management plan for the robberg coastal corridor … · 2018-09-05 · robberg coastal corridor...

Owners: Robberg Coastal Corridor Land

Owners Association (RCCLA)

Prepared by: Carlo van Tonder (CapeNature)

Date: 2 January 2013

MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE ROBBERG

COASTAL CORRIDOR PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT

(RCCPE)

Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment Management Plan

Requirements management plan much fulfill in terms of National Environmental

Management: Protected Areas Act (57 of 2003)

PART

NUMBER SECTION AND SUBSECTIONS

Best

Practice

Protected

Areas

BAs

Must

have

May

have

PART A

Part 1

Description

• Introduction Optional

• Description of landholdings and ownership Compulsory

– General description property (title deed information), landscape context, physical and biological environment, and socio-political context

Compulsory

• Purpose, Vision / Mission, Significance / Value

Compulsory S.40

(&17)

Part 2

Management

policy

framework

• Administrative and Legal Framework for the Management Authority

Compulsory S38

– Administration Framework/Structure focused on Management Authority,

Compulsory S38

– Legal/policy framework, – linkages to IDPs & SDFs,

Compulsory S.41(2)

S.41(3)

– Procedures for public participation with I&APs

Compulsory S.

41(2)

• Protected Area Policy Framework & guiding management principles

Compulsory S.41(2)

– Management Objectives Compulsory S.41(2)

– Threats analysis Optional

– Quantitative Biodiversity goals Optional

– Protected Area management policy framework

Compulsory S.41(2)

– Details of any Biodiversity Management Plan

Compulsory S.41(2)

– CBNRM Compulsory S.41(2)

– Invasive species control strategy (meet requirements of S.76 of NEM:BA)

Compulsory S.41(2)

– Development of local management capacity & knowledge exchange

Optional S.41(3)


– Strategic Research and Monitoring Compulsory

– Zonation plan (including permissible and non-permissible activities)

Compulsory S.41(2)

• Development Plan Optional S.41(3)

• Costing Plan – Business Plan with costings, budgets, etc – Development of economic activities

Compulsory S.41(2) S.41(3)

Part 3

Monitoring

& Auditing

• Monitoring & Auditing – controls and performance criteria – Audit procedure (Monitor with indicators) – Annual Reporting – 5-year review – Biodiversity monitoring

Compulsory

S.41(2)

S.43

S.43

Part 4

Appendices

• Appendices – maps, species lists, supporting docs.

Compulsory S.41(2)

PART B

Part 5

Management

Schedule

• Programme of Implementation – Management Programmes - Annual Plans

of Operation – Annual Management Schedule – Annual Audit Procedure

Compulsory S.43(3)


TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1 – DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................9

1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................9

2. Description of landholdings and ownership ...................................................................... 10

2.1 Property details and title deed information ................................................................ 10

2.2 Landscape perspective .............................................................................................. 11

2.3 Physical Environment ................................................................................................ 13

2.3.1 Climate .............................................................................................................. 13

2.3.2 Topography and terrain morphology ................................................................. 13

2.3.3 Geology, geomorphology, soils and land types ................................................ 14

2.3.4 Hydrology and aquatic systems ........................................................................ 14

2.4 Biological environment ............................................................................................... 14

2.4.1 Vegetation ......................................................................................................... 14

2.4.1.1 South Outeniqua Sandstone Fynbos .................................................................. 14

2.4.1.2 Southern Afro-temperate Forest ......................................................................... 14

2.4.1.3 Vegetation units in the RCCPE ........................................................................... 15

2.4.2 Terrestrial Mammals .......................................................................................... 17

2.4.3 Birds .................................................................................................................. 17

2.4.4 Amphibians and reptiles .................................................................................... 17

2.4.5 Invertebrates ...................................................................................................... 17

2.4.6 Aquatic organisms ............................................................................................. 17

3. Purpose, Vision and Significance/Value ........................................................................... 18

3.1 Purpose of the Protected Area .................................................................................. 18

3.2 Vision and Mission ..................................................................................................... 18

3.3 Significance of property ............................................................................................. 19

PART 2 – MANAGEMENT POLICY FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 20

4. Administrative and legal framework for the Management Authority ................................. 20

4.1 Administrative framework .......................................................................................... 20

4.2 Legal framework and procedures for public participation with interested and affected

parties 21

4.3 Linkage to Integrated Development and Spatial Development Frameworks ............ 22

4.4 Robberg Coastal Corridor: Environmental Law Guideline for a Coastal Corridor ..... 23

5. Protected Area Management Policy Framework .............................................................. 24

5.1 Management objectives ............................................................................................. 24

5.2 Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis ....................... 25


5.3 Quantitative biodiversity goals ................................................................................... 25

5.4 Protected Areas management policy framework and guiding management principles

26

5.4.1 Biodiversity conservation management ............................................................ 26

5.4.1.1 Fire management ............................................................................................ 26

5.4.1.2 Invasive alien vegetation eradication .............................................................. 27

5.4.1.3 Corridor management ..................................................................................... 28

5.4.2 Strategic research ............................................................................................. 28

5.4.3 Infrastructure management ............................................................................... 28

5.4.3.1 Footpaths ........................................................................................................ 28

5.4.3.2 Vehicle tracks .................................................................................................. 29

5.4.3.3 Visual impacts ................................................................................................. 29

5.4.4 Tourism development ........................................................................................ 29

5.4.5 Cultural, historical and archaeological management ........................................ 30

5.4.6 Security and safety ............................................................................................ 30

5.4.7 Community-based natural resource management ............................................ 30

5.4.7.1 Job creation .................................................................................................... 30

5.4.7.2 Providing opportunities for education and training ......................................... 30

5.4.7.3 Maintain and strengthen cultural and spiritual values ..................................... 31

5.4.7.4 Access to natural resources ........................................................................... 32

5.5 Zonation of the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment ........................... 33

6. Development plan ............................................................................................................. 41

6.1 Hiking trail .................................................................................................................. 41

6.2 Stabilization of water pipeline on Remainder of the Farm Kranshoek No. 432 ......... 41

6.3 Construction of dwellings unit on Portion 33 of the Farm Kranshoek No. 432 .......... 41

7. Costing plan ...................................................................................................................... 42

PART 3 – MONITORING AND AUDITING .................................................................................... 43

8. Monitoring and Auditing .................................................................................................... 43

8.1 Annual audit procedure .............................................................................................. 43

8.1.1 METT - Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool ........................................... 43

8.1.2 Protected Area Review ...................................................................................... 44

8.1.3 Management Plan review .................................................................................. 44

8.3 Biodiversity Monitoring ............................................................................................... 45

PART 4 – PROGRAMME OF IMPLEMENTATION ....................................................................... 47

9. Annual Plan of Operation ...................................................................................................... 47


9.1 Fire management ............................................................................................................. 48

9.2 Clearing of alien invasive vegetation ............................................................................... 49

9.3 Corridor management ...................................................................................................... 51

9.4 Biodiversity monitoring..................................................................................................... 51

9.5 Footpaths and vehicle tracks ........................................................................................... 52

9.6 Visual impacts .................................................................................................................. 52

9.7 Cultural, historical and archaeological management....................................................... 53

9.8 Funding ............................................................................................................................ 53

9.9 Review and audit ............................................................................................................. 54

10. Annual Management Schedule ......................................................................................... 55

PART 5 – REFERENCES AND APPENDICES ............................................................................ 58

11. References ........................................................................................................................ 58

12. Appendices ....................................................................................................................... 62


ACRONYMS AND ABREVIATIONS APO Annual Plan of Operation

CAPE Cape Action Plan for People and the Environment

CapeNature Western Cape Provincial Conservation Authority

CBA Critical Biodiversity Area

CFR Cape Floristic Region

CREW Custodians for Rare and Endangered Wild flowers

DEAT Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism

DWAF Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

EDM Eden District Municipality

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

ESA Ecological Support Area

E2A Eden to Addo

GRBSP Garden Route Biodiversity Sector Plan

GRI Garden Route Initiative

GRNP Garden Route National Park

IDP Integrated Development Plan

MEC Member of the executive council: Western Cape Province

METT Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool

NPAES National Protected Area Expansion Strategy

NEMA National Environmental Management Act

NEMPAA National Environmteal Management: Protected Areas Act

NSBA National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment

PE Protected Environment

RCC Robberg Coastal Corridor

RCCLA Robberg Coastal Corridor Landowners Association

RCCPE Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment

RNR Robberg Nature Reserve

SAPS South African Police Services

SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute

SANParks South African National Parks

SDF Spatial Development Framework

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

WESSA Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The current property owners of the Robberg Coastal Corridor Landowners Association are

thanked for their initiative and support to establish a Protected Environment in this unique area.

The Cape Action for People and the Environment Programme’s (C.A.P.E.) Garden Route

Initiative (GRI) is acknowledged for identifying the Robberg Coastal Corridor as a key area for

conservation. Eden District Municipality is acknowledged committing their property to form part of

the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment. The two conservation bodies, CapeNature

and SANParks are acknowledged for their involvement.

Finally, Eden to Addo, especially Pam Booth, is thanked for their vision that has led to the

establishment of a Protected Environment along the Robberg Coastal Corridor. Eden to Addo

must be acknowledged as the main driver behind this initiative and is commended for their efforts.


PART A PART 1 – DESCRIPTION

1. Introduction The Garden Route area is located within the Cape Floristic Region (CFR), which is one of three

biodiversity hotspots in South Africa making it one of 34 worldwide hotspots (Meyers et al. 2000).

It is the smallest and most diverse Floristic Regions in the world and the only one to be contained

within the boundaries of one country. The South African National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment

(NSBA) commissioned by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) has

identified the CFR as one of nine broad priority areas for conservation (Driver et al. 2005). Most

well protected ecosystems within South Africa are located in the Savanna Biome and

Mountainous Fynbos areas while Lowland Fynbos has been identified as being poorly protected

(Driver et al. 2005).

The Garden Route Initiative’s (GRI) fine scale biodiversity sector plan (Vromans et al. 2010) and

the Rapid Biodiversity Conservation Assessment and Framework for a Conservation Plan for the

Plettenberg Bay municipality (Lombard et al. 2004) by the Biodiversity Conservation Unit of the

Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa (WESSA) have identified the coastal area

between the Robberg Peninsula and the Harkerville section of the Garden Route National Park

(Hereafter the RCC – Robberg Cosatl Corridor) in the Southern Cape as an area with sufficient

Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA) remaining to form an east-west ecological corridor. It is

recognised that National conservation targets cannot be met without bringing private land into the

“conservation estate”. Key landowners within the corridor have agreed to form the Robberg

Coastal Corridor Landowners Association (RCCLA) as a vehicle to drive the declaration of a

Protected Environment (PE) and to achieve their conservation objectives. By participating in the

Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment (RCCPE) project, members are making a

significant contribution to regional conservation targets, particularly with respect to Lowland

Coastal Fynbos, and at the same time supporting Provincial and local Spatial Development

Frameworks.

The NSBA has suggested a number of actions to conserve terrestrial biodiversity in the nine

broad priority areas and the RCCPE will take at least three of those actions proposed:

• Minimise loss of habitat in threatened ecosystems

• Prevent and manage the spread of invasive alien species


• Expand protected areas to achieve representation targets

This management plan provides the strategic framework for managing the RCCPE as is required

by section 39 of the National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act no. 57 of 2003

(NEMPAA). It has clearly defined objectives aimed at the conservation of biodiversity and

ecosystems while also addressing sustainable use of natural, scenic and heritage resources over

a five year time period through a management schedule set against timeframes.

2. Description of landholdings and ownership

2.1 Property details and title deed information

Landowner Property description

Mrs. Johanna Robinson Remainder of Portion 6 of the Farm Jackals Kraal No. 433, in the Division of Plettenberg Bay, Western Cape Province, measuring approximately 25,3329 hectares in extent and held under title deed No. T13028/2000. The property is situated on the Airport Road approximately 12 kilometres west of Plettenberg Bay the nearest town.

Cairnbrogie Farms (Pty) Ltd.

Nr. 1990/007059/07

A portion of (still to be surveyed) the Remainder of the Farm Kranshoek No. 432, in the Division of Knysna, Western Cape Province, measuring 601,5791 hectares in extent and held under title deed No. T28939/92. It should be noted that 24.4221 hectares have recently been sold to Fynbos Nature Reserve (Pty) Ltd. The property is situated between the Airport Road and the coast, approximately 13 kilometres west of Plettenberg Bay the nearest town.

Upbeat Properties CC, No. 1094

A portion of (still to be surveyed) Portion 5 of the farm Kranshoek No. 432, in the Division of Knysna, Western Cape Province, measuring 30,8818 hectares in extent and held under Title deed No. T13894/1999. The property is situated between the Airport road and the coast, approximately 11 kilometres west of Plettenberg Bay, the nearest town.

Outeniqua Divisional Council Portion 45 of the Farm Roodefontein No. 440, in the Division of Knysna, Western Cape Province, measuring 75.6807 hectares in extent and held under Title deed No. T20560/1953. The property is situated between the Airport road and the coast, approximately 10 kilometres west of Plettenberg Bay, the nearest town.

Fynbos Nature Reserve (Pty) Ltd. No. 1998/009280/07

Portion 35 of the Farm Kranshoek No. 432, in the Division of Knysna, Western Cape Province, measuring 117.2672 hectares in extent and held under Certificate of Consolidated Title No. T34252/2008. The property is situated between the Airport road and the coast, approximately 12 kilometres west of Plettenberg Bay, the nearest town.


2.2 Landscape perspective The RCCPE is located south of the Outeniqua Mountains along the coast west of the Robberg

Peninsula near Plettenberg Bay that falls under the Bitou local municipality (Figure 1). It is flanked

by the Robberg Nature Reserve (RNR) in the east and the Garden Route National Park (GRNP)

in the west managed by CapeNature and South African National Parks (SANParks) respectively.

The latter forms part of the former Harkerville indigenous state forest of the Diepwalle Forest

Estate that was managed by the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). The

management was handed over to SANParks and it was incorporated with the Garden Route

National Park (GRNP) during its proclamation in 2009.

This area between the RNR and the Harkerville section of the GRNP has been identified as an

east-west ecological corridor by the GRI (Vromans et al. 2010) and the Rapid Biodiversity

Conservation Assessment and Framework for a Conservation Plan for the Plettenberg Bay

municipality (Lombard et al. 2004). It contains continuous CBA’s along a narrow band adjacent to

the coast (Figure 1). The areas north of this corridor consists of a matrix of transformed and

fragmented land caused by land-uses such as intensive agriculture, mining and residential

development. This corridor is the last natural area left that could form a link between the RNR and

Harkerville section of the GRNP.


Figure 1. The location of the five properties making up the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment in relation to formal conservation

areas and Critical Biodiversity Area.


2.3 Physical Environment

2.3.1 Climate The area experiences a mild maritime climate with rainfall occurring throughout the year but with

peaks in Autumn and Spring (CSIR, 1984). The mean annual precipitation for the nearby

Robberg Peninsula is approximately 550 mm (1998 – 2008) (Figure 2). Winter rainfall is mainly

caused by anticlinal cold fronts from predominantly westerly winds. The prevailing wind in

summer is mainly from the east.

Figure 2. Climate diagram showing mean monthly rainfall and mean daily maximum and minimum

temperatures for Plettenberg Bay airport for the period 2000 to 2008 (SA Weather Service).

2.3.2 Topography and terrain morphology The topography of the area is characterised by a coastal plateau extending inland from very

steep cliffs on the coastal side. The steep cliffs consist of resistant rock layers that typify the

interface between the coastal plateau and the marine environment. The coastal plateau slopes

gently upwards towards the base of the Outeniqua Mountains and is on average approximately

200 m.a.s.l (Rust, 1998).

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Me

an

ma

x. &

min

. te

mp

era

ture

s (

oC

)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Me

an

mo

nth

ly ra

infa

ll (mm

)

Rainfall

Max. temp.

Min. temp.


2.3.3 Geology, geomorphology, soils and land types The geology west of Robberg mainly consists of rocks from the Cape Supergroup i.e. Table

Mountain Group that is characterised by quartzites (Rust, 1998). Reddish-brown, coarse–grained

conglomerates of the Enon formation of the Uitenhage Group are also found (Rust, 1998).

The landscape is dominated by the coastal marine platform that resulted as a consequence of

erosion by the sea that took place between 140 and 25 million years ago when the sea level was

much higher than present (Rust, 1998).

