appendix d: specialist reportss3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3live.slrconsulting...access routes to the...

APPENDIX D:

SPECIALIST REPORTS

APPENDIX D1

BOTANICAL ASSESSMENT

Botanical Assessment for a new access road

at Saldanha Bay Industrial Development Zone, Saldanha Bay Municipality

Boophone haemanthoides

Report by Dr David J. McDonald Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC.

14A Thomson Road, Claremont, 7708 Tel: 021-671-4056 Fax: 086-517-3806

Report prepared for SLR Consulting

December 2016

Botanical Assessment: Access Roads, Saldanha Bay IDZ _________________________________________________________________________________

2

National Legislation and Regulations governing this report This is a ‘specialist report’ and is compiled in terms of the National Environmental Management

Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended, and the Environmental Impact Assessment

Regulations, 2014.

Appointment of Specialist David J. McDonald of Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC was appointed by SLR Consulting

to provide specialist botanical consulting services to inform the application process for future

roads over Remainder Farm 1139, Malmesbury (Farm RE/1139) to provide access alternative

access routes to the Saldanha Bay Industrial Development Zone (SBIDZ), Western Cape

Province. The consulting services comprise an assessment of potential impacts on the flora and

vegetation in the designated study area that may result from the construction of the roads.

Details of Specialist

Dr David J. McDonald Pr. Sci. Nat.

Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC

14A Thomson Road

Claremont

7708

Telephone: 021-671-4056

Mobile: 082-876-4051

Fax: 086-517-3806

e-mail: [email protected]

Professional registration: South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions No. 400094/06

Expertise Dr David J. McDonald:

• Qualifications: BSc. Hons. (Botany), MSc (Botany) and PhD (Botany)

• Botanical ecologist with over 35 years’ experience in the field of Vegetation Science.

• Founded Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC in 2006

• Has conducted over 300 specialist botanical / ecological studies.

• Has published numerous scientific papers and attended numerous conferences both

nationally and internationally (details available on request)


3

Independence

The views expressed in the document are the objective, independent views of Dr McDonald

and the survey was carried out under the aegis of, Bergwind Botanical Surveys and Tours CC.

Neither Dr McDonald nor Bergwind Botanical Surveys and Tours CC have any business,

personal, financial or other interest in the proposed development apart from fair remuneration

for the work performed.

Conditions relating to this report

The content of this report is based on the author’s best scientific and professional knowledge as

well as available information. Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC, its staff and appointed

associates, reserve the right to modify the report in any way deemed fit should new, relevant or

previously unavailable or undisclosed information become known to the author from on-going

research or further work in this field, or pertaining to this investigation

This report must not be altered or added to without the prior written consent of the author. This

also refers to electronic copies of the report which are supplied for the purposes of inclusion as

part of other reports, including main reports. Similarly, any recommendations, statements or

conclusions drawn from or based on this report must make reference to this report. If these

form part of a main report relating to this investigation or report, this report must be included in

its entirety as an appendix or separate section to the main report.


4

THE INDEPENDENT PERSON WHO COMPILED A SPECIALIST REPORT OR UNDERTOOK A SPECIALIST PROCESS I David Jury McDonald, as the appointed independent specialist hereby declare that I: ● act/ed as the independent specialist in this application;

● regard the information contained in this report as it relates to my specialist input/study to be true and correct, and

● do not have and will not have any financial interest in the undertaking of the activity, other than remuneration for work performed in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 and any specific environmental management Act;

● have and will not have no vested interest in the proposed activity proceeding;

● have disclosed, to the applicant, EAP and competent authority, any material information that have or may have the potential to influence the decision of the competent authority or the objectivity of any report, plan or document required in terms of the NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 and any specific environmental management Act;

● am fully aware of and meet the responsibilities in terms of NEMA, the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2014 (specifically in terms of regulation 13 of GN No. R. 982) and any specific environmental management Act, and that failure to comply with these requirements may constitute and result in disqualification;

● have ensured that information containing all relevant facts in respect of the specialist input/study was distributed or made available to interested and affected parties and the public and that participation by interested and affected parties was facilitated in such a manner that all interested and affected parties were provided with a reasonable opportunity to participate and to provide comments on the specialist input/study;

● have ensured that the comments of all interested and affected parties on the specialist input/study were considered, recorded and submitted to the competent authority in respect of the application;

● have ensured that the names of all interested and affected parties that participated in terms of the specialist input/study were recorded in the register of interested and affected parties who participated in the public participation process;

● have provided the competent authority with access to all information at my disposal regarding the application, whether such information is favourable to the applicant or not; and

● am aware that a false declaration is an offence in terms of regulation 48 of GN No. R. 982. Note: The terms of reference must be attached.

Signature of the specialist: Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC 6 December 2016


5

CONTENTS 1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 6

2. Terms of Reference ................................................................................. 6

3. Limitations and Assumptions ................................................................... 7

4. Study Area ............................................................................................... 7

4.1 Locality ............................................................................................... 7

4.2 Physiography .................................................................................... 10

5. Evaluation Method ................................................................................. 10

6. The Vegetation ...................................................................................... 13

6.1 General description ........................................................................... 13

6.2 Detailed description of vegetation along the proposed access road

route ....................................................................................................... 16

6.3 Critical Biodiversity Areas ................................................................. 25

7. Species of Conservation Concern .......................................................... 27

8. Botanical Sensitivity ............................................................................... 27

9. Impact Assessment ................................................................................ 28

9.1 Assessed impacts .......................................................................... 28 9.2 ‘No Go’ Alternative ......................................................................... 28 9.3 Direct Impacts ................................................................................ 28 9.4 Indirect Impacts ............................................................................. 30 9.5 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................... 30

10. Mitigation ............................................................................................. 30

11. Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................... 31

12. References .......................................................................................... 32

Appendix 1: Convention for assigning significance ratings to impacts. ....... 34

Appendix 2: Curriculum Vitae ..................................................................... 38


6

1. Introduction

Two new access roads are proposed within the Saldanha Bay Industrial Development Zone

(SBIDZ). They are as follows:

• A new eastern access road and new intersection on Minor Road (OP) 7645 to

provide access to the SBIDZ and the new AfriSam cement plant, north of Main Road

(MR) 559;

• A new northern access road along the SBIDZ eastern boundary for an alternative

access to the Duferco steel processing plant.

This botanical assessment investigates the type, condition and sensitivity of the vegetation

along the proposed road routes on Remainder Farm 1139, Malmesbury, to inform the

environmental process in terms of the NEMA Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations

(2014).

