DEBE WATER SUPPLY SCHEME UPGRADE IN NKONKOBE LOCAL ... Water Supply... · Amatola Water Private Bag...

DEBE WATER SUPPLY SCHEME UPGRADE IN NKONKOBE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY, EASTERN CAPE

ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Prepared for:

Element Consulting

Engineers 52 Stewart Drive

Baysville East London 5241

South Africa

Prepared for:

Amatola Water Private Bag X3

Vincent 5217

Prepared by:

EOH Coastal & Environmental Services

EAST LONDON 25 Tecoma Street, Berea

East London, 5241 043 726 7809

Also in Grahamstown, Port Elizabeth, Cape Town, JHB & Maputo

www.cesnet.co.za www.eoh.co.za

March 2016

http://www.cesnet.co.za/

Ecological Impact Assessment

EOH Coastal & Environmental Services ii Debe Water Supply Scheme

This Report should be cited as follows: EOH Coastal & Environmental Services, March 2013: Debe Water supply Scheme Upgrade in Nkonkobe Local Municipality, Eastern Cape. Ecological Impact Assessment. EOH CES, East London.

REVISIONS TRACKING TABLE

EOH Coastal and Environmental Services

Report Title: Ecological Impact Assessment for the Debe Water Supply Scheme Report Version: Draft Project Number: 201

Name Responsibility Signature Date

Peter De Lacy Lead Author

March 2016

Dr Cherie-Lynn Mack Reviewer

March 2016

Copyright This document contains intellectual property and propriety information that are protected by

copyright in favour of EOH Coastal & Environmental Services (EOH) and the specialist consultants. The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to any third party without the prior written consent of EOH. The document is prepared exclusively for submission to

Element Consulting, and is subject to all confidentiality, copyright and trade secrets, rules intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services iii Debe Water Supply Scheme

THE PROJECT TEAM Mr Peter De Lacy (Report Writer and Ecological Specialist) Peter is an environmental consultant. He holds a BSc with majors in Environmental Science and Zoology, as well as a BSc (Hons) in Environmental Science both from Rhodes University. Peter‟s honours dissertation looked at the growth rate of indigenous street and garden trees and it has subsequently been published in the South African Journal of Botany. His MSc (Environmental Science) thesis was done through Rhodes University and is currently being examined. It looked at the woody species composition and congregant appreciation of the cultural and spiritual services provided by sacred areas in Grahamstown. He has an academic background in a range of fields including Urban Ecology and Forestry, Rehabilitation and Disturbance Ecology, Statistics, Environmental Impact Assessment, and Community-Based Natural Resource Management. Dr Cherie-Lynn Mack Principal Environmental Consultant, holds a PhD and MSc (with distinction) degrees in Environmental Biotechnology, with a BSc degree in Microbiology and Biochemistry. She has postgraduate research experience in industrial and domestic wastewater treatment technologies, with particular emphasis on the coal and platinum mining industries. Her interests lie in the water sector, with experience in ecological reserve determination and water quality monitoring and analysis. She has experience in water quality analysis and industrial wastewater treatment research.


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services iv Debe Water Supply Scheme

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project description ............................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Alternative water crossing structures ................................................................................ 3

1.2.1 Alternative 1: trenching through the river bed ............................................................. 3 1.2.2 Alternative 2: pipe bridge above ground ..................................................................... 3

1.3 Objectives and Terms of Reference .................................................................................. 3 1.4 Approach .......................................................................................................................... 4 1.5 Assumptions and Limitations ............................................................................................ 4

2 RELEVANT LEGISLATION .................................................................................................... 5 3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................... 6

3.1 Aquatic Assessment ......................................................................................................... 6 3.2 Botanical Assessment ....................................................................................................... 6

3.2.1 Plant species of conservation concern ....................................................................... 6 3.2.2 Sampling protocol ...................................................................................................... 7 3.2.3 Vegetation mapping ................................................................................................... 7 3.2.4 Sensitivity assessment ............................................................................................... 7

3.3 Impact assessment ........................................................................................................... 8 3.3.1 Impact rating methodology ......................................................................................... 9

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT.................................................... 13 4.1 Desktop Investigation ...................................................................................................... 13

4.1.1 The National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (2004) .............................................. 14 4.1.2 National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA), 2011 ............................... 15 4.1.3 Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (ECBCP) .......................................... 17 4.1.4 SANBI Vegetation .................................................................................................... 19 4.1.5 Physical environment ............................................................................................... 20

4.2 Site survey ...................................................................................................................... 23 4.2.1 Water crossing 1(32°51'54.19"S; 27° 1'46.16"E) ...................................................... 23 4.2.2 Water crossing 2 (32°52'18.51"S; 27° 2'54.69"E) ..................................................... 24 4.2.3 Water crossing 3 (32°52'22.57"S; 27° 3'5.96"E) ....................................................... 25 4.2.4 Water crossing 4 (32°53'1.26"S; 27° 5'14.86"E) and 5 (32°53'2.17"S; 27° 5'17.18"E) 25 4.2.5 Water crossing 6 (32°52'18.16"S; 27° 2'19.36"E) ..................................................... 28 4.2.6 Water crossing 7 (33° 1'6.77"S; 27° 1'53.64"E) ........................................................ 29 4.2.7 Vegetation observed onsite ..................................................................................... 30

4.3 Plant species identified ................................................................................................... 33 4.3.1 Plant SCC ................................................................................................................ 34

4.4 Animal species................................................................................................................ 34 4.5 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 34 4.6 Sensitivity assessment .................................................................................................... 35

5 IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT ................................................................. 39 5.1 Identified Impacts ............................................................................................................ 39

6 IMPACT STATEMENT, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................... 47 6.1 Conclusions .................................................................................................................... 47

7 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................... 52 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3: Map of the water crossings associated with the Debe Water Supply Scheme .................................. 2 Figure 3: Map of the water crossings associated with the Debe Water Supply Scheme .................................. 3 Figure 4.1: Quaternary catchment locality. ...................................................................................................... 13 Figure 4.2: A map indicating the NFEPA Rivers in the area in which the Debe water supply scheme is

located (NFEPA, 2011). ........................................................................................................................... 16 The tables below indicate the PES classification of each water crossing, as well as their Ecological

Importance (EI) and Sensitivity and Socio-economic Importance (SI). ................................................... 16 Figure 4.3: The aquatic critical biodiversity areas in which the proposed upgrade of the Debe Water Supply

Scheme will occur (ECBCP, 2007). ......................................................................................................... 18 Figure 4.4: ........................................................................................................................................................ 19


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services v Debe Water Supply Scheme

Figure 4.6: SANBI vegetation map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006), indicating the vegetation type of the study area. ......................................................................................................................................................... 20

Figure 4.7: Topography of the study area. ...................................................................................................... 21 Figure 4.8: A geological map for the area in which the proposed upgrade of the Debe Water Supply Scheme

will occur .................................................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 4.9: Average rainfall and temperature variation over a 12 month period throughout the study area. .. 22 Figure 4.9: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 1. .............................................................................................. 35 Figure 4.10: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 2. ............................................................................................ 36 Figure 4.11: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 3. ............................................................................................ 36 Figure 4.12: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 4 and 5. .................................................................................. 37 Figure 4.13: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 6. ............................................................................................ 38 Figure 4.14: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 7. ............................................................................................ 38

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1: Environmental legislation considered in the preparation of the Ecological Impact Assessment for

the construction of the Debe Water Supply Scheme. ................................................................................ 5 Table 3.1.Criteria used for the analysis of the sensitivity of the area ................................................................ 8 Table 3.2. Significance Rating Table. .............................................................................................................. 10 Table 3.3 Impact Severity Rating. ................................................................................................................... 10 Table 3.4 Overall Significance Rating. ............................................................................................................ 11 Table 5.1: List of all plant species identified onsite. ........................................................................................ 33 Table 4.2: List of all alien invasive plant species identified. ............................................................................ 34 Table 4.3: List of all SCC identified onsite. ...................................................................................................... 34 Table 5.1: Impact identified during the phases of the upgrade to the Debe water Supply Scheme. .............. 39 Table 5.2: Impacts and mitigation measures for the Planning and Design Phase for all alignment alternatives.

................................................................................................................................................................. 42 Table 6.1: Assessment of pre- and post-mitigation impact significance. ........................................................ 47

LIST OF PLATES Plate 4.1: Water crossing 1 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ................................................ 24 Plate 4.2: Water crossing 2 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ................................................ 24 Plate 4.2: Water crossing 2 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ................................................ 25 Plate 4.3: Water crossing 3 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ................................................ 25 Plate 4.4: Water crossing 4 and 5 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ...................................... 26 Plate 4.4: Water crossing 4 and 5 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ...................................... 27 Plate 4.4: Water crossing 4 and 5 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ...................................... 28 Plate 4.5: Water crossing 6 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ................................................ 28 Plate 4.5: Water crossing 6 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ................................................ 29 Plate 4.6: Water crossing 6 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ................................................ 29 Plate 4.6: Water crossing 6 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. ................................................ 30 Plate 4.7: Vegetation observed throughout the site. ....................................................................................... 30 Plate 4.7: Vegetation observed throughout the site. ....................................................................................... 31 Plate 4.7: Vegetation observed throughout the site. ....................................................................................... 32


EOH Coastal & Environmental Services 1 Debe Water Supply Scheme

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project description The existing Debe Water Supply Scheme is situated south of the R63 Provincial Road, between the settlements of Dimbaza and Middeldrift (Figure 1). The scheme is located within the Nkonkobe Local Municipality, which forms part of the Amathole District Municipality (ADM). Amatola Water (AW) is the bulk water services provider within the ADM.