The area has a complex soil distribution pattern originating from combinations of land types,

erosion, material transport and deposition as well as the geology (Schloms, et al. 1997). This is

illustrated by Schloms et al. (1997) who identified 19 soil types on Cairnbrogie alone.

2.3.4 Hydrology and aquatic systems The rise of the coastal plateau above the sea has resulted in deep ravines draining southwards

towards the coast. The only river of note is the Crooks River in the west on the boundary with the

Harkerville section of the GRNP. Although the property of Mrs. Robinson is not along the coast it

does form part of this PE with the Piesang River running through it flanked on both banks by

indigenous forest.

2.4 Biological environment

2.4.1 Vegetation The vegetation of the Robberg Coastal Corridor (RCC) is characterised by Fynbos with thicket

and forest elements with the last prevalent in kloofs and at the bases of coastal cliffs that are

protected from fire. According to the identification of Vegetation of South Africa by Mucina and

Rutherford (2006), two vegetation types are found in the area (Figure 3):

• South Outeniqua Sandstone Fynbos

• Southern Afro-temperate Forest

2.4.1.1 South Outeniqua Sandstone Fynbos

South Outeniqua Sandstone Fynbos consists mainly of tall, open to medium dense Proteoid and

Restioid Fynbos shrubland and has been classified as Vulnerable (Rebelo et al. 2006). The

RCCPE contains ± 338 ha of this vegetation type that contributes 1.3 % to the conservation target

for this vegetation type.

2.4.1.2 Southern Afro-temperate Forest

Southern Afro-temperate Forest mainly consists of tall forest tree species with a well-developed

herb layer (Mucina and Geldenhuys, 2006). The conservation status is listed as Least Concern


and the RCCPE contains ± 30 ha of this vegetation type. This contributes 0.1 % to its

conservation target.

2.4.1.3 Vegetation units in the RCCPE

Vlok et al. (2008) further described five vegetation units (Figure 4) on a 1:50 000 scale for the

Garden Route area of the Southern Cape (Table 1). The representation of some of these units in

formally conserved areas managed by SANParks and CapeNature is limited. The RCCPE will

however make a major contribution towards expanding the area under which certain of these

vegetation units will be protected. Table 1 indicates that the protection of Noetzie Thicket Fynbos

and Noetzie Proteoid Fynbos will be expanded by 67.81 % and 54.06 % respectively by inclusion

with the RCCPE.

Table 1. Five vegetation units identified by Vlok et al. (2008) and the contribution of formally

protected areas and the RCCPE towards their conservation.

Vegetation unit

Area (ha) of vegetation unit protected by SANParks

Area (ha) of vegetation unit protected by CapeNature

Total area (ha) under formal protection

Area (ha) of vegetation unit contained in the RCCPE

Percentage (%) that protection of vegetation unit will be expanded by inclusion of the RCCPE

Noetzie Thicket Fynbos 141.54 7.30 148.84 100.93 67.81

Noetzie Proteoid Fynbos 273.23 84.95 358.18 193.64 54.06

Grootbrak River and Floodplain

6240.22 244.62 6484.84 39.70 0.61

Roodefontein Grassy Fynbos 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.50 Not applicable

Piesang River Fynbos-Forest 243.08 73.18 316.26 3.93 1.24

Over 150 plant species have been identified in the RCCPE (Appendix I). Rare plant species

found in the area include Acmadenia alternifolia (Endangered), Selago villicaulis (Vulnerable),

Muraltia knysnaensis (Endangered) and a new as yet undescribed species Wahlenbergia. Too a

limited extent it also includes important tree species such as Curtisia dentata (Near Threatened)

and Rapanea melanophloeos (Declining). There is a possibility that Acrolophia barbata and Disa

hallackii (both endangered) may also occur in the area but these species still need to be

identified. Fire is a main driver of the vegetation units in the area and most of it is exposed to

periodic fires (Vlok et al. 2008). However, some patches of vegetation are moribund and at least

45 years old and are in need of fire. Plant populations are viable as long as the vegetation is

properly managed in terms of fires and invasive alien plants are kept under control (Vlok

unpublished report, 2009).


Figure 3. Vegetation types according to Mucina and Rutherford (2006) occurring in the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Area.

Figure 4. Vegetation units in the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment as described by Vlok et al. (2008).


2.4.2 Terrestrial Mammals No mega-herbivores are found in the area however, antelope that include Cape Grysbok

(Raphicerus melanotis) and Bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus) are found. Chacma baboons (Papio

cynocephalus ursinus) and Vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus pygerythrus) represent the Primates.

The most notable carnivores include Caracal (Caracal caracal), Small-spotted genet (Genetta

genetta) and the generalist carnivore Honeybadger (Mellivora capensis). In addition, the African

clawless otter (Aonyx capensis) have been observed along the coast below Cairnbrogie. Leopard

(Panthera pardus) had been recorded on neighbouring properties and it is likely they will occupy

habitat in the RCCPE from time to time. Porcupine (Hystrix africaeaustralis) are the most notable

rodents to occur in the area. Bushpig (Potamochoerus larvatus) is the only representative of the

family SUIDAE. Appendix II lists mammal species for the RNR.

2.4.3 Birds Provisional distribution data from the current South African Bird Atlas Project 2 administered by

the Animal Demography Unit at the University of Cape Town has shown that 109 bird species

have been identified in the two 5 x 5 minute pentads 3405_2315 and 3405_2320 (Appendix III).

This not only includes terrestrial and waterfowl, but also marine shorebirds.

2.4.4 Amphibians and reptiles Currently no data is available on the amphibian and reptile species occurring in the area.

However, snakes such as Puffadders and Boomslangs have been encountered by landowners,

as well as various species of frogs Appendix IV lists amphibians and Appendix V list reptiles

recorded on the nearby Robberg Nature Reserve.

2.4.5 Invertebrates It is unknown what invertebrates species occur in the area and more information is required.

2.4.6 Aquatic organisms No information on aquatic organisms is available for this area and information is required on

species occurring in the area.


3. Purpose, Vision and Significance/Value

3.1 Purpose of the Protected Area The RCCPE has been identified as an area worthy of declaration as a Protected Environment in

that it provides essential ecosystem services and makes a significant contribution to:

• the protection of an identified Critical Biodiversity Area representative of coastal lowland

Fynbos;

• the establishment of a conservation corridor on private land to facilitate the movement of

genetic information between two protected areas;

• linking the Garden of Eden to Addo (E2A) as part of the Eden to Addo Corridor Initiative;

• linking formally protected but separate areas into a coherent ecological unit that

enhances ecosystem functioning and improves nature-based eco- tourism opportunities.

3.2 Vision and Mission The vision of the RCCPE is:

To protect the biodiversity and beauty of the RCC from encroachment and development, to

ensure the healthy functioning of its ecosystem, and by so doing secure the ecological future of

the RNR.

The mission of the RCCPE is to establish, maintain and sustain:

• a corridor where alien vegetation is actively managed and controlled;

• a corridor where healthy Fynbos is managed through appropriate fire regimes;

• a corridor where fire risk to private property is actively managed;

• a corridor where the east-west movement of ecological patterns and processes is actively

promoted;

• a corridor where heritage sites are actively protected and conserved;

• a corridor where indigenous fauna and flora are protected and illegal activities pertaining

thereto actively discouraged;

• a corridor where any land use change or development that is proposed respects the

sensitivity of the area and secures the ecological integrity of the corridor;

• a corridor that establishes a secure link between RNR and the Harkerville section of the

GRNP so that the Robberg Peninsula does not become an island cut-off from critical

ecological processes.


3.3 Significance of property • The area between the Robberg Peninsula and Harkerville has been identified as a CBA

by the GRI that is in need of protection to ensure that biodiversity and ecosystem

functioning persists (Vromans et al. 2010).

• Consolidation of the remaining natural area between RNR in the east and the Harkerville

section of the GRNP in the west, is the last available option to form a continuous corridor

that will ensure that the Robberg Peninsula is not cut off from surrounding natural

ecosystems.

• Very little of the vegetation units that are found along the coast west of Robberg is

currently protected in formal protected areas (See section 2.4.1.)

• Unique vegetation exists in the area that is highly threatened by coastal development and

mining. Several plant species are listed as threatened or endangered in the Red Data

Book of plants by Raimondo et al. (2009). Several unknown (possibly undescribed)

species have also been found in area.

• It is an area with significant natural and scenic beauty

• It is possible that the area contains important archaeological sites


PART 2 – MANAGEMENT POLICY FRAMEWORK

4. Administrative and legal framework for the

Management Authority

4.1 Administrative framework The RCCLA will be the management authority for the RCCPE. The RCCLA is a voluntary

association but has a Constitution and shall have and maintain a committee for the Management

of the Association. The Committee shall consist of a representative of each of the landowners

who have legal title to the properties that have been proclaimed as the PE in terms of the

NEMPAA. Persons may be co-opted onto the Committee due to their expertise in environmental

management, or for other relevant reasons.

Office bearers for the RCCLA will consist of the following:

• Chairperson

• Vice Chairperson

• Secretary

• Treasurer

Each Member of the RCCLA agrees to manage his/her/its own property according to the

approved Management Plan and agrees to the audit provisions provided for within the

Management Plan.

Members are obliged to:

• Implement the Management Plan which must be drafted within 12 months of declaration;

• Assist CapeNature wherever possible with the auditing of the Management Plan as per

the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Eden to Addo Corridor Initiative and

CapeNature;

• Pay the RCCLA membership fees;

• Negotiate in good faith with the MEC’s office, the relevant conservation authority and

other members of the RCCLA when concluding the Declaration Agreement in terms of its

Constitution;

A signed copy of the RCCLA constitution is included as Appendix VI.


4.2 Legal framework and procedures for public participation

with interested and affected parties The National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (Act No. 57 of 2003)

(Hereafter NEMPAA) commenced on 1 November 2004 and makes provision for the declaration

of various types of protected areas, one of which is a Protected Environment. NEMPAA aims for

the protection of conservation and ecologically viable areas, representative of South Africa’s

biological diversity and its natural landscapes and seascapes. The MEC is empowered under

section 28(1) of NEMPAA to declare, by notice in the Provincial Gazette, an area in respect of

private land as specified in the notice as a Protected Environment if the owner has consented to

the declaration by way of a written agreement with the MEC. Section 35(1) of NEMPAA

empowers owners of private land to initiate the declaration of a Protected Environment

individually or collectively. The owners wish to initiate the declaration of their land collectively, as

the Robberg Coastal Corridor Landowners Association (RCCLA). Section 38(2) of NEMPAA

stipulates that the MEC, in writing, must assign the management of a Protected Environment to a

suitable person, organisation or organ of state. This person, organisation or organ of state will

function as the management authority for the purposes of NEMPAA. In the case of RCCPE the

management authority will be the Robberg Coastal Corridor Landowners Association (RRCLA)

which according to section 39 of NEMPAA is also responsible for providing a management plan

within 12 months of the assignment.

According to section 31 of NEMPAA the Minister must follow a consultation process with

interested and affected parties before a notice under section 28(1) is issued. A consultation

process will be followed in terms of section 32, 33 and 34 of NEMPAA. Therefore copies of the

agreement to declare the RCCPE and consent to the assignment of the management authority

between the RCCLA and the Minister (still to be signed) will be sent to the Department of Water

and Environmental Affairs, the Department of Agriculture, the Local Municipality concerned, the

Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, the South African National

Biodiversity Institute, and the South African Heritage Resources Agency. The notice of intention

to declare the RCCPE as indicated will also be sent per registered mail to all adjoining

landowners concerned. The public participation process must entail the publication of the

intention to declare a Protected Environment in the area and an invitation for representations and

objections from the public and the above mentioned organs of state within 60 (sixty) days of such

publication. The MEC must give due consideration to such objections and representations before

declaring the Protected Environment.

The notice of intention to declare the RCCPE will be advertised in English, Afrikaans and Xhosa

in the Western Cape Province Provincial Gazette in terms of Provincial Notice No. 44436. A


notice of the same nature will also be published in English/Afrikaans in a national newspaper as

well as in the City Press in Xhosa as soon as the Minister has approved the process as

recommended in paragraph above.

Besides the legal framework for proclaiming a Protected Environment under NEMPAA given

above the following legislation could be applicable to activities on and regarding the RCCPE:

• Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act; No 108 of 1996

• National Environmental Management Act; No 107 of 1998

• National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act; No 57 of 2003

• National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act; No 10 of 2004

• National Forest Act; No 84 of 1998

• National Veld and Forest Fire Act; No 101 of 1998

• National Water Act, No 36 of 1998

• Conservation of Agricultural Resource Act; No 43 of 1983

• Environment Conservation Act; No 73 of 1989

• Game Theft Act ; No105 of 1991

• National Heritage Resources Act; No 25 of 1999

• Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act; No 28 of 2002

• Fencing Act; No 31 of 1963

• The Nature and Environmental Conservation Ordinance; No 19 of 1974

4.3 Linkage to Integrated Development and Spatial

Development Frameworks CapeNature’s Protected Area Expansion Strategy and Implementation Plan 2010 – 2015 address

the formal proclamation of protected areas in priority natural habitats to conserve biodiversity and

ecosystem services for future generations (Purnell et al. unpublished report, 2010). Currently, the

formal protected area network does not adequately protect the majority of ecosystems and

biodiversity in the Western Cape and the establishment of protected areas in the most threatened

and under-conserved habitats, are critical. This strategy is aligned to the concepts and goals of

the 2008 National Protected Area Expansion Strategy (NPAES), but does identify some different

spatial priorities. Although the RCCPE is not yet included with the CapeNature Protected Area

Expansion Strategy and Implementation Plan this corridor has been identified as a priority at local

level.

Currently the RCCPE consists of five properties that together do not cover the whole area

between the RNR and the Harkerville section of the GRNP. An additional five properties need to

be incorporated with the RCCPE to ensure the whole corridor is linked to the two formal protected

areas. However, the landowners of the RCCPE had indicated that they will be working on a


corridor consolidation plan to attempt to incorporate these additional properties (refer to section

5.4.1.3 Corridor management).

Currently the Spatial Development Framework (SDF) for the Bitou Municipality has not been

finalized yet. However, the Eden District Municipality (EDM) that includes the Kannaland,

Hessequa, Mossel Bay, George, Oudtshoorn, Bitou and Knysna municipalities has drafted an

Integrated Development Plan (IDP) for 2012-2016 that also includes a SDF. This plan

acknowledges and identifies the establishment of RCCPE under the section dealing with the

planned regional tourism and environmental initiative by the private sector (Eden District

Municipality Integrated Development Plan, March 2012). The GRI had produced the Garden

Route Biodiversity Sector Plan (GRBSP) for the George, Knysna and Bitou municipal areas with

the aim of informing decision makers at local and provincial government level as well as

independent environmental consultants and the public about protecting biodiversity through

applying sustainable development principles. A fine-scale map indicating Critical Biodiversity

Areas (CBA’s) and Ecological Support Areas (ESA’s) for this region accompanies the GRBSP

and had been supplied to all relevant role players in the Garden Route. Ultimately these tools

should be used to inform and finalise the IDP and SDF for each municipality.

4.4 Robberg Coastal Corridor: Environmental Law Guideline

for a Coastal Corridor The RCCLA has already taken environmental responsibility not only for the properties of current

members but also for those in the greater area by commissioning and funding the publication of

the Robberg Coastal Corridor: Environmental Law Guideline for a Coastal Corridor (Appendix

VII). This document describes current environmental and planning law in South Africa that is

relevant to the Robberg Coastal Corridor and typical development activities associated with the

coastal zone. According to the authors, Kingwell et al. (2012:9), “This Guideline aims to inform

and alert landowners within the coastal corridor between Robberg Nature Reserve and the

Noetzie River of their environmental rights and obligations, and what to consider in terms of ‘best

practice’ land management and the responsible development of this ecologically sensitive area”.

The document was presented at a launch in the Kranshoek Community Hall on 10 February 2012

and was well received by the Kranshoek community and Eden District Municipality mayor,

Wessie van der Westhuizen (refer to Appendix VIII – article in CXPress, p. 5, issue 334, 22

February 2012). To date, it has been distributed to property owners in the greater Robberg

Coastal Corridor area as well as different spheres of government.


5. Protected Area Management Policy Framework

5.1 Management objectives In addition to the management objectives below, RCCLA members agree to engage and

negotiate with neighbouring property owners in an effort to consolidate the RCC so that the area

between the RNR and the Harkerville section of the Garden Route National Park becomes a

continuous corridor.

