DRAFT BIOPHYSICAL REPORT - zitholele - Duvha/3. Environmental... · DRAFT BIOPHYSICAL REPORT March 2011 ... the New Largo Coal Mine adjacent to the Kusile Power ... Duvha-Minerva

ZITHOLELE CONSULTING

SSPPEECCIIAALLIISSTT SSTTUUDDYY

PPRROOPPOOSSEEDD DDUUVVHHAA--MMIINNEERRVVAA 440000kkVV PPOOWWEERR LLIINNEE DDEEVVIIAATTIIOONN

PPrrooppoonneenntt:: EEsskkoomm HHoollddiinnggss LLiimmiitteedd

PPrreeppaarreedd bbyy:: ZZiitthhoolleellee CCoonnssuullttiinngg

DDRRAAFFTT BBIIOOPPHHYYSSIICCAALL

RREEPPOORRTT

March 2011

BIO-PHYSICAL SPECIALIST REPORT

PPrroojjeecctt 1122662277

March 2011 i 12627


PPUURRPPOOSSEE OOFF TTHHIISS DDOOCCUUMMEENNTT

The growing demand for electricity is placing increasing pressure on Eskom’s existing power generation and transmission capacity. Eskom is committed to implementing a Sustainable Energy Strategy that complements the policies and strategies of National Government. Eskom aims to improve the reliability of electricity supply to the country, and in particular to provide for the growth in electricity demand in the Gauteng and Mpumalanga provinces. For this reason, Eskom obtained environmental authorisation to construct the new Kusile Power Station between Bronkhorstspruit and Witbank in 2007. Construction of this power station has already commenced.

The new Kusile Power Station requires the delivery of coal to the plant as an energy source in the power generation process. Anglo Coal is proposing the establishment of the New Largo Coal Mine adjacent to the Kusile Power Station. At present the Duvha-Minerva 400 kV power line traverses over the land earmarked for mining in 2013. Anglo Coal has requested that the existing line be deviated around the mining area in order to safely supply coal to the Kusile Power Station.

Eskom’s Transmission Division appointed Zitholele Consulting (Pty) Ltd, an independent company, to conduct an EIA to evaluate the potential environmental and social impacts of the proposed project. As part of the environmental process specialist assessments have to be undertaken in order to inform the Impact Assessment Phase. This report details the findings the terrestrial ecology, soil, agricultural potential, wetland delineation and visual specialist assessments.

Zitholele Consulting have undertaken the aforementioned studies. The purpose of this document is therefore to present the findings from these assessments and to provide impact assessments and mitigation measures for each of the biophysical elements.

March 2011 ii 12627


TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................... 1 1.2 STUDY SCOPE ...................................................................................... 2 1.3 STUDY APPROACH .............................................................................. 2 1.4 PROJECT PERSONNEL ........................................................................ 4

2 BIOPHYSICAL RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ........................................... 5

2.1 TOPOGRAPHY ...................................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Data Collection ......................................................................... 5 2.1.2 Regional Description ................................................................. 5

2.2 SOILS ..................................................................................................... 7 2.2.1 Data Collection ......................................................................... 7 2.2.2 Regional Description ................................................................. 7 2.2.3 Site Description ......................................................................... 7

2.3 AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL (LAND CAPABILITY) ........................... 17 2.3.1 Data Collection ....................................................................... 17 2.3.2 Regional Description ............................................................... 17 2.3.3 Site Description ....................................................................... 17

2.4 SURFACE WATER .............................................................................. 19 2.4.1 Data Collection ....................................................................... 19 2.4.2 Site Description ....................................................................... 22

2.5 WETLAND DELINEATION ................................................................... 23 2.5.1 Data Collection and Methodology ........................................... 23 2.5.2 Delineation .............................................................................. 24 2.5.3 Classification of Wetlands ....................................................... 26 2.5.4 Wetland Integrity ..................................................................... 27

2.6 TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY .................................................................. 33 2.6.1 Data Collection ....................................................................... 33 2.6.2 Regional Description ............................................................... 33 2.6.3 Vegetation .............................................................................. 33 2.6.4 Terrestrial species................................................................... 42

2.7 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................... 49 2.7.1 Introduction ............................................................................. 49 2.7.2 Methodology ........................................................................... 49 2.7.3 Visual Character ..................................................................... 53

3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ............................................. 56

3.1 SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT ........................................................... 56 3.2 SPATIAL SCALE .................................................................................. 58 3.3 DURATION SCALE .............................................................................. 58 3.4 DEGREE OF PROBABILITY ................................................................ 58 3.5 DEGREE OF CERTAINTY ................................................................... 59 3.6 QUANTITATIVE DESCRIPTION OF IMPACTS .................................... 59 3.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ...................................................................... 60 3.8 NOTATION OF IMPACTS .................................................................... 61

4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .......................................................................... 62

4.1 SOILS AND AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL ......................................... 63

March 2011 iii 12627


4.1.1 Initial Impact............................................................................ 63 4.1.2 Additional Impact .................................................................... 63 4.1.3 Cumulative Impact .................................................................. 64 4.1.4 Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 64 4.1.5 Residual Impact ...................................................................... 64

4.2 SURFACE WATER AND WETLANDS ................................................. 65 4.2.1 Initial Impact............................................................................ 65 4.2.2 Additional Impact .................................................................... 65 4.2.3 Cumulative Impact .................................................................. 66 4.2.4 Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 66 4.2.5 Residual Impact ...................................................................... 67

4.3 TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY .................................................................. 67 4.3.1 Initial Impact............................................................................ 67 4.3.2 Additional Impact .................................................................... 68 4.3.3 Cumulative Impact .................................................................. 68 4.3.4 Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 68 4.3.5 Residual Impact ...................................................................... 69

4.4 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ......................................................... 69 4.4.1 Initial Impact............................................................................ 69 4.4.2 Additional Impact .................................................................... 69 4.4.3 Cumulative Impact .................................................................. 71 4.4.4 Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 71 4.4.5 Residual Impact ...................................................................... 71

5 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................... 73

March 2011 iv 12627


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1: Proposed route alternatives for the power line. ................................................ 3

Figure 2-1: Topography of the site ..................................................................................... 6

Figure 2-2: Soil Type Map .................................................................................................. 8

Figure 2-3: Mispah soil form (Soil Classification, 1991). ..................................................... 9

Figure 2-4: Glenrosa Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991) ............................................... 10

Figure 2-5: Clovelly soil form (Soil Classification, 1991) ................................................... 11

Figure 2-6: Avalon Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991) ................................................... 12

Figure 2-7: Kroonstad Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991) ............................................. 13

Figure 2-8: Soft plinthic B-horizon. ................................................................................... 13

Figure 2-9: Longlands Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991) ............................................. 14

Figure 2-10: Wasbank Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991) ............................................. 14

Figure 2-11: Westleigh Soil Form (Soil Classification 1991) ............................................. 15

Figure 2-12: Katspruit Soil form (Soil Classification, 1991) ............................................... 16

Figure 2-13: Willowbrook Soil Form (Soil Classification 1991) ......................................... 17

Figure 2-14: Agricultural Potential Map ............................................................................ 20

Figure 2-15: Surface water and drainage features ........................................................... 21

Figure 2-16: Stream crossing within one of the streams on site. ...................................... 22

Figure 2-17: Wetlands Delineated and Classified. ............................................................ 31

Figure 2-18: Wetland Integrity. ......................................................................................... 32

Figure 2-19: Biodiversity Map the site. ............................................................................. 35

Figure 2-20: Vegetation Map the site. .............................................................................. 36

March 2011 v 12627


Figure 2-21: Maize fields with some weeds on the roadside ............................................ 37

Figure 2-22: Hyparrhenia grassland. ................................................................................ 38

Figure 2-23: Rocky Grassland. ........................................................................................ 39

Figure 2-24: Eragrostis Plana Moist Grassland. ............................................................... 40

Figure 2-25: Seepage Area. ............................................................................................. 41

Figure 2-26: View of the existing power line from the takeoff point looking west. ............. 54

Figure 2-27: Visual Impact. .............................................................................................. 55

Figure 4-1: Example of what the power line would look like ............................................. 62

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Species Lists ................................................................................................ 74

March 2011 vi 12627


LIST OF TABLES

Table 2-1: Agricultural Potential criteria ........................................................................... 18

Table 2-2: Land Capability of the soils within the study site.............................................. 18

Table 2-3: Agricultural Impact per route ........................................................................... 19

Table 2-4: Wetland types based on hydro-geomorphic characteristics (Kotze et al, 2007). .............................................................................................................................. 26

Table 2-5: Habitat integrity assessment criteria for palustrine wetlands (DWA, 2005). .............................................................................................................................. 27

Table 2-6: Scoring guidelines and relative confidence scores for the habitat integrity assessment for palustrine wetlands (DWA, 2005). ........................................................... 28

Table 2-7: Category's assigned to the scores achieved in the wetland habitat assessment (DWA, 2005). ............................................................................................... 28

Table 2-8: Level of service ratings. .................................................................................. 30

Table 2-9: Possible Red Data plant species occurring in Mpumulanga. ........................... 42

Table 2-10: Arthropoda recorded on site. ......................................................................... 46

Table 2-11: Reptilia recorded on site. .............................................................................. 47

Table 2-12: Amphibia recorded on site. ........................................................................... 48

Table 2-13: Mammalia recorded at site. ........................................................................... 48

Table 2-14: Red Data faunal species that may occur in the study area. ........................... 49

Table 2-15: Visual Impact Assessment Criteria ................................................................ 50

Table 3-1: Quantitative rating and equivalent descriptors for the impact assessment criteria .............................................................................................................................. 56

Table 3-2 : Description of the significance rating scale..................................................... 57

Table 3-3 : Description of the significance rating scale..................................................... 58

Table 3-4: Description of the temporal rating scale .......................................................... 58

March 2011 vii 12627


Table 3-5 : Description of the degree of probability of an impact occurring ...................... 59

Table 3-6 : Description of the degree of certainty rating scale .......................................... 59

Table 3-7 : Example of Rating Scale ................................................................................ 60

Table 3-8 : Impact Risk Classes ...................................................................................... 60

Table 4-1: Impact Rating Matrix for Soils and Agricultural Potential ................................. 65

Table 4-2: Impact Rating Matrix for Surface Water and Wetlands .................................... 67

Table 4-3: Impact Rating Matrix for Terrestrial Ecology .................................................... 69

Table 4-4: Dynamic Impact Table .................................................................................... 70

Table 4-5: Visual Impact Matrix ........................................................................................ 70

Table 4-6: Impact Rating Matrix for Visual ....................................................................... 71

March 2011 1 12627


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND

The growing demand for electricity is placing increasing pressure on Eskom’s existing power generation and transmission capacity. Eskom is committed to implementing a Sustainable Energy Strategy that complements the policies and strategies of National Government. Eskom aims to improve the reliability of electricity supply to the country, and in particular to provide for the growth in electricity demand in the Gauteng and Mpumalanga provinces. For this reason, Eskom obtained environmental authorisation to construct the new Kusile Power Station between Bronkhorstspruit and Witbank in 2007. Construction of this power station has already commenced.

The new Kusile Power Station requires the delivery of coal to the plant as an energy source in the power generation process. Anglo Coal is proposing the establishment of the New Largo Coal Mine adjacent to the Kusile Power Station. At present the Duvha-Minerva 400 kV power line traverses over the land earmarked for mining in 2013. Anglo Coal has requested that the existing line be deviated around the mining area in order to safely supply coal to the Kusile Power Station.

At present four route alternatives are being investigated, varying in length from 11 – 14 km, namely (Figure 1-1):

Deviation - Alternative 1

Alternative 1 exits the existing 400kV Duvha-Minerva power line at the north of the Eskom property, located 3 km south of the N4 highway. The corridor heads in a north easterly direction (~3.5km) towards the newly constructed 132kV distribution power line. Thereafter alternative 1 follows the exact alignment of the newly constructed 132kV distribution power line (~10km) before meeting the existing 400kV Duvha-Minerva power line (total length ~ 13.5 km).


Alternative 2 follows the same alignment as alternative 1 except 2.5km before re-joining the existing 400kV Duvha-Minerva power line, the alternative follows a straight south easterly path to the existing transmission line avoiding an additional bend tower (total length ~ 13.4 m).


Alternative 3 exits the existing 400kV Duvha-Minerva power line at the north of the Eskom property approximately 900m south east from alternative 1 starting point. Alternative 3 heads in a north easterly direction (~3.5km) crossing the 545 road and thereafter bending eastwards (~800m) before joining the newly constructed 132kV distribution power line (total length ~ 11.8 km).

March 2011 2 12627



Alternative 4 exits the existing 400kV Duvha-Minerva power line at the same location as alternative 3. The alternative heads in a south easterly direction (~1km) before crossing over the newly constructed 132kV distribution power line. Thereafter the alternative heads in a north easterly direction (~ 5km) before joining the newly constructed 132kV distribution power line (total length ~ 11.8 km).

1.2 STUDY SCOPE

Eskom’s Transmission Division has appointed Zitholele Consulting (Pty) Ltd (Zitholele Consulting), an independent company, to conduct an EIA to evaluate the potential environmental and social impacts of the proposed project. As part of the environmental impact assessment for the aforementioned project it is required that certain biophysical specialist investigations are undertaken. Zitholele Consulting was appointed to undertake the following biophysical specialist studies:

Wetlands and Surface Water;

Topography and Visual Impact;

Soils and Agricultural Potential; and

Terrestrial Ecology.

1.3 STUDY APPROACH

The study approach consisted of a desktop study followed by detailed site investigation. The desktop study involved using existing GIS data and existing literature on the study are. These included the studies undertaken for the Kusile Power Station EIA, the Kusile Railway EIA and the New Largo Coal Mine EIA.

The specialist studies were undertaken during site visits conducted from the 25th February – 2nd March 2011. The site visits were undertaken at this time of year to ensure that species were easily identifiable. The study area encompasses the area within a 5 00 m radius of the proposed power line alternatives. At 150m intervals along the power line alternatives a transect was surveyed across the corridor. In areas where there are more sensitive features such as wetlands and stream crossings the area was studied in more detail. At each of the transects the vegetation, soil, fauna and wetland characteristics were sampled.

Once all the information was gathered on site the information was summarised in a biophysical report (this report).

March 2011 3 12627


Figure 1-1: Proposed route alternatives for the power line.

March 2011 4 12627


1.4 PROJECT PERSONNEL

The following project team was involved in the compilation of this report.

Konrad Kruger, BSc Hons (Geog)

Mr. Konrad Kruger graduated from the University of Pretoria with a BSc Honours in Geography in 2003. He has been involved in a variety of environmental projects in the last six years and has become specialised in undertaking specialist studies, mapping and environmental consulting. He has undertaken GIS mapping for mining, residential as well as industrial developments. He is also an experienced land ecologist and will provide expertise for this project in terms of soil surveys, land capability assessments and mapping.

March 2011 5 12627


2 BIOPHYSICAL RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

This section details the receiving environment at the project location. For the context of this report the regional environment refers to a 50 km radius around the study area.

Although the aim of this report is to detail the vegetation, wetlands, soil and land capability component of the receiving environment; certain additional factors have been included, as they provide perspective to the soil and vegetation study. These include geology, topography, climate, surface water and land use.

2.1 TOPOGRAPHY

2.1.1 Data Collection

The topography data was obtained from the Surveyor General’s 1:50 000 toposheet data for the region, namely 2529CC and 2528DD. Contours were combined from the topographical mapsheets to form a combined contours layer. Using the Arcview GIS software the contour information was used to develop a digital elevation model of the region as shown in Figure 2-1 below.

2.1.2 Regional Description

The topography of the region is gently undulating to moderately undulating landscape of the Highveld plateau. Some small scattered wetlands and pans occur in the area, rocky outcrops and ridges also form part of significant landscape features in the area. Altitude ranges between 1 360 – 1 600 metres above mean sea level (mamsl). Figure 2-1 provides an illustration of the topography of the site. With regards to ridges, a small koppie occurs to the north of the site and all the routes traverse just to the south of this koppie.

March 2011 6 12627


Figure 2-1: Topography of the site

March 2011 7 12627


2.2 SOILS


The site visit was conducted in February – March 2011. Soils were augered at 200m intervals along the proposed railway line routes using a 150 mm bucket auger, up to refusal or 1.2 m. Soils were identified according to Soil Classification; a taxonomic system for South Africa (Memoirs on the Natural Resources of South Africa, no. 15, 1991). The following soil characteristics were documented:

Soil horizons;

Soil colour;

Soil depth;

Soil texture (Field determination);

Wetness;

Occurrence of concretions or rocks; and

Underlying material (if possible).


The soils in the region are mostly derived from the geology of the region namely, predominantly shale (Silverton formation), sandstone conglomerate (Wilgerivier formation), siltstone (Dwyka formation) or diabase intrusions which feature prominently in the area. The soils are generally shallow with a yellow-brown colour.

2.2.3 Site Description

During the site visit large quantities of soil forms were identified. The soils forms were grouped into management units and are described in detail in the sections below and Figure 2-2 illustrates the location of the soil types. The land capability (agricultural potential) of the abovementioned soil form is described in more detail in Section 2.3.

The management units are broken up into:

Deep Soils;

Clay Soils;

Rocky Soils;

Transitional Soils; and

Disturbed Soils.

March 2011 8 12627


Figure 2-2: Soil Type Map

March 2011 9 12627


Rocky Soils

The rocky soils are generally shallow and that overlie an impeding layer such as hard rock or weathering saprolite. These soils are not suitable for cultivation and in most cases are only usable as light grazing. The main soil forms found in rocky soils were Mispah and Glenrosa, each form is described below.

Mispah soil form

The Mispah soil form is characterised by an Orthic A – horizon overlying hard rock. Mispah soil is horizontally orientated, hard, fractured sediments which do not have distinct vertical channels containing soil material. There is usually a red or yellow-brown apedal horizon with very low organic matter content. Please refer to Figure 2-3 for an illustration of a typical Mispah soil form.

Figure 2-3: Mispah soil form (Soil Classification, 1991).

Glenrosa Soil Form

The Glenrosa soil form is a combination of an Orthic A horizon overlying a lithocutanic

B horizon as indicated in Figure 2-4 below. A lithocutanic B has several characteristics that separate it from other horizons, namely:

It merges into the underlying weathering rock;

Has a general organisation in respect of colour, structure or consistency that has distinct affinities with the underlying parent rock;

March 2011 10 12627


Has cutanic character expressed usually as tongues or prominent colour variations caused by residual soil formation and illuviation resulting in localization of one or more of clay, iron and manganese oxides;

Lacks a laterally continues horizon which would qualify as either a diagnostic podzol B, neocarbonate B, pedocutanic B, pedocutanic B, hardpan carbonate or dorbank; and

If the horizon shows signs of wetness, then more than 25% by volume has saprolitic character.