Figure 1: The locality of the Debe Water Supply Scheme AW propose to upgrade the Debe Water Supply Scheme to meet the projected water requirements by upgrading existing infrastructure and constructing additional infrastructure associated with the Water Supply Scheme. The upgrade of the Debe Water Supply Scheme will occur in two phases. Phase 1 being the upgrade of the Debe Water Treatment Works (WTW) to 5ML/day; and Phase 2 being the upgrade of the bulk water conveyance and storage systems (Figure 2), including the installation of telemetry systems and the upgrade of electrical systems associated with the bulk water and conveyance systems. Phase 1 of the Debe Water Supply Scheme Upgrade did not trigger any of the Listed Activities in the 2014 amended EIA regulations. This application for Environmental Authorisation however, pertains to the Second Phase of the proposed upgrade. The upgrade of the water supply pipelines will involve the construction of a new water supply pipeline adjacent to the existing pipelines with a 3-5m gap to minimize the risk of damage to the existing pipelines during construction as damaging these existing pipelines will mean disturbing the water supply for the households during the construction phase. Thereafter the old pipelines will cease to be used but will remain underground. Trenches will be dug the length of each pipeline upgrade. The trenches will be approximately 50cm wide and 100cm deep. The new command reservoirs will be constructed adjacent to the existing reservoirs. The reservoirs will be circular, reinforced concrete water-retaining structures with reinforced concrete roofs. The reservoirs will be designed to a 0.2mm crack width using a 35MPa concrete. Surveys have indicated that seven watercourses will be affected by the proposed upgrade of the bulk water conveyance and storage systems associated with Phase 2 of the Debe Water Supply Scheme.



Figure 2: A map indicating the sections of the Debe Water Supply Scheme that are to be upgraded

Figure 3: Map of the water crossings associated with the Debe Water Supply Scheme



Figure 3: Map of the water crossings associated with the Debe Water Supply Scheme

1.2 Alternative water crossing structures No location alternatives were considered for the pipeline route. The new pipeline will follow existing infrastructure and therefore avoid impacting any new areas unaffected by the original pipeline. 1.2.1 Alternative 1: trenching through the river bed In this case no additional support for the pipeline will be required. The trenching in order to place the pipeline within the riverbed will be detrimental to the surrounding environment in the construction phase. In the case of this alternative, if there is a leak in the pipeline, it would take longer to detect, resulting in the loss of potable water. 1.2.2 Alternative 2: pipe bridge above ground In this case the pipeline will have support structures and will have less impact on the watercourses. This makes the pipeline susceptible to damage and vandalism; however any leakages may be detected and fixed earlier, resulting in less loss of potable water.

1.3 Objectives and Terms of Reference The objectives of the ecological impact assessment were to:

Provide a general description of the status of each water crossing.

Provide a general description of the natural aquatic environment including riparian vegetation in the vicinity of each of the proposed water crossings.

Identify potential impacts of the proposed construction on the aquatic environment.

Provide a general description of the natural vegetation found within the surrounding areas affected by the pipeline.

Identify any plant species of conservation concern.



1.4 Approach The study site and surrounding areas were assessed using a two-phased approach. Firstly, a desktop assessment of the site was conducted in terms of current biodiversity programmes and plans. Further to the above, a site visit was conducted on 29 February 2016. The site visit served to inform potential impacts of the proposed project and how significantly it would impact on the surrounding aquatic and botanical environment.

1.5 Assumptions and Limitations This report is based on currently available information and, as a result, the following limitations and assumptions are implicit:–

The report is based on limited project information.

Descriptions of the natural environments are based on limited fieldwork and available literature.



2 RELEVANT LEGISLATION The following legislation is relevant when considering ecological impacts identified during the Planning and Design, Construction and Operation Phase of the proposed water supply scheme. Table 2.1: Environmental legislation considered in the preparation of the Ecological Impact Assessment for the construction of the Debe Water Supply Scheme.

Title of Environmental legislation, policy or guideline

Implications for the proposed Debe Water Supply Scheme

Constitution Act (108 of 1996)

Obligation to ensure that the proposed development will not result in pollution and ecological degradation; and Obligation to ensure that the proposed development is ecologically sustainable, while demonstrating economic and social development.

National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) (107 of 1998)

The developer must apply NEMA principles, the fair decision-making and conflict management procedures that are provided for in NEMA. The developer must apply the principles of Integrated Environmental Management and consider, investigate and assess the potential impact of existing and planned activities on the environment, socio-economic conditions and the cultural heritage.

National Environment Management: Biodiversity Act (10 of 2004)

The proposed development must conserve endangered ecosystems and protect and promote biodiversity; Must assess the impacts of the proposed development on endangered ecosystems; No protected species may be removed or damaged without a permit; The proposed site must be cleared of alien vegetation using appropriate means.

National Water Act (36 of 1998)

Provides details of measures intended to ensure the comprehensive protection of all water resources, including the water reserve and water quality.



3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

3.1 Aquatic Assessment The aim of this assessment is to identify the aquatic importance and sensitivity of all affected watercourses. The following literature was consulted for the desktop assessment of the river:

The National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (2004)

The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (2007)

The National Freshwater Ecosystems Protected Areas Programme (2011) A site visit was also conducted on 29 February 2016 in order to obtain photographic evidence of the current state of all affected watercourses.

3.2 Botanical Assessment The aim of this assessment is to identify areas of botanical importance and to evaluate these in terms of their conservation importance. In order to do so, the botanical sensitivity of areas is assessed as well as the species of conservation concern (SCC) that may occur in habitats present in the area. It is not the aim of this report to produce a complete list of all plant species occurring in the region, but rather to examine a representative sample. It is however, important to note areas of high sensitivity as well as SCC have been identified as far as possible, either from records from the site or a review of their habitat requirements and whether or not these habitats occur within the site. The aim of this study is to identify areas of high sensitivity and those areas that may be subject to significant impacts from the project. Aspects that would increase impact significance include:

Presence of plant SCC.

Vegetation types (which also constitute faunal habitats) of conservation concern.

Areas of high biodiversity.

The presence of process areas: o Ecological corridors o Complex topographical features (especially steep and rocky slopes that provide niche

habitats for both plants and animals).

3.2.1 Plant species of conservation concern Data on the known distribution and conservation status for each potential plant species of conservation concern has to be obtained in order to develop a list of „Species of Conservation Concern‟ (SCC). These plant species are those that may be impacted significantly by the proposed activity. In general these will be species that are already known to be threatened or at risk, or those that have restricted distributions with a portion (at least 50%) of their known range falling within the study area. Species that are afforded special protection, notably those that are protected by CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna) are also regarded as Species of Concern (see http://www.cites.org/). Efforts to provide assessments of conservation status („red list‟ status) of individual species may provide additional valuable information on Species of Concern (see http://www.iucnredlist.org/). A list of „Species of Possible Concern‟ (SPC) is derived from the species list by examining the relevant literature and databases and eliminating those that have a widespread distribution and which are not covered by CITES regulations or red listed. From this initial list, the status of „Confirmed Species of Concern‟ may be conferred if the species is substantially restricted to the study area based on:

http://www.iucnredlist.org/



Recent literature (last 10 years) that provides comprehensive information on the distribution range;

Examination of herbarium specimens available. Note that all uncertain identifications of species from the study area are regarded as SPC until they can be collected or recollected and studied further. Similarly, all species that are believed to be currently undescribed i.e. new to science – are regarded to be of Possible Concern unless a researcher working on the group in question can confirm that although currently unpublished, the plant is in fact widespread. 3.2.2 Sampling protocol A sampling protocol was developed that would enable the evaluation of the existing interpretations of the vegetation of the study area, to improve on them if necessary, and to add detailed information on the plant communities present. The protocol took into account the amount of time available for the study, the accessibility of different parts of the area, and limitations such as the seasonality of the vegetation. A stratified random sampling approach was adopted, whereby initial assumptions were made about the diversity of vegetation, based on initial reconnaissance visits, previous studies or from aerial photographs and satellite imagery and the area stratified into these basic types. In this way the time available was used much more efficiently than in random sampling, but there is a risk of bias and the eventual results may simply „prove‟ the assumptions. Sample sites within selected areas were chosen at random to ensure adequate coverage of vegetation types or recognised zones within the blocks of the different vegetation types. In general, the stratification of the site was influenced by obvious features of the vegetation, such as the presence of conspicuous species or vegetation structure. These factors may be largely independent of the floristic make-up of the vegetation, and by definition the biological communities present. Sample plots were analysed by determining the dominant species in each plot, as well as any alien invasive species and potential SCC occurring within the plots. Vegetation communities were then described according to the dominant species recorded from each type, and these mapped and assigned a sensitivity score. 3.2.3 Vegetation mapping Vegetation is usually mapped from aerial photographs, satellite images and literature descriptions (e.g. SANBI and ECBCP) and related to data gathered on the ground. 3.2.4 Sensitivity assessment This section of the report explains the approach to determining the ecological sensitivity of the study area on a broad scale. The approach identifies zones of high, medium and low sensitivity according to a system developed by EOH and used in numerous proposed development studies. It must be noted that the sensitivity zonings in this study are based solely on ecological characteristics and social and economic factors have not been taken into consideration. The sensitivity analysis described here is based on 10 criteria which are considered to be of importance in determining ecosystem and landscape sensitivity. The method predominantly involves identifying sensitive vegetation or habitat types, topography and land transformation (Table 3.1). Although very simple, this method of analysis provides a good, yet conservative and precautionary assessment of the ecological sensitivity.