The parties agree to the following management objectives for the RCCPE:

1. Conserve biodiversity by:

• ensuring that remaining natural vegetation is not reduced in size

• managing the threats to biodiversity such as alien invasive plant species and

erosion

• implementing an appropriate burning regime

• protecting the Corridor from future development

• minimizing the impact of existing infrastructure and activities such as trails and

tracks

2. Enhance ecosystem functioning by:

• Ensuring that ecosystem drivers such as fire are included in management actions

• Minimize or eliminate edge effects

3. Corridor Management

• Ensure and optimize the free migration of genetic material (including fauna and

flora) between natural areas

4. Maintain scenic beauty by:

• Minimizing or eliminating structures or activities that have or will have a visual

impact

• Implementing best practice guidelines during construction of structures on areas

excluded from RCCPE


5.2 Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT)

analysis A SWOT analysis undertaken of the RCCLA is given in Table 2 below.

Table 2. SWOT analysis for the RCCLA

Strengths

• Passionate, enthusiastic and dedicated landowners

• Environmental Legislation

• Clearly defined biodiversity priorities

• Irreplaceability value of biodiversity

• Scenic beauty of Corridor

Weaknesses

• Lack of capacity

• Insufficient operational budget

• Insufficient resources

• Insufficient knowledge of planning and environmental legislation

• Corridor currently not consolidated (fragmented)

Opportunities

• Increased public awareness

• Partnerships

• External funding

• Landscape Initiatives

• Volunteers

• Consolidation of Corridor

Threats

• Current economic climate

• Perimeter security

• Political instability at local government level

• Lack/slowness of decision making

• Land transformation and invading alien vegetation

• Climate change

• Depleted natural resources

• Human population growth

• Inappropriate development in coastal zone

5.3 Quantitative biodiversity goals • Maintain the 355.33 ha of remaining natural vegetation through the implementation of the

management schedule set out in Part B of this plan

• Minimize negative impact of existing infrastructure in zoned Conservation area

• Remove alien invasive plant species as per management schedule

• Formulate and follow up with implementation of prescribed burning schedule and fire risk

management plan

• Remove fencing as agreed amongst corridor landowners and neighbours

• Maintain undeveloped and scenically attractive landscapes and mitigate structures which

cause visual impacts


5.4 Protected Areas management policy framework and

guiding management principles

5.4.1 Biodiversity conservation management

5.4.1.1 Fire management

Fynbos is a fire-prone ecosystem with fire having played a major role in its plant reproductive

evolution (le Maitre and Midgeley, 1991). Fynbos plants are adapted to survive fires in various

ways which mainly include plants resprouting after fire; protection of seed against fire and by

growing in areas that do not experience regular fires such as rocky outcrops (Vlok et al. in prep).

Reseeding Fynbos species need fire to stimulate germination through exposure to smoke and

heat as well as to clear areas to facilitate the process of establishing suitable germination sites (le

Maitre and Midgeley, 1991). Fire is also essential for resprouters and geophytes (commonly

known as bulbs) in order to stimulate fresh sprouting and in some cases flowering. Fynbos plants

relying on reseeding survival strategies may be lost from the ecosystem if the fire return period is

too short resulting in reproductively immature species not having a chance to reproduce (van

Wilgen et al. 1991). Similarly, fire return periods that exceed the lifespan of reseeding species,

that typically have short-lived seed reserves, will also result in their local extinction. Fire

frequency, season and intensity all thus have an influence on the survival of Fynbos plants with

their different life histories which have implications for using fire as a management tool for

biodiversity conservation outcomes.

The RCCPE is a relatively small area (355 ha) and most of the Fynbos vegetation is moribund

and senescent – i.e. more than 40 years old. Fire events through natural fire ignitions (e.g.

lightning strikes) are basically precluded from entering the RCCPE due to the fragmentation of

the landscape as a result of agricultural lands and urban developments. Prescribed burning is

widely recognized as the fire management option used for establishing a mosaic of vegetation

ages and to spread the work load in Fynbos ecosystems (van Wilgen et al. 1994). The ideal size

for prescribed burns in a Fynbos ecosystem is 300 – 500 ha (Vlok et. al. in prep.) which can

normally be completed within a day. Important to remember however is that implementing any

prescribed burning will be determined by a combination of ecological, practical and monetary

considerations.

Taking into consideration that currently the extent of the RCCPE is 355 ha it is suggested that

prescribed burns must exceed 50 ha for it to have any positive outcome for plant diversity.

Burning a vegetation unit smaller than this would enable seed-eating rodents to cover most of the

burnt area in search of nutritious seeds and in the process decimate seed reserves (Vlok et al. in

prep.). As most Fynbos species cannot survive without establishing within the first year after fire


(Vlok et al. in prep.) it is essential to burn as large an area as possible to prevent mortality of

seedlings as a result of grazing by large herbivores such as antelope and domestic stock. For

these reasons properties that also contain CBA’s and that are currently outside the RCCPE

should be taken into consideration when planning prescribed burns.

Prescribed burning will be integrated with fire risk management in the RCCPE. Infrastructure such

as houses and fire risk management features (e.g. firebreaks) that are present on some RCCPE

properties and neighbouring properties and will have to be protected or maintained in order to

address both objectives. The RCCPE should use the Fire Protection Association (FPA) as a

vehicle to achieve their objectives in terms of fire management by actively participating in the

formulation of a fire action plan. With such a plan timeframes will be set and responsibilities be

assigned to FPA members some of which will be contained in the management schedule of this

management plan.

5.4.1.2 Invasive alien vegetation eradication

The spread of alien invasive plant species have had a massive impact on native ecosystems on a

global scale (Mack et al. 2000) with the Fynbos Biome not being an exception. Over the last 200

years alien invasive vegetation have proliferated to such an extent in the Fynbos Biome that in

many instances it had caused the reduction of streamflow, changes in fire intensity and changes

to the species composition of fauna and flora (Richardson et al. 1991, Richardson and van

Wilgen, 2004). Infestations of alien vegetation lead to increased fuel loads that in the event of a

fire, results in higher intensity fires that can destroy even flora with special adaptations such as

underground lignotubers and thick bark. Furthermore, it is known that native Fynbos regenerates

poorly after fire in areas with dense Acacia saligna infestations (Musil, 1993) and that dense alien

infestation reduces cover and species diversity of Fynbos (Richardson et al. 1989, Holmes and

Cowling, 1997). Likewise, fauna are also negatively affected by these hotter fires that could enter

rock crevices and burrows used for shelter by animals such as reptiles and small mammals

(Coetzee, 2005).

The eradication of alien invasive vegetation in the RCCPE is seen as one of the major

management interventions that are required. Sue Swain, formerly from the Garden Route

Initiative, has mapped the alien vegetation densities and completed a clearing plan for the

properties along the coast between the RNR in the east and SANParks in the west. The RCCLA

will use this plan to prioritize areas for clearing in relation with available funding as set out in Part

B of this plan. The invasive alien vegetation clearing plan will be integrated with the fire

management plan. Therefore, areas identified for prescribed burns will be cleared of alien

vegetation at least 18 months before. This would ensure that fire is used as a tool to destroy alien

vegetation that is regenerated from the seed bed.


Where possible, local labour will be used for the clearing operations and work will be done

according to Working for Water standards.

5.4.1.3 Corridor management

The coastal area between the Robberg Peninsula and the Harkerville section of the GRNP in the

Southern Cape has been identified to have sufficient Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBA’s) remaining

to form an east-west ecological corridor (Vromans et al. 2010). It will provide gradient to capture

the changes in vegetation along this gradient and to provide opportunities for the vegetation and

associated faunal communities to track future changes in climate. The vegetation within RNR is

very different from the other vegetation types along this southern coast, so RNR is not sufficient

to represent and protect these vegetation types. Plant endemism along this coastal corridor strip

is expected to be high.

Currently the RCCPE consists of five properties that together do not cover the whole corridor

area between the RNR and the Harkerville section of the GRNP. At least five additional

properties need to be incorporated within the RCCPE to ensure the corridor is continuous and

linked to the two formal protected areas. The RCCLA has undertaken to continue working with

the landowners of these outstanding properties with the aim of incorporation in the RCCPE.

Progress regarding negotiations will be presented to the quarterly RCCLA meetings, as will the

necessary steps to be taken for incorporation within the RCCPE when needed. This is an

essential part of managing the Corridor as it will enable property owners to have agreements in

place to remove fencing between Corridor properties to enable the movement of fauna such as

Cape Grysbok and Bushbuck. Until such time as full consolidation has been achieved, each

RCCLA member also undertakes, where possible, to put measures in place to allow for

permeable fencing.

5.4.2 Strategic research No strategic research is proposed at present. Biodiversity monitoring and baseline data collection

would provide good foundation from which suggestions on proposed research projects could be

made.

5.4.3 Infrastructure management

5.4.3.1 Footpaths

Various footpaths exist on the properties of the RCCPE. Some of the footpaths give access to the

coast and have been formed as a result of use by fishermen from the Kranshoek community

Other paths have been built by property owners with erosion control and maintenance measures

in place.


Once the Corridor is fully consolidated and subject to acceptable conditions that respect and

safeguard private landownership, the RCCLA would support the establishment of a well managed

and sustainable hiking trail along the coastal area that would link the Robberg Peninsula in the

east with the SANParks property in the west. The idea of the trail is presently in a conceptual

phase and no routes or overnight facilities have been identified but it is planned to be along the

lines of the Otter Trail in the Tsitsikamma National Park. Furthermore, a circular trail confined

mainly to the Forest vegetation is contemplated for Portion 6 of the Farm Jackalskraal No. 433.

Subject to the foregoing, the RCCLA will plan and map the layout of a footpath network and to

include scheduled management actions in Part B of this plan taking into consideration the

following factors:

• Respect for and safeguards of private property ownership rights

• Sustainable eco-tourism i.e. a viable and well managed hiking trail along the lines of The

Otter Trail

• Controlled access to the coast for local Kranshoek Community fishermen

• Existing footpaths in need of maintenance and also those to be closed and rehabilitated

5.4.3.2 Vehicle tracks

A number of vehicle tracks are present on the RCCPE that provide access to landowners. No

new vehicle tracks are planned but the RCCLA undertakes to map existing roads and assign

management actions under Part B of this plan taking into consideration erosion control,

maintenance and access for fire management. Where possible, property access will be confined

to one road.

5.4.3.3 Visual impacts

The RCCPE contains areas of extraordinary and unique scenic beauty that is of great

significance to the natural heritage of South Africa. Maintaining the scenic beauty of the RCCPE

would contribute greatly to the value and quality of planned tourism within the RCCPE such as

the planned hiking trail. It is therefore essential to maintain undeveloped and scenically attractive

landscapes and mitigate the visual impacts of existing and planned structures. The RCCLA

undertakes to identify and develop mitigating management actions to reduce visual impacts of

structures in the RCCPE and to include these under Part B of this plan. The RCCLA endeavours

to state the RCCPE’s plight in instances where structures with the potential to negatively impact

on the scenic beauty of the area are planned outside the boundaries of the RCCPE.

5.4.4 Tourism development At present no formal tourism facilities or concessions exists on the RCCPE. Ad-hoc extreme

sports events have taken place in the form of trail runs and mountain bike racing on the

Remainder of the farm Kranshoek No. 432 (Cairnbrogie) making use of existing paths. As


discussed under section 5.4.3.1 a hiking trail along the lines of the Otter trail in the Tsitsikamma

National Parks is planned for the zoned Conservation area on the coastal properties of the

RCCPE. The owner of Cairnbrogie had indicated that overnight accommodation might be

considered for the zoned Private area on Cairnbrogie.

5.4.5 Cultural, historical and archaeological management Currently it is not known what cultural, historical and archaeological features exist in the RCCPE.

The RCCLA will request RCCPE property owners to list features as part of a scheduled

management action under Part B of this plan from which a management program will be

formulated at a later stage.

5.4.6 Security and safety The properties currently incorporated within the RCCPE do not all bordering one another and a

number are not permanently occupied. Each property owner currently takes responsibility for

his/her own security and safety. Once the Corridor has been consolidated, the landward

perimeter of the RCCPE will be suitable fenced off with appropriate security and game fencing so

as to control and confine access to authorized persons.

5.4.7 Community-based natural resource management The RCCLA has already started to involve and engage with the local Kranshoek community by

inviting a representative to their quarterly meetings and also by hosting the launch of the Robberg

Coastal Corridor: Environmental Law Guideline for a Coastal Corridor at the Kranshoek

Community Hall on 10 February 2012 (refer to section 4.4 and Appendix VII).

The natural areas currently contained in the RCCPE are approximately 355.33 ha. This limits the

scope utilizing natural resources through popular projects such as sustainable agriculture,

forestry and flora harvesting. The RCCLA has demonstrated that they can contribute towards the

development of community-based natural resource management by the Kranshoek community

through involvement with at least three components.

5.4.7.1 Job creation

One RCCLA member employs three Kranshoek community members on a permanent basis to

actively manage the property for conservation by clearing alien invasive vegetation and

maintaining infrastructure. If funding can be obtained it will be likely that the greater RCCPE could

provide future employment opportunities for inhabitants of the Kranshoek community by

contracting services to do alien clearing, clear firebreaks and maintenance of footpaths.

5.4.7.2 Providing opportunities for education and training

The Eden District Municipality has indicated that it would like to make its property, Portion 45 of

the Farm Roodefontein No. 440, accessible for organized environmental education programs for

local school children (Hill pers. comm. 2011). Furthermore it is envisaged that the RCCLA will


seek partnerships with local interest groups (e.g. Plettenberg Bay Bird Club, Botanical Society

members and Custodians for Rare and Endangered Wild flowers) to assist the RCCPE with

biodiversity monitoring as prescribed under Section 8.3 of this plan.

During 2012 the RCCLA has made R20 000 available to fund the training of five Kranshoek

community members as tourist guides through the Montavigus Academy. The Kranshoek

community will benefit by having trained and accredited guides available to service an initiative

that is in the process of being established known as “Kranshoek Village Tours”. Subsequently,

the Small Enterprise Development Agency has offered to further train the five tourist guides with

business management skills together with other entrepreneurs identified in the community.

Provided that the RCCLA can generate funding it is planned to assist the surrounding community

with education and training opportunities that will contribute towards achieving the objectives of

the RCCPE.

Mr. Wendell MacCallum is one of the three Kranshoek community members employed on Portion

35 of the Farm Kranshoek No. 432 owned by Mr. Chris von Christierson. Over the last couple of

years Mr. von Christierson have sponsored Mr. MacCallum to participate in the annual Comrades

ultra-marathon that takes place during June in KwaZulu Natal. Mr. McCallum has decided to run

the 2012 marathon for charity and to donate all the money raised from his run to the Kranshoek

community in order to clear their area of alien invasive vegetation. To cover Mr. MacCallum’s

expenses for taking part in the 2012 marathon, Mr. von Christierson donated the funds to E2A.

E2A undertook to handle all the administration and to publicity surrounding the initiative. With this

initiative it was hoped to raise Mr. MacCallum’s profile as an athlete, gives E2A wide exposure

and publicity and hopefully also generate some funding for RCCLA’s treasury to help towards

achieving its objectives. (Mr. von Christierson, will this be an annual event?)

5.4.7.3 Maintain and strengthen cultural and spiritual values

E2A launched its “Land Art Route” at Kranshoek on 28 May 2012 hoping to use art as a medium

for communicating their conservation and community objectives. Mr. Simon Max Bannister

sculpted the “Aartmoeders” by arranging three alignments of large boulders, representing

elephants. These were placed in such a way as to give visitors a breathtaking view of the

Robberg Coastal Corridor coastline. It is planned to involve the people from Kranshoek by looking

at ways they can further benefit from the ” Aartmoeders”. The launch was well attended with the

Kranshoek community represented by a brass band, a choir and local entrepreneurs manning

their craft and food stalls. Mr. Chris Von Christierson of the RCCLA donated funds towards the art

piece.

It is envisaged that the RCCLA will continue its involvement with strengthening the cultural and

spiritual values of the properties associated with the Robberg Coastal Corridor. Currently it is


happening at an ad-hoc basis however, the RCCLA has through its actions demonstrated that it is

serious about its social responsibility.

5.4.7.4 Access to natural resources

Fishermen of the Kranshoek community traverse the RCCPE properties in order to gain access to

the coastline. The utilization of marine resources is regulated by the Marine Living Resources Act

18 of 1998 (MLRA). Amongst other things the regulations of the MLRA require recreational

fishermen to obtain permits to engage in fishing and harvesting molluscs and other bait

organisms. The Department of Environmental Affair’s Oceans and Coasts section is mainly

responsible for monitoring compliance with the regulations but is also supported by municipalities,

SANParks and provincial conservation authorities. The latter two authorities deal with compliance

issues almost exclusively only in areas where they manage Marine Protected Areas.