Figure 2-4: Glenrosa Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991)

Agricultural Soils

The agricultural soils found on site support an industry of commercial maize production. These soils include Clovelly and Avalon. These soils have deep yellow-brown B-horizons with minimal structure. These soils drain well and provide excellent to moderate cultivation opportunities. Each of the soils is described in detail below.

Clovelly Soil Form

Clovelly soils can be identified as an apedal “yellow” B-horizon as indicated in Figure 2-5 below. These soils along with Hutton soils are the main agricultural soil found within South Africa, due to the deep, well-drained nature of these soils. The soils are found on the valley slopes of the site.

March 2011 11 12627


Figure 2-5: Clovelly soil form (Soil Classification, 1991)

Avalon Soil Form

The Avalon soil form is characterised by the occurrence of a yellow-brown apedal B-horizon over a soft plinthic B – horizon (See Figure 2-6). The yellow-brown apedal horizon is the same as described for the Clovelly soil form and the plinthic horizon has the following characteristics:

Has undergone localised accumulation of iron and manganese oxides under conditions of a fluctuating water table with clear red-brown, yellow-brown or black strains in more than 10% of the horizon;

Has grey colours of gleying in or directly underneath the horizon; and

Does not qualify as a diagnostic soft carbonate horizon.

These soils are found between lower down the slopes than the Clovelly soils and indicate the start of the soils with clay accumulation.

March 2011 12 12627


Figure 2-6: Avalon Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991)

Transitional Soils

The transitional soil management unit comprises the soils found between clay soils and the agricultural soils. These soils often have signs of clay accumulation or water movement in the lower horizons. These soils are usually indicative of seasonal or temporary wetland conditions. The main soil forms found in transitional soils were Kroonstad, Wasbank, Longlands and Westleigh, each form is described below.

Kroonstad Soil Form

The Kroonstad soil form is most commonly found in areas of semi-permanent wetness. The soil is made up of an Orthic A horizon over a diagnostic E-horizon over a G-horizon, as indicated in Figure 2-7 below. The G-horizon has several unique diagnostic criteria as a horizon, namely:

It is saturated with water for long periods unless drained;

Is dominated by grey, low chroma matrix colours, often with blue or green tints, with or without mottling;

Has not undergone marked removal of colloid matter, usually accumulation of colloid matter has taken place in the horizon;

Has a consistency at least one grade firmer than that of the overlying horizon;

Lacks saprolitic character; and

Lacks plinthic character.

March 2011 13 12627


Figure 2-7: Kroonstad Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991)

Longlands Soil Forms

The Longlands soil forms are all typified by an eluvial (E) horizon over a soft plinthic horizon (as described above). The E-horizon is a horizon that has been washed clean by excessive water movement through the horizon and the plinthic horizon as undergone local accumulation of colloidal matter (refer photo below). Please refer to Figure 2-8 and Figure 2-9 for an illustration of the soil form.

Figure 2-8: Soft plinthic B-horizon.

Mottling

Grey matrix

March 2011 14 12627


Figure 2-9: Longlands Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991)

Wasbank Soil Form

The Wasbank soil form is found in close proximity to the Longlands soil form and is typified by an Orthic A-horizon over an E-horizon (as described above) over a Hard Plinthic B-horizon. The Hard Plinthic B-horizon develops when a Soft Plinthic horizon is subjected to a prolonged dry period and the accumulated colloidal matter hardens, almost irreversibly. The Wasbank soil form is illustrated in Figure 2-10 below.

Figure 2-10: Wasbank Soil Form (Soil Classification, 1991)

March 2011 15 12627


Westleigh Soil Forms

Westleigh soils are characterised by an orthic A-horizon over a soft plinthic B-horizon and is found in areas between good agricultural soils and clay soils and the movement of water determines the characteristics of the soil.

Figure 2-11: Westleigh Soil Form (Soil Classification 1991)

Clay Soils

The clay soil management unit is found in areas where clays have accumulated to such an extent that the majority of the soil matrix is made up of clay particles. These soils are usually indicative of seasonal or permanent wetland conditions. The main soil forms found in clay soils were Katspruit and Willowbrook, each form is described below. These soils are saturated with water and must be noted to be unstable for construction and are sensitive.

Katspruit Soil Form

The Katspruit soil form is most commonly found in areas of semi-permanent wetness. The soil is made up of an Orthic A-horizon over a diagnostic G-horizon and is indicated in Figure 2-12 below. The G-horizon has several unique diagnostic criteria as a horizon, namely:

It is saturated with water for long periods unless drained;

Is dominated by grey, low chroma matrix colours, often with blue or green tints, with or without mottling;

Has not undergone marked removal of colloid matter, usually accumulation of colloid matter has taken place in the horizon;

March 2011 16 12627


Has a consistency at least one grade firmer than that of the overlying horizon;

Lacks saprolitic character; and

Lacks plinthic character.

Figure 2-12: Katspruit Soil form (Soil Classification, 1991)

Willowbrook Soil Form

Willowbrook soils are characterised by Melanic A-horizon over a G-horizon. The G-horizon is invariably firm or very firm and its characteristics are described above. The Melanic horizon has several unique diagnostic criteria as a horizon, namely:

Has a dark colour in the dry state.

Lack slickensides that are diagnostic of vertic horizons.

Has less organic carbon than required for diagnostic organic O horizon.

Has structure that is strong enough so that the major part of the horizon is not both massive and hard or very hard when dry.

March 2011 17 12627


Figure 2-13: Willowbrook Soil Form (Soil Classification 1991)

2.3 AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL (LAND CAPABILITY)


A literature review was conducted in order to obtain any relevant information concerning the area, including information from the Environmental Potential Atlas (ENPAT), Weather Bureau and Department of Agriculture. Results from the soil study were taken into account when determining the agricultural potential also known as the land capability of the site. The land capability assessment methodology as outlined by the National Department of Agriculture was used to assess the soil’s capability to support agriculture on site.


The regional land capability is mostly Class II (Agricultural) soils with few limitations. This is evident in the large number of cultivated lands found in the region. In the areas where the soil is too shallow or too wet to cultivate, livestock are grazed.


According to the land capability methodology, the potential for a soil to be utilised for agriculture is based on a wide number of factors. These are listed in the table below along with a short description of each factor.

March 2011 18 12627


Table 2-1: Agricultural Potential criteria

Criteria Description

Rock Complex If a soil type has prevalent rocks in the upper sections of the soil it is a limiting factor to the soil’s agricultural potential

Flooding Risk The risk of flooding is determined by the closeness of the soil to water sources.

Erosion Risk The erosion risk of a soil is determined by combining the wind and water erosion potentials.

Slope The slope of the site could potentially limit the agricultural use thereof.

Texture The texture of the soil can limits its use by being too sandy or too clayey.

Depth The effective depth of a soil is critical for the rooting zone for agricultural crops.

Drainage The capability of a soil to drain water is important as most grain crops do not tolerate submergence in water.

Mechanical Limitations Mechanical limitations are any factors that could prevent the soil from being tilled or ploughed.

pH The pH of the soil is important when considering soil nutrients and hence fertility.

Soil Capability This section highlights the soil type’s capability to sustain agriculture.

Climate Class The climate class highlights the prevalent climatic conditions that could influence the agricultural use of a site.

Land Capability / Agricultural Potential

The land capability or agricultural potential rating for a site combines the soil capability and the climate class to arrive at the sites potential to support agriculture.

The soils identified in Section 2.2 above were classified according to the methodology proposed by the Agricultural Research Council – Institute for Soil, Climate and Water (2002). The criteria mentioned above were evaluated in the table below. The site is made up of two main land capability classes, namely Class II – cultivation and Class VIII – rocky grazing. The Class II soils are suitable for cultivation and can be used for a range of agricultural applications. The Class VIII soils have continuing limitations that cannot be corrected; in this case rock complexes, flood hazard, stoniness, and a shallow rooting zone constitute these limitations. Figure 2-14 illustrates the various land capability units on site.

Table 2-2: Land Capability of the soils within the study site

Soil Agricultural Transitional Rocky/Disturbed Clay

% on Site 1511 ha (32 %) 607 ha (13 %) 1947 ha (41 %) 636 ha (14 %) Rock Complex None None Yes None Flooding Risk No Moderate No Very Limiting Erosion Risk Low High High Very Low Slope % 3.9 3.7 4.0 0.5 Texture Loam Loam Loam Clay Effective Depth > 100 cm > 60 cm < 60 cm < 60 cm

March 2011 19 12627


Soil Agricultural Transitional Rocky/Disturbed Clay

Drainage Good drainage Imperfect Good drainage Poorly drained Mech Limitations None None Rocks None pH > 5.5 > 5.5 > 5.5 > 5.5 Soil Capability Class II Class IV VIII VI Climate Class Mild Mild Mild Mild

Land Capability Class II – Arable Land

Class IV – Poorly Arable

Land/Grazing Class VIII – Light Grazing/Wildlife

Class VI – Moderately

Grazing Land

As shown in the table above, the bulk of the site comprises agricultural and rocky soils. With regards to the various alternatives that are investigated for the proposed project, the length of route (in km) is given below for each soil unit.

Table 2-3: Agricultural Impact per route

Route Agricultural Transitional Rocky/Disturbed Clay

Alternative 1 4.48 1.22 4 1.41

Alternative 2 5.28 1.69 3.07 1.69

Alternative 3 5.22 1.37 3.54 1.67

Alternative 4 4.5 1.62 5.9 1.19

From the table above it is clear that the difference between the potential alignments is negligible. With the power lines able to span between 300 and 400 metres between pylons, the difference will be a pylon or two per route.

2.4 SURFACE WATER


The surface water data was obtained from the WR90 database from the Water Research Council. The data used included catchments, river alignments and river names. In addition water body data was obtained from the CSIR land cover database (1990) to illustrate water bodies and wetlands. This data was supplemented with site observations during the various site visits.

No limitation Low Moderate High Very Limiting

March 2011 20 12627


Figure 2-14: Agricultural Potential Map

March 2011 21 12627


Figure 2-15: Surface water and drainage features

March 2011 22 12627



The main drainage feature of the area is the Saalklapspruit which drains in a northerly direction. Several unnamed tributaries are also found in the area. In addition to the streams a few dams can also be found in the region along with a large pan/wetland to the south of the routes as illustrated in Figure 2-15 above. The streams and their associated dams support a number of faunal and floral species uniquely adapted to these aquatic ecosystems and therefore all surface water bodies are earmarked as sensitive features and should be avoided as far as possible.

In terms of the future mining operations, these water features should not be affected as they are outside of the proposed mining reserve. It is anticipated that clean water will be diverted around the mine into these streams to avoid contamination of surface water.

Figure 2-16: Stream crossing within one of the streams on site.

From Figure 2-15 above, it is clear that all the alternatives cross a stream or river at some point. In actual fact the alternatives are so closely spaced to each other that there is no difference between the alternatives in terms of the number of stream crossings. In terms of the crossing angle, it is always best to cross a wetland or stream at a right angle to minimise the area that is crossed. In this case Alternatives 1 and 2 provide the best options as they cross most of the streams at right angles.

March 2011 23 12627


2.5 WETLAND DELINEATION

2.5.1 Data Collection and Methodology

Riparian Zones vs. Wetlands

Wetlands

The riparian zone and wetlands were delineated according to the Department of Water Affairs (DWA, previously known as the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry -DWAF) guideline, 2003: A practical guideline procedure for the identification and delineation of wetlands and riparian zones. According to the DWA guidelines a wetland is defined by the National Water Act as:

“land which is transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near surface, or the land is periodically covered with shallow water, and which land in normal circumstances supports or would support vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated soil.”

In addition the guidelines indicate that wetlands must have one or more of the following attributes:

Wetland (hydromorphic) soils that display characteristics resulting from prolonged saturation;

The presence, at least occasionally, of water loving plants (hydrophytes); and

A high water table that results in saturation at or near surface, leading to anaerobic conditions developing in the top 50 centimetres of the soil.

During the site investigation the following indicators of potential wetlands were identified:

Terrain unit indicator;

Soil form indicator;

Soil wetness indicator; and

Vegetation indicator.

Riparian Areas

According to the DWA guidelines a riparian area is defined by the National Water Act as:

“Riparian habitat includes the physical structure and associated vegetation of the areas associated with a watercourse which are commonly characterised by alluvial soils, and which are inundated or flooded to an extent and with a frequency sufficient to support vegetation of species with a composition and physical structure distinct from those of adjacent land areas”

March 2011 24 12627


The difference between Riparian Areas and Wetlands

According to the DWA guidelines the difference between a wetland and a riparian area is:

“Many riparian areas display wetland indicators and should be classified as wetlands. However, other riparian areas are not saturated long enough or often enough to develop wetland characteristics, but also perform a number of important functions, which need to be safeguarded… Riparian areas commonly reflect the high-energy conditions associated with the water flowing in a water channel, whereas wetlands display more diffuse flow and are lower energy environments.”

2.5.2 Delineation

The site was investigated for the occurrence / presence of wetlands and riparian areas, using the methodology described above and described in more detail in the DWA guidelines.

Terrain Unit Indicator

The terrain on site varies from 1 360 mamsl to 1 600 mamsl as illustrated in Figure 2-1. From Figure 2-1 it can be seen that the site is located in an area of undulating hills with the dominant terrain units on site being the midslope, footslope and valley bottom units. According to the DWA guidelines the valley bottom is the terrain unit where wetlands are most likely to occur, but the occurrence of wetlands is not excluded from any of the other terrain units.

Soil Form Indicator

The site is located on a slope that drains towards the Saalklapspruit. Water enters the soils profile and then flows through the profile down-slope. This action of water movement through the slope typifies the soils of the largest part of the site (eluvial and plinthic soils). Closer to the stream (within the valley bottom terrain unit) the soils gradually deepen due to the down-slope transport of soil (colluvium). In addition these soils have gradually higher percentages of clays that over time have been washed down-slope and accumulate at the valley bottom where the slope angle reduces. The detailed soil mapping exercise was limited to the footslope and valley bottom area in order to delineate the wetland / riparian zones.

Of the soils identified on site the Katspruit soil form is indicative of the permanent wetland zone, while the Wasbank and Longlands soil forms are indicative of the temporary wetland zone. There is also a possibility that the Avalon soil form can be indicative of the temporary zone.

Soil Wetness Indicator

The soils on site were subjected to a soil wetness assessment. If soils showed signs of wetness within 50 cm of the soil surface, it was classified as a hydromorphic soil and divided into the following groups:

March 2011 25 12627


Temporary Zone

Minimal grey matrix (<10%);

Few high chroma mottles; and

Short periods of saturation.

Seasonal Zone

Grey matrix (>10%);

Many low chroma mottles present; and

Significant periods of wetness (>3 months / annum).

Permanent Zone

Prominent grey matrix;

Few to no high chroma mottles;

Wetness all year round; and

Sulphuric odour.

The Katspruit, Wasbank and Longlands soil forms have signs of wetness within the top 50 cm of the soil profile. The Avalon soil form however did not have any signs of wetness. The Katspruit soil form was classified as the permanent zone, while the Wasbank and Longlands were classified as the temporary and seasonal zone. The soil forms are illustrated in Figure 2-2.

Vegetation Indicator

The vegetation units on site are described and illustrated in Section 2.6 below. The vegetation found in the moist grassland and the seepage zone vegetation units both have species present to indicate the presence of wetlands.

Delineated Wetlands and Buffer Zones

According to the methodology that was followed for delineation of wetlands by DWA, there are wetlands present on site. It should however be noted that several of the so-called wetlands could also be classified as riparian zones as they follow the drainage path of the non-perennial streams on site. All the area’s identified above perform critical ecosystem functions (water purification, sediment trapping, pollution filtration) and also provide habitat for sensitive species. It is suggested that a 50m buffer be placed from the edge of the temporary zone in order to sufficiently protect the wetlands and riparian zones. Figure 2-17 below illustrates the various wetland zones as well as the buffer placed along the edge of the temporary zone.

March 2011 26 12627


2.5.3 Classification of Wetlands

The classification of the wetlands in the study area into different wetland types was based on the WET-EcoServices technique (Kotze et al, 2007). The WET-EcoServices technique identifies seven main types of wetland based on hydro-geomorphic characteristics (Table 2-4).

Table 2-4: Wetland types based on hydro-geomorphic characteristics (Kotze et al, 2007).

Using the methodology above the following wetland types were identified on site as shown below in Figure 2-17:

March 2011 27 12627


VB Valley Bottom;

VBC Valley Bottom with a channel;

HS Hillslope Seepage Wetland; and

HSW Hillslope Seepage linked to stream.

2.5.4 Wetland Integrity

The Present Ecological Status (PES) Method (DWA 2005) was used to establish the integrity of the wetlands in the study area and was based on the modified Habitat Integrity approach developed by Kleynhans (1996, 1999 In DWA 2005). The delineated wetland units (as described under section 3.2.1.) were used as the basis to divide the wetlands into different segments to increase the resolution of the integrity assessment.

Table 2-5 shows the criteria for assessing the habitat integrity of palustrine wetlands along with Table 2-6 describing the allocation of scores to attributes and the rating of confidence levels associated with each score. These criteria were selected based on the assumption that anthropogenic modification of the criteria and attributes listed under each selected criterion can generally be regarded as the primary causes of the ecological integrity of a wetland.

Table 2-5: Habitat integrity assessment criteria for palustrine wetlands (DWA, 2005). Criteria and Attributes Relevance

Hydrologic

Flow Modification

Consequence of abstraction, regulation by impoundments or increased runoff from human settlements or agricultural land. Changes in flow regime (timing, duration, frequency), volumes, velocity which affect inundation of wetland habitats resulting in floralistic changes or incorrect cues to biota. Abstraction of groundwater flows to the wetland.

Permanent Inundation Consequence of impoundment resulting in destruction of natural wetland habitat and cues for wetland biota.

Water Quality

Water Quality Modification

From point or diffuse sources. Measure directly by laboratory analysis or assessed indirectly from upstream agricultural activities, human settlements and industrial activities. Aggravated by volumetric decrease in flow delivered to the wetland.

Sediment Load Modification

Consequence of reduction due to entrapment by impoundments or increase due to land use practices such as overgrazing. Cause of unnatural rates of erosion, accretion or infilling of wetlands and change in habitats.

