A Vegetation Impact Study of a Proposed Retirement Village Development on Erf 657, Stilbaai, Western Cape, South Africa

September 15, 2020

chepri (Pty) Ltd Scientiﬁc Services Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai

This document contains intellectual property and proprietary information that is protected by copyright in favour of Chepri (Pty) Ltd. (and the specialist consultants). The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to any third party without the prior written consent of Chepri (Pty) Ltd. Although this document is prepared exclusively for submission to CapeEAPrac, its related client, and the Department of Environmental Aﬀairs (DEA), Chepri (Pty) Ltd. retains ownership of the intellectual property and proprietary information contained herein, which is subject to all conﬁdentiality, copyright and trade secrets, rules intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 1 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai

Abbreviations and Terms

Biome A distinct biological community that have formed in response to a shared physical climate and similar disturbance regimes. Anthropogenic Resulting from human activity. Critical Biodiversity Area Areas required to meet biodiversity targets for ecosystems, species (CBA) and ecological processes, as identified in a systematic biodiversity plan. Critically endangered (CR) A species is Critically Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets at least one of the five IUCN criteria for Critically Endangered, indicating that the species is facing an extremely high risk of extinction. Critically endangered: Possibly Extinct is a special tag associated with the category possibly extinct (CR PE) Critically Endangered, indicating species that are highly likely to be extinct, but the exhaustive surveys required for classifying the species as Extinct has not yet been completed. A small chance remains that such species may still be rediscovered.Critically Endangeredr (CR),A species is Critically Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets at least one of the five IUCN criteria for Critically Endangered, indicating that the species is facing an extremely high risk of extinction. Data Deficient: Insufficient A species is DDD when there is inadequate information to make an Information (DDD) assessment of its risk of extinction, but the species is well defined. Listing of species in this category indicates that more information is required and that future research could show that a threatened classification is appropriate. Ecological Support Areas Areas that play an important role in supporting the ecological (ESA) functioning of Critical Biodiversity Areas and/or in delivering ecosystem services. They are not essential for meeting biodiversity targets. Endangered (EN) A species is Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets at least one of the five IUCN criteria for Endangered, indicating that the species is facing a very high risk of extinction. Forb Herbaceous, non-woody flowering plant. Geoxylic suffrutice An underground tree with large stem structures below ground and only leaves and fruit protruding from the soil surface. Habitat specialist Species is restricted to a specialized microhabitat so that it has a very small Area of Occupancy (AOO), typically smaller than 20 km2. Irreplaceable areas Important and necessary areas in terms of meeting targets for biodiversity pattern and process, and large enough and connected enough to be functional and persist in the long term. Least concern A species is Least Concern when it has been evaluated against the IUCN criteria and does not qualify for any of the above categories. Species classified as Least Concern are considered at low risk of extinction. Widespread and abundant species are typically classified in this category.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 2 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai

Low density of individuals Species always occurs as single individuals or very small subpopulations (typically fewer than 50 mature individuals) scattered over a wide area Near Threatened (NT) A species is Near Threatened when available evidence indicates that it nearly meets any of the IUCN criteria for Vulnerable, and is therefore likely to become at risk of extinction in the near future. Orange Listed Species A species categorised under one of the following red list categories: Near Threatened (NT), Critically Rare, Rare or Data Deficient - Insufficient Information (DDD). Passive restoration Restoration that occassionally occurs without intentional active human interference. Rare A species is Rare when it meets at least one of four South African criteria for rarity, but is not exposed to any direct or plausible potential threat and does not qualify for a category of threat according to one of the five IUCN criteria. Red list category A scientific system designed to measure species’ risk of extinction. The purpose of this system is to highlight those species that are most urgently in need of conservation action. Red listed species A species categorised under one of the following red list categories: Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN),Vulnerable (VU). Restoration trajectory A change over time within an ecosystem towards a state more characteristic of its so-called ’climax’ or historical state. Restricted range Extent of Occurrence (EOO) < 500 km2. Small global population Less than 10 000 mature individuals. Species of conservation A species that have a high conservation importance in terms of concern (SOCC) preserving South Africa’s high floristic diversity and include not only threatened species, but also those classified in the categories Extinct in the Wild (EW), Regionally Extinct (RE), Near Threatened (NT), Critically Rare, Rare, Declining and Data Deficient: Insufficient Information (DDD). Threatened species Species that are facing a high risk of extinction. Any species classified in the IUCN categories Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable is a threatened species. Vulnerable (VU) A species is Vulnerable when the best available evidence indicates that it meets at least one of the five IUCN criteria for Vulnerable, indicating that the species is facing a high risk of extinction.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 3 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Contents

Contents

1 Executive Summary 7

2 Introduction 7 2.1 Site location and ecological context ...... 8 2.1.1 Climate and topography ...... 9 2.1.2 Hartenbos Dune Thicket ...... 9 2.2 Vegetation community and conservation status ...... 9 2.3 Site Vegetation description ...... 12 2.4 Nature of the Proposed Development ...... 12

3 Method 14 3.1 Site survey ...... 14 3.2 Impact assessment ...... 14

4 Results 17 4.1 Vegetation Communities present ...... 17 4.1.1 Brachylaena serrata - Raphanus raphanistrum Mowed Strandveld ...... 18 4.1.2 Osteospermun moniliferum - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld ...... 18 4.2 Endangered and Important species ...... 26 4.3 Ecosystem sensitivity ...... 26 4.4 Alien and Declared Invader Plants ...... 26 4.5 Impact Assessment ...... 29

5 Discussion 30 5.1 Limitations to this study ...... 30 5.2 Impact assessment ...... 30 5.3 Recommendations ...... 31

6 Conclusion 31

A Author details 33

B Declaration of Independence 45

C NEMBA classiﬁcations for invader species 46 C.1 Category 1a (PROHIBITED) : Listed Invasive Species ...... 46 C.2 Category 1b (PROHIBITED / Exempted if in Possession or Under control) : Listed Invasive Species ...... 46 C.3 Category 2 (PERMIT REQUIRED): Listed Invasive Species ...... 46 C.4 Category 3 (PROHIBITED): Listed Invasive Species ...... 46

D Terrestrial and Aquatic Biodiversity Protocols 47 D.1 Terrestrial Biodiversity ...... 47 D.2 Animal Species (Fauna) ...... 47 D.3 Plant Species ...... 47

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 4 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai List of Figures

List of Figures

1 A location map at 1:25000 scale of the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD)...... 9 2 A location map at 1:25000 scale of the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD)...... 10 3 National Vegetation Map (1:15000) around the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD)...... 10 4 National Vegetation Map (1:25000) around the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD)...... 11 5 Critical Biodiversity Area Map around the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD)...... 11 6 The Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development layout plan ...... 13 7 A map of the Vegetation Units identiﬁed on Erf 657, the proposed development site...... 19 8 Four photographs of the Mowed Strandveld community...... 20 9 A Species count within the Mowed Strandveld Vegetation Unit by habit...... 21 10 Eight plant species encountered on the Mowed Strandveld community...... 22 11 Osteospermun moniliferum - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld ...... 24 12 Plant species found within the Osteospermum monilifera - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld community...... 25 13 A Species count within the Osteospermum monilifera - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld Vegetation Unit by habit...... 27 14 Vegetation constraints map of the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD). 27 15 Thamnochortus insignis harvested on study site...... 28 16 NEMBA categorised and listed Alien Invasive Plants present on the study site ...... 28

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 5 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai List of Tables

List of Tables

2 A categorisation of the extent of an impact ...... 15 3 A categorisation of the duration of an envisaged impact ...... 15 4 A categorisation of the intensity of an envisaged impact ...... 16 5 A categorisation of the probability of an envisaged impact ...... 16 6 Categories of overall significance of an envisaged impact ...... 16 7 Area (m2) estimates of the two vegetation units identified on the study site ...... 17 8 List of plants encountered in the Mowed Strandveld vegetation unit...... 20 9 List of plants encountered in the Osteospermum moniliferum - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld vegetation unit...... 23 10 Alien plants recorded on the study area ...... 26 11 Impact assessment significance without mitigation ...... 29 12 Post-mitigation impact assessment significance ...... 29 13 Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver ...... 34

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 6 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Executive Summary

1 Executive Summary

Chepri (Pty) Ltd. was appointed by CapeEAPrac (Pty) Ltd to conduct a vegetation impact assessment of a Proposed Retirement Village Development on Erf 657, Stilbaai, Western Cape, South Africa (hereafer PRVD or the study site), Gauteng. The site was visited on the 24 July 2019, and a comprehensive search of the proposed area was conducted for species of conservation concern (SOCC). The site is situated in Hartenbos Dune Thicket, as identified by the National Vegetation Map. Two distinct vegetation types were found, based on structure and composition. The difference between them is a consequence of regular mowing, presumably by the municipality, perhaps with the view to control fire. The unmowed portion of the study area covers an area of approximately 1.6 ha of the study site, and is classified as Osteospermum monilifera - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld. The mowed section is referred to here as ‘Mowed Strandveld’ or Brachylaena serrata - Raphanus raphanistrum Mowed Strandveld and covers around 3.7 ha of the study site. A comprehensive search for species of conservation concern (SOCC) of the study site revealed the presence of six larger specimens of the protected ‘White Milkwood’ tree species (Sideroxylon inerme subsp. inerme). No other plant species of conservation concern (SOCC) were found. The overall impact of the proposed development on the existing ecosystem, and particularly its currently manifested vegetation patterns is considered low-medium. Four major potential impacts have been identified should the proposed development take place:

1. the destruction of individual plants of conservation concern (SOCC) status (here it is six mature individuals of the White Milkwood (Sideroxylon inerme subsp. inerme), and

2. the destruction of local habitat for valuable species and those of conservation concern.

3. the loss of local ecosystem services mostly that associated with the harvesting of the abundant Albertinia Thatching Reed (Thamnochortus insignis) in the smaller intact part of the study area.

4. the closure of a potential ecological corridor that stretch from the Goukou river in the northeast, to natural areas outside the town to the southwest.