Table 3.1.Criteria used for the analysis of the sensitivity of the area

CRITERIA LOW

SENSITIVITY MODERATE SENSITIVITY

HIGH SENSITIVITY

1 Topography Level or even Undulating; fairly steep slopes

Complex and uneven with steep slopes

2 Vegetation - Extent or habitat type in the region

Extensive Restricted to a particular region / zone

Restricted to a specific locality / site

3 Conservation status of flora or habitats

Well conserved independent of conservation value

Not well conserved, moderate conservation value

Not conserved - has a high conservation value

4 Species of conservation concern - Presence and number

None, although occasional regional endemics

No endangered or vulnerable species, some indeterminate or rare endemics

One or more endangered and vulnerable species, or more than 2 endemics or rare species

5 Habitat fragmentation leading to loss of viable populations

Extensive areas of preferred habitat present elsewhere in region not susceptible to fragmentation

Reasonably extensive areas of preferred habitat elsewhere and habitat susceptible to fragmentation

Limited areas of this habitat, susceptible to fragmentation

6 Biodiversity contribution

Low diversity or species richness

Moderate diversity, and moderately high species richness

High species diversity, complex plant and animal communities

7 Visibility of the site or landscape from other vantage points

Site is hidden or barely visible from any vantage points with the exception in some cases from the sea

Site is visible from some or a few vantage points but is not obtrusive or very conspicuous

Site is visible from many or all angles or vantage points

8 Erosion potential or instability of the region

Very stable and an area not subjected to erosion

Some possibility of erosion or change due to episodic events

Large possibility of erosion, change to the site or destruction due to climatic or other factors

9 Rehabilitation potential of the area or region

Site is easily rehabilitated

There is some degree of difficulty in rehabilitation of the site

Site is difficult to rehabilitate due to the terrain, type of habitat or species required to reintroduce

10

Disturbance due to human habitation or other influences (alien invasive species)

Site is very disturbed or degraded

There is some degree of disturbance of the site

The site is hardly or very slightly impacted upon by human disturbance

3.3 Impact assessment



3.3.1 Impact rating methodology To ensure a direct comparison between various specialist studies, a standard rating scale has been defined and will be used to assess and quantify the identified impacts. This is necessary since impacts have a number of parameters that need to be assessed. Five factors need to be considered when assessing the significance of impacts, namely:

Relationship of the impact to temporal scales - the temporal scale defines the significance of the impact at various time scales, as an indication of the duration of the impact.

Relationship of the impact to spatial scales - the spatial scale defines the physical extent of the impact.

The severity of the impact - the severity/beneficial scale is used in order to scientifically evaluate how severe negative impacts would be, or how beneficial positive impacts would be on a particular affected system (for ecological impacts) or a particular affected party. The severity of impacts can be evaluated with and without mitigation in order to demonstrate how serious the impact is when nothing is done about it. The word „mitigation‟ means not just „compensation‟, but also the ideas of containment and remedy. For beneficial impacts, optimization means anything that can enhance the benefits. However, mitigation or optimization must be practical, technically feasible and economically viable.

The likelihood of the impact occurring - the likelihood of impacts taking place as a result of project actions differs between potential impacts. There is no doubt that some impacts would occur (e.g. loss of vegetation), but other impacts are not as likely to occur (e.g. vehicle accident), and may or may not result from the proposed development. Although some impacts may have a severe effect, the likelihood of them occurring may affect their overall significance.

Each criterion is ranked with scores assigned as presented in Table 3-2 to determine the overall significance of an activity. The criterion is then considered in two categories, viz. effect of the activity and the likelihood of the impact. The total scores recorded for the effect and likelihood are then read off the matrix presented in Table 3-3, to determine the overall significance of the impact. The overall significance is either negative or positive.

The significance scale is an attempt to evaluate the importance of a particular impact. This evaluation needs to be undertaken in the relevant context, as an impact can either be ecological or social, or both. The evaluation of the significance of an impact relies heavily on the values of the person making the judgment. For this reason, impacts of a social nature need to reflect the values of the affected society. Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts affect the significance ranking of an impact because the impact is taken in consideration of both onsite and offsite sources. For example, pollution making its way into a river from a development may be within acceptable national standards. Activities in the surrounding area may also create pollution which does not exceed these standards. However, if both onsite and offsite activities take place simultaneously, the total pollution level may exceed the standards. For this reason it is important to consider impacts in terms of their cumulative nature. Seasonality



Although seasonality is not considered in the ranking of the significance, if may influence the evaluation during various times of year. As seasonality will only influence certain impacts, it will only be considered for these, with management measures being imposed accordingly (i.e. dust suppression measures being implemented during the dry season). Table 3.2. Significance Rating Table.

Temporal Scale (The duration of the impact)

Short term Less than 5 years (many construction phase impacts are of a short duration).

Medium term Between 5 and 20 years.

Long term Between 20 and 40 years (from a human perspective almost permanent).

Permanent Over 40 years or resulting in a permanent and lasting change that will always be there.

Spatial Scale (The area in which any impact will have an affect)

Individual Impacts affect an individual.

Localised Impacts affect a small area of a few hectares in extent. Often only a portion of the project area.

Project Level Impacts affect the entire project area.

Surrounding Areas Impacts that affect the area surrounding the development

Municipal Impacts affect either the Local Municipality, or any towns within them.

Regional Impacts affect the wider district municipality or the province as a whole.

National Impacts affect the entire country.

International/Global Impacts affect other countries or have a global influence.

Will definitely occur Impacts will definitely occur.

Degree of Confidence or Certainty (The confidence with which one has predicted the significance of an impact)

Definite More than 90% sure of a particular fact. Should have substantial supportive data.

Probable Over 70% sure of a particular fact, or of the likelihood of that impact occurring.

Possible Only over 40% sure of a particular fact, or of the likelihood of an impact occurring.

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

Table 3.3 Impact Severity Rating.

Impact severity (The severity of negative impacts or how beneficial positive impacts would be on a particular affected system or affected party)



Very severe Very beneficial

An irreversible and permanent change to the affected system(s) or party(ies) which cannot be mitigated. For example the permanent loss of land.

A permanent and very substantial benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies), with no real alternative to achieving this benefit. For example the vast improvement of sewage effluent quality.

Severe Beneficial

Long term impacts on the affected system(s) or party(ies) that could be mitigated. However, this mitigation would be difficult, expensive or time consuming, or some combination of these. For example, the clearing of forest vegetation.

A long term impact and substantial benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies). Alternative ways of achieving this benefit would be difficult, expensive or time consuming, or some combination of these. For example an increase in the local economy.

Moderately severe Moderately beneficial

Medium to long term impacts on the affected system(s) or party(ies), which could be mitigated. For example constructing the sewage treatment facility where there was vegetation with a low conservation value.

A medium to long term impact of real benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies). Other ways of optimising the beneficial effects are equally difficult, expensive and time consuming (or some combination of these), as achieving them in this way. For example a „slight‟ improvement in sewage effluent quality.

Slight Slightly beneficial

Medium or short term impacts on the affected system(s) or party(ies). Mitigation is very easy, cheap, less time consuming or not necessary. For example a temporary fluctuation in the water table due to water abstraction.

A short to medium term impact and negligible benefit to the affected system(s) or party(ies). Other ways of optimising the beneficial effects are easier, cheaper and quicker, or some combination of these.

No effect Don‟t know/Can‟t know

The system(s) or party(ies) is not affected by the proposed development.

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

Table 3.4 Overall Significance Rating.

Overall Significance (The combination of all the above criteria as an overall significance)

VERY HIGH NEGATIVE VERY BENEFICIAL

These impacts would be considered by society as constituting a major and usually permanent change to the (natural and/or social) environment, and usually result in severe or very severe effects, or beneficial or very beneficial effects. Example: The loss of a species would be viewed by informed society as being of VERY HIGH significance. Example: The establishment of a large amount of infrastructure in a rural area, which previously had very few services, would be regarded by the affected parties as resulting in benefits with VERY HIGH significance.

HIGH NEGATIVE BENEFICIAL

These impacts will usually result in long term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as HIGH will need to be considered by society as constituting an important and usually long term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. Society would probably view these impacts in a serious light. Example: The loss of a diverse vegetation type, which is fairly common elsewhere, would have a significance rating of HIGH over the long term, as the area could be rehabilitated. Example: The change to soil conditions will impact the natural system, and the impact on affected parties (such as people growing crops in the soil) would be HIGH.

MODERATE NEGATIVE SOME BENEFITS

These impacts will usually result in medium to long term effects on the social and/or natural



environment. Impacts rated as MODERATE will need to be considered by society as constituting a fairly important and usually medium term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. These impacts are real but not substantial. Example: The loss of a sparse, open vegetation type of low diversity may be regarded as MODERATELY significant.

LOW NEGATIVE FEW BENEFITS

These impacts will usually result in medium to short term effects on the social and/or natural environment. Impacts rated as LOW will need to be considered by the public and/or the specialist as constituting a fairly unimportant and usually short term change to the (natural and/or social) environment. These impacts are not substantial and are likely to have little real effect. Example: The temporary changes in the water table of a wetland habitat, as these systems are adapted to fluctuating water levels. Example: The increased earning potential of people employed as a result of a development would only result in benefits of LOW significance to people who live some distance away.

NO SIGNIFICANCE

There are no primary or secondary effects at all that are important to scientists or the public. Example: A change to the geology of a particular formation may be regarded as severe from a geological perspective, but is of NO significance in the overall context.

DON‟T KNOW

In certain cases it may not be possible to determine the significance of an impact. For example, the primary or secondary impacts on the social or natural environment given the available information. Example: The effect of a particular development on people‟s psychological perspective of the environment.



4 DESCRIPTION OF THE BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT The study site and surrounding areas were described using a two-phased approach. Firstly, a desktop assessment of the site was conducted in terms of current biodiversity programmes, and plans, followed by a site visit in order to obtain photographic evidence of the current state of the ecological environment.

4.1 Desktop Investigation Published literature on the ecology of the area was referenced in order to describe the study site in the context of the region and the Eastern Cape Province. The following documents/plans are referenced:

The National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (2004)

The Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (2007)

The National Freshwater Ecosystems Protected Areas Programme (2011)

The South African Vegetation Map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006) The project is located within quaternary catchments R10E, R10K and R10J (Figure 4.1). These quaternary catchments fall within primary catchment R which forms part of the Water Management Area 7 (Mzimvubu to Tsitsikamma).

Figure 4.1: Quaternary catchment locality. The major rivers in R10E (from East to West) are the Keiskamma and the Debe River. The major rivers in R10K (from East to West) are the Keiskamma, Qibira, Mdizeni, Mtati and Tamara Rivers. The major rivers in R10J (from East to West) are the Ngqakayi and Keiskamma Rivers. The following tables summarise the location of each of the watercourse crossings associated with the proposed upgrade of the Debe Water Supply Scheme:



Watercourse crossing Location

WC1 Located on the Debe River, approximately 200 meters below the Debe Dam.

WC2 Located on the Mxumbu River, which is a non-perennial tributary of the Debe River, and located approximately 5.3km upstream of the confluence with the Debe River.

