Ndumo-Gezisa 132kV Overhead Power Line

AVIFAUNAL SPECIALIST REPORT

AUGUST 2014

With specialist input from:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Eskom Holdings (SOC) Limited plans to construct a new 132kV powerline between the

proposed Ndumo substation near Makhane’s Drift and the proposed Gezisa substation near

Manguzi in the Kwa-Zulu Natal Province. The site falls within the Maputaland-Pondoland

Centre of Endemism, which is a “biodiversity hotspot”. There are numerous microhabitats

available to birds, and the entire area is regarded as highly sensitive in terms of avifauna.

There are numerous protected areas, including Tembe Elephant Park and Ndumo Game

Reserve, as well as two Important Bird Areas (IBA) in the broader area.

The South African Bird Atlas Project data (SABAP1) recorded a total of 46 Red Data species,

comprising 1 Endangered, 16 Vulnerable and 29 Near-threatened. The White Stork, which is

not listed, but is protected internationally through the Bonn Convention on Migratory

species, was also recorded. It was found that 26 of the 46 red-listed species recorded in

SABAP1 had been recorded by SABAP2. Following a site visit to 3 of the proposed corridors,

and examination of all available data, the following species were identified as Focal Species

for this study: Great White Pelican, Pink-backed Pelican, Saddle-billed Stork, Yellow-billed

Stork, Woolly-necked Stork, Lesser Flamingo, Black-bellied Bustard, Secretarybird, African

Crowned Eagle, White-headed Vulture, Martial Eagle, African Fish-Eagle, Bateleur, African

March Harrier, Southern-banded Snake-eagle, Collared Pratincole, Rosy-throated Longclaw,

Pink-throated Twinspot, African Broadbill, Neergard’s Sunbird, and Rudd’s Apalis.

In general terms, the impacts that could be associated with a project of this nature include:

collision of birds with the overhead cables; electrocution; destruction of habitat; and

disturbance of birds. Collisions posses the biggest potential risk to avifauna, while habitat

destruction is also expected to be an important impact of this project.

Various sensitivity zones were identified, associated with protected areas, including: sand

forest, wetlands and rivers. Avifaunal input in to the Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

(in the form of a site “walk down”) is recommended in order to, “fine tune” the sensitivity

zones, and to identify the exact spans of line for marking to mitigate for bird collisions, once

the route is chosen and the tower positions have been pegged. Provided that the high risk

sections of line are mitigated in the form of marking, the impact of collision should be

contained. During this “walk down” breeding/nesting sites and roost sites must be

identified, so that the correct mitigating actions can be implemented prior to construction, in

order to reduce the impacts of habitat destruction and disturbance on sensitive species.

Electrocutions can be successfully mitigated by ensuring that a bird-friendly monopole

structure is used. It was concluded that the proposed project can be built provided that the

various mitigation measures recommended in this report are implemented. From an

avifaunal perspective, it was found that corridors 3P and 3a are the preferred options out of

several options considered.

AUGUST 2014 UPDATE TO ORIGINAL EWT REPORT

The Avifaunal Specialist Draft Report Revision 00, dated May 2013 was compiled by the

specialist, Andrew Pearson, whilst in the employment of the Endangered Wildlife Trust

(EWT) (details of original report below). In July 2014, Arcus Consultancy Services Ltd.

(Arcus) was approached by Zitholele Consulting to amend the May 2013 Avifaunal report, as

the original author (Andrew Pearson) was no longer employed by the EWT but was now an

employee with Arcus. The amendments to the original report are required because of

comments received by various Interested and Affected Parties (IAP), and due to an

additional Corridor alternative (Corridor 3P- preferred) being identified, which was not

originally assessed, as well as the removal of Corridors 1 and 2. This report shows the

necessary amendments based on the changes described above. Arcus made no changes to

the reporting template or methods used by EWT. Quality control revision was only carried

out on those sections of work that were added to, or updated by Arcus in the finalisation of

this report, and not on the entire report which was previously reviewed by EWT. Updates to

GIS mapping (Figures 1, 2, 16 and 17) were made by the EWT and reviewed by Arcus.

Signed: ANDREW PEARSON in his capacity as Avifaunal Specialist with Arcus Consultancy

Services Ltd.

Date: 8th August 2014

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE: ORIGINAL REPORT

Specialist Investigator

The Natural Scientific Professions Act of 2003 aims to “Provide for the establishment of the

South African Council of Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP) and for the registration of

professional, candidate and certified natural scientists; and to provide for matters connected

therewith.”

“Only a registered person may practice in a consulting capacity” – Natural Scientific

Professions Act of 2003 (20(1)-pg 14)

Investigator: Andrew Pearson (Pri.Sci.Nat)

Qualification: BSc (hons) Conservation Ecology

Affiliation: South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions

Registration number: 400423/11

Fields of Expertise: Ecological Science

Registration: Professional Member

Andrew Pearson is employed by Arcus Consultancy Services Ltd, as a specialist investigator

for conducting avifaunal specific specialist reports. Andrew has a Four Year BSc in

Conservation Ecology, certificates in Environmental Law, as well as six years’ experience in

the environmental management field. The findings, results, observations, conclusions and

recommendations given in this report are based on the author’s best scientific and

professional knowledge as well as available information.

Declaration of Independence

All specialist investigators specified above declare that:

We act as independent specialists for this project.

We consider ourselves bound by the rules and ethics of the South African Council for

Natural Scientific Professions.

We do not have any personal or financial interest in the project except for financial

compensation for specialist investigations completed in a professional capacity as

specified by the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010.

We will not be affected by the outcome of the environmental process, of which this

report forms part of.

We do not have any influence over the decisions made by the governing authorities.

We do not object to or endorse the proposed developments, but aim to present facts

and our best scientific and professional opinion with regard to the impacts of the

development.

We undertake to disclose to the relevant authorities any information that has or may

have the potential to influence its decision or the objectivity of any report, plan, or

document required in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations,

2010.

Should we consider ourselves to be in conflict with any of the above declarations, we

shall formally submit a Notice of Withdrawal to all relevant parties and formally

register as an Interested and Affected Party.

Terms and Liabilities

This report is based on a short term investigation using the available information and

data related to the site to be affected. No long term investigation or monitoring was

conducted.

The Precautionary Principle has been applied throughout this investigation.

The specialist investigator, and Arcus/Endangered Wildlife Trust, for whom he/she

works, does not accept any responsibility for the conclusions, suggestions,

limitations and recommendations made in good faith, based on the information

presented to them, obtained from these assessments or requests made to them for

the purposes of this assessment.

Additional information may become known or available during a later stage of the

process for which no allowance could have been made at the time of this report.

The specialist investigator withholds the right to amend this report,

recommendations and conclusions at any stage should additional information

become available.

Information, recommendations and conclusions in this report cannot be applied to

any other area without proper investigation.

This report and all of the information contained herein remain the intellectual

property of the Arcus/Endangered Wildlife Trust.

This report, in its entirety or any portion thereof, may not be altered in any manner

or form or for any purpose without the specific and written consent of the specialist

investigator as specified above.

Acceptance of this report, in any physical or digital form, serves to confirm

acknowledgment of these terms and liabilities.

Signed on the 8th August 2014by Andrew Pearson.

ANDREW PEARSON

INTRODUCTION

The proponent for this project is Eskom Holdings SOC Limited, KwaZulu-Natal Operating

Unit (hereafter referred to as Eskom), which plans to construct a new 132kV powerline

between the proposed Ndumo substation near Makhane’s Drift and the proposed Gezisa

substation near Manguzi in the Kwa-Zulu Natal Province. The area is bordered by several

nature reserves with the Tembe Elephant Reserve on the northern most past of the

boundary, the Greater St Lucia Wetland reserve along the eastern boundary and Ndumo

game reserve on the North western boundary. The P522 road traverses the centre of the

study area. Authorization will be sought for a 500m corridor; however the final servitude

will be 36m wide. During construction of the power line access roads will be established and

tracks will also be used during the operational phase for maintenance vehicles to obtain

access to the power line servitude. Additionally, bush clearing will be undertaken along the

centre line of the power line of 4m wide to enable stringing, and an area of 40m X 40m

cleared at tower / pylon locations. Similarly all access roads and tracks will be cleared of

vegetation for 4m wide.