As a mitigation measure in terms of managing the species of conservation concern, it is recommended that the Milkwood trees be kept and incorporated into the building plans of the proposed retirement village development, or alternatively, new milkwood saplings be planted where suitable on the development area as part of its gardens. Without such mitigation the overall envisaged impact on biodiversity remains low and restricted to a local scale. The loss of habitat and ecosystem services is inevitable should the development be approved, but its impact is also considered relatively low and localised. Cumulatively, the impacts of housing developments on biodiversity can be severe, and is part of a fast growing trend in coastal down development, particularly in the Southern Cape. Here this impact is considered low, due to the location of the study area in the centre of town, adjacent to municipal buildings and a relatively busy road.

In terms of the obstruction of a potential ecological corridor, the proposed development would add to the already existing blockage of this corridor by the municipal buildings on the southwestern edge of its boundaries and the busy road that already cuts through this potential corridor in front of the municipal buildings. Therefore the proposed development is considered to have a low impact and would not constitute the only development that blocks this potential corridor, which is already compromised by existing developments and infrastructure.

It is recommended that the proposed development be approved on account of its relatively low and localised impacts on existing ecosystem function and services.

2 Introduction

CapeEAPrac (Pty) Ltd contracted chepri (Pty) Ltd to conduct a botanical/vegetation impact assessment for a proposed retirement village development in accordance with all the relevant guidelines (Brownlie et al.,

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 7 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 2.1 Site location and ecological context

2005; Villiers et al., 2005) for Biodiversity Impact Studies on Erf 657, Stilbaai, Western Cape (henceforth the study area). According to the relevant guidelines, this includes

(i) Mapping of the location and extent of all plant communities on the study site, with a description provided for each with the area (in hectares) and ecological sensitivity of each plant community indicated.

(ii) Mapping of all good condition natural vegetation and all primary grassland (even if it is in a poor/degraded condition) and designated as ecologically sensitive.

(iii) A plant species list for each plant community with invasive/exotic species indicated.

(iv) A general Red Data plant species survey.

(v) A sensitivity and constraints map of the aﬀected area including and adjacent 200 m radius of its area.

[i] According to the terms of Appendix 6(1)(1) of the EIA Regulations (2014) (amended 2017) a specialist report must contain:

1. an indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the report was prepared;

2. an indication of the quality and age of base data used for the specialist report;

3. a description of existing impacts on the site, cumulative impacts of the proposed development and levels of acceptable change;

4. the duration, date and season of the site investigation and the relevance of the season to the outcome of the assessment;

5. a description of the methodology adopted in preparing the report or carrying out the specialised process inclusive of equipment and modelling used;

6. a description of any assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in knowledge;

7. a description of any consultation process that was undertaken during the course of preparing the specialist report;

8. a summary and copies of any comments received during any consultation process and where applicable all responses thereto; and

9. any other information requested by the competent authority.

2.1 Site location and ecological context

The study area is situated within the town of Stilbaai on an area adjacent to a municipal building complex to the south and southwest. and show the location of the proposed development area. On its western side the area is bordered by a housing development similar to the one proposed here. To the North it is bordered by a patch of intact strandveld, approximately 9.9 ha in extent. This intact vegetation extends into Erf 657, Stilbaai (the proposed development), and here its estimated area measures around 0.16 ha. At a wider scale this relatively small intact patch of natural vegetation left on erf 657 is connected to a patch of intact vegetation associated with a valley in terms of topography, which is connected to the river. It is only a relatively low-traﬃc load road that divides these two intact areas on a narrow stretch that together constitutes a continuous intact ecological corridor towards the river to the northeast. This corridor also extends from the north of Erf 657 to the northwest. The remaining intact patch of vegetation on Erf 657 is the southernmost limit of this corridor. Due to the presence of the municipal buildings to the southwest of the study area, and the busy road that runs in front of it, this potential ecological corridor is already cut-oﬀ from relatively intact areas to the southwest of the study area.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 8 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 2.2 Vegetation community and conservation status

Erf 657, Stilbaai --- Location map

Legend

Erf 657, Stilbaai

Figure 1: A location map at 1:25000 scale of the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD).

2.1.1 Climate and topography

The site is located within 500m of the Goukou river which flows into the ocean within a distance of just over a kilometre as the crow flies. Consequently, the site is situated on white dune sands that are calcium-rich with abundant shell fragments. Mean Annual Precpitation for Stilbaai is measured between 230-620 mm (with a mean of 430 mm). The rainfall pattern does not show any significant peaks, and a slight low trough during December-January (Mucina, Rutherford, et al., 2006).

2.1.2 Hartenbos Dune Thicket

The intact vegetation identified on this site, which comprises an approximate area of hectares (roughly % are representative of the Hartenbos Strandveld community as identified by (Vlok and Euston-Brown, 2002). This community is also referred to here as Gouritz Dune Thicket Mosaic with Sand Fynbos. Together with Still Bay Dune Thicket and Robberg Dune Thicket it is classified as a sub-tropical thicket mosaic vegetation under the name Gouritz Dune Thicket.

As a fynbos-thicket mosaic, the matrix vegetation is Fynbos with often abundant geophytes (e.g. Brunsvigia orientalis, Chasmanthe saethiopica, Freesia leichtinii ssp. alba, Haemanthus coccineus, Ixia orientalis, etc.) and succulents (eg. Carpobrotus edulis, Conicosia pugioniformis, Dorotheanthus bellidiformis, Jordaaniella dubia, etc.) (Vlok and Euston-Brown, 2002). On this site,

2.2 Vegetation community and conservation status

According to the National Vegetation Map the study area falls within the Hartenbos Dune Thicket community (see Figure 3), and is here designated as an ecosystem of Least Concern in terms of conservation status. There are no Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBA) identiﬁed that overlaps the area of the proposed development as shown in Figure 5. chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 9 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 2.2 Vegetation community and conservation status

Erf 657, Stilbaai --- Location map

Legend

Erf 657, Stilbaai

Figure 2: A location map at 1:25000 scale of the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD).

Erf 657, Stilbaai --- National Vegetation Map

Legend

Erf 657, Stilbaai

VEGMAP2018_AEA_07012019_beta Cape Seashore Vegetation

Gouritz Valley Thicket

Hartenbos Dune Thicket

Estuarine Functional Zone

Estuarine vegetation, riparian

Estuarine vegetation, salt marsh

Figure 3: National Vegetation Map (1:15000) around the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD).

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 10 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 2.2 Vegetation community and conservation status

Erf 657, Stilbaai --- National Vegetation Map

Legend

Erf 657, Stilbaai

VEGMAP2018_AEA_07012019_beta Cape Seashore Vegetation

Gouritz Valley Thicket

Hartenbos Dune Thicket Non-terrestrial (Estuarine Functional Zone) Non-terrestrial (Estuarine vegetation, riparian) Non-terrestrial (Estuarine vegetation, salt marsh)

Figure 4: National Vegetation Map (1:25000) around the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD).

Erf 657, Stilbaai --- Critical Biodiversity Areas

Legend

Erf 657, Stilbaai

CBA_terrestrial_Hessequa Critical Biodiversity Area

Other

Figure 5: Critical Biodiversity Area Map around the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development (PSRVD). chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 11 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 2.3 Site Vegetation description

2.3 Site Vegetation description

The site falls within the more open dune crests and slopes where salty sea winds from the southern ocean and past fires from inland have kept it relatively free from large trees and other woody thicket elements. Instead, in the remaining intact and unmowed patch present on the proposed development area, the vegetation is dominated by Bietou (Osteospermum (= Chrysanthemum) moniliferum) and Albertinia Thatching Grass (Thamnochortus insignis, ’Dekriet’ in Afrikaans). The intact vegetation is slighty invaded by Prickly Pear (Opuntia ficus- indica). The site, prior to most of it being mowed, may have encountered fire sometime in the past 25 years or a combination of thicket-clearing and fire. Only individual clumps of milkwood (Sideroxylon inerme) remain in terms of woody thicket clump elements, both in the intact and mowed strandveld units. There is clear evidence of Albertinia Thatcing Reed (Thamnochortus insignis) being harvested in the intact area on the site. It is an important species used in thatch roof construction.

2.4 Nature of the Proposed Development

The proposed development is a typical retirement village complex, designed to take up the entire footprint of Erf 657, Stilbaai. Figure 6 shows a detailed plan of the proposed development. This proposed high-density housing complex is consistent with the main economic drivers of the town of Stillbay which involves tourism and also functions as a retirement destination. The proposed site on which the proposed development is planned is already largely (69%) transformed and directly adjacent to municipal buildings in town.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 12 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 2.4 Nature of the Proposed Development o . za 25 za 05 . . N

% 2 1 8 0 6 5 7 0 o. o. 7

ua 100 c c n 71 x . 0 4 2 0 he

o n. t n 2 9 8 7 a to ng . NA

i B e q t t S P u MV ( eke eke rg ss 3 8 2

nn r r e c o NY d j 4 5 9 ) ) v . e d PO n

a . h K 8394 8682 b l REA . . @ 7076 ha ) it a . 01 o s u e d l e d ( P 3 1 AN L A eet, ww ke 5 e He w p v s 0 4 4 h c e s i r

0 8 6 ( i p e t s r w o h i v r s l t a ro n r

S P U f r b e mv a nd o

D: B4787 - d e d o s 7 u ’ s TY d

S i tte e 1 E PL e n t ) 129 r il: a p p n v 130 p Q ro

d e e a d a i s 2015 a t n d i

T ma CK 3 L )( m w a 1915 AY N im T

III r

b - l

2 x . a S P e (

] 2 1 u m o e r he c HE \ U s

7 re B

r n

b e e 15 ipa o s C a G e i

t w 2018 p p r c IO 4784 p U h i / d Ap p a Zo a

II e d

e n s s _____

A ne n e c RS NNE A L P E B S G N WI E G OM & S D A h ST t s\

t k a l i S

e AN un e p H , r a ti a G ER e a

/ n LL r F 2258 a o ng s 21 un n s s 2019 i

M L h t

i s s c V y t I RS 60

G E n n XXXX

n Zo a 35 S ____ d e s e n

U r NN M o P T s r

s y ON

n b e A sio d MV

t f

L e e ANA 01 1915SB4787L01 e t \ f r P o si 20 w ER :