The assessment takes careful note of the general requirements and recommendations of the

CapeNature and the Botanical Society of South Africa for proactive assessment of

biodiversity of proposed development sites and follows published guidelines for evaluating

potential impacts on the natural vegetation in an area earmarked for some form of

development within the Fynbos Biome (Brownlie 2005; Cadman, 2016).

2. Terms of Reference

• Conduct a site visit to determine the condition as well as botanical and ecological

sensitivity of the study area as described;

• Provide a statement on the vegetation type, condition and ecological sensitivity of the land

proposed for road construction. Highlight any special or protected plant species or

sensitive habitats as well as the ecosystem status and conservation value of the

vegetation communities, including whether the site comprises any critically endangered,

endangered, or threatened ecosystem(s) listed in terms of section 52 of the NEMBA;

• Describe the direct, indirect and cumulative botanical impacts (both before and after

mitigation) and an assessment of the significance of the impacts (on a nominal scale of

neutral, very low, low, medium, and high).

• Give an indication of the degree to which the impacts can be mitigated, a description of

the measures to mitigate any impacts, and an indication of whether or not the measures

(if implemented) would change the significance of the impact

Botanical Assessment: Access Roads, Saldanha Bay IDZ_________________________________________________________________________________

7

3. Limitations and Assumptions

The environment was extremely dry at the time of the site visit so many of the herbaceous

plants were not in a condition that allowed for positive identification. However, apart from

grasses most herbaceous plant species do not make up a significant component of the

composition of the plant communities. Some geophytes were visible, as described, but the

majority of winter and spring-flowering geophytes, if present, were not visible. The indicator

species are mainly shrubs that were easily identified even with the prevailing dry

conditions.

4. Study Area4.1 Locality

The study area is a corridor across the central area of Farm RE/1139, Malmesbury and then

along the western boundary northwards to the Duferco factory. The study area falls within

the Saldanha Bay Municipality (Figures 1 & 2).

Figure 1. The location of the study area north-east of the town of Saldanha, within the defined Saldanha Bay

Industrial Development Zone.


8

Figure 2. Proposed eastern and northern access roads on Remainder Farm 1139, Malmesbury, for access to the Saldanha Bay Industrial Development Zone. (Drawing supplied by

SMEC).


9

Figure 3. Aerial image (Google Earth ™) showing farm RE/1139 Malmesbury (purple boundary) with the study area a corridor following the red line. The light blue line represents the

survey track with sample waypoints (blue pins:SID#).


10

4.2 Physiography

The climate of the study area is typically Mediterranean with hot, dry, windy summers and

cool, wet winters. This has a marked effect on the vegetation with many annuals and

geophytes only being seen in the winter-spring growing season.

The soils are shallow, sandy calcareous soils over limestone. In places the limestone is

exposed at the surface as ridges or as limestone sheetrock. A prominent limestone ridge is

found approximately half-way along the eastern access road route. This ridge is a few metres

higher in elevation than the surrounding flats that are approximately 20 m above mean sea

level (Figure 4).

Figure 4. View west along the

eastern access road route. The

vegetation in the foreground is

heavily disturbed. The denser

vegetation on the horizon is on

the slightly elevated limestone

ridge.

5. Evaluation Method

The study area was visited in fine weather. The survey was carried out on foot and a rapid

assessment, plot-less method was employed. A hand-held Garmin ® GPSMap 62s was used

to record ‘sample’ waypoints and the route followed (sample track) on the site is shown in

Figure 3. At the 15 ‘sample’ waypoints (Table 1) specific details of the surrounding vegetation

and features of the habitat were recorded and photographs taken to support the general

observations made. The GPS was used to navigate the route but observations were not

confined to the road route. Note was taken of the surrounding landscape so as to obtain the

best understanding of the overall landscape and biodiversity conditions.


11

Satellite aerial photography from Google Earth ™ was also used for interpretation of the

landscape and preparation of maps.

Table 1. Co-ordinates of the sample waypoints

Waypoint Latitude Longitude

SID1 S 32º 59’ 12.9” E 18º 00’ 12.4”

SID2 S 32º 59’ 12.3” E 18º 00’ 09.2”

SID3 S 32º 59’ 10.4” E 18º 00’ 02.2”

SID4 S 32º 59’ 09.1” E 18º 00’ 01.5”

SID5 S 32º 59’ 07.7” E 17º 59’ 57.1”

SID6 S 32º 59’ 06.6” E 17º 59’ 51.1”

SID7 S 32º 59’ 06.7” E 17º 59’ 48.3”

SID8 S 32º 59’ 05.5” E 17º 59’ 45.3”

SID9 S 32º 59’ 06.0” E 17º 59’ 42.0”

SID10 S 32º 59’ 04.3” E 17º 59’ 37.0”

SID11 S 32º 59’ 04.1” E 17º 59’ 33.5”

SID12 S 32º 58’ 59.1” E 17º 59’ 35.0”

SID13 S 32º 58’ 54.9” E 17º 59’ 37.3”

SID14 S 32º 58’ 42.6” E 17º 59’ 43.7”

SID15 S 32º 59’ 40.3” E 17º 59’ 44.7”


12

Figure 5. Portion of the National Vegetation Map for the Saldanha area (after Mucina et al. 2005 and SANBI, 2012), with the proposed Saldanha Bay IDZ access roads traversing

Saldanha Limestone Strandveld and Saldanha Flats Strandveld.


13

6. The Vegetation

6.1 General description

A number of vegetation types are found in the Saldanha area but since the climate is

much the same over the area immediately east and north of Saldanha Bay IDZ, the

type of vegetation is mainly determined by substrate e.g. granite-derived soil,

calcareous dunes, limestone or calcrete or deep sands (McDonald, 2010, 2012; 2013 a

& b). Two of these closely-related and rather similar vegetation types are Saldanha

Limestone Strandveld and Saldanha Flats Strandveld distributed in the Saldanha area

as shown in Figure 5. According to the National Vegetation Map (Mucina et al. 2005;

Rebelo et al. 2006; SANBI, 2012) the proposed access road would traverse Saldanha

Limestone Strandveld and Saldanha Flats Strandveld. The fine-scale vegetation map

compiled by Helme & Koopman (Helme, 2007) is exactly the same as the National

Vegetation Map for the area studied in this investigation so is not depicted here.