Hydraulic/Geomorphic

Canalisation Results in desiccation or changes to inundation patterns of wetland and thus changes in habitats. River diversions or drainage.

Topographic Alteration

Consequence of infilling, ploughing, dykes, trampling, bridges, roads, railway lines and other substrate disruptive activities which reduce or changes wetland habitat directly in inundation patterns.

March 2011 28 12627


Criteria and Attributes Relevance Biota

Terrestrial Encroachment

Consequence of desiccation of wetland and encroachment of terrestrial plant species due to changes in hydrology or geomorphology. Change from wetland to terrestrial habitat and loss of wetland functions.

Indigenous Vegetation Removal

Direct destruction of habitat through farming activities, grazing or firewood collection affecting wildlife habitat and flow attenuation functions, organic matter inputs and increases potential for erosion.

Invasive Plant Encroachment Affects habitat characteristics through changes in community structure and water quality changes (oxygen reduction and shading).

Alien Fauna Presence of alien fauna affecting faunal community structure.

Over utilisation of Biota Overgrazing, over fishing, etc. Total Mean

Table 2-6: Scoring guidelines and relative confidence scores for the habitat integrity

assessment for palustrine wetlands (DWA, 2005).

Scoring Guidelines per Attribute

Natural/Unmodified 5 Largely Natural 4 Moderately Modified 3 Largely Modified 2 Seriously Modified 1 Critically Modified 0

Relative Confidence of Scores: Very High Confidence 4 High Confidence 3 Moderate Confidence 2 Marginal/Low Confidence 1

Table 2-7 provides guidelines for the determination of the Present Ecological Status Category (PESC), based on the mean score determined for Table 2-7. This approach is based on the assumption that extensive degradation of any of the wetland attributes may determine the PESC (DWA, 2005).

Table 2-7: Category's assigned to the scores achieved in the wetland habitat assessment (DWA, 2005).

Category Mean Score Category Description

Within generally acceptable range

A >4 Unmodified or approximated natural condition.

March 2011 29 12627


Category Mean Score Category Description

B >3 and <=4

Largely natural with few modifications, but with some loss of natural habitats.

C >2 and <=3 Moderately modified, but with some loss of natural habitats.

D 2 Largely modified. A large loss of natural habitats and basic ecosystem functions has occurred. Outside generally acceptable range

E >0 and <2 Seriously modified. The losses of natural habitats and basic ecosystem functions are extensive.

F 0 Critically modified. Modifications have reached a critical level and the system has been modified completely with an almost complete loss of natural habitat.

Ecosystem Services Supplied by Wetlands

The assessment of the ecosystem services supplied by the identified wetlands was conducted according to the guidelines as described by Kotze et al (2009). A Level 2 assessment was undertaken which examines and rates the following services:

Flood attenuation;

Stream flow regulation;

Sediment trapping;

Phosphate trapping;

Nitrate removal;

Toxicant removal;

Erosion control;

Carbon storage;

Maintenance of biodiversity;

Water supply for human use;

Natural resources;

Cultivated foods;

Cultural significance;

Tourism and recreation; and

Education and research.

March 2011 30 12627


The characteristics were scored according to the following general levels of services provided:

Table 2-8: Level of service ratings.

Score Services Rating

0 Low

1 Moderately Low

2 Intermediate

3 Moderately High

4 High

The different wetland units (as delineated under section 2.5) were used as the basis for the level 2 assessment. The assessment was further focussed on those wetland units within the segments of likely impact associated with the different proposed power line routes. The relative importance of the different units, in relation to one another and between the three alternative railway alignments, were then evaluated by summing the number of services regarded as high (scoring levels higher than intermediate). The wetland units with the highest number of important functions were then delineated to facilitate decision making as shown in Figure 2-18. This map indicates that only one area can be deemed pristine with a high integrity rating, and that is the wetland associated with the Saalklapspruit at the southern end of the study area. This area is crossed by all the alternatives, however the shortest crossing is by Alternative 3.

March 2011 31 12627


Figure 2-17: Wetlands Delineated and Classified.

March 2011 32 12627


Figure 2-18: Wetland Integrity.

March 2011 33 12627


2.6 TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY


A literature review of the faunal species that could occur in the area was conducted. C-Plan data provided from the Mpumalanga provincial department was used to conduct a desktop study of the area. This data consists of terrestrial components; ratings provide an indication as to the importance of the area with respect to biodiversity.


The biodiversity rating for the bulk of the site (Figure 2-19) is rated as least concern and no natural habitat remaining. The initial stages of Alternatives 1 – 4 are on areas rated as least concern with a bottle neck near the small koppie where the rating is significant due to the potential for red data species, which was confirmed in the vegetation assessment section.

2.6.3 Vegetation

Data Collection

The floral study involved extensive fieldwork, a literature review and a desktop study utilizing GIS. The site was investigated from the 25th February - 2nd March 2011, in late summer. The area within the servitude was sampled using transects placed at 200 m intervals. At random points along the transect an area of 20 m x 20 m was surveyed. All species within the 20 m x 20 m quadrant were identified, photographed and their occurrence noted. Sensitive features such as ridges or wetlands were sampled by walking randomly through the area concerned and identifying all species within the area.

The floral data below is taken from The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland (Mucina and Rutherford 2006). Also, while on site, the following field guides were used:

Guide to Grasses of Southern Africa (Frits van Oudtshoorn, 1999); Field Guide to Trees of Southern Africa (Braam van Wyk and Piet van Wyk, 1997); Field Guide to the Wild Flowers of the Highveld (Braam van Wyk and Sasa Malan, 1998); Problem Plants of South Africa (Clive Bromilow, 2001); and Medicinal Plants of South Africa (Ben-Erik van Wyk, Bosch van Oudtshoorn and Nigel Gericke,

2002)

Regional Description

According to the South African National Biodiversity Institute, the study area falls within the Grassland Biome, where most of the country’s maize production occurs. The study area comprises of the Rand Highveld Grassland, Eastern Highveld Grassland and Eastern Temperate Freshwater Wetlands vegetation units as classified by Mucina and Rutherford2. Each of these vegetation units are described in more detail below.

March 2011 34 12627


Rand Highveld Grassland

Rand Highveld Grassland is found in the highly variable landscape with extensive sloping plains and ridges in the Gauteng, North-West, Free State and Mpumalanga Provinces. The vegetation type is found in areas between rocky ridges from Pretoria to Witbank, extending onto ridges in the Stoffberg and Roossenekal regions as well as in the vicinity of Derby and Potchefstroom, extending southwards and north-eastwards from there. The vegetation is species rich, sour grassland alternating with low shrubland on rocky outcrops. The most common grasses on the plains belong to the genera Themeda, Eragrostis, Heteropogon and Elionurus. High numbers of herbs, especially Asteraceae are also found. In rocky areas shrubs and trees prevail and are mostly Protea caffra, Acacia caffra, Celtis Africana and Rhus spp.

This vegetation type is poorly conserved (approx 1 %) and has a target of 24 % of the vegetation type to be conserved. Due to the low conservation status this vegetation type is classified as endangered. Almost half of the vegetation type has been transformed by cultivation, plantations, urbanisation or dam-building. Scattered aliens (most prominently Acacia mearnsii) are present in the unit.

Eastern Highveld Grassland

The Eastern Highveld Grassland is found in the Mpumalanga and Gauteng Provinces on the plains between Belfast in the east and the eastern side of Johannesburg in the west and extending southwards to Bethal, Ermelo and west of Piet Retief. The landscape is dominated by undulating plains and low hills with short dense grassland dominating belong to the genera Themeda, Aristida, Digitaria, Eragrostis, Tristachya. Once again woody species are prevalent on the rocky outcrops. In terms of conservation and disturbance, 44 % of the vegetation type is already transformed by cultivation, plantations, mines, and urbanisation. There is no serious alien invasion however Acacia mearnsii dominates in certain areas.

Eastern Temperate Freshwater Wetlands

Another vegetation type associated with the region is the Eastern Temperate Freshwater Wetlands, found around water bodies and embedded within the Grassland biome. Eastern Temperate Freshwater Wetlands are typically found in flat landscapes or shallow depressions filled with (temporary) water bodies supporting zoned systems of aquatic and hydrophillous (water loving) vegetation of temporarily flooded grasslands and ephemeral herblands. Important species include Cyperus congestus, Phragmites australis, Marsilea farinose, Rorippa fluviatalis, Disa zuluensis, Crassula tuberella and the carnivorous herb Utricularia inflexa. These wetlands are one of the most sensitive vegetation units found in the region and have been extensively modified by mining and industrial activities in the region. The vegetation types identified on site are indicated in the Figure below and described in detail below.

March 2011 35 12627


Figure 2-19: Biodiversity Map the site.

March 2011 36 12627


Figure 2-20: Vegetation Map the site.

March 2011 37 12627


Site Description

At the time of the site visit it was found that a large section of the site is already being developed as part of the Kusile Power Station construction as well as numerous sand mining operations on the prevalent sandstone in the area. Information was supplemented with the specialist ecological report1 undertaken for the Kusile Power Station EIA as well as the vegetation report for the New Largo Mine2.

Three main vegetation types were identified, namely rocky grassland, moist grassland and grazed/cultivated fields. Each of these vegetation types are described in more detail below and illustrated in Figure 2-20 above. The species list for the site is attached in Appendix 1. The species that could occur in the quarter degree grid was obtained from the Plants of Southern Africa (POSA) online database upheld by the South African National Botanical Institute (SANBI) and supplemented with field notes. The list provides species names, common names, as well as notes on which species were observed on site. In total 136 species have could occur in the area with 43 confirmed species.

Agriculture

Several areas within the study area are extensively used for cultivation and in this case Zea maize (Maize) is the preferred crop. The soil is tilled annually and with the regular disturbance comes the pioneer plants. In the roadways and fence lines between the fields there is often a collection of weeds and other pioneer plants that flourish before the soil is disturbed again.

Figure 2-21: Maize fields with some weeds on the roadside

1 Proposed Coal-Fired Power Station Near Kendal, Witbank Area Ecological Report, Dr. P.J. Du Preez, 2006. 2 Flora Specialist Report: Vegetation Assessment On New Largo Update Area Northwest Of Ogies, Mpumalanga, EcoInfo 2008.

March 2011 38 12627


Hyparrhenia hirta Anthropogenic Grassland (Grazed and Old Cultivated Fields)

This tall grassland occurs over vast areas, usually on shallow, leached soils on the Johannesburg granite dome, and on undulating north-facing warm andesitic lava slopes of the Suikerbosrand, Witwatersrand and Klipriviersberg areas. Disturbed grassland or other disturbed areas such as road reserves or fallow fields, not cultivated for some years, are also usually Hyparrhenia dominated (Coetzee et al. 1995; Bredenkamp & Brown 2003).

This Hyparrhenia – dominated grassland may appear to be quite natural, but they are mostly associated with an anthropogenic influence from recent or even iron-age times. This grassland is characterised by the tall growing dominant Thatch grass (Hyparrhenia hirta), and Bankrupt Bush (Stoebe vulgaris), an invader dwarf shrub which usually indicates grassland’s degraded condition (Bredenkamp & Brown 2003).

This grassland mostly has low species richness, with only a few other species able to establish or survive in the shade of the dense sward of tall grass. Most of these species are relict pioneers or early seral species. The most prominent species include the grasses Cynodon dactylon, Eragrostis plana, E. racemosa, E. curvula and Aristida congesta. Forbs are rarely encountered, though a few individuals of species such as Anthospermum rigidum, Conyza podocephala, Crabbea angustifolia and Helichrysum rugulosum are often present (Bredenkamp & Brown 2003). Figure 2-22 below provides an illustration of the Hypparrhenia grassland unit with the current Duvha-Minerva power line in the background.

Figure 2-22: Hyparrhenia grassland.

March 2011 39 12627


Schizachyrium sanguineum - Loudetia simplex Grassland (Rocky Grassland)

This rocky grassland is found throughout the study area on rocky midslopes of ridges and hills. The soils are often shallow with high rock cover (up to 60% in some cases). This vegetation is found mostly on cooler aspects, but also occur on the warmer north-facing aspects where scattered individuals of dwarf shrubs are present. In some degraded areas Aristida junciformis, A. congesta and Cynodon dactylon are more prominent (Coetzee et al. 1995; Bredenkamp & Brown 2003).

This grassland is dominated by the grasses Digitaria monodactyla, Loudetia simplex, Trachypogon spicatus, Eragrostis racemosa, Andropogon shirensis, Schizachyrium sanguineum, Brachiaria serrata and Themeda triandra (Figure 2-23).

The woody layer consists mainly of a few scattered individuals of the dwarf shrubs Protea welwitschii, Lopholaenia coriifolia, and the geoxylophyte Parinari capensis, that are locally prominent. The grasses Alloteropsis semialata, Panicum natalense, Urelytrum agropyroides, Tristachya leucothrix, Monocymbium ceresiiforme, Digitaria monodactyla, Sporobolus pectinatus, Alloteropsis semialata, Bewsia biflora and Elionurus muticus are also abundant together with the forbs Cyanotis speciosa, Bulbostylis burchellii, Senecio venosus, Sphenostylus angustifolia and Pentanissia angustifolia (Coetzee et al. 1995; Bredenkamp & Brown 2003).

Figure 2-23: Rocky Grassland.

March 2011 40 12627


Eragrostis plana Moist Grassland (Moist Grassland)

The Eragrostis plana Grassland is well represented occurring mainly in high rainfall parts. This grassland type is a moist grassland, usually restricted to flat plains or bottomlands, mostly on moist, deep, clayey and poorly drained, seasonally wet soils, adjacent to wetlands , seasonal as well as perennial rivers. These habitats are often fairly unstable due to seasonal flooding and drying, which, together with frequent overgrazing, cause degradation of the vegetation (Bezuidenhout & Bredenkamp 1990).

Eragrostis plana is conspicuous, often dominant member of this grassland type (Figure 2-24). Paspalum dilatatum, and the rhizomatous Cynodon dactylon, often presents in degraded sites, are also diagnostic, as well as the forbs Crabbea acaulis, Berkheya radula, B. pinnatifida and Trifolium africanum. Grass species such as Eragrostis curvula, Themeda triandra, Setaria sphacelata and Digitaria eriantha are often abundantly present, and may be locally dominant, while forbs are generally quite rare (Coetzee et al. 1995; Bredenkamp & Brown 2003).

Figure 2-24: Eragrostis Plana Moist Grassland.

March 2011 41 12627


Seepage areas and wetland communities

Seepage areas are seasonally wet areas that occur in sandy areas where water seeps into lowlying drainage lines after rains. These areas are usually covered by hygrophytes such as sedges and reeds. The dominant sedge in the study area is Juncus rigidus. Sometimes bulrush (Typha capensis) and reeds (Phragmites australis) also occur.

Wetlands are of a more permanent nature and occur in low-lying areas such as tributaries of streams and rivers. Here hydrophytes can be found. Typical plants are the Orange River Lily (Crinum bulbispermum), bulrush (Typha capensis) and reeds (Phragmites australis), sedges of the Cyperus, Fuirena and Scirpus genera also occur (Figure 2-25).

Figure 2-25: Seepage Area.

March 2011 42 12627


Red data Flora Species

The findings of the ecological assessment undertaken for the New Largo Coal Mine identified Frithia humulis on rocky outcrops just south of the proposed routes. None of the proposed power line alternatives traverses over this area, however they all are very close in proximity, and a no-go buffer was placed around the red data sites as shown in the Figure. These findings were confirmed by the South African National Biodiversity Institute during a site visit to the area, and a 100m buffer was proposed.

Table 2-9 below illustrates the potential red data species that could occur in the area, according to the red data species database from the Mpumalanga environmental department.

Table 2-9: Possible Red Data plant species occurring in Mpumulanga.

Biological Name Acacia ebutsiniorum

Argyrolobium muddii

Asparagus fractiflexus

Ceropegia scabriflora

Disa clavicornis

Disa zuluensis

Erica rivularis

Eriosema naviculare

Gerbera aurantiaca

Gladiolus cataractarum

Haworthia koelmaniorum

Helichrysum lesliei

Helichrysum summo-montanum

Morella microbracteata

Pachycarpus suaveolens

Warburgia salutaris

2.6.4 Terrestrial species

Methodology

This section was adapted from the Golder report “Ecological Follow-up Surveys for the Proposed ESKOM Bravo Power Station near Kendal, Mpumalanga, 2008”. In order to enable a characterization of the environment, as well as floral and faunal species that may be impacted by the proposed power line, faunal groups were investigated. The groups of species investigated were:

Arthropoda;

March 2011 43 12627


Mammals;

Herpetofauna (Reptiles); and

Amphibia.

Avifauna was excluded as a separate specialist study was conducted for the avi-fauna. Methods implemented during this investigation are based on accepted scientific investigative techniques and principles and were performed to acceptable standards and norms, taking the limitations of this investigation into consideration. The Precautionary Principle was applied throughout the assessments.

Arthropoda

Arthropods were surveyed by means of setting out of pitfall traps, in selected areas within the various vegetation communities, and intensive transects making use of visual identification. Furthermore capture of species on the wing was also undertaken in order to aid identification, this was done by means of sweep-netting. Identification of species was done to the lowest possible taxonomic level using Picker et al (2002).

Suitable habitat was identified for scorpions, spiders and butterflies in order to select areas in which to sample by means of pitfall traps and visual identification, as well as to determine the possibility of the occurrences of Red Data or protected species of these taxa.

Reptilia

Suitable areas were identified and sampled using active search and capture methods, searches were concentrated in rocky areas and disused ant hills were investigated for the presence of snakes. Snakes and other reptiles are identified visually and only captured if visual identification is hampered by swift-moving snakes or if the snake is obscured from view. Branch, 1996 was used as an identification guide, where necessary.

Amphibia

Suitable areas for frogs were sampled by means of active search and capture and acoustic identification methods, especially at night when highest amphibian activity is expected. Areas were also netted for tadpoles and amphibian species identified by means of tadpoles. Carruthers (2001) was used to confirm identification where necessary.

Mammalia

Sherman traps were placed at the sites during the night in order to capture small mammals. Visual sightings and ecological indications were used to identify the small mammal inhabitants of the

March 2011 44 12627


study area. Scats were also collected and used for identification of nocturnal small mammals. Stuart and Stuart (1993) and Smithers (1992) were used for identification purposes.

Red Data Faunal Assessment

The following parameters were used to assess the Probability of Occurrence of each Red Data species:

Habitat requirements (HR) – Most Red Data animals have very specific habitat requirements and the presence of these habitat characteristics in the study area was evaluated.