L i fed ifie

____ R o S L e n e p r z 28 P a o t t

[ eken t 2 r a A M r

p a c e e l n T

c t , r r n

- im a l e N

T: e e n 2015 S De n L r a e y y. e y Ph d t b V / c BDIVI H c

s n ME S e

e m a B

a m

e . n n f n v

y l p G ON r d a u PA m o R e p e G: o o I

u U f f l r

ud a nd ke V ne r ATE: c 1206 RI i n t im s e b

7472 e G e O i N l i e l N s s ipa e r

x D: Y f

NO: v I . v E r n S la Pr r ICI e D r

ms c e a & P i e r

e na P a N i e he r N h

N . N De T S O e tt

s TAL i P t s

Fo M

ri un e i M

. . . . . AN AN U O l C h RBA

ATE: EGEND i RAWN: s 4

3 5 fi 2 z 1 L L U n n T O w Z L F i M i _____ It NO TES T P STORE D P D M 25m rf e y e rov r

r ha P o / t e

1652 u s p

3m e 6 50% l

, g NE

22 A XXX n

4 e q

le 16 X si 270 R L

c a

S 0 E

I c i h

1623 J

T a p

G r

s) E

o o m R r

t: R

i a d

e d E

o 75

. r un T o o m

b 20

l r

r r S c e e e d s: ): p p

21 25 b

. 25m (e x

s s 50 . 1

s s 0

2 2593

r 2 t y ha i y

e 50 /

e te r . a

a 1 t:

2 p %) un b n m

b 75

s s

r 1 pa c e : e 35u

60 2 y 5

e , S m) 25 m) g ) x , a m a ra 0

3 2592 p m²

2 n

( a b P : , i e d

re 25

19 : . n s s t 8 v

g 2 5 s i t

m w 2 l i , ui n ( 362 n x 75 i

o .

0 22

tdoor 0 : e

isio

2 75 a ll v . ne

: 50

i m²

un i . u 2 e

0 2 e d

a L

L o o ms) m e 22 m 8 t

2 r ( r g o O 2591 g m² (

g g req a a n y 26 t 8

i op r 23 p r t n l e d e d ssis ll i h C t e m² si 40

1 b A a te l e kin d v i

l ig 2 v 2 i m² 21 iv o w a ssis a r e r 0 r 8x 25 32 P D He A ( De n 5 P C Bu ( F D m²

17 m²

22 408 309 m²

16 23 m² 408

327

25 . 21 m²

25 .

15 21 75 .

408 2 50 .

m² 2 2

2 36

m²

21 75

. 50

288 . m² 24 20

2 75 . 2

14 50

. 286

21 20 408

.25

50 20 50

m² 22

692 m² 2

25 . 21 m²

/ 13 48

m²

408

692 235 75

. 2

367 2

R 312 m²

.50 1

2 49 m²

.50 12 m² 1 291

2 m²

35 408 47 m² 229

235 m² 26 m²

21.50 38 11 325 m² 312 310

.75 1 50

2 m²

75 .

m² m² 2

m²

281 2

34 46 10 230 235 214 m² 22 348

m²

64 m²

27 .

2 39 311 2 m² m²

326 m²

22 312 51 m² 22 45 25 m² .

348 2 62

281 2 215 1.75 33 2 235

21.25 235

.50 .50 m² 21

1 m²

2 m² m² 80 8

m² 50

. m²

1 28 232

2 40 44 401

50 m² .312 326

21 m² m² 312

234 61 52 32 m²

75 235

. m² 281 235 81

2 7 m² 264

m² 408 79

75 .

43 m² 22 214 m² m²

. m²

60 m² 235 1

66 21.25

2 m² 29 m² 41

22 31

214 6 312 53 m² 350 307

75 230

21. 23 281 82

75 m² 408 1.

2 m²

78 274 m² 96

m² 50

0 214

59 2 42 330 m²

5 214 23 232 m² m²

m²

408

m² 67 m²

54 m² 77

97 312 m² 381

293

75 . 22 214

m² 1 m² 269

m²

2 75 116 . m²

274 21

4 95 58

152 50

75 115

. 50

25 339 20

. m² 235

20 1 408

161 2 21 m²

21 117 m² m²

m² 144

m² 55 114

50 m² 214 68 . m²

m²

161 22

22 3 107 165 25 98 . 312 m² 84 2 m² 118

204 2 277 94 408 57 134 274 m² m² 339

235

m² m²

113 119 75 m² 108 157

134 m² 2 214

271 m² m² m²

m²

22 106

75 75

409

. 69

99 1 50 . 0

1 214 2 120 85

m²

m² 75 25 . . 1 1 m² 2 2 312

m² 148 277 121 56 274 1 93 57 m²

m² m² 232

74 339 20.50 315 122 m² b

59 112 m² 22 m² 214

105 177 123 59 109 214 m² m²

m² 319

124 m² 59 86 22

100 m²

70 125 m² m² 274 276

59 25

. 50 . m² m² m² 307 73 92

22 2 126 59 111 104 235 339

m²

75 .

2 188 235

127 2 59 m²

m²

128 .

20 87

110 25 .

m² 101 21 2

m² 310 2

274 m² 277

72 129 91 m²

25 . 235 3977 50 339 103

. 21 22 1 .75 2 1 657 2 229 .25 .25

2 /

2 m²

25 . 2 2 m² E 88

1500 m² 02 8

R 1 273 m² N 71

: 26 90 209 1 339

. Figure 6: The Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development layout plan

25 .

22 22

25 . L 22 m²

298

. 2 2

. 25

CA .

2 22

22 2 25 .25 S

. m² 22 22

25 130

22. .25 22

3977 50 . 22

2266

50 .

a 2

75 .

22.75 22

25 . 3 2

50 . 3

2 .75

75 . 24 23 3 2

25 25

24 4 50 .

2 4

75 4

. 2

2 75

4 25 . 2 . 50 4 . 24 2 4 75 50. 25 2 4785 . 25 502424 78M .

.25 .75 . 3 25

2 24

. 7 3 2 3

2267

24 D 2

A SIGN

. SIGNSIGN 4 2 50

. 2

2 O

75 .

R 24 SIGN IN

75 A SIGN 24.

25 M 25 .

25 2

5. .75 2 5

26 2 75 . 25 5.505 . 5075

22 6 ..

2 66

2 50

2 27 .

2 27

50 . 75 . 5 50 26 6 . 2 25 2 6 . 2 6 2

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 13 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Method

3 Method

3.1 Site survey

The Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook (Pool-Stanvliet et al., 2017) was used as guideline in preparing this report. Prior to the ﬁeld survey, I studied recent (2019) Google EarthTM satelite images of the proposed development footprint, its host property and the surrounding area (study area). Homogenous vegetation units within the study site were delineated based on patterns observed from these satellite images.

I conducted the field survey on 24 July 2019. Each of the pre-identified homogenous vegetation units were surveyed in terms of species composition. The survey involved randomly transversing each of the identified vegetation units and recording species composition up to a point where no more new species were found. No formal transects were surveyed, and only visual estimates of species abundances were recorded. Based on the species composition and abundance, with surrounding landscape factors taken into account, adjustments were made to the pre-groundtruthed delineation as required.

Extensive notes on veld condition and disturbance factors such as recent or previous fires, cultivation/harvesting practices, artificial channels, dams or ditches, evidence of herbivory and its severity, evidence of anthropogenic harvesting of plant material were made for each of the homogenous vegetation units identified. Rockiness, soil characteristics and underlying geology was noted and various photographs were taken. A list of all plant species encountered with their conservation status, according to the habitat in which they were recorded was compiled.

The ﬁeld guides by Manning (2018), Moriarty and Snijman (1997), Dorrat-Haaksma (2012), Smith et al. (1998), Manning et al. (2010), Manning et al. (2002) Van Oudtshoorn (1992), Van Wyk (2013) and Bromilow et al. (2003) were used to identify species encountered.Recent updates to the local state of biodiversity report for the Western Cape (Pool-Stanvliet et al., 2017), and the updated national vegetation map (Mucina et al., 2018).

A list of red list category species and other species of conservation concern were recorded for the Quarter Degree Square (QDS:2527DD) was obtained from SANBI’s older records, in addition to records from the new POSA website. An extensive targeted search of the site for the presence of potential red list category species was conducted. The positions of all relevant plants were marked with GPS coordinates.

3.2 Impact assessment

The Impact Assessment (IA) was performed according to the CSIR’s IA methodology (DEAT, 2002), which takes into account:

1. Impact nature (direct, indirect and cumulative);

2. Impact status (positive, negative or neutral);

3. Impact spatial extent (Table 2);

4. Impact duration (Table 3)

5. Potential impact intensity (Table 4)

6. Impact reversibility (high, moderate, low or irreversible);

7. Irreplaceability of the impacted resource (high, moderate, low or replaceable);

8. Impact probability (Table 5);

9. Conﬁdence in the ratings (high, moderate or low);

Overall impact signiﬁcance (IS, Table 6) is calculated as:

IS = IM × IP

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 14 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 3.2 Impact assessment

where IM and IP are Impact magnitude and Impact probability respectively.

Impact magnitude (IM ) is calculated as:

IM = II + ID + IE where II is impact intensity, ID is impact duration, and IE is impact extent.