Saldanha Limestone Strandveld

Saldanha Limestone Strandveld is a low shrubland consisting of succulent-stemmed

and deciduous fleshy-leaved shrubs in shallow sand soil over calcrete or limestone

(hardpan) with annuals and geophytes found in cracks and shallow depressions in

exposed limestone. According to the National Vegetation Map (Figure 5) Saldanha

Limestone Strandveld occurs along the eastern access road route from the vicinity of

waypoint SID2 to SID9.

Saldanha Flats Strandveld

Saldanha Flats Strandveld is a sclerophyllous shrubland with a low open shrub layer

and emergent mid-high shrub stratum. It is species-rich and well-known for colourful

displays of annuals in spring. Geophytes are common but are also usually only seen

during the winter and spring season when they are growing and flowering. The upper

shrub stratum is characterized by species such as Euclea racemosa, Muraltia spinosa

and Searsia glauca. Species of lower stature include Euphorbia mauritanica, Ruschia

macowanii, Tetragonia decumbens, Tetragonia fruticosa, Zygophyllum cordifolium and

Zygophyllum morgsana. A wide array of low succulent ‘vygies’, annual Asteraceae and

geophytic herbs make up the greater proportion of the species complement (Rebelo et

al. 2006; Helme, 2006). Aloe perfoliata occurs in occasional patches in Saldanha Flats


14

Strandveld. Aloe plants encountered by Helme (2006) and McDonald (2007) were

identified as Aloe distans and recorded as rare. Aloe distans is now considered to be

part of Aloe perfoliata which is regarded as of Least Concern (Raimondo et al. 2009).

Other endemic and rare species such as Limonium capense (Near Threatened) also

occur in this vegetation type.

Saldanha Flats Strandveld has been impacted by agriculture and around Saldanha by

industrial development. Helme (2006) estimated that about 59% of Saldanha Flats

Strandveld still remains. However, it is declining and listed as being Vulnerable (A1)1 in

the List of Threatened Ecosystems of South Africa (Government Gazette 2011) as

opposed to the status given by Rebelo et al. (2006) as Endangered. More recent

evaluation by Pence (2014) supports the classification of this vegetation type as

Endangered. Reference to Figure 5 indicates that sample waypoints SID1 in the east,

as well as SID10—SID15 along the route of the northern access road were located in

Saldanha Flats Strandveld. However, this study shows that the vegetation at waypoint

SID1 should be classified as Saldanha Limestone Strandveld.

Historical Record

Boucher (2012) carried out a botanical assessment for a limestone quarry and factory

near Saldanha. His study was based on numerous visits in all seasons from 1993 to

2012 and principally addressed two sites, a quarry site and a factory site. The latter was

proposed to be constructed on Farm RE/1139 which is where the SBIDZ access roads

are now proposed. Although the present study entailed a ‘once-off’ site visit during a

sub-optimal season, observations recorded agree well with Boucher’s findings and his

detailed descriptions of the plant communities within the strandveld types. The relevant

communities described by Boucher (2012) are referred to below.

Boucher’s (2012) map for part of Farm RE/1139 (Figure 4) shows two plant

communities that are sub-communities of Nylandtia spinosa- Afrolimon2 capense

Limestone Strandveld which fall within what Boucher-designated Dryland Strandveld

Shrublands. They are:

• Nylandtia spinosa2–Agathosma imbricata Neutral Sand Shrubland (H)

1 The A1 criterion refers to irreversible loss of natural habitat. 2 Nylandtia spinosa is now Muraltia spinosa; Afrolimon capense is referred to as Limonium capense.


15

• Nylandtia spinosa–Cephalophyllum rostellum Limestone Sheetrock Succulent

Shrubland (I)

The third community described by Boucher (2012) is the Prenia pallens–Medicago

polymorpha Fallow Dry Grassland (J) that falls within the broader Disturbed Dryland

Strandveld. It should also be noted that on Boucher’s map (Figure 6), the area west of

the area delineated as the factory site (red boundary) was identified as ‘cultivated

lands’.

Figure 6. Map of the vegetation of part of Farm RE/1139 from Boucher (2012). The names of communities

H, I and J are given in the text.


16

6.2 Detailed description of vegetation along the proposed access road route

The present survey was conducted from east to west on the eastern access road route

and then from south to north on the northern road route (see Figure 3). The vegetation

from waypoint SID1 to SID6 and from SID9 to SID15 has been historically heavily

grazed, probably by cattle and sheep. In addition, an area in the west represented by

waypoint SID10 was previously cultivated.

The strandveld, mapped mostly as Saldanha Limestone Strandveld, is highly degraded.

The vegetation is in such poor condition that it is difficult to categorically classify it but

going on the presence of limestone, with a thin capping of sandy soil, the classification

of Saldanha Limestone Strandveld is supported (Figures 7 & 8). Following Boucher’s

(2012) classification this community is the Prenia pallens–Medicago polymorpha Fallow

Dry Grassland (J) that falls within the broader Disturbed Dryland Strandveld. Plant

species recorded from waypoint SID1 through to waypoint SID6 include Acacia cyclops

(exotic), Asparagus capensis, Atriplex semibaccata, Berkheya rigida, Bromus sp.,

Brunsvigia orientalis, Cyanella hyacinthoides, Cysticapnos vesicarius, Exomis

microphylla, Galenia sarcophylla, Limonium capense, Lycium ferocissimum, Lycium

tetrandrum, Mesembryanthemum (Psilocaulon) junceum, Mesembryanthemum

guerichianum, Muraltia spinosa, Osteopsermum incanum, Pteronia divaricata, Pteronia

ovalifolia, Pteronia uncinata, Searsia glauca, Tylecodon wallichii and Zygophyllum

morgsana.

Figure 7. The vegetation around waypoint SID1, dominated by Mesembryanthemum (formerly Psilocaulon)

junceum.


17

Figure 8. Saldanha Limestone Strandveld on the ‘flats’ east of the limestone ridge.

Muraltia spinosa is abundant in the vicinity of waypoint SID2, being one of the species

that has resisted the heavy grazing and browsing (Figure 9). The field stratum is

dominated by low, creeping Galenia sarcophylla that also indicates disturbance (heavy

grazing).

Figure 9. Spiny shrubs of Muraltia (Nylandtia) spinosa have mostly resisted the historical heavy grazing

and browsing.


18

Of particular note in the vicinity of waypoint SID3 is a population of old plants of

Boophone haemanthoides (gifbol) (Figure 10). Although not threatened, these plants,

together with Brunsvigia orientalis, should be rescued and relocated to a safe area.