The Endangered Wildlife Trust (EWT) was subsequently appointed as an avifaunal specialist

for the project and a site visit was conducted from the 8th to the 11th of April, 2013. The

report was then updated and finalised, following several changes to the corridor

alternatives, by Arcus Consultancy Services Ltd. (Arcus) in August 2014. The avifaunal

study used a set methodology (discussed elsewhere) as well as various data sets. The focal

species for the study were determined, and then, by looking at the focal species which could

occur in the area, as well as assessing the availability of bird micro habitats, the possible

impacts of the development were then assessed and rated according to a set of pre-

determined criteria. In general terms, the impacts that could be associated with a project of

this nature include: The collision of birds with the overhead cables; electrocution;

destruction of habitat; and disturbance of birds.

TERMS OF REFERENCE

The following terms of reference were utilized for this study:

Describe the current state of avifauna in the study area, outlining important

characteristics which may be influenced by the proposed infrastructure or which may

influence the proposed infrastructure during construction and operation.

Identify Red List species potentially affected by the proposed power lines and

substation.

Identify potential impacts (positive and negative, including cumulative impacts if

relevant) of the proposed development on avifauna during construction and

operation.

Rate the significance of the impacts.

Identify mitigation measures for enhancing benefits and avoiding or mitigating

negative impacts and risks.

Identify information gaps, limitations and additional information required

Ranking and identification of most and least suitable alternatives for the proposed

project.

Identify and address any other aspects related to avifauna in the study area that

should be incorporated into the reports.

METHODOLOGY

In predicting the impacts of a proposed power line on birds, a combination of science, field

experience and common sense is required. More specifically the methodology used to

predict impacts in the current study was as follows:

The various data sets discussed below under “sources of information” were collected

and examined.

The data was examined to determine the location and abundance of power line

sensitive Red List species as well as non-Red List power line sensitive species in the

study area.

A desk top examination, using Google Earth imagery was done to compare

alternatives.

The area was visited, and thoroughly traversed, to obtain a first-hand perspective of

the proposed routes and birdlife, and to determine which bird micro-habitats are

present and relevant to the study. This involved driving the study area, taking

photographs, and walking certain accessible areas, to see as much as possible of the

proposed routes for the power line.

The impacts of the proposed power line on birds were predicted on the basis of

experience in gathering and analysing data on wildlife impacts with power lines

throughout southern Africa since 1996 (see van Rooyen & Ledger 1999 for an

overview of methodology), supplemented with first hand data

Recommended mitigation measures for significant impacts were proposed.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

The study made use of the following data sources:

Bird distribution data of the Southern African Bird Atlas Project (SABAP – Harrison,

Allan, Underhill, Herremans, Tree, Parker & Brown, 1997) obtained from the Avian

Demography Unit of the University of Cape Town, in order to ascertain which species

occur in the study area.

The Southern African Bird Atlas Project 2 data for certain pentads in the study area

was examined.

The conservation status of relevant all bird species was then determined with the use

of The Eskom Red Data book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland

(Barnes, 2000).

Data from the Co-ordinated Avifaunal Road count project (CAR – Young, Harrison,

Navarro, Anderson & Colahan, 2003) was consulted to determine whether any CAR

routes exist in the study area.

Data from the Co-ordinated Waterbird Count (CWAC) project was also consulted to

determine whether any CWAC sites exist in the study area (Taylor, Navarro, Wren-

Sargent, Harrison & Kieswetter, 1999).

The Important Bird Areas of southern Africa (IBA) project data (Barnes 1998) was

consulted to determine its relevance to this project.

A classification of the vegetation types in the study area was obtained from Mucina

and Rutherford (2006).

Information on the micro-habitat level was obtained through visiting the area on two

separate occasions and obtaining a firsthand perspective.

Electronic 1:50 000 maps were obtained from the Surveyor General.

Satellite Imagery of the area was studied using Google Earth ©2013.

Personal conversation was conducted with Catharine Hanekom, District Ecologist

North East for KZN Wildlife, based at Tembe Elephant Park.

Bird lists for Ndumo Game Reserve and Tembe Elephant Park were obtained from

KZN Wildlife.

LIMITATIONS & ASSUMPTIONS

This study made the assumption that the above sources of information are reliable. The

following factors may potentially detract from the accuracy of the predicted results:

The SABAP-1 data covers the period 1986-1997. Bird distribution patterns

fluctuate continuously according to availability of food and nesting substrate.

(For a full discussion of potential inaccuracies in SABAP data, see Harrison,

Allan, Underhill, Herremans, Tree, Parker & Brown, 1997).

The site visit was conducted in autumn over which time various species may

not have been present in the study area. No long term monitoring was

conducted.

Google Earth Imagery may not always reflect the true situation on the

ground, as some images may be outdated.

Predictions in this study are based on experience of these and similar species

in different parts of South Africa. Bird behaviour cannot be reduced to

formulas that will hold true under all circumstances.

It was not possible to access the entire length of all alternatives, i.e. a

walkthrough of each route was not conducted.

Nest searches were not conducted.

The preferred Corridor 3P (Alternative A1) was not proposed at the time of

the site visit (April 2013), and therefore certain sections of this routing were

not observed whilst on site.

DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

The site is situated within the Maputaland-Pondoland Centre of Endemism, which was

recently awarded ‘biodiversity hotspot’ status by Conservation International (Mittermeier et

al, 2004). This greater region is has a diverse array of biomes and is a biogeographical

transition zone between the tropics to the north and the subtropics to the south. Several

bird species occur here at their southernmost or northernmost range limits (Geldenhuys and

MacDevette 1989, van Wyk 1996) and most of the endemic species in the region are

associated with sand forests (van Wyk 1996, van Rensburg et al. 2000).

Vegetation and Land Use

While this report is an avifaunal specialist report, vegetation and micro habitats are very

important in determining avifaunal abundances and likelihood of occurrences. Therefore,

two maps have been produced below (FIGURES 1 and 2) showing the vegetation

classification of the broader area (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006), as well as the land use

(CSIR, 2009).

FIGURE 1 shows that the majority of the study area is covered by “Tembe Sandy Bushveld”

(which falls within the greater Savanna Biome) as well as “Maputaland Coastal Belt” with

the latter lying to the east of the former. Numerous patches of the Critically Endangered

“Sand Forest” are scattered within the bushveld region while “Subtropical Freshwater

Wetlands” and “Maputaland Wooded Grassland” is associated with the coastal plain.

Elements of “Western Maputaland Clay Bushveld”, “Western Maputaland Sandy Bushveld”,

“Makatini Clay Thicket”, and “Subtropical Alluvial Vegetation” are present in the west of the

study site, with the latter associated with the Pongola River. “Subtropical Salt Pans” are also

present in Ndumo Game Reserve. From this discussion and the map, it is clear that the

vegetation types, and thus micro-habitats are extremely diverse and numerous.

FIGURE 2 below shows that the dominant land cover/uses in the area are “Forest and

Woodland”, “Degraded: forest and woodland”, “Thicket & bushland (etc)”, “Wetlands” and

“Unimproved grassland” with the latter predominant in the east. “Cultivated: temporary -

semi-commercial/subsistence dryland” is present especially near to human settlements.

These land use types were confirmed during the site visit to the study area. However, the

map does not show the presence of numerous Forestry activities in the east of the study

area, observed during the site visit, as these may be recent activities.

FIGURE 1: Vegetation map (Mucina & Rutherford 2006) indicating the route alternatives as well as rivers, CWAC sites and formal protected areas.

FIGURE 2: Land Cover (CSIR, 2009) Map indicating the power line alternatives, Rivers and protected areas.

Bird micro habitats

In addition to the description of vegetation, it is important to understand the habitats

available to birds at a smaller spatial scale, i.e. micro habitats. Micro habitats are shaped by

factors other than vegetation, such as topography, land use, food sources and man-made

factors. Investigation of this study area revealed the presence of the following bird micro

habitats.

Sand Forest:

Sand Forest occurs in a broad and highly fragmented belt in South Africa from False Bay

Park (Greater St Lucia Wetland Park) in the south to the national border with Mozambique

(Tembe Elephant Park and Ndumo Game Reserve). The main distribution of this forest is in

Maputaland, where still reasonably extensive patches of this forest can be encountered.

