ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE …€¦ · ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE...

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE

PROPOSED OTJIVALUNDA SALT MINING AND SOAP

PRODUCTION FACILITY

BIRD SPECIALIST STUDY

May 2013

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page ii

Bird specialist study

May 2013

COPYRIGHT © AFRICAN CONSERVATION SERVICES CC, 2013.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PROJECT NAME Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed Otjivalunda salt

mining and soap production facility: Bird specialist study

STAGE OF REPORT Final Bird Specialist Report

LEAD CONSULTANT

Enviro Dynamics

Enquiries: Eloise Carstens

Tel: (061) 223-336

E-Mail: [email protected]

SPECIALIST CONSULTANT

African Conservation Services cc

Tel: (063) 683-026/081-284-5130

Fax nr: (088) 616-031

E-Mail: [email protected]

DATE OF RELEASE 31 May 2013

CONTRIBUTORS TO THE REPORT Mike Scott and Dr Ann Scott

COPYRIGHT

Copyright vests with African Conservation Services CC and the

author/s of this report unless otherwise agreed to in writing. The

reports may not be copied or transmitted in any form whatsoever

to any person without the written permission of the Copyright

Holder. This does not preclude the authorities’ use of the report for

consultation purposes or the applicant’s use of the report for

project-related purposes.

DECLARATION

We, Mike and Ann Scott, do not have and will not have any vested interest (either business, financial,

personal or other) in the proposed activity proceeding other than remuneration for work performed.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page iii


May 2013

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Gecko Namibia (Pty) (Ltd) and the Ondonga and Uukwambi Traditional Authorities

have entered into a joint venture through mutual shareholding in Ondonga-

Uukwambi Mining Enterprises (Pty) (Ltd) (see above). This company aims to extract

and process salt, trona, burkeite and sodium sulphate from the Otjivalunda salt pans

in northern Namibia; transport raw materials to the production facility near Oshakati;

and produce soap, detergents, salt and sodium sulphate at the production facility.

Enviro Dynamics cc has been appointed to conduct an Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) and produce an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the

proposed project. This bird assessment forms part of the EIA and is required to take

an ecosystem approach, focussing on the habitats at the Otjivalunda pans. The

overall objectives of this approach are to identify and consider the various bird

species likely to inhabit or utilise the pans; identify sensitive species and their habitat

preferences including where and how frequently they breed, feed and roost;

consider these species’ sensitivity to change in the habitat (e.g. increased noise

levels, changes in water depth, salinity etc.); compare their distribution in other salt

pans in the area; and delineate sensitive and potential no-go areas on the

Otjivalunda pans. The study of this ephemeral pan system was limited by the fact

that the field visit took place under unusually dry conditions for the normally rainy

season.

The study area lies immediately north of the Etosha National Park and within the

Lipumbu Ya Tshilongo Conservancy, near several other communal conservancies.

Etosha National Park is a both a designated Ramsar site, or Wetland of International

Importance, and an Important bird Area, being home to some 340 bird species. The

area regularly supports a significant number of Globally Threatened species,

including Lesser Flamingo and Ludwig's Bustard. It also regularly supports a significant

number of species in restricted range/biome-restricted assemblages, including

Ludwig's Bustard. Furthermore the site holds, on a regular basis, more than 1% of the

biogeographic population of congregatory waterbird species including Greater

Flamingo and a salt specialist, the Chestnut-banded Plover.

The Otjivalunda salt pans are fed by local rainfall and lie within the seasonal Cuvelai

drainage system, being fed by rainfall in southern Angola. Amounts of water within

this ephemeral system vary, depending on this precipitation. The following habitats

may be distinguished in the area, namely wetlands, salt flats, pan edge (with a

fluctuating water line), man-made wetland habitats, flat grasslands with drainage

lines and sparse Mopane shrublands. No obvious differences were noted between

the habitat at the eastern pan and the western pan. The site for the Soap

Production Plant and Salts Purification Facility lies within the Oshana-Kalahari mosaic

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page iv


May 2013

vegetation unit and consists of short grasses and a few scattered trees around a

small oshana.

Within the four QDS representing the study area 254 or 38% of the 676 Namibian

species have been recorded. Of these species, 24 (10%) are classed as threatened

in Namibia, while four more (2%) are threatened in southern Africa. Fifteen species

are also Globally Threatened. The study area is home to one species (0.5%) that is

near-endemic to Namibia, and 48 (8%) species that are endemic/near-endemic to

southern Africa. Sixty-eight (27%) of the bird species are migrant, i.e. undertake

large-scale, regular seasonal movements, usually to the northern hemisphere and

back, while a large proportion (97 or 38%) are nomadic at some stage of their lives.

At least 85 species (34%) of these birds are associated with wetlands at some stage

of their life cycle, although the majority are terrestrial.

The species considered at risk by the present development comprise the following

main groups of birds. At the Otjivalunda salt pan area, aquatic birds include

Chestnut-banded Plover (Near Threatened), Lesser Flamingo (Vulnerable, Globally

Threatened) and Greater Flamingo (Vulnerable). The key potential impacts are

identified as disturbance and habitat destruction from construction and operational

activities, including road and aerial traffic; and poaching. Terrestrial birds include

Kori Bustard (nomadic) and Ludwig’s Bustard (recently uplisted to Globally

Threatened and candidate for Endangered in Namibia; near-endemic to southern

Africa); and Southern Ground Hornbill (Vulnerable). The main potential impacts in

this case are disturbance and habitat destruction (as above), and poaching.

Bustards are especially sensitive to disturbance during nesting periods, and may

easily desert the nest.

For the access road, road kills (e.g. of korhaans, francolins and other ground-

dwelling birds) are a potential threat. Sodium poisoning of passerines (including

Great Sparrow and Cape Sparrow – both southern Africam near-endemics) from

road spillage is a possibility. At the plant, the main potential impacts are bird

strikes/collisions on the power supply structures, especially if it should run near water

bodies (e.g. oshanas or tailings dams). Electrocutions of birds (including owls and

other raptors) may take place on transformers and substation structures. Sodium

poisoning due to spillage is also a possibility.

The potential impacts identified may be summarised as follows: physical disturbance

and habitat destruction, rated as both site specific and regional (road), long term (7

years), during construction, operation/maintenance and rehabilitation, moderate

to serious effects, definite, lower probability with mitigation, and overall of moderate

significance; poaching and road associated mortalities, rated as both site specific

and regional (road), long term (7 years), during construction, operation/

maintenance and rehabilitation, minor to moderate effects, probable, lower

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page v


May 2013

probability with mitigation, and overall of moderate significance; and collision and

electrocutions, rated as low probability.

Without mitigation, the effects of increasing human presence in the area in the form

of herdsmen and their dogs and cattle are likely to become cumulative in

combination with the potential impacts of the development, in the form of physical

disturbance, habitat destruction, poaching and road mortalities. In addition to

environmental features, other ecological/biological features such as an already

threatened conservation status; endemism/restricted distribution with narrow habitat

requirements; and mobility/ nomadism/ migrant habits all increase the sensitivity of

bird populations and render the effects of impacts more likely to become

cumulative.

Recommended mitigation and enhancement measures are as follows:

Before construction starts, proposed traffic routes should be inspected for any

signs of bird nesting (especially ground-nesting species); and every effort

should be made to try to avoid disturbing breeding birds.

Where possible the unnecessary destruction of nesting habitat (i.e. grasslands,

shrubs) should be avoided.

Once the mining is finished, rehabilitation is of prime importance. During this

phase, the construction of an artificial breeding island for flamingos could be

considered, using the island at Kamfer’s Dam in South Africa (Anderson 2008;

see Appendix 2) as a model. If an island is created with a moat of water

around it, it could possibly assist with the breeding of the flamingos, and this

step would ultimately create a positive impact.

Anti-poaching measures should be enforced strictly, and this should be

emphasised during induction to contractors. If there is reason to believe

poaching may be taking place, the services of the Ministry of Environment

and Tourism or the police should be enlisted to investigate further.

Driving rules should also be emphasised during induction to contractors, and

strictly enforced.

A demarcated route should be followed, especially on the pans' edge, and

off-road driving should be prohibited. Realistic driving schedules should be

drawn up and speed limits should be adhered to. Aerial disturbance should

be minimised, especially over the pan area.

Spillage of salt(s) along the road should be avoided.

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page vi


May 2013

Ongoing awareness should be promoted about the negative impacts of

disturbance, especially to breeding birds; and of poaching.

Bird mortalities on the electricity supply structures at the processing plant are

considered a low probability, but monitoring is required (see below).

Stringent and regular monitoring is recommended for development as a matter of

policy, especially in an ephemeral habitat such as the salt pan area. It is

recommended that monitoring commences from the time of construction, for any

signs of bird mortalities resulting from the construction and operation of the salt

works, and especially in the identified sensitive areas, namely pan edges and

grasslands. During monitoring a look out should be kept for possible bird mortalities

related to road kills, sodium poisoning, collision and electrocution on power line

structures. One advantage of the development schedule is that only the larger

eastern pan will be mined initially, while the Otjivalunda west pan will remain

unutilised until a later stage. This will enable comparisons to be made in terms of the

effects of disturbance. Ideally, monitoring should take place on an ongoing basis.

Given that the field visit took place under unusually dry conditions, at least one visit

after the next good rains should be taken to ascertain the presence and usage of

the area by species such as Chestnut-banded Plover and flamingos. This could

possibly be undertaken by the resident MET staff at the Etosha Ecological Institute

(EEI). The findings should be incorporated into the Environmental Management Plan

(EMP) with the provision that the EMP be revised and appropriate mitigation

measures be included where necessary.

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page vii


May 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ vii

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ................................................................................................... x

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACCRONYMS ..................................................................................... xiii

GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY ............................................................................................... xiv

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

1.1 Background and project objectives ........................................................................... 1

1.1.1 Background ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1.2 Project objectives ............................................................................................... 2

1.2 Terms of Reference ........................................................................................................ 2

1.2.1 Terms of reference for the EIA .......................................................................... 2

1.2.2 Objectives of the bird specialist study ............................................................. 3

1.3 Methodology for assessing potential impacts ........................................................... 4

1.3.1 Desk-top study .................................................................................................... 4

1.3.2 Field visit and observations:............................................................................... 5

1.3.3 Sensitivity of the affected environment .......................................................... 8

1.4 Assumptions and limitations ......................................................................................... 8

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................... 10

2.1 Site locality .................................................................................................................... 10

2.2 Background .................................................................................................................. 11

2.3 Project scope ............................................................................................................... 11

2.4 Project description ....................................................................................................... 12

2.4.1 Mining activities ................................................................................................ 12

2.4.2 Transport route .................................................................................................. 14

2.4.3 Production facilities .......................................................................................... 15

3 LEGAL AND REGULATORY REVIEW .................................................................................. 18

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page viii


May 2013

4 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................................... 19

4.1 Locality and habitats................................................................................................... 19

4.1.1 Locality ............................................................................................................... 19

4.1.2 Protected land status ....................................................................................... 19

4.1.3 Broad habitats .................................................................................................. 20

4.1.4 Bird habitats: Otjivalunda salt pans ............................................................... 24

4.1.5 Bird habitats: the processing plant ................................................................ 34

4.2 Bird diversity .................................................................................................................. 35

4.3 Potential sensitivity ....................................................................................................... 36

4.3.1 Red Data bird species ..................................................................................... 36

4.3.2 Endemic bird species/habitat specialists ...................................................... 37

4.3.3 Migrant and nomadic bird species ............................................................... 38

4.4 Bird species of concern .............................................................................................. 38

4.4.1 Wetland species ............................................................................................... 38

4.4.2 Chestnut-banded Plover ................................................................................. 39

4.4.3 Lesser Flamingo and Greater Flamingo ........................................................ 40

4.4.4 Lesser Flamingo ................................................................................................. 41

4.4.5 Greater Flamingo ............................................................................................. 43

4.4.6 Terrestrial birds ................................................................................................... 45

4.5 Environmental sensitivities related to birds ............................................................... 46

4.5.1 Identification of risk sources ............................................................................ 46

4.6 Bird species potentially at risk in the study area ...................................................... 48

5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................... 49

5.1 Identification of risk sources ....................................................................................... 49

5.2 Identification of key impacts anticipated................................................................ 49

5.2.1 For the Otjivalunda salt pan area .................................................................. 49

5.2.2 For the access road and processing plant area ......................................... 50

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page ix


May 2013

5.3 Assessment of impacts based on the criteria set out in this document .............. 50

5.4 Mitigation and enhancement measures ................................................................. 52

5.5 Monitoring ..................................................................................................................... 54

5.6 Additional assignments ............................................................................................... 54

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 55

7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................... 58

6 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 59

Appendix 1: Checklist of bird species recorded in four QDS in the Otjivalunda study

area.

Appendix 2: Details of the construction of flamingo breeding islands (Anderson 2008)

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page x


May 2013

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURE 1: GENERAL ORIENTATION OF THE STUDY AREA (INDICATED BY YELLOW

ARROW), WITHIN THE CUVELAI STYSTEM NORTH OF ETHOSA NATIONAL

PARK IN NORTHERN NAMIBIA (GOOGLE MAP GENERATED ON EIS,

2013) ........................................................................................................................ 1

FIGURE 2: SALT PANS, CLAY PANS AND OTHER WETLAND AREAS VISITED IN THE

GREATER OTJIVALUNDA STUDY AREA, WHICH LIES WITHIN THE CUVELAI

SYSTEM (GOOGLE MAP GENERATED BY THE EIS 2013): ..................................... 6

FIGURE 3: FOUR QDS USED TO MAP THE POTENTIAL DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS IN THE

GREATER OTJIVALUNDA STUDY AREA, FOCUSSING ON AREAS WITH

SALT PAN AND CLAY PAN HABITATS AND A RELATIVELY HIGH DIVERSITY

OF BIRD SPECIES (BASED ON A GOOGLE MAP GENERATED ON EIS

2013). ....................................................................................................................... 6

FIGURE 4: LOCATION OF THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PANS (RED SHADING), JUST

NORTH OF THE ETOSHA NATIONAL PARK’S NORTHERN BOUNDARY

(GREEN LINE), WITHIN THE LIPUMBU YA TSHILONGO CONSERVANCY

AND APPROXIMATELY 100 KM SOUTH OF OSHAKATI (SEE ALSO

FIGURE 1). .............................................................................................................. 10

FIGURE 5: BERM COMPARTMENTS OF MINE SITE AND THE POSITION OF THE CAMP

SITE AND WORKSHOP AREA. ............................................................................... 12

FIGURE 6: BERM INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE UNDERLYING SOIL LAYERS. ......................... 13

FIGURE 7: EXAMPLE OF A 6X6 ARTICULATED DUMP TRUCK (ADT). ................................... 14

FIGURE 8: LOCATION OF THE SOAP PRODUCTION PLANT SITE, 10 KM WEST OF

OSHAKATI. ............................................................................................................. 15

FIGURE 9: THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PANS (INDICATED BY YELLOW ARROW) ARE

LOCATED JUST NORTH OF THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF THE ETOSHA

NATIONAL PARK (RED LINE). ............................................................................... 19

FIGURE 10 THE STUDY AREA LIES IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE ETOSHA NATIONAL

PARK (BROWN SHADING) AND WITHIN A COMMUNAL

CONSERVANCY, WITH OTHERS CLOSE BY (GREEN SHADING; GOOGLE

MAP GENERATED ON EIS 2013). ......................................................................... 20

FIGURE 11 A, B, C EFFECTS OF FLOODING OF THE CUVELAI SYSTEM ON THE

ETOSHA PAN: (A) SEPTEMBER 2009, (B) 2009, (C) 2011

(HTTP://EARTHOBSERVATORY.NASA.GOV/IOTD/VIEW.PHP?ID=80816).