Figure 10. Massive

bulbs with

inflorescences of

Boophone

haemanthoides

(gifbol).

Waypoint SID4 was located where a soil pit for the proposed road was excavated

(Figure 11). The vegetation at this location is typical of the degraded flats with abundant

Mesembryanthemum guerichianum and scattered clusters of Exomis microphylla. The

preponderance of both these species also attests to the historical disturbance.

Figure 11. The

location of waypoint

SID4 at a soil pit with

calcareous sandy

soil.


19

The area around waypoint SID5 is littered with old refuse from the farm with virtually the

only shrubs persisting being Exomis microphylla and Lycium ferocissimum. The

ubiquitous Galenia sarcophylla forms an extensive ‘ground cover’ (Figure 12).

Figure 12. A highly

disturbed area around

waypoint SID5 on the ‘flats’

where a large amount of

old farm refuse has been

discarded.

Sample waypoint SID6 is at a soil pit on the boundary between the flats and the

sandstone ridge. The limestone lying below shallow sandy topsoil was unearthed in the

soil investigation (Figure 13). The boundary between the vegetation of the flats and that

of the limestone ridge is abrupt with an immediate change to a mid-dense to closed

thicket with abundant Thamnochortus erectus on the limestone ridge. The vegetation

on the ridge has been much less disturbed and negatively impacted than that on the

flats (Figure 14).

Figure 13. The soil pit at

waypoint SID6 revealed the

shallow depth of the

limestone on the edge of

the ridge.


20

Figure 14. Mid-dense to

dense thicket vegetation of

the Saldanha Limestone

Strandveld on the

limestone ridge.

The vegetation on the limestone ridge (waypoints SID6, SID7 7 SID8) is the Nylandtia

(Muraltia) spinosa–Afrolimon (Limonium) capense Limestone Strandveld, and more

specifically Nylandtia spinosa2-Agathosma imbricata Neutral Sand Shrubland (H)

following Boucher’s 2012 classification. Plant species recorded on the ridge include

Albuca cf. maxima, Asparagus capensis, Brunsvigia orientalis, Cotyledon orbiculata,

Crassula expansa, Cyanella hyacinthoides, Diosma guthriei (Figure 15), Euclea

racemosa, Euphorbia burmanii, Euryops sp. Ferraria cf. densepunctulata, Galenia

sarcophylla, Gladiolus sp., Helichrysum revolutum, Limonium capense (Figure 16),

Mesembryanthemum guerichianum, Muraltia spinosa, Pelargonium carnosum, Pteronia

divaricata, Pteronia ovalifolia, Pteronia uncinata, Searsia glauca, Searsia undulata,

Tetragonia fruticosa, Tylecodon wallichii and Zygophyllum morgsana.

Figure 15. Diosma

guthriei – an endemic

species of conservation

concern in Saldanha

Limestone Strandveld.

2 Nylandtia spinosa is now Muraltia spinosa.


21

Figure 16. Limonium capense,

an endemic species

of conservation

concern in Saldanha

Limestone

Strandveld.

Waypoint SID8 is at an existing farm track that is approximately 3 m wide (Figures 17 &

18). It traverses the limestone ridge from east to east from the old farm house to the

previously cultivated lands. The vegetation has obviously been removed along the track

and there is disturbance along its edges. It would be beneficial if the proposed road

could follow the track over the ridge since then the impact on the vegetation would be

less than if it was to be aligned through undisturbed vegetation.

Figure 17. The

existing farm track

through the

Saldanha

Limestone

Strandveld on the

ridge – view looking

east from waypoint

SID8.


22

Figure 18. The existing farm track through the Saldanha Limestone Strandveld on the ridge – view looking

west from waypoint SID8.

Waypoint SID9 specifically marks the location of a stand of Aloe perfoliata (Figure 19)

almost on the boundary between the limestone ridge and the cultivated lands to the

west. If this stand of aloes is in any way affected by the road, which is likely, it must be

relocated to elsewhere on the limestone ridge at a safe site.

Figure 19. A stand of Aloe perfoliata on the western edge of the limestone ridge.


23

The cultivated lands west of the limestone ridge are now fallow. They are vegetated with

species reflecting the disturbance and the habitat is highly degraded from its former

natural state of Saldanha Flats Strandveld (Figure 20). This habitat was sampled at

waypoint SID10 and the low ground cover, Galenia sarcophylla is dominant. Other

species recorded in low numbers include Berkheya rigida, Brunsvigia orientalis, Exomis

microphylla, Lycium sp., Lycium tetrandrum, Mesembryanthemum guerichianum,

Muraltia spinosa and Searsia undulata.

Figure 20. The highly disturbed area west of the limestone ridge on the eastern access road route.

Waypoint SID11 was recorded near the boundary fence close to where a new road has

been built in the IDZ. The vegetation in this area is highly degraded and not sensitive in

any way (Figure 21). However, south of this point is a remnant of what is mapped as

Saldanha Flats Strandveld. The proposed road alignment is such that this stand of

vegetation should be missed. It should nevertheless be flagged as a ‘No Entry’ area

where no construction machinery or workers should be permitted.

The question of whether this vegetation is Saldanha Flats Strandveld or Saldanha

Limestone Strandveld is debatable. A detailed study would be required to verify which it

is.


24

Figure 21. The location

of the junction between

eastern access road

route and northern

access road route. The

vegetation is highly

disturbed but south of this

point is a stand of

relatively intact Saldana

Flats Strandveld that

would not be impacted by

the road.

The route from waypoint SID11 to SID15 would have formerly traversed Saldanha Flats

Strandveld according to the mapping of Mucina et al. 2005 and SANBI, 2012 as well as

Helme & Koopman (Helme, 2007). However, only a few remnant grazing- and browsing-

resistant species persist. Waypoint SID13 was at a soil pit was along the boundary

fence. The limestone bedrock is found below a shallow cap of sand and this strongly

suggests that the original vegetation was Saldanha Limestone Strandveld. There is no

reason to suggest that Boucher’s community ‘J’ (Prenia pallens-Medicago polymorpha

Fallow Dry Grassland within the broader Disturbed Dryland Strandveld) should not

extend westwards to the property boundary (see Figure 6). Apart from the presence of

shallow limestone two other observations support this conclusion. Firstly, the high level

of disturbance and secondly the presence of the vygie Prenia pallens (Figure 22), a

nominate species of the Prenia pallens–Medicago polymorpha Fallow Dry Grassland.