Sand forests are associated with old sand dunes and are characterised by a low canopy

height and dense, scrubby understory. Bird specials to be found in the sand forests of

northern KwaZulu-Natal include African Broadbill, Woodward's Batis, Eastern Nicator,

Crested Guineafowl, Neergard's Sunbird, Plain-backed Sunbird, and Pink-throated Twinspot.

Grey Sunbird, Square-tailed Drongo, Dark-backed Weaver, Livingstone’s Turaco, Olive

Sunbird, Collared Sunbird, Trumpeter Hornbill, Yellow-bellied Greenbul and Brown Scrub-

robin may be relatively numerous in this habitat type. Large raptors such as the African

Crowned-Eagle and Southern Banded Snake-eagle may also favour this micro-habitat.

This already localised habitat is critically endangered due to its vulnerability and economic

pressure, especially outside the protected areas. An unknown portion was lost through

clearing for subsistence agriculture and grazing. Uncontrolled extraction of wood for fuel

and woodcraft is a problem as is the high density of elephants in Tembe Elephant Park—the

best preserved portion of the sand forest in South Africa (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006).

FIGURE 3: Sand Forest canopy observed from a viewing platform in the Tembe Elephant

Park.

Natural Bushveld/Woodland:

Large areas of undisturbed bushveld and woodlands are present in the broader area

associated primarily with the “Bushveld” vegetation types described above. The most

undisturbed areas are within the protected areas (Tembe and Ndumo) and in the more

northerly areas of the study site. “Bushveld” is a term loosely applied to smaller-tree

woodland, comprised of mixed trees and bushes, with the substrate often being well

grassed. Plant species present are related to soil type, but usually include both broad-leafed

and thorn trees. This habitat type will be utilized by numerous raptors including Bateleur,

Martial Eagle, Tawny Eagle, Brown Snake-Eagle, Booted Eagle, African Harrier-Hawk,

Wahlberg’s Eagle as well as occasionally White-backed and Lappet-Faced Vultures.

FIGURE 4: Natural “bushveld” observed in the study area.

Disturbed Bushveld/Woodland:

Large areas of disturbed bushveld and woodlands are present, primarily outside of the

protected areas and around human settlements, where bush clearing and uncontrolled

extraction of wood for fuel and woodcraft is ongoing. All of the species mentioned to

possibly occur in undisturbed bushveld, may well be present in the disturbed areas as well,

although this is far less likely.

Grasslands:

Extensive open grassland areas are present in the east of the study area, primarily

associated with the following vegetation types (Mucina & Rutherford 2006): “Subtropical

Freshwater Wetlands “, “Maputaland Coastal Belt” and “Maputaland Wooded Grassland”. In

fact, the “wetland” areas visited during the site visit were mostly dry, and are likely to only

be seasonally inundated with water. However, when they do not have water, they form

large open areas of grasslands, often with scattered palm trees (FIGURE 5). Grasslands may

represent a significant foraging and/or hunting area for many bird species, and although

much of the grassland areas seem to be disturbed to some degree (FIGURE 6), there may

well be patches in the area that attract sensitive species. In general terms these open

grassland areas could attract the Denham’s Bustard, Black-bellied Bustard, Africa Openbill

and Collared Pratincole (both especially near water), Secretarybird and White Stork. Open

Grassland may also be a favourite foraging area for game birds such as francolins and

Guineafowl, as well as being hunting and foraging habitat for raptors such as African Marsh-

Harrier, Steppe Buzzard, Lanner Falcon, Amur Falcon and Black-shouldered Kite, because of

both the presence and accessibility of prey. Interestingly, the moist, grazed grasslands in

the communal lands (“communal rangelands”) may support all three Longclaw species,

namely Cape, Yellow-throated and Rosy-throated.

FIGURE 5: Relatively undisturbed grasslands with scattered palms in the east of the study

area.

FIGURE 6: Short, grazed grasslands provide habitat for Longclaw and Pipit species.

Wetlands:

“Subtropical Freshwater Wetlands” are associated with the Futi River in the north central

region of the study area, as well as in the east, as discussed above. These wetlands may

well be seasonal and only occasionally inundated with water. There is also a large flood

plain in the west associated with the “Subtropical Alluvial Vegetation” vegetation type

(Mucina & Rutherford 2006) along the Pongola River. Freshwater Lakes and Subtropical Salt

Pans are also found in the west and northwest. Pans and lakes in the study area may

especially attract Greater and Lesser Flamingos, Great White and Pink-backed Pelicans,

Saddle-billed Stork, African Marsh-Harrier, Pel’s Fishing-Owl, Yellow-billed Stork, Collared

Pratincole, Caspian Tern and African Jacana as well as a variety of other water birds.

Various waterfowl, such as White-faced Duck, African Pygmy-Goose, Yellow-billed Duck and

Egyptian geese, may frequent these areas and are vulnerable to collision with power lines.

Fish eating raptors like the African Fish Eagle and Osprey may also be present. These areas

will be very important for assorted water bird species, and construction of the new power

line in close proximity to these areas should be avoided.

FIGURE 7: The southern end of a freshwater lake, near to the Pongolo River floodplain, in

the west of the study area. Note that it is utilized by both livestock and threatened bird

species (see Pink-backed Pelican circled).

Rivers or drainage lines:

The largest and most prominent River in the Study area is the Pongolo River (FIGURE 8) in

the west with its tributary the Ngwavuma River. The Futi River runs north in to Mozambique

through the North East of Tembe National Park. Rivers in their true form represent

important habitat for many species, including Wooly-necked Stork, Saddle-billed Stork,

Yellow-billed Stork, as well as Ducks, Geese and a variety of other water birds. The wooded

riparian habitat (FIGURE 9) alongside the Pongola River may hold Pel’s Fishing Owl and

White-backed Night-Heron, as well as providing habitat for various species such as the

Hamerkop, African Darter, various cormorants, kingfishers, bee-eaters, robin-chats and

numerous smaller species. Rivers also represent feeding areas for fish eating raptors such

as the African Fish Eagle and Osprey. Quite backwaters and streams in the study area may

provide refuge for the African Finfoot. Sandbanks associated with large rivers provide

habitat for various wading species including, Lapwings, Plovers, Stilts, and Sandpipers.

Rivers and drainage lines also represent important flight paths for many species.

FIGURE 8: The large Pongolo River is flanked by tall woodland and forest.

FIGURE 9: Riparian Woodland associated with the Pongolo River.

Arable and/or cultivated lands:

Arable or cultivated lands can represent a significant feeding areas for many bird species in

any landscape for the following reasons: through opening up the soil surface, land

preparation makes many insects, seeds, bulbs and other food sources readily accessible to

birds and other predators; the crop or pasture plants cultivated are often eaten themselves

by birds, or attract insects which are in turn eaten by birds; during the dry season arable

lands often represent the only green or attractive food sources in an otherwise dry

landscape. Arable lands exist in this study area (FIGURES 10 and 11), mainly in the form of

maize or “mielie” fields. Relevant bird species that may be attracted to these areas include

most importantly the Blue Crane, Grey-crowned Crane, Southern Bald Ibis, Denham’s

Bustard and White Stork.

FIGURE 10: Small scale agriculture observed in the west of the study area, with a

freshwater lake in the back-ground.

FIGURE 11: Small scale agriculture observed south of Tembe Elephant Park.

Forestry/Stands of Alien Trees:

Small forestry plantations are present in the rural settlement areas, while some larger scale

forestry operations were observed in the east of the study site, as one heads towards

Manguzi. This habitat will mostly be important to physically smaller bird species, which are

less likely to interact directly with the proposed power lines. They may, however, provide

perching, roosting and nesting habitat for various raptor species, as well as larger birds

such as francolins, Guineafowl, Herons and Hadeda Ibises. Although stands of Eucalyptus

are strictly speaking invader species, these stands have become important refuges for

certain species of raptors including Long Crested Eagle and Steppe Buzzard, while Black

Sparrowhawk and Ovambo Sparrowhawk in particular are two species that use these trees

for roosting and breeding purposes. Large Eucalyptus trees are also used by the migratory

Lesser Kestrels for roosting purposes.

FIGURE 12: A new stand of recently planted trees in the foreground, and a more established

plantation in the background. This larger scale forestry was observed in the east of the

study area.

Rural Homesteads:

Rural communities are scattered throughout the study area, outside of the reserves,

especially along main roads and to the south of Tembe Elephant Park. These areas all have

mixed levels of disturbance, with some having varying elements of grassland, bushveld and

plantations present. In the natural areas surrounding homesteads, many of the species

associated with the microhabitats mentioned above, may well be present. Cattle are

widespread in these areas, often grazing on open fields that double as soccer pitches

(FIGURE 13). Cattle Egret and Hadeda Ibis are almost always present, as are doves, robin-

chats, drongos, shrikes and various others.

FIGURE 13: On open patch of grassland, used as a soccer-field and surrounded by disturbed

bushveld, is traversed by a herd of cattle in the rural homesteads in the south of the study

area.

TABLE 1 below shows the micro habitats that each Red List bird species (recorded in

SABAP1 data) typically frequents in the study area. It must be stressed that birds can and

will, by virtue of their mobility, utilise almost any areas in a landscape from time to time.

However, the analysis in TABLE 1 represents each species’ most preferred or normal

habitats. These locations are where most of the birds of that species will spend most of their

time – so logically that is where impacts on those species will be most significant.

RELEVANT BIRD POPULATIONS

Southern African Bird Atlas Project 1 (Harrison et al, 1997)

This data was collected over an 11 year period between 1986 and 1997. Although it is now

quite old, it remains the best long term data set on bird distribution and abundance

available to us at present. This data was collected on the basis of quarter degree squares,

which is also a relatively large spatial scale. The species recorded in the relevant quarter

degree squares could have been recorded anywhere within these squares and not

necessarily on the exact site of the proposed developments. It does however provide a good

indication of what could be found in the study area. Table 1 below summarises data for Red

List species recorded in the quarter degree squares 2632CD, 2632DC, 2732AB and 2732BA

(Barnes, 2000)1.

TABLE 1: Red List species recorded in the quarter degree squares covering the study area

(Harrison et al, 1997).

Species Cons. status

Report rate (%) Preferred micro habitat

2632C

D 2632D

C 2732AB

2732BA

Total species 388 231 256 196

Number of cards submitted

183 41 65 48

Saddle-billed Stork EN 36 2 - 13 Rivers, Lakes, Wetlands

Cape Vulture VU 3 - - - Grassland, Savanna, Hills and Ridges

White-backed Vulture VU 12 - - - Savanna woodland, Bushveld

Lappet-faced Vulture VU 3 - - - Open woodland

White-headed Vulture VU 14 - 2 - Broad-leaved woodland

Martial Eagle VU 21 7 2 2 Savanna, woodlands, semi-arid shrubland

Tawny Eagle VU 6 - 2 - Savanna, woodlands

Bateleur VU 66 10 31 2 Woodlands

Southern Banded Snake-Eagle

VU 5 2 9 2 Lowland forest, Sand forest, Plantation margins

African Marsh-Harrier VU 14 7 - 19 Wetlands, grasslands

Pel’s Fishing-Owl VU 4 - - - Dense Riparian Forest, Swamp and Lake margins.

Southern Ground-Hornbill VU 1 - - - Savanna, Woodland, Grassland

Denham’s Bustard VU - 5 - 29 Grassland, shrublands, cultivated lands

White-backed Night-Heron VU 1 - - - Quite waters with overhanging vegetation.

African Finfoot VU 6 - - - Slow-flowing streams

Corn Crake VU - 2 - - Rank grassland adjacent to wetlands and marshes.

Pink-backed Pelican VU 22 - 5 - Lakes and estuaries

Great White Pelican NT 32 2 6 - Lakes and estuaries

Black Stork NT 5 - - - Rivers and Kloofs

Woolly-necked Stork NT 63 20 51 23 Rivers, Wetlands, Coastal mudflats

African Openbill NT 45 - 8 - Rivers, Wetlands, Floodplains

Marabou Stork NT 10 - - - Savanna, Grassland

Yellow-billed Stork NT 59 2 2 4 Rivers, Lakes, Estuaries

Greater Flamingo NT 10 - - - Shallow lakes, Salt Pans, Estuaries

Lesser Flamingo NT 11 - - - Shallow lakes, Salt Pans, Estuaries

Secretarybird NT 2 7 - 6 Grassland, arable lands

African Pygmy-Goose NT 13 10 9 21 Permanent waters with water-lilies

Lesser Jacana NT 6 - - 4 Wetlands, River floodplains

1 Arcus is aware of the latest Red Data Book Revision (Taylor, 2014) which is in press. A decision was made to

continue with Barnes 2000 when describing Red-Listed species to ensure continuity with the original report. However, the revised statuses (Taylor, 2014) of the focal species for the study (described below) were considered when determining the impact significance of the updated proposed corridors, and were deemed not to alter the specialist original ratings and findings.

Black-bellied Bustard NT 26 27 25 54 Open Grassland

Greater Painted-snipe NT 6 2 - - Wetlands with exposed mud

Collared Pratincole NT 2 5 - 31 Wetland margins

Black-winged Lapwing NT - - - 4 Short grasslands

Caspian Tern NT 11 - 2 - Wetlands and Large Dams

Half-collared Kingfisher NT 1 - 2 - Coastal lagoons, Wooded streams

Ayres Hawk-Eagle NT 1 - - - Dense woodland and forest edges

African Crowned Eagle NT 15 7 40 - Forest, Dense Woodland

Lanner Falcon NT 1 5 - - Open grassland, woodland

Rudd’s Apalis NT 20 2 22 2 Coastal dune forest, Acacia Woodland

African Broadbill NT 13 27 58 - Evergreen and Sand Forests

Woodward's Batis NT 1 2 11 - Dune Forest, Sand Forest

Rosy-throated Longclaw NT - 2 - 25 Damp grasslands adjoining lakes and vleis

Black-throated Wattle-eye NT 8 - 2 - Riparian forest.

Red-billed Oxpecker NT 2 - - - Open woodland

Neergard’s Sunbird NT 5 2 20 - Sand Forest

Pink-throated Twinspot NT 17 32 54 6 Woodland and Sand Forest

Lemon-breasted Canary NT 2 - - 6 Woodland and bushveld with Lala Palms.

White Stork Bonn 7 - - 4 Grassland, arable lands, wetland, dams

CR = Critically Endangered; EN = Endangered; V = Vulnerable; NT = Near-threatened; Bonn = Protected Internationally under the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species. Report rates are essentially percentages of the number of times a species was recorded in the square, divided by the number of times that square was counted. It is important to note that these species were recorded in the entire quarter degree square in each case and may not actually have been recorded on the proposed site for this study.

Across all squares a total of 46 Red Data species were recorded, comprising 1 Endangered,

16 Vulnerable and 29 Near-threatened. The white Stork, which is not listed, but is protected

internationally through the Bonn Convention on Migratory species, was also recorded.

Southern African Bird Atlas Project 2

SABAP 2 data was examined for the pentads (which are roughly 8km x 8km squares, and

are smaller than the QDS’s used in SABAP1) in the study area which had been counted

more than twice. Table 2 below shows report rates as of 7th August 2014, based on the

number of cards submitted, for the relevant red data species identified in Table 1, as well as

additional species deemed relevant to the study by the specialist.

TABLE 2: Relevant species recorded by SABAP2 in selected pentads, as of 7th August 2014.