Table 2: A categorisation of the extent of an impact

Extent.Description Score

Site speciﬁc 1 Local (< 2 km from site) 2 Regional (within 30 km of site) 3 National 4 Global 5

Table 3: A categorisation of the duration of an envisaged impact

Duration Score

Temporary ( < 2 yrs) or duration of construction period. This impact is reversible 1 Short term (2-5 yrs). Impact is reversible 2 Medium term (5-15 yrs) The impact is reversible with appropriate mitigation and management 3 Long term (> 15 yrs but where the impact will cease with the operational life of the activity). 4 The impact is reversible with the implementation of appropriate mitigation and management action Permanent (i.e. mitigation will not occur in such a way or in such a timespan that the impact 5 can be considered transient). The impact is irreversible

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 15 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 3.2 Impact assessment

Table 4: A categorisation of the intensity of an envisaged impact

Description Eﬀect Rating Score

Potential to severely impact human health, or lead to loss of species Negative Fatal ﬂaw 16 Potential to reduce fauna/ﬂorapopulation or to lead to severe Negative High 8 reduction/alteration of natural process, loss of livelihoods, quality of life and economic loss Potential to reduce environmental quality - air, soil, water. Negative Medium 4 Potential loss of habitat, loss of heritage, reduced amenity Nuisance Negative Medium-Low 2 Negative change - no other consequence. Negative Low 1 Potential net improvement in human welfare Positive High 8 Potential to improve environmental quality - air, soil, water, Positive Medium 4 improved livelihoods Potential to lead to economic development Positive Medium-Low 2 Potential positive change - with no other consequence Positive Low 1

Table 5: A categorisation of the probability of an envisaged impact

Probability Score

Improbably (little to no chance of occurring) 0.10 Low probability (10-25% chance of occurring) 0.25 Probable (25-50% chance of occurring) 0.50 Highly probable (50-90% chance of occurring) 0.75 Deﬁnite (> 90% chance of occurring) 1.00

Table 6: Categories of overall signiﬁcance of an envisaged impact

Score Rating Description

18-26 Fatally flawed The project cannot be authorised unless major changes to the design are carried out to reduce the significance rating 10-17 High The impacts will result in major alteration to the environment even with the implementation of the appropriate mitigation measures and will have an influence on decision-making 5-9 Medium The impact will result in moderate alteration of the environment and can be reduced or avoided by implementing the appropriate mitigation measures, and will only have an impact on decision-making if not mitigated <5 Low The impact may result in minor alterations of the environment andf can be easily avoided by implementing appropriate mitigation measures, and will not have an influence on decision-making

Cumulative Impact Assessment Potential impacts of the development were cumulatively assessed using the guidelines provided by (DEAT, 2004; Kotze, 2001). DEAT (2004) provides a list of generic questions to ask in order to assess a potential cumulative impact on a particular study area. These questions are: chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 16 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present

1. Is the proposed action one of several similar past, present or future actions in the same geographic area?

2. Do other activities (whether state or private) in the region have environmental eﬀects similar to those of the proposed action?

3. Will the proposed action (in combination with other planned activities) aﬀect any natural resources, cultural resources, socio or economic units, or ecosystems of local, regional or national concern?

4. Have any recent environmental studies of similar actions identified important adverse or beneficial cumulative effects issues?

5. Has the impact been historically signiﬁcant, such that the importance of the resource is deﬁned by past loss, gain or investments to restore resources?

6. Does the proposed action involve any of the following?

• Long range transport of air pollution;

• Air emissions resulting in the degradation of regional air quality;

• Loading large water bodies with discharges of sediment, thermal or toxic pollutants;

• Contamination of ground water supplies;

• Changes in hydrological regimes of major rivers and estuaries;

• Long-term disposal of hazardous wastes;

• Mobilisation of persistent bioaccumulated substances through the food chain;

• Decreases in quantity and quality of soils;

• Loss of natural habitats or historic character through residential, commercial and industrial development;

• Social, economic or cultural eﬀects on marginalised communities resulting from ongoing development; and

• Loss of biological diversity.

4 Results

4.1 Vegetation Communities present

A total of two vegetation communities were delineated on the study area. Table 7 provides approximate area calculations of each of the identiﬁed vegetation units delineated with their status and sensitivity ratings, and Figure 7 shows their location and extent on the vegetation unit map.

Table 7: Area (m2) estimates of the two vegetation units identiﬁed on the study site

Vegetation Unit Status Sensitivity Area

Mowed Strandveld Transformed Least sensitive 37083.86 Om - Ti Strandveld Intact Least sensitive 16333.40

Note: Transformed = Original ecological functions lost, potentially recoverable by intensive restoration action; Intact = Mostly natural vegetation and signiﬁcant ecological function retained

A short description of each follows.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 17 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present

4.1.1 Brachylaena serrata - Raphanus raphanistrum Mowed Strandveld

The Brachylaena serrata - Raphanus raphanistrum Mowed Strandveld community is around 3.71 ha in size. It is regularly mowed, presumably by the municipality and consequently consists of a very low herbaceous layer, with a few bush-clumps distributed across the area. It is dominated by Red Signal Grass Brachiara serrata and Wild Raddish (Raphanus raphanistrum), with a range of species able to persist under regular mowing pressure. Figure 10 contains some photographs taken of this community and Table 8 list the plant species and their conservation status encountered here.

4.1.2 Osteospermun moniliferum - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld

This section refers to the small area identiﬁed on Figure 7 inside the proposed development property and extends to the north onto the adjacent property. The vegetation is dominated by Bietou (Osteospermum (= Chrysanthemum) moniliferum) and Albertinia Thatching Grass (Thamnochortus insignis, ’Dekriet’ in Afrikaans), and slighty invaded by Prickly Pear (Opuntia ﬁcus-indica).

The species diversity is relatively poor, and if left untouched may be conducive to the development of more woody thicket elements. Figure 11

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 18 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present --- Erf 657, Stilbaai Mowed strandVeld Osteospermum monilifera - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld Legend Vegetation Units Erf 657, Stilbaai Figure 7: A map of the Vegetation Units identiﬁed on Erf 657, the proposed development site.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 19 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present

Figure 8: Four photographs of the Mowed Strandveld community.

Table 8: List of plants encountered in the Mowed Strandveld vegetation unit.

Family Species Names Status

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 20 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present

Table 8: List of plants encountered in the Mowed Strandveld vegetation unit. (continued)

Family Species Names Status

POACEAE Cynodon dactylon Kweekgras LC POACEAE Festuca scabra Munniksgras LC POACEAE Lolium perenne Perennial Rye-grass N POACEAE Pentameris pallida Cape Ricegrass LC RESTIONACEAE Restio cf. vimineus Biesie LC RESTIONACEAE Thamnochortus insignis Dekriet LC SAPOTACEAE Sideroxylon inerme Milkwood LC SCROPHULARIACEAE Manulea cf. cheiranthus Vingertjies LC SCROPHULARIACEAE Nemesia aﬃnis Leeubekkie LC SCROPHULARIACEAE Nemesia bicornis Leeubekkie LC SCROPHULARIACEAE Nemesia cf. versicolor Leeubekkie LC

Note: Status: LC = Least Concern; E = Exotic; N = Naturalised; 1b = Invasive category 1b (NEMBA)

20 22

10 count 8 5 4 0 1 2 2 Climber Geophyte Graminoid Herb Shrub Tree Habit

Figure 9: A Species count within the Mowed Strandveld Vegetation Unit by habit.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 21 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present

(a) Freesia leichtinii ssp. alba (b) Dimorphotheca pluvialis (c) Raphanus raphanistrum

(d) Brunsvigia orientalis (e) Oxalis pes-caprae (f) Babiana cf. ambigua

(g) Dorotheanthus bellidiformis (h) Arctotis hirsuta

Figure 10: Species found within the Mowed Strandveld community.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 22 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present

Table 9: List of plants encountered in the Osteospermum moniliferum - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld vegetation unit.

Family Species Names Status

AIZOACEAE Carpobrotus edulis Sour fig LC AIZOACEAE Conicosia pugioniformis ssp. muiri Varkslaai LC AIZOACEAE Disphyma crassifolium Purple dewplant LC AIZOACEAE Dorotheanthus bellidiformis Livingstone daisy LC AIZOACEAE Drosanthemum intermedium Dewfig LC AIZOACEAE Mesembryanthemum aitonis Angled Iceplant LC AIZOACEAE Tetragonia fruticosa Kinkelbossie LC AMARANTHACEAE Atriplex vestita var. appendiculata Brakbos LC AMARYLLIDACEAE Brunsvigia orientalis Chandelier/Candelabra Lily LC ANACARDIACEAE Searsia glauca Blue kunibush LC ANACARDIACEAE Searsia laevigata Dune taaibos LC APOCYNACEAE Cynanchum africanum Bokhoring LC ASPARAGACEAE Asparagus rubicundus Red-stemmed Asparagus LC ASPARAGACEAE Asparagus suavolens Cat’s tail Asparagus LC ASPHODELACEAE Trachyandra ciliata Veldkool LC ASTERACEAE Arctotis hirsuta Gousblom LC ASTERACEAE Dimorphotheca pluvialis Reenblommetjie LC ASTERACEAE Osteospermum moniliferum Bietou LC ASTERACEAE Senecio burchelli Geelgifbossie LC ASTEREAE Metalasia densa Coast Metalasia, White bristle bush LC CACTACEAE Opuntia ficus-indica Turksvy, Prickly Pear 1b CELASTRACEAE Cassine peragua Cape saffron LC EBENACEAE Diospyros dichrophylla Common Star-apple LC FABACEAE Acacia saligna Port Jackson Willow 1b GERANIACEAE Pelargonium grossularioides Gooseberry-leaved Geranium LC IRIDACEAE Babiana cf. ambigua Bobbejaantjie LC IRIDACEAE Freesia leichtinii ssp. alba White Freesia LC IRIDACEAE Romulea rosea var. rosea Froetang LC MYRICACEAE Myrica cordifolia Waxberry LC OROBANCHACEAE Hyobanche sanguinea Scarlet Broomrape, Katnaels, Wolwekos LC OXALIDACEAE Oxalis pes-caprae Geelsuring/Bermuda buttercup E OXALIDACEAE Oxalis polyphylla Geeloogsuring LC POACEAE Brachiaria serrata Velvet Signal Grass LC POACEAE Bromus diandrus Rip-gut Brome N POACEAE Cynodon dactylon Kweekgras LC POACEAE Festuca scabra Munniksgras LC POACEAE Panicum deustum Broad-leaved Panicum LC POACEAE Pentameris pallida Cape Ricegrass LC POACEAE Sporobolus africanus Rat-tail dropseed LC RESTIONACEAE Hypodiscus sp. Pineapple reed LC RESTIONACEAE Restio cf. vimineus Biesie LC RESTIONACEAE Thamnochortus insignis Dekriet LC SALVADORACEAE Azima tetracantha Bee-sting bush LC SAPOTACEAE Sideroxylon inerme Milkwood LC SCROPHULARIACEAE Nemesia affinis Leeubekkie LC SCROPHULARIACEAE Nemesia bicornis Leeubekkie LC SCROPHULARIACEAE Nemesia cf. versicolor Leeubekkie LC SOLANACEAE Solanum sodomaeodes Apple of Sodom LC ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Zygophyllum morgsana Slaaibos LC

Note: Status: LC = Least Concern; E = Exotic; N = Naturalised; 1b = Invasive category 1b (NEMBA)

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 23 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present

Figure 11: Osteospermun moniliferum - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld .

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 24 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.1 Vegetation Communities present

(a) Sideroxylon inerme subsp. inerme0. (b) Hyobanche sanguinea

(f) Trachyandra ciliata (g) Nemesia aﬃnis (h) Diospyros dichrophylla

Figure 12: Plant species found within the Osteospermum monilifera - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld community.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 25 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.4 Alien and Declared Invader Plants

4.2 Endangered and Important species

Apart from six larger Milkwood (Sideroxylon inerme subsp. inerme) individuals, which is a protected species according to the National Forest Act, 1998 (Act No. 84 of 1998), no other species populations of conservation concern were found on the site. Figure 14 shows the location of each of these individuals. Dekriet (Thamnochortus insignis) is an important species used in thatching and grass weaving. Some of the plants in the unmowed strandveld community on the study site was clearly harvested likely for this purpose.

4.3 Ecosystem sensitivity

The bulk of the property (circa 69%) is being mowed regularly and thus mostly transformed. The intact community is relatively species-poor. The milkwood clumps scattered across the property provides some refuge for species like Cassine peragua that germinate and grow under the canopy shade. On a larger scale, the variant of Hartenbos strandveld found on the study site is representative of the more open dune crests and slopes, where woody thicket clumps are rare. Apart from the horticultural value of some of the bulbous plants found, only one economically important species, namely the Albertinia Thatching Reed (Thamnochortus insignis) is found here and it is evident that it is being harvested on site at a small scale (see Figure 15).

4.4 Alien and Declared Invader Plants

A number of plants considered exotic or naturalised and two declared invader plants were found on the study site. Table 10 provides a list of these among other exotic and naturalised species recorded on Erf 657, Stilbaai.

Table 10: Alien plants recorded on the study area

Family Species Names Status Habit

ASTERACEAE Sonchus oleraceus Common Sowthistle N Herb BRASSICACEAE Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd’s purse E Herb BRASSICACEAE Capsella bursa-pastoris sheperd’s purse / herderstassie N Herb BRASSICACEAE Raphanus raphanistrum Wild radish/ramenas E Herb CACTACEAE Opuntia ﬁcus-indica Turksvy, Prickly Pear 1b Shrub FABACEAE Acacia saligna Port Jackson Willow 1b Tree FABACEAE Medicago polymorpha bur clover, klitsklawer N Herb OXALIDACEAE Oxalis pes-caprae Geelsuring/Bermuda buttercup E Herb POACEAE Bromus diandrus Rip-gut Brome N Graminoid POACEAE Lolium perenne Perennial Rye-grass N Graminoid

Note: Status: E = Exotic; N = Naturalised; 1b = Invasive category (NEMBA).

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 26 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.4 Alien and Declared Invader Plants

18 15

10 10 11 count

5 4 3 0 1 1 1 Climber Dwarf shrub Geophyte Graminoid Herb Parasite Shrub Tree Habit

Figure 13: A Species count within the Osteospermum monilifera - Thamnochortus insignis Strandveld Vegetation Unit by habit.

Erf 657, Stilbaai --- Vegetation Constraints

Legend Milkwood trees 21.410536, -34.374689 21.409803, -34.375711 21.409819, -34.375712 21.410922, -34.373803 21.410536, -34.374689 21.410378, -34.374451

Figure 14: Constraints map: Milkwood trees (Sideroxylon inerme) on the Proposed Stilbaai Retirement Village Development site.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 27 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.4 Alien and Declared Invader Plants

Figure 15: Thamnochortus insignis harvested on study site.

(a) Prickly Pear (Opuntia ﬁcus-indica) (b) Acacia saligna (Port Jackson Willow)

Figure 16: NEMBA categorised and listed Alien Invasive Plants present on the study site

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 28 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 4.5 Impact Assessment

4.5 Impact Assessment

The following potential impacts on plant biodiversity and ecosystem services on the study site have been identiﬁed should the proposed development take place:

1. the destruction of individual plants of conservation concern (SOCC) status (here it is only six individuals of the White Milkwood (Sideroxylon inerme subsp. inerme), and

2. the destruction of local habitat for valuable species and those of conservation concern.

3. the loss of ecosystem services locally, especially that associated with the harvesting of the abundant Albertinia Thatching Reed (Thamnochortus insignis) in the smaller intact part of the study area.

4. compromising a potential ecological corridor that links the Goukou river with the natural areas to the southwest of the town of Stillbay.

As a mitigation measure in terms of managing the species of conservation concern, it is recommended that the Milkwood trees be kept and incorporated into the building plans of the proposed retirement village development. An alternative is to plant at least six saplings of Milkwood in the gardens of the proposed development after construction has been completed. Without such mitigation the overall envisaged impact on biodiversity remains low and restricted to a local scale.

Table 11 show an assessment of the risk associated with the planned development on Erf 657, Stilbaai and Table 12 show the signiﬁcance of identiﬁed impacts after possible mitigation factors. Note that these risks apply in the construction and established phases of the project.

Table 11: Impact assessment signiﬁcance without mitigation

Impact Extent Duration Intensity Probability Score Signiﬁcance

Destruction of individual plants of 1 4 3 1.0 8.0 Medium conservation concern (SOCC) Destruction of local habitat for species of 1 3 2 0.8 4.8 Low conservation concern. Loss of ecosystem services 1 1 2 1.0 4.0 Low Compromising a potential ecological corridor 1 4 2 0.4 2.8 Low

Table 12: Post-mitigation impact assessment signiﬁcance

Impact Mitigation Extent Duration Intensity Probability Score Signiﬁcance

Destruction of Plan development 1 1 1 0.1 0.3 Low individual plants of around existing trees, conservation concern or plant new (SOCC) Milkwood seedlings post-construction Destruction of local None 1 3 2 0.8 4.8 Low habitat for valuable species and those of conservation concern. Loss of ecosystem None 1 2 1 1.0 4.0 Low services Compromising a None 1 4 2 0.4 2.8 Low potential ecological corridor

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 29 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Discussion

Cumulative Impact Assessment The development is one of a number retirement villages in the town of Stilbaai. The economy of Stilbaai depends mostly on tourism, with a large economic injection over the school holidays, but also beneﬁts from the relatively large component of retired people settled there. The town continues to be an important destination for retired people. The proposed development caters for that need. Such intensive housing developments such as retirement villages have a negative impact on biodiversity, particularly on vulnerable vegetation types close to the ocean.

Housing developments and urban expansion is a major threat to biodiversity and natural habitat - speciﬁcally around coastal towns in the Western Cape. The Hartenbos Dune Thicket vegetation type has been impacted by this type of development, but currently it is still regarded as of Least Concern (Pool-Stanvliet et al., 2017). The proposed development is situated near the centre of town, on a property that has 69% of its natural vegetation area transformed by regular mowing. The remaining 31% of intact vegetation is relatively species-poor and thus the cumulative eﬀect this development will have on the overall destruction of habitat and loss of biodiversity of Hartenbos Dune Thicket is considered low.

5 Discussion

5.1 Limitations to this study

The study was based on a single site visit on the 24th of July 2019 that took place over 4 hours. It is unlikely that some important plant species were overlooked during the ﬁeld visit. Around 69% of the proposed development area is regularly mowed and thus transformed. It is possible that some bulb species not visible during this site visit may have survived the repeated mowing, but unlikely. Of the remaining 31% of intact natural vegetation likewise some bulb species may have remained undetected. Since fynbos geophytes typically retain their underground storage reserves by limiting aboveground growth during summer months, at least the leaves of most of the geophytes present must have emerged during the time the site visit was conducted. However, the intact vegetation is densely covered with two dominant species with relatively large growth forms, and thus it is unlikely that other additional bulb species is present than the relatively few individuals found here.

5.2 Impact assessment

Overall the impacts on the ecology and more speciﬁcally the vegetation of the study area is considered relatively low, despite the medium impact rating obtained for one identiﬁed impacts, namely:

• Destruction of individual plant species of conservation concern (SOCC)

This is mainly due to the likely destruction of six larger (canopy diameter of a minimum of 2m) specimens of the White Milkwood (Siderocylon inerme subsp. inerme, which is protected by the National Forest Act, 1998 (Act No. 84 of 1998), as envisaged by the proposed development. The other impacts identiﬁed are all ranked as low potential impacts according to the method used here.

The proposed retirement village would take up all of the study area, and thus the relatively intact area on circa 31% of the study area, (i.e. 1.6 ha of functional Hartenbos strandveld habitat) would be lost for the long term. With the mitigation measure proposed, i.e. through the incorporation of the milkwood trees within the planning design or the planting of at least six Milkwood saplings, the ﬁrst of these impacts can be successfully mitigated from a medium envisaged impact to a low impact. Where the location of the standing milkwood trees are not conducive to eﬃcient development plans, other options such as the replacement of the number of trees destroyed with new milkwood seedlings on more appropriate locations on the development as part of the landscaping phase may be acceptable.