Figure 22. Prenia pallens, a

creeping and spreading vygie on

sandy soil. (Photo: Mariana

Delport).


25

In the vicinity of waypoint SID14, Exomis microphylla is the dominant shrub and Galenia

sarcophylla is the dominant species in the field stratum (ground cover). A few mature

exotic Acacia cyclops (rooikrans) trees are also found at this locality.

In this ecosystem Exomis microphylla and Galenia sarcophylla are analogous to

Increaser II grass species in grassland ecosystems. Increaser II grass species increase

under any form of mismanagement or overgrazing. Large parts of Farm RE/1139 are

heavily overgrazed including the entire route of the northern access road route (Figure

23) with the overgrazing resulting in the increase in E. microphylla and G. sarcophylla.

These species are therefore functionally Increaser II species.

Figure 23. Looking southwards along the route of Leg 2 of the access road route, along the western

boundary of Farm RE/1139.

6.3 Critical Biodiversity Areas

The Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBA) around Saldanha were originally based on the

fine-scale mapping of Helme & Koopman (Helme, 2007; Maree & Vromans, 2010) and

have more recently been updated by Pence (2014). Figure 24 shows that the area

studied, although supporting some vegetation in fair to good condition on the limestone

ridge, has not been assigned to any CBA category.


26

Figure 24. Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBA) map of the area covering part of the Saldanha IDZ. The CBAs are shaded red. The study area (indicated by white arrow) does not

fall within a CBA.


27

7. Species of Conservation Concern

A number of endemic species and species of conservation concern were encountered in the

survey on the limestone ridge namely, Diosma guthriei [Near Threatened] (Figure 15),

Ferraria cf. densepunctulata [Vulnerable] and Limonium capense [Near Threatened] (Figure

16). Referring to the species of conservation concern listed by Boucher (2012), There is a

strong likelihood that others such as the following could occur in the vegetation on the

limestone ridge: Babiana tubiflora [Declining], Cephalophyllum rostellum [Endangered],

Chaenostoma multiramosum [Vulnerable], Diosma sp. nov. nr. D. haelkraalensis

[Endangered], Nenax hirta subsp. calciphylla [Near Threatened], Ruschia geminiflora

[Vulnerable] and Zaluzianskya parviflora [Near Threatened].

Although Brunsvigia orientalis and Boophone haemanthoides are listed in the ‘Red List’ as of

‘Least Concern’ a ‘Search and Rescue’ strategy should nevertheless be implemented to

save these plants from where they would be impacted by road construction.

8. Botanical Sensitivity

The proposed eastern access road on Farm RE/1139 would first traverse ‘flats’

where the vegetation has been heavily negatively impacted by overgrazing. The

botanical sensitivity is very low in this area apart from the presence of geophytes.

The route then crosses a low limestone ridge where the vegetation is mostly intact

and harbours endemic species with some of them being of conservation concern.

This vegetation has high botanical sensitivity even though it is classified as Least

Threatened (Government Gazette, 2011). West of the limestone ridge the original

vegetation on the eastern access route has been transformed and once again has

very low botanical sensitivity. Although some shrubs are present along the northern

access route, the natural vegetation is also heavily disturbed and largely

transformed.


28

9. Impact Assessment

9.1 Assessed impacts

The assessment of the impacts is considered for construction of the access roads

(preferred alternative) and the ‘No Go’ alternative which would be no development.

Three types of impacts are assessed:

Direct impacts: Impacts occurring directly on the vegetation of the site as a result of the

proposed road.

Indirect impacts: Impacts that would not be as a direct result of the proposed road, but that

would occur away from the original source of impact.

Cumulative impacts: impacts caused by several similar projects.

9.2 ‘No Go’ Alternative

The No Go alternative would be no construction of the proposed road as described above.

The veld would remain as it is (fallow) and there would be a gradual change over time but with

some low-level impacts due to human activity. The result would be a Low Negative impact.

9.3 Direct Impacts

The impacts of the construction of a road Farm RE/1139 are, for practical purposes,

considered for the loss of natural vegetation and habitat i.e. loss of Saldanha Flats Strandveld

and Saldanha Limestone Strandveld. (Detailed plant communities as described above are not

considered; only the major types are assessed).

9.3.1. Loss of vegetation and habitat of the ‘flats’

On eastern access route, the lower-lying areas (‘flats’) support heavily disturbed and degraded

Saldanha Limestone Strandveld east of the limestone ridge and equally degraded Saldanha

Flats Strandveld (ENDANGERED) west of the limestone ridge. Along northern access route

the vegetation is highly degraded Saldanha Flats Strandveld. The proposed access road

would have a Low Negative impact on the flora and vegetation in the low-lying areas of both

the eastern and northern access road routes (Table 1). The most marked impact would be on

the populations of geophytes therefore as mitigation, these plants should be rescued and

relocated. This would reduce the impact to Very Low Negative.


29

Table 1. Impact and Significance – Loss of Saldanha Flats Strandveld and Saldanha Limestone Strandveld on the flats (low-lying areas) of the proposed eastern and northern access road routes.

CRITERIA WITHOUT MITIGATION WITH MITIGATION

Extent Local Local

Duration Long-term Long-term

Intensity Medium Low

Probability Highly probable Highly probable

Confidence High High

Significance Low negative Very Low Negative

Cumulative impact Low negative Very Low Negative

Nature of Cumulative impact

Loss of Saldanha Flats Strandveld and Saldanha Limestone Strandveld

Degree to which impact can be reversed

Low

Degree to which impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources

Low

Degree to which impact can be mitigated

Medium

9.3.2. Loss of vegetation and habitat of the limestone ridge The limestone ridge lies in the path of the proposed eastern access road. The distance of the

road across the ridge would be approximately 243 m and if an estimate of the width (including

construction impact) is 50 m, the amount of strandveld to be lost from the ridge would be 1.22

ha. This figure should be used as a guide only since there would be other factors such as

fragmentation and edge effects that would contribute to the negative impact. However, overall

the loss of Saldanha Limestone Strandveld on the ridge would not be excessive. If the road is

aligned though undisturbed strandveld on the ridge, the impact would High Negative, but if

the road is aligned along the existing farm track (see Figures 17 & 18) where vegetation has

already been lost, this would mitigate for the anticipated loss and the impact would then be

Medium Negative (Table 2).