Habitat status (HS) – The status or ecological condition of available habitat in the area is assessed. Often a high level of habitat degradation prevalent in a specific habitat will negate the potential presence of Red Data species (this is especially evident in wetland habitats).

Habitat linkage (HL) – Movement between areas for breeding and feeding forms an essential part of the existence of many species. Connectivity of the study area to surrounding habitat and the adequacy of these linkages are evaluated for the ecological functioning of Red Data species within the study area.

Probability of occurrence is presented in four categories, namely:

Low;

Medium;

High; and

Recorded.

Impacts to biological patterns and processes

The assessments of potential impacts are discussed according to biological patterns and processes. The identified potential impacts for each of these are discussed below.

Patterns

Habitat

Habitat Loss

- Loss of wetland habitats within the site, where infrastructure and deposits are planned.

- Alteration of wetland and aquatic system functioning as a result of coal mining activities and the construction of the power station to the east of the site.

- Loss of Eastern Highveld Grassland within Site, where infrastructure and deposits are planned.

March 2011 45 12627


- Loss of Grassland and Rocky outcrop habitats along the linear infrastructure

- Loss of wetland habitat along the linear infrastructure

Habitat Alteration

- Alteration of wetland functioning as a result on infrastructure altering water flow

- Alteration in habitat quality as a result of pollution, dust and altered temperatures of discharge

Rare and Sensitive Species

- Loss of rare and sensitive species (All Sites)

Processes

Biological

Migration

- Noise, and pollution, may deter fauna from settling or passing through the area

- Physical barrier to species using and moving across the area

Competition

- Alteration in quality and quantity of available habitat

Predation

- Alteration in species composition - occurrence and abundance

Anthropogenic

- Increased human activity in the area

Faunal Assessment

Arthropoda

A total of 67 arthropods were recorded during the site investigation and are given in Table 2-10. All of the species recorded during the survey were common grassland species and are not restricted in terms of habitat or distribution. It is likely that more species may occur in the area. However it is unlikely that Red Data arthropod species, such as Aloeides dentatis or Aloeides merces, occur on this site as the host plants for these species are not present.

March 2011 46 12627


Table 2-10: Arthropoda recorded on site.

Family Genus Species Gomphidae Ictinogomphus ferox Aeshnidae Aeshna miniscula Anax imperator Libellulidae Nothiothemis jonesi Trithemis stictica Blattidae Deropeltis erythrocephala Periplenata americana Blatellidae Blatella germanica Blaberidae Derocalymma Pseudophyllodromiidae Supella dimidiata Termitidae Macrotermes natalensis Hymenopodidae Harpagomantis tricolor Mantidae Sphodromantis gastrica Miomantis Empusidae Empusa guttula Libiduridae Euborellia annuplipes Anostostomatidae Onosandrus Bradyporidae Hetrodes pupus Tettigonidae Phaneroptera Eurycorypha sp. Phaneroptera sp. Gryllidae Gryllus bimaculatus Gryllotalpidae sp. Pamphagidae Hoplolopha Pyrgomorphidae Zonocerus elegans Lentulidae Lentula Acrididae Acrida acuminata Truxaloides Cyrtacnthacris aeruginosa Phasmatidae Palophus reyi Miridae Deraeocoris Reduviidae Etrichodia crux Glymmatophora Lopodytes grassator Plataspidae Solenostethium lilligerum Alydidae Mirperus faculus Pentatomidae Nezara viridula Scarabidae Gymnopleurus humanus Anachalcos convexus Copris mesacanthus Cerambycidae Prosopocera lactator Carabidae Passalidius fortipes Acanthoscelis ruficornis Melirydae Melyris Tennebrionidae Psammodes striatus Stenocara dentata Dichtha incantatoris Meloidae Actenoidia curtula

March 2011 47 12627


Family Genus Species Curculionidae Prionorhinus canus Myrmeleontidae Centroclisi sp. Hagenomyia tristis Tabanidae Philoliche rostrata Culicidae Aedes Culex Bombyliidae Exoprosopa Calliphoridae Chrysomya chloropyga Saturniidae Bunaea alcinoe Pieridae Eurema brigitta Nymphalidae Hamanumida daedalus Danaus chrysippus Vespidae Ropalidia Belonogaster dubia Apidae Apis mellifera Formicidae Camponotus sp. Arachnidae Araneidae Argiope australis Gasteracanthus sanguinolenta

Reptilia

Nine reptilian species were recorded during the site survey (Table 2-11). None of the recorded species are restricted in terms of habitat and distribution, or classified as Red Data Species. It is likely that more species may occur in the area but unlikely that any of the species occurring on this site are classified as Red Data species.

Table 2-11: Reptilia recorded on site.

Scientific Name Common Name Chammaesaura aenea Transvaal Grass Lizard Lamprophis fuliginosus Brown House Snake Mabuya striata punctatissima Striped Skink Psammophylax rhombeatus Rhombic Skaapsteker Mabuya striata punctatissima Striped Skink Mabuya varia Variable Skink Pelomedusa subrufa Marsh Terrapin Philothamnus hoplogaster Green Water Snake Varanus niloticus Water monitor

Amphibia

Seven species of amphibians were recorded as occurring within the study area and are given in Table 2-12. These species are not restricted in terms of habitat or distribution and none of the species recorded are classified as Red Data species. It is possible that more species may occur in

March 2011 48 12627


the area but, due to the fact that no Red Data amphibian species are known to occur in this vegetation type, it is unlikely that any Red Data amphibian species occur at this site.

Table 2-12: Amphibia recorded on site.

Species Revised Status Bufo gutturalis Not Listed Schismaderma carens Not Listed Tomopterna cryptotis Not Listed Kassina senegalensis Not Listed Xenopus laevis Not Listed Cacosternum boettgeri Not Listed Afrana angolensis Not Listed

Mammalia

Mammal species diversity was very low at this site, with only 17 species being recorded (Table 2-13). Although no individuals of these species were found during this survey, Mystromys albicaudatus, White-tailed mouse, are Red Data species that may utilize this habitat type.

Table 2-13: Mammalia recorded at site.

Biological Name Common Name Elephantulus myurus Rock elephant shrew Lepus saxatilis Scrub hare Hystrix africaeaustralis Porcupine Rhabdomys pumilio Striped mouse Mastomys natalensis Natal multimammate mouse Dendromus melanotis Grey climbing mouse Dendromus mystacalis Chestnut climbing mouse Ictonyx striatus Striped polecat Cynictis penicillata Yellow mongoose Raphicerus campestris Steenbok Crocidura cyanea Reddish grey musk shrew Otomys angoniensis Angoni vlei rat Otomys irroratus Vlei rat Dendromus mystacalis Chestnut climbing mouse Aonyx capensis Cape clawless otter Lutra maculicollis Spotted-necked otter Atilax paludinosus Water mongoose

Red Data Faunal Species

Red Data faunal species that may occur in the area are listed in Table 2-14. A total of 11 Red Data faunal species may occur in the area, according to the provincial departments.

March 2011 49 12627


Table 2-14: Red Data faunal species that may occur in the study area.

Biological Name Common Name Aloeides dentatis Aloeides merces Amblysomus septentrionalis HIGHVELD GOLDEN MOLE (Eng) Chrysospalax villosus ROUGH-HAIRED GOLDEN MOLE Mystromys albicaudatus WHITE-TAILED MOUSE

The Red Data species that may occur in the study area consist of 2 arthropod species, 0 amphibian species and 3 mammal species. The habitat suitability for Red Data species ranges from low to medium with a 16 species for which the habitat suitability can be classified as high. Although no individuals of these species were found during this survey Mystromys albicaudatus, White-tailed mouse is a Red Data species that may utilize this habitat type.

2.7 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

2.7.1 Introduction

The site and surrounding area may be characterised as agricultural land utilised mainly for the grazing of cattle, with isolated areas of sand mining, coal mining and brickworks. A recent addition to the area is the construction of the Kusile Power Station. The topography of the region and study site is gently undulating to moderately undulating landscape of the Highveld plateau.

The proposed power lines are located in the area immediately noerth and west of the Kusile Power Station with the power station construction site and other infrastructures like existing power lines and roads featuring prominently in the landscape.

2.7.2 Methodology

The methodology adopted for the visual assessment includes the following tasks:

Examine the baseline information (contours, building dimensions, vegetation);

Determine the area from which the proposed power line may be visible (viewshed);

Identify the locations from which views of the proposed power line may be visible (observation sites), which include buildings and roads;

Analyse the observation sites to determine the potential level of visual impact that may result from the proposed railway; and

Identify measures available to mitigate the potential impacts.

Each component of the assessment process is explained in detail in the following sections of the Report.

March 2011 50 12627


The Viewshed

The viewshed represents the area from which the proposed site would potentially be visible. The extent of the viewshed is influenced primarily by the combination of topography and vegetation, which determine the extent to which the site would be visible from surrounding areas.

The viewshed was determined by Zitholele through the following steps and presumptions:

The likely viewshed was determined by desktop study (ArcGIS) using contour plans (20 m interval); and

An offset of 2 m (maximum) for the observer and an offset of 30 m (maximum) for the proposed power lines were utilized during the spatial analysis.

Visibility Assessment

Site visibility is an assessment of the extent to which the proposed power line would potentially be visible from surrounding areas. It takes account of the context of the view, the relative number of viewers, duration of view and view distance.

The underlying rationale for this assessment is that if the proposed power line (and associated infrastructure) is not visible from surrounding areas then the development will not produce a visual impact. On the other hand if one or more power lines are highly visible to a large number of people in surrounding areas then the potential visual impact is likely to be high.

Based on a combination of all these factors an overall rating of visibility was applied to each observation point. For the purpose of this report, categories of visibility have been defined as high (H), moderate (M) or low (L).

Assessment Criteria

For the purpose of this report, the quantitative criteria listed in Table 2-15 have been determined and used in the Visibility Assessment. The criteria are defined in more detail in the subsection following.

Table 2-15: Visual Impact Assessment Criteria

CRITERIA DEFINITIONS Category of Viewer Static Farms, homesteads or industries Dynamic Travelling along road View Elevation Above Higher elevation then proposed power line. Level Level with power line view Below Lower elevation then power line viewed View Distance

March 2011 51 12627


CRITERIA DEFINITIONS Long > 5 km Medium 1 – 5 km Short 200 m – 1 000 m Very Short < 200 m Period of View Long Term > 120 minutes Medium Time 1 – 120 minutes Short Term < 1 minute

Category Viewer

The visibility of the proposed power line will vary between static and dynamic view types. In the case of static views, such as views from a farmhouse or homestead, the visual relationship between the proposed power line and the landscape will not change. The cone of vision is relatively wide and the viewer tends to scan back and forth across the landscape.

In contrast views from a moving vehicle are dynamic as the visual relationship between the proposed power line is constantly changing as well as the visual relationship between the proposed power line and the landscape in which they it is seen. The view cone for motorists, particularly drivers, is generally narrower than for static views.

View Elevation

The elevation of the viewer relative to the object observed significantly influences the visibility of the object by changing the background and therefore the visual contrast. In situations where the viewer is at a higher elevation than the building/structure it will be seen against a background of landscape. The level of visual contrast between the proposed power line and the background will determine the level of visibility. A white/bright coloured structure seen against a background of dark/pale coloured tree-covered slopes will be highly visible compared to a background of light coloured slopes covered by yellow/brown dry vegetation.

In situations where the viewer is located at a lower elevation than the proposed power lines it will mostly be viewed against the sky. The degree of visual contrast between a metallic structure will depend on the colour of the sky. Dark grey clouds will create a significantly greater level of contrast than for a background of white clouds.

View Distance

The influence of distance on visibility results from two factors:

With increasing distance the proportion of the view cone occupied by a visible structure will decline; and

March 2011 52 12627


Atmospheric effects due to dust and moisture in the air reduce the visual contrast between the structure and the background against which they are viewed.

Period of View

The visibility of structures will increase with the period over which they are seen. The longer the period of view the higher the level of visibility. However, it is presumed that over an extended period the level of visibility declines as people become accustomed to the new element in the landscape.

Long term views of the proposed power line will generally be associated with farms homesteads located within the viewshed. Short term and moderate term views will generally relate to people moving through the viewshed mostly by vehicle.

Site Visibility

The procedure followed by Zitholele to assess Site Visibility involved:

Generate a viewshed analysis of the area utilizing ArcGIS 9.

Determine the various categories of observation points (e.g. Static, Dynamic).

Impact Assessment Methodology

Visual impact is defined as the significance and/or severity of changes to visual quality of the area resulting from a development or change in land use that may occur in the landscape.

Significance or severity is a measure of the response of viewers to the changes that occur. It represents the interaction between humans and the landscape changes that they observe. The response to visible changes in the landscape may vary significantly between individuals.

Perception results from the combination of the extent to which the proposed power line is visible (level of visibility) and the response of individuals to what they see. A major influence on the perception of people/tourist in relation to the proposed power line will be the visual character and quality of the landscape in which it would be located. Natural landscape areas such as national parks, mountain areas or undeveloped sections of coast are valued for their high visual quality. The introduction of buildings and associated infrastructure may be seen as a negative impact on these areas of high visual quality. In the case of this site many people are used to the power lines as the line is existing and has been in the area for a number of years.

The potential visual impact of the proposed power line will primarily result from changes to the visual character of the area within the viewshed. The nature of these changes will depend on the level of the visual contrast between buildings/structures and the existing landscape within which they would be viewed.

March 2011 53 12627


The degree of contrast between the proposed power line and the surrounding landscape will result from one or more of the following visual characteristics:

Colour;

Shape or form;

Scale;

Texture; and

Reflectivity.

2.7.3 Visual Character

Landscape Character

The site and the surrounding area can be described as an agricultural landscape with intermittent mining and power generation activities. The proposed power line will be located on a slope starting at the Klipfonteinspruit valley bottom and moving up the slope towards the Kusile Power Station. Elevations along the slope range from 1 420 mamsl and 1 520 mamsl. All power line route alternatives are located on this slope with very little screening from topography or vegetation. Please refer to Figure 2-1 for the topography of the site.

There are no major rivers in the area, but the non perennial Klipfonteinspruit and an unnamed tributary to the spruit are found on site. Alternative 1 crosses the Klipfonteinspruit and the tributary, while Alternative 2 is aligned along the tributary and crosses the Klipfonteinspruit. For an illustration of the surface water features please refer to Figure 2-15.

The landscape surrounding the proposed power line can be described as open grassland with numerous cultivated fields. In addition a large section of the site is currently being developed for the Kusile Power Station. The natural vegetation does not provide any screening for the proposed power line. There are also several existing power lines on site. Figure 2-26 below provides a view of the existing Duvha-Minerva power line lines looking east along the power line line.

The study area is dominated by agricultural smallholdings and small farms with the main farming activities being either livestock or maize farming. The N4 highway and the R 104 regional roads cross through the site and the power line will cross over/under these roads. In addition to the main roads, several smaller gravel farm roads also occur in the area along with several 400 kV power lines.

Viewshed

It should be noted that the viewshed, which is plotted on Figure 2-27, is an approximation that may vary in some locations. Potential views to the proposed power line are likely to be blocked in some

March 2011 54 12627


localised situations by buildings, vegetation or local landform features at specific locations within the viewshed. Similarly, glimpses of the proposed power line may be available from some isolated high-elevation locations outside the plotted viewshed. The figures illustrate the visibility of each of the alternatives. The coloured areas indicate areas that are visible with the red areas having very high visibility and the green having lower visibility. It should be noted that the variations in visual impact between the alternatives are relatively small, considering the alignment of all three alternatives together in the northern part of the route, which is also the most populated.

Figure 2-26: View of the existing power line from the takeoff point looking west.

Notable features of the viewshed are summarised by the following points:

The viewshed extends approximately 6 km to the north of the proposed power line;

In a easterly direction the viewshed is generally limited by a ridgelines approximately 9 km from the site, just before Emalahleni;

To the west the viewshed extends approximately 12 km with isolated views on high outcrops; and

Potential views from the south are blocked by the flowing ridges located south from the proposed site, and the viewshed extends about 8 km.

March 2011 55 12627


Figure 2-27: Visual Impact.

March 2011 56 12627


3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

The impacts will be ranked according to the methodology described below. Where possible, mitigation measures will be provided to manage impacts. In order to ensure uniformity, a standard impact assessment methodology was utilised so that a wide rage of impacts can be compared with each other. The impact assessment methodology makes provision for the assessment of impacts against the following criteria:

Significance;

Spatial scale;

Temporal scale;

Probability; and

Degree of certainty.

A combined quantitative and qualitative methodology was used to describe impacts for each of the aforementioned assessment criteria. A summary of each of the qualitative descriptors along with the equivalent quantitative rating scale for each of the aforementioned criteria is given in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1: Quantitative rating and equivalent descriptors for the impact assessment criteria

Rating Significance Extent Scale Temporal Scale 1 VERY LOW Isolated sites / proposed

site Incidental

2 LOW Study area Short-term 3 MODERATE Local Medium-term 4 HIGH Regional / Provincial Long-term 5 VERY HIGH Global / National Permanent

A more detailed description of each of the assessment criteria is given in the following sections.

3.1 SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT

Significance rating (importance) of the associated impacts embraces the notion of extent and magnitude, but does not always clearly define these since their importance in the rating scale is very relative. For example, the magnitude (i.e. the size) of area affected by atmospheric pollution may be extremely large (1 000 km2) but the significance of this effect is dependent on the concentration or level of pollution. If the concentration is great, the significance of the impact would be HIGH or VERY HIGH, but if it is diluted it would be VERY LOW or LOW. Similarly, if 60 ha of a grassland type are destroyed the impact would be VERY HIGH if only 100 ha of that grassland type were known. The impact would be VERY

March 2011 57 12627


LOW if the grassland type was common. A more detailed description of the impact significance rating scale is given in Table 3-2 below.

Table 3-2 : Description of the significance rating scale

Rating Description 5 Very high Of the highest order possible within the bounds of impacts which

could occur. In the case of adverse impacts: there is no possible mitigation and/or remedial activity which could offset the impact. In the case of beneficial impacts, there is no real alternative to achieving this benefit.

4 High Impact is of substantial order within the bounds of impacts, which could occur. In the case of adverse impacts: mitigation and/or remedial activity is feasible but difficult, expensive, time-consuming or some combination of these. In the case of beneficial impacts, other means of achieving this benefit are feasible but they are more difficult, expensive, time-consuming or some combination of these.

3 Moderate Impact is real but not substantial in relation to other impacts, which might take effect within the bounds of those which could occur. In the case of adverse impacts: mitigation and/or remedial activity are both feasible and fairly easily possible. In the case of beneficial impacts: other means of achieving this benefit are about equal in time, cost, effort, etc.

