households provide a reasonable spread, with the highest number of households falling within the 35 to 45-year old category (Table 3-6). Of these households, over 40.2 % have no form of schooling whilst a further 41.4 % have up to a Grade 11 education level. Only 18.4 % of all households involved in agricultural activities within the Nkomazi Local Municipality have completed matric or some form of tertiary or other education.

ISEAL Project No. AVERAGE AGRICULTURAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME 539084

Figure 3-5: Average Income of Agricultural Households within the Nkomazi Local Municipality (Source: Stats SA, 2018)

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 65

Table 3-6: Percentage of Agricultural Households by Age Group (after Stats SA, 2018)

Age Group (Years) Percentage of Households (%) Younger than 15 0.6 15-34 22.1 35-45 24.3 46-55 20.0 56-64 14.0 Older than 65 19.0 Total 100

The type of agricultural activity within the Local Municipality varies from animals only (41.2 %) through to crops only (37.4 %). Only 18.5 % of the households engaging in agriculture practice mixed farming whilst the remaining 3 % engages in other farming practices.

Given that agriculture is heavily reliant of water as an input, every household undertaking some form of agricultural activity requires a water source. Within the Nkomazi LM, 60.9 % of the water used by agricultural households is from a regional or local water scheme, followed by river/stream (9.2 %) and other (10.1 %) abstractions (Table 3-7).

Table 3-7: Main Source of Water for Agricultural Use (after Stats SA, 2018)

Main Source of Water for Agricultural Percentage of Households Activities (%) Regional/local water scheme (operated by a Water 60.9 Service Authority or provider) Borehole 6.4 Spring 1.2 Rain-water tank 2.1 Dam / pool / stagnant water 3.3 River/stream 9.2 Water tanker 6.8 Other 10.1 Total 100

4 Conclusion The purpose of this Baseline Environmental and Social Report was to develop a point of reference for the larger study by determining the social and environmental conditions to be found within the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area and the Nkomazi Local Municipality. This baseline will not only assist in identifying potential risks within the study area but will also guide the project in terms of the Status Quo and Gap Analysis reports to follow on from this report.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 66

Prepared by Reviewed by

______

Roanne Sutcliffe, Candidate Engineer Wouter Jordaan, Pr.Sci.Nat.