30

Table 2. Impact and Significance – Loss of Saldanha Limestone Strandveld on the limestone ridge crossed by the proposed eastern access road route.

CRITERIA WITHOUT MITIGATION WITH MITIGATION

Extent Local Local

Duration Long-term Long-term

Intensity High Medium

Probability Highly probable Highly probable

Confidence High High

Significance High negative Medium Negative

Cumulative impact Medium negative Low Negative

Nature of Cumulative impact

Loss of Saldanha Limestone Strandveld

Degree to which impact can be reversed

Low

Degree to which impact may cause irreplaceable loss of resources

Low

Degree to which impact can be mitigated

Medium

9.4 Indirect Impacts

No indirect impacts of the proposed access roads were identified.

9.5 Cumulative Impacts

Saldanha Limestone Strandveld is being negatively impacted in many places around

Saldanha due to development within the Saldanha Bay Industrial Development Zone and

elsewhere e.g. at Middelpos for housing. The proposed access road at Farm RE/1139 would

have a small but nevertheless measurable and meaningful negative cumulative impact that

would result from loss and fragmentation of Saldanha Limestone Strandveld. As for Saldanha

Flats Strandveld, the impact of the proposed road on this vegetation type would be negligible

since it is so degraded on Farm RE/1139. The road would not add to cumulative loss

(negative impact) of Saldanha Flats Strandveld to only a very limited extent.

10. Mitigation

The most meaningful mitigation that can be suggested and recommended is to locate

geophytes and then relocate them to safe sites in similar habitat. This would be possible for


31

species such as Boophone haemanthoides and Brunsvigia orientalis. The large bulbs of B.

haemanthoides would be visible year-round whereas Brunsvigia orientalis would only be

identifiable from the inflorescences in late February to March or in the winter when the leaves

would be visible on the soil surface. Ideally these bulbs should be lifted when dormant but if

not, they should be replanted immediately in a designated safe receptor area.

A second, and vital, mitigation would be to restrict construction activities to the construction

zone, particularly on the limestone ridge. No movement of vehicles or workers must be

permitted in the areas of vegetation north and south of the construction zone on the ridge.

Thirdly, all vegetation removed on the limestone ridge should be retained, mulched and used

for rehabilitation of any areas alongside the road and elsewhere that require restoration post-

construction.

11. Conclusions and Recommendations

• The natural vegetation types mapped for the study area at Farm RE/1399

Malmesbury, are Saldanha Flats Strandveld (Endangered) and Saldanha

Limestone Strandveld (Least Threatened).

• The Saldanha Flats Strandveld and areas of Saldanha Limestone Strandveld on

the farm have been extremely heavily grazed and the disturbance has

transformed the vegetation on the ‘flats’ to a very poor, degraded condition. It now

has very low botanical sensitivity.

• The impact of the proposed road on the ‘flats’ where both Saldanha Flats

Strandveld and Saldanha Limestone Strandveld originally occurred, both to the

east and west of the limestone ridge, would be Low Negative without mitigation

and Very Low Negative with mitigation.

• Recommended mitigation would be to locate, lift and relocate the geophytes

occurring on the footprint of the road. Those of particular note are Boophone

haemanthoides and Brunsvigia orientalis.

• The Saldanha Limestone Strandveld on the limestone ridge is in good condition

and harbours a number of endemic and plant species of conservation concern.

For this reason, the vegetation is considered to have high sensitivity. Construction

of the proposed road over the ridge would result in a High Negative impact

without mitigation and a Medium Negative impact with mitigation.

• It is recommended that, if possible, as one of the mitigation measures, the

proposed road should follow the existing farm track across the limestone ridge.

This would limit negative impact on intact vegetation on the ridge.


32

• Despite the possible loss of some endemic shrubs on the limestone ridge, the

overall negative impact is not anticipated to be high for the greater part of the

access road route. If adequate mitigation is applied the impacts would be within

acceptable limits and the proposed road is supported from a botanical

perspective.

12. References

Boucher, C. 2012. Botanical assessment for EIA – Proposed AfriSam cement plant, mine

and associated infrastructure at Saldanha, Western Cape. Unpublished report for

AfriSam.

Brownlie, S. 2005. Guideline for involving biodiversity specialists in EIA processes: Edition

1. CSIR Report No. ENV-S-C 2005-053 C. Provincial Government of the Western

Cape: Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning.

Cadman, M. 2016. (ed) Fynbos Forum Ecosystem Guidelines for Environmental

Assessment in the Western Cape, Edition 2. Fynbos Forum, Cape Town, 201pp

Government Gazette No. 34809. 2011. Threatened Terrestrial Ecosystems in South Africa.

Helme, N. 2006. Botanical assessment of Portion 4 of Farm 187, Portion 4 of Farm 127,

Portion 1 of Farm 189, Portion 0 of Farm 133 and Farm 1195, Vredenburg. Report

compiled for Envirologic, Tygervalley.

Helme, N. A. 2007. Botanical report: Fine scale vegetation mapping in the Saldanha

Peninsula. Report for CapeNature, as part of the C.A.P.E. programme.

Maree, K.S. and Vromans, D.C. 2010. The Biodiversity Sector Plan for the Saldanha Bay,

Bergrivier, Cederberg and Matzikama Municipalities: Supporting land-use planning and

decision-making in Critical Biodiversity Areas and Ecological Support Areas. Produced

by CapeNature as part of the C.A.P.E. Fine-scale Biodiversity Planning Project.

Kirstenbosch.

McDonald, D.J. 2007. Re-evaluation of Botanical Assessment of Portion 4 of Farm 187,

Portion 4 of Farm 127, Portion 1 of farm 189, Portion 0 of farm 133 and Farm 1195,

Vredenburg. Report for LEAP planning consultants, Malmesbury.


33

McDonald, D.J. 2010. Botanical Assessment, Middelpos, Saldanha Bay Municipality, West

Coast, Western Cape. Unpublished report for EnviroAfrica.

McDonald, D.J. 2012. Baseline Botanical Assessment for the proposed Saldanha Anaerobic

Biogas Facility, Western Cape. Unpublished report for Chand Environmental.

McDonald, D.J. 2013a. Baseline Botanical Assessment for the proposed Mossgas Quay

Access Road, Saldanha. Unpublished report for Holland & Associates, Cape Town.

McDonald, D.J. 2013b. Baseline Botanical Assessment for the proposed Avedia LP Gas

Storage Facility and associated pipeline, Saldanha. Unpublished report for Chand

Environmental.