Pentad Report Rate (%)

2700_3215 2655_3215 2655_3225 2700_3225 2655_3230 2700_3220

No Cards 7 4 8 26 9 4

Total Species 149 129 94 211 135 107

Saddle-billed Stork - - - - 11.1 -

Martial Eagle - - - 11.5 - 25

Bateleur - - 12.5 26.9 33.3 -

Southern Banded Snake-

Eagle - - - 7.7 - -

African Marsh-Harrier - - - 3.9 22.2 -

White-backed Night-

Heron - 25 - - - -

African Finfoot 28.6 25 - - - -

Pink-backed Pelican 28.6 incidental - - - -

Great White Pelican - 25 - - - -

Woolly-necked Stork - - - 53.9 22.2 -

African Openbill - 25 - - - -

Yellow-billed Stork 14.3 25 - - 22.2 -

Secretarybird 14.3 - - - - -

African Pygmy-Goose 14.3 - - - - -

Black-bellied Bustard - - - 26.9 44.4 -

Collared Pratincole - - - 3.9 - -

African Crowned Eagle - - - 7.7 11.1 -

Rudd’s Apalis - - 12.5 30.8 22.2 -

African Broadbill - - - 15.4 - -

Woodward's Batis - - - 19.2 - 50

Rosy-throated Longclaw - - - - 11.1 -

Black-throated Wattle-

eye - 25 - - - -

Red-billed Oxpecker - - - 42.3 77.8 -

Pink-throated Twinspot - - 12.5 42.3 44.4 50

Neergards Sunbird - - - - - 50

Plain-backed Sunbird - - - 19.2 11.1 50

Long-crested Eagle 14.3 25 - - - -

African Harrier-hawk 14.3 25 - 34.6 33.3 -

Black Chested Snake-

Eagle 14.3 25 12.5 11.5 11.1 -

African Fish-Eagle 42.9 25 12.5 15.4 66.7 -

Data from pentad 2700_3235 (2 cards only) was also reviewed, with the only additional

relevant information being a single record of Lemon-breasted Canary. Interestingly, 20 of

the relevant species identified in the SABAP 1 data (i.e. Table 1), have not been recorded in

the SABAP 2 data for all the pentads examined. This however, does not necessarily mean

that these species do not occur here, or that they have moved from the area, post SABAP1,

but may merely be due to the lower counting effort of the pentads, or selective micro

habitat counting by the SABAP2 field counters. Bateleur, African Finfoot, Woolly-necked

Stork, Yellow-billed Stork, Black-bellied Bustard, Rudd’s Apalis and Pink-throated Twinspot

are the only Red-List (Barnes, 2000) species showing relatively high abundance across

more than one pentad.

Coordinated Avifaunal Road-count (CAR) data

There are no CAR routes in the vicinity of the proposed project.

Coordinated Waterbird count (CWAC) data

There are no CWAC sites within the immediate site, or traversed by any of the alternatives.

However, three CWAC sites present in the broader area (two within Ndumo Game Reserve

and one to the south of the study area) were considered. Avifaunal data from these sites is

useful in providing a better understanding of the species present in the broader vicinity of

the study site, and they are therefore discussed below.

Ndumo Game Reserve: Banzi Pan

Banzi Pan, located in the Ndumo Game Reserve, a declared RAMSAR site, is linked to the

Usuthu River System. Recent changes in the river course have resulted in this system

changing from a pan system to a narrow linear river system. The site is no longer counted

by boat and instead it is now surveyed on foot. Waterfowl recorded in high numbers here

were White-faced Duck, Fulvous Duck, Spur-winged Goose, Egyptian Goose and African

Pygmy-Goose. Species recorded regularly included African Fish-Eagle, Black Crake, African

Jacana, Pied Kingfisher, Water Thick-knee, Goliath Heron, Reed Cormorant, Great Egret,

Little Egret, Squacco Heron, Yellow-billed Stork and African Openbill. An additional three

Stork species have been observed here namely, Saddle-billed, Black and Woolly-necked

Storks as well as both flamingo species, Lesser Jacana and Great White Pelican.

Ndumo Game Reserve: Nyamithi Pan

A large open expanse of water in the Ndumo Game Reserve, flanked by tall forest and

woodland. There are breeding colonies of Yellow-billed Storks and Pink-backed Pelicans

here, while African Skimmer and Marabou Stork have been recorded on one occasion each.

Osprey and African Fish-Eagle are present, as are the following relevant species: Caspian

Tern, Great White Pelican, Goliath Heron, African Openbill, and Saddle - billed Stork,

Woolly-necked Stork, Greater Flamingo and African Pygmy-Goose. Numerous other more

common waterbirds are also present.

FIGURE 14: A Giraffe drinks from the banks of the Nyamithi Pan, in the Ndumo Game

Reserve.

Ngutshana Pan

This is a non-perennial vegetated freshwater pan lying immediately west of a cashew nut

plantation. It is surrounded by settlement and has small subsistence crops planted

immediately on its high water mark. It is relatively poorly counted with only 8 cards

(counts) submitted, which possibly explains why data for only 15 species has been recorded

by the CWAC project here. White-faced Duck, Cattle Egret and White-breasted Cormorant

are the species recorded in the highest numbers here, while African Pygmy-Goose has also

been seen here.

Important Bird Areas (IBA’s)

The study area falls between two IBA’s, the Kosi Bay System to the east and Ndumo Game

Reserve to the north west. In order to further understand the avifauna present in the

broader area, these two sites are examined below using information from BirdLife

International (2013). It is also important to note that there may well be extensive

movement of birds (particularly water birds) between these two sites.

Kosi Bay System (SA053/ZA039)

The Kosi Bay system is situated in a warm, humid, subtropical climate 470 km north-east of

Durban; Mozambique borders it in the north and the Indian Ocean in the east. The system

is composed of four interconnected, roughly circular, fresh to brackish lakes (Makhawulani,

Mpungwini, Nhlange and aManzimnyama), a broad channel leading to an estuary that opens

to the Indian Ocean, and three extensive areas of swamp. Numerous sandy mud banks,

emergent at low tide, occur in the lower part of the system. The wetland shows complex

patterns and interactions in thermal properties, salinity and nutrient levels through the

various lakes. The main vegetation-types include marshes, sedge-beds, submerged plants

(in lakes, pans and streams), swamps and other aquatic communities dominated by reed

Phragmites, sedge Cladium and the fern Achrostichum. The swampy vegetation is

surrounded by undulating grassland, among which palms Phoenix are interspersed. The

surrounding woodland includes trees of Syzygium, Acacia, Trichilia, Albizia and Dialium.

Only 85 of the 296 bird species that have been recorded at Kosi Bay are estuary-associated.

The system is important for various species of migratory and nomadic birds. The avifauna is

prolific and diverse, largely as a result of the undisturbed condition of the marginal

vegetation along the water’s edge. Greater and Lesser Flamingo’s are almost always

present, and the open water occasionally supports Caspian Tern as well as Great White and

Pink-backed Pelicans. It is assumed that Kosi Bay acts as a staging post for migrating

waders as part of the east coast flyway. The swamp-forest and associated overhanging

vegetation supports several rare, localized and specialized bird species, including White-

backed Night Heron, African Finfoot and Pel’s Fishing-Owl. The larger riverine trees are

suitable for Bat Hawk and Southern Banded Snake-Eagle, which probably breed there. The

sand forest supports Pink-throated Twinspot and Rudd’s Apalis two restricted-range species.

The forests are home to Brown Scrub-robin, Chorister Robin-chat, Woodward’s’ Batis and

Black-bellied Starling. Additional IBA trigger species include Mangrove Kingfisher, Olive

Bush-shrike, Grey Cuckooshrike, Gorgeous Bush-shrike, Grey Sunbird and White-throated

Robin-chat.

Ndumo Game Reserve (SA052/ZA038)

Ndumo Game Reserve nestles at the eastern foot of the Lebombo Mountains, at the junction

of the Pongola and Usuthu flood-plain systems. The Pongola River runs through the reserve,

from south to north, while the Usuthu River forms the northern border (which is also the

international border with Mozambique). The topography is very flat, with a few small hills.

There are two major semi-permanent flood-plain pans (i.e. Nyamithi and Banzi Pans- see

above) and many smaller permanent and ephemeral pans within the reserve.

The rivers, flood-plains, pans, dams and vleis are important for many wetland birds, and

species including Great White and Pink-backed Pelicans, Woolly-necked Stork, African

Openbill, Saddle-billed Stork, Grey Crowned Crane, Lesser Flamingo, Rufous-bellied Heron,

White-backed Night-Heron Lesser Jacana and Black Coucal. The riverine forest holds Pel’s

Fishing-Owl and African Finfoot. This reserve is one of the few in KwaZulu-Natal that holds

most of its original complement of raptors, including, Lizard Buzzard, Bateleur and Southern

Banded Snake-eagle. The sand forest holds Neergard’s Sunbird (80–120 breeding pairs) and

Pink-throated Twinspot. Other important species include Brown-headed Parrot, Olive Bush-

shrike, Rudd’s Apalis, Grey Cuckooshrike, Plain-backed Sunbird, Black-bellied Starling and

White-throated Robin-chat.

FIGURE 15: A Lizard Buzzard perched on electrical infrastructure, observed during the site

visit.