2 Low Impact is of a low order and therefore likely to have little real effect. In the case of adverse impacts: mitigation and/or remedial activity is either easily achieved or little will be required, or both. In the case of beneficial impacts, alternative means for achieving this benefit are likely to be easier, cheaper, more effective, less time consuming, or some combination of these.

1 Very low Impact is negligible within the bounds of impacts which could occur. In the case of adverse impacts, almost no mitigation and/or remedial activity are needed, and any minor steps which might be needed are easy, cheap, and simple. In the case of beneficial impacts, alternative means are almost all likely to be better, in one or a number of ways, than this means of achieving the benefit. Three additional categories must also be used where relevant. They are in addition to the category represented on the scale, and if used, will replace the scale.

0 No impact There is no impact at all - not even a very low impact on a party or system.

March 2011 58 12627


3.2 SPATIAL SCALE

The spatial scale refers to the extent of the impact i.e. will the impact be felt at the local, regional, or global scale. The spatial assessment scale is described in more detail in Table 3-3.

Table 3-3 : Description of the significance rating scale

Rating Description 5 Global/National The maximum extent of any impact. 4 Regional/Provincial The spatial scale is moderate within the bounds of impacts

possible, and will be felt at a regional scale (District Municipality to Provincial Level).

3 Local The impact will affect an area up to 5 km from the proposed study area.

2 Study Area The impact will affect an area not exceeding the study area.

1 Isolated Sites / proposed site

The impact will affect an area no bigger than the power line alignments.

3.3 DURATION SCALE

In order to accurately describe the impact it is necessary to understand the duration and persistence of an impact in the environment. The temporal scale is rated according to criteria set out in Table 3-4.

Table 3-4: Description of the temporal rating scale

Rating Description 1 Incidental The impact will be limited to isolated incidences that are

expected to occur very sporadically. 2 Short-term The environmental impact identified will operate for the duration

of the construction phase or a period of less than 5 years, whichever is the greater.

3 Medium term The environmental impact identified will operate for the duration of life of plant.

4 Long term The environmental impact identified will operate beyond the life of operation.

5 Permanent The environmental impact will be permanent.

3.4 DEGREE OF PROBABILITY

Probability or likelihood of an impact occurring will be described as shown in Table 3-5 below.

March 2011 59 12627


Table 3-5 : Description of the degree of probability of an impact occurring

Rating Description 1 Practically impossible 2 Unlikely 3 Could happen 4 Very Likely 5 It’s going to happen / has occurred

3.5 DEGREE OF CERTAINTY

As with all studies it is not possible to be 100% certain of all facts, and for this reason a standard “degree of certainty” scale is used as discussed in Table 3-6. The level of detail for specialist studies is determined according to the degree of certainty required for decision-making. The impacts are discussed in terms of affected parties or environmental components.

Table 3-6 : Description of the degree of certainty rating scale Rating Description

Definite More than 90% sure of a particular fact. Probable Between 70 and 90% sure of a particular fact, or of the likelihood

of that impact occurring. Possible Between 40 and 70% sure of a particular fact or of the likelihood

of an impact occurring. Unsure Less than 40% sure of a particular fact or the likelihood of an

impact occurring. Can’t know The consultant believes an assessment is not possible even with

additional research. Don’t know The consultant cannot, or is unwilling, to make an assessment

given available information.

3.6 QUANTITATIVE DESCRIPTION OF IMPACTS

To allow for impacts to be described in a quantitative manner in addition to the qualitative description given above, a rating scale of between 1 and 5 was used for each of the assessment criteria. Thus the total value of the impact is described as the function of significance, spatial and temporal scale as described below:

Impact Risk = (SIGNIFICANCE + Spatial + Temporal) X Probability

3 5

An example of how this rating scale is applied is shown below:

March 2011 60 12627


Table 3-7 : Example of Rating Scale

Impact Significance Spatial Scale

Temporal Scale

Probability Rating

LOW Local Medium-term Could Happen Impact to air 2 3 3 3 1.6

Note: The significance, spatial and temporal scales are added to give a total of 8, that is divided by 3 to give a criteria rating of

2,67. The probability (3) is divided by 5 to give a probability rating of 0,6. The criteria rating of 2,67 is then multiplied by the

probability rating (0,6) to give the final rating of 1,6.

The impact risk is classified according to five classes as described in the table below.

Table 3-8 : Impact Risk Classes

Rating Impact Class Description 0.1 – 1.0 1 Very Low 1.1 – 2.0 2 Low 2.1 – 3.0 3 Moderate 3.1 – 4.0 4 High 4.1 – 5.0 5 Very High

Therefore with reference to the example used for air quality above, an impact rating of 1.6 will fall in the Impact Class 2, which will be considered to be a low impact.

3.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

It is a requirement that the impact assessments take cognisance of cumulative impacts. In fulfilment of this requirement the impact assessment will take cognisance of any existing impact sustained by the operations, any mitigation measures already in place, any additional impact to environment through continued and proposed future activities, and the residual impact after mitigation measures.

It is important to note that cumulative impacts at the national or provincial level will not be considered in this assessment, as the total quantification of external companies on resources is not possible at the project level due to the lack of information and research documenting the effects of existing activities. Such cumulative impacts that may occur across industry boundaries can also only be effectively addressed at Provincial and National Government levels.

Using the criteria as described above an example of how the cumulative impact assessment will be done is shown below:


Temporal Scale

Probability Rating

Initial / Existing Impact (I-IA)

2 2 2 1 0.4

Additional Impact (A-IA) 1 2 1 1 0.3

March 2011 61 12627



Temporal Scale

Probability Rating

Cumulative Impact (C-IA) 3 4 2 1 0.6 Residual Impact after mitigation (R-IA)

2 1 2 1 0.3

As indicated in the example above the Additional Impact Assessment (A-IA) is the amount that the impact assessment for each criterion will increase. Thus if the initial impact will not increase, as shown for temporal scale in the example above the A-IA will be 0, however, where the impact will increase by two orders of magnitude from 2 to 4 as in the spatial scale the A-IA is 2. The Cumulative Impact Assessment (C-IA) is thus the sum of the Initial Impact Assessment (I-IA) and the A-IA for each of the assessment criteria.

In both cases the I-IA and A-IA are assessed without taking into account any form of mitigation measures. As such the C-IA is also a worst case scenario assessment where no mitigation measures have been implemented. Thus a Residual Impact Assessment (R-IA) is also made which takes into account the C-IA with mitigation measures. The latter is the most probable case scenario, and for the purpose of this report is considered to be the final state Impact Assessment.

3.8 NOTATION OF IMPACTS

In order to make the report easier to read the following notation format is used to highlight the various components of the assessment:

Significance or magnitude- IN CAPITALS

Temporal Scale – in underline

Probability – in italics and underlined.

Degree of certainty - in bold

Spatial Extent Scale – in italics

March 2011 62 12627


4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The Impact Assessment will highlight and describe the impact to the environment following the abovementioned methodology and will assess the following components:

Soils and Agricultural Potential

Surface Water and Wetlands;

Terrestrial Ecology, and

Visual Assessment.

The impact assessment was undertaken for the construction and operational phases of the project. The impact of each line/route alternative was also assessed separately, however, where the impact was not significantly different, only one impact assessment was undertaken. The power line will constitute a single 400 kV power line with a single overhead line and an access road (Figure 4-1). According to the design team the impact servitude required for such a power line would be approximitaly 55 m.

Figure 4-1: Example of what the power line would look like

March 2011 63 12627


4.1 SOILS AND AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL

4.1.1 Initial Impact

As mentioned above, the site will soon be the New Largo Coal Mine. The section of soils that will be crossed by the power line alternatives are presently not impacted by the construction of the mine, but in the near future the construction of the mine could start. In addition there are several sand mining, brickworks and coal mining operations present in the area. Other existing impacts are the existing power line pylon footings (132 kV) and cultivation of soils for mainly maize and fodder.

The soils that are mined or part of a mining operation could be removed in entirety or become sterile from being stored in stockpiles and could not be used for the land capability that the soils possess. This impact is rated as a HIGH negative impact that occurs on isolated sites and will remain for the long term. The impact is very likely to occur and is therefore rated as a High impact.

4.1.2 Additional Impact

During the construction phase, the 400 kV power lines will be erected. A 400 kV Transmission line requires a servitude width of 55 m. Where there are physical constraints such as other power lines adjacent to the new servitude, a minimum of 55 m-separation distance from such lines is required. The power line cables are strung between pylons / towers, which are steel structures erected on concrete footings fixed in the substrate (soil or rock) below the pylon.

The major impacts during construction are the construction activities associated with the erection of the power lines and include, amongst others, excavation of the pylon footings, heavy vehicle movement, construction of an access road and waste generation.

The impact to soils and land capability will be the removal of the soil resource at the pylon footings by means of excavation, possible contamination and pollution of the soil from heavy vehicle movement and the compaction of the soils from heavy vehicle traffic. Another potential impact to soils is during the construction of an access road to the pylons the cleared road could become prone to erosion, and thereby removing the soil resource. Due to the fact that the various alternatives are some similar in length and traverse the same areas the impact is rated as identical for all the alternatives.

Considering the potential impact described above the additional impact during construction is rated as a LOW negative impact occurring in the study area and acting in the short-term. This impact will likely occur and as such is rated as a Low impact.

During the operational phase the pylon footings will remain, but the vehicle traffic will significantly reduce. The impact is rated as a LOW negative impact occurring in the study

March 2011 64 12627


area and acting in the long-term. This impact could occur and as such is rated as a Low impact.

The ratings of the impacts are shown in Table 4-1 below.

4.1.3 Cumulative Impact

The cumulative impact during the construction phase remains as assessed above in the initial assessment as the impact stretches over the study site. Therefore the impact remains a Moderate impact.

4.1.4 Mitigation Measures

Avoid unnessacary removal of vegetation cover;

If possible utilise the existing servitude road that was constructed for the 132 kV power line to Kusile;

Ensure that all machinery on site is in a good working order;

Limit all activities to the proposed power line servitude;

Ensure that adequate storm water control measures are in place to prevent erosion;

Avoid placement of pylons on the clay soils;

Spread absorbent sand on areas where oil spills are likely to occur, such as the refuelling area in the hard park;

Oil-contaminated soils are to be removed to a contained storage area and bio-remediated or disposed of at a licensed facility;

If soils are excavated for the foundations construction, ensure that the soil is utilised elsewhere for rehabilitation/road building/fill purposes; and

Ensure that soil is stockpiled in such a way as to prevent erosion from storm water.

4.1.5 Residual Impact

The residual impact with the successful implementation of the mitigation measures mentioned above will be slightly less significant as the probability reduces slightly. The result is a MODERATE impact in the study site in the Long Term. This impact is very likely to occur and the rating remains Moderate. This is relevant for both the construction and operational phases.

March 2011 65 12627


Table 4-1: Impact Rating Matrix for Soils and Agricultural Potential

Construction phase Impact Type Significance Spatial Temporal Probability Rating Initial High Study site Long Term Very Likely 2.67 - Moderate Additional Low Study site Short Term Very Likely 1.6 - Low Cumulative High Study site Long Term Very Likely 2.67 - Moderate Residual Moderate Study site Long Term Very Likely 2.4 - Moderate Operational Phase Impact Type Significance Spatial Temporal Probability Rating Additional Low Study site Long Term Could occur 1.6 - Low Cumulative High Study site Long Term Very Likely 2.67 - Moderate Residual Moderate Study site Long Term Very Likely 2.4 - Moderate

4.2 SURFACE WATER AND WETLANDS


The initial impacts on surface water and wetlands are mostly located around the Kusile power station and a few new roads that are being built in the area. In terms of older impacts a number of farm dams have been constructed in the water courses, but this appears not to have affected the downstream aquatic environment.

The site is currently undergoing major construction works with the potential to contaminate the surface water through hydrocarbon and dust pollution, and furthermore the proposed mining activitities from New Largo could add to this impact. In addition the study area is criss-crossed with roads and their associated bridges over the rivers and streams. This existing impact is a HIGH impact acting on isolated sites in the Long Term. This impact is ocuring and is rated as a Moderate impact as shown in Table 4-2 below.


The potential impact from the construction of the power line through surface water and wetland areas could alter the environment if a pylon is placed inside the wetland or surface water body. This alteration will occur from firstly the excavation of the soil, which will increase the turbidity in the water. Secondly the heavy vehicles that are required to erect the pylons will also drive through the wetland/surface water area that will mobilise sediment increasing turbidity and there is always the risk of hydrocarbon spillages from the vehicles, resulting in pollution of the water. In order for the vehicles to get to the pylons a road will have to be constructed which in turn will require in importation of gravel and the compaction thereof. This will alter the stream flow environment and impact on the vegetation in the wetland.

Due to the fact that the alternatives all cross the same rivers, wetlands and drainage features, there is no discernable difference in the impact of the various alternatives. This

March 2011 66 12627


potential impact is rated as VERY HIGH impact acting on isolated sites in the short term. This impact is very likely to occur and is rated as a Moderate impact.

During the operational phase the structures constructed will remain on site and have the potential to continue impacting on the water resource. During operations the potential impacts are the reduction or altering of the stream flow by the physical structure in the water. This impact is rated as a HIGH impact acting on isolated sites in the Long term. This impact is very likely to occur and is rated as a Moderate impact as shown in Table 4-2.


The cumulative impact of the proposed power line along with the existing impacts in the area will cumulatively remain a Moderate impact as rated for the initial impact and shown in the table below.


No construction vehicles or activities will be allowed to work within 50 m from the edge of any of the streams or wetlands on site, unless this cannot be avoided, then it should only occur under supervision of the ECO;

Place pylons outside of the 50 m buffer zone from the edge of the wetlands and riparian zones;

Demarcated areas where waste can be safely contained and stored on a temporary basis during the construction phase should be provided at the hard park;

When adequate volumes (not more than 1 month) have accumulated all waste is to be removed from site and disposed of at a licensed facility;

Waste is not to be buried on site;

Hydro-carbons should be stored in a bunded storage area;

All hazardous materials inter alia paints, turpentine and thinners must be stored appropriately to prevent these contaminants from entering the environment;

Spill-sorb or similar type product must be used to absorb hydrocarbon spills in the event that such spills should occur;

Undertake construction during the dry months to ease the river crossings;

Care must be taken to ensure that in removing vegetation adequate erosion control measures are implemented;

Demarcate the no-go areas with tape and ensure that the demarcation remains in place for the duration of the construction works; and

Use existing river crossings where possible.

March 2011 67 12627



The residual impact if the above mitigation measures are implemented, especially the adherence to the buffer zones could reduce the impact significance and also the probability of the impact. If successfully implemented the impact could be reduced to a LOW impact acting on isolated sites in the short term. This impact could occur and is rated as a Very Low impact during the construction and operational phases.

Table 4-2: Impact Rating Matrix for Surface Water and Wetlands

Construction phase Impact Type Significance Spatial Temporal Probability Rating Initial High Isolated

Sites Long Term Is happening 3 - Moderate

Additional Very High Isolated sites

Short Term Very Likely 2.13 – Moderate

Cumulative High Isolated Sites

Long Term Will happen 3 - Moderate

Residual Low Isolated sites

Short Term Could occur 1 – Very Low

Operational Phase Impact Type Significance Spatial Temporal Probability Rating Additional High Isolated

sites Long Term Very Likely 2.4 – Moderate

Cumulative High Isolated sites

Long Term Will happen 3 – Moderate

Residual Low Isolated sites

Short Term Could occur 1 – Very Low

4.3 TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY


The initial impact on the terrestrial ecology of the study is mainly in the form of the agricultural establishment over an extended period of time. The natural grasslands have been transformed into croplands where the soils are left fallow and the remainder of the habitat is used for the grazing of livestock. In addition several alien invasive plants have also established themselves in the area, especially Acacia mearnsii (Black Wattle) and poplar. The natural grasslands have also been fragmented through the establishment of farms, fences and roads in the area. There are patches of grassland that is still in relatively good condition and that support small faunal species, but no large fauna remain in the area.

The highveld grassland habitat which this area falls under has been severely impacted upon by coal mining, sand quarrying and industries such as steel smelters and power stations. These mining and industrial activities not only remove the natural vegetation but insufficient rehabilitation has allowed the spread of invasive species. This is rated as a HIGH impact acting in the long term on the local area. This impact has occurred and is rated as a High impact as shown in Table 4-3 below.

March 2011 68 12627



The additional impact of the construction and operation of the power line will further fragment an already disturbed ecosystem. During construction the 55 m servitude will be cleared of vegetation that poses a fire or electrical shortage risk. In addition an access road will be constructed as well and the habitat will be lost. This impact is rated as a HIGH impact acting in the short term on the study area. This impact is very likely to occur and is rated as a Moderate impact. During the operational phase the impacts from construction will persist resulting in a HIGH impact acting in the long term on the study area. This impact is very likely to occur and therefore remains a Moderate impact as assessed below in Table 4-3.


The cumulative impact of both the historical impacts and the proposed development remain as assessed for the initial impact assessment, i.e. a Moderate impact.


Utilise the existing 132 kV power line access road rather than constructing a new road;

Ensure that all gates along the route are closed to avoid farm animals escaping or being stolen;

Do not remove/flatten any fences without prior permission from the local landowner;

All offcut and waste material that is generated during power line construction to be removed from the construction site on a weekly basis;

The contractor must provide waste bags for workers to dispose of their domestic waste and remove the waste off site and dispose at a licensed facility;

No shooting or hunting of animals will be allowed on site;

No cooking fires shall be allowed on site;

Toilet facilities must be provided to workers at their accommodation;

All construction areas should be demarcated prior to construction to ensure that the footprint of the impacts are limited (including areas where vehicles may traverse);

The sensitive vegetation should be avoided and construction limited to 100 m from the edge of the red data plant populations;

Adhere to the ESKOM vegetation management guideline;

All alien invasive species on site should be removed and follow up monitoring and removal programmes should be initiated once construction is complete; and

Install power lines according to the ESKOM bird collision prevention guideline.

March 2011 69 12627



With the successful implementation of the above mitigation measures the impact to the terrestrial ecology can be mitigated to MODERATE impact acting in the long term on the study area. This impact is very likely to occur and is rated as a moderate impact. This is also relevant for the operational phase.