Should the full extent of the property be developed as is planned, it would impact only slightly on a probable

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 30 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai 5.3 Recommendations ecological corridor area that extends from the Goukou river and marginally link the areas of natural vegetation to the southwest of the town of Still bay. This potential corridor is already compromised by the municipal buildings to the southwest of the study area and the traﬃc-laden road that runs adjacent to these municipal grounds and through this potential corridor.

The proposed development would also likely impact on the ecosystem services the relatively intact natural vegetation still remaining on approximately 31% of the study area provide. This small area is occassionally used as a low-impact harvesting site for Albertinia Thatching Grass (Thamnochortus insignis). Since the area to the northeast of the study area is still more than 9 hectares of intact undeveloped strandveld, it is likely that this area or other natural areas outside of town will still provide this service, although the harvesting intensity is likely to be higher in these alternative harvesting areas.

The larger part 69% of the study area is already transformed by regular mowing that maintains a highly disturbed form of strandveld which allows some establishment of low-growing herbs, graminoids, geophytes and the occasional dwarf-shrub, and a host of alien plants. Despite this, some attractive plants of horticultural value are able to persist as the mowed strandveld simulates some aspects of an open piece of strandveld after ﬁre. These species include Freesia leichtinii subsp. alba, Brunsvigia orientalis and Babiana ambigua. It would be conscientuous of the developer and residents to cultivate these species in the gardens planned for the proposed development. The study area is a habitat for very attractive native plants, such as Freesia leichtinii subsp. alba, Dorotheanthus bellidiformis, Nemesia aﬃnis, Brunsvigia orientalis and Babiana ambigua.

Cumulative Impact Assessment The proposed housing development is one of a number of such developments already established in the town of Stilbaai, and will likely increase in the coming years due to the towns’ popularity as a retirement destination. This particular site is in the middle of town and adjacent to the municipal buildings. A similar development has already been established adjacent to this property. Although the mowed portion of the land has some potential for restoration, with the existing busy roads and the requirement of the municipality to mow the study area, likely as a ﬁre-control measure, it is unlikely to have a persisitent corridor and biodiversity function in the long run without active rehabilitation. The cumulative impacts of biodiversity loss and loss of suitable habitat by the proposed development on the larger study area, and the town of Stilbaai is considered low.

5.3 Recommendations

It is recommended that the proposed development be approved. This recommendation is founded on the relatively low impact the proposed development is envisaged to exert on intact plant biodiversity (approximately 31%) still remaining on the study area. It is further recommended that all NEMBA categorized alien invasive plants be controlled during the construction and post-construction phases. Either existing mature milkwood trees will need to be incorporated into the development plan or at least six milkwood saplings need to be planted post-construction. Post-construction landscaping should preferably incorporate plant species from the site into the gardens if at all possible. Should any of the identiﬁed protected plants on the property be destroyed or pruned, it must be done only after obtaining a premit from the National Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries.

6 Conclusion

The study area, comprising Erf 657, Stilbaai, as delineated in this report, does not fall within any of the critical biodiversity areas (CBAs) as identiﬁed by national, provincial and municipal spatial biodiversity plans. In this context it is thus considered of least concern for conservation purposes although all areas with natural vegetation and those likely to be restored relatively successfully should be valued highly. An extensive search for potential red data species were conducted and none were found to occur on the study area. There are however six large

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 31 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai References specimens of the White Milkwood (Sideroxylon inerme subsp. inerme ) present. This species is protected in terms of the National Forest Act, 1998 (Act No. 84 of 1998). The overall impacts of the development is considered low - medium. The potential medium impact is primarily related to the presence of these protected individuals. Overall, the proposed development impact is considered low if the mitigation recommendations are adhered to, if not it is considered medium-low. This recommended mitigation strategy relates to the destruction of milkwood trees. It would entail either the incorporation of the existing plants into the development design, or plant new Milkwood seedlings for each of the plants to be destroyed after construction is completed. Permits from the National Department of Environmental Aﬀairs, Forestry and Fisheries are required before cutting or pruning these individual trees. In the light of these overall low envidaged impacts, it is recommended that the development be approved. It is further recommended that some of the plant species present on site be incorporated into the landscaping or garden design of the development after construction.

References

Bromilow, C. et al. (2003). Problem Plants of South Africa. Briza Publications. Brownlie, S., C. De Villiers, A. Driver, N. Job, A. Von Hase, and K. Maze (2005). “Systematic Conservation Planning in the Cape Floristic Region and Succulent Karoo, South Africa: enabling sound spatial planning and improved environmental assessment”. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 7.02, pp. 201–228. DEAT (2002). Impact significance. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. — (2004). Cumulative Effects Assessment. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. Dorrat-Haaksma, E. (2012). Restios of the fynbos. Penguin Random House South Africa. Kotze, I. (2001). “Integrating the assessment of cumulative effects into environmental impact assessment and strategic environmental assessment in South Africa”. Environmental Assessment Yearbook. Manning, J. (2018). Field guide to fynbos. Penguin Random House South Africa. Manning, J., P. Goldblatt, D. Snijman, et al. (2002). The color encyclopedia of Cape bulbs. Timber Press. Manning, J. C., P. Goldblatt, G. Duncan, F. Forest, R. Kaiser, I. Tatarenko, et al. (2010). Botany and horticulture of the genus Freesia (Iridaceae). South African National Biodiversity Institute. Moriarty, A. and D. Snijman (1997). Outeniqua, Tsitsikamma & Eastern Little Karoo. Botanical Society of South Africa. Mucina, L., M. Rutherford, and L. Powrie, eds. (2018). The Vegetation Map of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. South African National Biodiversity Institute. Mucina, L., M. C. Rutherford, et al. (2006). The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. South African National Biodiversity Institute. Pool-Stanvliet, R., A. Duffell-Canham, G. Pence, and R. Smart (2017). “The Western Cape biodiversity spatial plan handbook”. Stellenbosch: CapeNature. Smith, G. F., P. Burgoyne, P. Chesselet, S. Hammer, H. Hartmann, C. Klak, H. Kurzweil, E. J. Van Jaarsveld, and B.-E. Van Wyk (1998). Mesembs of the world. Briza Pretoria, South Africa. Van Oudtshoorn, F. (1992). Guide to grasses in South Africa. Briza Publications. Van Wyk, B. (2013). Field guide to trees of southern Africa. Penguin Random House South Africa. Villiers, C. de, A. Driver, B. Clark, D. Euston-Brown, L. Day, N. Job, N. Helme, P. Holmes, S. Brownlie, and T. Rebelo (2005). “Ecosystem guidelines for environmental assessment in the Western Cape”. Fynbos Forum. Vlok, J. and D. Euston-Brown (2002). “The patterns within, and the ecological processes that sustain, the subtropical thicket vegetation in the planning domain for the Subtropical Thicket Ecosystem Planning (STEP) project”. TERU report 40, 142pp.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 32 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details

A Author details

Marius van der Vyver holds a PhD in Botany from Nelson Mandela University and has more than 15 years’ experience as an ecologist and botanist. He is registered with the South African Council of Natural Scientiﬁc Professions (SACNASP) as an ecological scientist (reg.no. 118303) and a member of the South African Association of Botanists (SAAB).

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 33 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2018 2019 2019 Ongoing Year tist Role Statistical analyst 2018 Statistical analyst Project Scientist Restoration Ecologist Biodiversity Scien Ecological Scientist 2019 y monitoring data to investigate and promote ecialist Vegetation (botanical) and Statistical analyses of energy usageelectricity of monitoring data Mammal study for assessing the impacts of a low-impact residential development Biodiversity Impact Study including a sp Statistical analyses of energy usageelectricit of Research manager of a restoration team spekboom restoration with funding from the Department of Environmental Aﬀairs, Forestry and Fisheries’ Natural Resoiuorce Management (NRM) division. Guidelines for rehabilitation after construction of a pedestrian footbridge over a wetland, Diepsloot, Gauteng Determine the ecological risk involved with the introduction of aof population Red Deer on Kamala Game Reserve. bique e Port Elizabeth, South Africa Diepsloot, Johannesburg Cradle of Mankind, Muldersdrift, Gauteng Maputo, Mozam Eastern and Western Cap Eastern Cape, South Africa Location Description Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver Management Research Group y usage from data ecialist Vegetation and steel factory, Arcellor Mittal Determining trends in Electricit provided by Maputo Hospital Guidelines: Diepsloot Footbridge construction Biodiversity Impact Assessment with sp Mammal Studies for Calmera Estate, Cradel of Mankind. Associate Researcher – NRM Restoration Rehabilitation Ecological Risk Assessment for the introduction of Red Deer (Cervus elaphus) on Kamala Game Reserve. Name Mittal Energy usage analysis from a Group, t (IDM) y (Pty.) Ltd. IDM, Arcellor Integrated Data Managemen Envirobalance (Pty) Ltd Client Nelson Mandela Universit Kamala Game Reserve BMK consulting engineers Wild Summit

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 34 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2018 2018 2018 2018 Year ecialist, Role Restoration ecologist Ecological Scientist Restoration ecologist, Statistical analyst Botanical sp Statistical analyst Botanical specialist 2018 d) (continue ecology for publication in across Addo Elephant maintenance of an existing the academic journal Bothalia Biomass estimation of aboveground vegetation National Park for calibration with LiDAR and radiometric sensor data Peer-review of a research paperrestoration on Determine the ecological risk involved with the population of Barbary sheep on Kamala Game Reserve. Develop a monitoring system forrehabilitation the and revegetation of ferro-bauxite mines, based on the inputs of various Biodiversity specialists. Botanical input to a post-doc researching phytolith composition in relation to extant vegetation types. t South Surinam, South America Addo Elephan National Park, Eastern Cape. Southern Cape including Garden Route and Little Karoo NA Eastern Cape, Africa Location Description ecology for thicket vegetation in Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver tenance of an existing Peer-review of a research paper on restoration publication in the academic journal Bothalia population of Barbary Sheep on Kamala Game Reserve. Monitoring system for the Revegetation Index – Suralco LCC Mine Closure Project. Biomass estimation of subtropical Addo Elephant National Park for calibration with LiDAR and radiometric sensor data. Vegetation community identiﬁcation and plant species list for phytolith research on speciﬁc extant vegetation types in the Garden Route andKaroo Klein area Ecological Risk Assessment for the main Name Reserve Environmental Centre of Coastal Bothalia (academic journal) Paleosciences, NMU CSIR Advice, Enviro-mining, Suralco LCC Client Wild Summit Group, Kamala Game Resilience African