IN CONTRAST, SMALLER SALT PANS RECEIVE THEIR WATER FROM

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page xi


May 2013

LOCAL PRECIPITATION; NOTE THAT THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PANS

(YELLOW CIRCLES) ARE AMONGST THOSE PANS THAT RETAIN THEIR

WATER FOR A RELATIVELY LONGER TIME. .......................................................... 22

FIGURE 12 THE STUDY AREA, SHOWING THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PANS: EAST (A)

AND WEST (B); NOTE THE PROXIMITY OF THE BORDER OF THE ETOSHA

NP (RED ARROW; GOOGLE MAP GENERATED ON EIS 2013). ......................... 24

FIGURE 13: THE STUDY AREA, SHOWING THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PAN: EAST (A;

GOOGLE MAP GENERATED ON EIS 2013). ........................................................ 25

FIGURE 14: THE STUDY AREA, SHOWING THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PAN: WEST (B;

GOOGLE MAP GENERATED ON EIS 2013). ........................................................ 25

FIGURE 15 BIRD HABITATS ASSOCIATED WITH THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PANS (A =

EAST, B = WEST): .................................................................................................... 26

FIGURE 16: EXAMPLE OF EPHEMERAL WETLANDS IN THE LAKE OPONONO AREA,

SHOWING FLUCTUATING WATER LEVELS IN SURROUNDING PANS. ................ 27

FIGURE 17: AS THE WETLANDS DRY UP AND START TO RECEDE THE HIGH SALT

CONTENT CAUSES CRYSTALLISATION, AND SALT FLATS WITH VARYING

DEPTHS OF SALTS START TO FORM. ..................................................................... 28

FIGURE 18: UNDER THESE CONDITIONS OF EXTREME SALINITY, SALT FLATS MAY STILL

BE UTILISED BY SOME SALT-ADAPTED BIRD SPECIES. ......................................... 28

FIGURE 19 THE EDGE OF THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PAN (EAST) SHOWS SIGNS OF

TRAFFIC FROM ANIMALS AND VEHICLES. .......................................................... 29

FIGURE 20: TRACKS OF ANIMALS, INCLUDING SPRINGBOK AND CATTLE, ON THE

EDGE OF OTJIVALUNDA (EAST) PAN. ................................................................ 29

FIGURE 21: THE EDGE OF THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PAN (WEST) IS ALSO HEAVILY

DISTURBED, BY ANIMALS SUCH AS SPRINGBOK AND CATTLE. ......................... 30

FIGURE 22: THE EDGE OT THE CLAY PAN NORTH-EAST OF OTJIVALUNDA (C) ALSO

SHOWS SOME SIGNS OF DISTURBANCE. ............................................................ 30

FIGURE 23 A AND B. A VARIETY OF ORGANIC REMAINS FOUND PRESERVED IN THE

DRY SALT CRUST ON THE PAN'S EDGES. ............................................................. 31

FIGURE 24: SALT MINING AT MILE 4 SALTWORKS NEAR SWAKOPMUND HAS

CREATED A HABITAT FAVOURABLE TO FLAMINGOS. ....................................... 32

FIGURE 25: REMNANTS OF PAST SALT-MINING ACTIVITIES AT OTJIVALUNDA. ................... 32

FIGURE 26 AROUND THE PANS, FLAT GRASSLANDS ON SAND FORM A HABITAT

FOR TERRESTRIAL BIRDS, AND ANTELOPE SUCH AS SPRINGBOK ..................... 33

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page xii


May 2013

FIGURE 27: HEAVY TRAMPLING IN A DRAINAGE GULLEY AT OJIVALUNDA PAN

(EAST). .................................................................................................................... 33

FIGURE 28: SPARSE MOPANE SHRUBLANDS (BACKGROUND) IN THE PAN AREA. ............ 34

FIGURE 29: SHORT GRASSES AND SCATTERED TREES IN THE OSHANA HABITAT IN

THE VICINITY OF THE PROCESSING PLANT. ........................................................ 35

FIGURE 30: CLAY PAN WEST OF THE EKUMA RIVER, WHERE MANY FLAMINGOS

WERE OBSERVED. THE PAN LIES WITHIN THE ETOSHA NP AND IS

RELATIVELY UNDISTURBED. ................................................................................... 44

FIGURE 31: SIGNS OF KORI BUSTARD ACTIVIRT OBSERVED IN THE STUDY AREA IN

APRIL 2013: FOOTPRINTS AND DROPPINGS. ...................................................... 45

TABLE 1: THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY. ........................................................ 7

TABLE 2: CRITERIA USED TO DESCRIBE AND DETERMINE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF

THE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED FOR THE PROJECT. ....................................................... 8

TABLE 3: VARYING WATER LEVELS AT LAKE OPONONO, DEPENDING ON

RAINFALL (W VERSFELD UNPUBL DATA). D = DRY (NO WATER,

DRIED UP); L = LOW (ONLY WATER IN DEEPEST PARTS OF LAKE); M =

MEDIUM (FAIR AMOUNT OF WATER); H = HIGH (MUCH WATER FROM

FLOOD WATER). .................................................................................................... 23

TABLE 4: ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITIES RELATED TO BIRDS ........................................... 46

TABLE 5: DESCRIPTION OF IDENTIFIED IMPACTS ................................................................ 50

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page xiii


May 2013

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACCRONYMS

BID Background Information Document

Bird habitat categories M = marine/coastal, W = wetland, T = predominantly terrestrial

EEI Etosha Ecological Institute

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIS Environmental Information Service

EMP Environmental Management Plan

Endemic status categories E = endemic, NE = near-endemic, sA = southern Africa, Nam =

Namibia

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

IUCN Red List categories LC Least Concern

V Vulnerable

NT Near Threatened

E Endangered

CE Critically Endangered

EW Extinct in the Wild

E Extinct

MET Ministry of Environment and Tourism

NP National Park

QDS Quarter Degree Square

SABAP South African Bird Atlas Project

Bird movements S = sedentary, N = nomadic, M = migrant, V = vagrant, R = rare

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page xiv


May 2013

GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY

Endemic Occurring within a restricted range

IUCN Red List

category See abbreviations and acronyms (above)

EIA: Proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility Page 1


May 2013

Oshakati

1 INTRODUCTION

1 .1 BACKGROUND AND PROJEC T OBJECT IVES

1.1.1 BACKGROUND

Gecko Namibia has recognised the potential of the Otjivalunda salt pans as a

source of various sodium salts used in the production of soap products (Background

Information Document [BID]). It has therefore entered into a joint venture with the

Ondondga and Uukwambi Traditional Authorities, who are responsible for the area,

to establish the Onganga-Uukwambi Mining Enterprises (OUME). In 2010, the Ministry

of Mines and Energy approved the Exclusive Prospecting Licence (EPL 4365) of

OUME. Under this licence, OUME is authorised to do prospecting activities to verify

the quantity and quality of the resource.

OUME intends to:

Mine the sodium salts (i.e. trona, burkeite, halite and thenardite) at the

Otjivalunda pans,

Transport the mined products via a transfer station at Onkani to a soap

production plant near Uukwangula (approximately 10 km west of Oshakati on

the M111), and

Produce soap (including laundry and body bars, soap and detergent

powders and sodium sulphate) at the soap production plant.

Figure 1: General orientation of the study area (indicated by yellow arrow), within the

Cuvelai stystem north of Ethosa national Park in northern Namibia (Google map generated

on EIS, 2013)



May 2013

In order for OUME to apply for a mining licence at the Ministry of Mines and Energy

(MME), an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study is required along with the

associated Clearance Certificate from the Ministry of Environment and Tourism

(MET).

Enviro Dynamics has thus been appointed to conduct an EIA and produce an

Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the proposed project.

1.1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The principal objective of this study is to prepare an environmental impact

assessment (EIA) that considers all relevant environmental, biophysical and social

issues as well as relevant financial and technical considerations. In addition, the

study aims to deliver a management plan (EMP) that provides guidelines that

primarily avoid and subsequently minimise negative environmental impacts

associated with the components of the project. The environmental consultant is

therefore required to assess the environmental acceptability of the project.

1 .2 TERMS OF REFERENCE

1.2.1 TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE EIA

The following main tasks must be achieved during the EIA process. They must be

conducted to meet the requirements of the Regulations of the Environmental

Management Act of 2007 (February 2012):

A description of the environment that may be affected by the activity and

the manner in which the physical, biological, social, economic and cultural

aspects of the environment may be affected by the proposed activity;

A description of the need and desirability of the proposed listed activity and

identified potential alternatives to the proposed listed activity, including

advantages and disadvantages that the proposed activity or alternatives

may have on the environment and the community that may be affected by

the activity;

An indication of the methodology used in determining the significance of

potential effects;

A description and comparative assessment of all alternatives identified during

the assessment process;

A description of all environmental issues that were identified during the

assessment process, an assessment of the significance of each issue and an



May 2013

indication of the extent to which the issue could be addressed by the

adoption of mitigation measures;

An assessment of each identified potentially significant effect (including

cumulative effects, nature, extent and duration, probability, degree to which

the effects can be reversed, degree to which the effects may cause

irreplaceable loss of resources and degree to which the effects can be

mitigated);

A description of any assumptions, uncertainties and gaps in knowledge;

Following the outcome of the Scoping Assessment, the following key

environmental issues are to assume central importance during the study:

o Habitat destruction and consequent loss of wetland bird species

o Habitat destruction and consequent loss of endemic aquatic

crustaceans

o Loss of cultural salt harvesting rituals

o Loss of or damage to archaeologically significant sites.

1.2.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE BIRD SPECIALIST STUDY

The following preliminary scope of work is prepared for the BIRD ASSESSMENT.

For this study, the sub-consultant is required to take an ecosystem approach

focussing on the habitats at the Otjivalunda pans. The overall objectives of this

approach are to:

Identify and consider the various bird species likely to inhabit or utilise the

pans,

Identify sensitive species and their habitat preferences including where and

how frequently they breed, feed and roost,

Consider these species’ sensitivity to change in the habitat (e.g. increased

noise levels, changes in water depth, salinity etc.),

Compare their distribution in other salt pans in the area, and

Delineate sensitive and potential no-go areas on the Otjivalunda pans.

The Scope of Work for the sub-consultant includes general requirements in terms of

impact assessment conventions and Namibian EIA legislation, as well as addressing

specific aspects related the specialist’s area of expertise.

In order to achieve the objectives outlined above, the specialist is required to:

Research historical data to determine the sensitive bird species likely to occur

at the pans,

Assess the potential impact of the project on the identified species and

Focus on the wetland habitat of the pans to:



May 2013

o Investigate sensitive habitats at the pan where the species are likely to

breed or feed;

o Compare the eastern and western pan habitats to determine similarities;

o Delineate no-go areas at the pans that would preserve a representative

area of the species’ habitat;

o Discuss/propose possible mitigation measures to avoid or minimise the

impact of mining activities on sensitive bird species.

1 .3 METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSING POTENT IAL IMPACTS

The methods used for the bird assessment comprised:

1.3.1 DESK-TOP STUDY

During a desk-top study a comprehensive bird species list was compiled from

information from the Southern African Bird Atlas Project (SABAP), gathered during

1987-1992 (Harrison et al. 1997) and available on the Namibian Avifaunal Database;

this database includes all available information on birds in Namibia, including SABAP

data, nest record cards, wetland bird counts, Namibian Raptor Road Counts and

museum specimens. The above information was supplemented by the online

Environmental Information Service/EIS [EIS 2013]), published sources (e.g. Hockey et

al. 2005, Chittenden 2007), the draft Red Data Book for Birds in Namibia (Simmons &

Brown in press), the global IUCN Red Data list for birds (BirdLife International 2013),

discussions with a local bird conservationist and expert (Wilferd Versfeld of the MET

Etosha Ecological Institute); and both the authors’ 30+ years of experience of

working together on and observing birds in southern Africa, including Namibia.

The following information for each bird species recorded in the study area (based

on the above SABAP data for four quarter degree squares [QDS]) is provided in a

table (Appendix 1):

Taxonomic order according to Roberts VII Birds of Southern Africa (RVII; Hockey

et al. 2005)

Previous Roberts numbers (RVI)

Species name: common

Species names: scientific

Red Data status (LC = Least Concern, V = Vulnerable, NT = near Threatened, E =

Endangered, CE = Critically Endangered, EW = Extinct in the Wild, EX = Extinct) is

derived from the IUCN Red List of threatened species (BirdLife International 2013),

which is widely considered to be the most objective and authoritative system for

classifying species in terms of the risk of extinction on a global scale. Information



May 2013

on a taxon's population size, population trends and range size is applied to

standard quantitative criteria to determine its IUCN Red List Category. BirdLife

International is the official Red List Authority for birds for the IUCN Red List,

supplying the categories and associated detailed documentation for all the

world's birds to the IUCN Red List each year. The global Red Data categories are

used to supplement the national categories in the draft Namibian Red Data

Book (Simmons & Brown in press) and other recent sources, e.g. Chittenden

(2007; in which conservation status is based on Hockey et al. [2005] and Barnes

[2000]).

Endemic status (E = endemic, NE = near-endemic, sA = southern Africa, Nam =

Namibia; derived from the above sources)

Movements (S = sedentary, N = nomadic, M = migrant, V = vagrant, R = rare;

derived from the above sources)

Habitat (C/M = coastal/marine, W = wetland, T = predominantly terrestrial;

derived from the above sources)

Potential bird species distribution was determined according to four QDS in the

greater Otjivalunda study area, focussing on areas with salt pan and clay pan

habitats and a relatively high diversity of bird species (Figure 2). Probability of

occurrence in the study area was estimated by the total occurrence of each

bird species in each of these four atlas QDS, on a scale of 1-4.

1.3.2 FIELD VISIT AND OBSERVATIONS:

A field visit was carried out on 15-17 April 2013. During this time various pans were

visited, including Otjivalunda salt pan east and Otjivalunda salt pan west; a clay pan

immediately north-west of Natukanaoka Pan (centred at 18.531543S 15.620161E,

hereafter referred to as Pan C); and the top part of a clay pan immediately west of

the Ekuma River and east of Natukanaoka Pan (centred at 18.512434S 15.902247E;

referred to as Pan D) to identify any signs of bird activity; incidental observations

were also made at other wetland habitats including the Lake Oponono area, and

at the Ekuma River within the Etosha National Park (NP; see Figure 3).



May 2013

1815Bb

1815Db

1815BdA

1815Da

Otjivalunda salt pans

Figure 3: Four QDS used to map the potential distribution of birds in the greater Otjivalunda

study area, focussing on areas with salt pan and clay pan habitats and a relatively high

diversity of bird species (based on a Google map generated on EIS 2013).

Figure 2: Salt pans, clay pans and other wetland areas visited in the greater Otjivalunda

study area, which lies within the Cuvelai system (Google map generated by the EIS 2013):

A - Otjivalunda salt pan east

B - Otjivalunda salt pan west

C - Clay pan north-west of Natukanoaka Pan (outside Etosha NP)

D - Clay pan west of Ekuma River (within Etosha NP)

E - Lake Oponono

F - Ekuma River



May 2013

Potential sources of risk to the environment as a result of the proposed project were

identified. The impact evaluation considered cumulative effects that are associated

with the project and other activities that are either developed or in the process of

being developed in the region. All potential impacts that result from the proposed

project were evaluated for the full life-cycle of the project, namely construction,

operation/maintenance and decommissioning/rehabilitation phases.

The impact assessment methodology is contained in Table 1 below. Criteria used to

describe and determine the significance of the impacts identified for the project are

listed in Table 2.

Table 1: The impact assessment methodology.

CRITERIA DESCRIPTION

Nature Reviews the type of effect that the proposed activity will have on the relevant

component of the environment and includes “what will be affected and

how?”

Extent Indicates whether the impact will be site specific; local (limited to within 15 km

of the area); regional (limited to ~100 km radius); national; or international

(extending beyond Namibia’s borders).

Duration Reviews the lifetime of the impact, as being short (days, <1 month), medium

(months, <1 year), long (years, <10 years), or permanent (generations, or >10

years).

Intensity Establishes whether the magnitude of the impact is destructive or innocuous

and whether or not it exceeds set standards, and is described as none (no

impact); low (where natural/ social environmental functions and processes are

negligibly affected); medium (where the environment continues to function but

in a noticeably modified manner); or high (where environmental functions and

processes are altered such that they temporarily or permanently cease and/or

exceed legal standards/ requirements).