Table 4-3: Impact Rating Matrix for Terrestrial Ecology

Construction phase Impact Type Significance Spatial Temporal Probability Rating Initial High Local Area Long Term Has

Occurred 3.7 - High

Additional High Study area Short Term Very Likely 2.3 - Moderate Cumulative High Local Area Long Term Has

Occurred 3.7 - High

Residual Moderate Study Area Long Term Very Likely 2.67 - Moderate Operational Phase Impact Type Significance Spatial Temporal Probability Rating Additional High Study area Long Term Very Likely 2.7 - Moderate Cumulative High Local Area Long Term Has

Occurred 3.7 - High

Residual Moderate Study Area Long Term Very Likely 2.67 - Moderate

4.4 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The visual simulations prepared by Zitholele Consulting illustrate the extent to which the power line will be visible from key observation points (static and dynamic views). The vertical form/dimensions of the buildings/structures would be hidden by their location among existing buildings and within a well vegetated area. The visual contrast is increased by the “shape” and scale of the buildings/structures, which generally will not be viewed along the skyline.


The existing visual environment in this area has been altered for an extended period of time. Visual impacts include the roads (N4, R545), power lines (Duvha Minerva 400 kV, 2 x 132 kV), industries (Brickworks, Highveld Steel, Kusile Power Station, Kendal Power Station) and mines (Honingkrans Sand, New Largo) in a landscape of predominantly grazing and farming land. This impact is rated as a HIGH impact acting in the local area in the long term. This impact is occurring and is therefore rated as a High impact.


The additional impact determination for visual aspects is quite a challenge as there are different viewers all over the viewshed. They are classified as either static or dynamic viewers, each of which is described below.

March 2011 70 12627


Static Views

The proposed power line would potentially be visible from the surrounding farmland and the high-lying areas to the west of Emalahleni. The potential number of viewers from this area should be low as the farmlands are quite sparsely populated but the views would vary greatly depending on site specific conditions like the orientation of the homes as well as the location of other buildings, fences, vegetation and localized landforms. All these elements have the potential to block views from the buildings to the proposed power line. In addition the existing 400 kV Duvha-Minerva power line traverses in the same vicinity and this existing impact will merely be moved.

Dynamic Views

The power lines will be visible to a moderate number of viewers, mainly those travelling along the N4 highway and some travellers along the R 545. Views from the N4 extend approximately 10 km and represent a view period of approximately 36 seconds travelling at 120 km/h. The level of visibility would be low due to the view distance of more than 5 km and the resulting atmospheric effects that reduce the contrast between the power lines and the surrounding landscape. The effects are similar for the R 545. Please refer to Table 4-4 for a summary of the dynamic impacts. This assessment is similar for all route alternatives.

The proposed power line would also be visible from several farm roads which are located around the proposed site. The viewing distance varies between 1 and 11 km for these roads and if the viewing distance is less than 2 km, the potential visual impact would be considered as moderate.

Table 4-4: Dynamic Impact Table

Road Name Speed limit (km/h)

Length of Road (km)

Approximate Period of View (min)

View Distance

N 4 120 10 5 1 – 6km R 545 100 9 5.3 0 – 7 km

Conclusion

Table 4-5 lists the observation points together with the category of viewer, context of view, relative numbers of viewers and approximate distance of observation point to the proposed site. The location of these observation points are shown in Figure 2-27.

Table 4-5: Visual Impact Matrix

Potential Observation Point

Category of Potential Receptor

Context of View

Approximate View Distance

Period of View Visibility Rating

Surrounding Farmland

Static Level 0 – 11 km Long Term Medium

Emalahleni highlands Static Level Above > 4 km Long Term Medium Gravel Roads Dynamic Above & below 0 – 11 km Medium Low Tar Roads Dynamic Level - Above 5 – 11 km Short Low

March 2011 71 12627


From the table above it can be concluded that the impact to the visual environment during construction will be a LOW impact acting in the short term on the local area. This impact will occur and is rated as a Moderate impact.

During the operational phase the impacts will remain, and although a static viewer can grow accustomed to a visual impact, the static viewers will not. This impact is rated as a LOW impact acting in the long term on the local area. This impact will occur and is rated as a Moderate impact.


The cumulative impact remains as assessed for the initial impact, i.e. a High impact.


Avoid leaving any building material or waste on site that could create a visual impact;

Only the servitude of the proposed power line should be exposed. In all other areas, the natural vegetation should be retained;

Access road construction should be minimised to prevent unnecessary dust, i.e. use existing roads as far as possible; and

Utilise non-shiny structures for the hard park and toilets, i.e. avoid unpainted roofs.


With the implementation of the mitigation measures above, the visual impact will be managed as best it could, however in the main the impact will remain as assessed for the additional impact i.e. a Moderate impact for both the construction and operational phases.

Table 4-6: Impact Rating Matrix for Visual

Construction phase Impact Type Significance Spatial Temporal Probability Rating Initial High Local Area Long Term Has

Occurred 3.7 - High

Additional Low Local Area Short Term Will occur 2.67 - Moderate Cumulative High Local Area Long Term Has

Occurred 3.7 - High

Residual Low Local Area Short Term Will occur 2.67 - Moderate Operational Phase Impact Type Significance Spatial Temporal Probability Rating Additional Low Local Area Long Term Will occur 3 - Moderate Cumulative High Local Area Long Term Has

Occurred 3.7 - High

Residual Low Local Area Short Term Will occur 2.67 - Moderate

March 2011 72 12627


The visual impact of the power line in a landscape characterised by existing power lines, roads, power stations, mining and farmlands will have an impact, but not as high as in an unimpacted area. As mentioned before, this is an existing power line that will be moved and therefore the existing impact will simply change location. All four alternatives have very similar visual impacts, however due to Alternative 4’s close proximity to the N4 highway, it is not a recommended route.

March 2011 73 12627


5 CONCLUSION

In conclusion the proponent proposes to construct and operate a 400 kV power line in order to deviate the existing Duvha-Minerva power line around the proposed mining area of the New Largo Coal Mine.

Zitholele Consulting was appointed to assess the biophysical aspects and stakeholder sensitivities of the proposed routes. The aspects investigated include topography, soils, agricultural potential, surface water and wetlands, terrestrial ecology and visual impacts.

It was found that the major areas of concern were the red data plant species on site, surface water/wetland crossings, habitat fragmentation and loss of agricultural land.

The alternatives are so close to one another the there is no real grounds for choosing a preferred route, as the impacts are almost identical. However as this report should highlight a preferred option it is the opinion of the specialist that Alternatives 1 and 4 should not be utilised due to their higher visibility and location much closer to the mining area. There is an existing 132 kV power line along a similar alignment to Alternatives 2 and 3, and hence there is also an existing servitude road that can be used. In the view of aligning existing services, Alternative 2 or 3 should be considered.

In the view of the findings represented in this report, it is recommended that the power line deviation be approved conditional to the adherence to the mitigation measures proposed.

ZITHOLELE CONSULTING (PTY) LTD

Konrad Kruger Warren Kok C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\KONRAD\DESKTOP\12627_DUVHA DRAFT BIOPHYSICAL REPORT 7 MARCH 2011.DOC


Appendix 1: Species Lists

Family Name Species Name CategoryACANTHACEAE Blepharis innocua PlantsACANTHACEAE Chaetacanthus costatus PlantsAGYRIACEAE Trapeliopsis parilis PlantsALLIACEAE Tulbaghia leucantha PlantsAMARYLLIDACEAE Boophone disticha PlantsAMARYLLIDACEAE Cyrtanthus breviflorus PlantsAMARYLLIDACEAE Cyrtanthus tuckii var. transvaalensis PlantsAMARYLLIDACEAE Nerine rehmannii PlantsANACARDIACEAE Ozoroa paniculosa var. paniculosa PlantsANACARDIACEAE Rhus magalismontana subsp. magalismontana PlantsANACARDIACEAE Sclerocarya birrea subsp. caffra PlantsANACARDIACEAE Searsia magalismontana subsp. magalismontana PlantsANACARDIACEAE Searsia zeyheri PlantsANEURACEAE Riccardia sp. PlantsANTHERICACEAE Chlorophytum calyptrocarpum PlantsANTHERICACEAE Chlorophytum fasciculatum PlantsAPIACEAE Afrosciadium magalismontanum PlantsAPIACEAE Alepidea setifera PlantsAPIACEAE Heteromorpha arborescens var. abyssinica PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Asclepias albens PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Asclepias aurea PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Asclepias brevipes PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Asclepias crispa var. crispa PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Asclepias eminens PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Asclepias fallax PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Asclepias gibba var. gibba PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Asclepias stellifera PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Aspidoglossum biflorum PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Aspidoglossum glabrescens PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Aspidoglossum validum PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Brachystelma rubellum PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Caralluma bredae var. thomallae PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Cordylogyne globosa PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Cryptolepis oblongifolia PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Gomphocarpus glaucophyllus PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Huernia loeseneriana PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Pachycarpus schinzianus PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Parapodium costatum PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Pentarrhinum insipidum PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Periglossum angustifolium PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Raphionacme galpinii PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Raphionacme hirsuta PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Raphionacme velutina PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Sisyranthus randii PlantsAPOCYNACEAE Xysmalobium asperum PlantsAPONOGETONACEAE Aponogeton natalensis PlantsAQUIFOLIACEAE Ilex mitis var. mitis PlantsASPARAGACEAE Asparagus flavicaulis subsp. flavicaulis PlantsASPARAGACEAE Asparagus laricinus PlantsASPHODELACEAE Aloe ecklonis PlantsASPHODELACEAE Aloe zebrina PlantsASPHODELACEAE Bulbine favosa PlantsASPHODELACEAE Chortolirion angolense Plants

ASPHODELACEAE Kniphofia ensifolia subsp. ensifolia PlantsASPHODELACEAE Kniphofia porphyrantha PlantsASPHODELACEAE Trachyandra asperata var. nataglencoensis PlantsASPHODELACEAE Trachyandra saltii var. saltii PlantsASTERACEAE Acanthospermum australe PlantsASTERACEAE Aster harveyanus PlantsASTERACEAE Berkheya insignis PlantsASTERACEAE Berkheya onopordifolia var. onopordifolia PlantsASTERACEAE Callilepis laureola PlantsASTERACEAE Callilepis leptophylla PlantsASTERACEAE Crassocephalum x picridifolium PlantsASTERACEAE Dicoma anomala subsp. anomala PlantsASTERACEAE Dicoma macrocephala PlantsASTERACEAE Dimorphotheca caulescens PlantsASTERACEAE Dimorphotheca spectabilis PlantsASTERACEAE Euryops gilfillanii PlantsASTERACEAE Felicia muricata subsp. cinerascens PlantsASTERACEAE Gazania krebsiana subsp. serrulata PlantsASTERACEAE Geigeria aspera var. aspera PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum acutatum PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum aureonitens PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum caespititium PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum cephaloideum PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum cerastioides var. cerastioides PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum nudifolium var. nudifolium PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum rugulosum PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum setosum PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum splendidum PlantsASTERACEAE Helichrysum subglomeratum PlantsASTERACEAE Lactuca inermis PlantsASTERACEAE Lasiospermum pedunculare PlantsASTERACEAE Macledium zeyheri subsp. argyrophyllum PlantsASTERACEAE Nidorella anomala PlantsASTERACEAE Nidorella hottentotica PlantsASTERACEAE Osteospermum striatum PlantsASTERACEAE Schistostephium crataegifolium PlantsASTERACEAE Schistostephium heptalobum PlantsASTERACEAE Senecio burchellii PlantsASTERACEAE Senecio coronatus PlantsASTERACEAE Senecio glanduloso-pilosus PlantsASTERACEAE Senecio gregatus PlantsASTERACEAE Senecio harveianus PlantsASTERACEAE Senecio latifolius PlantsASTERACEAE Senecio sp. PlantsASTERACEAE Seriphium plumosum PlantsASTERACEAE Sonchus dregeanus PlantsASTERACEAE Ursinia nana subsp. leptophylla PlantsASTERACEAE Vernonia hirsuta PlantsASTERACEAE Vernonia oligocephala PlantsASTERACEAE Vernonia poskeana subsp. botswanica PlantsASTERACEAE Xanthium strumarium PlantsAYTONIACEAE Asterella wilmsii PlantsBRASSICACEAE Heliophila rigidiuscula PlantsBRYACEAE Bryum argenteum Plants

CAPPARACEAE Maerua cafra PlantsCARYOPHYLLACEAE Corrigiola litoralis subsp. litoralis var. perennans PlantsCARYOPHYLLACEAE Dianthus mooiensis subsp. mooiensis var. mooiensis PlantsCARYOPHYLLACEAE Dianthus transvaalensis PlantsCARYOPHYLLACEAE Polycarpaea corymbosa var. corymbosa PlantsCELASTRACEAE Gymnosporia tenuispina PlantsCOLCHICACEAE Camptorrhiza strumosa PlantsCOMMELINACEAE Commelina africana var. africana PlantsCOMMELINACEAE Commelina modesta PlantsCOMMELINACEAE Cyanotis speciosa PlantsCONVOLVULACEAE Convolvulus sagittatus PlantsCONVOLVULACEAE Falkia oblonga PlantsCONVOLVULACEAE Ipomoea bathycolpos PlantsCONVOLVULACEAE Ipomoea crassipes var. crassipes PlantsCONVOLVULACEAE Ipomoea magnusiana PlantsCONVOLVULACEAE Ipomoea oenotherae PlantsCONVOLVULACEAE Ipomoea ommanneyi PlantsCONVOLVULACEAE Merremia verecunda PlantsCRASSULACEAE Crassula setulosa var. setulosa forma setulosa PlantsCRASSULACEAE Kalanchoe thyrsiflora PlantsCYPERACEAE Bulbostylis burchellii PlantsCYPERACEAE Bulbostylis contexta PlantsCYPERACEAE Bulbostylis densa subsp. afromontana PlantsCYPERACEAE Bulbostylis hispidula subsp. pyriformis PlantsCYPERACEAE Bulbostylis oritrephes PlantsCYPERACEAE Bulbostylis schlechteri PlantsCYPERACEAE Bulbostylis scleropus PlantsCYPERACEAE Carex glomerabilis PlantsCYPERACEAE Cyperus denudatus var. denudatus PlantsCYPERACEAE Cyperus difformis PlantsCYPERACEAE Cyperus indecorus var. decurvatus PlantsCYPERACEAE Cyperus margaritaceus var. margaritaceus PlantsCYPERACEAE Cyperus marginatus PlantsCYPERACEAE Cyperus obtusiflorus var. obtusiflorus PlantsCYPERACEAE Eleocharis dregeana PlantsCYPERACEAE Eleocharis limosa PlantsCYPERACEAE Fimbristylis complanata PlantsCYPERACEAE Fuirena pubescens var. pubescens PlantsCYPERACEAE Fuirena stricta PlantsCYPERACEAE Kyllinga alba PlantsCYPERACEAE Kyllinga erecta var. erecta PlantsCYPERACEAE Lipocarpha nana PlantsCYPERACEAE Pycreus macranthus PlantsCYPERACEAE Pycreus pumilus PlantsCYPERACEAE Schoenoplectus corymbosus PlantsCYPERACEAE Schoenoplectus decipiens PlantsCYPERACEAE Schoenoplectus scirpoides PlantsCYPERACEAE Scirpoides burkei PlantsCYPERACEAE Scirpoides dioecus PlantsCYPERACEAE Scleria aterrima PlantsDICRANACEAE Campylopus savannarum PlantsDIOSCOREACEAE Dioscorea dregeana PlantsDIPSACACEAE Cephalaria decurrens PlantsDROSERACEAE Drosera madagascariensis Plants

EBENACEAE Diospyros lycioides subsp. guerkei PlantsEBENACEAE Euclea sp. PlantsERICACEAE Erica drakensbergensis PlantsERIOCAULACEAE Eriocaulon abyssinicum PlantsERIOSPERMACEAE Eriospermum porphyrovalve PlantsEUPHORBIACEAE Acalypha angustata PlantsEUPHORBIACEAE Euphorbia clavarioides var. clavarioides PlantsEUPHORBIACEAE Euphorbia inaequilatera var. inaequilatera PlantsEUPHORBIACEAE Jatropha lagarinthoides PlantsEXORMOTHECACEAE Exormotheca holstii PlantsFABACEAE Acacia caffra PlantsFABACEAE Chamaecrista comosa var. capricornia PlantsFABACEAE Chamaecrista mimosoides PlantsFABACEAE Dichrostachys cinerea subsp. nyassana PlantsFABACEAE Elephantorrhiza elephantina PlantsFABACEAE Eriosema burkei var. burkei PlantsFABACEAE Eriosema cordatum PlantsFABACEAE Eriosema gunniae PlantsFABACEAE Eriosema psoraleoides PlantsFABACEAE Eriosema salignum PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera arrecta PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera atrata PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera cryptantha var. cryptantha PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera egens PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera hilaris var. hilaris PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera mollicoma PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera oxalidea PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera oxytropis PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera velutina PlantsFABACEAE Indigofera zeyheri PlantsFABACEAE Lotononis foliosa PlantsFABACEAE Lotononis solitudinis PlantsFABACEAE Melolobium alpinum PlantsFABACEAE Melolobium wilmsii PlantsFABACEAE Neorautanenia ficifolia PlantsFABACEAE Pearsonia cajanifolia subsp. cajanifolia PlantsFABACEAE Pearsonia sessilifolia subsp. filifolia PlantsFABACEAE Rhynchosia monophylla PlantsFABACEAE Rhynchosia nervosa var. nervosa PlantsFABACEAE Rhynchosia totta var. totta PlantsFABACEAE Smithia erubescens PlantsFABACEAE Sphenostylis angustifolia PlantsFABACEAE Tephrosia capensis var. capensis PlantsFABACEAE Tephrosia elongata var. elongata PlantsFABACEAE Tephrosia longipes subsp. longipes var. longipes PlantsFABACEAE Tephrosia semiglabra PlantsFABACEAE Vigna vexillata var. vexillata PlantsFABACEAE Virgilia divaricata PlantsFABACEAE Zornia linearis PlantsFABACEAE Zornia milneana PlantsFOSSOMBRONIACEAE Fossombronia crispa PlantsFOSSOMBRONIACEAE Fossombronia gemmifera PlantsGENTIANACEAE Chironia krebsii PlantsGENTIANACEAE Chironia purpurascens subsp. humilis Plants