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 35 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2017 2017 2017 2017 Year tist Role Statistical analyst 2017 Biodiversity scien Wetland specialist 2017 Restoration ecologist Statistical analyst Biodiversity scientist d) (continue ecology for publication in wnship development de to implement the boundary line Specialist assistance to develop allometric models from commercially planted and wild honeybush plants sampled analysis method and quantile regression to various soil datasets Wetland delineation for a proposed Basic Assessment for a housing development the academic Journal of Applied Ecology Develop new and debug existingco R Biodiversity impact screening report for to Peer-review of a research paperrestoration on Biodiversity impact screening report on a closed-down gold mine site. opo NA Cradle of Mankind, Muldersdrift, Gauteng NA Dunnottar, Gauteng Makhado area, Limp NA Location Description ecology for Biomass of Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver proposed township elopment for applying Honeybush tea plants Estate, Cradle of Mankind. Peer-review of a research paper on restoration publication in the academic Journal of Applied Ecology for a proposed township development, Dunottar, Gauteng Biodiversity Screening Report for a development, Tshivhazwaulu Extension 1 estimating Statistical analysis and R code dev boundary line analysis to various soil datasets Name (Pty) Ltd Wetland delineation for Calmera (Pty) Ltd Biodiversity Screening Report (academic journal) Envirobalance Journal of Applied Ecology KDS Consortium (Pty) Ltd C4ES (Pty) Ltd Client Rhodes University Develop allometric models for Envirobalance

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 36 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2016 2014 2013- 2014 2016 2015 Year Role Restoration ecologist Botanical specialist Botanical specialist, Statistical analyst Restoration ecologist Restoration ecologist d) (continue project and establish ecology for publication in Peer-review of a research paper on Peer-review of a research paper on restoration ecology for publication in the academic Journal of AridResearch Land and Management research sites to ascertain the feasibility of diﬀerent clearing protocols and treatments for the restoration of grassland habitat after alien plant clearing by WfW teams. the academic journal Forests, Trees and Livelihoods Develop allometric models by destructively harvesting a number of prominent Invasive Alien Plant Species Monitoring of ongoing forest restoration Peer-review of a research paperrestoration on restoration ecology for publication in the academic journal PeerJ e. NA Port Elizabeth Port St. Johns area, Eastern Cap NA NA Location Description ecology for Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver ane, near Port St. Peer-review of a research paper on restoration ecology for publication in the academic Journal of Arid Land Research and Management biomass estimation of 5 major alien invasive plants in the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan area. Peer-review of a research paper on restoration Restoration of Forest Vegetation in Matiw publication in the academic journal Forests, Trees and Livelihoods Johns, Eastern Cape on restoration ecology for publication in the academic journal PeerJ Name t (academic ods (academic os Irrigation Board Develop allometric models for (academic journal) Peer-review of a research paper Ltd / DEA Journal) (National Resource Management Programmes) journal) Gamto Forests, Trees and Liveliho Sigwela and Associates (Pty) Client Arid Land Research and Managemen PeerJ

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 37 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2010- 2011 2011- 2012 2013 2012 2012 2012 Year tist tist tist Role Environmental scien Restoration ecologist Biodiversity scien Biodiversity scientist Biodiversity scien Biodiversity scientist d) (continue ality monitoring instruments and ecialist study for a proposed landfill site Experiment with planting nursery-grown propagules in spekboom restoration stands of diffent ages. Analysis and reporting on the ecological and economic implications of results. Publish results inApplied Journal Vegetation of Science. Biodiversity (Flora and Fauna) impact sp Procure, install maintain and manage air qu weather stations and analyse data Botanical and Fauna specialist study Biodiversity (Flora and Fauna) impact specialist study of a proposedEnergy Wind Project Biodiversity (Flora and Fauna) screening study for a proposedsite landfill e e Krompoort, Rhinosterhoek Eastern Cape Wesley, Eastern Cape Badplaas, Mpumulanga Kuruman, Northern Cape East London, Eastern Cap Swartwater, Northern Cap Location Description Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver ort Harbour proposed Albert Luthuli proposed Swartwater Active restoration of woody canopy dominants in degraded south african semi-arid thicket is neither ecologically nor economically feasible Ecological Impact Assessment for the proposed Wesley Wind Energy Facility, Eastern Cape Ecological Impact Assessment for the (Badplaas) Landfill Site Kuruman Housing Development and Wastewater Treatment Works Air Quality monitoring at East London P Ecological Impact Assessment for the Solar Energy Facility, Northern Cape Name (Pty) (Pty) Ltd Ecological Screening Report – h Group NMU Restoration Researc USK Consulting (Pty) Ltd Ltd Envirobalance (Pty) Ltd Client USK Consulting (Pty) Ltd USK Consulting Envirobalance

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 38 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2011- 2017 2011- 2012 2010- 2011 2011- 2017 Year analyst Role Restoration ecologist, Statistical Restoration ecologist Environmental scientist Restoration ecologist, Statistical analyst d) (continue t factors affecting elowground carbon pools in Assessment of local environmental and managemen spekbooom restoration efficacy on 275 experimental restoration plots on a biome-wide scale (Thicket-wide Plot Experiment) Assessment of various propagule treatments and planting protocols affecting spekbooom restoration efficacy on 275 experimental restoration plots on a biome-wide(Thicket-wide scale Plot Experiment) Survey plant biodiversity and above and b different stands ranging from 0-50 years under spekboom restoration treatment and intact stands, and compare results to gauge restoration success in terms of biodiversity. Publish results in the journal Restoration Ecology. Water sampling from various locations around and inside the municipal landfill site and lab analysis interpretation and reporting against norms and allowable limits. ek, the Various locations within the Southern and Eastern Cape East London, Eastern Cape Various locations within Southern and Eastern Cape Krompoort, Rhinosterho Eastern Cape Location Description Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver t ecological restoration of ersity in restored Plant larger truncheons deeper: more effective spekboom (Portulacaria afra) thicket restoration protocol. subtropical thicket: Portulacaria afra as an ecosystem engineer. Water quality monitoring at Roundhill municipal landfill site in Buffalo City Municipality Habitat and herbivory impact efficien spekboom (Portulacaria afra)-rich subtropical thicket. Spontaneous return of biodiv Name (Pty) Resource t h Group, DEA Programmes), NMU Management Programmes), NMU DEA (National DEA (National Resource Managemen Ltd / BCM Client NMU Restoration Researc USK Consulting

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 39 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2011 2011- 2017 2011- 2014 Year tist and GIS ecialist, Role Biodiversity scien analyst Wetland specialist 2011 Botanical sp Statistical analyst Restoration ecologist d) (continue models for estimating and Flora) component Wetland delineation and map forfor a proposed BA housing development I was responible for the(Fauna biodiversity including extensive mapping and verification/ground-truthing of areas delineated by the Eastern Cape Biodiversity Plan. I managed thecomponent GIS of the project. I developed 40 different species-specific allometric abovegroound biomass of subtropical thicket vegetation Monitor and quantify aboveground carbon of spekboom restoration plots as terrestrial carbon offsets y, the Weltevreden Park, Gauteng Mnquma Municipalit Transkei, Eastern Cape Various locations within Southern and Eastern Cape Kaboega, Klipplaat, Jansenville and Uitenhage areas, Eastern Cape Location Description t (SEA) for Mnquma Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver ol estimations of intact and Delineation Study, Centurion. Strategic Environmental Assessmen Municipality, Eastern Cape. Contrasted aboveground carbon po degraded (Portulacaria afra)-rich subtropical thicket show terrestrial carbon offset potential. Monitoring of aboveground carbon pools on rehabilitated spekboomveld for three sites in the Eastern Cape. Name journal) (Pty) Ltd Weltevreden Park Wetland t Programmes), NMU Envirobalance USK Consulting (Pty) Ltd Client DEA (National Resource Managemen C4ES (academic / PrimaKlima (academic journal)

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 40 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2010 2010 2009- 2011 2008 2010 Year tist tist ecialist Role Biodiversity scien Wetland specialist 2010 Biodiversity sp Environmental consultant Botanical specialist Biodiversity scien Botanical specialist 2010 d) (continue study for a proposed study for a proposed road a vegetation map an alien for a proposed road. Wetland delineation and rehabilitation plan Standard Basic Assessments and various inputs to EIA reports. Biodiversity (Flora and Fauna) screening agricultural clearing Biodiversity (Flora and Fauna) impact study Biodiversity (Flora and Fauna) screening A biodiversity management plan including plant control plan and anmanagement ecological plan of a smallarea protected adjacent to the miningplant area checklist, with botanical baseline, veld condition assessment, game and stocking rate recommendation Botanical screening study for a proposed landﬁll site est ei, ulanga e Nelspruit, Mpumulanga East London Area, Eastern Cape Gonubie, Eastern Cap Kuruman, Northern Cape Steelpoort area, Mpum Tsolo, Transk Eastern Cape Lichtenburg, North W Location Description Dudﬁeld Mine, Tsate road – Orchard Farm 799/37 Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver Development, Eastern and Management Plan. A number of Basic Assessments Reports Ecological Screening for Tsolo Junction Cape Ecological screening report - Riverland Kuruman Housing development and Wastewater treatment works Ecological Impact Assessment: Ga-Oria to Sekhukhuneland, Limpopo Gonubie Biodiversity Management Plan for Afrisam Lichtenburg Name (Pty) (Pty) Ltd Karino Wetland Rehabilitation (Pty) Ltd Vegetation Screening Report: Afrisam Ltd Envirobalance USK Consulting USK Consulting (Pty) Ltd USK Consulting (Pty) Ltd Client USK Consulting (Pty) Ltd / Envirobalance Envirobalance (Pty) Ltd