Probability Considers the likelihood of the impact occurring and is described as

improbable (low likelihood), probable (distinct possibility), highly probable

(most likely) or definite (impact will occur regardless of prevention measures).

Degree of

confidence in

predictions

Is based on the availability of specialist knowledge and other information.



May 2013

Table 2: Criteria used to describe and determine the significance of the impacts identified for the

project.

SIGNIFICANCE RATING CRITERIA

Low Where the impact will have a negligible influence on the environment and no

modifications or mitigations are necessary for the given development

description. This would be allocated to impacts of any severity/ magnitude, if

at a local scale/ extent and of temporary duration/time.

Medium Where the impact could have an influence on the environment, which will

require modification of the development design and/or alternative mitigation.

This would be allocated to impacts of moderate severity/magnitude, locally to

regionally, and in the short term.

High Where the impact could have a significant influence on the environment and,

in the event of a negative impact the activity(ies) causing it, should not be

permitted (i.e. there could be a ‘no-go’ implication for the development,

regardless of any possible mitigation). This would be allocated to impacts of

high magnitude, locally for longer than a month, and/or of high magnitude

regionally and beyond.

1.3.3 SENSITIVITY OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

An indication of the sensitivity of the affected environment (the "ability" of an

affected environment to tolerate disturbance (given existing cumulative impacts) is

also provided.

Habitat sensitivity was determined according to broadly accepted criteria (see

Table 1 and 2) that reflect the habitat’s functional value, and its vulnerability and

resilience in the face of disturbances. The sensitivity aspect for birds using these

habitats included calculating the proportion of "species of concern", i.e. Red

Data/threatened species, endemic/near-endemic bird species and

nomadic/migrant bird species recorded within the study area according to habitat.

1 .4 ASSUMPTIONS AND L IMI TAT IONS

Bird diversity is based on the Southern African Bird Atlas Project (SABAP),

gathered during 1987-1992 (Harrison et al. 1997). A second bird atlas project

has been launched recently in Namibia, but to date only the data from the

first project are available. Some of these data now need to be updated, and



May 2013

the atlas data are therefore regarded as a guideline to the potential bird

diversity.

A major limitation to the assessment is that the salt pans are essentially

ephemeral and do not hold water throughout the year, and therefore bird

distribution and usage fluctuates accordingly; this means that it is difficult to

assess the usage of these areas by birds during a single visit under dry

conditions, even though this was at a time when rainy conditions normally

prevail. A local bird expert based at MET Etosha Ecological Institute was

consulted in order to address this limitation. These imputs were supplemented

by the above atlas data.

Recommended mitigation and monitoring measures take into account

existing observations and records of bird distribution, but should be regarded

as provisional. The precautionary principle should therefore apply until such

time as further data can be obtained.

Mitigation recommendations are based on the best available information;

however, these methods should be reviewed periodically, and updated as

additional information is acquired.



May 2013

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2 .1 S ITE LOCALI TY

The Otjivalunda salt pans are located just north of the northern boundary of the

Etosha National Park, within the Lipumbu Ya Tshilongo Conservancy and

approximately 100 km south of Oshakati (Figure 1 and 4). Surrounding homesteads

closest to these pans are at Otjivalunda (± 3km north-east), Ouiwahunda (± 6.5 km

south) and Okovenduka (± 3km west).

Oshakati

Figure 4: Location of the Otjivalunda salt pans (red shading), just north of the Etosha National

Park’s northern boundary (green line), within the Lipumbu Ya Tshilongo Conservancy and

approximately 100 km south of Oshakati (see also Figure 1).



May 2013

2 .2 BACKGROUND

Gecko Namibia (Pty) (Ltd) and the Ondonga and Uukwambi Traditional Authorities

have entered into a joint-venture through mutual shareholding in Ondonga-

Uukwambi Mining Enterprises (Pty) (Ltd) (see above). This company aims to:

Extract and process salt, trona, burkeite and sodium sulphate from the

Otjivalunda salt pans,

Transport raw materials to the production facility near Oshakati, and

Produce soap, detergents, salt and sodium sulphate at the production

facility.

The Otjivalunda salt pans are ephemeral lakes that contain a solid layer of various

sodium salts (trona, burkeite, and sodium sulphate), beneath the surface of the pan.

During the dry season sodium chloride forms on the pans’ surface. Ondonga-

Uukwambi Mining Enterprises (Pty) Ltd holds EPL (Exclusive Prospecting Licence)

4365, which cover the salt pans. This EPL was granted by the Ministry of Mines and

Energy and allows the applicant to conduct prospecting activities to determine

mineral deposit quantities for mining.

Value will be added to the raw materials by producing a variety of products

including household soap products, sodium sulphate and coarse salt. These

products will be supplied to retailers within the local and international markets in a

variety of packaging.

The salts will be washed at the pan. Household soaps will be produced at a

production plant west of Oshakati on a portion of land allocated for this purpose by

the Ondonga-Uukwambi Traditional Authority. The sodium sulphate production plant

will either be located in the north of Namibia or at the coast; the assessment of a

plant at the coast does not form part of the current EIA but will form part of a

separate EIA.

Profits from the venture will be shared amongst the Ondonga-Uukwambi Mining

Enterprises (Pty) Ltd shareholders on the following basis:

2.5% Ondonga Community Trust Fund

2.5% Uukwambi Community Trust Fund

95% Gecko Namibia (Pty) Ltd

2 .3 PROJECT SCOPE

The scope of the proposed project includes the following:

Sodium salt mining at Otjivalunda salt pans – estimated tonnage: 150,000-

200,000 t/a.



May 2013

De-sliming of the nardite, burkeite and trona salts at the pan (120,000 t/a).

Brine evaporation and re-crystallisation of salt at the Otjivalunda salt pans,

harvesting of salt from crystallizer pan – target: tonnage 30,000 t/a.

Transport of products (up to 150,000 t/a) from Otjivalunda to the various

production plants.

Only the larger eastern pan will be mined initially, while the Otjivalunda west pan will

remain unutilised until a later stage. The Otjivalunda east pan is 5km long x 1.5km

wide, covers an area of approximately 650 hectares.

2 .4 PROJECT DESCRIPT ION

2.4.1 MINING ACTIVITIES

Activities on the mining site on the east pan will be implemented gradually.

Operational areas in the pan will be divided into compartments (see Figure 5).

To obtain safe access to the various ores and in order to partition the pan into

different sections, custom designed berm infrastructure will be used (Figure 6). After

compartmentation, the surface of the pan is stripped and dewatered to obtain

access to the underlying sodium salts.

The extreme north-western part of the pan will further be compartmentalised into

two or three sections for evaporation/crystallisation of sodium chlorite salt (halite)

during the dry season. This section will also receive the “brine” (saltwater) extracted

from the south eastern side of the pan.

Figure 5: Berm compartments of mine site and the position of the camp site

and workshop area.



May 2013

In order to obtain halite of sellable quality, the salt needs to be crystallised from the

brine in a controlled fashion. The brine containing the salts therefore flows through

stages of evaporation to a crystallisation pond, to separate the mud and the

different salts from each other.

Approximately 40 workers are needed on the mine site for the initial stages of mine

site establishment. About 25 people will be employed during full scale mining. Some

of these people will be accommodated permanently.

Infrastructure requirements at the main campsite

The following are the infrastructural requirements needed at the mine site:

Workshop

2 x Bedroom park-homes with bathroom sharing

Kitchen

Generator slab

3 x 8-man tents for staff surrounded with poles and covered with shade-

netting

Water tank

Ablution facilities with compartments for toilets and showers and a sewerage

treatment facility

Equipment and bulk infrastructure foreseen for the mining, salt crystallisation and

harvesting operations are:

Two custom-made excavators

Two diesel pumps and generators

Three dump trucks for transport to a stock pile at the washing plant

Salt harvester

Figure 6: Berm infrastructure and the underlying soil layers.



May 2013

Washing plant for removing mud from the ore

Water will be brought from Oshakati on custom-made water transport

vehicles and stored on site

Septic tank sewerage system (to be emptied periodically)

All general waste generated on site will be taken to the Oshakati municipal

waste disposal site

2.4.2 TRANSPORT ROUTE

From the Otjivalunda salt pans northwards to the village of Onkani, Ondongo-

Uukwambi Mining Enterprises intends to use an existing soft-sand road (Figure 4).

This track is poorly developed, thereby necessitating the use of 6x6 Articulated

Dump Trucks (ADTs) to transport materials (Figure 7). By using the ADTs the immediate

need to upgrade this road section will be eliminated.

From Onkani to Oshakati, the gravel road is adequate for normal sized tipper trucks,

which will be used to transport raw materials to the manufacturing plant. The

company has agreed to maintain the above mentioned gravel road as needed.

It is estimated that up to approximately 15 trips will be made back and forth

between the mine site (at Otjivalunda salt pans) and the manufacturing plant per

day. This amounts to approximately 500 tons of raw material transported daily.

Figure 7: Example of a 6x6 Articulated Dump Truck (ADT).



May 2013

2.4.3 PRODUCTION FACILITIES

Soap production plant

The proposed production plant is located approximately 10km to the west of

Oshakati (Figure 8). Although some of the "oshanas" (interconnected seasonal

channel system, see also 6.1.2) in the area are subject to seasonal flooding, the

plant site is much higher than the surrounding oshanas and there is also a fringe of

vegetation between the oshana and the site; it is considered very unlikely that it will

be flooded, and according to the local chief it has never been flooded (E Carstens

pers. comm.).

Here, the extracted salts sourced from the Otjivalunda pan will be processed to

produce soaps and washing powder. The plant will follow a wet chemistry

production process that involves fats (i.e. tallow) and oils being hydrolysed (a

chemical reaction with water to break down the fats) with super heated steam to

form fatty acids. The fatty acids are then neutralised to make soap. The size of the

site required is approximately 5,000 m². Its location provides quick access to the C41

road which offers a convenient link to the railway line in Ondangwa, from where

national distribution of the final products is considered.

Construction of the production facility will take ± 6 months and will require about 30–

50 people, mostly skilled and semi-skilled, during peak construction. Although initially

estimated at 25 years, the project’s lifespan is now estimated at approximately

seven years (pers. comm. Kai Zech April 2013), depending on its success. The plant

will have stockpiles of trona, thenardite, burkeite ore and halite raw materials

Figure 8: Location of the soap production plant site, 10 km west of Oshakati.



May 2013

sourced from the Otjivalunda pan. Stockpiles will be sprayed with a dust coagulant

to suppress dust emissions.

Infrastructure requirements

The infrastructure and bulk services needed at the production plant are as follows:

Factory and warehouse (approximately 3000 m²)

Office complex, 400 m²

A small tailings dam into which the perched liquids and clays from the

production plant will flow

Water is supplied to Oshakati by NamWater. Abstraction from an adjacent

Oshana might constitute an alternative supply option. This will still need to be

investigated in more detail.

Sodium sulphate

The location of the sodium sulphate purification plant (cleaning salt) has not yet

been finalised. The location will be influenced by the environmental and economic

factors that are under investigation.

The purification plant will comprise the following:

Raw material storage

Dissolving and solid removal (by thickening and disposal to tailings facility)

Crystallization and separation (through mechanical and vacuum

evaporation)

Drying (by fluidised bed or rotary drier)

Packaging

Infrastructure requirements

The infrastructure and bulk services required at the purification plant are as follows:

Open area for stockpiles and equipment (approximately 5,000 m²)

Warehouse (approximately 2,000 m²)

Office complex, 400 m²

A small tailings dam into which the perched liquids and clays from the

production plant will flow

Water supplied by NamWater



May 2013

Coarse salt (sodium chloride, NaCl)

The location of the washing plant for the salt works also remains to be finalised,

pending the outcome of the environmental and economic study.

The washing can be done either at the pan itself or at the same site where the soap

factory will be located.

Salt washing is done by washing the harvested salt with clean water to

remove unwanted solids and sulphates. The equipment used is a counter-

current wash tank and centrifuge for drying. Thereafter the salt is stockpiled

and packaged.

The facilities will include:

Open area for stockpiles (approximately 2,500 m²)

The offices and tailings dam infrastructure will be shared either with those at

the mine site or the soap factory (depending on final location)

Generic requirements

All the sites will require the following:

Power supply from the national electricity grid; the existing power line next to

the road will be extended to the site but it will probably be less than 1km ( E

Carstens pers. comm.)

Sewerage system (stand-alone)

The company will provide transport to its employees from Oshakati to the plant site.



May 2013

3 LEGAL AND REGULATORY REVIEW

The Environmental Management Act (Act 7 of 2007) came into effect on 18 January

2012 (Anon. 2012c - Government Gazette of the Republic of Namibia No. 4878,

Windhoek, 6 February 2012). This legislation requires that biodiversity, habitat and

landscape parameters, values and criteria be fully considered as part of the

environmental assessment processes. In order for OUME to apply for a mining license

at the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME), therefore, an Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) study is required along with the associated Environmental

Clearance Certificate from the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET).

In terms of this Bird Impact Assessment, the legislation that applies to the

conservation of terrestrial birds in Namibia is the Nature Conservation Ordinance of

1975. According to this legislation, all species of birds are "Protected Game" except

(a) huntable game birds (francolins and quails, button-quails, guineafowl, ducks,

geese and Namaqua Sandgrouse); and (b) the following birds (which were

perceived as potential problem birds): weavers, sparrows, mousebirds, Red-billed

Quelea, bulbuls and the Pied Crow (Brown et al. 2011).

It is envisaged that the (draft) Parks and Wildlife Bill will replace the above Nature

Conservation Ordinance. This Bill has, however, been under development for the

past 15 years. The list of Specially Protected Birds according to this Bill is based on the

(draft) Namibian Red Data Book (Simmons & Brown in press), and the Red Data

categories in the latter document are used in the present report.

In terms of other agreements pertaining to the conservation of wetlands and their

bird species, Namibia is a signatory to the international Convention on Biological

Diversity (CBD; Rio de Janeiro, 1992), a legally binding instrument for the global

conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

Etosha National Park is a proclaimed Ramsar site. Such sites receive special

protection status in terms of the Convention on Wetlands of International

Importance, 1971 (Ramsar); however, Namibia is not yet a contracting party to the

African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement (AEWA; 1995).

The Park is also classified as an Important Bird Area (IBA N005; Simmons et al. 1998),

while Hobatere (IBA N006) lies west of the study area (see 4.2 below). IBAs are places

of international significance for the conservation of birds at the Global, Regional

(Continental) or Sub-regional (southern African) level, selected according to

stringent criteria (Barnes 1998).



May 2013

4 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

4 .1 LOCALITY AND HABITATS

4.1.1 LOCALITY

The Otjivalunda salt pans are located just north of the northern boundary of the

Etosha National Park, about 100 km south of Oshakati (Figure 9).

4.1.2 PROTECTED LAND STATUS

The study area lies immediately north of the Etosha National Park and within the

Lipumbu Ya Tshilongo Conservancy, with several other communal conservancies

adjacent (Figure 10).

Etosha National Park is a Ramsar site, or Wetland of International Importance

(designated in 1995; Kolberg undated). At 600 000 ha the site is Namibia's largest

listed wetland and conforms to six of the eight Ramsar criteria, including the

categories of sites containing representative, rare or unique wetland types; sites of

international importance for conserving biological diversity; and specific criteria

based on waterbirds (Kolberg undated). Although water reaches Fischer's Pan in the

eastern extremity of Etosha Pan almost every year, it is only during seasons of

exceptional rainfall that the pan floods (see below). Sixty species of birds

sporadically breed on the seasonal wetlands and it is the only known mass breeding

Oshakati

Figure 9: The Otjivalunda salt pans (indicated by yellow arrow) are located just north of

the northern boundary of the Etosha National Park (red line).



May 2013

ground for flamingos in Namibia. At times over one million flamingos congregate on

the pan. Etosha Pan is surrounded by sweetveld savanna plains, which sustain

extraordinary numbers of wildlife.

Etosha National Park is also an Important Bird Area (IBA N005; Simmons et al. 1998)

and home to some 340 bird species. Further to the west lies the Hobatere IBA (N006).