Focal Species List

Determining the focal species for this study, i.e. the most important species to be

considered, is a four step process. Firstly, the micro-habitats available on site were

identified. An analysis of the above existing avifaunal data represents the second step, i.e.

which species occur historically in the area at significant abundances. The third step is to

identify those species which have a high likelihood of being present on, and/or utilizing, the

site, based on the above two steps and are more likely to be impacted upon by the power-

line and associated development. This step called on the vast experience of the EWT in

evaluating and investigating electrical infrastructure impacts on birds (these impacts are

discussed in more detail below). In general, large, heavy flying birds are more vulnerable to

collision with over-head powerlines, while perching Raptors are more vulnerable to

electrocution. Furthermore, in this particular study, the impacts of disturbance and habitat

destruction are likely to be high due to the high diversity of natural microhabitats and large

number of smaller endemic birds, restricted to the Maputaland area .The fourth and final

step was to consider the species conservation status or other reasons for protecting the

species. This involved primarily consulting the Red List bird species (Barnes 2000).

The resultant list of ‘focal species’ for this study is as follows: Great White Pelican,

Pink-backed Pelican, Saddle-billed Stork, Yellow-billed Stork, Woolly-necked

Stork, Lesser Flamingo, Black-bellied Bustard, Secretarybird, African Crowned

Eagle, White-headed Vulture, Martial Eagle, African Fish-Eagle, Bateleur, African

March Harrier, Southern-banded Snake-eagle, Collared Pratincole , Rosy-throated

Longclaw, Pink-throated Twinspot, African Broadbill, Neergard’s Sunbird, and

Rudd’s Apalis.

In many cases, these species serve as surrogates for other similar species (as mitigation

will be effective for both), examples being Yellow-billed for Black Stork, Martial Eagle for

Tawny Eagle, Lesser Flamingo for Greater Flamingo and Neergard’s’ Sunbird for other small

Sand Forest species such as Plain-backed Sunbird and Woodward’s Batis. Assorted more

common species will also be relevant to this study, but it is believed that the above focal

species will to a large extent serve as surrogates for these in terms of impact assessment

and management.

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS2

General description of impacts of power lines on birds

Because of its’ size and prominence, electrical infrastructure constitutes an important

interface between wildlife and man. Negative interactions between wildlife and electricity

structures take many forms, but two common problems in southern Africa are electrocution

of birds (and other animals) and birds colliding with power lines (Ledger 1983; Verdoorn

1996; Kruger 1999; Van Rooyen 1999; Van Rooyen 2000). Other problems are electrical

faults caused by bird excreta when roosting or breeding on electricity infrastructure, (Van

Rooyen & Taylor 1999) and disturbance and habitat destruction during construction and

maintenance activities.

Electrocutions

Electrocution of birds on overhead lines is an important cause of unnatural mortality of

raptors and storks. It has attracted plenty of attention in Europe, USA and South Africa

(APLIC 1994; van Rooyen & Ledger 1999). Electrocution refers to the scenario where a bird

is perched or attempts to perch on the electrical structure and causes an electrical short

circuit by physically bridging the air gap between live components and/or live and earthed

components (van Rooyen 2004). Electrocution is possible on a 132kV power line, especially

where large raptors and vultures feature prevalently. Fortunately, it is unlikely that vultures

will occur in the study area but numerous large eagles and buzzards may be present, so the

impact of electrocution is likely to be of Low Significance across all alternatives for

the proposed power line, including the preferred alternative (Corridor 3P), if the proposed

mitigations are implemented.

Collisions

Collisions are the biggest single threat posed by over-head power lines to birds in southern

Africa (van Rooyen 2004). In general, large lines with earth wires that are not always visible

to birds can have the largest impact in terms of collisions. Most heavily impacted upon are

korhaans, bustards, storks, cranes and various species of water birds. These species are

mostly heavy-bodied birds with limited manoeuvrability, which makes it difficult for them to

take the necessary evasive action to avoid colliding with power lines (van Rooyen 2004,

Anderson 2001). Unfortunately, many of the collision sensitive species are considered

2 The significance of the impacts discussed were rated according to a set of criteria (APPENDIX 2) supplied by

Zitholele Consulting, using Impact Rating Tables (APPENDIX 1). The ratings are applicable to all corridor alternatives.

threatened in southern Africa. The Red Data species vulnerable to power line collisions are

generally long living, slow reproducing species under natural conditions. Some require very

specific conditions for breeding, resulting in very few successful breeding attempts, or

breeding might be restricted to very small areas. These species have not evolved to cope

with high adult mortality, with the results that consistent high adult mortality over an

extensive period could have a serious effect on a population’s ability to sustain itself in the

long or even medium term. Many of the anthropogenic threats to these species are non-

discriminatory as far as age is concerned (e.g. habitat destruction, disturbance and power

lines) and therefore contribute to adult mortality, and it is not known what the cumulative

effect of these impacts could be over the long term. Collision of certain large flying bird

species such as Great White Pelican, Pink-backed Pelican, and Saddle - billed Stork, Yellow-

billed Stork, Woolly-necked Stork, Lesser Flamingo, Black-bellied Bustard and Secretarybird

with the proposed lines is a distinct possibility, and this impact is predicted to be of

Moderate Significance across all alternatives including the preferred alternative

(Corridor 3P), after mitigation.

Habitat destruction

During the construction phase and maintenance of substations and power lines some habitat

destruction and alteration inevitably takes place. This happens with the construction of

access roads, and the clearing of servitudes, as well as clearing vegetation at the substation

site. Servitudes have to be cleared of excess vegetation at regular intervals in order to

allow access to the line for maintenance, to prevent vegetation from intruding into the

legally prescribed clearance gap between the ground and the conductors and to minimize

the risk of fire under the line which can result in electrical flashovers. These activities have

an impact on birds breeding, foraging and roosting in or in close proximity of the servitude

through modification of habitat. Habitat destruction along all alternatives including

the preferred alternative (Corridor 3P) is anticipated to be of Moderate to high

significance in this study area.

Disturbance

Similarly, the above mentioned construction and maintenance activities impact on birds

through disturbance, particularly during bird breeding activities. Disturbance to birds

along all alternatives including the preferred alternative (Corridor 3P) is

anticipated to be of Low to Moderate Significance if mitigation is implemented.

MITIGATIONS

Potential mitigations for the identified impacts are shown in TABLES 3 and 4 below.

TABLE 3: Potential mitigations for the identified impacts- Construction Phase

Impact Mitigation

Habitat destruction Strict control should be maintained over all

activities during construction, in particular

heavy machinery and vehicle movements,

and staff. It is difficult to mitigate properly for

this as some habitat destruction is inevitable.

It is important to ensure that the construction

Environmental Management Plan incorporates

guidelines as to how best to minimize this

impact.

Disturbance Strict control should be maintained over all

activities during construction. It is difficult to

mitigate properly for this as some disturbance

is inevitable. During Construction, if any

of the “Focal Species” identified in this

report are observed to be roosting

and/or breeding in the vicinity (within

500m of the power line), the Avifaunal

Specialist is to be contacted for further

instruction.

TABLE 4: Potential mitigations for the identified impacts- Operational Phase

Impact Mitigation

Collision Mark the relevant sections of line with

appropriate marking devices. These sections

of line, and the exact spans, should be

finalised by a “walk down” as part of the

Environmental Management Programme

(EMP) phase, once power-line routes are

finalised and pylon positions are pegged.

Electrocution It is highly recommended that the steel

monopole design be used and that this

incorporates the standard bird perch. If this is

the case then most raptors and birds of high

electrocution risk will perch well above the

conductors and out of harm’s way. In addition

it is critical that all clearances between live

and earth components are greater than 1.8

meters. If this is the case then the impact of

bird electrocution will be very minimal.

Disturbance during routine

maintenance.

No nests may be removed, without first

consulting the EWT’s Wildlife and Energy

Program (WEP). During maintenance, if any

of the “Focal Species” identified in this

report are observed to be roosting

and/or breeding in the vicinity, the

avifaunal specialist is to be contacted for

further instruction.

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

As discussed elsewhere, the site falls within the Maputaland-Pondoland Centre of

Endemism, which is a “biodiversity hotspot”. The site has high sensitivity in terms of

avifauna, based on the occurrence of a number of listed species and endemics in the study

area, as well as the various micro-habitats available to avifauna. However, there are areas

associated with certain landscape elements that will be more sensitive than others. Three

sensitivity zones are therefore identified, and depicted in the maps (FIGURES 16 and 17)

below.

High Sensitivity

This zone includes Formal Protected Areas, a 200m buffer around Rivers and all Sand Forest

patches buffered by 100m. Within these areas, it is recommended that construction of the

power line be avoided, if possible, and any line that is built in these zones may require

collision mitigation in the form of bird flight diverters (“flappers”).

High-Medium Sensitivity

This zone includes all wetlands buffered by 100m. The exact sensitivity of these zones will

still need to be ground truthed, as many of these wetlands my now be disturbed/degraded

to some extent. However, the majority and especially those associated with the Pongolo

River, appear to be very important for avifauna, and it is recommended that construction of

the power line be avoided where possible. Any line that is built in these zones may require

collision mitigation in the form of bird flight diverters.

Medium Sensitivity.

All remaining zones not described above. It is likely that these areas have a medium

sensitivity, and at this stage, some of the more natural undisturbed grassland patches may

require mitigation in the form of line marking, but this will be confirmed during a site walk

through in the EMP phase of the process. Construction of line is preferred in these zones,

especially where the new line can follow existing infrastructure (e.g. roads and medium

voltage power lines).

FIGURE 16: Sensitive zones in the west of the study area, associated with sand forest, protected areas, rivers and wetlands.

FIGURE 17: Sensitive zones in the east of the study area, associated with sand forest, protected areas, rivers and wetlands.

COMPARRISON OF ALTERNATIVES

For this project, three potential corridors were initially considered: Corridor 1 was a

northern corridor bordering Mozambique; Corridor 2 a central route in a straight line

connecting the two proposed substations; and Corridor 3 south of Tembe Elephant Reserve

along the P522 road and consisting of four options, 3a, 3b, 3c and 3d. Following initial

analysis (which included public consultation) of these corridors, Corridors 1, 2 and 3d were

subsequently ruled out, and a preferred Corridor (Corridor 3P) was added for consideration

in the analysis below.

Alternative A1 – Corridor 3P

Approximately 44.7 km in length.

This corridor traverses from the Ndumo substation in an east-southeasterly direction

towards the proposed Pongola River crossing at Makhane’s Drift.

This corridor will cross the Pongola River approximately 100m to the south of the

existing high level pedestrian bridge (at which Corridors 3b and 3c are proposed to

cross) over the Pongola River.

Once across the Pongola River, the corridor runs parallel to the southwest of the

gravel District Road D1861 until its junction with the P522 tar road. Thereafter, the

corridor runs parallel to the P522 road in an easterly direction and to the south of the

P522 road.

2.4 km from to the west of the junction of the P522 road with the R22 road the

corridor veers away and to the south of the P522 road up to a distance of 0.9 km in

order to traverse around the Phelandaba township area, and then traverses back

towards the P522 road and crosses over it where after which it runs parallel to the

P522 road to the north for approximately 5.5 km

The final 3.7 km turns away from the P522 road in a northeasterly direction to the

Gezisa substation.

In Summary:

o The corridor passes to the south of Tembe Elephant Park.

o The corridor passes through some Sand Forest patches, although these have

already been fragmented by the existing road and power lines.

o A high proportion of the corridor length runs in close proximity to existing

linear infrastructure (e.g. roads/power lines etc.) and relatively disturbed

areas (e.g. towns/villages/arable land etc.).

o Areas of high conservation value (e.g. parks, reserves, elephant reserve etc.)

have been avoided where possible.

Alternative A2 - Corridor 3a

Approximately 48 km in length.

Initially runs south from Ndumo substation for approximately 3 km and then follows

P522 tar road as well as existing electrical infrastructure for the majority of its

length.

Passes through some Sand Forest patches, although these have already been

fragmented by the existing road and power lines.

Runs along the southern boundary of Tembe Elephant Park.

Sections of this corridor follow the same route as that of 3P described above.

Alternative A3 - Corridor 3b

Approximately 48 km in length.

Initially runs east from Ndumo Substation, crossing the Pongolo River in the vicinity

of a foot bridge.

Runs approximately 1 km to the south of the P522 tar road for the majority of its

length.

Passes close to the northern boundary of Sileza Nature Reserve.

Alternative A4 – Corridor 3c

Approximately 46 km in length.

From Ndumo substation, this option follows the exact routing as 3b for approximately

30 km. It then crosses over the P522 road, and runs to the north of this road.

In order to rank these alternatives TABLE 5 was compiled and the corridors given a rating

on a scale of 0 to 5, with 0 being NO GO, 1 being the least preferred and 5 being the most

highly preferred option.

TABLE 5: Preference rating for the three power line route alternatives.

Corridor Preference Rating

3P 4

3a 4

3b 3

3c 3

As can be seen from the discussions and table above, corridors 3P and 3a are preferred

while corridors 3b and 3c, although not preferred, are possibly acceptable from an avifaunal

perspective but will require extensive mitigations, and additional closer investigation.

CONCLUSION

The site falls within the Maputaland-Pondoland Centre of Endemism, which is a “biodiversity

hotspot”. There are numerous microhabitats available to birds, and the entire area is

regarded as highly sensitive in terms of avifauna. There are numerous protected areas as

well as two IBA’s in the broader area. It is highly likely that a large number of water birds

and collision prone species such as Storks and Pelicans move between Ndumo Game

Reserve and the Kosi Bay systems to the east. From an avifaunal perspective, the preferred

corridor options for this project are either Corridor 3P or Corridor 3a, if the recommended

mitigations of this report are implemented.

The impacts that could be associated with a project of this nature include collision of birds

with the overhead cables; electrocution; destruction of habitat; and disturbance of birds.

The impact rating exercise found that after mitigation, collision will have a Low-Moderate

Environmental Significance; and both electrocution and Disturbance a Low Environmental

Significance. Habitat destruction was found to be moderately significant for all alternatives.

Destruction and fragmentation of certain habitat types such as Sand Forest, is the main

concern. In fact Wilson et al (2007) found that the number of individual birds recorded in

Sand Forest patches, decreased significantly with increasing isolation of the patch.

Avifaunal input in to the EMP (in the form of a site “walk down”) is recommended in order

to, “fine tune” the sensitivity zones, and to identify the exact spans of line for marking to

mitigate for bird collisions, once the route is chosen and the tower positions have been

pegged. Provided that the high risk sections of line are mitigated in the form of marking, the

impact of collision should be contained. During this “walk down” breeding/nesting sites and

roost sites must be identified, so that the correct mitigating actions can be implemented

prior to construction, in order to reduce the impacts of habitat destruction and disturbance

on sensitive species. Electrocutions can be successfully mitigated by ensuring that a bird-

friendly monopole structure (with clearance distances between live and earth components of

at least 1.8 m but preferably 2 m) is used, as discussed elsewhere in the report.

REFERENCES

Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC). 1994. Mitigating Bird Collisions with Power

Lines: The State of the Art in 1994. Edison Electric Institute. Washington D.C.

Anderson, M.D. 2001. The effectiveness of two different marking devices to reduce large

terrestrial bird collisions with overhead electricity cables in the eastern Karoo, South Africa.

Draft report to Eskom Resources and Strategy Division. Johannesburg. South Africa.

Barnes, K.N. (ed). 1998. The Important Bird Areas of Southern Africa. Birdlife South Africa,

Johannesburg.

Barnes, K.N. (ed.) 2000. The Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and

Swaziland. BirdLife South Africa: Johannesburg.

BirdLife International. 2013. Important Bird Areas factsheet: Kosi Bay system. Downloaded

from http://www.birdlife.org on 06/05/2013

BirdLife International. 2013. Important Bird Areas factsheet: Ndumo Game Reserve.

Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 06/05/2013

Geldenhuys, C. J and MacDevette, D.R. 1989. Conservation status of coastal and montane

evergreen forest. In: Huntley BJ (ed) Biotic Diversity in Southern Africa: Concepts and

Conservation. Oxford University Press, Cape Town

Harrison, J.A., Allan, D.G., Underhill, L.G., Herremans, M., Tree, A.J., Parker, V & Brown,

C.J. (eds). 1997. The atlas of southern African birds. Vol. 1&2. BirdLife South Africa:

Johannesburg.

Kruger, R. 1999. Towards solving raptor electrocutions on Eskom Distribution Structures in

South Africa. M. Phil. Mini-thesis. University of the Orange Free State. Bloemfontein. South

Africa.