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 41 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2008 2008 2008 2007- 2008 2008 Year Officer tist Role Environmental consultant Environmental Compliance Environmental scien Environmental Compliance Officer Environmental consultant d) (continue construction activities of t plan for the construction I co-authored the scoping reportmade and two site visits andpublic attended meetings. I developed an environmental managemen of a large transmission linesensitive across ecologal communities in the KwaZulu Natal midlands. Environmental compliance project auditing the a pipeline for the disposalwater of and waste ash at DuvhaStation, Power Witbank. Independent Environmental Compliance Monitoring of a largeconstruction dam project (DWAF) and an associated project involving the consequent realignment of the provincial road EIA and scoping for ainfrastructure proposed including water extensive pipelines and reservoirs waZulu Mossel Bay LM Natal Ingula, Ladysmith area, K Witbank, Mpumulanga Steelpoort area, Mpumulanga Medupi, Limpopo Province Location Description Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver Ingula Transmission (ECO) for construction Scoping report: Ankerlig Power Station Conversion and transmission integration project, Western Cape. Environmental Compliance Officer of pipeline for disposal ofwater waste and ash at DuvhaStation, Power Witbank Environmental Management Plan for line On-site ECO for construction of the De Hoop Dam and realignment of the provincial road Environmental Impact Assessment for building water infrastructure at Medupi Power Plant Name Ltd / Eskom Ltd / Eskom Ltd / Eskom annah Environmental annah Environmental Sav Savannah Environmental (Pty) Savannah Environmental (Pty) Client Savannah Environmental (Pty) Sav (Pty) Ltd / DWAF (Pty) Ltd / Eskom

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 42 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2004 2006- 2007 2004- 2006 Year h manager Role Botanical specialist Project and researc Volunteer facilitator, Monitoring officer d) (continue game reserve, specifically in assessments and game Botanical surveys, vegetation condition stocking recommendation on tribal lands in view of theestablishment potential of a reserve (3-month contract). Research and monitoring within a large big-5 terms of Elephant impacts on vegetation, leopard population and home range study, game monitoring and census, alien plant control, predation preferences of lions and management of international paying volunteers and post graduate students Research and monitoring within a large big-5 game reserve, specifically elephant group behaviour with regards to the reserve immuno-contraception program, predation preferences of predators on reserve, hyaena monitoring and home range calculations, elephant impacts on vegetation, leopard population and home range study, game monitoring and census, alien plant controlmanagement and of international paying volunteers and post graduate students ation opo Greater Giyani region, Limp Greater Makalali Conservation Area near Hoedspruit, Limpopo Greater Makalali Conserv Area near Gravelotte, Limpopo Location Description Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver assessments and game ort to Pidwa Reserve Botanical surveys, vegetation condition Research and Monitoring support to Makalali Reserve Management, part of the Greater Makalali Conservation Area, with paying volunteers. stocking recommendation on tribal lands in view ofpotential the establishment of a reserve. Research and Monitoring supp Management, part of the Greater Makalali Conservation Area, with paying volunteers. Name Conservation (Pty) Ltd hnology Tshwane University of Tec Projects (Pty) Ltd Client Pidwa Conservation Projects Siyafunda

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 43 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Author details 2003- 2004 2003 Year 4x4 trail Role Research technician, Reserve infrastructure manager. Field ranger, Field guide, guide d) (continue ﬁeld guide Reserve management and research technician Reserve management duty, 4x4 trail guide, tier Kuruman River Reserve, Van Zylsrus, Northern Cape Kgalagadi Transfron Park Location Description Table 13: Project experience table: Dr. M.L. van der Vyver International research station on small reserve focussed mostly on the behavioural ecology of Meerkats. Field ranger Name Project SANParks Client Cambridge University, Kalahari Meerkat

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 44 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Declaration of Independence

B Declaration of Independence

I, Dr. Marius L van der Vyver, hereby declare that I

• Act as the independent specialist in this application;

• Will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and ﬁndings that are not favourable to the applicant and that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work;

• Have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of the Act, regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity;

• Will comply with the Act, regulations and all other applicable legislation;

• Have no, and will not engage in, conﬂicting interests in the undertaking of the activity;

• Undertake to disclose to the applicant and the competent authority all material information in my possession that reasonably has or may have the potential of inﬂuencing any decision to be taken with respect to the application by the competent authority; and the objectivity of any report, plan or document to be prepared by myself for submission to the competent authority.

I further declare that all the particulars furnished by me in this form are true and correct; and acknowledge that a false declaration is an oﬀence in terms of Regulation 71 and is punishable in terms of Section 24F of the Act.

Name of Company chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services Name of Specialist Consultant Dr. ML van der Vyver Signature of Specialist Consultant

Date September 15, 2020

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 45 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai NEMBA classiﬁcations for invader species

C NEMBA classiﬁcations for invader species

Last Updated (2019-02-13) with latest NEMBA classiﬁcations in accordance with the NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: BIODIVERSITY ACT, 2004 (ACT NO. 10 OF 2004) ALIEN AND INVASIVE SPECIES LISTS, 2016

C.1 Category 1a (PROHIBITED) : Listed Invasive Species

A person in control of a Category 1a Listed Invasive Species must comply with the provisions of section 73(2) of the Act; immediately take steps to combat or eradicate listed invasive species in compliance with sections 75(1), (2) and (3) of the Act; and allow an authorised oﬃcial from the Department to enter onto land to monitor, assist with or implement the combatting or eradication of the listed invasive species.

C.2 Category 1b (PROHIBITED / Exempted if in Possession or Under control) : Listed Invasive Species

A person in control of a Category 1 b Listed Invasive Species must control the listed invasive species in compliance with sections 75(1), (2) and (3) of the Act. A person contemplated in sub-regulation (2) must allow an authorised oﬃcial from the Department to enter onto the land to monitor, assist with or implement the control of the listed invasive species, or compliance with the Invasive Species Management Programme contemplated in section 75(4) of the Act.

C.3 Category 2 (PERMIT REQUIRED): Listed Invasive Species

Category 2 Listed Invasive Species are those species listed by notice in terms of section 70(1)(a) of the Act as species which require a permit to carry out a restricted activity within an area specified in the Notice or an area specified in the permit, as the case may be. A landowner on whose land a Category 2 Listed Invasive Species occurs or person in possession of a permit, must ensure that the specimens of the species do not spread outside of the land or the area specified in the Notice or permit. Unless otherwise specified in the Notice, any species listed as a Category 2 Listed Invasive Species that occurs outside the specified area contemplated in sub-regulation (1), must, for purposes of these regulations, be considered to be a Category 1 b Listed Invasive Species and must be managed according to Regulation 3. Notwithstanding the specific exemptions relating to existing plantations in respect of Listed Invasive Plant Species published in Government Gazette No. 37886, Notice 599 of 1 August 2014 (as amended), any person or organ of state must ensure that the specimens of such Listed Invasive Plant Species do not spread outside of the land over which they have control.

C.4 Category 3 (PROHIBITED): Listed Invasive Species

Category 3 Listed Invasive Species are species that are listed by notice in terms of section 70(1)(a) of the Act, as species which are subject to exemptions in terms of section 71(3) and prohibitions in terms of section 71A of the Act, as speciﬁed in the Notice. Any plant species identiﬁed as a Category 3 Listed Invasive Species that occurs in riparian areas, must, for the purposes of these regulations, be considered to be a Category 1b Listed Invasive Species and must be managed according to regulation 3.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 46 Vegetation Impact Assessment, Erf 657, Stilbaai Terrestrial and Aquatic Biodiversity Protocols

D Terrestrial and Aquatic Biodiversity Protocols

Although this project has been completed (Oct 2019) before the new Terrestrial and Aquatic Biodiversity Protocols were gazetted (20 March 2020), this appendix serve to address the biodiversity related themes highlighted as sensitive by the new screening tool for this proposed development. Below each relevant potential concern is highlighted and addressed.

The screening tool identiﬁes the need for a Terrestrial Biodiversity Impact Assessment, an Animal or Fauna species assessment and a Plant species assessment.

D.1 Terrestrial Biodiversity

This report addresses that requirement and concludes that the area is identified as of Least Concern in terms of conservation status (Pool and Stanvliet, 2017) and does not overlap with any identified CBA areas (see Figure 5 in the report). Importantly, most (69%) of the proposed development site that falls within the area identified as of very high terrestrial biodiversity importance by the EIA screening tool has already been transformed through regular mowing, and therefore the actual terrestrial biodiversity sensitivity of the site is considered low.

D.2 Animal Species (Fauna)

The screening tool identiﬁes the area as of high animal species combined sensitivity. In particular this applies to the following birds: Bradypterus sylvaticus (Knysna Warbler) Species Common name Sensitivity L.O. * Bradypterus sylvaticus Knysna Warbler High Medium Neotis denhami Stanley’s bustard High Low Certhilauda brevirostris Agulhas long-billed lark High Medium Campethera notata Knysna Wood-pecker High Medium * Likelihood of occurrence on site

Since the development involves the establishment of a retirement village on the site where most of the natural vegetation has already been transformed due to regular mowing, it is unlikely that any would be nesting on site. Should any be present, the disappearance locally from site would most likely be only temporary, i.e. during the construction phase, if the recommendations outlined in the report is adhered to.

There is a number of invertebrate species identiﬁed by the screening tool as of Medium concern (see the screening report). Since most of the natural habitation of the site has been transformed by regular mowing, the likelihood of a meaningful impact on these species populations, should they be present, is considered low.

D.3 Plant Species

None of the plant species designated by the online screening tool as of Medium sensitivity were found to be present on the site, which is not surprising, given that 69% of the site is already transformed by regular mowing. This current report gives a full description of the plant species encountered on site. Therefore the risk of impacting any of these plant species populations is considered very low.

chepri (Pty) Ltd scientific services 47