IBAs are places of international significance for the conservation of birds at the

Global, Regional (Continental) or Sub-regional (southern African) level, selected

according to stringent criteria (Barnes 1998). The reasons for categorising the Etosha

area as an IBA include the fact that it regularly supports a significant number of

Globally Threatened species, including Slaty Egret, Lesser Kestrel, Wattled Crane and

Blue Crane, and Globally Near-threatened species such as Lesser Flamingo, Pallid

Harrier and Black-winged Pratincole (Simmons et al. 1998). It also regularly supports a

significant number of species in restricted range/biome-restricted assemblages,

including Hartlaub's Francolin, Ludwig's Bustard, Burchell's Sandgrouse and Monteiro's

Hornbill. Furthermore the site holds, on a regular basis, more than 1% of a

biogeographic population of congregatory waterbird species including Greater

Flamingo (average 9,770, maximum 100,000); Chestnut-banded Plover (average

166, maximum 550); White Pelican and Caspian Plover.

4.1.3 BROAD HABITATS

The landscape surrounding the Otjivalunda salt pans is characterised by flat

grasslands and Mopani shrubland (Mendelsohn et al. 2009).

These pans lie within the seasonal Cuvelai drainage system that originates in

highland areas some 300 km to the north of Etosha National Park in Angola, where

Figure 10 The study area lies immediately north of the Etosha National Park

(brown shading) and within a communal conservancy, with others close by

(green shading; Google map generated on EIS 2013).



May 2013

annual rainfalls often exceed 700 mm (Mendelsohn et al. 2009). This complex

network of seasonally interconnected channels – known locally as "oshanas" –

initially spreads out and later converges once it crosses the Namibian border.

Water flows vary each year, depending on the amounts of rain and where it falls.

Much of the water in the oshanas is also often the result of heavy falls of rain within

central northern Namibia. A good flow, or "efundja", occurs in about four out of ten

years on average, when water surges south- /south-eastwards down to the

Omadhiya Lakes (including Lake Oponono), to the Ekuma River and into the Etosha

Pan. The varying water levels that characterise the system, both seasonally and

annually, are shown in Table 3 and Figure 11a, b and c.

The system includes a large number of ephemeral pans. These wetland habitats are

used seasonally by a diversity of wetland birds that migrate from the northern

hemisphere to breed and then return to the north once the water starts drying up.

Numerous smaller salt and clay pans exist to the north and west of the main pan,

some of which lie just outside the Park including the Otjivalunda salt pans (Figure 3).

Among the pans in the study area are the Ngandjela pans west of Otjivalunda and,

the Onanzi Pan immediately north, the large Natukanaoka Pan and associated

smaller pans to the north-west and west of the Ekuma River (mostly lying within the

Etosha NP) and the Ondangwa Pan and Lyapeke Pan to the east. A representative

selection of these pans was also investigated during the study (see 1.3.2 above).

The Etosha Pan is the primary feature within the Etosha National Park (Simmons et al.

1998). This large salt pan (4 760 km2) is fed in the north by the Ekuma and Oshigambo

rivers that drain catchments in northern Namibia and southern Angola (Simmons et

al. 1998). In exceptional rain years the Etosha Pan becomes a shallow lake, keeping

its water in the eastern parts for longer than in the west (Figure 11). Although the

Etosha Pan receives its water from the flooding of the Cuvelai system, smaller pans

such as the Otjivalunda salt pans receive most of their water from local precipitation.

Between December and March both these pans receive on average between 350

and 400 mm of rainfall. Consequently, the pans can normally be accessed only

during the dry months from June to December, although conditions may be

different during dry periods, for instance the pans were accessible during April 2013

under what was then considered incipient drought conditions. The ability of these

ephemeral pans to hold water may vary; the Otjivalunda salt pans hold water for

longer periods than some others (Figure 11).

About a quarter of Namibia’s people live in this unusual drainage system, their

homes spread across the flat landscape dominated by a network of shallow

channels. The presence of relatively fertile soils and access to water in shallow wells

attracted people to settle here hundreds of years ago. Much of the area is much

more densely populated than immediately to the north in Angola.



May 2013

c

a

b

Figure 11 a, b, c Effects of flooding of the Cuvelai system on the Etosha

Pan: (a) September 2009, (b) 2009, (c) 2011

(http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=80816). In

contrast, smaller salt pans receive their water from local precipitation;

note that the Otjivalunda salt pans (yellow circles) are amongst those

pans that retain their water for a relatively longer time.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=80816



May 2013

Table 3: Varying water levels at Lake Oponono, depending on rainfall (W Versfeld unpubl data).

D = Dry (no water, dried up); L = Low (only water in deepest parts of lake); M = Medium (fair amount of

water); H = High (much water from flood water).

Year Jan April Jul

1993 M

1994 L L

1995 L H

1996 H M

1997 H H

1998 M ? M ?

1999 H M M

2000 H

2001 M ? D D

2002 H L

2003 M L L

2004 H M

2005 H H

2006 H H

2007 H H

2008 H M

2009 H M

2010 H M

2011 H H

2012 H H

2013 M L

Geologically the area comprises calcareous sand, gravel and limestone with

dolomite outcrops in the west (Simmons et al. 1998). The temperature is one of

extremes, ranging from below freezing on some winter nights to above 45°C during

the day in mid-summer. Annual rainfall averages 300 mm p.a. in the west and 500

mm p.a. in the east.

The vegetation within the Etosha National Park is primarily arid savanna, shrub and

thorn scrub in the west, tending towards tree savanna and broad-leaved woodland

in the east (Simmons et al. 1998). Acacia woodland is found throughout the region

with mostly Acacia tortilis, A. reficiens and A. newbrownii dominating. Patches of

Colophospermum mopane and Combretum spp. are also characteristic of the Park,

especially in the eastern broadleaved savanna belt. Dominant grass genera include

Anthophora, Enneapogon, Aristida, Stipagrostis, Eragrostis and Sporobolus.

Due to the saline soil, the areas directly to the north of the Etosha Pan, including the

project area, produce very little plant biomass and do not support extensive plant

and animal life.



May 2013

4.1.4 BIRD HABITATS: OTJIVALUNDA SALT PANS

Around the Otjivalunda salt pans a mosaic of habitats (Figure 12, 13, 14) provides

roosting, foraging and breeding areas for a number of birds, including for those

migrating between southern Africa and the northern hemisphere. Birds use these

habitats opportunistically, often on a seasonal basis and then moving rapidly into

areas that have received rain and speedily commencing with breeding activities

when conditions are suitable (Simmons et al. 1999).

The following habitats may be distinguished, namely wetlands, salt flats, pan edge

(with fluctuating water line), man-made wetland habitats, flat grasslands with

drainage lines and sparse Mopane shrublands (Figure 15). No obvious differences

were noted between the habitat at the eastern pan and the western pan.

A

B

Figure 12 The study area, showing the Otjivalunda salt pans: east (A) and west (B); note the

proximity of the border of the Etosha NP (red arrow; Google map generated on EIS 2013).



May 2013

Figure 13: The study area, showing the Otjivalunda salt pan: east (A; Google map

generated on EIS 2013).

Figure 14: The study area, showing the Otjivalunda salt pan: west (B; Google map

generated on EIS 2013).



May 2013

Ephemeral/wetland habitats

Ephemeral wetland habitats are characterised by fluctuating water levels.

B C E F

a

F E C B

b

Figure 15 Bird habitats associated with the Otjivalunda salt pans (a = east, b =

west):

A – Wetlands (none present at during the field visit)

B – Salt flats

C – Pan edge/fluctuating water line

D – Man-made wetland habitats (not illustrated)

E – Flat grasslands with drainage lines

F – Sparse mopane shrublands



May 2013

Wetlands

The salt pans and clay pans fill with water only after significant local precipitation.

These habitats are then transformed into wetlands with water of varying depths

(Figure 16). The pans may hold their water for varying degrees - in the case of the

Otjivalunda salt pans, for relatively longer (see above and Figure 11).

When filled, these pans are likely to attract migrant species such as Greater and

Lesser Flamingo, which may forage and roost in these habitats. Other species such

as the salt-adapted Chestnut-banded Plover may also nest in these habitats.

The Cuvelai system as a whole, with its oshanas, rivers and scattered pans (see

Figure 1 and 3) is important to migrant birds, providing "stepping stones" en route

between hemispheres.

Salt flats

As the wetlands dry up and start to recede the high salt content causes

crystalisation, and salt flats with varying depths of salts start to form (Figure 17 and

18). Under these conditions of extreme salinity, these habitats then become less

attractive to some waders, although utilised by some salt-adapted species.

Figure 16: Example of ephemeral wetlands in the Lake Oponono area,

showing fluctuating water levels in surrounding pans.



May 2013

Figure 17: As the wetlands dry up and start to recede the high salt content

causes crystallisation, and salt flats with varying depths of salts start to form.

Figure 18: Under these conditions of extreme salinity, salt flats may still be

utilised by some salt-adapted bird species.



May 2013

Pan edge (fluctuating water line)

The interface between the wetlands and the shore on the pan edge is a muddy

habitat that shrinks as the water levels recede (Figure 15). This dynamic "edge"

habitat may serve as a refuge for concentrations of migratory waders and other

birds, depending on the availability of water and food. Salt-adapted species such

as Chestnut-banded Plover may forage, roost and breed in these habitats.

The pan edges in this area provide a natural corridor that is used by game

(springbok and giraffe; also elephant). Many cattle also use this habitat, resulting in

potential disturbance by trampling to bird species sharing these areas. Vehicle

tracks are also evident, adding to the disturbance.

Figure 19 The edge of the Otjivalunda salt pan (east) shows signs of traffic

from animals and vehicles.

Figure 20: Tracks of animals, including springbok and cattle, on the edge

of Otjivalunda (east) pan.



May 2013

Figure 21: The edge of the Otjivalunda salt pan (west) is also heavily

disturbed, by animals such as springbok and cattle.

Figure 22: The edge ot the clay pan north-east of Otjivalunda (C) also shows

some signs of disturbance.



May 2013

The potential abundance of invertebrates and other prey items during the rainy

season is indicated by the variety of organic remains found preserved in the dry salt

crust on the pan's edges, presumably washed in from the surrounding terrestrial

habitats (Figure 23 a and b).

a

b

Figure 23 a and b. A variety of organic remains found preserved in the dry salt

crust on the pan's edges.



May 2013

Man-made wetland habitats

The envisaged salt-mining development will include partitioning and drainage,

resulting in the formation of further salt pans/flats. Although the salinity is then high,

and depending on the depth, these areas may provide further suitable habitats for

some birds in the form of salt flats and "edge" habitats, such as those at Mile 4

Saltworks near Swakopmund (Figure 24) – although the latter system is dependant

on inflow from the sea. Remnants of past salt mining activities at Otjivalunda are still

evident (Figure 25).

Figure 24: Salt mining at Mile 4 Saltworks near Swakopmund has created a

habitat favourable to flamingos.

Figure 25: Remnants of past salt-mining activities at Otjivalunda.



May 2013

Terrestrial habitats

a) Flat grasslands

Around the pans, flat grasslands on sand form a habitat for terrestrial birds including

Kori Bustard (and Ludwig's Bustard), korhaans and raptors, and also springbok (Figure

26). Small gullies drain from these areas into the main pans, some showing signs of

trampling by cattle (Figure 27).

Figure 26 Around the pans, flat grasslands on sand form a habitat for terrestrial

birds, and antelope such as springbok

Figure 27: Heavy trampling in a drainage gulley at Ojivalunda pan (east).



May 2013

Further afield from the pans, sparse low mopane shrublands form a more woody

habitat for species such as hornbills and raptors (Figure 28).

4.1.5 BIRD HABITATS: THE PROCESSING PLANT

The site for the Soap Production Plant and Salts Purification Facility lies within the

Oshana-Kalahari mosaic vegetation unit and is regarded as one of five smaller

vegetation units found in the Cuvelai drainage system Mendelsohn (2009). Plant life

therefore mainly consists of short grasses and a few scattered trees (including

Makalani palms Hyphaene petersiana) around the small oshana present on site

(Figure 29).

The material from the pans will be transported by a road some 50 km long to the

processing plant (see 3.4.2 above).

Figure 28: Sparse mopane shrublands (background) in the pan area.



May 2013

4 .2 BIRD D IVERSI TY

The Otivalunda salt pan study area lies immediately north of the Etosha National

Park (Figure 1). Classified as a Ramsar site and an Important Bird Area (IBA; see

above), this large area (2,291,200 ha) supports a diversity of birds, and much of the

general description for the IBA (Simmons et al. 1998) is also relevant to the study area

in terms of sketching the broader context of the biodiversity.

The Park supports at least 340 bird species. Slightly fewer bird species have been

recorded in the four QDS representing the study area (SABAP data; Appendix 1),

namely 254 or 38% of the 676 Namibian species; however, these relatively lower

numbers are ascribed to limited sampling effort rather than to actual lower diversity

(W Versfeld pers. comm.). At least 85 species (34%) of these birds are associated with

wetlands at some stage of their life cycle, although the majority are terrestrial.

Although the field visit took place during dry conditions in the normally wet rainy

season in April 2013, over 60 species were recorded in the general area.

In terms of wetland species the Etosha Pan is of particular importance as large

numbers of both Greater Flamingo and Lesser Flamingo regularly breed here when

rainfall exceeds 440 mm p.a. (Simmons et al. 1998). Etosha is one of only two regular

breeding sites for these species in southern Africa, the other being Sua Pan in the

Makgadikgadi Salt Pans in Botswana. In recent years the pan has regularly held over

20,000 waterbirds during the wet season. Apart from flamingos, White Pelican and

Chestnut-banded Plover also breed here in large numbers in years of good rainfall.

Figure 29: Short grasses and scattered trees in the oshana habitat in the

vicinity of the processing plant.



May 2013

Recent research has shown that while flamingos occur in spectacular numbers, they

rarely breed successfully (only one in nine years) because the water rapidly

evaporates, exposing chicks and fledglings to predators and eliminating food

sources adjacent to the colony. The low breeding success in recent years has shown

that the pan does not support a self-sustaining population (see also below).

Rarities are also attracted at such times, including Slaty Egret and Striped Crake. The

pan and its surrounding grassveld is also good for Palearctic migrants, including

important numbers of Black-winged Pratincole and Caspian Plover.

The Pan supports other wetland species including large numbers of Cape Teal and

Red-billed Teal; and smaller numbers of Red-winged Pratincole, Saddle-billed Stork,

Wattled Crane and Crowned Crane in the wet season. Etosha also supports the only

breeding population of Blue Crane outside South Africa, a tiny population in decline.

The Park is particularly rich in raptors with 46 species recorded, including all vulture

species found in Namibia; 12 eagle species including scavengers such as Tawny

Eagle and Bateleur Eagle. The far western woodland holds small populations of

endemics and near-endemics including Violet Woodhoopoe, Carp's Black Tit,

Monteiro's Hornbill, Bradfield's Hornbill, Rosy-faced Lovebird, Rüppell's Parrot, White-

tailed Shrike, Rockrunner and Hartlaub's Francolin.

Typical open country species found most commonly around the pan include Kori

Bustard, Ludwig's Bustard, Black-bellied Korhaan, Burchell's Courser, Temminck's

Courser, Double-banded Courser, and all of southern Africa's sandgrouse species.

Species preferring wooded Acacia woodland and partial cover include Red-billed

Francolin, Red-crested Korhaan, Crimson-breasted Shrike, babblers, sunbirds,

waxbills, Long-tailed Glossy Starling and Burchell's Glossy Starling, and Sociable

Weaver.

4 .3 POTENTIAL SENSIT IVIT Y

The potential sensitivity of the bird species is assessed according to the following

criteria: Red Data status, endemism/habitat specialisation and nomadic/migrant

habits.

4.3.1 RED DATA BIRD SPECIES

Of the 254 species recorded in the Otjivalunda study area (see Appendix 1), 24

(10%) are classed as threatened in Namibia (Simmons & Brown in press), while four

more (2%) are threatened in southern Africa (Chittenden 2007). Fifteen species are

also Globally Threatened (BirdLife 2013).