The RCCPE property owners had a long-standing informal agreement with the local fishermen

whereby they allow them access the coast through their properties on condition that they have

valid permits and adhere to the MLRA fishing regulations, do not bring dogs with, do not litter and

vacate the premises before sunset. The RCCPE landowners have thus demonstrated that they

have an understanding of the local community’s needs and do not necessarily want to deny

access to the coast.


5.5 Zonation of the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment The zonation of the RCCPE was done by assessing each property. Two zones were identified for each property namely: Private and Conservation

areas (Table 3). Management inputs were identified and permissible and impermissible activities were assigned to each zone per property.

Table 3. The zonation of the RCCPE with a description of management inputs, permissible activities and impermissible activities for each zone per

respective property.

Zoning Property Description Management inputs Permissible activities Impermissible activities

PRIVATE AREA

Remainder of portion 6 of the farm Jackalskraal 433 (Figure 5) Area: ± 2.72 ha

This area is utilized for residential, agricultural and business purposes and is excluded from the agreement. No management actions are required except for limiting impacts on the conservation area.

• Limit impact or exclude domestic animals from conservation area

• Interventions that will mitigate or eliminate adverse impact of on Conservation area

• Development and agriculture subject to approval by relevant environmental legislation

• Any activity that will have direct adverse effect on the conservation area

Kranshoek 432/0 (Figure 6) Area: ± 480.53 ha

This area is utilized for residential, agricultural and business purposes and is excluded from the agreement. No management actions are required except for limiting impacts on the conservation area.





Kranshoek 432/35 (Figure 7) Area: Refer to description

This area is utilized for residential purposes and is excluded from the agreement. No management actions are required except for limiting impacts on the conservation area. Environmental authorization had been obtained for constructing two dwellings: One with a disturbance footprint not exceeding 1,000m2 near the western boundary and one of 2,000 m2 situated close to the northern boundary (refer to Figure 7).





Kranshoek 432/5 (Figure 8) Area: 12.36 ha

This area is utilized for residential purposes and is excluded from the agreement as indicated by diagram A3588/1924. No management actions are required except for limiting impacts on the conservation area.





Roodefontein 440/45 (Figure 9)

No private area exists on this property • None • Not applicable • Not applicable


Area: None

Zoning Property Description Management inputs Permissible activities Impermissible activities

CONSERVATION AREA

Remainder of portion 6 of the farm Jackalskraal 433 (Figure 5) Area: 19.12 ha

This is the remaining natural area that is still relatively unspoiled or with the potential to recover or be rehabilitated towards a better state. Biodiversity conservation and ecosystem functioning are the primary objectives. Minimal or no development will take place other than maintaining existing infrastructure for recreational activities. Low impact recreational activities will take place but the decision to allow them must vest solely with the owner.

• Eradicate alien vegetation

• Remove alien fauna (if present)

• Establish and maintain specified tourism infrastructure i.e. circular hiking trail

• Maintain specified firebreaks (if applicable)

• Prescribed burning of specified natural veld

• Low impact recreational activities: hiking and access for local interest groups i.e. Botanical Society, Bird Club, etc.

• Bee-keeping

• Development

• Agriculture (except bee-keeping)

• Mining

• Hunting

• Indiscriminate burning of natural veld

• Removal of archeological artifacts

• Disturbance of archeological and historical sites



• Exclude domestic stock


• Maintain and rehabilitate specified tourism infrastructure i.e. foot and vehicle paths

• Maintain specified firebreaks


• Management of introduced game

• Low impact recreational activities: mountain biking, trail running, hiking, photography, access to school groups for environmental education purposes, access to coast for local fishermen

• Bee-keeping

• Introduction of game in terms of CapeNature’s Game Translocation and Utilization Policy

• Development


• Mining

• Hunting








• Maintain specified firebreaks



• Bee-keeping

• Flora harvesting

• Development


• Mining

• Hunting




Kranshoek 432/5 • Eradicate alien • Low impact recreational • Development


(Figure 8) Area: 21.52 ha

vegetation

• Exclude domestic stock originating from neighbouring properties





activities: mountain biking, trail running, hiking, photography, access to school groups for environmental education purposes, access to coast for local fishermen

• Bee-keeping


• Mining

• Hunting




Roodefontein 440/45 (Figure 9) 75.68 ha







• Bee-keeping

• Development


• Mining

• Hunting




*Development refers to listed activity under regulations issued in terms of section 24 and 24D of National Environmental Management Act 107 of

1998 or any other applicable environmental legislation.


Figure 5. Zonation of Jackalskraal 433/6


Figure 6. Zonation of Kranshoek 432/0. Note: this Map excludes the 24.4221 hectares sold by Cairnbrogie to Fynbos Nature Reserve which is pending registration of transfer of ownership.


Figure 7. Zonation of Kranshoek 432/33. Note: this map includes the 24.4221 hectares purchased by Fynbos Nature Reserve from Cairnbrogie but pending registration of ownership.


Figure 8. Zonation of Kranshoek 432/5.


Figure 9. Zonation of Roodefontein 440/45.


6. Development plan The RCCLA will follow a membership policy that amongst other things respect the laws of the

Republic of South Africa within the framework of existing environmental legislation. Each member

also undertakes to advise the RCCLA of any proposed development on the property timeously to

enable the Committee to determine whether the proposed development is in terms of the agreed

principles of the RCCLA and to resolve any dispute which may arise as a result thereof in

accordance with the provisions of the RCCLA Constitution. After consultation with members of

the RCCPE, future possible developments described below have been identified.

6.1 Hiking trail The RCCLA will support the establishment of a single hiking trail along the coastal area that

would link RNR in the east with SANParks property in the west, provided the trail is modelled on

the Otter Trail in the Tsitsikamma National Park. The idea of such a trail is presently in a

conceptual phase and no routes or overnight facilities have been identified but will incorporate

existing footpaths accessing the coast. Furthermore, a circular trail confined mainly to the Forest

vegetation is planned for Portion 6 of the Farm Jackalskraal No. 433.

6.2 Stabilization of water pipeline on Remainder of the Farm

Kranshoek No. 432 The private area on this property, that is excluded from the RCCPE, is used for agricultural

purposes which mainly consist of dairy farming. A wind turbine is located close to the boundary of

the natural vegetation set aside for inclusion with the RCCPE (Figure 6). This wind turbine

provides electricity to pump water from the Crooks River (almost at sea level) to a storage tank at

the waterpoint on the pasture (± 400 m.a.s.l.). It is planned to stabilize the waterpipe and

electricity cable that connects the wind turbine and storage tank with the water inlet pump. At this

stage it is uncertain how this will be done. It is suggested that the relocation or the replacement

with a less obtrusive device (maybe a solar panel) be considered in terms of the windturbine.

6.3 Construction of dwellings unit on Portion 33 of the Farm

Kranshoek No. 432 On 11 November 2004, Ministerial Consent was received by the Deptartment of Agriculture to

construct a single dwelling unit and related facilities within a disturbance area not exceeding

2,000 m2 situated close to the northern boundary just east of the stream that bisects Portion 33

and demarcated by dwelling site co-ordinates X -25833.81 and Y 773 736.52 on S.J. McMillan

survey diagram 432-MAR05/L2 dated March 2004 (refer Figure 4). No such dwelling has yet

been erected.


On 19 May 2011, Environmental and Municipal authorizations were obtained to construct a single

eco-friendly dwelling unit within a disturbance footprint not exceeding 1,000m2 near the western

boundary of Portion 33 (refer Figure 4). A vegetation sensitivity study was completed by Vlok

(2006) and mitigation measures to keep disturbance to a minimum were suggested. These

mitigation measures address access, impact on the skyline, suggested building materials and

sewage disposal as well as energy and water supply aspects.

7. Costing plan The RCCLA will levy membership fees, as determined by the Association, which shall be paid by

Founding Members and any subsequent member joining the Association. All members shall pay

such further fees and levies as the Association may determine from time to time. Funding to

implement management actions as set out in the management plan will be sourced on a per

project basis.


PART 3 – MONITORING AND AUDITING

8. Monitoring and Auditing

8.1 Annual audit procedure

8.1.1 METT - Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool The METT-SA is a rapid, site-level assessment tool adapted from the World Bank & WWF‘s

system (second edition 2007). The system is based on the idea that good protected area

management follows a process that has six distinct stages or elements:

It begins with understanding the context (where are we now?) of existing values and threats; it

then progresses through planning (where do we want to be?): followed by

allocation of resources (inputs) (what do we need?); and

as a result of management actions (processes) (how do we go about it?);

eventually produces products and services (outputs) (what were the results?);

that finally result in impacts or outcomes (what did we achieve?).

This version of the tool has been compiled so that it can be applied to the full range of protected

areas managed by all C.A.P.E. Partners. It is also applicable to protected areas in other regions

and with minor adaptations could be applied outside of South Africa. It may also be applied to

Marine Protected Areas and islands, but in the long run it may be necessary to amend the system

to be more area specific. It may be necessary to develop a system for off-reserve conservation

areas such as conservancies or stewardships.

When applying METT-SA it is important that the following be kept in mind:

• The METT-SA is intended to report on progress of the RCCPE. Thus the score is the

baseline against which future assessments are made to see if there has been an

improvement.

• It is site specific and must thus not be used to compare scores between different

protected areas.

• It is a useful tool to give indications of trends in management. In this version the six

groups of elements of the management process as defined in the original version are

scored as subsets of the total. This gives an indication of where improvement in

management needs to focus.

• It is not intended to replace more detailed assessments as part of adaptive management

systems.


• The METT has limitations in the quantitative measurement of Outcomes and these

should be measured by more objective and quantitative systems.

• This version adjusts the total score where questions are not relevant.

• Often low scores in some questions can be a reflection on the organization and are out of

the control of the protected area manager. Thus the performance of managers should not

necessarily be measured against the results of the METT-SA.

Frequency of application: Tracking the trends of management effectiveness is a long term

process and instant improvements are unlikely to be obtained. Generally the METT is applied at 3

year intervals, but an annual application is acceptable if it is understood that changes may only

be slight.

8.1.2 Protected Area Review The Protected Area Review is an internal review conducted annually to assist managers in

reviewing their sites and to allow for adaptive management actions to take place where required

(and within the managers control).

8.1.3 Management Plan review On a 5-yearly basis, this Management Plan should be reviewed and adjusted where necessary.

To achieve this, the following questions (and others as needed) should be addressed:

1. Did this Management Plan make a meaningful contribution to management of the RCCPE?

2. Were individual management prescriptions realistic and achievable? Were they written

unambiguously or was there room for misunderstanding?

1. Were budgets for each management activity realistic? Were the allocated budgets too

much or too little?

2. Were sufficient staff members of the right qualifications allocated to each management

activity?

There will be some overlap between the review and the audit and they should therefore be done

on the same day, by the same team.


8.3 Biodiversity Monitoring Biodiversity monitoring for the RCCPE is set out in Table 4 below. The biodiversity monitoring

programmes identified cover all the basic indicators needed to give an account of existing and

changes in biodiversity in the RCCPE. Care was taken to provide for monitoring that is achievable

and effective in terms of skills, time and resources required.

Table 4. Biodiversity monitoring programmes for the RCCPE.

Action Responsible party Means of verification Frequency Vegetation Monitoring Alien Invasive vegetation clearing - operations should be monitored by assessing the effectiveness of the clearing operation, the effectiveness of the follow–up operations, clearing methods used, compliance with the alien clearing schedule and environmental damage such as herbicide spillage Rare plant monitoring - Knowledge of the biology and population dynamics of rare plants as well as the threats and management implications, all play a role in understanding the ecological system more fully. In this way decisions can be made to ensure the survival of rare species. PROTEACEAE regeneration after fire Determine whether a particular management activity (e.g. the eradication of invasive alien plants, grazing, fire) has a negative impact on the population of a plant species, which has been selected as an indicator species. (Carlo van Tonder to find out whether this monitoring is essential)

• RCCLA

• RCCLA facilitate visit by local CREW groups

• RCCLA facilitate CapeNature staff site visits

• Weekly Inspections for the duration of the clearing operation

• Final Inspections

• Field Verification Sheets

• SANBI Threatened Species Programme data sheet submitted to CapeNature

• Prescribed CapeNature site sheets

• Weekly for the duration of the clearing operation

• Once off – completion of contract

• Annually - to determine Management Unit Clearing Plan

• Annually

• 1 to 2 years after fire

Fire mapping Mapping and recording of all natural or prescribed veld fires must be done to create veld age map. A simple map indicating the extent of each fire with the date of the fire is the minimum requirement.

• CapeNature • Veld age map • Annually

Baseline data collection Baseline-data is collected during Biodiversity surveys, which are carried out in pre-selected areas in order to collect biodiversity data, as

• RCCLA • State of Biodiversity database kept at Fynbos Nature Reserve by Quinton Snyman

• Daily


well as opportunistic collection of biodiversity information whenever in the field. The baseline data collected during focused biodiversity surveys forms a basic inventory of information necessary for biodiversity conservation planning and management

Erosion monitoring Trail profile monitoring of foot paths

• RCCLA • Trail profile monitoring database

• Annually

Weather monitoring Rainfall and daily minimum and maximum temperatures

• RCCLA • Weather records kept on hard copy

• Daily


PART B

PART 4 – PROGRAMME OF IMPLEMENTATION

9. Annual Plan of Operation This section of the management plan identifies management actions to be implemented by the management authority in order to achieve the

objectives set for the RCCPE. It gives detail of the day-to-day tasks that are needed to be performed for the coming year and assign responsible

parties and timeframes. This section provides the basis for cost estimates and operational plans in terms of staff and projects. It is subject to

change on a yearly basis after processes of internal review and an external audit. It is based on a financial year system with the “year” starting on

1 April to 31 March the next year. Nine (9) management action “projects’ are identified and described in points 9.1 – 9.9 below. Appendix IX gives

a timetable allowing for quick reference to the schedule for the nine management actions.


9.1 Fire management

Management Action 1 – Fire Management

Objective Actively participate with integrated fire management of the RCCPE to ensure the maintenance of the fire-driven Fynbos ecosystem and to actively manage fire risk to private property

Responsible Party • Each RCCPE landowner to join the local Fire Protection Association and assist to finalize fire action plan that will address firebreaks, management/ecological burns and fire response schedule (protection)

Time Frame Continuous but finalize fire action plan before December

Means/action • RCCLA will assist the local FPA to create a fire action plan for the area by contributing towards gathering the following: - Identify and map infrastructure - Identify and map fire hazards including veld age classification - Identify and map existing firebreaks and new firebreaks to be established - Create schedule for carrying out controlled burns and for creating/maintaining fire breaks

• Each landowner to negotiate with neighbour on firebreak agreements where needed

• Verification of this management action will be reflected in minutes of the FPA management unit meetings and ultimately in the complete action plan


9.2 Clearing of alien invasive vegetation

Management action 2 – Clearing of alien invasive vegetation

Objective Clear alien invasive vegetation as per Garden Route Initiative alien clearing plan by Sue Swain (Appendix X)

Responsible party • RCCLA to prioritize alien clearing according to alien clearing plan provided in Appendix X

• RCCLA landowners to establish alien clearing schedule against available funding (Example given in Table 5. Management unit 62 on Cairnbrogie has been prioritized by the RCCLA as per the first bullet above before April (beginning of year) and this table gives a cost estimate. This would enable the RCCLA to plan during the first month of the “year” for the 12 months ahead against funding available to target priorities for alien clearing).

• RCCLA landowners to keep records and update alien clearing plan on annual basis. Current alien clearing plan does not include Remainder of Portion 6 of the Farm Jackals Kraal No. 433. This property should be included.

• Where possible, CapeNature to assist with lobbying for funding to clear alien invasive vegetation and with inputs in alien clearing plan

Time frame • Prioritize alien clearing before April

• Alien clearing schedule to be completed against available funding by April

• Updating of clearing plan by December

• Lobbying for funding to clear aliens – continuous

Means/action • Appendix X shows alien clearing plan and identifies densities, clearing methods, person days and costs.This information must be used to complete the alien clearing schedule against the available funding. This could be done during a RCCLA quarterly meeting or during an ad-hoc field visit and planning session

• Updates on available funding will be reflected in the minutes given per RCCLA quarterly meeting


Table 5. Alien density, person days and costing for management unit 62 on 0/432 Kranshoek (Cairnbrogie) according to alien clearing plan

(Appendix X).

MGT UNIT

FARM #

SPECIES DETAILS AGE DENSITY AREA TREATMENT PERSONDAYS /

HECTARE

TOTAL COST

If more than one speces: on

another line, use same Veg Unit

number and give the other species

present

Where infestation can be found e.g.

southern slope, north of road, edge of forest

Adult, Young, Sapling, Mixed

Give density of all individual species listed

(ha)

Stage Method

1st Treatment

2nd Treatment

3rd Treatment

(initial, followup, rehab)

(Slash, frill, cut stump)

Initial Followup

62 RE/432 Pine On gorge edges and going down into indigenous

Adult 2.0% 10.55 Initial Fell 17 10.5 681.53 265.86 227.88

Rooikrans Cliff edges Adult 1.0% 10.55 Initial Fell 17 10.5 340.765 132.93 113.94

Eucalyptus On gorge edges Adult 10.0% 10.55 Initial Cut

stump 25 15 5011.25 1899 1139.4

Black Wattle On gorge edges Adult 10.0% 10.55 Initial Cut

stump 25 15 5011.25 1899 1139.4

Total: R11044.80 R4196.79 R2620.62


9.3 Corridor management

9.4 Biodiversity monitoring

Management action 3 – Corridor management

Objective • Seek incorporation of remaining 5 coastal properties into RCCPE to secure entire corridor

• Assess current situation in terms of barriers that might prevent movement of fauna through corridor

Responsible party • RCCLA members to approach neighbouring landowners for negotiations

• RCCLA to map existing fencing and identify sections that are impermeable for naturally occurring fauna. Identify and prioritize interventions

Time frame • Negotiating with neighbouring landowners will be a continuous task

• Mapping of fencing and identifying impermeable sections to be completed by September. Identify and prioritize interventions by December

Means/action • RCCLA will identify member(s) to negotiate with neighbours during quarterly RCCLA meetings. Member(s) will supply feedback to meeting that will be reflected in the minutes

• RCCLA will identify member(s) that would be tasked to use a global positioning system (GPS) to map fences and digitize the data onto a map. The RCCLA to conduct a field visit to identify methods/structures to be implemented to ensure fence permeability to naturally occurring fauna. Map with data presented at RCCLA quarterly meeting where prioritizing and final decisions regarding implementation will be made.

Management action 4 – Biodiversity monitoring

Objective Gather data on basic indicators needed to give an account of existing and changes in biodiversity in the RCCPE

Responsible party Refer to section 8.3 Biodiversity Monitoring in part A of this management plan

Time frame Refer to section 8.3 Biodiversity Monitoring in part A of this management plan

Means/action Refer to section 8.3 Biodiversity Monitoring in part A of this management plan


9.5 Footpaths and vehicle tracks

9.6 Visual impacts

Management action 5 – Footpaths and vehicle tracks

Objective Manage footpaths and vehicle tracks in such as a way as to limit negative impact on environment

Responsible party • RCCLA

Time frame • Mapping to be completed by September

• Prioritizing to be completed by December

Means/action • RCCLA will identify member(s) that would be tasked to use a global positioning system (GPS) to track footpaths and vehicle tracks and digitize these data onto a map.

• Map to be presented at RCCLA quarterly meeting. Meeting decides on footpaths and vehicle tracks to be closed/rehabilitated and those to be maintained. Alternatively, RCCLA assess situation by conducting in field inspection. Final decisions regarding measures to be implemented will be made during quarterly RCCLA meeting and checked against available funding.

Management action 6 – Visual impacts

Objective Maintain natural and scenic beauty of landscape on the RCCPE

Responsible party • RCCLA

Time frame • Continuous

Means/action • The RCCLA to identify features within the RCCPE (if present) that might be considered to have a negative impact on the scenic beauty and address this internally by proposing mitigation measures through the quarterly RCCLA meetings.

• The RCCLA to timeously identify any proposed activity outside the RCCPE that have the potential to negatively impact on the scenic beauty of the area. Register concerns through official channels available under existing legislation. Report back and minute progress and outcomes during quarterly RCCLA meetings.

• Report any illegal activity that have or might have negative impact on scenic beauty of RCCPE to relevant authority. Report back and minute progress and outcomes during Quarterly RCCLA meetings.


9.7 Cultural, historical and archaeological management

9.8 Funding

Management action 7 – Cultural, historical and archaeological management

Objective Ascertain Cultural, historical and archaeological features of the RCCPE

Responsible party RCCLA

Time frame Complete inventory by December

Means/action • RCCLA members to list cultural, historical and archaeological features known to exist on the RCCPE properties and compile an inventory and map

• RCCLA to identify member to collate data and produce inventory and map. Inventory and map to be included in update of management plan

• RCCLA to identify member to approach South African Heritage Resource Agency to provide guidance on the management of heritage resources on RCCPE. Report back to quarterly RCCLA meeting

Management action 8 – Funding

Objective Acquire funds for management of the RCCPE

Responsible party RCCLA to raise/acquire funds for the management of the RCCPE

Time frame Continuous

Means/action • RCCLA to identify member(s) during quarterly meetings to: - Direct funding proposals to relevant institutions/individuals - Identify and implement fund raising events (for example trail running event) - Identify and research feasibility of sustainable natural resource based or tourism projects to generate funds

(like for example flora harvesting or beekeeping)

• Funding acquired by the RCCLA will be administered by the RCCLA treasurer and a financial report given at the quarterly RCCLA meetings. Available funding will be allocated to identified management actions required


9.9 Review and audit

Management action 9 – Review and Audit

Objective • Review performance of RCCPE internally and propose adapted management actions for next year

• Audit RCCPE to ascertain whether management actions identified had been implemented

Responsible party • The RCCLA to review the performance of the RCCPE in preparation for annual external audit

• CapeNature to perform annual external audit

Time frame • Internal review to take place between January and February

• External audit to take place in February

Means/action • RCCLA to do internal review during a quarterly RCCLA meeting or convene a special meeting. In preparation for external audit, collate means of verification for management actions implemented.

• CapeNature to do external audit on pre-arranged date. Provide audit report before first quarterly RCCLA meeting for the next year

• Management actions and schedule finalized for the next year


10. Annual Management Schedule Management schedule for the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment for the year …….

Management Intervention Management Action Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar

Fire management Finalize Plett South management unit action plan Identify and map infrastructure Identify and map fire hazards including veld age classificat Identify and map existing firebreaks and new firebreaks to be established

Clearing of alien invasive vegetation

Prioritize alien clearing

Complete alien clearing schedule

Update alien clearing plan

Lobby for funding

Corridor management Negotiate with neighbouring landowners

Mapping of fencing and identifying impermeable sections

Identify and prioritize interventions

Biodiversity monitoring Alien Invasive vegetation clearing

Rare plant monitoring

PROTEACEAE regeneration after fire

Ad-hoc: after fire

Fire mapping


Baseline data collection

Erosion monitoring

Weather monitoring

Footpaths and vehicle tracks

Mapping

Prioritize

Visual impacts Identify features within the RCCPE

Identify features from outside the RCCPE

Report illegal activities

Cultural, historical and archaeological management

List cultural, historical and archaeological features

Collate data and produce inventory and map

Approach SAHRA

Funding Funding proposals to institutions/individuals

Identify and implement fund raising events

Identify and research feasibility of sustainable natural resource based or tourism projects


Auditing Internal review/Prepare for Audit

WCNCB/ External Audit

Finalize management actions and schedule for the next year


PART 5 – REFERENCES AND APPENDICES

11. References Coetzee, K. 2005. Caring for Natural Rangelands. Scottsville: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.

CSIR Research Report. 1984. Estuaries of the Cape. Part 11 Synopsis of Available Information

on individual Systems. Report Number 31. Keurbooms System (CMS 19). Piesang (CMS 18).

Stellenbosch, pp. 1 - 49.

Driver, A., Maze, K., Rouget, M., Lombard, A.T., Nel, J., Turpie, J.K., Cowling, R.M., Desmet, P.,

Goodman, P., Harris, J., Jonas, Z., Reyers, B., Sink, K. and Strauss, T. 2005. National Spatial

Biodiversity Assessment 2004: Priorities for Biodiversity Conservation in South Africa. Strelitzia

17. Pretoria: South African National Biodiversity Institute.

Germishuizen, G. and Meyer, N.L. (eds.). 2003. Plants of southern Africa: an annotated checklist.

Strelitzia 14. Pretoria: National Botanical Institute.

Hill, H. 2011. Personal communication with Carlo van Tonder in George on 6 April 2011 on the

zoning and management actions proposed for Portion 45 of the Farm Roodefontein No. 440 to be

included with the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment.

Holmes, P.M. and Cowling, R.M. 1997. The Effects of Invasion by Acacia saligna on the Guild

Structure and Regeneration Capabilities of South African Fynbos Shrublands. Journal of Applied

Ecology. 34: 317 – 332.

Kingwill, J. M., Joubert, P. A., and Bester, C. D. 2012. Robberg Coastal Corridor: Environmental

Law Guideline for a Coastal Corridor. Bluepebble independent environmental agency.

Commissioned and funded by the Robberg Coastal Corridor Landowners Association.

Le Maitre, D.C. and Midgeley, J.J. 1991. Plant reproductive ecology. In: Cowling, R.M. (Ed.). The

Ecology of Fynbos – Nutrients, Fire and Diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 135 - 174.

Lombard, A.T., Strauss, T., Stewart, W.I., Vlok, J. and Wolf, T. 2004. A rapid biodiversity

conservation assessment and framework for a conservation plan for the Plettenberg Bay

Municipality, Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Port Elizabeth, Biodiversity Conservation Unit,

Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa.


Mack, R.N., Simberloff, D., Lonsdale, W.M., Evans, H., Clout, . and Bazzaz, F.A. 2000. Biotic

invasions: Causes, epidemiology, global consequences and control. Ecological Applications. 10:

689 – 710.

Mucina, L. and Geldenhuys, C.J. 2006. FOz1 Southern Afrotemperate Forest. In: Mucina, L. and

Rutherford, M.C. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. Pretoria,

South African National Biodiversity Institute, pp. 597 – 598.

Mucina, L. and Rutherford, M.C. 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland.

Strelitzia 19. Pretoria: South African National Biodiversity Institute.

Musil, C.F. 1993. Effect of invasive Australian Acacias on the regeneration growth and nutrient

chemistry of South African lowland fynbos. Journal of Applied Ecology. 30: 361 – 372.

Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca, G.A.B. and Kent, J. 2000.

Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature. 403: 853 – 858.

Purnell, K., Kirkwood, D. and Maree, K. 2010. CapeNature Protected Area Expansion Strategy

and Implementation Plan 2010 – 2015. Unpublished document.

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

and Manyama, P.A. (Eds.). 2009. Red List of South African plants 2009. Strelitzia 25. Pretoria,

South African National Biodiversity Institute.

Rebelo, A.G., Boucher, C., Helme, N., Mucina, L. and Rutherford, M.C. 2006. FFs 19 South

Outeniqua Sandstone Fynbos. In: Mucina, L. and Rutherford, M.C. The vegetation of South

Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. Pretoria: South African National Biodiversity

Institute, pp. 199 – 120.

Richardson, D.M., MacDonald, I.A.W. and Forsyth, G.G. 1989. Reductions in Plant Species

Richness under Stands of Alien Trees and Shrubs in the Fynbos Biome. South African Forestry

Journal. 149: 1 – 8.

Richardson, D.M., MacDonald, I.A.W., Holmes, P.M. and Cowling, R.M. 1991. Plant and animal

invasions. In: Cowling, R.M. (Ed.). The Ecology of Fynbos – Nutrients, Fire and Diversity. Oxford:

Oxford University Press, pp. 271 – 308.


Richardson, D.M. and van Wilgen, B.W. 2004. Invasive plant species in South Africa: how well do

we understand the ecological impacts? South African Journal of Science. 100: 45 – 52.

Rouget, M., Reyers, B., Jonas, Z., Desmet, P., Driver, A., Maze, K., Egoh, B., Cowling, R.M.,

Mucina, L. and Rutherford, M.C. 2004. South African National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment

2004: Technical Report. Volume 1: Terrestrial Component. Pretoria: South African National

Biodiversity Institute.

Rust, I.C. 1998. Geology and geomorphology. In: Field guide to the Eastern and Southern Cape

Coasts. Lubke, R. and de Moor, I. (Eds.). Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press, pp. 10 –

26.

Schloms, B., Lambrechts, J. and Ellis, F. 1997. Soil survey of the farm Cairn Brogie, Plettenberg

Bay. Unpublished report.

Schutte-Vlok, A.L., Vlok, J., de Klerk, H., Wessels, N., Marshall, T and Day. L. Fire management.

In prep.

The South African Bird Atlas Project 2 [online]. Animal Demography Unit 2011 Department of

Zoology - University of Cape Town website by Michael Brooks (cited 2010-08-28). Available from

Internet URL http://adu.org.za/.

Van Wilgen, B.W., Bond, W.J. and Richardson, D.M. 1991. Ecosystem management. In: Cowling,

R.M. (Ed.). The Ecology of Fynbos – Nutrients, Fire and Diversity. Oxford: Oxford University

Press, pp. 345 – 371.

Van Wilgen, B.W., Richardson, D.M. and Seydack, A.H.W. 1994. Managing Fynbos for

biodiversity: constraints and options in a fire-prone environment. South African Journal of

Science. 90: 322 – 329.

Vlok, J.H.J., Euston-Brown D.I.W. & Wolf, T. 2008. A vegetation map for the Garden Route

Initiative. Unpublished 1:50 000 maps and report supported by CAPE fine scale planning task

team.

Vlok, A.L. 2009. Unpublished report. Stewardship Programme Site Assessment for Biodiversity

Value for the property Brakkloof 443 Portion 0, Plettenberg Bay.

http://adu.org.za/staff_page.php?staff_id=15

http://www.http/adu.org.za/


Vlok, J. 2006. Specialist botanical report for the proposed subdivision of the Remainder of the

farm Cairnbrogie # 432 located in the Bitou Municipality of the Knysna district. Unpublished

report.

Vromans, D.C., Maree, K.S., Holness, S. and Job, N. and Brown, A.E. 2010. The Garden Route

Biodiversity Sector Plan for the George, Knysna and Bitou Municipalities. Supporting land-use

planning and decision-making in Critical Biodiversity Areas and Ecological Support Areas for

sustainable development. Knysna: Garden Route Initiative, South African National Parks.


12. Appendices

Appendix I

Plant species of the Robberg Coastal Corridor Protected Environment

(Nomenclature follows that of Germishuizen and Meyer, 2003)

Species Family Red data status

Brunsvigia orientalis AMARYLLIDACEAE Least Concern

Haemanthus sanguineus AMARYLLIDACEAE Least Concern

Searsia chirindensis ANACARDIACEAE Least Concern

Searsia glauca ANACARDIACEAE Least Concern

Searsia lucida ANACARDIACEAE Not Evaluated

Arctopus echinatus APIACEAE Least Concern

Centella virgata APIACEAE Least Concern

Asparagus densiflorus ASPARAGACEAE Least Concern

Asparagus rubicundus ASPARAGACEAE Least Concern

Chrysanthemoides monilifera ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Conyza scabrida ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Corymbium africanum ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Corymbium glabrum ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Eriocephalus africanus ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Helichrysum cymosum ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Helichrysum felinum ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Helichrysum foetidum ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Helichrysum petiolare ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Helichrysum teretifolium ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Hippia frutescens ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Metalasia erectifolia ASTERACEAE Near Threatened

Metalasia muricata ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Metalasia pungens ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Othonna parviflora ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Plecostachys serpyllifolia ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Relhania calycina ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Senecio burchellii ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Senecio elegans ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Senecio ilicifolius ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Senecio rigidus ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Syncarpha paniculata ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Tarchonanthus littoralis ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Ursinia trifida ASTERACEAE Least Concern

Berzelia intermedia BRUNIACEAE Least Concern


Wahlenbergia sp.nov CAMPANULACEAE

Gymnosporia buxifolia CELASTRACEAE Least Concern

Maytenus acuminata CELASTRACEAE Least Concern

Maytenus procumbens CELASTRACEAE Least Concern

Pterocelastrus tricuspidatus CELASTRACEAE Least Concern

Commelina africana COMMELINACEAE Least Concern

Falkia repens CONVOLVULACEAE Least Concern

Curtisia dentata CORNACEAE Near Threatened

Crassula ericoides CRASSULACEAE Least Concern

Crassula rubricaulis CRASSULACEAE Least Concern

Ficinia oligantha CYPERACEAE Least Concern

Schoenoxiphium ecklonii CYPERACEAE Least Concern

Tetraria capillacea CYPERACEAE Least Concern

Tetraria cuspidata CYPERACEAE Least Concern

Tetraria spp. CYPERACEAE

Pteridium aquilinum DENNSTAEDTIACEAE Least Concern

Drosera aliciae DROSERACEAE Least Concern

Diospyros dichrophylla EBENACEAE Least Concern

Diospyros whyteana EBENACEAE Least Concern

Euclea polyandra EBENACEAE Least Concern

Euclea racemosa EBENACEAE Least Concern

Erica canaliculata ERICACEAE Least Concern

Erica discolor ERICACEAE Least Concern

Erica formosa ERICACEAE Least Concern

Erica imbricata ERICACEAE Least Concern

Erica sessiliflora ERICACEAE Least Concern

Erica sparsa ERICACEAE Least Concern

Erica versicolor ERICACEAE Least Concern

Eriospermum spp. ERIOSPERMACEAE

Aspalathus alopecurus FABACEAE Least Concern

Aspalathus angustifolia FABACEAE Least Concern

Aspalathus nigra FABACEAE Least Concern

Aspalathus setacea FABACEAE Least Concern

Dipogon lignosus FABACEAE Least Concern

Indigofera flabellata FABACEAE Least Concern

Indigofera porrecta FABACEAE Least Concern

Lotus hispidus FABACEAE Not Evaluated

Otholobium spp. FABACEAE

Podalyria myrtillifolia FABACEAE Least Concern

Psoralea plauta FABACEAE Least Concern

Psoralea spp. FABACEAE

Tephrosia capensis FABACEAE Least Concern

Virgilia oroboides FABACEAE Least Concern


Chironia tetragona GENTIANACEAE Least Concern

Pelargonium candicans GERANIACEAE Least Concern

Pelargonium capitatum GERANIACEAE Least Concern

Pelargonium grossularioides GERANIACEAE Least Concern

Pelargonium radens GERANIACEAE Least Concern

Ornithogalum dubium HYACINTHACEAE Least Concern

Ornithogalum spp. HYACINTHACEAE

Hypoxis angustifolia HYPOXIDACEAE Least Concern

Hypoxis spp. HYPOXIDACEAE

Aristea pusilla IRIDACEAE Least Concern

Bobartia orientalis IRIDACEAE Least Concern

Bobartia spp. IRIDACEAE

Crocosmia aurea IRIDACEAE Least Concern

Ixia orientalis IRIDACEAE Least Concern

Moraea elliottii IRIDACEAE Least Concern

Tritoniopsis caffra IRIDACEAE Least Concern

Watsonia fourcadei IRIDACEAE Least Concern

Watsonia spp. IRIDACEAE

Stachys aethiopica LAMIACEAE Least Concern

Cassytha ciliolata LAURACEAE Least Concern

Linum africanum LINACEAE Least Concern

Lobelia neglecta LOBELIACEAE Least Concern

Lobelia tomentosa LOBELIACEAE Least Concern

Monopsis unidentata LOBELIACEAE Least Concern

Hibiscus trionum MALVACEAE Not listed

Carpobrotus spp. MESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE

Montinia caryophyllacea MONTINIACEAE Least Concern

Morella humilis MYRICACEAE Least Concern

Morella serrata MYRICACEAE Least Concern

Rapanea melanophloeos MYRSINACEAE Declining

Olea capensis subsp. capensis OLEACEAE Least Concern

Olea europaea subsp. africana OLEACEAE Least Concern

Ceratandra grandiflora ORCHIDACEAE Least Concern

Harveya capensis OROBANCHACEAE Least Concern

Oxalis spp. OXALIDACEAE

Pittosporum viridiflorum PITTOSPORACEAE Least Concern

Briza maxima POACEAE Not Evaluated

Eragrostis capensis POACEAE Least Concern

Lolium multiflorum POACEAE Not Evaluated

Themeda triandra POACEAE Least Concern

Podocarpus falcatus PODOCARPACEAE Least Concern

Podocarpus latifolius PODOCARPACEAE Least Concern

Muraltia ericaefolia POLYGALACEAE Least Concern


Muraltia knysnaensis POLYGALACEAE Endangered

Polygala fruticosa POLYGALACEAE Least Concern

Polygala garcinii POLYGALACEAE Least Concern

Leucadendron eucalyptifolium PROTEACEAE Least Concern

Leucadendron salignum PROTEACEAE Least Concern

Leucospermum cuneiforme PROTEACEAE Least Concern

Protea cynaroides PROTEACEAE Least Concern

Protea neriifolia PROTEACEAE Least Concern

Pteris dentata PTERIDACEAE Least Concern

Knowltonia vesicatoria RANUNCULACEAE Least Concern

Ranunculus multifidus RANUNCULACEAE Not Evaluated

Elegia equisetacea RESTIONACEAE Least Concern

Restio triticeus RESTIONACEAE Least Concern

Phylica axillaris RHAMNACEAE Least Concern

Phylica spp. RHAMNACEAE

Cliffortia ilicifolia ROSACEAE Least Concern

Cliffortia linearifolia ROSACEAE Least Concern

Cliffortia serpyllifolia ROSACEAE Least Concern

Anthospermum aethiopicum RUBIACEAE Least Concern

Acmadenia alternifolia RUTACEAE Endangered

Agathosma ovata RUTACEAE Least Concern

Trimeria grandifolia SALICACEAE Least Concern

Osyris compressa SANTALACEAE Least Concern

Thesium fimbriatum SANTALACEAE Data Deficient

Thesium spp. SANTALACEAE

Sideroxylon inerme subsp. inerme SAPOTACEAE Least Concern

Schizaea pectinata SCHIZAEACEAE Least Concern

Halleria lucida SCROPHULARIACEAE Least Concern

Selago canescens SCROPHULARIACEAE Least Concern

Selago corymbosa SCROPHULARIACEAE Least Concern

Selago glomerata SCROPHULARIACEAE Least Concern

Selago villicaulis SCROPHULARIACEAE Vulnerable

Pellaea calomelanos SINOPTERIDACEAE Least Concern

Solanum spp. SOLANACEAE

Hermannia flammea STERCULIACEAE Least Concern

Cyanella lutea TECOPHILAEACEAE Least Concern

Gnidia juniperifolia THYMELAEACEAE Least Concern

Passerina corymbosa THYMELAEACEAE Least Concern


Appendix II

Terrestrial and marine mammal species of Robberg Nature Reserve

Scientific Name English common name Afrikaans common name

Acomys subspinosus Cape spiny mouse Kaapse stekelmuis

Aonyx capensis African clawless otter Groototter

Arctocephalus pusillus Cape fur seal Kaapse pelsrob

Caracal caracal Caracal Rooikat

Cercopithecus pygerythrus Vervet monkey Blouaap

Delphinus delphis Short-beaked common dolphin Gewone dolfyn

Epomophorus wahlbergi Wahlberg's epauletted fruit bat Wahlberg-witkolvrugtevlermuis

Eubalaena australis Southern right whale Noordkapper walvis

Galerella pulverulenta Cape grey mongoose Kleingrysmuishond

Herpestes ichneumon Large grey mongoose Grootgrysmuishond

Hystrix africaeaustralis Porcupine Ystervark

Mastomys natalensis Natal multimammate mouse Natalse vaalveldmuis

Megaptera novaeangliae Humpback whale Boggelrugwalvis

Mus minutoides Pygmy mouse Dwergmuis

Myomyscus verreauxi Verreaux's mouse Verreaux-muis

Otomys irroratus Vlei rat Vleirot

Panthera pardus Leopard Luiperd

Papio cynocephalus ursinus Chacma baboon Kaapse bobbejaan

Procavia capensis Rock dassie Klipdassie

Raphicerus melanotis Grysbok Grysbok

Rhabdomys pumilio Striped mouse Streepmuis

Rousettus aegyptiacus Egyptian fruit bat Egiptiese vrugtevlermuis

Sousa chinensis Humpback dolphin Boggelrug dolfyn

Tragelaphus scriptus Bushbuck Bosbok

Tursiops truncatus Atlantic Ocean bottlenosed dolphin Atlantiese Oseaan-stompneusdolfyn


Appendix III

Bird species identified through the South African Bird Atlas Project 2 in 5 x 5

minute pentads 3405_2315 and 3405_2320 covering the RCCPE.

Scientific name English common name Afrikaans common name

Alopochen aegyptiacus Egyptian Goose Kolgans

Anas undulata Yellow-billed Duck Geelbekeend

Anastomus lamelligerus African Openbill Oopbekooievaar

Andropadus importunus Sombre Greenbul Gewone Willie

Anthobaphes violacea Orange-breasted Sunbird Oranjeborssuikerbekkie

Apalis thoracica Bar-throated Apalis Bandkeelkleinjantjie

Apus affinis Little Swift Kleinwindswael

Apus barbatus African Black Swift Swartwindswael

Apus caffer White-rumped Swift Witkruiswindswael

Aquila verreauxii Verreaux's Eagle Witkruisarend

Ardea cinerea Grey Heron Bloureier

Batis capensis Cape Batis Kaapse Bosbontrokkie

Bostrychia hagedash Hadeda Ibis Hadeda

Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret Veereier

Burhinus capensis Spotted Thick-knee Gewone Dikkop

Buteo rufofuscus Jackal Buzzard Rooiborsjakkalsvoel

Buteo trizonatus Forest Buzzard Bosjakkalsvoel

Campethera notata Knysna Woodpecker Knysnaspeg

Caprimulgus pectoralis Fiery-necked Nightjar Afrikaanse Naguil

Centropus burchellii Burchell's Coucal Gewone Vleiloerie

Cercomela familiaris Familiar Chat Gewone Spekvreter

Ceryle rudis Pied Kingfisher Bontvisvanger

Chalcomitra amethystina Amethyst Sunbird Swartsuikerbekkie

Chrysococcyx caprius Diderick Cuckoo Diederikkie

Chrysococcyx cupreus African Emerald Cuckoo Mooimeisie

Chrysococcyx klaas Klaas's Cuckoo Meitjie

Cinnyris afer Greater Double-collared Sunbird Groot-rooibandsuikerbekkie

Cinnyris chalybeus Southern Double-collared Sunbird Klein-rooibandsuikerbekkie

Cinnyris chalybeus Southern Double-collared Sunbird Klein-rooibandsuikerbekkie

Cisticola fulvicapilla Neddicky Neddicky Neddikkie

Coccopygia melanotis Swee Waxbill Suidelike Swie

Colius striatus Speckled Mousebird Gevlekte Muisvoel

Columba guinea Speckled Pigeon Kransduif

Corvus albicollis White-necked Raven Withalskraai

Corvus albus Pied Crow Witborskraai

Corvus capensis Cape Crow Swartkraai

Cossypha caffra Cape Robin-Chat Gewone Janfrederik

Crithagra gularis Streaky-headed Seedeater Streepkopkanarie

Crithagra scotops Forest Canary Gestreepte Kanarie

Crithagra sulphuratus Brimstone Canary Dikbekkanarie

Crithagra totta Cape Siskin Kaapse Pietjiekanarie

Cryptillas victorini Victorin's Warbler Rooiborsruigtesanger

Cyanomitra veroxii Grey Sunbird Gryssuikerbekkie


Dendrocygna viduata White-faced Duck Nonnetjie-eend

Dendropicos griseocephalus Olive Woodpecker Gryskopspeg

Dicrurus adsimilis Fork-tailed Drongo Mikstertbyvanger

Dryoscopus cubla Black-backed Puffback Sneeubal

Estrilda astrild Common Waxbill Rooibeksysie

Euplectes capensis Yellow Bishop Kaapse Flap

Euplectes orix Southern Red Bishop Rooivink

Falco rupicolus Rock Kestrel Kransvalk

Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen Grootwaterhoender

Haematopus moquini African Black Oystercatcher Swarttobie

Halcyon albiventris Brown-hooded Kingfisher Bruinkopvisvanger

Haliaeetus vocifer African Fish-Eagle Visarend

Hirundo cucullata Greater Striped Swallow Grootstreepswael

Hirundo fuligula Rock Martin Kransswael

Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow Europese Swael

Indicator minor Lesser Honeyguide Kleinheuningwyser

Laniarius ferrugineus Southern Boubou Suidelike Waterfiskaal

Lanius collaris Common Fiscal Fiskaallaksman

Larus dominicanus Kelp Gull Swartugmeeu

Monticola rupestris Cape Rock-Thrush Kaapse Kliplyster

Morus capensis Cape Gannet Witmalgas

Motacilla capensis Cape Wagtail Gewone Kwikkie

Muscicapa adusta African Dusky Flycatcher Donkervlieevanger

Nectarinia famosa Malachite Sunbird Jangroentjie

Numida meleagris Helmeted Guineafowl Gewone Tarentaal

Oena capensis Namaqua Dove Namakwaduifie

Onychognathus morio Red-winged Starling Rooivlerkspreeu

Oriolus larvatus Black-headed Oriole Swartkopwielewaal

Passer diffusus Southern Grey-headed Sparrow Gryskopmossie

Passer domesticus House Sparrow Huismossie

Phalacrocorax africanus Reed Cormorant Rietduiker

Phalacrocorax capensis Cape Cormorant Trekduiker

Phalacrocorax carbo White-breasted Cormorant Witborsduiker

Phyllastrephus terrestris Terrestrial Brownbul Boskrapper

Plectropterus gambensis Spur-winged Goose Wildemakou

Ploceus capensis Cape Weaver Kaapse Wewer

Prinia maculosa Karoo Prinia Karoolangstertjie

Promerops cafer Cape Sugarbird Kaapse Suikervoiel

Psalidoprocne holomelaena Black Saw-wing Swartsaagvlerkswael

Pternistis afer Red-necked Spurfowl Rooikeelfisant

Pycnonotus capensis Cape Bulbul Kaapse Tiptol

Saxicola torquatus African Stonechat Gewone Bontrokkie

Serinus canicollis Cape Canary Kaapse Kanarie

Sigelus silens Fiscal Flycatcher Fiskaalvlieivanger

Sphenoeacus afer Cape Grassbird Grasvoel

Sterna bergii Swift Tern Geelbeksterretjie

Sterna caspia Caspian Tern Reusesterretjie

Sterna sandvicensis Sandwich Tern Grootsterretjie

Streptopelia capicola Cape Turtle-Dove Gewone Tortelduif

Streptopelia semitorquata Red-eyed Dove Grootringduif


Sturnus vulgaris Common Starling Europese Spreeu

Tachymarptis melba Alpine Swift Witpenswindswael

Tauraco corythaix Knysna Turaco Knysnaloerie

Tchagra tchagra Southern Tchagra Grysborstjagra

Telophorus olivaceus Olive Bush-Shrike Olyfboslaksman

Telophorus zeylonus Bokmakierie Bokmakierie Bokmakierie

Terpsiphone viridis African Paradise-Flycatcher Paradysvlieevanger

Threskiornis aethiopicus African Sacred Ibis Skoorsteenveer

Trochocercus cyanomelas Blue-mantled Crested-Flycatcher Bloukuifvlieevanger

Turdus olivaceus Olive Thrush Olyflyster

Turtur tympanistria Tambourine Dove Witborsduifie

Vanellus armatus Blacksmith Lapwing Bontkiewiet

Vanellus coronatus Crowned Lapwing Kroonkiewiet

Vanellus melanopterus Black-winged Lapwing Grootswartvlerkkiewiet

Vidua macroura Pin-tailed Whydah Koningrooibekkie

Zosterops virens Cape White-eye Kaapse Glasogie

Appendix IV

Amphibians of Robberg Nature Reserve


Hyperolius marmoratus Painted reed frog Geskilderde rietpadda

Strongylopus grayii Clicking stream frog Kliekpadda

Appendix V

Reptiles of Robberg Nature Reserve


Afrogecko porphyreus Marbled leaf-toed gecko Marmer blaartoongeitjie

Agama atra Southern rock agama Suidelike rotskoggelmander

Bitis arietans Puff adder Pofadder

Caretta caretta Loggerhead turtle Grootkopseeskilpad

Chersina angulata Angulate tortoise Rooipensskilpad

Dispholidus typus Boomslang Boomslang

Duberria lutrix Common slug eater Gewone slakvreter

Homoroselaps lacteus Spotted harlequin snake Gevlekte kousbandjie slang

Lamprophis capensis Brown House Snake Bruin huisslang

Lamprophis guttatus Spotted house snake Gevlekte huisslang

Lamprophis inornatus Olive house snake Olyfkleurige huisslang

Psammophis crucifer Cross-marked grass snake Kruismerkgrasslang

Psammophylax rhombeatus Spotted skaapsteker Skaapsteker

Rhinotyphlops lalandei Delalande's Beaked Blind Snake Delalande blinde slang

Trachylepis homalocephala Red-sided skink Rooi-sy skink


Appendix VI

Robberg Coastal Corridor: Environmental Law Guideline for a Coastal Corridor

attached as an electronic file.

