FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM NETWORK: CLASSIFICATION OF...
Transcript of FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM NETWORK: CLASSIFICATION OF...
FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEM NETWORK:
CLASSIFICATION OF WATER RESOURCES
Date: 16 September 2013 Venue: Pretoria National Botanical Gardens
Time: 09:00
PRESENTATION CONTENTS Overview of the Classification Process (7-Steps)
Why Classifying?
Study areas and status
Classification and NFEPAs
Consideration of NFEPAs in classification
Challenges
WHY ARE WE CLASSIFYING: LEGAL MANDATE The classification of South Africa’s water resources is required by the
National Water Act (NWA) (No. 36 of 1998) (Chapter 3 regarding the protection of water resources)
Class
Reserve
Resource Quality Objectives
Regulation 810 published in Government Gazette No. 33541 dated 17 September 2010 defined the water resource management classes and a procedure (Water Resource Classification System – WRCS) to determine a Class.
According to the NWA, once this WRCS has been gazetted all significant
water resources must be classified.
Classification
Resource Quality
Objectives
The Reserve
STUDY PROCESS: OVERVIEW OF THE CLASSIFICATION PROCESS
Assessment of WMA
Divided into catchment areas (IUAs) based on socio-economic/ land use characteristics/ water resources(IUAs) Data assessed Status quo understood
Value and condition of
water resources
Goods and
services assessed
Economic
Framework for decision
making developed
Ecological requirements
of water resources
understood and quantified
How much
water does the ecology
require for different
protection levels
Models set up with ecological requirements
and water requirements
Set and test a
sustainable ecological protection
level scenario for water resources
In accordance with the classification guidelines: 7 step process applies
Set other scenarios
(future states) and evaluate
within the integrated
water resource management
context of WMA
Understand the
implications of different
protection levels
Stak
eh
old
er
Enga
gem
en
t
1 2 3 4 5 6
Stakeholder engagement
THREE MANAGEMENT CLASSES
Classes Description of use Ecological Category
Description of
resource
Class I Minimally used A-B Minimally altered
Class II Moderately used C Moderately altered
Class III Heavily used D Heavily altered
Ecological Category (EC) - means the assigned ecological condition to a water resource in terms of the deviation of its biophysical components from a pre-development condition.
THE NEED FOR CLASSIFICATION
The Catchments are highly utilised and regulated
Water resources are becoming more stressed due to an accelerated rate of development and the scarcity of water resources.
Water Quality deterioration – due to Agricultural and mining runoff (AMD)
There is an urgency to ensure that water resources in the catchment areas are able to sustain their level of uses and be maintained at their desired states into the future.
THE PURPOSE OF WATER RESOURCE CLASSIFICATION
Ensure long term sustainable use of the water resources
Quality and quantity
Provide regulatory certainty
Facilitate decision making
Provide framework in which goals (resource quality objectives) can be set to measure regulatory performance and compliance
Water Quality
Water Quantity
River and wetland habitat and biota
OUTCOMES OF THE CLASSIFICATION PROCESS
A Class represents the state water resources need to be in, to make sufficient water of an appropriate quality available to satisfy the socio-economic needs of the country;
The process sets a Class for each IUA that describes:
The extent of use; and
The level of protection afforded to each water resource
Defines a catchment configuration of ecological categories for each IUA
Percentage of A/B categories identified in each IUA
STUDY AREAS AND STATUS Studie
s no.
Study Areas Status
1 Olifants/Doorn WMA Technical process concluded
(Recommended Management Classes
2 Vaal WMA Technical process concluded
(Recommended Management Classes
3 Olifants WMA Technical process concluded
(Recommended Management Classes
4 Crocodile/West Marico, Mokolo and
Matlabas catchments
Draft Scenario Report & MC Report
5 Mvoti to Umzimkulu WMA Draft Resource Units & EWR sites report
6 Letaba catchment Concluded Status Quo assessment
7 Inkomati WMA Currently on the Status Quo
CLASSIFICATION OF WATER RESOURCES
AND NFEPAs
INFORMATION SUPPORTING ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
Preliminary Reserve Determination
Updated PES/EIS data
NFEPA
Stakeholder contribution in terms of conservation priorities
CONSIDERATION OF NFEPAs IN CLASSIFICATION Step Description How NFEPAs were considered
Step 1: Delineate the units of analysis
(IUAs) and describe the status
quo of the water resources
•Identification of “significant” water resources
•Identification of nodes/EWR sites to represent ecologically
important areas
•Homogenizing the delineated IUAs
Step 2: Link the socio-economic and
ecological value and condition of
the water resources
• Economic contribution of water ecosystems (Ecosystem
services)
•Flow of water in the economy
• Decision support to evaluate consequences of degradation
towards the economy and social well-being
Step 3: Quantify the ecological water
requirements and changes in
non-water quality ecosystem
goods, services and attributes
•Distribution of nodes – assessed against NFEPA & PES/EIS
•Relate a node to a specific NFEPA
•Node modelled to check the achievability of NFEPA
•Where NFEPA did not correlate, PES was considered
•Modelling conducted to get the required flow/water
quality at each node
CONSIDERATION OF NFEPAs IN CLASSIFICATION (2) Step Description How NFEPAs were considered
Step 4: Determine an ecologically sustainable
base configuration (ESBC) scenarios
•Entails identification of minimum level of
protection considering:
• NFEPA minimum is A/B
• PES/ Preliminary Reserve Requirements
• D – minimum level of protection (guidelines)
Step 5: Evaluate scenarios within the integrated
water resource management process
•Any improvement in ecological category is
considered
• Achievability is tested against options
identified in the Reconciliation Strategy
Step 6: Evaluate the scenarios with stakeholders;
and
• implications of scenario’s (flow, water quality,
conservation imperatives)
Step 7: Gazette and implement the class
configuration.
• Proposed template to include:
- IUA class
- EC configuration
CHALLENGES
No supporting data provided to justify NFEPAs - Bulshoek dam (E10K) in the Olifants/Doorn WMA, PES = E
A farm dam in the Karoo in the Olifants/Doorn WMA was mapped as NFEPA
Difficulty in refinement of the catchment configuration scenario as a result of interpretation of 60% of natural flow of a tributary to reach mainstem - difficult to implement (RQOs)
Raw data such as the fish information not available - Barbus anoplus (BANO) is provided as a reason for the NFEPA (it is not present in Mtamvuna River in Mvoti system)
CHALLENGES (2)
Discrepancies between NFEPA wetland coverage in comparison with Google earth and other sources – (Crocodile West Marico, Mokolo and Matlabas catchments) There was no ground-truthing of the FEPA maps in comparison to the updated PES/EIS
There was limited broader stakeholder involvement /engagement conducted in the determination of NFEPAs