May 2013

The Threatened species in each Red Data category include the following:

Critically Endangered: Wattled Crane, Cape Vulture

Endangered: Ludwig's Bustard (candidate for Endangered), Saddle-billed

Stork

Near Threatened: Greater Painted Snipe, Chestnut-banded Plover, Black-

winged Pratincole, Bat Hawk, Lanner Falcon, Black-necked Grebe, White

Pelican, Yellow-billed Stork, African Openbill, Woolly-necked Stork, Marabou

Stork

Vulnerable: Southern Ground-Hornbill, Grey Crowned Crane, Blue Crane,

White-backed Vulture, Lappet-faced Vulture, White-headed Vulture,

Bateleur, Tawny Eagle, Martial Eagle, Greater Flamingo, Lesser Flamingo

Species that are also Globally threatened include: Ludwig's Bustard, Grey

Crowned Crane, Blue Crane, Wattled Crane, Black-winged Pratincole, White-

backed Vulture, Cape Vulture, Lapped-faced Vulture, White-headed Vulture,

Bateleur, Secretarybird, Martial Eagle, Lesser Flamingo

Endangered in s Afr (only): African Fish-Eagle (V), Kori Bustard (V), Great

Crested Grebe (E), Rufous-bellied Heron (E), Black Stork (E)

4.3.2 ENDEMIC BIRD SPECIES/HABITAT SPECIALISTS

The study area is home to one species (0.5%) that is near-endemic to Namibia,

namely Bradfield's Swift; a further 48 (8%) species are endemic/near-endemic to

southern Africa (Appendix 1). Endemism (having a restricted distribution range) is a

factor that increases the vulnerability of a species to impacts such as disturbance

and habitat destruction.

The southern African endemics/near-endemics include Orange River Francolin, Red-

billed Spurfowl, South African Shelduck, Cape Shoveler, Acacia Pied Barbet,

Monteiro's Hornbill, Southern Yellow-billed Hornbill, Ludwig's Bustard, Red-crested

Korhaan, Northern Black Korhaan, Blue Crane, Namaqua sandgrouse, Double-

banded Sandgrouse, Burchell's Sandgrouse, Burchell's Courser, Cape Vulture,

Southern Pale Chanting Goshawk; and a variety of smaller birds including Crimson-

breasted Shrike, Pririt Batis, Southern White-crowned Shrike, Cape Penduline-Tit, Ashy

Tit, African Red-eyed Bulbul, Black-faced Babbler, Southern Pied Babbler, Black-

chested Prinia, Barred Wren-Warbler, Monotonous Lark, Cape Clapper Lark, Sabota

Lark, Fawn-coloured Lark, Spike-heeled Lark, Grey-backed Sparrowlark, Stark's Lark,

Pink-billed lark, Marico Flycatcher, Kalahari Scrub-Robin, Anteating Chat, Burchell's



May 2013

Starling, Dusky Sunbird, Scalyfeathered Finch, Sociable Weaver, Southern Masked-

Weaver, Red-headed Finch, Shafttailed Whydah, Great Sparrow, Cape Sparrow,

Yellow Canary.

4.3.3 MIGRANT AND NOMADIC BIRD SPECIES

Sixty-eight (27%) of the bird species in the Otjivalunda study area are migrant, i.e.

undertake large-scale, regular seasonal movements, usually to the northern

hemisphere and back, while a large proportion (97 or 38%) are nomadic at some

stage of their lives. Nomadic species generally remain within the southern African

sub region, moving around widely and in no fixed pattern, to exploit patchy and

unpredictable food, water and other environmental resources, mainly in response to

climatic conditions (Brown et al. 2011). Numbers of and abundance of nomadic

species may vary dramatically over time.

Nomadic bird species tend to follow rainfall and seasonal changes in food

abundance. Bird densities may thus change in the area following rain, and

insectivore species, such as Kori Bustard, Ludwig’s Bustard, Karoo Korhaan and

Burchell’s Courser, may move in temporarily if food abundance increases following

rain. Other species that respond in a similar manner include passerines (e.g.

canaries) and raptors (e.g. kestrels, falcons and owls).

4 .4 BIRD SPECIES OF CONCERN

4.4.1 WETLAND SPECIES

Three Red Data wetland bird species are of concern, namely Chestnut-banded

Plover, Lesser Flamingo and Greater Flamingo. The detailed species' accounts and

distribution maps below are based on the (draft) Namibian Red Data book for birds,

"Birds to watch in Namibia: red, rare and endemic species" (Simmons & Brown in

press).



May 2013

Chestnut-

banded Plover

Distribution in

Namibia derived

from SABAP

records, wetland

counts and nest

records

(Simmons &

Brown in press)

4.4.2 CHESTNUT-BANDED PLOVER

One of the species of concern is the

Chestnut-banded Plover (Simmons et al.

2007; W Versfeld pers. comm.). This small

wetland bird species is classed as Near

Threatened in Namibia (Simmons &

Brown in press). It feeds and breeds in

salt-pan habitats in the study area and

could potentially be impacted by

physical disturbance during con-

struction of the saltworks, as well as by

subsequent habitat changes. The

potential sensitivity of this species is

related to the fact that it is highly

specialised and adapted to these saline habitats, and therefore an important

indicator of environmental health.

The nominate race of this species is endemic to southern Africa and occurs very

patchily in its highly specialised niche – on salt pans and saline coastal flats (Simmons

& Brown in press).

It breeds on the major inland pans of Etosha and the Makgadikgadi in Namibia and

Botswana respectively, but also in coastal saline areas. It feeds and breeds on highly

saline pans, coastal flats and in artificial evaporation pans. Breeding birds typically

occur at the edge of partially flooded inland pans such as Etosha and the

surrounding salt pans such as Pan Points Pan, Natukanoaka Pan and Lake Oponono

(W Versfeld pers obs, Jarvis et al. 2001). Records of breeding, however, (n = 57)

indicate that breeding occurs mainly at the coast, Etosha and Lüderitz (Jarvis et al.

2001). Nests are typically scrapes in dry sand or on hard salt crust on the edge of salt

pans or coastal flats well beyond the reach of water. Breeding success is unknown

but occurs mainly after summer rains have flooded inland pans in April – May but

with a few records from November – January (Jarvis et al. 2001). Coastal salt works

with their more dependable water levels are frequently used sites (M Boorman

unpubl data).

The dependence of over 90% of this species' population on just two coastal sites puts

the Chestnut-banded Plover at risk. It is arguable whether salt works have increased

the possible range of habitats or population size of this species (Tree 1997) because

they are often sited on areas which are naturally salty and may in the long term lead

to the silting up of sites that are otherwise washed with high tides or flooded with

river water following substantial rains. With global warming and sea level rise (IPCC



May 2013

2001) this species may be prone to more flooding of its coastal sites – a possible

advantage – but its inland breeding will almost certainly experience less frequent

flooding as rainfall decreases, reducing breeding success as it appeared to do

during the dry 1980s and 1990s.

The southern African race (pallidus) is designated as Near-Threatened in Namibia

because the population fluctuates around 10 000 individuals, and the majority are,

at critical times of year, concentrated in only two locations on the Namibian coast.

While the Etosha Pan is protected, water abstraction from the Abenab aquifers to

the south-east have already resulted in less water reaching the pan from the east

(Christelis and Struckmeier 2001). The salt pans to the west are utilised for salt

abstraction, and Lake Oponono outside the Park boundaries is used by local

herdsmen to water their cattle. Their dogs and snares they set in the vicinity of their

temporary camps (W Versfeld pers obs) will all take a toll on these and other

wetland species dependent on these temporary wetlands.

Studies of the feeding ecology and breeding success of this species are required to

determine why this species prefers more saline areas, and if they are more successful

in such areas. Ecologically it is poorly known what proportion of the Chestnut–

banded Plover population breeds inland on Etosha and the Makgadikgadi pans

and thus how dependant this species is on the great salt pans of southern Africa.

This may become important as summer rainfall diminishes over southern Africa under

climate change scenarios (IPCC 2001, Midgley et al. 2001, Simmons et al. 2004),

presumably reducing the quality and quantity of the breeding habitat for this and

other salt-pan species.

Chestnut-banded Plover has been recorded in the QDS east of the Otjivalunda salt

pans and northwards to Lake Oponono as well as on Etosha Pan. A small group of

these birds was seen at the salt pans to the west of the Ekuma River in April 2013 at

sunset – even though the pans were dry. As this site lies within Etosha NP, the

chances of disturbance by cattle, herdsmen and their dogs is considerably less than

in the adjacent areas to the north. No birds were seen at Otjivalunda but, in view of

the observed extensive use of the pan "edge" area by cattle, game and vehicles

and the resulting disturbance, this is not surprising.

4.4.3 LESSER FLAMINGO AND GREATER FLAMINGO

Other species of concern include Lesser Flamingo (Near Threatened, Globally

Threatened) and Greater Flamingo (Near Threatened, Simmons & Brown in press),

which use the salt pans adjacent to the Otjivalunda pans on a seasonal basis and

would likewise be impacted by physical disturbance and any habitat changes

resulting from the development (W Versfeld pers. comm.).



May 2013

Lesser

Flamingo &

Greater

Flamingo Distribution in

Namibia derived

from SABAP

records, wetland

counts and nest

records

(Simmons &

Brown in press)

4.4.4 LESSER FLAMINGO

Lesser Flamingo has a more restricted

distribution in southern Africa than

Greater Flamingo, and breeds in mass

concentrations at only two flooded salt

pans, Etosha (Namibia) and Sua Pan

(Botswana; Berry 1972, McCulloch &

Irvine 2004). Lake Natron in Tanzania

(Brown et al. 1982) is the other regular

site. Successful breeding has also taken

place on an artificial breeding island at

Kamfer's Dam in South Africa (Anderson

2008). Non-breeding birds are found

concentrated at commercial salt pans

inland and coastal bays, especially Walvis Bay, Mile 4 Saltworks and Sandwich

Harbour. Inland they are most numerous at Etosha Pan, Lake Oponono and in the

Bushmanland (Tsumkwe) Pans (Williams & Velasquez 1997, Simmons et al. 1999).

Africa-wide, numbers have been estimated at 4 million birds (Howard 1997, Simmons

2000), although recent African estimates have been reduced to 1.5 - 2.5 million birds

(Flamingo Specialist Group, Waterfowl and Wetlands Trust). The largest (exceptional)

populations recorded in Namibia were estimated at 1.1 million birds in Etosha in 1971

(Berry 1972), and about 1.4 million birds on the Mkgadikgadi Pans in 1974 (Parker

1975). Populations resident in southern Africa declined markedly from the late 1970s

when 55 000 were estimated (Cooper & Hockey 1981) to 1994 when 40 000 birds

were found in the best instantaneous winter count (July 1994) from southern Africa

(Simmons 1997).

The Lesser Flamingo prefers more saline habitat than the Greater Flamingo,

especially salt pans, salt works evaporation ponds, and brackish rivers such as the

Ekuma River (Berry 1972, Williams & Velasquez 1997, W Versfeld pers obs). It feeds

day and night for up to 12.5 hr/24 hr, by wading in shallow water, with bill upside-

down, filtering cyano-bacteria from the surface, and small diatoms from the bottom

layers (Brown et al. 1982).

Breeding in Etosha occurs typically after annual rainfall exceeds 400 mm; egg laying

usually begins in January-February, starting within weeks of the birds migrating to the

Pan (Berry 1972). Success is greater on average when rainfall exceeds 440 mm

(Simmons 1996). Breeding colonies comprising several thousand nests are made far

out on the salt pan, frequently mixed with Greater Flamingos (Berry 1972, W Versfeld

unpubl data). Breeding is rarely successful, however, and fluctuating pan water



May 2013

reduces food supplies and increases predation, leading to mass mortality (Berry

1972, Simmons 1996). The recruitment rate is estimated at 0.04-0.053 young/pr/yr - a

rate too low to sustain southern African populations (Simmons 1996).

Direct threats in Namibia include low level organochlorine pesticide residues used

extensively in the catchment area of the Ekuma River against malaria mosquitos.

Naturally low breeding frequency and success occurs in Etosha (Simmons 1996), but

this will in future be exacerbated by reduction in eastward inflow onto Etosha Pan

from the Omuramba Omatako due to mining of aquifer water outside the park

(Christelis & Struckmeier 2001). Climate change will probably further exacerbate this

as annual rainfall diminishes over southern Africa in future years (IPCC 2001, Simmons

et al. 2004). At the unprotected Sua Pan breeding site in Botswana, soda ash mining

around the main breeding site pumps water from deep underground and may

reduce water levels on the pan (Hancock 1990). The potential negative impacts of

soda ash mining at Lake Natron, Tanzania on the breeding of Lesser Flamingos have

received much publicity (e.g. BirdLife International 2008). These impacts include

disturbance, habitat destruction and poaching. The potential negative impacts of

corrosive soda ash as an irritant on cuts and sores (e.g. on flamingo legs) have been

also been mentioned (e.g.

http://www.rogersheldon.com/Shinseido/Resource_pages/Pages%20on%20website/

legend_of_phoenix.htm; http://www.genchem.com/precautions-in-handling.asp

http://www.pharmcoaaper.com/pages/MSDS/MSDS_S/sodium_carbonate_dense_s

oda_ash.pdf).

The Lesser Flamingo is classified as Vulnerable in Namibia and Near Threatened in

World conservation assessments (Stattersfield & Capper 2000) and in South Africa's

Red data book (Anderson 2000). While recent figures have pushed the population

above those estimated in the early 1970s, the species is highly dependent upon just

two (mass) breeding sites, Etosha and Sua Pans, and these have limitations (see

above). Disturbance from low flying aircraft is a further threat.

The world population of Lesser Flamingo was estimated at two million in 2008

(Anderson 2008). To safeguard the continuing trend for increasing populations in

southern Africa, it was recommended that management and tourism authorities

should investigate the feasibility of artificial breeding islands at Etosha and other sites

under threat (Simmons & Brown in press). The success of the French breeding island

in the Camargue (Johnson 1989) has precipitated many attempts to build artificial

breeding islands in southern Africa (Simmons 1996; Anderson 2008; W Tarboton,

unpubl.), some with little success because of needless bureaucracy. A coastal

breeding island constructed in 2001 at Walvis Bay salt works was not successful (R

Braby pers obs). An artificial breeding island was constructed at Kamfer's Dam in

Kimberley, South Africa in 2006, and Lesser Flamingos first bred successfully there in in

http://www.rogersheldon.com/Shinseido/Resource_pages/Pages%20on%20website/legend_of_phoenix.htm

http://www.rogersheldon.com/Shinseido/Resource_pages/Pages%20on%20website/legend_of_phoenix.htm

http://www.genchem.com/precautions-in-handling.asp



May 2013

2008 (Anderson 2008). The use of breeding islands at Etosha would negate the need

for the rescue of chicks stranded on drying salt pans which are rarely successful

(Berry & Berry 1976, Fox et al. 1997). These will ensure more frequent breeding and

greater success than currently experienced.

Monitoring by MET Etosha Ecological Institute staff of breeding events and their

success on Etosha Pan should be continued and when breeding is successful the

ringing of a cohort of young should take place. These will allow an assessment of

survival and movement of these birds as undertaken by Etosha-released birds in 1994

(Fox et al. 1997). Conservation management should also continue to prevent

harassment by illegal low flying aircraft, in collaboration with Civil Aviation.

4.4.5 GREATER FLAMINGO

Greater Flamingo is widely distributed in southern Africa, with concentrations at

flooded salt pans (during breeding) and coastal bays during non-breeding. Inland

they are most numerous at Etosha Pan, Lake Oponono and the Bushmanland

(Tsumkwe) Pans; at the central coast, they are concentrated at Walvis Bay, MIle 4

Saltworks and Sandwich Harbour (Williams & Velasquez 1997).

The largest populations recorded were estimated at 100 000 birds in Etosha in 1971

(Berry 1972). Populations declined markedly in southern and all Africa between mid

1970s and mid 1990s, from 165 000 (Kahl 1975) to about 85 000 birds (Simmons 1996)

but presently stabilised at about 115 000 birds (data in Dodman et al. 1997).

The Greater Flamingo prefers less saline habitat than the Lesser Flamingo, including

recently flooded salt pans (s. Africa), alkaline lakes (Rift Valley), coastal bays and

river mouths, sewage works and inland dams (Berry 1972, Williams and Velasquez

1997, Anderson 2000). It feeds by wading in shallow water with bill upside down,

filtering small crustaceans and other invertebrates from the water column and mud.

