APPENDIX D4: Biodiversity-Terrestrial Ecology Biodiversity Assessment for the Development of the Proposed Leslie 1 Mining Project Leandra, Mpumalanga Province, South Africa May 2018 CLIENT Prepared for: Prepared by: Kongiwe Environmental (Pty) Ltd The Biodiversity Company 223 Cube Workspace, 1 Wedgewood Link, 420 Vale Ave. Ferndale, 2194 Bryanston, 2191 Cell: +27 81 319 1225 www.kongiwe.co.za Fax: +27 86 527 1965 [email protected] www.thebiodiversitycompanycom Biodiversity Assessment 2018 The Leslie 1 Project Biodiversity Assessment for the Development of the Proposed Report Name Leslie 1 Mining Project Reference Leslie - Biodiversity Submitted to Kongiwe Environmental (Pty) Ltd Andrew Husted Andrew Husted is Pr Sci Nat registered (400213/11) in the following fields of Report Reviewer practice: Ecological Science, Environmental Science and Aquatic Science. Andrew is an Aquatic, Wetland and Biodiversity Specialist with more than 12 years’ experience in the environmental consulting field. Andrew has completed numerous wetland training courses, and is an accredited wetland practitioner, recognised by the DWS, and also the Mondi Wetlands programme as a competent wetland consultant. Michael Adams Report Writer (Herpetofauna) Michael Adams is Cert Sci Nat registered (118544) and is an experienced natural scientist with a specialisation in herpetofauna. He has over 10 years of experience working with reptiles and amphibians as a consultant and through various conservation initiatives. Martinus Erasmus Report Contributor (Botany & Fauna) Martinus Erasmus obtained his B-Tech degree in Nature Conservation in 2016 at the Tshwane University of Technology. Martinus has been conducting basic assessments and assisting specialists in field during his studies since 2015. The Biodiversity Company and its associates operate as independent consultants under the auspice of the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions. We declare that we have no affiliation with or vested financial interests in the proponent, other than for work performed under the Ecological Assessment Declaration Regulations, 2017. We have no conflicting interests in the undertaking of this activity and have no interests in secondary developments resulting from the authorisation of this project. We have no vested interest in the project, other than to provide a professional service within the constraints of the project (timing, time and budget) based on the principals of science. www.thebiodiversitycompany.com [email protected] i Biodiversity Assessment 2018 The Leslie 1 Project EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The completion of a comprehensive desktop study, in conjunction with the detailed results from the surveys mean that there is a high confidence in the information provided. The two surveys which were completed, and the corresponding studies resulted in good site coverage, assessing the major habitats and ecosystems, obtaining a general species (fauna and flora) overview and observing the major current impacts. It is clear from the regional ecological overview, as well as the baseline data collected to date that the Project area has been somewhat altered (historically and currently) predominantly by agricultural land use. It is further evident that the remaining natural habitats have been impacted on as a result of poor grazing practices. However, despite these impacts the remaining natural Highveld grassland habitats (including grassland and wetland habitats) exhibited a healthy balance between various common grassland species and associated herbaceous plants. The ecological integrity, importance and functioning of the natural grassland and wetland systems within the larger Project area is furthermore reflected in the diverse community structures. This diversity is indicative of the importance of these systems to collectively provide refugia, food and corridors for dispersal in and through the Project area. The preservation of these systems, albeit the majority are modified to some extent, is the most important aspect to consider for the consideration of the proposed mining project. The impacts associated with the proposed underground mining method are considerably less significant when compared to comparable opencast mining methods. However, underground mining also requires the placement of new infrastructure, access routes, waste dumps and various other mining activities. These activities will have a significant impact on the local environment and ecological processes. Both of the proposed infrastructure areas at Leslie 1C and Leslie 1A are situated within, or adjacent to, areas that are considered as ecologically highly sensitive. Furthermore, according to the Mining and Biodiversity Guidelines (2013), the proposed Project area Leslie 1C falls within an area which is considered the highest risk for mining and of high biodiversity importance. According to these guidelines, a buffer of 1 km is recommended around any FEPA rivers or wetlands situated in this category and if biodiversity sensitivities are confirmed, ‘the likelihood of a fatal flaw for new mining projects is very high because of the significance of the biodiversity features in these areas and the associated ecosystem services’. Careful consideration must be afforded each of the recommendations provided in this report. In the event that environmental authorisation is issued for this project, proven ecological (or environmental) controls and mitigation measures must be entrenched in the management framework. It is strongly recommended that a comprehensive biodiversity action plan be compiled prior to the issuing of any environmental authorisation. The following further conclusions were reached based on the results of this assessment: • The primary recommended mitigation measure for this project is ensure that the surface infrastructure is significantly far away from sensitive wetlands, rivers or ridges (minimum of 100m); www.thebiodiversitycompany.com [email protected] ii Biodiversity Assessment 2018 The Leslie 1 Project • Much of the Project area is identified as either HMAs or ONAs, while a smaller percentage are classified as ESAs and as CBAs. The proposed infrastructure portion on Leslie 1C is situated mostly in areas regarded as HMAs but also overlaps marginally with a CBA and is surrounded by other CBAs. The proposed infrastructure development areas on Leslie 1A overlap predominantly with areas identified as ONAs and HMAs. A small portion of Leslie 1A infrastructure crosses a CBA area; • According to the Mining and Biodiversity Guidelines (2013), the proposed Project area Leslie 1C falls within an area which is considered the highest risk for mining and of high biodiversity importance. According to these guidelines, a buffer of 1 km is recommended around any FEPA rivers or wetlands situated in this category. Based on this information, the proposed mining areas at Leslie 1C overlap with the recommended buffer; • The Leslie 1A Project area does not overlap with any areas that represent a biodiversity risk to mining according to the Mining and Biodiversity Guidelines (2013); • The Project area was superimposed on the terrestrial ecosystem threat status. According to this, the infrastructure development portions (Leslie 1A and 1C), as well as the overall Project area, overlap entirely with ecosystems that are listed as Vulnerable (VU). A Critically Endangered (CR) ecosystem lies to the west of the Project area; • The Leslie 1 Project area was superimposed on the ecosystem protection level map to assess the protection status of terrestrial ecosystems associated with the development. Based on this the majority of the terrestrial ecosystems associated with the development are rated as not protected and small pockets in both the northern and southern portions of the Project area are rated as poorly protected; • Based on the SANBI (2010) Protected Areas Map and the National Protected Areas Development Strategy (NPAES) the Project area does not overlap with any formally or informally protected area; • The Project area does overlap with certain wetland areas and various perennial rivers. The northern portion of the Leslie 1A Project area, and specifically the infrastructure footprint area, overlap with two perennial rivers. However, neither of these rivers are classified as NFEPA rivers. Project area 1A does not intersect with any FEPA or Non- FEPA wetland areas. Various small Non-FEPA wetlands occur east of the infrastructure footprint area; • The southern portion of the Leslie 1C Project area intersects with a Class 1: Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Area. This Class 1 NFEPA river has the most sensitive classification. Project areas 1A does not intersect with any FEPA wetland areas. • The Leslie 1 Project area in relation to the MBSP Freshwater Assessment overlaps with the following areas: Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs), Ecological Support Areas (ESAs), Heavily Modified Areas (HMAs) and Other Natural Areas (ONAs); • The Project area is situated across two major different vegetation types; the Eastern Highveld Grassland (GM12) and the Soweto Highveld Grassland (GM8) vegetation www.thebiodiversitycompany.com [email protected] iii Biodiversity Assessment 2018 The Leslie 1 Project types. Both these vegetation types are listed as Endangered according to Mucina & Rutherford (2006). A third vegetation type, the Eastern Temperate Freshwater Wetlands (AZf3), occurs in a number of pockets within the Project area; • Based on the Plants of Southern Africa (BODATSA-POSA,