GERANIACEAE Pelargonium luridum PlantsGERANIACEAE Pelargonium pseudofumarioides PlantsHALORAGACEAE Myriophyllum aquaticum PlantsHALORAGACEAE Myriophyllum spicatum PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Albuca setosa PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Albuca shawii PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Dipcadi gracillimum PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Dipcadi marlothii PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Dipcadi rigidifolium PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Dipcadi viride PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Ledebouria cooperi PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Ledebouria marginata PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Ornithogalum tenuifolium subsp. tenuifolium PlantsHYACINTHACEAE Schizocarphus nervosus PlantsHYPERICACEAE Hypericum lalandii PlantsHYPOXIDACEAE Hypoxis filiformis PlantsHYPOXIDACEAE Hypoxis hemerocallidea PlantsHYPOXIDACEAE Hypoxis rigidula var. pilosissima PlantsHYPOXIDACEAE Hypoxis rigidula var. rigidula PlantsIRIDACEAE Babiana hypogaea var. hypogaea PlantsIRIDACEAE Dierama mossii PlantsIRIDACEAE Gladiolus antholyzoides PlantsIRIDACEAE Gladiolus crassifolius PlantsIRIDACEAE Gladiolus elliotii PlantsIRIDACEAE Gladiolus papilio PlantsIRIDACEAE Gladiolus vinosomaculatus PlantsIRIDACEAE Gladiolus woodii PlantsIRIDACEAE Lapeirousia sandersonii PlantsIRIDACEAE Watsonia bella PlantsISOETACEAE Isoetes transvaalensis PlantsJUNCACEAE Juncus dregeanus subsp. dregeanus PlantsJUNCACEAE Juncus exsertus PlantsJUNCACEAE Juncus lomatophyllus PlantsJUNCACEAE Juncus oxycarpus PlantsLAMIACEAE Acrotome hispida PlantsLAMIACEAE Geniosporum angolense PlantsLAMIACEAE Mentha aquatica PlantsLAMIACEAE Ocimum angustifolium PlantsLAMIACEAE Ocimum obovatum subsp. obovatum var. obovatum PlantsLAMIACEAE Pycnostachys reticulata PlantsLAMIACEAE Rotheca hirsuta PlantsLAMIACEAE Syncolostemon pretoriae PlantsLAMIACEAE Teucrium trifidum PlantsLENTIBULARIACEAE Utricularia stellaris PlantsLOBELIACEAE Lobelia angolensis PlantsLOBELIACEAE Lobelia erinus PlantsLYTHRACEAE Nesaea sagittifolia var. sagittifolia PlantsLYTHRACEAE Nesaea schinzii PlantsMALPIGHIACEAE Triaspis hypericoides subsp. nelsonii PlantsMALVACEAE Hermannia depressa PlantsMALVACEAE Hermannia geniculata PlantsMALVACEAE Hermannia lancifolia PlantsMALVACEAE Hermannia sp. PlantsMALVACEAE Hermannia transvaalensis Plants

MALVACEAE Hibiscus aethiopicus var. ovatus PlantsMALVACEAE Pavonia transvaalensis PlantsMALVACEAE Triumfetta obtusicornis PlantsMENYANTHACEAE Nymphoides thunbergiana PlantsMESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Delosperma leendertziae PlantsMESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Frithia humilis PlantsMESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Mossia intervallaris PlantsMOLLUGINACEAE Limeum viscosum subsp. viscosum var. glomeratum PlantsMORACEAE Ficus abutilifolia PlantsMORACEAE Ficus salicifolia PlantsMORACEAE Ficus thonningii PlantsNYMPHAEACEAE Nymphaea nouchali var. caerulea PlantsOCHNACEAE Ochna gamostigmata PlantsONAGRACEAE Epilobium hirsutum PlantsORCHIDACEAE Centrostigma occultans PlantsORCHIDACEAE Disa rhodantha PlantsORCHIDACEAE Disa versicolor PlantsORCHIDACEAE Eulophia hians var. hians PlantsORCHIDACEAE Eulophia milnei PlantsORCHIDACEAE Eulophia ovalis var. ovalis PlantsORCHIDACEAE Habenaria clavata PlantsORCHIDACEAE Satyrium hallackii subsp. ocellatum PlantsORCHIDACEAE Satyrium longicauda var. longicauda PlantsORCHIDACEAE Satyrium parviflorum PlantsORCHIDACEAE Satyrium trinerve PlantsORCHIDACEAE Schizochilus zeyheri PlantsOROBANCHACEAE Alectra sessiliflora var. monticola PlantsOROBANCHACEAE Alectra sessiliflora var. sessiliflora PlantsOROBANCHACEAE Cycnium tubulosum subsp. tubulosum PlantsOROBANCHACEAE Rhamphicarpa brevipedicellata PlantsOROBANCHACEAE Sopubia cana var. cana PlantsOROBANCHACEAE Striga bilabiata subsp. bilabiata PlantsOROBANCHACEAE Striga gesnerioides PlantsOXALIDACEAE Oxalis latifolia PlantsOXALIDACEAE Oxalis obliquifolia PlantsPALLAVICINIACEAE Symphyogyna brasiliensis PlantsPANNARIACEAE Psoroma sp. PlantsPARMELIACEAE Canoparmelia pustulescens PlantsPEDALIACEAE Dicerocaryum senecioides PlantsPHYLLANTHACEAE Phyllanthus maderaspatensis PlantsPILOTRICHACEAE Callicostella tristis PlantsPILOTRICHACEAE Cyclodictyon vallis-gratiae PlantsPITTOSPORACEAE Pittosporum viridiflorum PlantsPOACEAE Alloteropsis semialata subsp. eckloniana PlantsPOACEAE Andropogon eucomus PlantsPOACEAE Andropogon schirensis PlantsPOACEAE Aristida aequiglumis PlantsPOACEAE Aristida congesta subsp. barbicollis PlantsPOACEAE Aristida junciformis subsp. galpinii PlantsPOACEAE Aristida stipitata subsp. graciliflora PlantsPOACEAE Bewsia biflora PlantsPOACEAE Brachiaria serrata PlantsPOACEAE Calamagrostis epigejos var. capensis PlantsPOACEAE Cenchrus ciliaris Plants

POACEAE Chloris gayana PlantsPOACEAE Ctenium concinnum PlantsPOACEAE Cymbopogon caesius PlantsPOACEAE Cynodon dactylon PlantsPOACEAE Digitaria brazzae PlantsPOACEAE Digitaria monodactyla PlantsPOACEAE Digitaria tricholaenoides PlantsPOACEAE Diheteropogon amplectens var. amplectens PlantsPOACEAE Echinochloa jubata PlantsPOACEAE Elionurus muticus PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis capensis PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis chloromelas PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis curvula PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis gummiflua PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis hierniana PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis inamoena PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis plana PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis racemosa PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis sclerantha subsp. sclerantha PlantsPOACEAE Eragrostis tef PlantsPOACEAE Heteropogon contortus PlantsPOACEAE Hyparrhenia hirta PlantsPOACEAE Hyparrhenia quarrei PlantsPOACEAE Hyparrhenia tamba PlantsPOACEAE Hyperthelia dissoluta PlantsPOACEAE Ischaemum fasciculatum PlantsPOACEAE Koeleria capensis PlantsPOACEAE Leersia hexandra PlantsPOACEAE Leptochloa fusca PlantsPOACEAE Loudetia simplex PlantsPOACEAE Melinis nerviglumis PlantsPOACEAE Melinis repens subsp. repens PlantsPOACEAE Microchloa caffra PlantsPOACEAE Miscanthus junceus PlantsPOACEAE Monocymbium ceresiiforme PlantsPOACEAE Panicum natalense PlantsPOACEAE Panicum repentellum PlantsPOACEAE Paspalum scrobiculatum PlantsPOACEAE Perotis patens PlantsPOACEAE Phalaris arundinacea PlantsPOACEAE Phalaris canariensis PlantsPOACEAE Pogonarthria squarrosa PlantsPOACEAE Schizachyrium sanguineum PlantsPOACEAE Schizachyrium ursulus PlantsPOACEAE Setaria nigrirostris PlantsPOACEAE Setaria sphacelata var. sphacelata PlantsPOACEAE Setaria sphacelata var. torta PlantsPOACEAE Sporobolus africanus PlantsPOACEAE Sporobolus albicans PlantsPOACEAE Sporobolus pectinatus PlantsPOACEAE Sporobolus stapfianus PlantsPOACEAE Stiburus conrathii PlantsPOACEAE Themeda triandra PlantsPOACEAE Trichoneura grandiglumis Plants

POACEAE Tristachya biseriata PlantsPOACEAE Tristachya leucothrix PlantsPOACEAE Tristachya rehmannii PlantsPOACEAE Urelytrum agropyroides PlantsPOACEAE Urochloa brachyura PlantsPOLYGALACEAE Polygala houtboshiana PlantsPOLYGALACEAE Polygala ohlendorfiana PlantsPOLYGALACEAE Polygala producta PlantsPOLYGALACEAE Polygala spicata PlantsPOLYGALACEAE Polygala transvaalensis subsp. transvaalensis PlantsPOLYGONACEAE Oxygonum dregeanum subsp. canescens var. linearifolium PlantsPOLYGONACEAE Persicaria lapathifolia PlantsPOLYGONACEAE Persicaria serrulata PlantsPORTULACACEAE Anacampseros subnuda subsp. subnuda PlantsPORTULACACEAE Portulaca hereroensis PlantsPORTULACACEAE Portulaca quadrifida PlantsPOTAMOGETONACEAE Potamogeton octandrus PlantsPOTAMOGETONACEAE Potamogeton pectinatus PlantsPOTAMOGETONACEAE Potamogeton schweinfurthii PlantsPOTAMOGETONACEAE Potamogeton trichoides PlantsPROTEACEAE Protea caffra subsp. caffra PlantsPROTEACEAE Protea welwitschii PlantsPTERIDACEAE Actiniopteris radiata PlantsPTERIDACEAE Cheilanthes involuta var. obscura PlantsRANUNCULACEAE Ranunculus meyeri PlantsRHAMNACEAE Helinus integrifolius PlantsRICCIACEAE Riccia atropurpurea PlantsRICCIACEAE Riccia natalensis PlantsRICCIACEAE Riccia okahandjana PlantsRICCIACEAE Riccia volkii PlantsRUBIACEAE Canthium inerme PlantsRUBIACEAE Fadogia homblei PlantsRUBIACEAE Kohautia amatymbica PlantsRUBIACEAE Kohautia cynanchica PlantsRUBIACEAE Pachystigma pygmaeum PlantsRUBIACEAE Pachystigma thamnus PlantsRUBIACEAE Pentanisia angustifolia PlantsRUBIACEAE Pentanisia prunelloides subsp. latifolia PlantsRUBIACEAE Pentanisia prunelloides subsp. prunelloides PlantsRUBIACEAE Pygmaeothamnus zeyheri var. rogersii PlantsRUBIACEAE Richardia scabra PlantsRUTACEAE Zanthoxylum thorncroftii PlantsSANTALACEAE Thesium procerum PlantsSANTALACEAE Thesium spartioides PlantsSANTALACEAE Thesium transvaalense PlantsSAPOTACEAE Englerophytum magalismontanum PlantsSCROPHULARIACEAE Chaenostoma leve PlantsSCROPHULARIACEAE Hebenstretia angolensis PlantsSCROPHULARIACEAE Jamesbrittenia aurantiaca PlantsSCROPHULARIACEAE Manulea parviflora var. parviflora PlantsSCROPHULARIACEAE Melanospermum transvaalense PlantsSCROPHULARIACEAE Nemesia sp. PlantsSCROPHULARIACEAE Selago densiflora PlantsSCROPHULARIACEAE Selago sp. Plants

SCROPHULARIACEAE Zaluzianskya spathacea PlantsSELAGINELLACEAE Selaginella dregei PlantsSOLANACEAE Solanum giganteum PlantsSOLANACEAE Solanum nigrum PlantsSOLANACEAE Solanum retroflexum PlantsSOLANACEAE Solanum sisymbriifolium PlantsSOLANACEAE Withania somnifera PlantsSPHAGNACEAE Sphagnum sp. PlantsTECTARIACEAE Ctenitis sp. PlantsTHELYPTERIDACEAE Thelypteris confluens PlantsTHYMELAEACEAE Gnidia capitata PlantsTHYMELAEACEAE Gnidia kraussiana var. kraussiana PlantsTHYMELAEACEAE Gnidia sericocephala PlantsVELLOZIACEAE Xerophyta retinervis PlantsVERBENACEAE Chascanum adenostachyum PlantsVERBENACEAE Chascanum hederaceum var. hederaceum PlantsVERBENACEAE Lippia javanica PlantsVERBENACEAE Verbena bonariensis PlantsVERBENACEAE Verbena brasiliensis PlantsXYRIDACEAE Xyris capensis PlantsXYRIDACEAE Xyris gerrardii PlantsZAMIACEAE Encephalartos lanatus PlantsCyprinidae Barbus paludinosus AnimalsCyprinidae Barbus trimaculatus AnimalsCyprinidae Labeo cylindricus AnimalsCyprinidae Labeobarbus aeneus AnimalsCyprinidae Labeobarbus marequensis AnimalsCyprinidae Labeobarbus polylepis AnimalsColubridae Lamprophis aurora AnimalsColubridae Psammophylax tritaeniatus AnimalsElapidae Hemachatus haemachatus AnimalsBufonidae Bufo rangeri AnimalsGekkonidae Lygodactylus nigropunctatus AnimalsGekkonidae Ptenopus garrulus AnimalsRanidae Phrynobatrachus natalensis AnimalsAlaudidae Calandrella cinerea AnimalsAlaudidae Calendulauda sabota AnimalsAlaudidae Certhilauda curvirostris AnimalsAlaudidae Chersomanes albofasciata AnimalsAlaudidae Eremopterix leucotis AnimalsAlaudidae Mirafra africana AnimalsAlaudidae Mirafra apiata AnimalsAlaudidae Mirafra cheniana AnimalsAlaudidae Mirafra rufocinnamomea AnimalsAlaudidae Spizocorys conirostris AnimalsAnatidae Alopochen aegyptiaca AnimalsAnatidae Anas capensis AnimalsAnatidae Anas erythrorhyncha AnimalsAnatidae Anas hottentota AnimalsAnatidae Anas smithii AnimalsAnatidae Anas sparsa AnimalsAnatidae Anas undulata AnimalsAnatidae Dendrocygna bicolor AnimalsAnatidae Dendrocygna viduata Animals

Anatidae Netta erythrophthalma AnimalsAnatidae Oxyura maccoa AnimalsAnatidae Plectropterus gambensis AnimalsAnatidae Sarkidiornis melanotos AnimalsAnatidae Tadorna cana AnimalsAnatidae Thalassornis leuconotus AnimalsAnhingidae Anhinga rufa AnimalsApodidae Apus affinis AnimalsApodidae Apus barbatus AnimalsApodidae Apus caffer AnimalsApodidae Apus horus AnimalsApodidae Cypsiurus parvus AnimalsApodidae Tachymarptis melba AnimalsBurhinidae Burhinus capensis AnimalsCapitonidae Lybius torquatus AnimalsCapitonidae Pogoniulus chrysoconus AnimalsCapitonidae Trachyphonus vaillantii AnimalsCapitonidae Tricholaema leucomelas AnimalsCaprimulgidae Caprimulgus pectoralis AnimalsCaprimulgidae Caprimulgus rufigena AnimalsCaprimulgidae Caprimulgus tristigma AnimalsCharadriidae Charadrius tricollaris AnimalsCharadriidae Vanellus armatus AnimalsCharadriidae Vanellus coronatus AnimalsCharadriidae Vanellus senegallus AnimalsCiconiidae Ciconia abdimii AnimalsCiconiidae Ciconia ciconia AnimalsCiconiidae Ciconia nigra AnimalsColiidae Colius striatus AnimalsColiidae Urocolius indicus AnimalsCorvidae Corvus albus AnimalsCorvidae Corvus capensis AnimalsCuculidae Centropus burchellii AnimalsCuculidae Chrysococcyx caprius AnimalsCuculidae Chrysococcyx klaas AnimalsCuculidae Clamator jacobinus AnimalsCuculidae Cuculus clamosus AnimalsCuculidae Cuculus solitarius AnimalsDicruridae Dicrurus adsimilis AnimalsEstrildidae Amadina erythrocephala AnimalsEstrildidae Amandava subflava AnimalsEstrildidae Estrilda astrild AnimalsEstrildidae Estrilda erythronotos AnimalsEstrildidae Lagonosticta rubricata AnimalsEstrildidae Lagonosticta senegala AnimalsEstrildidae Ortygospiza atricollis AnimalsEstrildidae Spermestes cucullatus AnimalsEstrildidae Uraeginthus angolensis AnimalsFalconidae Falco amurensis AnimalsFalconidae Falco biarmicus AnimalsFalconidae Falco naumanni AnimalsFalconidae Falco rupicolis AnimalsFalconidae Falco rupicoloides AnimalsFalconidae Falco vespertinus Animals

Fringillidae Crithagra atrogularis AnimalsFringillidae Crithagra gularis AnimalsFringillidae Crithagra mozambicus AnimalsFringillidae Emberiza capensis AnimalsFringillidae Emberiza tahapisi AnimalsFringillidae Serinus canicollis AnimalsGlareolidae Cursorius temminckii AnimalsGlareolidae Glareola nordmanni AnimalsGruidae Anthropoides paradiseus AnimalsGruidae Balearica regulorum AnimalsHalcyonidae Alcedo cristata AnimalsHalcyonidae Alcedo semitorquata AnimalsHalcyonidae Ceryle rudis AnimalsHalcyonidae Halcyon albiventris AnimalsHalcyonidae Halcyon senegalensis AnimalsHalcyonidae Megaceryle maximus AnimalsHirundinidae Delichon urbicum AnimalsHirundinidae Hirundo abyssinica AnimalsHirundinidae Hirundo albigularis AnimalsHirundinidae Hirundo cucullata AnimalsHirundinidae Hirundo dimidiata AnimalsHirundinidae Hirundo fuligula AnimalsHirundinidae Hirundo rustica AnimalsHirundinidae Hirundo semirufa AnimalsHirundinidae Hirundo spilodera AnimalsHirundinidae Riparia cincta AnimalsHirundinidae Riparia paludicola AnimalsHirundinidae Riparia riparia AnimalsIndicatoridae Indicator indicator AnimalsIndicatoridae Indicator minor AnimalsIndicatoridae Prodotiscus regulus AnimalsJacanidae Actophilornis africanus AnimalsJyngidae Jynx ruficollis AnimalsLaniidae Lanius collaris AnimalsLaniidae Lanius collurio AnimalsLaniidae Lanius minor AnimalsLaniidae Prionops plumatus AnimalsLaridae Chlidonias hybrida AnimalsLaridae Chlidonias leucopterus AnimalsLaridae Larus cirrocephalus AnimalsMalaconotidae Dryoscopus cubla AnimalsMalaconotidae Laniarius ferrugineus AnimalsMalaconotidae Tchagra senegalus AnimalsMalaconotidae Telophorus zeylonus AnimalsMeropidae Merops apiaster AnimalsMeropidae Merops bullockoides AnimalsMeropidae Merops pusillus AnimalsMotacillidae Anthus caffer AnimalsMotacillidae Anthus cinnamomeus AnimalsMotacillidae Anthus lineiventris AnimalsMotacillidae Anthus similis AnimalsMotacillidae Anthus vaalensis AnimalsMotacillidae Macronyx capensis AnimalsMotacillidae Motacilla aguimp Animals