Ledger, J. 1983. Guidelines for Dealing with Bird Problems of Transmission Lines and

Towers. Eskom Test and Research Division Technical Note TRR/N83/005.

Mittermeier, R.A, Robles Gil, P, Hoffmann M, Pilgrim J, Brooks T, Mittermeier C.G, Lamoreux

J and da Fonseca G.A.B. 2004. Hotspots Revisited. CEMEX, Mexico

Mucina & Rutherford. 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland.

Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

Taylor, P.B., Navarro, R.A., Wren-Sargent, M., Harrison, J.A. & Kieswetter, S.L. 1999.

Coordinated waterbird Counts in South Africa, 1992-1997. Avian Demography Unit, Cape

Town.

Taylor, M.R. (ed.) 2014. The Eskom Red Data Book of Birds of South Africa, Lesotho and

Swaziland. BirdLife South Africa, Johannesburg. In press.

Van Rensburg, B.J, Chown, S.L, van Jaarsveld A.S, and McGeogh, M.A. 2000. Spatial

variation and biogeography of sand forest avian assemblages in South Africa. Journal of

Biogeography 27: 1385–1401

Van Rooyen, C.S. & Ledger, J.A. 1999. “Birds and utility structures: Developments in

southern Africa” in Ferrer, M. & G..F.M. Janns. (eds.) Birds and Power lines. Quercus:

Madrid, Spain, pp 205-230

Van Rooyen, C.S. 1999. An overview of the Eskom - EWT Strategic Partnership in South

Africa. (EPRI Workshop on Avian Interactions with Utility Structures 2-3 December 1999,

Charleston, South Carolina.)

Van Rooyen, C.S. 2000. “An overview of Vulture Electrocutions in South Africa.” Vulture

News, 43, pp 5-22. Vulture Study Group: Johannesburg, South Africa.

Van Rooyen, C.S. 2004a. The Management of Wildlife Interactions with overhead lines. In

The fundamentals and practice of Overhead Line Maintenance (132kV and above), pp217-

245. Eskom Technology, Services International, Johannesburg.

Van Rooyen, C.S. 2004b. Investigations into vulture electrocutions on the Edwardsdam-

Mareetsane 88kV feeder, Unpublished report, Endangered Wildlife Trust, Johannesburg.

Van Rooyen, C.S. & Taylor, P.V. 1999. Bird Streamers as probable cause of electrocutions in

South Africa. (EPRI Workshop on Avian Interactions with Utility Structures 2-3 December

1999. Charleston, South Carolina)

Van Wyk, A.E. 1996. Biodiversity of the Maputaland Centre. In: van der Maesen LJG, van

der Burgt XM and van Medenbach de Rooy JM (eds) The Biodiversity in African Savannahs.

Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

Verdoorn, G.H. 1996. Mortality of Cape Griffons Gyps coprotheres and African Whitebacked

Vultures Pseudogyps africanus on 88kV and 132kV power lines in Western Transvaal, South

Africa, and mitigation measures to prevent future problems. (2nd International Conference

on Raptors: 2-5 October 1996. Urbino, Italy.)

Wilson, J.W., van Aarde, R.J. & van Rensburg, B.J. 2007. Effects of habitat fragmentation on

bird communities of sand forests in southern Mozambique. Ostrich 2007, 78(1): 37–42.

Young, D.J., Harrison, J.A., Navarro, R.A., Anderson, M.D. and Colahan, B.D. (eds). 2003.

Big Birds on Farms: Mazda CAR Report 1993-2001. Avian Demographic Unit. University of

Cape Town, South Africa.

APPENDIX 1: Impact Tables

IMPACT TABLE 1

Environmental Parameter Large, heavy flying birds (e.g. Pelicans, Storks, Flamingoes and Bustards)

Issue/Impact/Environmental Effect/Nature

Collisions of birds with the earth wires

Pre-mitigation impact rating Post mitigation impact rating

Scale 4 4

Duration 4 4

Magnitude 4 4

Probability 4 3

Significance Points (SP) rating 3.2 2.4

Environmental Significance Moderate to High Low to Moderate

Mitigation measures Line routing is critical to mitigate for this and as such the power line route should avoid crossing any highly sensitive microhabitats, for example wetland, dams, rivers, etc. It is best practice to follow any existing lines as electrical infrastructure grouped together generally mitigates for the impact of collision by making the lines more visible. Mark the identified sections (as per sensitivity map below) of line with anti collision marking devices on the earth wire to increase the visibility of the line and reduce likelihood of collisions. Marking devices should be spaced 10m apart. The sections of line that pose a concern and require marking should be finalised in a site “walkthrough” by an avifaunal specialist once final route is decided and towers/pylons pegged.

IMPACT TABLE 2

Environmental Parameter Large raptors and vultures (e.g. African Crowned Eagle and Martial Eagle) and possibly Storks

Issue/Impact/Environmental Effect/Nature

Electrocution of birds on the power lines and in the substations

Pre-mitigation impact rating Post mitigation impact rating

Scale 4 4

Duration 4 4

Magnitude 4 4

Probability 3 2

Significance Points (SP) rating 2.4 1.6

Environmental Significance Low to Moderate Low

Mitigation measures A bird friendly tower structure must be used (an example of which is shown in Appendix 3 below). It is highly recommended that the steel monopole design be used and that this incorporate the standard bird perch. If this is the case then most raptors and birds of high electrocution risk will perch well above the conductors and out of harm’s way. In addition it is critical that all clearances between live and earth components are at least greater than 1.8 meters, and preferable greater than 2 m, as this is the dimension of the largest birds wing span (e.g. Martial Eagle, Pelicans and Storks). If this is the case then the impact of bird electrocution will be very minimal. Electrocutions in the proposed substation yard should not affect the sensitive bird species as they are unlikely to use the substation yards for perching or roosting. Should this become an issue the impact can be mitigated reactively using a range of insulation devices that exist and are approved by ESKOM.

IMPACT TABLE 3

Environmental Parameter Various Bird Species (especially Sand Forest specials)

Issue/Impact/Environmental Effect/Nature

Destruction of habitat used by relevant bird species.

Pre-mitigation impact rating Post mitigation impact rating

Scale 3 3

Duration 5 5

Magnitude 4 2

Probability 5 5

Significance Points (SP) rating 4 3.33

Environmental Significance High Moderate

Mitigation measures Strict control should be maintained over all activities during construction, in particular heavy machinery and vehicle movements, and staff. It is difficult to mitigate properly for this as some habitat destruction is inevitable. Route selection is vital, and the shortest route passing through the least sensitive habitats should be chosen if possible.

IMPACT TABLE 4

Environmental Parameter Various bird species, especially breeding or nesting birds

Issue/Impact/Environmental Effect/Nature

Disturbance relevant bird species during construction and maintenance.

Pre-mitigation impact rating Post mitigation impact rating

Scale 2 2

Duration 3 2

Magnitude 4 3

Probability 4 3

Significance Points (SP) rating 2.40 1.40

Environmental Significance Moderate to Low Low

Mitigation measures Strict control should be maintained over all activities during construction and maintenance, in particular heavy machinery and vehicle movements, and staff. It is difficult to mitigate properly for this as some disturbance is inevitable. If any of the Red-listed species identified in this report are observed to be roosting and/or breeding in the vicinity, the avifaunal specialist is to be contacted for further instruction

APPENDIX 2: Significance Rating Criteria (as supplied by Zitholele Consulting)

Probability: 5 – Definite/don’t know 4 – Highly probable 3 – Medium probability 2 – Low probability 1 – Improbable 0 – None

Duration: 5 – Permanent 4 - Long-term (ceases with the operational life) 3 - Medium-term (5-15 years) 2 - Short-term (0-5 years) 1 – Immediate

Scale: 5 – International 4 – National 3 – Regional (>5km) 2 – Local (<5km) 1 – Site only 0 – None

Magnitude: 5 - Very high/don’t know 4 – High 3 – Moderate 2 – Low 1 – Minor

Rank Description

5 Very High Environmental Significance

4 High Environmental Significance

3 Moderate Environmental Significance

2 Low Environmental Significance

1 Very Low Environmental Significance

APPENDIX 3: Example of a “bird friendly steel monopole tower structure” as supplied by

EWT.