Appendix VII

Constitution of the Robberg Coastal Corridor Landowners Association attached

as an electronic file.

Appendix VIII

Newspaper article regarding the launch of the Robberg Coastal Corridor:

Environmental Law Guideline for a Coastal Corridor as published in the CXPress,

p. 5, issue 334, 22 February 2012.


Appendix IX

Alien clearing plan compiled by Sue Swain of the Garden Route Inititaive for all the properties between Robberg nature

Reserve and the Harkerville section of the Garden Route National Park but excluding Portion 6 of the Farm Jackals Kraal

No. 433.

Harkerville Corridor Alien Vegetation Management Plan

VEGETATION UNIT INFORMATION SCHEDULE OF TREATMENT

MGT UNIT

FARM #

SPECIES DETAILS AGE DENSITY AREA TREATMENT

PERSONDAYS / HECTARE

PRIORITY

TOTAL PERSONDAYS (Pdays/ha x ha) TOTAL COST

If more than one speces:

on another line, use

same Veg Unit

number and give the other species present

Where infestation

can be found e.g. southern

slope, north of

road, edge of forest

Adult, Young, Sapling, Mixed

Give density of all individual species listed

(ha)

Stage Method

1st Treatment

2nd Treatment

3rd Treatment

4th Treatment

1st Treatment

2nd Treatment

3rd Treatment

4th Treatment

5th Treatment (initial,

followup, rehab)

(Slash, frill, cut stump)

Initial Followup 1-10

1 RE/443 Rooikrans Under bio-

control Adult 10.0% 22.93 Initial Fell 17 10.5 38.981 24.0765 24.0765 R 7,406.39

R 2,889.18

R 2,889.18

Van

Rooyen Port

Jackson

Tackle healthy plants

Adult 5.0% 22.93 Initial Cut stump

healthy individuals

25 15 1 28.6625 17.1975 10.3185 R 5,445.88 R

2,063.70 R

1,238.22

Pine

Ones planted in a

row near hous

Adult 2.00% 22.93 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 7.7962 4.8153 4.1274 R 1,481.28 R 577.84 R 495.29

2 RE/443 Rooikrans In sand quarry

Adult 30.0% 11.96 Initial Fell 17 10.5 5 60.996 37.674 32.292 R

11,589.24 R

4,520.88 R

3,875.04

Port

Jackson In sand quarry

Adult 25.0% 11.96 Initial Cut stump 25 15 2 74.75 44.85 26.91 R

14,202.50 R

5,382.00 R

3,229.20

Black Wattle

Big one along path

Adult 2.0% 11.96 Initial Cut stump 25 15 2 5.98 3.588 2.1528 R 1,136.20 R 430.56 R 258.34

Hakea Adult 3.0% 11.96 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 6.0996 3.7674 3.2292 R 1,158.92 R 452.09 R 387.50

3 RE/443 Rooikrans Sweep area

Adult 1.0% 18.00 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 3.06 1.89 1.62 R 581.40 R 226.80 R 194.40


(indigenous thicket)

Port

Jackson

Sweep area

(indigenous thicket)

Adult 1.00% 18.00 Initial Cut stump 25 15 1 4.5 2.7 1.62 R 855.00 R 324.00 R 194.40

Hakea In NE corner

Adult 7.00% 18.00 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 21.42 13.23 11.34 R 4,069.80 R

1,587.60 R

1,360.80

Pine In NE corner


1,134.00 R 972.00

4 RE/443 Rooikrans Adult 3.0% 9.76 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 4.9776 3.0744 2.6352 R 945.74 R 368.93 R 316.22

Port

Jackson Adult 2.0% 9.76 Initial Cut stump 25 15 1 4.88 2.928 1.7568 R 927.20 R 351.36 R 210.82

Black Wattle

Adult 2.0% 9.76 Initial Cut stump 25 15 1 4.88 2.928 1.7568 R 927.20 R 351.36 R 210.82

Hakea Near

quarry office


5 Rooikrans

In and around

quarry and along coast

Adult 10.0% 25.17 Initial Fell 17 10.5 42.789 26.4285 22.653 R 8,129.91 R

3,171.42 R

2,718.36

Port

Jackson

In and around quarry

Adult 3.00% 25.17 Initial Remove healthy

individuals 25 15 1 18.8775 11.3265 6.7959 R 3,586.73

R 1,359.18

R 815.51

Hakea Near path to quarry


Pine Near path to quarry


6 RE/443 Rooikrans Along coast

Adult 8.0% 16.47 Initial Fell 17 10.5 22.3992 13.8348 11.8584 R 4,255.85 R

1,660.18 R

1,423.01

Pine Adult 3.0% 16.47 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 8.3997 5.18805 4.4469 R 1,595.94 R 622.57 R 533.63

7 RE/443 Rooikrans Disturbed

area Adult 8.0% 35.84 Initial

Fell healthy specimens to make space

17 10.5 3 48.7424 30.1056 25.8048 R 9,261.06 R

3,612.67 R

3,096.58

Port

Jackson Disturbed

area Adult 6.0% 35.84 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 53.76 32.256 19.3536

R 10,214.40

R 3,870.72

R 2,322.43

Black Wattle

Disturbed area

Adult 4.0% 35.84 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 35.84 21.504 12.9024 R 6,809.60 R

2,580.48 R

1,548.29

Pine Disturbed

area Adult 3.0% 35.84 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 18.2784 11.2896 9.6768 R 3,472.90

R 1,354.75

R 1,161.22

8a RE/443 Rooikrans Previous

fields Adult 4.0% 11.75 Initial


17 10.5 2 7.99 4.935 4.23 R 1,518.10 R 592.20 R 507.60

Port

Jackson Previous


Cut stump healthy

individuals 25 15 2 11.75 7.05 4.23 R 2,232.50 R 846.00 R 507.60

Black Wattle

Previous fields and

side of Robberg

road


1,480.50 R 888.30

Pine Previous

fields Adult 2.0% 11.75 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 3.995 2.4675 2.115 R 759.05 R 296.10 R 253.80

Kikuyu Previous

fields Adult 15.0% 11.75 Initial Cut and spray 10.5 10.5 2 18.50625 18.50625 15.8625 R 3,516.19

R 2,220.75

R 1,903.50

8b 20/443 Rooikrans Previous



17 10.5 3 8.3776 5.1744 4.4352 R 1,591.74 R 620.93 R 532.22

Port

Jackson Previous


Cut stump healthy

individuals 25 15 3 12.32 7.392 4.4352 R 2,340.80 R 887.04 R 532.22

Black Wattle

Previous fields and

side of Robberg

road


1,552.32 R 931.39

Pine Previous

fields Adult 2.0% 12.32 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 4.1888 2.5872 2.2176 R 795.87 R 310.46 R 266.11

8c 20/443 Black Wattle

Burnt area Seedlings 20.0% 1.56 Follow

up Foliar Spray

when between 25 15 1 7.8 4.68 2.808 R 1,482.00 R 561.60 R 336.96


knee and hip height

8d 20/443 Pine Adult 30.0% 2.31 Initial Fell 17 10.5

1 (if Murray clearing from his

side, need to work

and prioritise together)

11.781 7.2765 6.237 R 2,238.39 R 873.18 R 748.44

Rooikrans Adult 8.0% 2.31 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 3.1416 1.9404 1.6632 R 596.90 R 232.85 R 199.58

Hakea Mixed 4.0% 2.31 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 1.5708 0.9702 0.8316 R 298.45 R 116.42 R 99.79

Port

Jackson Adult 10.0% 2.31 Initial Cut stump 25 15 2 5.775 3.465 2.079 R 1,097.25 R 415.80 R 249.48

9 10/443 Rooikrans West of current quarry


1,023.12 R 876.96

Port

Jackson

West of current quarry


1,461.60 R 876.96

Black Wattle

West of current quarry


1,461.60 R 876.96

Pine West of current quarry


Hakea West of current quarry


10a 10/443 Rooikrans

Current quarry and

eastern vegetation


1,179.36 R

1,010.88

Port

Jackson

Current quarry and

eastern vegetation


1,684.80 R

1,010.88

Black Wattle

Current quarry and

eastern vegetation

Adult 5.0% 31.20 Initial Cut stump 25 15 5 39 23.4 14.04 R 7,410.00 R

2,808.00 R

1,684.80

Pine

Current quarry and

eastern vegetation


Hakea

Current quarry and

eastern vegetation


Eucalyptus One big

tree Adult 0.1% 31.20 Initial

Control new ones - Cut

Stump 25 15 5 0.78 0.468 0.2808 R 148.20 R 56.16 R 33.70

10b Black Wattle

Burnt area Seedlings 30.0% 2.90 Follow

up

Foliar Spray when between knee and hip

height

25 15 1 21.75 13.05 7.83 R 4,132.50 R

1,566.00 R 939.60

11 32/443 Pine On border with NE property

Adult 10.0% 5.82 Initial Fell 17 10.5

1 (if Van Rooyen clearing from his

side, need to work

and prioritise together)

9.894 6.111 5.238 R 1,879.86 R 733.32 R 628.56

Tom Rooikrans

Check on indigenous

borders and in

indigenous forest

Adult 2.0% 5.82 Initial Fell and leave 17 10.5

1 (priority to keep

indigenous gorge clear)

1.9788 1.2222 1.0476 R 375.97 R 146.66 R 125.71


12 32/443 Rooikrans

Isolated plants

coming up in

indigenous forest

Adult 2.0% 18.86 Initial Fell and leave 17 10.5 1 6.4124 3.9606 3.3948 R 1,218.36 R 475.27 R 407.38

Pine Check for isolated plants

Adult 1.0% 18.86 Initial Fell and leave 17 10.5 1 3.2062 1.9803 1.6974 R 609.18 R 237.64 R 203.69

13 32/443 Black Wattle

Check for seedlings every 3 months

Seedlings 1.0% 3.13 Follow

up Hand pull 25 15 1 0.7825 0.4695 0.2817 R 148.68 R 56.34 R 33.80

Rooikrans

In gorge, work

carefully to avoid

damage to indigenous


14 32/443 Rooikrans

Along coast, if under

biocontrol, leave


15 32/443 Rooikrans

Burnt area - deal with

as per detailed report

Seedlings 20.0% 18.45 Initial Handpull 17 10.5 1 62.73 38.745 33.21 R

11,918.70 R

4,649.40 R

3,985.20

Port

Jackson

Burnt area - deal with

as per detailed report

Seedlings 5.0% 18.45 Initial

Foliar Spray when between knee and hip

height

25 15 1 23.0625 13.8375 8.3025 R 4,381.88 R

1,660.50 R 996.30

16 32/443 Rooikrans Adult 8.0% 8.81 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 11.9816 7.4004 6.3432 R 2,276.50 R 888.05 R 761.18

Port

Jackson Adult 12.0% 8.81 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 2 26.43 15.858 9.5148 R 5,021.70

R 1,902.96

R 1,141.78

Black Wattle

Adult 5.0% 8.81 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 2 11.0125 6.6075 3.9645 R 2,092.38 R 792.90 R 475.74

Eucalyptus Adult 2.0% 8.81 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 2 4.405 2.643 1.5858 R 836.95 R 317.16 R 190.30

Hakea

Near Telkom

poles at top end near 17 and 25 confluence

Mixed 1.0% 8.81 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 1.4977 0.92505 0.7929 R 284.56 R 111.01 R 95.15

17 32/443 Rooikrans Adult 6.0% 8.53 Initial Fell and leave 17 10.5 3 8.7006 5.3739 4.6062 R 1,653.11 R 644.87 R 552.74

Port

Jackson Adult 7.0% 8.53 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 14.9275 8.9565 5.3739 R 2,836.23

R 1,074.78

R 644.87

Black Wattle


Pine Adult 10.0% 8.53 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 14.501 8.9565 7.677 R 2,755.19 R

1,074.78 R 921.24

Eucalyptus Lining

entrance road


1,535.40 R 921.24

Hakea Adult 1.0% 8.53 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 1.4501 0.89565 0.7677 R 275.52 R 107.48 R 92.12

Blackwood Adult 3.0% 8.53 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 3 6.3975 3.8385 2.3031 R 1,215.53 R 460.62 R 276.37

18 32/443 Clear

In and around castle, sweep once a year

2.0% 4.81 Initial Handpull 17 10.5 3 1.6354 1.0101 0.8658 R 310.73 R 121.21 R 103.90

19 76/443 Rooikrans In kloof

near dam Adult 8.0% 0.78 Initial Fell and leave 17 10.5

1 but have to look at erosion control

first

1.0608 0.6552 0.5616 R 201.55 R 78.62 R 67.39

Stevens Port

Jackson

In and around

Plett Park Adult 20.0% 0.78 Initial Cut stump 25 15

2 but have to look at erosion

3.9 2.34 1.404 R 741.00 R 280.80 R 168.48


parking area

control first

Black Wattle

Adult 12.0% 0.78 Initial Cut stump 25 15

3 but have to look at erosion control

first

2.34 1.404 0.8424 R 444.60 R 168.48 R 101.09

20 76/443 Rooikrans

In wind-pruned fynbos area

around hotel


Black wattle

In wind-pruned fynbos area

around hotel

Adult 5.0% 0.96 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 1 1.2 0.72 0.432 R 228.00 R 86.40 R 51.84

Port

Jackson Adult 2.0% 0.96 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 2 0.48 0.288 0.1728 R 91.20 R 34.56 R 20.74

21 76/443 Rooikrans

Along coast - if

under biocontrol,

leave


Pine Scattered Mixed 1.0% 8.62 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 1.4654 0.9051 0.7758 R 278.43 R 108.61 R 93.10

22 76/443 Rooikrans

Scattered, some

under bio-control


Port

Jackson In and

around vlei Adult 5.0% 13.76 Initial Cut stump 25 15 1 17.2 10.32 6.192 R 3,268.00

R 1,238.40

R 743.04

Black Wattle

In veld Adult 2.0% 13.76 Initial Cut stump 25 15 1 6.88 4.128 2.4768 R 1,307.20 R 495.36 R 297.22

Pine Marching in

over hill Mixed 7.0% 13.76 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 16.3744 10.1136 8.6688 R 3,111.14

R 1,213.63

R 1,040.26

23 76/443 Rooikrans Near road and in-field

Adult 4.0% 29.82 Initial Fell and leave 17 10.5 2 20.2776 12.5244 10.7352 R 3,852.74 R

1,502.93 R

1,288.22

Port

Jackson Near road and in-field

Adult 11.0% 29.82 Initial Cut stump 25 15 2 82.005 49.203 29.5218 R

15,580.95 R

5,904.36 R

3,542.62

Black Wattle

Near road and in-field


2,683.80 R

1,610.28

Pine Large forests

Mixed 14.0% 29.82 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 70.9716 43.8354 37.5732 R

13,484.60 R

5,260.25 R

4,508.78

Eucalyptus On border Adult 2.0% 29.82 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 14.91 8.946 5.3676 R 2,832.90 R

1,073.52 R 644.11


24 76/443 Pine Adult 8.0% 7.13 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 9.6968 5.9892 5.1336 R 1,842.39 R 718.70 R 616.03

Eucalyptus Adult 30.0% 7.13 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 53.475 32.085 19.251 R

10,160.25 R

3,850.20 R

2,310.12

Port


Rooikrans Adult 8.0% 7.13 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 9.6968 5.9892 5.1336 R 1,842.39 R 718.70 R 616.03

Australian

Myrtle Mixed 8.0% 7.13 Initial Fell 25 15 2 14.26 8.556 5.1336 R 2,709.40

R 1,026.72

R 616.03

25 76/443 Pine Mixed 8.0% 5.20 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 7.072 4.368 3.744 R 1,343.68 R 524.16 R 449.28