Mucina, L., Rutherford, M.C., & Powrie, L.W. (Eds.). 2005. Vegetation map of South Africa,

Lesotho, and Swaziland 1:1 000 000 scale sheet maps. South African National

Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. ISBN 1-919976-22-1.

Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. 2006. (eds.) The Vegetation of South Africa. Lesotho &

Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

Pence, Genevieve Q.K. 2014. Western Cape Biodiversity Framework 2014 Status Update:

Critical Biodiversity Areas of the Western Cape. Unpublished CapeNature project

report. Cape Town, South Africa.

Raimondo, D., Von Staden, L., Foden, W., Victor, J.E., Helme, N.A., Turner, R.C., Kamundi,

D.A. & Manyama, P.A. (eds) 2009. Red List of South African plants 2009. Strelitzia 25.

South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

Rebelo, A.G., Boucher, C., Helme, N., Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. 2006. Fynbos Biome.

In: Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. (eds.) The Vegetation of South Africa. Lesotho &

Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) 2012, Vegetation Map of South Africa,

Lesotho and Swaziland [vector geospatial dataset] 2012. Available from the

Biodiversity GIS website http://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/18

_________________________________________________________________________

Report submitted: 5 December 2016; revised and updated 3 February 2017.

http://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/18

http://bgis.sanbi.org/SpatialDataset/Detail/18


34

Appendix 1: Convention for assigning significance ratings to impacts.

Specialists will consider seven rating scales when assessing potential impacts. These include: • extent; • duration; • intensity; • status of impact; • probability; • degree of confidence; and • significance. In assigning significance ratings to potential impacts before and after mitigation specialists are instructed to follow the approach presented below:

1. The core criteria for determining significance ratings are “extent” (Section 6.3.1), “duration” (Section 6.3.2) and “intensity” (Section 6.3.3). The preliminary significance ratings for combinations of these three criteria are given in Section 6.3.7.

2. The status of an impact is used to describe whether the impact will have a negative, positive or neutral effect on the surrounding environment. An impact may therefore be negative, positive (or referred to as a benefit) or neutral.

3. Describe the impact in terms of the probability of the impact occurring (Section 6.3.5) and the degree of confidence in the impact predictions, based on the availability of information and specialist knowledge (Section 6.3.6).

4. Additional criteria to be considered, which could “increase” the significance rating if deemed justified by the specialist, with motivation, are the following:

• Permanent / irreversible impacts (as distinct from long-term, reversible impacts); • Potentially substantial cumulative effects (see Item 7 below); and • High level of risk or uncertainty, with potentially substantial negative consequences.

5. Additional criteria to be considered, which could “decrease” the significance rating if deemed justified by the specialist, with motivation, is the following: • Improbable impact, where confidence level in prediction is high.

6. When assigning significance ratings to impacts after mitigation, the specialist needs to: • First, consider probable changes in intensity, extent and duration of the impact after mitigation,

assuming effective implementation of mitigation measures, leading to a revised significance rating; and

• Then moderate the significance rating after taking into account the likelihood of proposed mitigation measures being effectively implemented. Consider: o Any potentially significant risks or uncertainties associated with the effectiveness of

mitigation measures; o The technical and financial ability of the proponent to implement the measure; and o The commitment of the proponent to implementing the measure, or guarantee over time that

the measures would be implemented.

7. The cumulative impacts of a project should also be considered. “Cumulative impacts” refer to the impact of an activity that may become significant when added to the existing activities currently taking place within the surrounding environment.


35

8. Where applicable, assess the degree to which an impact may cause irreplaceable loss of a resource. A resource assists in the functioning of human or natural systems, i.e. specific vegetation, minerals, water, agricultural land, etc.

9. The significance ratings are based on largely objective criteria and inform decision-making at a project

level as opposed to a local community level. In some instances, therefore, whilst the significance rating of potential impacts might be “low” or “very low”, the importance of these impacts to local communities or individuals might be extremely high. The importance which I&APs attach to impacts must be taken into consideration, and recommendations should be made as to ways of avoiding or minimising these negative impacts through project design, selection of appropriate alternatives and / or management.

The relationship between the significance ratings after mitigation and decision-making can be broadly defined as follows (see overleaf): substance Significance rating Effect on decision-making

VERY LOW; LOW

Will not have an influence on the decision to proceed with the proposed project, provided that recommended measures to mitigate negative impacts are implemented.

MEDIUM Should influence the decision to proceed with the proposed project, provided that recommended measures to mitigate negative impacts are implemented.

HIGH; VERY HIGH

Would strongly influence the decision to proceed with the proposed project.

1. Extent “Extent” defines the physical extent or spatial scale of the impact.

Rating Description LOCAL Extending only as far as the activity, limited to the site and its immediate surroundings. Specialist studies

to specify extent. REGIONAL Western Cape. Specialist studies to specify extent. NATIONAL South Africa INTERNATIONAL

2. Duration “Duration” gives an indication of how long the impact would occur.

Rating Description SHORT TERM 0 - 5 years MEDIUM TERM 5 - 15 years LONG TERM Where the impact will cease after the operational life of the activity, either because of natural processes or

by human intervention. PERMANENT Where mitigation either by natural processes or by human intervention will not occur in such a way or in

such time span that the impact can be considered transient.

3. Intensity “Intensity” establishes whether the impact would be destructive or benign.

Rating Description ZERO TO VERY LOW Where the impact affects the environment in such a way that natural, cultural and social functions and

processes are not affected. LOW Where the impact affects the environment in such a way that natural, cultural and social functions and

processes continue, albeit in a slightly modified way. MEDIUM Where the affected environment is altered, but natural, cultural and social functions and processes

continue, albeit in a modified way. HIGH Where natural, cultural and social functions or processes are altered to the extent that it will temporarily or

permanently cease.


36

4. Loss of resources “Loss of resource” refers to the degree to which a resource is permanently affected by the activity, i.e. the degree to which a resource is irreplaceable.

Rating Description LOW Where the activity results in a loss of a particular resource but where the natural, cultural and social

functions and processes are not affected. MEDIUM Where the loss of a resource occurs, but natural, cultural and social functions and processes continue,

albeit in a modified way. HIGH Where the activity results in an irreplaceable loss of a resource.

5. Status of impact The status of an impact is used to describe whether the impact would have a negative, positive or zero effect on the affected environment. An impact may therefore be negative, positive (or referred to as a benefit) or neutral. 6. Probability “Probability” describes the likelihood of the impact occurring.