Motacillidae Motacilla capensis AnimalsMuscicapidae Batis molitor AnimalsMuscicapidae Melaenornis pammelaina AnimalsMuscicapidae Muscicapa striata AnimalsMuscicapidae Sigelus silens AnimalsMuscicapidae Stenostira scita AnimalsMuscicapidae Terpsiphone viridis AnimalsMusophagidae Corythaixoides concolor AnimalsNectariniidae Chalcomitra amethystina AnimalsNectariniidae Chalcomitra senegalensis AnimalsNectariniidae Cinnyris afer AnimalsNectariniidae Cinnyris mariquensis AnimalsNectariniidae Cinnyris talatala AnimalsNectariniidae Nectarinia famosa AnimalsNumididae Numida meleagris AnimalsOriolidae Oriolus larvatus AnimalsOtididae Eupodotis afra AnimalsOtididae Eupodotis caerulescens AnimalsOtididae Eupodotis senegalensis AnimalsPandionidae Pandion haliaetus AnimalsParidae Parus niger AnimalsPhalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax africanus AnimalsPhalacrocoracidae Phalacrocorax lucidus AnimalsPhasianidae Coturnix coturnix AnimalsPhasianidae Coturnix delegorguei AnimalsPhasianidae Peliperdix coqui AnimalsPhasianidae Pternistis natalensis AnimalsPhasianidae Pternistis swainsonii AnimalsPhasianidae Scleroptila levaillantii AnimalsPhasianidae Scleroptila levaillantoides AnimalsPhasianidae Scleroptila shelleyi AnimalsPhoenicopteridae Phoenicopterus minor AnimalsPhoenicopteridae Phoenicopterus ruber AnimalsPhoeniculidae Phoeniculus purpureus AnimalsPhoeniculidae Rhinopomastus cyanomelas AnimalsPicidae Campethera abingoni AnimalsPicidae Dendropicos fuscescens AnimalsPlataleidae Bostrychia hagedash AnimalsPlataleidae Platalea alba AnimalsPlataleidae Plegadis falcinellus AnimalsPlataleidae Threskiornis aethiopicus AnimalsPodicipedidae Podiceps cristatus AnimalsPodicipedidae Tachybaptus ruficollis AnimalsPycnonotidae Pycnonotus nigricans AnimalsPycnonotidae Pycnonotus tricolor AnimalsRallidae Amaurornis flavirostris AnimalsRallidae Fulica cristata AnimalsRallidae Gallinula chloropus AnimalsRallidae Porphyrio madagascariensis AnimalsRallidae Rallus caerulescens AnimalsRallidae Sarothrura rufa AnimalsRecurvirostridae Himantopus himantopus AnimalsRecurvirostridae Recurvirostra avosetta AnimalsSagittariidae Sagittarius serpentarius Animals

Scolopacidae Actitis hypoleucos AnimalsScolopacidae Calidris ferruginea AnimalsScolopacidae Calidris minuta AnimalsScolopacidae Gallinago nigripennis AnimalsScolopacidae Tringa glareola AnimalsScolopacidae Tringa nebularia AnimalsScolopacidae Tringa stagnatilis AnimalsScopidae Scopus umbretta AnimalsStrigidae Asio capensis AnimalsStrigidae Bubo africanus AnimalsStrigidae Bubo capensis AnimalsStrigidae Bubo lacteus AnimalsStrigidae Glaucidium perlatum AnimalsStrigidae Otus senegalensis AnimalsStruthionidae Struthio camelus AnimalsSturnidae Acridotheres tristis AnimalsSturnidae Cinnyricinclus leucogaster AnimalsSturnidae Creatophora cinerea AnimalsSturnidae Lamprotornis nitens AnimalsSturnidae Onychognathus morio AnimalsSturnidae Spreo bicolor AnimalsTimaliidae Turdoides jardineii AnimalsTytonidae Tyto alba AnimalsTytonidae Tyto capensis AnimalsUpupidae Upupa africana AnimalsViduidae Vidua chalybeata AnimalsViduidae Vidua funerea AnimalsViduidae Vidua macroura AnimalsViduidae Vidua paradisaea AnimalsZosteropidae Zosterops pallidus AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Accipiter ovampensis AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Acrocephalus arundinaceus AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Acrocephalus baeticatus AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Acrocephalus gracilirostris AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Acrocephalus palustris AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Acrocephalus schoenobaenus AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Amblyospiza albifrons AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Anomalospiza imberbis AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Apalis thoracica AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Aquila rapax AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Aquila wahlbergi AnimalsARDEIDAE Ardea cinerea AnimalsARDEIDAE Ardea goliath AnimalsARDEIDAE Ardea melanocephala AnimalsARDEIDAE Ardea purpurea AnimalsARDEIDAE Ardeola ralloides AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Aviceda cuculoides AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Bradypterus baboecala AnimalsARDEIDAE Bubulcus ibis AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Buteo vulpinus AnimalsARDEIDAE Butorides striata AnimalsTURDIDAE Cercomela familiaris AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Chloropeta natalensis AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Circaetus cinereus Animals

ACCIPITRIDAE Circus ranivorus AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Cisticola aberrans AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Cisticola aridulus AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Cisticola ayresii AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Cisticola fulvicapilla AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Cisticola juncidis AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Cisticola lais AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Cisticola textrix AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Cisticola tinniens AnimalsCOLUMBIDAE Columba guinea AnimalsCOLUMBIDAE Columba livia AnimalsTURDIDAE Cossypha caffra AnimalsTURDIDAE Cossypha humeralis AnimalsARDEIDAE Egretta alba AnimalsARDEIDAE Egretta ardesiaca AnimalsARDEIDAE Egretta garzetta AnimalsARDEIDAE Egretta intermedia AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Elanus caeruleus AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Euplectes afer AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Euplectes albonotatus AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Euplectes ardens AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Euplectes axillaris AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Euplectes orix AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Euplectes progne AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Gyps coprotheres AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Haliaeetus vocifer AnimalsARDEIDAE Ixobrychus minutus AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Kaupifalco monogrammicus AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Lophaetus occipitalis AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Melierax canorus AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Melierax gabar AnimalsTURDIDAE Monticola rupestris AnimalsTURDIDAE Myrmecocichla formicivora AnimalsARDEIDAE Nycticorax nycticorax AnimalsCOLUMBIDAE Oena capensis AnimalsTURDIDAE Oenanthe monticola AnimalsTURDIDAE Oenanthe pileata AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Passer diffusus AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Passer domesticus AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Passer melanurus AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Pernis apivorus AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Petronia superciliaris AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Phylloscopus trochilus AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Plocepasser mahali AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Ploceus capensis AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Ploceus cucullatus AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Ploceus velatus AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Polyboroides typus AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Prinia flavicans AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Prinia subflava AnimalsPROCELLARIIDAE Procellaria cinerea AnimalsTURDIDAE Psophocichla litsipsirupa AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Quelea quelea AnimalsTURDIDAE Saxicola torquatus Animals

SYLVIIDAE Sphenoeacus afer AnimalsPLOCEIDAE Sporopipes squamifrons AnimalsCOLUMBIDAE Streptopelia capicola AnimalsCOLUMBIDAE Streptopelia semitorquata AnimalsCOLUMBIDAE Streptopelia senegalensis AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Sylvia borin AnimalsSYLVIIDAE Sylvietta rufescens AnimalsTURDIDAE Thamnolaea cinnamomeiventris AnimalsTURDIDAE Turdus libonyanus AnimalsTURDIDAE Turdus olivaceus AnimalsTURDIDAE Turdus smithi AnimalsCOLUMBIDAE Turtur chalcospilos AnimalsZosteropidae Zosterops virens AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Milvus migrans migrans AnimalsACCIPITRIDAE Milvus migrans parasitus AnimalsSCOLOPACIDAE Kemphaan AnimalsAraneidae Lipocrea longissima AnimalsBaetidae Baetis harrisoni AnimalsBelostomatidae Diplonychus nepoides AnimalsCarabidae Metagonum crenato-striatum AnimalsChironomidae Chironomus linearis AnimalsChironomidae Cricotopus scottae AnimalsChironomidae Dicrotendipes pilosimanus AnimalsChironomidae Limnophyes natalensis AnimalsCoenagrionidae Pseudagrion kersteni AnimalsCorixidae Micronecta dimidiata AnimalsDytiscidae Bidessus ovoideus AnimalsDytiscidae Bidessus sharpi AnimalsDytiscidae Hydaticus capicola AnimalsDytiscidae Tikoloshanes eretiformis AnimalsEcnomidae Ecnomus oppidanus AnimalsGnaphosidae Zelotes fuliginea AnimalsGyrinidae Aulonogyrus abdominalis AnimalsGyrinidae Orectogyrus conformis AnimalsGyrinidae Orectogyrus elongatus AnimalsHesperiidae Tsitana tsita AnimalsHydraenidae Hydraena accurata AnimalsHydraenidae Parasthetops aeneus AnimalsHydroptilidae Hydroptila capensis AnimalsLeptophlebiidae Euthraulus elegans AnimalsNymphalidae Junonia hierta cebrene AnimalsNymphalidae Paternympha narycia AnimalsOsmylidae Silveira AnimalsActinolaimidae Afractinolaimus noblei AnimalsAeshnidae Aeshna sp. AnimalsAeshnidae Anax sp. AnimalsAncylidae Burnupia transvaalensis AnimalsAncylidae Ferrissia lacustrus AnimalsAthericidae Atherix sp. AnimalsAtyidae Caridina nilotica AnimalsBaetidae Afroptilum excisum AnimalsBaetidae Afroptilum flavum AnimalsBaetidae Afroptilum indusii AnimalsBaetidae Afroptilum medium Animals

Baetidae Afroptilum pulchrum AnimalsBaetidae Afroptilum sp. AnimalsBaetidae Afroptilum sudafricanum AnimalsBaetidae Austrocloeon africanum AnimalsBaetidae Baetis bellus AnimalsBaetidae Baetis glaucus AnimalsBaetidae Baetis latus AnimalsBaetidae Baetis quintus AnimalsBaetidae Baetis sp. AnimalsBaetidae Cloeon sp. AnimalsBaetidae Pseudocloeon maculosum AnimalsBaetidae Pseudocloeon vinosum AnimalsBaetidae Unidentified Baetidae AnimalsBelostomatidae Diplonychus sp. AnimalsCaenidae Austrocaenis capensis AnimalsCaenidae Austrocaenis sp. AnimalsCaenidae Caenis capensis AnimalsCeratopogonidae Atrichopogon sp. AnimalsCeratopogonidae Bezzia sp. AnimalsCeratopogonidae Culicoides magnus AnimalsChironomidae Corynoneura sp. AnimalsChironomidae Cricotopus sp. AnimalsChironomidae Endochironomus disparilis AnimalsChironomidae Pentaneura sp. AnimalsChironomidae Rheotanytarsus sp. AnimalsChironomidae Tanypus sp. AnimalsChironomidae Tanytarsus sp. AnimalsChironomidae Unidentified Chironomidae AnimalsChlorocyphidae Chlorocypha sp. AnimalsChrysomelidae Sphaeroderma capensis AnimalsChydoridae Leydigia macrodonta AnimalsChydoridae Leydigia quadrangularis AnimalsCoenagrionidae Pseudagrion sp. AnimalsCorbiculidae Corbicula africana AnimalsCorduliidae Macromia sp. AnimalsCorixidae Sigara sp. AnimalsCorixidae Unidentified Corixidae AnimalsCulicidae Anopheles sp. AnimalsCulicidae Culex sp. AnimalsCyclopidae Cryptocyclops caudatus AnimalsCyclopidae Cryptocyclops sp. AnimalsCyclopidae Macrocyclops sp. AnimalsCyclopidae Unidentified Cyclopidae AnimalsCypridae Isocypris sp. AnimalsCypridae Pionocypris intermedia AnimalsCypridae Pionocypris sp. AnimalsCypridae Unidentified Cypridae AnimalsCyprididae Cypridopsis sp. AnimalsCyprididae Heterocypris capensis AnimalsDaphniidae Simocephalus sp. AnimalsDaphniidae Simocephalus vetulus AnimalsDixidae Dixa sp. AnimalsDorylaimidae Ischiodorylaimus gulliver AnimalsDytiscidae Africophilus nesiotes Animals

Dytiscidae Africophilus sp. AnimalsDytiscidae Bidessus sp. AnimalsDytiscidae Guignotus bivittatus AnimalsDytiscidae Guignotus infirmus AnimalsDytiscidae Hydrocanthus sp. AnimalsDytiscidae Rantus capensis AnimalsEcnomidae Ecnomus sp. AnimalsElmidae Helminthocharis cristula AnimalsElmidae Helminthopsis bifida AnimalsElmidae Helminthopsis ciliata AnimalsElmidae Leptelmis fragilis AnimalsElmidae Lobelmis harrisoni AnimalsElmidae Microdinodes pilistriatus AnimalsElmidae Microdinodes vaalensis AnimalsElmidae Pachyelmis rufomarginata AnimalsElmidae Protelmis chutteri AnimalsElmidae Pseudancyronyx humeralis AnimalsElmidae Stenelmis gades AnimalsElmidae Stenelmis thusa AnimalsElmidae Unidentified Elmidae AnimalsEmpididae Hemerodromia sp. AnimalsEmpididae Unidentified Empididae AnimalsGelastocoridae Nerthra sp. AnimalsGomphidae Ceratogomphus sp. AnimalsGomphidae Paragomphus sp. AnimalsGyrinidae Aulonogyrus sp. AnimalsGyrinidae Orectogyrus sp. AnimalsHaliplidae Unidentified Haliplidae AnimalsHeptageniidae Afronurus barnardi AnimalsHeptageniidae Afronurus scotti AnimalsHeptageniidae Notonurus cooperi AnimalsHeptageniidae Notonurus sp. AnimalsHydraenidae Parasthetops camurus AnimalsHydraenidae Parasthetops pearcei AnimalsHydraenidae Parasthetops rubidus AnimalsHydraenidae Unidentified Hydraenidae AnimalsHydrophilidae Unidentified Hydrophilidae AnimalsHydropsychidae Amphipsyche sp. AnimalsHydropsychidae Cheumatopsyche afra AnimalsHydropsychidae Cheumatopsyche sp. AnimalsHydropsychidae Cheumatopsyche thomasseti AnimalsHydropsychidae Hydropsyche sp. AnimalsHydropsychidae Macrostemum sp. AnimalsHydropsychidae Unidentified Hydropsychidae AnimalsHydroptilidae Hydroptila sp. AnimalsHydroptilidae Orthotrichia capensis AnimalsHydroptilidae Orthotrichia sp. AnimalsHydroptilidae Oxyethira sp. AnimalsHydroptilidae Unidentified Hydroptilidae AnimalsIlyocyprididae Ilyocypris sp. AnimalsLeptoceridae Athripsodes sp. AnimalsLeptoceridae Ceraclea sp. AnimalsLeptoceridae Oecetis sp. AnimalsLeptoceridae Unidentified Leptoceridae Animals

Leptophlebiidae Unidentified Leptophlebiidae AnimalsLibellulidae Trithemis sp. AnimalsMicronectidae Micronecta sp. AnimalsMoinidae Moina dubia AnimalsMuscidae Unidentified Muscidae AnimalsNaididae Nais communis AnimalsNaididae Nais simplex AnimalsNaididae Nais sp. AnimalsNepidae Ranatra parvipes AnimalsNotonectidae Anisops sp. AnimalsOribatidae Unidentified Oribatidae AnimalsPerlidae Neoperla sp. AnimalsPlanariidae Unidentified Planariidae AnimalsPlanorbidae Biomphalaria sp. AnimalsPlanorbidae Gyraulus costulatus AnimalsPolycentropodidae Nyctiophylax sp. AnimalsPolycentropodidae Polyplectropus sp. AnimalsPolymitarcyidae Povilla adusta AnimalsPotamonautidae Potamonautes warreni AnimalsProsopistomatidae Prosopistoma crassi AnimalsProsopistomatidae Prosopistoma deguernei AnimalsPsephenidae Eubrianax sp. AnimalsRhabditidae Rhabditis sp. AnimalsRhagionidae Unidentified Rhagionidae AnimalsScirtidae Unidentified Scirtidae AnimalsSimuliidae Simulium adersi AnimalsSimuliidae Simulium damnosum AnimalsSimuliidae Simulium mcmahoni AnimalsSimuliidae Simulium medusaeforme AnimalsSimuliidae Simulium sp. AnimalsSimuliidae Simulium unicornutum AnimalsSphaeriidae Pisidium georgeanum AnimalsSphaeriidae Pisidium langleyanum AnimalsSphaeriidae Pisidium sp. AnimalsTabanidae Tabanus sp. AnimalsTabanidae Unidentified Tabanidae AnimalsTipulidae Unidentified Tipulidae AnimalsTricorythidae Neurocaenis discolor AnimalsTricorythidae Neurocaenis sp. AnimalsTubificidae Limnodrilus sp. AnimalsUnidentified Coleoptera Unidentified Coleoptera AnimalsUnidentified Collembola Unidentified Collembola AnimalsUnidentified Ephemeroptera Unidentified Ephemeroptera AnimalsUnidentified Hemiptera Unidentified Hemiptera AnimalsUnidentified Odonata Unidentified Odonata AnimalsUnidentified Ostracoda Unidentified Ostracoda AnimalsUnidentified Trichoptera Unidentified Trichoptera AnimalsVeliidae Microvelia vilhenai AnimalsNYMPHALIDAE Danaus chrysippus subsp. orientis AnimalsPIERIDAE Eurema brigitta subsp. brigitta AnimalsAraneidae Araniella sp. AnimalsAraneidae Kilima decens AnimalsAraneidae Neoscona moreli Animals

Documents

DRAFT BIOPHYSICAL REPORT - zitholele - Duvha/3. Environmental... · DRAFT BIOPHYSICAL REPORT March 2011 ... the New Largo Coal Mine adjacent to the Kusile Power ... Duvha-Minerva