Bioresources Engineer Partner/Principal Scientist

All data used as source material plus the text, tables, figures, and attachments of this document have been reviewed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering and environmental practices.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 67 5 References 1. Botha, S, Palmer, R, and Bonthuys, D, 2003. Inkomati Water Management Area: Water Resources Situtation Assessment – Main Report (Volume 3 of 3). DWAF Report No.: P05000/00/0101. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa. 2. DataWorld, 2018. Mpumalanga Spatial Development Framework. Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Mpumalanga Provincial Government, Nelspruit, Mpumalanga. 3. Department of Water Affairs (RSA), 2012. National Water Resource Strategy 2: Managing Water for an Equitable and Sustainable Future. 4. Diedricks, G.J., Roux, F, Hoffmann, A.C., and Selepe,M, 2016. Ecostatus of the Usuthu-Lusutfu Catchment. Inkomati-Usuthu Catchment Management Agency, Nelspruit, Mpumalanga. 5. Inkomati-Usuthu Catchment Management Agency, 2019. Annual Performance Plan 2019/2020. 6. Institutional Reforms and Re-Alignment, 2012. Business Case for the Inkomati-Usuthu Catchment Management Agency. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa. 7. Kleynhans, CJ, Thirion, C and Moolman, J (2005). A Level I River Ecoregion classification System for South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Report No.: N/0000/00/REQ0104. Resource Quality Services, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa. 8. Kleynhans, C.J., Thirion, C, Roux, F, Hoffmann, A.C., and Diedricks, G.(Ed. Roux, F and Selepe, M) 2015. Ecostatus of the Komati River Catchment, Inkomati River System. Inkomati-Usuthu Catchment Management Agency, Nelspruit, Mpumalanga. 9. Kottek, M, Grieser, J, Beck, C, Rudolf, B and Rubel, F, 2006. World map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorolische Zeitschrift, 15(3), pp.259-263. 10. Le Maitre, D, Seyler, H, Holland, M, Smith-Adao,L Nel, J, Maherry, A and Witthser, K, 2018. Identification, Delineation and Importance of the Strategic Water Source Areas of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland for Surface Water and Groundwater. WRC Report No.: TT 754/1/18. Water Research Commission., Pretoria, South Africa. 11. Lötter, M, 2015. Technical Report for the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan – MBSP 2015. MSBP 2013 12. Nel, J, Colvin, C, Le Maitre, D, and Haines, I, 2013. South Africa’s Srategic Water Source Areas. CSIR Report No.: CSIR/NRE/ECOS/ER/2013/0031/A 13. Nkomazi Local Municipality, 2019. 2019/2020 Nkomazi Local Municipality Integrated Development Plan: Draft IDP. 14. Republic of South Africa, 2012. Schedule: National List of Ecosystems that are Threatened and in need of Protection. GN 1002 of 9 December 2012. 15. Roux, F, Diedricks, Hoffmann, A.C., Selepe, M, Scherman, P, and Riddell, E, 2018. Ecostatus of the Crocodile River Catchment, Inkomati River System, Phase II (2017). Inkomati-Usuthu Catchment Management Agency, Nelspruit, Mpumalanga. 16. Roux, F, Diedricks, G, Kleynhans, C.J., Thirion, C,Hoffmann, A.C., and Selepe, M, 2017. Ecostatus of the Sabie-Sand River Catchment, Inkomati River System, Phase II (2016). Inkomati- Usuthu Catchment Management Agency, Nelspruit, Mpumalanga. 17. SASRI WeatherWeb. Data Available at: https://sasri.sasa.org.za/weatherweb/weatherweb.ww_menus.menu_frame?menuid=1. Accessed August and September 2019. 18. Selepe, M, Tlowana, C, Dhlamini, M, Maentja, J, Myanga, X, Nkosi, S, Mahlatsi, B, ChiloaNE, T, and Mahlako, P, 2018 Annual Water Quality Status Report for the Inkomati-Usuthu Water Management Area. 19. Statistics South Africa, 2018. Provincial Profile: Mpumalanga – Community Survey 2016. StatsSA Report: 03-01-13. Statistics South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa. 20. The Secretariat of the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), 2019. The List of Wetlands of International Importance – the Ramsar List. The Secretariat of the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), Switzerland. 21. UNESCO, 2018. Barberton Makhonjwa Mountains World Heritage Site Executive Summary. 22. Van der Berg, E, Stevens, E.G., and Nagdi, F, 2003. Usuthu to Mhlatuze Water Management Area: Water Resources Situation Assessment – Volume 1 of 2. DWAF Report No.: P06000/00/0101. Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria, South Africa.

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019 SRK Consulting: Project No: [Abbreviated title] Page 68

23. Water Research Commission, 2016. South African Mine Water Atlas. WRC Report TT 670/16. Water Research Commission, Pretoria, South Africa.

Spatial data used: Description Name of File Source Soils Soils http://waterresourceswr2012.co.za/resource-centre/ Meteorological N/A (coordinates provided) Stations Strategic SWSA_all_v3_Nov2017 https://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/663 Water Source Areas NFEPA NFEPA_Wetlands https://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/395 Wetlands (2011) NFEPA Rivers NFEPA_Rivers https://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/397 (2011) Mining and Mineguide https://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/423 Biodiversity Guidelines (2012) MBSP MBSP_terrestrial https://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/589 Terrestrial Assessment (2014) Threatened Threatened_ecos_9_12_2011 https://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/501 Ecosystems _original_extent (2011) National Land SALandCover_ReprojectedUTM35 https://egis.environment.gov.za/data_egis/data_download/ Cover South_2013_GTI_72Classes current 2013/2014 Ecoregions – Ecolev1-0704 http://www.dwa.gov.za/iwqs/gis_data/ecoregions/get- Level 1 ecoregions.aspx Water Nms_wms_geo http://www.dwa.gov.za/iwqs/gis_data/ Monitoring Points PES, EI & ES PRIMARY_ X, PRIMARY_W http://www.dwa.gov.za/iwqs/rhp/eco/peseismodel.aspx River Assessment

SURO/JORD 539084_ISEAL_BaselineReport_Draft_rev01_SURO December 2019