Eucalyptus Adult 10.0% 5.20 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 13 7.8 4.68 R 2,470.00 R 936.00 R 561.60

Port



Australian

Myrtle

On both sides of

road leading to dump site

Mixed 6.0% 5.20 Initial Fell 25 15 2 7.8 4.68 2.808 R 1,482.00 R 561.60 R 336.96

Black Wattle

Especially near dump

site Adult 5.0% 5.20 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 3 6.5 3.9 2.34 R 1,235.00 R 468.00 R 280.80

26 76/443 Port

Jackson Adult 15.0% 4.42 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 3 16.575 9.945 5.967 R 3,149.25

R 1,193.40

R 716.04

Black Adult 5.0% 4.42 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 3 5.525 3.315 1.989 R 1,049.75 R 397.80 R 238.68


Wattle

Eucalyptus Adult 15.0% 4.42 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 3 16.575 9.945 5.967 R 3,149.25 R

1,193.40 R 716.04



Blackwood Adult 5.0% 4.42 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 3 5.525 3.315 1.989 R 1,049.75 R 397.80 R 238.68


27 45/440 Pine Adult 8.0% 21.30 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 28.968 17.892 15.336 R 5,503.92 R

2,147.04 R

1,840.32

Rooikrans Adult 6.0% 21.30 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 21.726 13.419 11.502 R 4,127.94 R

1,610.28 R

1,380.24


28 45/440 Pine Indigenous

gorge Adult 15.0% 10.08 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 25.704 15.876 13.608 R 4,883.76

R 1,905.12

R 1,632.96

29 45/440 PIne Adult 35.0% 1.97 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 11.7215 7.23975 6.2055 R 2,227.09 R 868.77 R 744.66



Black Wattle


30 Pine Adult 18.0% 7.99 Initial Fell 17 10.5

1 - prevailing

winds carrying seed into

indigenous gorge

24.4494 15.1011 12.9438 R 4,645.39 R

1,812.13 R

1,553.26

Rooikrans Adult 15.0% 7.99 Initial Fell 17 10.5

2 - prevailing


indigenous gorge

20.3745 12.58425 10.7865 R 3,871.16 R

1,510.11 R

1,294.38

Hakea Adult 4.0% 7.99 Initial Fell 17 10.5

3 - prevailing


indigenous gorge

5.4332 3.3558 2.8764 R 1,032.31 R 402.70 R 345.17

31 45/440 Pine Lower

plateau Mixed 4.0% 27.57 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 18.7476 11.5794 9.9252 R 3,562.04

R 1,389.53

R 1,191.02

Rooikrans

Lower plateau and on cliffs. If under

biocontrol, leave



2,549.23 R

2,185.06

Rooikrans Under bio-

control Adult 2.0% 8.43 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 2.8662 1.7703 1.5174 R 544.58 R 212.44 R 182.09

Australian

Myrtle Adult 5.0% 8.43 Initial Fell 25 15 1 10.5375 6.3225 3.7935 R 2,002.13 R 758.70 R 455.22

33 45/440 Hakea Large

forest of hakea


1,920.74 R

1,646.35


Port

Jackson Adult 2.0% 4.12 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 1 2.06 1.236 0.7416 R 391.40 R 148.32 R 88.99




35 26/440 PIne Adult 25.0% 4.95 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 21.0375 12.99375 11.1375 R 3,997.13 R

1,559.25 R

1,336.50







Black Wattle



Rooikrans Adult 20.0% Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 0 0 0 R 0.00 R 0.00 R 0.00


2,489.26 R

2,133.65

Black Wattle

Adult 18.0% 8.98 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 2 40.41 24.246 14.5476 R 7,677.90 R

2,909.52 R

1,745.71

Australian

Myrtle Adult 20.0% 8.98 Initial Fell 25 15 1 44.9 26.94 16.164 R 8,531.00

R 3,232.80

R 1,939.68



R

36,845.84 R

29,519.75

39 5/432 Hakea

Scattered, some

under bio-control


Pine All over Mixed 15.0% 3.53 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 9.0015 5.55975 4.7655 R 1,710.29 R 667.17 R 571.86

Rooikrans

Some with biocontrol

but not effective as

yet


Black Wattle


Port

Jackson

In burnt area and

elsewhere Mixed 18.0% 3.53 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 3 15.885 9.531 5.7186 R 3,018.15

R 1,143.72

R 686.23

Eucalyptus All over Mixed 12.0% 3.53 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 3 10.59 6.354 3.8124 R 2,012.10 R 762.48 R 457.49

Australian

Myrtle More on

road verge Adult 10.0% 3.53 Initial Fell 25 15 3 8.825 5.295 3.177 R 1,676.75 R 635.40 R 381.24

Blackwood On road

verge and infield


40 5/432 Pine All over Mixed 15.0% 15.65 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 39.9075 24.64875 21.1275 R 7,582.43 R

2,957.85 R

2,535.30

Port

Jackson

In kloof just west of house


1,408.50 R 845.10

Black Wattle

In kloof just west of house


1,971.90 R

1,183.14


Blackwood In kloof just

west of house


41 5/432 Pine Mixed 20.0% 7.20 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 24.48 15.12 12.96 R 4,651.20 R

1,814.40 R

1,555.20


42 29/432 PIne

Bordering Kranshoek

and Leggatt at

top of gorge


Black Wattle

Bordering Kranshoek

and Leggatt at

top of gorge


Port

Jackson

Bordering Kranshoek

and Leggatt at

top of gorge


Eucalyptus Bordering Kranshoek

and Adult 5.0% 1.48 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 1 1.85 1.11 0.666 R 351.50 R 133.20 R 79.92


Leggatt at top of gorge

43 29/432 PIne

Bordering Kranshoek

and extending

south


1,040.76 R 892.08

Black Wattle

Bordering Kranshoek

and extending

south


Rooikrans

Bordering Kranshoek

and extending

south

Adult 10.0% 2.36 Initial Cut Stump 17 10.5 2 4.012 2.478 2.124 R 762.28 R 297.36 R 254.88

Australian

Myrtle

Bordering Kranshoek

and extending

south

Adult 7.0% 2.36 Initial Fell 25 15 2 4.13 2.478 1.4868 R 784.70 R 297.36 R 178.42

44 29/432 Pine In fynbos

area Mixed 10.0% 8.96 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 15.232 9.408 8.064 R 2,894.08

R 1,128.96

R 967.68

45 4/432 Rooikrans

In recovering

burnt section and on northern

portion


1,070.50 R 917.57

Black Wattle

On nothern portion of

plot Adult 2.0% 7.08 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 1 3.54 2.124 1.2744 R 672.60 R 254.88 R 152.93

Australian

Myrtle

On nothern portion of

plot Mixed 5.0% 7.08 Initial Fell 25 15 1 8.85 5.31 3.186 R 1,681.50 R 637.20 R 382.32

Pine

On nothern portion of plot and

scattered in field


46 4/432 Pine

Near water works and

then scattered in

field

Mixed 4.0% 15.87 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 10.7916 6.6654 5.7132 R 2,050.40 R 799.85 R 685.58

Rooikrans Scattered

in field Adult 2.0% 15.87 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 5.3958 3.3327 2.8566 R 1,025.20 R 399.92 R 342.79

Black Wattle

Northern portion of

plot Adult 3.0% 15.87 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 1 11.9025 7.1415 4.2849 R 2,261.48 R 856.98 R 514.19

Australian

Myrtle

Northern portion of

plot Mixed 4.0% 15.87 Initial Fell 25 15 1 15.87 9.522 R 3,015.30

R 1,142.64

R 0.00

Hakea Northern portion of

plot Mixed 2.0% 15.87 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 5.3958 3.3327 R 1,025.20 R 399.92 R 0.00

47 4/432 Eucalyptus Adult 25.0% 13.51 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 84.4375 50.6625 30.3975 R

16,043.13 R

6,079.50 R

3,647.70

Pine Adult 14.0% 13.51 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 32.1538 19.8597 17.0226 R 6,109.22 R

2,383.16 R

2,042.71

Hakea Some under

biocontrol Adult 8.0% 13.51 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 18.3736 11.3484 9.7272 R 3,490.98

R 1,361.81

R 1,167.26


Australian

Myrtle Bordering

dam Mixed 1.0% 13.51 Initial Fell 25 15 1 3.3775 2.0265 1.2159 R 641.73 R 243.18 R 145.91

48 4/432 Pine In old stone

quarry Adult 5.0% 14.69 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 12.4865 7.71225 6.6105 R 2,372.44 R 925.47 R 793.26

Rooikrans In old stone

quarry Adult 3.0% 14.69 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 7.4919 4.62735 3.9663 R 1,423.46 R 555.28 R 475.96


Australian

Myrtle Bordering

dam Adult 1.0% 14.69 Initial Fell 25 15 1 3.6725 2.2035 1.3221 R 697.78 R 264.42 R 158.65


49 4/432 Pine Adult 8.0% 1.76 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 2.3936 1.4784 1.2672 R 454.78 R 177.41 R 152.06

Hakea Young 5.0% 1.76 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 1.496 0.924 0.792 R 284.24 R 110.88 R 95.04

Australian

Myrtle Adult 1.0% 1.76 Initial Fell 25 15 1 0.44 0.264 0.1584 R 83.60 R 31.68 R 19.01

Eucalyptus Adult 10.0% 1.76 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 4.4 2.64 1.584 R 836.00 R 316.80 R 190.08

50 30/432 Clear

Sweep area for

pine, hakea, gums

2.0% 3.41 Follow

up Handpull/fell/cut

stump 15 15 1 1.023 1.023 0.6138 R 194.37 R 122.76 R 73.66

51 30/432 Clear

Sweep area for

pine, hakea, gums

2.0% 17.35 Follow


stump 15 15 1 5.205 5.205 3.123 R 988.95 R 624.60 R 374.76

52 30/432 Clear

Sweep area for

pine, hakea, gums,

rooikrans

Young 2.00% 12.68 Follow


stump 15 15 1 3.804 3.804 2.2824 R 722.76 R 456.48 R 273.89

53 30/432 Pine Small

plantation Adult 6.00% 9.40 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 9.588 5.922 5.076 R 1,821.72 R 710.64 R 609.12

30/432 Black Wattle

In cleared area

Young 20.00% 9.40 Follow

up Handpull 25 15 1 47 28.2 16.92 R 8,930.00

R 3,384.00

R 2,030.40

54 new area

Pine Check up

again Adult 5.00% 13.47 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 11.4495 7.07175 6.0615 R 2,175.41 R 848.61 R 727.38

Black Wattle

Adult 12.0% 13.47 Initial Ringbark 25 15 1 40.41 24.246 14.5476 R 7,677.90 R

2,909.52 R

1,745.71

Blackwood Adult 12.0% 13.47 Initial Frill 25 15 1 40.41 24.246 14.5476 R 7,677.90 R

2,909.52 R

1,745.71

Eucalyptus Leave for

now Adult 28.0% 13.47 Initial Ringbark 25 15 1 94.29 56.574 33.9444

R 17,915.10

R 6,788.88

R 4,073.33

Eucalyptus Young 4.0% 13.47 Initial Cut Stump 25 15 1 13.47 8.082 4.8492 R 2,559.30 R 969.84 R 581.90


Port

Jackson Adult 1.0% 13.47 Initial Cut stump 25 15 1 3.3675 2.0205 1.2123 R 639.83 R 242.46 R 145.48

55 new area

Rooikrans

Leave coastal

ones, clear ones

beside path and in

accessible clumps


Pine

Near plantation,

remove ones close to roads, fell and leave others

Mixed 4.0% 11.57 Initial Fell, de-branch,

scatter 17 10.5 1 7.8676 4.8594 4.1652 R 1,494.84 R 583.13 R 499.82

Hakea Check for Mixed 0.5% 11.57 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 0.98345 0.607425 0.52065 R 186.86 R 72.89 R 62.48

56 new area

Rooikrans

Leave coastal

ones, clear ones along path and in

patches


Pine

Near plantation,

remove ones close to roads, fell and leave others

Mixed 3.0% 17.81 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 9.0831 5.61015 4.8087 R 1,725.79 R 673.22 R 577.04

Hakea Check for Mixed 1.0% 17.81 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 3.0277 1.87005 1.6029 R 575.26 R 224.41 R 192.35


57 RE/432 Pine Adjacent to plantation near gorge


1,425.06 R

1,221.48

Eucalyptus Adjacent to plantation near gorge


1,357.20 R 814.32

Blackwood Adjacent to plantation near gorge


Black Wattle

Adjacent to plantation near gorge


Hakea Adjacent to plantation near gorge


58 RE/432 Rooikrans

Along coast

edges, just above forest

gorge and in-land. Coastal

with biocontrol -

leave


1,134.38 R 972.32


Hakea Mixed 2.0% 30.01 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 10.2034 6.3021 5.4018 R 1,938.65 R 756.25 R 648.22

Blackwood Adult 3.0% 30.01 Initial Cut stump 25 15 1 22.5075 13.5045 8.1027 R 4,276.43 R

1,620.54 R 972.32

59 RE/432 PIne In

indigenous finger


3,505.32 R

3,004.56

Rooikrans In

indigenous finger


60 RE/432 Pine All over Adult 5.0% 27.89 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 23.7065 14.64225 12.5505 R 4,504.24 R

1,757.07 R

1,506.06

Rooikrans

On cliff edge above

indigenous. If under

biocontrol, leave


Hakea

On cliff edges and near edges

of fields


61 RE/432 Pine All over Mixed 2.0% 7.56 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 2.5704 1.5876 1.3608 R 488.38 R 190.51 R 163.30

Rooikrans

On cliff edges, if

under biocontrol,

leave


Hakea All over Mixed 1.0% 7.56 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 1.2852 0.7938 0.6804 R 244.19 R 95.26 R 81.65

62 RE/432 Pine

On gorge edges and going down

into indigenous


Rooikrans Cliff edges Adult 1.0% 10.55 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 1.7935 1.10775 0.9495 R 340.77 R 132.93 R 113.94

Eucalyptus On gorge

edges Adult 10.0% 10.55 Initial Cut stump 25 15 2 26.375 15.825 9.495 R 5,011.25

R 1,899.00

R 1,139.40

Black Wattle

On gorge edges


1,899.00 R

1,139.40

63 RE/432 Pine Adult 38.0% 19.55 Initial Fell 17 10.5 3 126.293 78.0045 66.861 R

23,995.67 R

9,360.54 R

8,023.32

Rooikrans

A lot on cliff edges - if

under biocontrol,



leave

Hakea Mixed 3.0% 19.55 Initial Fell 17 10.5 1 9.9705 6.15825 5.2785 R 1,894.40 R 738.99 R 633.42

Black Wattle

Mixed 2.0% 19.55 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 9.775 5.865 3.519 R 1,857.25 R 703.80 R 422.28

Blackwood Adult 2.0% 19.55 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 9.775 5.865 3.519 R 1,857.25 R 703.80 R 422.28

Eucalyptus Adult 28.0% 19.55 Initial Cut stump 25 15 3 136.85 82.11 49.266 R

26,001.50 R

9,853.20 R

5,911.92

64 RE/432 Pine Adult 20.0% 17.58 Initial Fell 17 10.5 2 59.772 36.918 31.644 R

11,356.68 R

4,430.16 R

3,797.28

Eucalyptus Adult 2.0% 17.58 Initial Cut stump 25 15 2 8.79 5.274 3.1644 R 1,670.10 R 632.88 R 379.73

Rooikrans

On cliff edges - leave if under

biocontrol. Cut and

leave if not.


1,107.54 R 949.32


AUTHORISATION PAGE

This integrated Management Plan for the ROBBERG COASTAL CORRIDOR

PROTECTED ENVIRONMENT was drafted and recommended by

CAPENATURE for the ROBBERG COASTAL CORRIDOR LANDOWNERS

ASSOCIATION.

Supported by:

CAPENATURE CONSERVATION SERVICES: GARDEN ROUTE AREA

RECOMMENDED BY THE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY:

Name of Management Authority:

ROBBERG COASTAL CORRIDOR LANDOWNERS ASSOCIATION

Represented by:

MR. CHRIS VON CHRISTIERSON

Signature Date

ADOPTED BY THE AREA MANAGER: GARDEN ROUTE

Name: MR. MBULELO SIDWELL JACOBS

Signature Date

APPROVED BY THE MINISTER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT,

ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING:

Name: MR. ANTON BREDELL

Signature Date

management plan for the robberg coastal corridor … · 2018-09-05 · robberg coastal corridor...

Documents