WC3 Located on a small non-perennial tributary of the Mxumbu River, approximately 200 meters upstream of the confluence with the Mxumbu River.

WC4 Located along the non-perennial headwater of the Qibira River, approximately 500 meters downstream of the source of the Qibira River.

WC5 Located along a non-perennial tributary of the Qibira River, approximately 200 meters upstream of the confluence with the Qibira River.

WC6 Located on the Mxumbu River, which is a non-perennial tributary of the Debe River, and is located approximately 4km upstream of the confluence with the Debe River

WC7 Located approximately 1.6km upstream on a small non-perennial tributary of the Qibira River. The tributary meets the Qibira River approximately 3km upstream of the confluence of the Qibira River and Keiskamma River.

Watercourse Crossing Catchment Reference Number

WC1 R10E

WC2 R10E

WC3 R10E

WC4 R10K

WC5 R10K

WC6 R10E

WC7 R10K

4.1.1 The National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (2004) The National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment of 2004 is a framework document within which fine-scale conservation planning in identified priority areas should occur. The NSBA integrates terrestrial, river, marine, estuarine and wetland ecosystems using available spatial data, relevant conservation planning software and a series of expert and stakeholder workshops. It is important to note that the NSBA was conducted at a national scale (1:250 000), and thus can only provide a general context for biodiversity assessments at a local level. The major rivers in R10E are classified as Class C: Moderately Modified, major rivers in R10J are classified as Class D: Largely Modified, while major rivers in R10K are also classified as Class D: Largely Modified A second important mapping tool used in the NSBA is conservation status. Conservation status aims at identifying threatened ecosystems, and is based on the classification scheme developed by the IUCN to categorise species. Of the 120 rivers in South Africa that have been classified using this categorisation, 44% are critically endangered, 27 % are endangered, 11 % are vulnerable and 18 % are least threatened.



Critically endangered ecosystems have lost so much of their original natural habitat that ecosystem functioning has broken down and species associated with the ecosystem have been lost or are likely to be lost. Endangered ecosystems have lost significant amounts of their original natural habitat, so their functioning is compromised. Vulnerable ecosystems have lost some of their original natural habitat, and their functioning will be compromised if they continue to lose natural habitat. Least threatened ecosystems have lost only a small proportion of their original natural habitat, and are largely intact (although they may be degraded to varying degrees). The major rivers in R10E, R10J and R10K are classified as vulnerable ecosystems. 4.1.2 National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA), 2011 The National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (NFEPA) project provides strategic spatial priorities for conserving South Africa‟s freshwater ecosystems and supports sustainable use of water resources. These priority areas are called Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas, or „FEPAs‟. FEPAs were identified based on:

Representation of ecosystem types and flagship free-flowing rivers

Maintenance of water supply areas in areas with high water yield

Identification of connected ecosystems

Representation of threatened and near-threatened fish species and associated migration corridors

Preferential identification of FEPAs that overlapped with: o Any free-flowing river o Priority estuaries identified in the National Biodiversity Assessment 2011 o Existing protected areas and focus areas for protected area expansion identified in the

National Protected Area Expansion Strategy. The Keiskamma River and the Debe River in R10E have been classified as fresh water ecosystem priority areas in terms of NFEPA. R10J and R10K do not have any rivers that have been classified in terms of NFEPA. A number of wetlands have been identified within the project area. These wetlands have been classed as “artificial wetlands”. However, these artificial wetlands have not been categorised as priority NFEPA wetlands. The artificial wetlands that are present are dams that are used primarily for watering of livestock. The Debe Dam has also been identified as an artificial wetland and this dam forms the basis of the water supply scheme in the project area.

Various river systems within the project area have also been classified by NFEPA. Figure 4.2 below indicates the Present Ecological State (PES), determined by the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) in 1999, of the NFEPA assessed rivers. The table below provides a description of the NFEPA River PES (1999) Classification system.

Code Description

A Unmodified, natural. Considered intact and able to contribute towards river ecosystem biodiversity targets.

B Largely natural with few modifications. Considered intact and able to contribute towards river ecosystem biodiversity targets

C Moderately modified.

D Largely modified.

E Seriously modified.

F Extremely modified.



The river condition of the Debe River is classified by NFEPA as being moderately modified while the Qibira and Keiskamma Rivers are classified as being largely modified.

Figure 4.2: A map indicating the NFEPA Rivers in the area in which the Debe water supply scheme is located (NFEPA, 2011). The tables below indicate the PES classification of each water crossing

Watercourse crossing

Description

WC1 The Debe River is classified by NFEPA as being a Class C River: Moderately modified.

WC2 The Mxumbu River is a tributary of the Debe River. The Debe River is classified by NFEPA as being a Class C River: Moderately modified.

WC3 The Mxumbu River is a tributary of the Debe River. The Debe River is classified by NFEPA as being a Class C River: Moderately modified.

WC4 The Qibira River is classified by NFEPA as being a Class D River: Largely modified

WC5 The Qibira River is classified by NFEPA as being a Class D River: Largely modified

WC6 The Mxumbu River is a tributary of the Debe River. The Debe River is classified by NFEPA as being a Class C River: Moderately modified

WC7 The Qibira River is classified by NFEPA as being a Class D River: Largely modified. The Qibira River then flows into the Keiskamma River, which is classified by NFEPA as being a Class D river: Largely modified



4.1.3 Eastern Cape Biodiversity Conservation Plan (ECBCP)

The ECBCP is a first attempt at detailed, low-level conservation mapping for land-use planning purposes. Specifically, the aims of ECBCP were to map critical biodiversity areas through a systematic conservation planning process. The current biodiversity plan includes the mapping of priority aquatic features, land-use pressures, critical biodiversity areas and develops guidelines for land and resource-use planning and decision-making. The main outputs of the ECBCP are “critical biodiversity areas” or CBAs, which are allocated the following management categories: 1. CBA 1 = Maintain in a natural state 2. CBA 2 = Maintain in a near-natural state The ECBCP maps CBAs based on extensive biological data and input from key stakeholders. Although ECBCP is mapped at a finer scale than the National Spatial Biodiversity Assessment (Driver et al., 2005) it is still, for the large part, inaccurate and “course”. Therefore it is imperative that the status of the environment, for any proposed development MUST first be verified before the management recommendations associated with the ECBCP are considered (Berliner and Desmet, 2007). It is also important to note that in absence of any other biodiversity plan, the ECBCP has been adopted by the Provincial Department of Economic Development and Environmental Affairs (DEDEAT) as a strategic biodiversity plan for the Eastern Cape. As with terrestrial CBAs, aquatic CBAs are grouped into BLMCs. The ECBCP recommends limits (thresholds) to the total amount of land transformation that should be allowed in an ABLMC 1 and 2, if biodiversity is to be conserved. The goal is to maintain sufficiently large intact and well-connected habitat patches in each sub-quaternary catchment.

ABLMC CBA Code

Description of CBAs ABLMC Transformation Threshold

ABLMC 1 CBA1 Critically important river sub-catchments; Priority primary catchments for E1 estuaries

Less than 10 % of total area of sub-quaternary catchment

ABLMC 2a CBA2 Important sub-catchments, Primary catchment management areas for E2 estuaries.


ABLMC 2b CBA3 Catchments of free flowing rivers important for fish migration


R10E, R10J and R10K are classified as an Estuarine CBA2, with the Keiskamma estuary being of particular importance. (Figure 4.3) The ECBCP shows that a small portion of the project (gravity main 1 and 2 fall into the CBA2 which is classified as “maintain near natural state” (see Figure 4.4). The recommended land use objective for the “maintain natural state” classification is that biodiversity should be maintained in as natural a state as possible and environmental authorisations should support ecosystem integrity while keeping natural habitat intact in wetlands and riparian zones. The land under this objective should also be managed for no biodiversity loss. The recommended land use for this classification is conservation.



Figure 4.3: The aquatic critical biodiversity areas in which the proposed upgrade of the Debe Water Supply Scheme will occur (ECBCP, 2007).



Figure 4.4: The terrestrial critical biodiversity areas in which the proposed upgrade of the Debe Water Supply Scheme will occur (ECBCP, 2007). 4.1.4 SANBI Vegetation The SANBI Vegetation Map (Figure 4.6) indicates that different sections of the proposed Debe Water Supply Scheme upgrade are located in two different vegetation types; namely Bisho Thornveld and Great Fish Thicket (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006). Bhisho Thornveld Bhisho Thornveld is commonly found on undulating to moderately steep slopes and sometimes in shallow, incised drainage valleys. It is open savannah characterised by small trees of Acacia natalitia with short to medium, dense sour under storey. A variety of other woody species also occur, often increasing under conditions of over grazing. This vegetation type is considered least threatened. Great Fish Thicket

Great Fish thicket is prevalent on plateaus and mildly sloping flanks of ridges supporting succulent thicket of low to medium height. This succulent thicket is dominated by the local endemic Euphorbia bothae and well as Euphorbia species intermixed with sclerophyllous bush clumps, groups of succulent shrubs, patches of rhizomatous herbs and accompanied by species rich grass flora. This vegetation type is considered least threatened.



Figure 4.6: SANBI vegetation map (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006), indicating the vegetation type of the study area. 4.1.5 Physical environment Topography The area in which the proposed upgrade to the Debe Water Supply Scheme will occur varies from level ground, undulating hills and steep valleys. Figure 4.7 indicates the topography of the area by mapping the 5m contour lines.



Figure 4.7: Topography of the study area. Geology and Soils The geology of the area in which the proposed upgrade of the Debe Water Supply Scheme will occur is dominated by the Beaufort group, which forms part of the Karoo super group (Figure 4.8). The geology dates back to the Phanerozoic period and consist mainly of mudstone and arenite.



Figure 4.8: A geological map for the area in which the proposed upgrade of the Debe Water Supply Scheme will occur Climate The area surrounding the Debe Water Supply Scheme normally receives about 659mm of rain per year, with most rainfall occurring mainly during summer. Figure 4.9a shows the average rainfall values for the area per month. It receives the lowest rainfall (13mm) in July and the highest (96mm) in March. The monthly distribution of average daily maximum temperatures (Figure 4.9b) shows that the average midday temperatures for the area ranges from 19°C in July to 26.7°C in February. The region is the coldest during July when the mercury drops to 5.5°C on average during the night. Figure 4.9c provides an indication of the monthly variation of average minimum daily temperatures

a

b

c

Figure 4.9: Average rainfall and temperature variation over a 12 month period throughout the study area.



4.2 Site survey 4.2.1 Water crossing 1(32°51'54.19"S; 27° 1'46.16"E) The area surrounding water crossing 1 located on the Debe River, approximately 200 metres below the Debe Dam, is infested with alien vegetation. Although Typha capensis was present onsite, it has been made clear by the Department of Water and Sanitation that this is an artificial water body created by the Debe Dam and it is therefore not a wetland of concern. It was evident from the site survey that development in the area had impacted on the banks of the watercourse (Plate 4.1).

View of the water crossing

Phytolacca octandra Cirsium vulgare

Plate 4.1: Water crossing 1 with the associated vegetation observed onsite.



Typha capensis

Plate 4.1: Water crossing 1 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. 4.2.2 Water crossing 2 (32°52'18.51"S; 27° 2'54.69"E) The Mxumbu River is a tributary of the Debe River. Water crossing 2 on the Mxumbu River contained very little riparian vegetation (Plate 4.2). Indigenous vegetation included O. barberiae and A. Karoo was found surrounding the site while the alien prickly pear was also observed.


Osteospermum barberiae Opuntia sp.




Acacia karoo

Plate 4.2: Water crossing 2 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. 4.2.3 Water crossing 3 (32°52'22.57"S; 27° 3'5.96"E) The Mxumbu River is a tributary of the Debe River. Water crossing 3 contained species such as P. capensis, A. karoo and B. orientalis within the riparian zone.

View of the existing water crossing

Psychotria capensis Bobartia orientalis

Plate 4.3: Water crossing 3 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. 4.2.4 Water crossing 4 (32°53'1.26"S; 27° 5'14.86"E) and 5 (32°53'2.17"S; 27° 5'17.18"E)



Water crossing 4 and 5 were in extremely close proximity located on a tributary of the Qibira River. A number of different plant species were observed onsite (Plate 4.4) within the riparian zone. In both cases the banks on either side of the water crossing were extremely steep and there was evidence of stabilisation through the use of gabions.

View of water crossing 4

Plate 4.4: Water crossing 4 and 5 with the associated vegetation observed onsite.



View of water crossing 5

Sersia incisa Plumbago auriculata

Lantana rugosa Sersia krebsiana

Plate 4.4: Water crossing 4 and 5 with the associated vegetation observed onsite.



Sersia lucida Tecoma capensis

Plate 4.4: Water crossing 4 and 5 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. 4.2.5 Water crossing 6 (32°52'18.16"S; 27° 2'19.36"E) The Mxumbu River is a tributary of the Debe River. During the site survey it was observed that the original pipeline had been removed from the watercourse. The site survey suggested that the section of the tributary that will be affected is moderately modified with indigenous species identified (Plate 4.5).


It was observed that the water pipe and concrete had already been removed from the watercourse.




Bobartia orientalis Acacia karoo

Cotula sericeae

Plate 4.5: Water crossing 6 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. 4.2.6 Water crossing 7 (33° 1'6.77"S; 27° 1'53.64"E) Water crossing 7 was located on a tributary of the Qibira River, which feeds into the Keiskamma River. The site survey indicated that there was a variety of plant species surrounding the proposed water crossing. The area contained very little ground cover.





Ptaeroxylon obliquum Gymnosporia capitata

Aloe ferox Harpephylum caffrum

Plate 4.6: Water crossing 6 with the associated vegetation observed onsite. The desktop assessment suggested the water crossings 4, 5 and 7 occurred within an Aquatic CBA 2 area. NFEPA showed that all the areas affected by the proposed pipeline are in fact largely modified, this was confirmed during the site survey. 4.2.7 Vegetation observed onsite

Ficus burkei Acacia karoo

Plate 4.7: Vegetation observed throughout the site.



Sideroxylon inerm

Searsia krebsiana Euphorbia triangularis

Gymnosporia sp 1 Gymnosporia sp 2

Plate 4.7: Vegetation observed throughout the site.



Gymnosporia sp 3 Gymnosporia sp 4

Plumbago auriculata Azima tetracantha

Cussonia spicata Kalanchoe rotundiflora

Plate 4.7: Vegetation observed throughout the site. The desktop assessment suggested that the majority of the proposed pipeline route would pass through Bhisho Thornveld. The site survey showed that large sections of the proposed site are covered by Acacia karroo. This was the case in the area surrounding the Far Easter Reservoir along with large Ficus burkei trees lining the road. Other species observed throughout these areas are indicated in Plate 4.7. This included one Whit Milkwood (Sideroxylon inerme) in the vicinity of water crossing 4 and 5.



The desktop assessment indicated that Gravity Main 1 occurred within a Terrestrial CBA 2. Ground truthing suggested that the vegetation surrounding Gravity Main 1 contains very little sensitive vegetation as the area had been impacted by human activity. This area is therefore of little ecological concern.

The desktop assessment suggested that Gravity Main 2 falls within the Great Fish Thicket vegetation type. This was ground truthed and a number of different species were observed (Aloe ferox, Cussonia spicata and Ptaeroxylon obliquum). The desktop assessment illustrated that parts of the pipeline fell into CBA 2. This area was therefore found to be ecologically important.

4.3 Plant species identified A list of species observed along the proposed route for the Debe Water Supply Scheme is presented in Table 4.1 below. This species list is not a comprehensive list and certain seasonally flowering species may have gone undetected. Table 5.1: List of all plant species identified onsite.

Plant name Common name Family

Acacia karroo Sweet Thron Fabaceae

Aloe ferox Bitter Aloe Aloaceae

Azima tetracantha Needle-bush Salvadoraceae

Bobartia orientalis Iridaceae

Cirsium vulgare Scottish Thistle Asteraceae

Cotula sericea Silky Cotula Asteraceae

Cussonia spicata Cabbage Tree Araliaceae

Euphorbia triangularis River Euphorbia Euphorbiaceae

Ficus burkei Fig tree Moraceae

Grewia occidentalis Cross-Berry Malvaceae

Gymnosporia capitata Ashen Spikethron Celastraceae

Gymnosporia spp Celastraceae

Harpephyllum caffrum Wild Plum Anacardiaceae

Kalanchoe rotundifolia Common Kalanchoe Crassulaceae

Lantana rugosa Bird's Brandy Verbenaceae

Opuntia sp Prickly Pear Cactaceae

Osteospermum barberiae African Daisy Asteraceae

Phytolacca octandra Dye-Berry Phytolaccaceae

Plumbago auriculata Plumbago Plumbaginaeae

Psychotria capensis Black Bird-Berry Rubiaceae

Ptaeroxylon obliquum Sneezewood Rutaceae

Searsia incisa Rub-Rub Currant Anacardiaceae

Searsia krebsiana Mountain Currant Anacardiaceae

Searsia lucida Waxy Current Anacardiaceae

Sideroxylon inerme White Milkwood Sapotaceae

Tecoma capensis Cape Honeysuckle Bignoniaceae

Typha capensis Bulrush Typhaceae



Below is a list of all alien invasive plant species identified at the proposed Debe Water Supply Scheme. These plants are classified according to the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (Act No. 43 of 1983 or CARA) and the national Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004): Alien and Invasive Species List, 2014. Table 4.2: List of all alien invasive plant species identified.

Plant name Common name CARA classification

status

NEMBA: Alien and Invasive Classification

Cirsium vulgare Scottish Thistle Weed (Category 1) 1b

Opuntia sp Prickly Pear Weed (Category 1) 1b

Phytolacca octandra Dye-Berry 1b

4.3.1 Plant SCC

Potential SCC include all those plants listed in terms of the IUCN, CITES and both national and provincial legislation that may occur in the area of study. The list of SCC includes over 133 species which are listed individually by Victor and Dold (2003), the IUCN red data list, the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), the Forests Act and the Provincial Nature Conservation Ordinance (PNCO) 16 of 1974 for the Eastern Cape. The following plant species appearing on this list was identified onsite. Table 4.3: List of all SCC identified onsite.

SCC Name Conservation status

Aloe ferox CITES Appendix II

Cotula sericea SANBI Red List (Rare),

Euphorbia triangularis CITES #4 II

Sideroxylon inerme DAFF Schedule A

4.4 Animal species No amphibians, reptiles, terrestrial invertebrates, birds and nesting areas as well as large mammals were observed onsite. Small mammals such as rodents, ground squirrels, bats and a variety of insects, amphibians and reptiles are expected to occur on site. There might be some protected animal species associated with river areas.

4.5 Summary The two vegetation types that the project area passes through, Bhisho Thornveld and Great Fish Thicket, are classified by SANBI as least threatened. Although these vegetation types were observed to be moderately transformed, the area that will be affected by the pipeline will be minimal, and has already been impacted during the laying of the existing pipeline. The section of the Debe Water Supply Scheme (Gravity Main 1) that falls within a CBA 2 was found to be transformed by human influences, and was not intact. Gravity Main 2 however was found traverse areas found to be in good condition. The desktop assessment suggested that three of the water crossings (4, 5 and 7) occurred within an Aquatic CBA 2 area. NFEPA showed that all the areas affected by the proposed pipeline are in fact largely modified, this was confirmed during the site survey. Although no animal SCC were observed onsite, there is still a possibility of some SCC being present. This will especially be the case surrounding watercourses.



4.6 Sensitivity assessment A Sensitivity map was developed based on desktop and site information gathered, and was classified into areas of high, low and medium sensitivity.

Areas of high sensitivity include process areas such as watercourses that are important for ecosystem functioning including surface and ground water as well as animal and plant dispersal. All Nature Reserves, Conservancies and Parks are considered as highly sensitive as well as areas with 1 or more endangered species.

