HERMANUS BYPASS: TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT A BARRIE LOW FINAL REPORT AUGUST 2016 coastal and environmental consultants P O Box 370 Rondebosch 7701 Tel/Fax: 021-685 5445 Cell: 082 579 7040 email: [email protected] VAT reg no: 4580173914 hermanus bypass – terrestrial ecology assessment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An assessment of the terrestrial ecology of the proposed Hermanus Bypass road is presented. The study found the local flora of the area to be quite distinctive, although the vegetation is well-represented elsewhere. Regarding fauna, general lack of seasonally wet fynbos habitat along the route indicates that amphibians are not likely impacted to a significant degree along the route. The Golf Course wetland is the only habitat of concern for this group, but is regarded as of low to medium importance. The Overberg Sandstone Fynbos (OSF) vegetation of the area is ranked as Critically Endangered by virtue of the high number of Red List plant species present. Correspondingly, Hangklip Sand Fynbos (HSF) receives a ranking of Endangered. However, species rarity along the alignment (14 Red List species were identified) is relatively low and does not justify such a high ranking, with OSF mostly intact as a vegetation type. There is, however concern for HSF, owing to its high level of transformation. On the whole, site sensitivity was not of concern, although special habitats such as the Sand Fynbos and Golf Course wetland would require particular attention. The impact assessment indicated that potential impacts could be satisfactorily mitigated, with road realignment the main mitigation measure. These realignments would have the greatest significance for the special habitats (HSF and the Golf Course wetland). Construction phase impacts: Impact Consequence Probability Significance Status Confidence Impact 1: Loss of terrestrial habitat Both Alternatives Medium Definite MEDIUM –ve High With Mitigation Low Probable LOW –ve Medium Impact 2: Fragmentation of terrestrial habitat Northern Medium Definite MEDIUM –ve High Alternative With Mitigation: Low Probable LOW –ve Medium Southern Low Definite LOW –ve High Alternative With Mitigation: - - INSIGNIFICANT i C O A S T E C coastal and environmental consultants botanical specialists ecological analysis environmental management impact assessment hermanus bypass – terrestrial ecology assessment Impact Consequence Probability Significance Status Confidence Impact 3: Loss of Red List plant species or endemics Both Alternatives Medium Possible LOW –ve High With Mitigation Low Possible VERY LOW –ve Medium Impact 4: Loss of wetland habitat Both Alternatives High Definite HIGH –ve High With Mitigation Medium Probable MEDIUM –ve Medium Impact 5: Loss of fauna Both Alternatives Medium Possible LOW –ve High With Mitigation Low Possible VERY LOW –ve Medium Operational phase impacts: Impact Consequence Probability Significance Status Confidence Impact 1: Degradation of road-side vegetation Both Alternatives Medium Probable MEDIUM –ve High With Mitigation Low Probable LOW –ve Medium Impact 2: Loss and disturbance of fauna Both Alternatives Medium Probable MEDIUM –ve High With Mitigation Low Probable LOW –ve Medium Recommendations Measures should be taken to ensure that: (i) The alignment is amended to remove direct impacts on good condition fynbos, in particular along the central / eastern section of the northern alignment, thereby reducing loss of habitat and fragmentation; (ii) Impact on the Hangklip Sand Fynbos in the west of the alignment is minimised by realignment of the road; (iii) The alignment of the section of the road through the Golf Course wetland is amended to minimise impact on the wetland; (iv) The rehabilitation and monitoring guidelines are closely followed; (v) By way of compensation for loss of fynbos in the FNR, rehabilitation of areas outside the alignment is strongly supported. This would include degraded areas along the ii C O A S T E C coastal and environmental consultants botanical specialists ecological analysis environmental management impact assessment hermanus bypass – terrestrial ecology assessment interface between the proposed road and the FNR, as well as the stream which exits the Golf Course wetland and enters the sea to the south via an artificial channel. Conclusions Road construction should be allowed to proceed, provided the proposed mitigation measures - particularly through road realignment - are followed. The loss of fynbos habitat is acceptable, given the ratio of loss to the current size of the FNR. However, impacts on the wetland habitat should be minimised through realignment of the road, as well as through effective search & rescue operations. Net plant species loss from the alignment is unlikely; however important species should be the subject of a thorough search & rescue plan, with key species forming part of the rehabilitation plan. iii C O A S T E C coastal and environmental consultants botanical specialists ecological analysis environmental management impact assessment hermanus bypass – terrestrial ecology assessment CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. I CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... IV 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .............................................................. 1 1.1 General description of site ................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project description (from Scoping Report, SRK, 2015) ...................................... 1 1.3 Alternatives ........................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Environmental triggers ......................................................................................... 2 1.5 Terms of reference ................................................................................................ 3 1.5.1 Objectives and Purpose of the ToR .............................................................. 3 1.5.2 Impact Identification and Assessment ......................................................... 5 1.5.3 Environmental Acceptability and Comparison of Alternatives ................... 6 1.5.4. Terrestrial Ecology Impact Assessment ToR ............................................... 6 2. APPROACH & METHODS .................................................................................. 8 2.1 Literature review ................................................................................................... 8 2.2 Field assessment .................................................................................................. 8 2.3 Mapping ................................................................................................................. 8 2.4 Sensitivity and rarity ............................................................................................. 8 2.5 Conservation value ............................................................................................... 9 2.6 Plant species ......................................................................................................... 9 2.6 Legislation ............................................................................................................. 9 2.7 Potential impacts and mitigation ........................................................................10 2.8 Monitoring ............................................................................................................10 3. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION .......................................................................... 11 3.1 Background ..........................................................................................................11 3.2 Mapping ................................................................................................................14 3.3 Vegetation of the study area ...............................................................................14 3.4 Flora ......................................................................................................................21 3.4.1 Species occurrence and endemism .............................................................21 3.4.2 Subregional analysis ....................................................................................22 3.4.3 Analysis along route .....................................................................................22 3.4.4 Analysis of species from the Golf Course wetland .....................................25 3.4.5 Analysis of flora plots ...................................................................................35 3.5 Sensitivity .............................................................................................................35 3.6 Rarity .....................................................................................................................37 3.7 Conservation importance ....................................................................................37 iv C O A S T E C coastal and environmental consultants botanical specialists ecological analysis environmental management impact assessment hermanus bypass – terrestrial ecology assessment 3.8 Fauna ....................................................................................................................41 3.8.1 Conservation status ......................................................................................47 3.8.2 Taxonomic changes