Mainly takes marine benthic organisms such a molluscs, and diatoms, and saline

lake crustaceans such as fairy shrimps (e.g. Branchinella spp) and brine flies

(Ephydra spp.) (Berry 1972, G McCulloch unpubl data).

Breeding occurs in large, typically mixed colonies on raised islands on flooded salt

pan at Etosha, with a maximum of 27 000 pairs recorded in 1971 (Berry 1972). Laying

induced by extensive flooding and continued high levels increases chances of

success (Cezilly et al. 1995, Simmons 2000, McCulloch & Irvine 2004). In Etosha, main

rains occur February and laying typically starts then when annual rains exceeds 400

mm (Berry 1972). Success greater on average when rainfall over 440 mm (Simmons

1996). Fluctuating pan water reduces food supplies and increases predation leading

to mass mortality (Berry 1972, Simmons 1996).



May 2013

Direct threats to flamingos in Namibia are mentioned above (see Lesser Flamingo).

The Greater Flamingo is also classified as Vulnerable in Namibia and Near-

threatened in World conservation assessments (Stattersfield & Capper 2000) and in

South Africa's Red data book (Anderson 2000).

Operations to rescue chicks stranded on drying salt pans are rarely successful (Berry

& Berry 1976; Fox et al. 1997) because of the high predation on released chicks;

and, as for Lesser Flamingo, the construction of breeding islands has also been

recommended as a conservation strategy.

Lesser Flamingo has been recorded east of the Otjivalunda salt pans and at Lake

Oponono, as well as on Etosha Pan, while Greater Flamingo has been recorded in

the Otjivalunda salt pan area, and eastwards and at Lake Oponono. Numerous

flamingo feathers were found on the edge of the salt pans (D) west of the Ekuma

River during the field visit, indicating that these birds use the area when the pans

have water. As they lie within the Etosha NP, there is considerably less chance of

disturbance by cattle, herdsmen and their dogs than outside the Park. No flamingos

were observed at Otjivalunda during the field visit in April 2013, as could be

expected under the prevailing dry conditions; but had the area been used

previously, there should have been at least some sign of feathers on the pan edge.

During the above field visit, mud samples were collected for hatching experiments

for the sampling of wetland invertebrates. Unfortunately no brine shrimp or any other

crustaceans were hatched, although Ephydridae (brine fly) larvae were obtained in

one sample, from the clay pan north-east of Otjivalunda (Pan C in Figure 3; J Irish

pers. comm.). This may be regarded as an indicator that this pan would be a

suitable habitat for Greater Flamingo – although no feathers were found there.

4.4.6

Figure 30: Clay pan west of the Ekuma River, where many flamingos were observed. The pan

lies within the Etosha NP and is relatively undisturbed.



May 2013

TERRESTRIAL BIRDS

Large terrestrial birds including Kori Bustard (and Ludwig's Bustard), korhaans,

francolins and raptors use habitats such as the flat grasslands on sand around the

pans. Bustards and korhaans are nomadic, insectivorous bird species that tend to

follow rainfall and seasonal changes in food abundance, and may move into the

area following rain.

Ludwig's Bustard is near-endemic to southern Africa and typical of arid and semi-

arid regions of the subcontinent. The species has recently been uplisted to Globally

Threatened and is under consideration for Endangered Status in Namibia, due

mainly to unsustainable levels of mortality on power lines (Allan & Anderson 2010).

This bustard has been recorded in the Otjivalunda Pan area (Appendix 1).

Kori Bustard is classed as Vulnerable in South Africa). It is more abundant in the study

area and has been recorded in all four QDS. Footprints were found in the mud in the

grassy areas around the edge of the pan, together with droppings on the grassy

flats, during the field visit in April 2013.

Ground Hornbill is classed as Vulnerable and has been recorded in the Lake

Oponono area. This large, ground-dwelling species is vulnerable to disturbance and

poaching. It is probably not often present in these habitats any more due to the

increasing human presence.

All of these large terrestrial species would be sensitive to disturbance, habitat

destruction and road kills, and in particular to poaching.

Figure 31: Signs of Kori Bustard activirt observed in the study area in April 2013:

footprints and droppings.



May 2013

Great Sparrow and Cape Sparrow, both near-endemics to southern Africa, are

potentially at risk from sodium chloride poisoning from spillage on the road in transit

to the processing plant. The toxicity of sodium chloride to passerines (e.g. sparrows)

has been investigated on the basis of numerous anecdotal reports of poisoning of

passerine birds by road salt in the United States and Canada (Bollinger 2005); sodium

chloride (NaCl) is widely used as a deicing agent on roadways. The results indicate

that passerines ingesting relatively small numbers of road salt granules or small

quantities of highly concentrated NaCl solutions are at risk of sodium poisoning.

4 .5 ENVIRONMENTAL SENSI T IVI T IES RELATED TO B IRDS

4.5.1 IDENTIFICATION OF RISK SOURCES

Environmental sensitivities related to birds are described below and in Table 4.

Table 4: Environmental sensitivities related to birds

DESCRIPTION SENSITIVITY POTENTIAL IMPACT

ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE

TOPOGRAPHY Pan edge (with fluctuating

waterline)

Potential feeding/

breeding habitat for

Chestnut-banded Plover

Roosting areas for

migrant birds

Feeding/ roosting/

breeding disturbance

Habitat destruction

Grasslands on sand flats Grasslands and drainage

lines / shallow valleys

provide food and shelter

to birds

Feeding/ roosting/


Habitat destruction

Poaching

WATER (Ephemeral) wetlands on salt

pans

Potential feeding/

breeding habitat for

flamingos and other

migrant birds

Feeding/ roosting/


Habitat destruction

MAN-MADE

FEATURES

Soft-sand road (used

frequently by ATV trucks)

Processing plant

Bird species are

unaccustomed to large

vehicles and may use

the road for roosting/

feeding/ rearing chicks

Potential spillage of

Road kills, poaching

and disturbance

Sodium chloride

poisoning of

passerines



May 2013

DESCRIPTION SENSITIVITY POTENTIAL IMPACT

ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURE

salt(s) in new areas in

view of proven toxicity of

sodium chloride to

passerines (e.g. sparrows)

Processing plant Power supply structures

Potential spillage of salts

(see above)

Collisions/

electrocution on

power supply

structures

Sodium chloride

poisoning of

passerines

BIOLOGICAL

SENSITIVITIES

Threatened conservation

status

Endemism/restricted

distribution with narrow

habitat requirements

Mobility/ nomadism /

migrant habits

Increase sensitivity of

populations

Effects of impacts

likely to become

cumulative

Potential sources of risk to the environment as a result of the proposed project at the

Otjivalunda pans that emerge as being particularly important and/or sensitive for

birds are summarised in Table 4 and include:

The pan edges (with fluctuating waterline), which are potential feeding/

breeding habitat for Chestnut-banded Plover and roosting areas for migrant

birds; potential impacts include feeding/ roosting/ breeding disturbance and

habitat destruction

Grasslands and drainage lines / shallow valleys on sand flats provide food

and shelter to birds; potential impacts include feeding/ roosting/ breeding

disturbance, habitat destruction and poaching

(Ephemeral) wetlands on salt pans provide potential feeding/ breeding

habitat for flamingos and other migrant birds; potenial impacts include

feeding/ roosting/ breeding disturbance and habitat destruction



May 2013

The soft-sand road (used frequently by ATV trucks) is a source of risk as bird

species are unaccustomed to large vehicles and may use the road for

roosting/ feeding/ rearing chicks; potential impacts are road kills, poaching

and disturbance; potential spillage of sodium chloride could result in

poisoning of passerines

At the processing plant, sources of risk include collisions/electrocutions on

power supply structures; and the above mentioned poisoning of passeries

due to spillage of sodium chloride

Threatened conservation status, endemism/restricted distribution with narrow

habitat requirements and/or mobility/ nomadism / migrant habits increase

sensitivity of populations and render the effects of impacts more likely to

become cumulative

The cumulative effects of the above impacts could result in some bird species

moving from the area. However, the existing disturbance from cattle (and herdsmen

and their dogs) also needs to be considered.

4 .6 BIRD SPECIES POTENT IALLY AT R ISK IN THE STUDY AREA

Although many of the bird species recorded in the study area could be potentially

at risk from the proposed development, it is important to direct risk assessments and

mitigation towards species that have high biological significance, in order to

achieve the most optimum results with the available resources at hand (Van Rooyen

2008). For the purposes of this study, therefore, the focus is on Red Data species

(Appendix 1):

Endangered: Ludwig's Bustard (candidate for Endangered in Namibia; near-

endemic to southern Africa)

Near Threatened: Chestnut-banded Plover

Vulnerable: Lesser Flamingo, Greater Flamingo, Southern Ground Hornbill

Globally Threatened: Lesser Flamingo, Ludwig's Bustard

Threatened in southern Africa: Kori Bustard

Other southern African endemics/near-endemics (not listed above): Orange

River Francolin, Red-billed Spurfowl, Monteiro's Hornbill, Southern Yellow-billed

Hornbill, Red-crested Korhaan, Northern Black Korhaan, Great Sparrow, Cape

Sparrow

Other nomadic/migrant species (not listed above): Karoo Korhaan, Burchell’s

Courser



May 2013

5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

5 .1 IDENT IF ICAT ION OF R I SK SOURCES

The impact assessment methodology is contained in Table 1 and 2 (above). Risk

sources are identified in Table 4 (above).

5 .2 IDENT IF ICAT ION OF KE Y IMPACTS ANT ICIPATE D

The species considered at risk by the present development include the following

main groups of birds (see also Appendix 1 and 5.6 above):

5.2.1 FOR THE OTJIVALUNDA SALT PAN AREA

Aquatic birds:

o Chestnut-banded Plover (NT): probability moderate

o Lesser Flamingo (V, GT) and Greater Flamingo (V): probability

moderate

The key potential impacts are disturbance and habitat destruction from construction

and operational activities; and poaching.

Terrestrial birds:

o Kori Bustard (nomadic): probability moderate-high; and Ludwig’s

Bustard (recently uplisted to Globally Threatened and candidate for

Endangered in Namibia; near-endemic to southern Africa): probability

low

o Southern Ground Hornbill (V): probability very low

o Great Sparrow and Cape Sparrow (N/E s Afr): probability moderate-low

The main potential impacts are disturbance and habitat destruction from

construction and operational activities; and poaching. Bustards are especially

sensitive to disturbance during nesting periods, and may easily desert the nest. The

above impacts are most likely in open areas. Sodium poisoning of sparrows is a

possibility.



May 2013

5.2.2 FOR THE ACCESS ROAD AND PROCESSING PLANT AREA

Road kills (e.g. of korhaans, francolins and other ground-dwelling birds) are a

potential threat on the 50 km access road.

At the plant, the main potential impacts are bird strikes/collisions on the power line,

especially if it should run near water bodies (e.g. oshanas or tailings dams).

Electrocutions of birds (including owls and other raptors) may take place on

transformers and substation structures. Sodium poisoning due to spillage is a

possibility.

5 .3 ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT S BASED ON THE CRITE RIA SET OUT

IN TH IS DOCUMENT

Identified impacts are described in Table 5.

Table 5: Description of identified impacts

CRITERIA

IMPACT

1. PHYSICAL

DISTURBANCE

2. HABITAT

DESTRUCTION 3. POACHING

4. ROAD ASSOCIATED

MORTALITIES

EXTENT Site specific: at the

facility and

regional (road)

Site specific: at the

facility

Site specific: at

the facility

Site specific: at the

facility and regional

(road)

DURATION Long: 7 years (life

of the mining)

Long: 7 years (life

of the mining)

Long: 7 years

(life of the

mining)

Long: 7 years (life of

the mining)

PHASE Construction/

operation-

maintenance/

rehabilitation

Construction/

operation-

maintenance/

rehabilitation

Construction/

operation-

maintenance/

rehabilitation

Construction/

operation-

maintenance/

rehabilitation

INTENSITY/

MAGNITUDE

Moderate to

serious effects

Moderate to

serious effects s

Minor to

moderate

effects

Minor to moderate

effects

PROBABILITY

(WITHOUT

Definite Definite Probable

(distinct

Probable (distinct

possibility)



May 2013

CRITERIA

IMPACT

1. PHYSICAL

DISTURBANCE

2. HABITAT

DESTRUCTION 3. POACHING

4. ROAD ASSOCIATED

MORTALITIES

MITIGATION) possibility)

DEGREE OF

CONFIDENCE IN

PREDICTIONS

Good Good Good Good

NATURE OF

IMPACT

Potentially

cumulative

Potentially

cumulative

Potentially

cumulative

Potentially cumulative

WITH MITIGATION Lower probability Lower probability Lower

probability

Lower probability

SIGNIFICANCE Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate

The potential impacts identified in terms of the criteria in Table 5 (above) may be

described as follows:

Physical disturbance and habitat destruction

Rated as: both site specific and regional (road), long term (7 years), during

construction, operation/maintenance and rehabilitation, moderate to serious

effects, definite, lower probability with mitigation, and overall of moderate

significance.

During the construction, operation/maintenance and rehabilitation phases of the

project, a certain amount of disturbance to birds, as well as habitat destruction and

alteration, will inevitably take place. Birds may be disturbed while going about their

daily activities, such as feeding, roosting and in particular breeding – in some cases

on a seasonal basis. The construction of berms and salt pans requires mechanical

means, and vehicle and human activity on the site is then at a peak. Aerial

disturbance is likely to increase.

Any disturbance or removal of natural vegetation, such as grass on the flats, results in

changes to the habitat available to the birds of the area, potentially impacting on

their ability to breed, forage and roost in the vicinity.

(Ephemeral) wetland habitats are likewise susceptible to habitat destruction.



May 2013

Poaching and road associated mortalities

Rated as: both site specific and regional (road), long term (7 years), during

construction, operation/maintenance and rehabilitation, minor to moderate effects,

probable, lower probability with mitigation, and overall of moderate significance.

The increased presence of humans and vehicles in the area could potentially lead

to poaching and road mortalities. Sodium poisoning (to passerines) is a possibility.

Collision and electrocutions


flagged as a possibility, although of low probability.

Cumulative effects




disturbance, habitat destruction, poaching and road mortalities.

In addition to environmental features, other ecological/biological features such as

an already Threatened conservation status; endemism/restricted distribution with

narrow habitat requirements; and mobility/ nomadism/ migrant habits all increase

the sensitivity of bird populations and render the effects of impacts more likely to be

cumulative.

5 .4 MIT IGAT ION AND ENHANCEM ENT MEASURES

Physical disturbance and habitat destruction








considered (W Versfeld pers. comm.), using the island at Kamfer’s Dam in

South Africa (Anderson 2008; see Appendix 2) as a model. This should be



May 2013

relatively easy in that the removal of material from the pan will create a

depression which will then collect and keep water for longer periods; if an

island is created with a moat of water around it, it could possibly assist with

the breeding of the flamingos, and this step would ultimately create a positive

impact.

Poaching and road-associated kills






strictly enforced.



drawn up, and speed limits should be adhered to. Aerial disturbance should





Collision and electrocutions





May 2013

5 .5 MONITORING


policy, especially in an ephemeral habitat such as the salt pan area.

It is recommended that monitoring commences from the time of construction, for

any signs of bird mortalities resulting from the construction and operation of the salt


grasslands. During monitoring, a look out should also be kept for possible bird

mortalities related to road kills, sodium poisoning, collision and electrocution on

power line structures.

One advantage of the development schedule is that only the larger eastern pan will

be mined initially, while the Otjivalunda west pan will remain unutilised until a later

stage. This will enable comparisons to be made in terms of the effects of

disturbance.

Ideally, monitoring should take place on an ongoing basis.