Medium sensitivity is given to areas that have moderate species richness and are not hugely impacted by current land use and are not degraded. Medium sensitivity areas contain intermediate or rare endemics. Medium sensitivity is also given to areas that, despite being somewhat degraded, still provide a valuable contribution to biodiversity and ecosystem functioning as they are pristine or semi-pristine and have a relatively high species richness, these areas may also contain SCC. In this case all areas surrounding areas of high sensitivity were granted medium sensitivity as well as areas with an excessively steep gradient.

Low sensitivity is given to areas that are highly impacted by current land use and thus highly degraded and provide limited value to the ecosystem and are not likely to harbour any SCC.

The site for the proposed water crossing has been classified as HIGH sensitivity. The banks of the watercourse have been classified as MEDIUM sensitivity. The area surrounding water crossing 1 has been given LOW sensitivity.

Figure 4.9: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 1. The site for the proposed water crossing 2 has been classified as HIGH sensitivity. The banks of the watercourse have been classified as MEDIUM sensitivity. The area surrounding water crossing 2 has been given LOW sensitivity.

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW



Figure 4.10: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 2. The site for the proposed water crossing has been classified as HIGH sensitivity. The banks of the watercourse have been classified as MEDIUM sensitivity. The area surrounding water crossing 3 has been given LOW sensitivity.

Figure 4.11: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 3.

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW



The site for the proposed water crossing has been classified as HIGH sensitivity. The banks of the watercourse have been classified as MEDIUM sensitivity. The MEDIUM sensitivity has also been put in place due to the presence of SCC (Sideroxylon inerme) observed in the surrounding area. The area surrounding water crossing 4 and 5 has been given LOW sensitivity.

Figure 4.12: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 4 and 5. The site for the proposed water crossing has been classified as HIGH sensitivity. The banks of the watercourse have been classified as MEDIUM sensitivity. SCC (Euphorbia triangularis) were also observed in surrounding area. The area surrounding water crossing 6 has been given LOW sensitivity.

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW



Figure 4.13: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 6. The site for the proposed water crossing has been classified as HIGH sensitivity. The banks of the watercourse have been classified as MEDIUM sensitivity. In the case of water crossing 7 the extended area surrounding the water crossing has been granted MEDIUM sensitivity. This is due to the fact that an SCC (Aloe ferox and Euphorbia triangularis) were observed in surrounding area and that the banks were excessively steep. The area surrounding water crossing 7 has been given LOW sensitivity.

Figure 4.14: Sensitivity Map of water crossing 7.

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW

HIGH

MEDIUM

LOW



5 IMPACT IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT

5.1 Identified Impacts Ecological impacts were identified during the Planning and Design, Construction and Operational Phases of the Debe Water Supply Scheme. These included the consideration of direct, indirect and cumulative impacts that may occur. Table 5.1: Impact identified during the phases of the upgrade to the Debe water Supply Scheme.

Phases Issue Nature of

Impact Description of Impact

Planning & Design

Loss of natural vegetation

Direct

During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of the Debe Water Supply Scheme may lead to unnecessary loss of natural vegetation.

Loss of endangered and protected vegetation

Direct

During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of the Debe Water Supply Scheme may lead to unnecessary loss of endangered and protected vegetation.

Loss of SCC

Direct

During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of the Debe Water Supply Scheme may lead to the loss of identified and unidentified plant and animal SCC.

Damage to the riverine systems

Alternative 1: Trenching through the river bed

Direct

During the planning and design phase, incorrect placement and/or design of pipe covering may result in scouring of the river bed in the areas immediately surrounding the concrete covering.

Direct

During the planning and design phase, inappropriate construction scheduling that does not take into account the seasonal requirements of the aquatic environment, e.g. allowing for unimpeded flood events, could lead to short-term (and potentially long-term) impacts such as excessive sediment mobilization, etc.

Alternative 2: Pipe bridge

Direct

During the planning and design phase, insufficient planning for erosion prevention along the banks of the stream alongside the watercourse crossing structures will result in erosion that may eventually impair the safety of the structure.

Soil erosion Direct

During the planning and design phase inappropriate stormwater design may lead to an increase in surface soil erosion.

Spillages of harmful substances

Direct, Cumulative

During the planning and design phase, inappropriate planning for the storage of hazardous substances such as diesel, tools and equipment used on site could lead to surface and ground water pollution, due to oil leaks, spillage of diesel etc. These hazardous substances could be washed off into nearby drainage lines water resources.





Control of alien plant species

N/A

N/A

Rehabilitation of disturbed areas

N/A

N/A

Construction Loss of natural vegetation

Direct During the construction phase the uncontrolled clearing of the development area will result in the unnecessary loss of natural vegetation.


Direct

During the construction phase the uncontrolled clearing of vegetation may lead to the unnecessary loss of endangered and protected vegetation.

Loss of SCC Direct, indirect, cumulative

During the construction phase the uncontrolled clearing of the development area may lead to the unnecessary loss of identified and unidentified plant and animal SCC.


Alternative 1: Trenching through the river bed

Direct, indirect, cumulative

During the construction phase, underlying soil structure may result in a need to anchor pipeline infrastructure using concrete pedestals. Batching of concrete within 32 meters of watercourses could result in contamination of the surrounding surface water environment.


During the construction phase, coffer dams have the potential to permanently change the flow dynamics in a river, exacerbating scour and enhancing sedimentation. Both of these changes can impact negatively on the aquatic ecosystem.


Inappropriate disturbance and further modification to the streams during construction of upgraded stream crossings at various (7) locations may lead to significant changes to the hydrology of the watercourse systems.


Soil erosion will decrease the quality of the aquatic habitat downstream of the construction activities by silting over exposed rocks, and decreasing the clarity and oxygen saturation of the water.


During the construction phase, indiscriminate removal of riparian vegetation at the site of the crossings may lead to disturbance of the aquatic ecosystem.

Alternative 2: Pipe bridge

Direct

During the construction phase, indiscriminate removal of riparian vegetation at the site of the bridge may lead to disturbance of the aquatic ecosystem.

Direct Inappropriate disturbance and further modification to the streams during construction of upgraded





stream crossings at various (7) locations may lead to significant changes to the hydrology of the watercourse systems.

Soil erosion Direct, indirect, cumulative

During the construction phase the extensive clearing of ground cover and the inappropriate routing of stormwater may lead to soil erosion.

Spillages of harmful substances Direct

During the construction phase, hazardous substances such as cement, tar/bitumen and diesel/oil all have the potential to contaminate the surrounding environment (soil, surface/groundwater, etc.) if not managed properly.

Control of alien plant species Direct,

indirect

During the construction phase the clearing of existing natural vegetation creates „open‟ habitats that are susceptible to the establishment of undesirable alien plant species in areas that are typically very difficult to eradicate and may pose a threat to natural ecosystems.



During the construction phase poor rehabilitation of disturbed areas may lead to the permanent degradation of ecosystems as well as allow invading alien vegetation species to expand and potentially displace indigenous species.

Operational Loss of natural vegetation

N/A N/A


N/A N/A

Loss of SCC N/A N/A


N/A N/A

N/A N/A

Soil erosion N/A N/A


N/A N/A



During the operational phase the lack of an effective alien vegetation management plan may lead to the large scale alien plant invasion.



During the operational phase the failure to adequately rehabilitate areas post-construction could lead to a large scale alien plant invasion and potential displacement of indigenous vegetation.



Table 5.2: Impacts and mitigation measures for the Planning and Design Phase for all alignment alternatives.

PLANNING AND DESIGN PHASE

Pre mitigation Post mitigation

Nature of impact Impact Description Temporal Spatial Likelihood Severity Significance Mitigation Significance

LOSS OF NATURAL VEGETATION

DIRECT During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of the Debe Water Supply Scheme may lead to unnecessary loss of sensitive vegetation.

Short-term Localised Definite Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Pipeline design must avoid sensitive environments where feasible. Take note of the sensitivity maps contained in this report.

LOW NEGATIVE

LOSS OF ENDANGERED AND PROTECTED VEGETATION

DIRECT During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of the Debe Water Supply Scheme may lead to unnecessary loss of endangered and protected vegetation.

Permanent Localised Definite Moderately severe

HIGH NEGATIVE

Pipeline design must avoid endangered and protected vegetation where feasible. Take note of the sensitivity maps contained in this report. In particular, groundtruth areas where endangered and protected species have been identified.

LOW NEGATIVE

LOSS OF SCC

DIRECT During the planning and design phase the inappropriate design of the Debe Water Supply Scheme may lead to the loss of identified and unidentified plant and animal SCC.

Permanent Localised Definite Moderately Severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Pipeline design must avoid areas where plant and animal SCC have been identified.

Permits must be obtained from the relevant departments in order to remove plant and animal SCC from the development area prior to construction.

LOW NEGATIVE

DAMAGE TO RIVERINE SYSTEMS

ALTERNATIVE 1: TRENCH THROUGH THE RIVER BED

CHANGES TO FLUVIAL GEOMORPHOLOGY

DIRECT During the planning and design phase, design of pipe casing may result in scouring of the river bed in the areas immediately surrounding the concrete covering

Long-term Localised Possible Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Ensure that scour countermeasures are incorporated into the design of the watercourse crossing structures.

Trenches should go through bedrock if possible.

LOW NEGATIVE

DIRECT During the planning and design phase, inappropriate construction scheduling that does not take into account the seasonal requirements of the aquatic environment, e.g. allowing for unimpeded flood events, could lead to short-term (and potentially long-term) impacts such as excessive sediment mobilization, etc.

Short Term Regional Possible Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Wherever possible, construction activities must be undertaken during the driest part of the year to minimize downstream sedimentation due to excavation, etc.

When not possible, suitable stream diversions structures must be used to ensure that rivers/streams are not negatively impacted by construction activity.

LOW NEGATIVE

ALTERNATIVE 2: PIPE BRIDGE

CHANGES TO FLUVIAL GEOMORPHOLOGY

DIRECT During the planning and design phase, insufficient planning for erosion prevention along the banks of the stream alongside the watercourse crossing structures will result in erosion that may eventually impair the safety of the structure.

Long-term Localised and

downstream

Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE

Adequate bank stabilization measures must be incorporated

into the design of the watercourse crossing structures

MODERATE NEGATIVE

SOIL EROSION

DIRECT During the planning and design phase inappropriate stormwater design may lead to an increase in surface soil erosion.

Medium-Term

Localised Possible Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Appropriate stormwater structures must be designed and implemented.

All areas of development situated on slopes must incorporate

stormwater diversions.

LOW NEGATIVE

SPILLAGES OF HARMFUL SUBSTANCES

DIRECT, CUMULATIVE During the planning and design phase, inappropriate planning for the storage of hazardous substances such as diesel, tools

Short Term Localized/ Nearby river and water

Possible Moderate MODERATE NEGATIVE

All hazardous substances such as paints, diesel and cement must be stored in a bunded area with impermeable surface beneath them.

LOW NEGATIVE



PLANNING AND DESIGN PHASE


Nature of impact Impact Description Temporal Spatial Likelihood Severity Significance Mitigation Significance

and equipment used on site could lead to surface and ground water pollution, due to oil leaks, spillage of diesel etc. These hazardous substances could be washed off into nearby drainage lines water resources.

systems

CONSTRUCTION PHASE


Nature of Impact

Impact Description Temporal Spatial Likelihood Severity Significance Mitigation Significance

LOSS OF NATURAL VEGETATION

DIRECT During the construction phase the uncontrolled clearing of the development area will result in the unnecessary loss of natural vegetation.

Long-term Localised Probable Moderately Severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Construction activities must be limited to the designated footprint of the upgrade route i.e. construction materials, vehicular storage, construction camps etc., should occur in an area that has already been disturbed or of low sensitivity and is at least 50 metres (but preferably 100 meters) from a watercourse.

The construction footprint must be surveyed and demarcated prior to construction commencing.

The surveyed construction footprint must be approved by an ECO to ensure that natural vegetation is not unnecessarily damaged.

Where vegetation has been cleared, site rehabilitation in terms of soil stabilisation and re-vegetation must be undertaken.

LOW NEGATIVE

LOSS OF ENDANGERED AND PROTECTED VEGETATION

DIRECT During the construction phase the uncontrolled clearing of vegetation may lead to the unnecessary loss of endangered and protected vegetation.

Long term Localised Possible Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Should protected vegetation be relocated, the relevant permits must be obtained from the competent authority.

All sensitive areas must be demarcated and signs erected to ensure these areas are maintained. This must be done with the assistance of the ECO.

A Plant Rescue & Protection Plan must be implemented and managed by a vegetation specialist familiar with the site in consultation with the appointed ECO.

All SCC impacted by construction must be conserved and rescued.

All rescued SCC must be replanted within the surrounding areas.

LOW NEGATIVE

LOSS OF SCC

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

During the construction phase the uncontrolled clearing of the development area may lead to the unnecessary loss of identified and unidentified plant and animal SCC.

Long term Study area Possible Low LOW NEGATIVE The development area must be surveyed prior to topsoil removal in order to locate and capture any SCC and relocate them.

The contractor‟s workers must not poach or trap wild animals.

The contractor‟s workers must not harvest natural vegetation.

LOW NEGATIVE

DAMAGE TO RIVERINE SYSTEMS

ALTERNATIVE 1: TRENCHED IN RIVER BED

DIRECT/ INDIRECT

During the construction phase, underlying soil structure may result in a need to anchor pipeline infrastructure using concrete pedestals. Batching of concrete within 32 meters of watercourses could result in contamination of the surrounding surface

Short term Surrounding areas

Possible Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

All concrete must be mixed on a suitably bunded temporary area.

No concrete will be mixed within 32m of a watercourse.

Contaminated water from concrete mixing should be collected and disposed of according to the instructions of the ECO

A serviced fire powder extinguisher should be available on site

LOW NEGATIVE



CONSTRUCTION PHASE


Nature of Impact


water environment. in the event that wet concrete is accidentally spilled into the river.

DIRECT/ CUMULATIV

E

During the construction phase, coffer dams have to potential to permanently change the flow dynamics in a river, exacerbating scour and enhancing sedimentation. Both of these changes can impact negatively on the aquatic ecosystem.

Medium Term

Localised and

downstream

Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE Coffer dams must not be left in place for longer than 30 days.

All work within the watercourses should be completed during the dry season, when flows are at their lowest.

Water in the watercourses must be allowed to pass downstream of the construction. If necessary this should be achieved via a temporary diversion – this should not be in place for more than 30 days.

MODERATE NEGATIVE

DIRECT/ INDIRECT/

CUMULATIVE


Medium term

Surrounding areas

Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE Construction of any watercourse crossings must comply with an EMPr approved by the Department of Water and Sanitation and by the Department of Environmental Affairs

Use of ecologically acceptable temporary diversion methods must be made if necessary.

DWS must approve plans for water crossings, ECO must sign off on proper completion according to these plans.

MODERATE NEGATIVE

CUMULATIVE

Soil erosion will decrease the quality of the aquatic habitat downstream of the construction activities by silting over exposed rocks, and decreasing the clarity and oxygen saturation of the water.

Short Term Project area

Possible Severe MODERATE NEGATIVE

Construction activities must be demarcated and vegetation clearing and top soil removal (if required) limited to these areas.

Ensure that construction sites are stabilised and soil is prevented from unnecessary exposure.

Implement vegetation re-establishment as part of a detailed Rehabilitation Plan.

LOW NEGATIVE

DIRECT/ CUMULATIV

E

During the construction phase, indiscriminate removal of riparian vegetation at the site of the crossings may lead to disturbance of the aquatic ecosystem.

Long Term Localised Possible Moderately Severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Removal of riparian vegetation should take place under the supervision of the ECO

Removal of the alien invasive vegetation should be prioritised.

LOW NEGATIVE

ALTERNATIVE 2: PIPE BRIDGES

DIRECT/ CUMULATIV

E

During the construction phase, indiscriminate removal of riparian vegetation at the site of the bridge may lead to disturbance of the aquatic ecosystem.

Long Term Localised Possible Moderately Severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Removal of riparian vegetation should take place under the supervision of the ECO within the site camp

Removal of the alien invasive vegetation should be prioritised.

LOW NEGATIVE

DIRECT/ INDIRECT/

CUMULATIVE


Medium term

Surrounding areas

Possible Severe HIGH NEGATIVE Construction of any watercourse crossings must comply with an EMPr approved by the Department of Water and Sanitation and by the Department of Environmental Affairs



MODERATE NEGATIVE

SOIL EROSION

DIRECT, INDIRECT,

CUMULATIVE

During the construction phase the extensive clearing of ground cover and the inappropriate routing of stormwater may lead to soil erosion.

Medium term

Study area Definite Moderately Severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

The contractor must develop and implement an Erosion Action Plan.

Wind screening and stormwater control must be undertaken to prevent soil loss from the site.

All erosion control mechanisms must be regularly maintained.

Vegetation must be retained where possible to avoid soil erosion.

Construction must be phased in order to minimise the area of exposed soil at any one time.

Re-vegetation of disturbed surfaces must occur immediately

LOW NEGATIVE



CONSTRUCTION PHASE


Nature of Impact


after the construction activities are completed.

Disturbed areas of natural vegetation as well as cut and fills must be rehabilitated immediately to prevent further soil erosion.

SPILLAGE OF HARMFUL SUBSTANCES

DIRECT During the construction phase, hazardous substances such as cement, tar/bitumen and diesel/oil all have the potential to contaminate the surrounding environment (soil, surface/groundwater, etc.) if not managed properly.

Short Term Localised Possible Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

Hazardous Chemical Substances Regulations promulgated in terms of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 and the SABS Code of Practise must be adhered to. This applies to solvents and other chemicals possibly used in the construction process.

Oil trays must be placed under parked machinery to avoid soil contamination.

CONCRETE BATCHING

Concrete should not be mixed directly on the ground, or during rainfall events when the potential for transport to the stormwater system is the greatest (as per the EMPr).

No concrete must be mixed within 32 meters of any watercourses and can only be mixed in the area demarcated for this purpose and on an impermeable substratum.

A serviced fire extinguisher should be available on site in the event that wet concrete is accidentally spilled into the river.

All areas affected during the Construction Phase should be rehabilitated.

HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL SPILLS

The individual responsible for or who discovers the spill must report the incident to the Project Coordinator, ECO and or Contractor as soon as reasonably possible.

The problem must be assessed and the necessary actions required will be undertaken.

The immediate response must be to contain the spill.

Depending on the nature and extent of the spill, contaminated soil must be either excavated or treated on-site.

The ECO must determine the precise method of treatment of polluted soil.

This could involve the application of soil absorbent materials or oil-digestive powders to the contaminated soil.

If a spill occurs on an impermeable surface such as cement or concrete, the surface spill must be contained using oil absorbent materials.

Contaminated remediation materials must be carefully removed from the area of the spill so as to prevent further release of petrochemicals to the environment, and stored in adequate containers until appropriate disposal.

HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL STORAGE

Staff that will be handling hazardous materials must be trained to do so.

All hazardous chemicals must be properly stored in a secure, bunded and contained area.

LOW NEGATIVE



CONSTRUCTION PHASE


Nature of Impact


CONTROL OF ALIEN PLANT SPECIES

DIRECT, INDIRECT

During the construction phase the clearing of existing natural vegetation creates „open‟ habitats that are susceptible to the establishment of undesirable alien plant species in areas that are typically very difficult to eradicate and may pose a threat to natural ecosystems.

Long term Project level

Probable Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

A Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the construction phase to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species.

Alien plants must be removed from the site through appropriate methods such as hand pulling, application of chemicals, cutting etc. This must be done under the supervision of the ECO.

LOW NEGATIVE

REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED AREAS

DIRECT, INDIRECT

During the construction phase poor rehabilitation of disturbed areas may lead to the permanent degradation of ecosystems as well as allow invading alien vegetation species to expand and potentially displace indigenous species.


Probable Moderately severe

MODERATE NEGATIVE

A Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the construction phase.