Rating Description IMPROBABLE Where the possibility of the impact to materialise is very low either because of design or historic experience. PROBABLE Where there is a distinct possibility that the impact will occur. HIGHLY PROBABLE Where it is most likely that the impact will occur. DEFINITE Where the impact will occur regardless of any prevention measures.

7. Degree of confidence This indicates the degree of confidence in the impact predictions, based on the availability of information and specialist knowledge.

Rating Description HIGH Greater than 70% sure of impact prediction. MEDIUM Between 35% and 70% sure of impact prediction. LOW Less than 35% sure of impact prediction.

8. Significance “Significance” attempts to evaluate the importance of a particular impact, and in doing so incorporates the above three scales (i.e. extent, duration and intensity).

Rating Description VERY HIGH Impacts could be EITHER:

of high intensity at a regional level and endure in the long term; OR of high intensity at a national level in the medium term; OR of medium intensity at a national level in the long term.

HIGH Impacts could be EITHER: of high intensity at a regional level and endure in the medium term; OR of high intensity at a national level in the short term; OR of medium intensity at a national level in the medium term; OR of low intensity at a national level in the long term; OR of high intensity at a local level in the long term;


37

Rating Description OR of medium intensity at a regional level in the long term.

MEDIUM Impacts could be EITHER: of high intensity at a local level and endure in the medium term; OR of medium intensity at a regional level in the medium term; OR of high intensity at a regional level in the short term; OR of medium intensity at a national level in the short term; OR of medium intensity at a local level in the long term; OR of low intensity at a national level in the medium term; OR of low intensity at a regional level in the long term.

LOW Impacts could be EITHER of low intensity at a regional level and endure in the medium term; OR of low intensity at a national level in the short term; OR of high intensity at a local level and endure in the short term; OR of medium intensity at a regional level in the short term; OR of low intensity at a local level in the long term; OR of medium intensity at a local level and endure in the medium term.

VERY LOW Impacts could be EITHER of low intensity at a local level and endure in the medium term; OR of low intensity at a regional level and endure in the short term; OR of low to medium intensity at a local level and endure in the short term.

INSIGNIFICANT Impacts with: Zero to very low intensity with any combination of extent and duration.

UNKNOWN In certain cases it may not be possible to determine the significance of an impact.

9. Degree to which impact can be mitigated This indicates the degree to which an impact can be reduced / enhanced.

Rating Description NONE No change in impact after mitigation. VERY LOW Where the significance rating stays the same, but where mitigation will reduce the intensity of the impact. LOW Where the significance rating drops by one level, after mitigation. MEDIUM Where the significance rating drops by two to three levels, after mitigation. HIGH Where the significance rating drops by more than three levels, after mitigation.

10 Reversibility of an impact This refers to the degree to which an impact can be reversed.

Rating Description IRREVERSIBLE Where the impact is permanent. PARTIALLY REVERSIBLE Where the impact can be partially reversed. FULLY REVERSIBLE Where the impact can be completely reversed.


38

Appendix 2: Curriculum Vitae

Dr David Jury McDonald Pr.Sci.Nat.

Name of Firm: Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC. (Independent consultant)

Work and Home Address: 14 A Thomson Road, Claremont, 7708

Tel: (021) 671-4056 Mobile: 082-8764051 Fax: 086-517-3806

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: www.bergwind.co.za

Profession: Botanist / Vegetation Ecologist / Consultant / Tour Guide

Date of Birth: 7 August 1956

Employment history:

• 19 years with National Botanical Institute (now SA National Biodiversity Institute) as researcher in vegetation ecology.

• Five years as Deputy Director / Director Botanical & Communication Programmes of the Botanical Society of South Africa

• Six years as private independent Botanical Specialist consultant (Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC)

Nationality: South African (ID No. 560807 5018 080) Languages: English (home language) – speak, read and write Afrikaans – speak, read and write Membership in Professional Societies:

• South Africa Association of Botanists • International Association for Impact Assessment (SA) • South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (Ecological Science,

Registration No. 400094/06) • Field Guides Association of Southern Africa

Key Qualifications :

• Qualified with a M.Sc. (1983) in Botany and a PhD in Botany (Vegetation Ecology) (1995)

at the University of Cape Town.

• Research in Cape fynbos ecosystems and more specifically mountain ecosystems.

• From 1995 to 2000 managed the Vegetation Map of South Africa Project (National

Botanical Institute)

• Conducted botanical survey work for AfriDev Consultants for the Mohale and Katse Dam

projects in Lesotho from 1995 to 2002. A large component of this work was the analysis

of data collected by teams of botanists.

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.bergwind.co.za/


39

• Director: Botanical & Communication Programmes of the Botanical Society of South

Africa (2000—2005), responsible for communications and publications; involved with

conservation advocacy particularly with respect to impacts of development on centres of

plant endemism.

• Further tasks involved the day-to-day management of a large non-profit environmental

organisation.

• Independent botanical consultant (2005 – to present) over 300 projects have been

completed related to environmental impact assessments in the Western, Southern and

Northern Cape, Karoo and Lesotho. A list of reports (or selected reports for scrutiny) is

available on request.

Higher Education Degrees obtained and major subjects passed: B.Sc. (1977), University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg Botany III Entomology II (Third year course) B.Sc. Hons. (1978) University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg Botany (Ecology /Physiology)

M.Sc. - (Botany), University of Cape Town, 1983. Thesis title: 'The vegetation of Swartboschkloof,

Jonkershoek, Cape Province'.

PhD (Botany), University of Cape Town, 1995. Thesis title: 'Phytogeography endemism and diversity of the fynbos of the southern Langeberg'.

Certificate of Tourism: Guiding (Culture: Local)

Level 4, Code: TGC7 (Registered Tour Guide: WC 2969). Employment Record: January 2006 – present: Independent specialist botanical consultant and tour guide in own

company: Bergwind Botanical Surveys & Tours CC August 2000 - 2005 : Deputy Director, later Director Botanical & Communication Programmes,

Botanical Society of South Africa January 1981 – July 2000 : Research Scientist (Vegetation Ecology) at National Botanical Institute January 1979—Dec 1980 : National Military Service Further information is available on my company website: www.bergwind.co.za

http://www.bergwind.co.za/

appendix d: specialist reportss3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3live.slrconsulting...access routes to the...

Documents