5 .6 ADDIT IONAL ASSIGNMENTS





(EEI). The findings could be incorporated into the Environmental Management Plan





May 2013

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECO MMENDATIONS

The species considered at risk by the present development comprise the following

main groups of birds. At the Otjivalunda salt pan area, aquatic birds include

Chestnut-banded Plover (Near Threatened), Lesser Flamingo (Vulnerable, Globally

Threatened) and Greater Flamingo (Vulnerable). The key potential impacts are

identified as disturbance and habitat destruction from construction and operational

activities, including road and aerial traffic; and poaching. Terrestrial birds include

Kori Bustard (nomadic) and Ludwig’s Bustard (recently uplisted to Globally

Threatened and candidate for Endangered in Namibia; near-endemic to southern

Africa); and Southern Ground Hornbill (Vulnerable). The main potential impacts in

this case are disturbance and habitat destruction (as above), and poaching.

Bustards are especially sensitive to disturbance during nesting periods, and may

easily desert the nest.

For the access road, road kills (e.g. of korhaans, francolins and other ground-

dwelling birds) are a potential threat. Sodium poisoning of passerines (including

Great Sparrow and Cape Sparrow – both southern Africam near-endemics) from

road spillage is a possibility. At the plant, the main potential impacts are bird

strikes/collisions on the power supply structures, especially if it should run near water

bodies (e.g. oshanas or tailings dams). Electrocutions of birds (including owls and

other raptors) may take place on transformers and substation structures. Sodium

poisoning due to spillage is also a possibility.

The potential impacts identified may be summarised as follows: physical disturbance

and habitat destruction, rated as both site specific and regional (road), long term (7

years), during construction, operation/maintenance and rehabilitation, moderate

to serious effects, definite, lower probability with mitigation, and overall of moderate

significance; poaching and road associated mortalities, rated as both site specific

and regional (road), long term (7 years), during construction, operation/

maintenance and rehabilitation, minor to moderate effects, probable, lower

probability with mitigation, and overall of moderate significance; and collision and

electrocutions, rated as low probability.




disturbance, habitat destruction, poaching and road mortalities. In addition to

environmental features, other ecological/biological features such as an already

threatened conservation status; endemism/restricted distribution with narrow habitat

requirements; and mobility/ nomadism/ migrant habits all increase the sensitivity of



May 2013

bird populations and render the effects of impacts more likely to become

cumulative.

Recommended mitigation and enhancement measures are as follows:








considered, using the island at Kamfer’s Dam in South Africa (Anderson 2008;

see Appendix 2) as a model. If an island is created with a moat of water

around it, it could possibly assist with the breeding of the flamingos, and this

step would ultimately create a positive impact.






strictly enforced.



drawn up and speed limits should be adhered to. Aerial disturbance should








policy, especially in an ephemeral habitat such as the salt pan area. It is

recommended that monitoring commences from the time of construction, for any

signs of bird mortalities resulting from the construction and operation of the salt



May 2013


grasslands. During monitoring a look out should be kept for possible bird mortalities

related to road kills, sodium poisoning, collision and electrocution on power line

structures. One advantage of the development schedule is that only the larger

eastern pan will be mined initially, while the Otjivalunda west pan will remain

unutilised until a later stage. This will enable comparisons to be made in terms of the

effects of disturbance. Ideally, monitoring should take place on an ongoing basis.





(EEI). The findings should be incorporated into the Environmental Management Plan





May 2013

7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The invaluable inputs of local bird conservationist Wilferd Versfeld are

acknowledged with thanks. We also wish to thank Oliver Krappmann, Kai Zech, John

Irish and Wilferd for the willing assistance in the field; and Eloise Carstens of Enviro

Dynamics for ongoing support and assistance.

Photographs: Ann Scott



May 2013

6 REFERENCES

Allan, D, Anderson, M. 2010. Assessment of the threat faced by South Africa’s

bustard species. Unpublished report to Birdlife South Africa.

Anderson, MD. 2000. The status of flamingos in the Northern Cape Province, South

Africa. Ostrich 71: 425-437.

Anderson, MD. 2008. A vision in pink. Lesser Flamingo breeding success. African Birds

& Birding April/May 2008: 42-49.

Anon., 2012c. Government Gazette of the Republic of Namibia No. 4878, Windhoek,

6 February 2012.

Barnes, KN (ed.). 1998. Important Bird Areas of Namibia. In The Important Bird Areas

of southern Africa. pp295-332. BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg.

Barnes, KN (ed.). 2000. The Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho

and Swaziland. Johannesburg: BirdLife South Africa.

Berry HH. 1972. Flamingo breeding on the Etosha Pan, South West Africa, during

1971. Madoqua 1: 5-31.

Berry HH, Berry CU. 1976. Hand-rearing abandoned Greater Flamingoes

Phoenicopterus ruber L. in Etosha National Park, South West Africa. Madoqua 9:27-

32.

BirdLife International. 2008. Soda extraction plant at Lake Natron, Tanzania,

threatens East Africa's Lesser Flamingos. Presented as part of the BirdLife State of the

world's birds website. Available from:

http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/153. Checked: 04/06/2013

BirdLife International. 2013. IUCN Red List of bird species. www.birdlife.org.

Brown, CJ, Scott, A, Scott, M. 2011. Assessment of the possible impacts between

birds and a proposed mast to collect wind data at the NamPower Rotkop

Substation near Lüderitz. Unpublished report for NamPower, Namibia.

Bollinger, TK, Muneau, P, Wickstrom, ML. 2005. Toxicity of sodium chloride to house

sparrows (Passer domesticus). J Wildl Dis. 2005 Apr; 41(2):363-70.

Cezilly F, Boy V, Green RE, Hirons GJM, Johnson AR. 1995. Inter-annual variation in

Greater Flamingo breeding success in relation to water levels. Ecology 76: 20-26.

Chittenden, H. 2007. Roberts Bird Guide. Trustees of the John Voelcker Bird Book

Fund, Cape Town.

Christelis G, Struckmeier W (eds). 2001. Ground water in Namibia. Ministry of

Agriculture, Water and Rural Development. Windhoek.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16107671



May 2013

Dodman T, de Vaan C, Hubert E, Nivet C. 1997. African Waterbird Census 1997.

Wetlands International, Dakar Senegal.

EIS. 2013. Environmental Information Service, www.the-eis.com.

Fox VE, Lindeque PM, Simmons RE, Berry HH, Brain C, Braby R. 1997. Flamingo 'rescue'

in Etosha National Park, 1994: technical, conservation and economic considerations.

Ostrich 68: 72-76.

Hancock P. 1990. The flamingos of Sowa Bushcall 1:16-21.

Harrison, JA, Allan, DG, Underhill, LG, Herremans, M, Tree, AJ, Parker, V, Brown, CJ

(eds). 1997. The atlas of southern African birds. Vol 1: Non-Passerines, and Vol 2:

Passerines. BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg.

Hockey, PAR, Dean, WRJ, Ryan, PG (eds). 2005. Roberts Birds of Southern Africa, 7th

Edition. The Trustees of the John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape Town.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 2001. Climate change 2001:

impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press.

Jarvis A, Robertson T, Brown CJ, Simmons RE. 2001. Namibian Avifaunal database.

National Biodiversity Programme. Ministry of Environment & Tourism, Windhoek

Johnson AR. 1989. Population studies and conservation of Greater Flamingos in the

Camargue. In: Spaans AL (ed) Wetlands and waterbirds. Pudoc, Wageningen, The

Netherlands.

Kahl MP. 1975. Distribution and numbers - a summary. In: J. Kear K, Duplaix-Hall (eds.).

Flamingos. T & AD Poyser. Berkhamsted, UK.

Kolberg H. 2002. Preliminary inventory of Namibia's wetlands. Ministry of Environment

& Tourism, Windhoek.

McCulloch G, Irvine K. 2004. Breeding of Greater and Lesser Flamingos at Sua Pan,

Botswana, 1998-2001. Ostrich 75: 236-242.

Mendelsohn, J., Jarvis, A., Roberts, C., & Robertson, T. 2009. Atlas of Namibia: A

portrait of the land and its people. Cape Town, South Africa: Sunbird Publishers (PTY)

LTD.

Midgley GF, Rutherford M, Bond WJ. 2001. The heat is on….impacts of climate

change on plant diversity in southern Africa. WWF South Africa, Cape Town.

Simmons RE. 1996. Population declines, viable breeding areas, and management

options for Flamingos in Southern Africa. Conserv. Biol. 10:504-514.

Simmons RE. 1997. The Lesser Flamingo in southern Africa - a summary. In G Howard

(ed.) Conservation of the Lesser Flamingo in East Africa and beyond. Pp 50 -61. IUCN

East Africa, Lake Bogoria Nairobi, Kenya.



May 2013

Simmons RE. 2000. Declines and movements of Lesser Flamingos in Africa. Waterbirds

23:40-46.

Simmons, RE, Boix-Hinzen, C, Barnes, KN, Jarvis, AM, Robertson, A. 1998. Important

Bird Areas of Namibia. in: The Important Bird Areas of southern Africa. Barnes, KN

(ed.). pp295-332. BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg.

Simmons RE, Barnard PE, Jamieson IG. 1999. What precipitates influxes of birds to

ephemeral pans in arid landscapes? Observations from Namibia. Ostrich 70: 145-148.

Simmons RE, Barnard PE, Dean WRJ, Midgley GF, Thuiller W, Hughes G 2004. Climate

change and birds: perspectives and prospects from southern Africa. Ostrich 75: 295-

308.

Simmons R, Baker N, Braby R, Dodman T, Nasirwa O, Tyler S, Versveld W, Wearne K &

Wheeler M. 2007. The Chestnut-banded Plover is an overlooked globally Near

Threatened Species. Bird Conservation International (2007) 17:273–283.

Simmons, RE, Brown, CJ In press. Birds to watch in Namibia: red, rare and endemic

species. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Namibia Nature Foundation, Windhoek.

Tree AJ. 1997. Chestnut-banded Plover In: Harrison JA, Allan DG, Underhill LG,

Herremans M, Tree AJ, Parker V, Brown CJ (eds). The Atlas of Southern African Birds.

Vol 1: 380-381 BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg.

Williams AJ, Velásquez C. 1997. Greater Flamingo. In: Harrison JA, Allan DG, Underhill

LG, Herremans M, Tree AJ, Parker V, Brown CJ (eds). The Atlas of Southern African

Birds. Vol. 1:112-113. BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg

Environmental Impact Assessment for the proposed Otjivalunda salt mining and soap production facility: Bird Asessment (May 2013)

APPENDIX 1. Checklist of bird species recorded in four QDS in the Otjivalunda salt pans area

Final: Bird Assessment Report (May 2013) 62

Key:

RVII = taxonomic order according to Roberts VII Birds of Southern Africa

RVI = Previous Roberts numbers

RDS = Red Data Status (LC = Least Concern, V = Vulnerable, NT = near Threatened, E = Endangered, CE = Critically Endangered; 1Chittenden 2007; 2Simmons &

Brown in press; 3BirdLife International 2012)

End S = Endemic status (E = endemic, NE = near-endemic, sA = southern Africa, Nam = Namibia)

Mov = movements (S = sedentary, N = nomadic, M = migrant, V = vagrant, R = rare)

Habitat (M = marine/coastal, W = wetland [coastal or freshwater], T = predominantly terrestrial)

Total QDS in which species was recorded (n = 4) = probability of occurrence in the study area

1815Da = Otjivalunda pans

1815Db = Otjivalunda east

1815Bd = Oponono south

1815Bb = Oponono

*Species of concern are indicated in red

Rob

VII

No.

Rob

VI

No. Scientific name Common name RDS End S Mov Hab

1815

Da

1815

Db

1815

Bd

1815

Bb

1 1 Struthio camelus Ostrich LC N T X X X X

4 189 Francolinus sephaena Crested Francolin LC S T X

8 193 Francolinus levaillantoides Orange River Francolin LC NE (sA) S T X

10 194 Pternistis adspersus Red-billed Spurfowl LC NE (sA) S T X X

14 199 Pternistis swainsonii Swainson's Spurfowl LC S T X

15 200 Coturnix coturnix Common Quail LC M T X X X

16 201 Coturnix delegorguei Harlequin Quail LC M T X X X

20 203 Numida meleagris Helmeted Guineafowl LC S T X X X X

21 100 Dendrocygna bicolor Fulvous Duck LC S W X

22 99 Dendrocygna viduata White-faced Duck LC S, N W X X

25 102 Alopochen aegyptiaca Egyptian Goose LC N W X X X

26 103 Tadorna cana South African Shelduck LC E (sA) N W X

27 116 Plectropterus gambensis Spur-winged Goose LC S W X

28 115 Sarkidiornis melanotos Comb Duck LC N, M W X X

30 106 Anas capensis Cape Teal LC N W X X X

34 112 Anas smithii Cape Shoveler LC NE (sA) N W X X X

36 108 Anas erythrorhyncha Redbilled Teal LC S, N W X X X X

39 107 Anas hottentota Hottentot Teal LC S, N W X

40 113 Netta erythrophthalma Southern Pochard LC S, M W X

41 205 Turnix sylvatica Kurrichane Buttonquail LC S, N T X X




Rob

VII

No.

Rob

VI


1815

Da

1815

Db

1815

Bd

1815

Bb

51 481 Campethera bennettii Bennett's Woodpecker LC S T X

53 483 Campethera abingoni Golden-tailed Woodpecker LC S T X X

57 486 Dendropicos fuscescens Cardinal Woodpecker LC S T X X

67 465 Tricholaema leucomelas Acacia Pied Barbet LC NE (sA) S T X

70 462 Tockus monteiri Monteiro's Hornbill LC E (sA) N T X X

71 458 Tockus erythrorhynchus Redbilled Hornbill LC S T X X

73 459 Tockus leucomelas Sthn Yellow-billed Hornbill LC NE (sA) S T X X X X

76 457 Tockus nasutus African Grey Hornbill LC S T X X X X

79 463 Bucorvus leadbeateri Southern Ground-Hornbill E1, V2 S T X

80 451 Upupa africana African Hoopoe LC S, N, M T X X X X

81 452 Green Wood-Hoopoe Redbilled Woodhoopoe LC S T X

83 454 Rhinopomastus cyanomelas Common Scimitarbill LC S T X X X

85 446 Coracias garrulus European Roller NT3 M T X X

86 447 Coracias caudatus Lilac-breasted Roller LC S T X X X X

88 449 Coracias naevius Purple Roller LC S, N T X X X X

93 436 Halcyon leucocephala Grey-headed Kingfisher LC M W, T X X

97 437 Halcyon chelicuti Striped Kingfisher LC S W

99 428 Ceryle rudis Pied Kingfisher LC S, N W X

101 444 Merops pusillus Little Bee-Eater LC S, N T, W X

102 445 Merops hirundineus Swallow-tailed Bee-Eater LC S T X X X X

105 440 Merops persicus Blue-cheeked Bee-Eater LC M T, W X

107 438 Merops apiaster European Bee-Eater LC M T X X X X

114 380 Clamator glandarius Great Spotted Cuckoo LC M T X

117 378 Cuculus clamosus Black Cuckoo LC M T X

119 375 Cuculus gularis African Cuckoo LC M T X

144 421 Cypsiurus parvus African Palm-Swift LC S T X X

147 411 Apus apus Common Swift LC M T X

150 413 Apus bradfieldi Bradfield's Swift LC NE (Nam) S T X

151 417 Apus affinis Little Swift LC S, M T X

159 373 Corythaixoides concolor Grey Go-away-bird LC S T X X X

160 392 Tyto alba Barn Owl LC S T X X X

162 396 Otus senegalensis African Scops-Owl LC S T X

163 397 Otus leucotis Sthn White-faced Scops-Owl LC S T X X X

165 401 Bubo africanus Spotted Eagle-Owl LC S T X X

166 402 Bubo lacteus Verreaux's Eagle-Owl LC S T X

169 398 Glaucidium perlatum Pearl-spotted Owlet LC S T X X

171 395 Asio capensis Marsh Owl LC S W X X

172 405 Caprimulgus pectoralis Fiery-necked Nightjar LC S, M T X X




Rob

VII

No.