LOW NEGATIVE

OPERATIONAL PHASE


Nature of Impact Impact Description Temporal Spatial Likelihoo

d Severity Significance Mitigation Significance

CONTROL OF ALIEN PLANT SPECIES

DIRECT, INDIRECT, CUMULATIVE

During the operational phase the lack of an effective alien vegetation management plan may lead to the large scale alien plant invasion.



MODERATE NEGATIVE


LOW NEGATIVE

REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED AREAS

DIRECT, INDIRECT, CUMULATIVE

During the operational phase the failure to adequately rehabilitate areas post-construction could lead to a large scale alien plant invasion and potential displacement of indigenous vegetation.



MODERATE NEGATIVE

A Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan must be implemented during operational phase.

LOW NEGATIVE



6 IMPACT STATEMENT, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusions AW proposes to upgrade the Debe Water Supply Scheme to meet the projected water requirements for the water users in the area by upgrading existing infrastructure and constructing additional infrastructure associated with the Water Supply Scheme. The upgrade of the Debe Water Supply Scheme will occur in two phases. Phase 1 being the upgrade of the Debe Water Treatment Works (WTW) to 5ML/day; and Phase 2 being the upgrade of the bulk water conveyance and storage systems (Figure 2), including the installation of telemetry systems and the upgrade of electrical systems associated with the bulk water and conveyance systems. Phase 1 of the Debe Water Supply Scheme Upgrade did not trigger any of the Listed Activities in the 2014 amended EIA regulations. An ecological impact assessment was commissioned in order to assess the ecological importance of the aquatic and botanical environment over which the Debe Water Scheme will occur. This report forms part of the greater EIA process. A comparison of impacts in terms of the number of impacts per phase is illustrated in Table 6.1 below. HIGH pre-mitigation impacts relate to hydrology and stormwater management. The majority of impacts can be mitigated using the recommended mitigation measures to LOW/MODERATE post-mitigation impacts. Table 6.1: Assessment of pre- and post-mitigation impact significance.

PRE-MITIGATION POST-MITIGATION

LOW MOD HIGH VERY HIGH

LOW MOD HIGH VERY HIGH

Planning and Design

0 6 2 0 7 1 0 0

Construction 1 10 3 0 11 3 0 0

Operation 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0

TOTAL 1 18 5 0 20 4 0 0

Recommendations for the Debe Water Supply Scheme All the mitigation measures provided below are to be implemented in the Planning and Design, Construction and Operation Phases of the upgrade of the proposed Debe Water Supply Scheme.

6.1.1 Planning and design phase Loss of natural vegetation

Pipeline design must avoid sensitive environments where feasible.



Loss of endangered and protection vegetation Pipeline design must avoid endangered and protected vegetation where feasible. LOSS OF SCC

Pipeline design must avoid areas where plant and animal SCC have been identified.

Permits must be obtained from the relevant departments in order to remove plant and animal SCC from the development area prior to construction.

Damage to riverine system

Ensure that scour countermeasures are incorporated into the design of the watercourse crossing structures.

Trenches should go through bedrock if possible.

Wherever possible, construction activities must be undertaken during the driest part of the year to minimize downstream sedimentation due to excavation, etc.

When not possible, suitable stream diversions structures must be used to ensure that rivers/streams are not negatively impacted by construction activity.

Adequate bank stabilization measures must be incorporated into the design of the watercourse crossing structures

Soil erosion

Appropriate stormwater structures must be designed and implemented.

All areas of development situated on slopes must incorporate stormwater diversions. Spillages of harmful substances

All hazardous substances such as paints, diesel and cement must be stored in a bunded area with impermeable surface beneath them.

6.1.2 Construction phase

Loss of natural vegetation

Construction activities must be limited to the designated footprint of the upgrade route i.e. construction materials, vehicular storage, construction camps etc., should occur in an area that has already been disturbed or of low sensitivity and is at least 50 metres (but preferably 100 meters) from a watercourse.

The construction footprint must be surveyed and demarcated prior to construction commencing.

The surveyed construction footprint must be approved by an ECO to ensure that natural vegetation is not unnecessarily damaged.

Where vegetation has been cleared, site rehabilitation in terms of soil stabilisation and re-vegetation must be undertaken.


Should protected vegetation be relocated, the relevant permits must be obtained from the competent authority.

All sensitive areas must be demarcated and signs erected to ensure these areas are maintained. This must be done with the assistance of the ECO.



A Plant Rescue & Protection Plan must be implemented and managed by a vegetation specialist familiar with the site in consultation with the appointed ECO.

All SCC impacted by construction must be conserved and rescued.

All rescued SCC should be kept in an onsite nursery for the duration of construction.

All rescued SCC must be replanted within the site where it was originally found during rehabilitation.

Loss of SCC

The development area must be surveyed prior to topsoil removal in order to locate and capture any SCC and relocate them.

The contractor‟s workers must not poach or trap wild animals.

The contractor‟s workers must not harvest natural vegetation. Damage to riparian vegetation

All concrete must be mixed on a suitably bunded temporary area.

Contaminated water from concrete mixing should be collected and disposed of according to the instructions of the ECO

A serviced fire powder extinguisher should be available on site in the event that wet concrete is accidentally spilled into the river.

Coffer dams must not be left in place for longer than 30 days.

All work within the watercourses should be completed during the dry season, when flows are at their lowest.

Water in the watercourses must be allowed to pass downstream of the construction. If necessary this should be achieved via a temporary diversion – this should not be in place for more than 30 days.

Construction of any watercourse crossings must comply with an EMPr approved by the Department of Water and Sanitation and by the Department of Environmental Affairs



Construction activities must be demarcated and vegetation clearing and top soil removal (if required) limited to these areas.

Ensure that construction sites are stabilised and soil is prevented from unnecessary exposure.

Implement vegetation re-establishment as part of a detailed Rehabilitation Plan.

Removal of riparian vegetation should take place under the supervision of the ECO

Removal of the alien invasive vegetation should be prioritised. Soil erosion

The contractor must develop and implement an Erosion Action Plan.

Wind screening and stormwater control must be undertaken to prevent soil loss from the site.

All erosion control mechanisms must be regularly maintained.

Vegetation must be retained where possible to avoid soil erosion.

Construction must be phased in order to minimise the area of exposed soil at any one time.

Re-vegetation of disturbed surfaces must occur immediately after the construction activities are completed.

Disturbed areas of natural vegetation as well as cut and fills must be rehabilitated immediately to prevent further soil erosion.




Any storage tanks containing hazardous materials must be placed in bunded

Hazardous Chemical Substances Regulations promulgated in terms of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 and the SABS Code of Practise must be adhered to. This applies to solvents and other chemicals possibly used in the construction process.

Oil trays must be placed under parked machinery to avoid soil contamination. CONCRETE BATCHING

Concrete should not be mixed directly on the ground, or during rainfall events when the potential for transport to the stormwater system is the greatest (as per the EMPr).

No concrete must be mixed within 32 meters of any watercourses and can only be mixed in the area demarcated for this purpose and on an impermeable substratum.

A serviced fire extinguisher should be available on site in the event that wet concrete is accidentally spilled into the river.

All areas affected during the Construction Phase should be rehabilitated. HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL SPILLS

The individual responsible for or who discovers the spill must report the incident to the Project Coordinator, ECO and or Contractor as soon as reasonably possible.

The problem must be assessed and the necessary actions required will be undertaken.

The immediate response must be to contain the spill.

Depending on the nature and extent of the spill, contaminated soil must be either excavated or treated on-site.

The ECO must determine the precise method of treatment of polluted soil.

This could involve the application of soil absorbent materials or oil-digestive powders to the contaminated soil.

If a spill occurs on an impermeable surface such as cement or concrete, the surface spill must be contained using oil absorbent materials.

Contaminated remediation materials must be carefully removed from the area of the spill so as to prevent further release of petrochemicals to the environment, and stored in adequate containers until appropriate disposal.

HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL STORAGE

Staff that will be handling hazardous materials must be trained to do so.

All hazardous chemicals must be properly stored in a secure, bunded and contained area. Control of alien plant species

A Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the construction phase to reduce the establishment and spread of undesirable alien plant species.



A Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan must be developed and implemented during the construction phase.

6.1.3 Operational phase


Alien plants must be removed from the site through appropriate methods such as hand pulling, application of chemicals, cutting etc. throughout the operational phase of the development.




A Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan must be implemented and run during operational phase.

6.1.4 Proposed management plans to be developed and implemented as part of the final

EMPr In summary, the following plans need to be developed as part of the final EMPr and Project monitoring, incorporating all the issues, conclusions and recommendations of this report:

Erosion Action Plan

Plant Rescue & Protection Plan

Rehabilitation and Alien Management Plan Environmental Statement and Opinion of the Specialist The ecological impacts of all aspects of the proposed Debe Water Supply Scheme upgrade were assessed and considered to be acceptable, provided that the mitigation measures provided in this report are implemented. The majority of the impacts are rated as MODERATE to HIGH pre-mitigation (Table 6.1), therefore implementation of recommended mitigation measures coupled with comprehensive rehabilitation and monitoring in terms of re-vegetation and restoration is an important element of the mitigation strategy. Implementing the recommended mitigations measures will reduce impacts to MODERATE and LOW.



7 REFERENCES Mucina, L, Scott-Shaw CR, Rutherford MC, Camp KGT, Matthews WS, Powrie LW and Hoare DB (2006) Indian Ocean Coastal Belt In: The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland, Mucina L and Rutherford (eds). South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. National Environmental Management Act (No 107 of 1998) as amended in 2010. National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (No 10 of 2004). National Water Act (No 36 of 1998). NFEPA Atlas, 2011 Technical Report for the National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas project The Constitution Act (108 of 1996). SANBI (bgis.sanbi.org)

DEBE WATER SUPPLY SCHEME UPGRADE IN NKONKOBE LOCAL ... Water Supply... · Amatola Water Private Bag...

Documents

Transcript of DEBE WATER SUPPLY SCHEME UPGRADE IN NKONKOBE LOCAL ... Water Supply... · Amatola Water Private Bag...