Rob

VI


1815

Da

1815

Db

1815

Bd

1815

Bb

176 406 Caprimulgus rufigena Rufous-cheeked Nightjar LC M T X X X

179 348 Columba livia Rock Dove Alien S T X

180 349 Columba guinea Speckled Pigeon LC S T X X

185 355 Streptopelia senegalensis Laughing Dove LC S T X X X X

186 353 Streptopelia decipiens African Mourning Dove LC S W, T X X

187 354 Streptopelia capicola Cape Turtle-Dove LC S, N T X X X X

189 358 Turtur chalcospilos Emerald-spotted Wood-Dove LC S. N T X X X

192 356 Oena capensis Namaqua Dove LC S, N T X X X X

195 232 Neotis ludwigii Ludwig's Bustard V2, E3 NE (sA) N T X

196 230 Ardeotis kori Kori Bustard V1 S, N T X X X X

197 237 Lophotis ruficrista Red-crested Korhaan LC NE (sA) S T X X X

199 239 Afrotis afraoides Northern Black Korhaan LC E (sAfr) S T X X X X

205 209 Balearica regulorum Grey Crowned Crane NT1, V2, V3 N W X X X

206 208 Anthropoides paradiseus Blue Crane CE1, V2, GT3 E (sAfr) S T, W X X

207 207 Bugeranus carunculatus Wattled Crane CE1, CE2, V3 S, N W X X

217 213 Amaurornis flavirostris Black Crake LC S W X

224 226 Gallinula chloropus Common Moorhen LC S, N W X

225 227 Gallinula angulata Lesser Moorhen LC M W X

226 228 Fulica cristata Red-knobbed Coot LC S, N W X X X

227 344 Pterocles namaqua Namaqua Sandgrouse LC NE (sA) N T X X

229 347 Pterocles bicinctus Double-banded Sandgrouse LC NE (sA) N T X X X X

230 345 Pterocles burchelli Burchell's Sandgrouse LC NE (sAfr) S T X X X

240 269 Tringa stagnatilis Marsh Sandpiper LC M W X

241 270 Tringa nebularia Common Greenshank LC M W X X X

245 266 Tringa glareola Wood Sandpiper LC N, M W X X X

247 264 Actitis hypoleucos Common Sandpiper LC M W X

252 274 Calidris minuta Little Stint LC M W X X

260 272 Calidris ferruginea Curlew Sandpiper LC M W X

263 284 Philomachus pugnax Ruff LC M W X

267 242 Rostratula benghalensis Greater Painted Snipe NT2 N, M W X

271 298 Burhinus vermiculatus Water Thick-knee LC S, N W X X

272 297 Burhinus capensis Spotted Thick-knee LC S T X X X X

275 295 Himantopus himantopus Blackwinged Stilt LC S, N, M W X X X X

276 294 Recurvirostra avosetta Pied Avocet LC S, N, M W X X X

280 245 Charadrius hiaticula Common Ringed Plover LC M W X X

282 248 Charadrius pecuarius Kittlitz's Plover LC S, N, M W, T X X X X

283 249 Charadrius tricollaris Three-banded Plover LC S, N W X X

284 247 Charadrius pallidus Chestnut-banded Plover NT1, 2 S, N, M M, W X X X

286 246 Charadrius marginatus White-fronted Plover LC S W X




Rob

VII

No.

Rob

VI


1815

Da

1815

Db

1815

Bd

1815

Bb

289 252 Charadrius asiaticus Caspian Plover LC M W, T X

291 258 Vanellus armatus Blacksmith Lapwing LC S, N, M W X X X X

294 260 Vanellus senegallus African Wattled Lapwing LC S, N, M W X X

297 255 Vanellus coronatus Crowned Lapwing LC S, N T X X X X

299 301 Rhinoptilus africanus Double-banded Courser LC S T X X X X

300 303 Rhinoptilus chalcopterus Bronze-winged Courser LC S, N T X

302 299 Cursorius rufus Burchell's Courser LC NE (sA) N, M T X X

303 300 Cursorius temminckii Temminck's Courser LC S, N, M T X X

305 305 Glareola nordmanni Black-winged Pratincole NT1, NT2, NT3 M W X

316 315 Larus cirrocephalus Grey-headed Gull LC S, N W X X X

339 338 Chlidonias hybridus Whiskered Tern LC S, N W X X

340 339 Chlidonias leucopterus White-winged Tern LC M W X X

347 129 Macheiramphus alcinus Bat Hawk NT2 S T X

348 127 Elanus caeruleus Black-shouldered Kite LC S, N T X X X

349 126 Milvus migrans Black Kite LC M T X

350 148 Haliaeetus vocifer African Fish-Eagle V1 S W X X

355 123 Gyps africanus White-backed Vulture NT1, V2, GT3 S, N T X X X X

357 122 Gyps coprotheres Cape Vulture CE2, GT3 E (sA) S, N T X X X

358 124 Aegypius tracheliotus Lappet-faced Vulture V1, 2, GT3 S, N T X X X X

359 125 Aegypius occipitalis White-headed Vulture V1, V2, V3 S, N T X X

360 143 Circaetus pectoralis Black-chested Snake Eagle LC S, N T X X

361 142 Circaetus cinereus Brown Snake-Eagle LC S, N T X X

364 146 Terathopius ecaudatus Bateleur E1, V2, NT3 S T X X X

373 162 Melierax canorus Sthn Pale Chanting Goshawk LC NE (sA) S, N T X X X X

374 161 Melierax gabar Gabar Goshawk LC S T X X X

376 159 Accipiter badius Shikra LC S T X X

378 156 Accipiter ovampensis Ovambo Sparrowhawk LC S T X

381 149 Buteo buteo Steppe Buzzard LC M T X X

386 133 Aquila nipalensis Steppe Eagle LC M T X

387 132 Aquila rapax Tawny Eagle E1, V2 S T X X X X

390 137 Aquila spilogaster African Hawk-Eagle LC S T X

393 135 Aquila wahlbergi Wahlberg's Eagle LC M T X

394 140 Polemaetus bellicosus Martial Eagle E1, V2, NT3 S T X X X

395 139 Lophaetus occipitalis Long-crested Eagle LC S W, T X

397 118 Sagittarius serpentarius Secretarybird V3 S, N T X X X X

398 186 Polihierax semitorquatus Pygmy Falcon LC S T X

401 182 Falco rupicoloides Greater Kestrel LC S, N T X X X X

404 178 Falco chicquera Red-necked Falcon LC S, N T X

405 179 Falco vespertinus Red-footed Falcon NT3 M T X




Rob

VII

No.

Rob

VI


1815

Da

1815

Db

1815

Bd

1815

Bb

409 173 Falco subbuteo Eurasian Hobby LC M T X X

411 172 Falco biarmicus Lanner Falcon NT2 S, M T X X X X

414 8 Tachybaptus ruficollis Dabchick LC S, N W X X

415 6 Podiceps cristatus Great Crested Grebe E1 S W X

416 7 Podiceps nigricollis Black-necked Grebe NT2 S, N M, W X X

425 58 Phalacrocorax africanus Reed Cormorant LC S, N W X

427 55 Phalacrocorax lucidus White-breasted Cormorant LC S, N M, W X

432 67 Egretta garzetta Little Egret LC S, N W X X

434 68 Egretta intermedia Yellow-billed Egret LC S, N W X

435 66 Egretta alba Great Egret LC S, N W X X

438 62 Ardea cinerea Grey Heron LC S W X X X

439 63 Ardea melanocephala Black-headed Heron LC S W, T X X X X

440 64 Ardea goliath Goliath Heron LC S W X

441 65 Ardea purpurea Purple Heron LC S W X

442 71 Bubulcus ibis Cattle Egret LC S W, T X X X

443 72 Ardeola ralloides Squacco Heron LC S, N W X

445 75 Ardeola rufiventris Rufous-bellied Heron E1 S, M W X

447 76 Nycticorax nycticorax Black-crowned Night-Heron LC S, N W X

450 79 Ixobrychus sturmii Dwarf Bittern LC M W X

453 96 Phoenicopterus ruber Greater Flamingo NT1, V2 S, N, M M, W X X X

454 97 Phoenicopterus minor Lesser Flamingo V1, NT2, NT3 S, N, M W X X

455 93 Plegadis falcinellus Glossy Ibis LC S, N W X X

458 91 Threskiornis aethiopicus African Sacred Ibis LC S, N, M W, T X

459 95 Platalea alba African Spoonbill LC S, N W X X X

460 49 Pelecanus onocrotalus White Pelican V1, NT2 S, N W X X X

462 90 Mycteria ibis Yellow-billed Stork NT2 S, N, M W X

463 87 Anastomus lamelligerus African Openbill NT2 S, N W X

464 84 Ciconia nigra Black Stork E1 S W, T X

466 86 Ciconia episcopus Woolly-necked Stork NT2 S, M W X X

467 83 Ciconia ciconia White Stork LC M W, T X X

468 88 Ephippiorhynchus senegalensis Saddle-billed Stork E1, E2 S, N W X X X

469 89 Leptoptilos crumeniferus Marabou Stork NT1, NT2 S W X X X

534 543 Oriolus oriolus Eurasian Golden Oriole LC M T X

539 541 Dicrurus adsimilis Forktailed Drongo LC S T X X X X

541 710 Terpsiphone viridis African Paradise-Flycatcher LC M T X

542 741 Nilaus afer Brubru LC S T X X X X

545 744 Tchagra senegala Blackcrowned Tchagra LC S T X X

546 743 Tchagra australis Brown-crowned Tchagra LC S T X X X

551 739 Laniarius atrococcineus Crimson-breasted Shrike LC NE (sA) S T X X X




Rob

VII

No.

Rob

VI


1815

Da

1815

Db

1815

Bd

1815

Bb

558 753 Prionops plumatus White-crested Helmet-Shrike LC S T X X X

565 701 Batis molitor Chinspot Batis LC S T X

567 703 Batis pririt Pririt Batis LC NE (sA) S T X

570 547 Corvus capensis Cape Crow LC S T X X X X

571 548 Corvus albus Pied Crow LC N T X X X X

573 733 Lanius collurio Redbacked Shrike LC M T X X X

575 731 Lanius minor Lesser Grey Shrike LC M T X X X X

576 732 Lanius collaris Common Fiscal LC S T X X

577 735 Corvinella melanoleuca Magpie Shrike LC S, N T X

578 756 Eurocephalus anguitimens Sthn White-crowned Shrike LC NE (sA) S T X X X X

584 557 Anthoscopus minutus Cape Penduline-Tit LC NE (sA) S, N T X X X

591 552 Parus cinerascens Ashy Tit LC NE (sA) S, N T X

595 534 Riparia cincta Banded Martin LC M W, T X X X

598 518 Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow LC M T X X X X

600 520 Hirundo albigularis White-throated Swallow LC M T X

604 526 Hirundo cucullata Greater Striped Swallow LC M T X

616 567 Pycnonotus nigricans African Red-eyed Bulbul LC NE (sA) S, N T X X X

634 651 Sylvietta rufescens Longbilled Crombec LC S T X X X

635 653 Eremomela icteropygialis Yellowbellied Eremomela LC S, N T X X X

656 643 Phylloscopus trochilus Willow Warbler LC M W, T X X X

659 561 Turdoides melanops Blackfaced Babbler LC NE (sA) S T X

661 563 Turdoides bicolor Southern Pied Babbler LC NE (sA) S T X X X

666 621 Chestnut-vented Tit-Babbler Titbabbler LC S T X X

676 672 Cisticola chiniana Rattling Cisticola LC S T X

677 671 Cisticola rufilatus Tinkling Cisticola LC S T X X X

687 664 Cisticola juncidis Zitting Cisticola LC S T X

688 665 Cisticola aridulus Desert Cisticola LC S T X X X X

693 685 Prinia flavicans Black-chested Prinia LC NE (sA) S T X X X X

707 658 Calamonastes fasciolatus Barred Wren-Warbler LC NE (sA) S T X X X

710 493 Mirafra passerina Monotonous Lark LC NE (sA) N T X

712 494 Mirafra africana Rufous-naped Lark LC S T X X X

714 495 Mirafra apiata Cape Clapper Lark LC E (sA) S T X X X X

717 498 Calendulauda sabota Sabota Lark LC NE (sA) N T X X X X

718 497 Calendulauda africanoides Fawn-coloured Lark LC E (sA) S, N T X X X X

723 505 Pinarocorys nigricans Dusky Lark LC M T X X

725 506 Chersomanes albofasciata Spike-heeled Lark LC NE (sA) S T X X X

733 515 Eremopterix leucotis Chestnut-backed Sparrowlark LC S, N T X X X X

734 516 Eremopterix verticalis Grey-backed Sparrowlark LC NE (sA) N, M T X X X

735 507 Calandrella cinerea Red-capped Lark LC S, N, M T X X X X




Rob

VII

No.

Rob

VI


1815

Da

1815

Db

1815

Bd

1815

Bb

736 511 Spizocorys starki Stark's Lark LC NE (sA) N T X

737 508 Spizocorys conirostris Pink-billed Lark LC NE (sA) S, N T X X

748 580 Psophocichla litsitsirupa Groundscraper Thrush LC S T X X X

754 697 Bradornis infuscatus Chat Flycatcher LC S T X X X

755 695 Bradornis mariquensis Marico Flycatcher LC NE (sA) S, N T X X

758 689 Muscicapa striata Spotted Flycatcher LC M T X X

777 615 Cercotrichas paena Kalahari Scrub-Robin LC NE (sA) S, N T X X X

787 587 Oenanthe pileata Capped Wheatear LC S, M T X X X

793 595 Myrmecocichla formicivora Anteating Chat LC E (sA) S T X X X X

800 764 Lamprotornis nitens Cape Glossy Starling LC S T X X X

804 762 Lamprotornis australis Burchell's Starling LC NE (sA) S T X X X

805 763 Lamprotornis mevesii Meves's Starling LC S T X

808 760 Creatophora cinerea Wattled Starling LC S, N T X X X

830 788 Cinnyris fuscus Dusky Sunbird LC NE (sA) S, N T X X

836 798 Bubalornis niger Red-billed Buffalo-Weaver LC S, N T X X X

837 806 Sporopipes squamifrons Scalyfeathered Finch LC NE (sA) S, N T X X X X

838 799 Plocepasser mahali White-browed Sparrow-weaver LC S T X X X X

839 800 Philetairus socius Sociable Weaver LC E (sA) S T X X X

846 814 Ploceus velatus Southern Masked-Weaver LC NE (sA) S, M T X X X

848 812 Ploceus rubiginosus Chestnut Weaver LC N T X

854 821 Quelea quelea Red-billed Quelea LC S T X X

855 826 Euplectes afer Yellow-crowned Bishop LC S W X X

867 852 Ortygospiza atricollis African Quailfinch LC S T X

868 856 Amadina erythrocephala Red-headed Finch LC NE (sA) S, N T X X X

879 845 Uraeginthus granatinus Violet-eared Waxbill LC S, N T X X

880 844 Uraeginthus angolensis Blue Waxbill LC S,N T X X

883 834 Pytilia melba Green-winged Pytilia LC S T X

895 861 Vidua regia Shafttailed Whydah LC NE (sA) S, N T X X X

901 801 Passer domesticus House Sparrow Alien S T X

902 802 Passer motitensis Great Sparrow LC NE (sA) S, N T X X

903 803 Passer melanurus Cape Sparrow LC NE (sA) S T X

904 804 Passer diffusus Sthn Grey-headed Sparrow LC S, N T X X X

907 711 Motacilla aguimp African Pied Wagtail LC S, N W X

908 713 Motacilla capensis Cape Wagtail LC S W, T X X

920 716 Anthus cinnamomeus African Pipit LC S, N, M T X X X

922 718 Anthus leucophrys Plain-backed Pipit LC S, M T X X X

936 870 Serinus atrogularis Blackthroated Canary LC S T X X

939 878 Serinus flaviventris Yellow Canary LC NE (sA) S, N T X X

950 884 Emberiza flaviventris Golden-breasted Bunting LC S T X X X




Total

254 spp. 38% of 676

Namibian

species

24 (10%) threatened in Nam

4 (2%) threatened in sA

15 (6%) Globally Threatened

1 (0.5%) NE (Namibia)

48 (8%) E/NE (sA)

191 (75%) resident/sedentary at some

stage;

97 (38%) nomadic at some stage;

68 (27%) migrant at some stage;

141 177 100 168

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE …€¦ · ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE...

Documents

Transcript of ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE …€¦ · ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE...