amendment of environmental management … · reviewer andrew bradbury ... status draft report for...

Amendment of Environmental Management Programmes for

Mining Rights 554MRC, 10025MR, 512MRC and 513MRC

Volume 1: EMPR Amendment Overview

SLR Project No.: 720.01087.00001

Report No.: 1

Revision No.: 0

November 2017

Alexkor RMC Pooling and Sharing Joint Venture

SLR & PRM Page i

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1

Amendment of Environmental Management Programmes for Mining

Rights 554MRC, 10025MR, 512MRC and 513MRC


November 2017

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

Title Amendment of Environmental Management Programmes for Mining Rights

554MRC, 10025MR, 512MRC and 513MRC

Sub-title Volume 1: EMPR Amendment Overview

Project Manager Jeremy Blood

Project Manager e-mail [email protected]

Authors Jeremy Blood and Jeremy Midgely

Reviewer Andrew Bradbury

Client Alexkor RMC Pooling and Sharing Joint Venture

Date last printed 2017/11/08

Date last saved 2017/11/08

Keywords Alexkor RMC; diamonds; Sea Concessions a, b & c; Orange River; Mining

Rights 554MRC, 10025MR, 512MRC & 513MRC

Project Number 720.01087.00001

Report Number 1

Revision Number 0

Status Draft report for I&AP review and comment

Issue Date November 2017

REPORT COMPILED BY: Jeremy Blood and Jeremy Midgely

............................................................. ...........................................................

Jeremy Blood Pr.Sci.Nat.; CEAPSA Jeremy Midgely Pr.Sci.Nat.

SLR Senior Environmental Assessment Practitioner PRM

REPORT REVIEWED BY: Andrew Bradbury and Neil Fraser

............................................................. .............................................................

Andrew Bradbury Pr.Sci.Nat. Neil Fraser Pr.Sci.Nat.; MAusIMM

SLR Technical Director: Cape Town PRM Director

This report has been prepared by an SLR Group company with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, taking into

account the manpower and resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. Information reported herein is based on

the interpretation of data collected, which has been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid.

No warranties or guarantees are expressed or should be inferred by any third parties.

This report may not be relied upon by other parties without written consent from SLR.

SLR disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the agreed scope of the work.

SLR & PRM Page ii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

SLR & PRM Page iii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

VOLUMES OF THE EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS


Volume 1 includes supporting information applicable to all four marine mining right areas, including the key

legislative requirements, public participation process, specialist studies and baseline description.

Volume 2: Mining Right 554MRC

Volume 2 deals with the coastal and marine operations in the surf zone, Sea Concession 1a, 2a, 3a and 1b),

as well as the management/rehabilitation of the Orange River Mouth Estuary.

Volume 3: Mining Right 10025MR

Volume 3 deals with Sea Concession 1c operations.


Volume 4 deals with Sea Concession 4a operations.


Volume 5 deals with Sea Concession 4b operations.

SLR & PRM Page iv

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

SLR & PRM Page v

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

AMENDMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMMES FOR MINING

RIGHTS 554MRC, 10025MR, 512MRC AND 513MRC

VOLUME 1: EMPR AMENDMENT OVERVIEW

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND

In 2011, Alexkor SOC Limited (Alexkor) and the

Richtersveld Mining Company (Pty) Ltd (RMC) formed a

Pooling and Sharing Joint Venture (hereafter referred to

as “PSJV”) in order to oversee all current and future

mining activities relating to Alexkor’s mining rights.

The PSJV thus manages an onshore and four marine

mining rights on and off the West Coast of South Africa.

These Mining Rights are located roughly between the

Orange River in the north and Kleinzee in the south (see

Figure 1). The current mining activities are approved

and executed under three approved Environmental

Management Programmes (EMPRs), as amended.

The PSJV is amending its EMPRs for the marine Mining

Rights to comply with the current requirements of the

National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (No. 108

of 1998) (NEMA) and the Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) Regulations 2014, as amended, and

to ensure alignment with each other, all new legislation,

environmental standards, as well as internal PSJV

Performance Assessment Reports. The EMPR for the

onshore Mining Right 550MRC, which was approved in

April 2017, is not being amended as part of this process

as agreed to with the Department of Mineral Resources

(DMR).

SLR Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (“SLR”), in

association with Placer Resource Management (Pty) Ltd

(“PRM”), has been appointed by the PSJV as the

independent environmental consultant to amend the

existing EMPRs for Mining Rights 554MRC, 10025MRC,

512MRC and 513MRC and undertake the associated

public participation process.

2. KEY LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

The key legislative requirements and guiding principles

underpinning the EMPR amendment process include:

• Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development

Act, 2002 (No. 28 of 2002) (MPRDA)

Section 102 of the MPRDA requires that any

amendment to an EMPr be approved by the

Minister of Mineral Resources (or the delegated

authority). Any amendment of an EMPR is to take

place in accordance with NEMA and the EIA

Regulations 2014, as amended.

• National Environmental Management Act, 1998

and EIA Regulations 2014

Section 24N(6) of NEMA provides for the

amendment of an EMPR, as defined in

Section 37 of the EIA Regulations 2014, as

amended. The current EMPR amendment

process is being undertaken in compliance with

this legislation.

3. EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS

3.1 APPROACH

A combined process is being undertaken to streamline

the EMPR amendment processes for the four marine

mining right areas and to avoid duplication. Some of the

information gathered as part of this combined process is

applicable to all four amendment applications. Five

separate reports (or volumes) have been prepared as

part of this EMPR amendment process:

• Volume 1: EMPR Amendment Overview (applic-

able to all mining right areas) – this volume.

• Volume 2: EMPR for Mining Right 554MRC.

• Volume 3: EMPR for Mining Right 10025MR.



3.2 INITIAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS

The objective of the initial public participation process

was to ensure that I&APs were notified about the EMPR

amendment process, given a reasonable opportunity to

register on the project database and to provide initial

comments. Steps undertaken included:

• I&AP identification: A preliminary I&AP database was

compiled using the PSJV’s existing database, as well

as other databases from previous studies undertaken

in the area.

• Notification letter and Background Information

Document (BID): A notification letter and BID were

distributed for a 30-day review and comment period

from 16 August to 15 September 2017.

• Advertisements: Advertisements announcing the

proposed project, the availability of the BID and the

I&AP registration / comment period were placed in

regional (Cape Times and Die Burger) and local

newspapers (Die Plattelander, Die Namakwalander

and Die gemsbok).

SLR & PRM Page viii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 1: Location map of the PSJV’s existing Mining Rights on and off the West Coast

of South Africa

SLR & PRM Page viii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Sixteen written submissions were received during the

initial public participation process. These submissions

have been collated, and responded to, in a Comments

and Responses Report.

3.3 SPECIALIST STUDIES

Three specialist studies were undertaken as part of the

EMPR amendment process:

• Marine and Coastal Ecology Assessment: This study

focused on the shore and surf zone of Sea

Concessions 1a, 2a, 3a, 4a, 1b, 4b and 1c.

• Orange River Estuarine Assessment: This study

focused on the Orange River estuary and river, and

the management/rehabilitation thereof.

• Fisheries Spatial Distribution: This study focused on

providing a spatial assessment on the distribution of

commercial fisheries off the West Coast in the vicinity

of the marine mining right areas.

3.4 COMPILATION AND REVIEW OF AMENDED EMPRS

The EMPRs for the four marine Mining Right areas

(Volumes 1 to 5) have been amended in compliance with

Section 37 and Appendix 4 of the EIA Regulations 2014.

The specialist studies and other relevant information/

assessments have been integrated into these reports.

All reports (5 volumes in total) have been made available

for a 30-day review and comment period from

10 November to 11 December 2017 in order to provide

I&AP with an opportunity to comment on the proposed

amendments and to any raise issues of concern.

3.5 COMPLETION OF THE EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS

The remainder of the EMPR amendment process is as

follows:

• After closure of the comment period, the draft

reports will be finalised. All comments received on

the draft reports will be assimilated and, where

relevant, responded to in an updated Comments

and Responses Report.

• The final amended EMPRs will be submitted to

DMR for decision-making.

4. OVERVIEW OF MINES AND WORK PROGRAMME

The Mines and Work Programme (MWP) provides

details on the location and extent of known and probable

diamond bearing gravels occurring within the mining

right areas (see Figure 2).

The PSJV outsources the majority of the marine

prospecting and mining operations to contractors.

Current and potential future prospecting and mining

methods are described in the sections below.

4.1 MARINE PROSPECTING

4.1.1 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS

Geophysical surveys are undertaken to investigate the

structure and makeup of seabed and underlying

sediment sequences. A number of surveying tools can

be considered for use, including: single beam echo

sounder; bottom profiler; multi beam or swat bathymetry;

side scan sonar; topas; compressed high intensity radar

pulse (Chirp); boomer; and sparker.

These surveys can be undertaken from a small ski boat

or large ocean going survey vessel, depending primarily

on the water depths over which the survey is to be

conducted. Shallow water surveys (< 20 m) would be

conducted from ski boats, which would return to port

daily. Mid- to deep-water surveys (> 20 m) would be

undertaken from larger survey vessels that are capable

of remaining at sea for several days at a time.

4.1.2 SAMPLING

Following geophysical survey data acquisition, samples

are collected to understand of the distribution and grade

(number of stones and carats) of diamonds within the

target gravel horizon.

Various methods are used to ground-truth geophysical

survey interpretations, including: coring (e.g. vibrocoring

/ drop coring); grab samples or box coring; drill sampling;

bulk sampling; and small vessel-based diver assisted

and mobile pump unit sampling.

4.2 MARINE MINING

4.2.1 VESSEL-BASED DIVER ASSISTED MINING

The diver operations commonly operate in water

depths of less than 12 m. These vessels are small

enough to operate out of Alexander Bay or Port

Nolloth. There are currently approximately 23 vessel-

based contractors operating in the PSJV shallow water

concession areas.

The dredging operations are typically conducted using

vessel mounted suction pumps and hoses, which are

guided by divers into gullies, potholes and bedrock

depressions to retrieve the diamond-bearing gravel.

The divers operate via a surface supplied airline, with

air generated from a vessel based air compressor.

The gravel is pumped up through the hose gravel

pump system to the on-board screening system

(trommel). Fine material (<2 mm) and oversized

material (>20 mm) discharged from the screening unit

washes directly back into the sea. The diamond-

bearing gravel is bagged and transported to the

onshore processing plants for further processing.

SLR & PRM Page viii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 2: Future marine mining locations

SLR & PRM Page ix

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 3: Typical vessel-based diver assisted mining

operation (Source: J. Blood)

4.2.2 SHORE-BASED DIVER ASSISTED MINING

Mining in the surf zone to water depths of up to 12 m

can also be shore-based and locally referred to as

“Walpomp” (beach pumping units). There are currently

at least 64 shore-based units operating in the surf zone

area.

These mining operations are typically confined to small

trap sites. The submerged target gravels are mined by

at least two diver-guided suction hoses. The hoses are

connected to a tractor that is modified to drive a

centripetal pump (see Figure 4), which feeds the gravel

into a rotary classifier (Trommel). The classifier

screens the pumped material and extracts the size

fraction of interest (2 to 20 mm). The large size

fraction tailings (>20 mm) accumulate around the

classifier (being later dispersed during the high tide or

mechanically redistributed over the beach), while the

fine tailings (<2 mm) are returned directly to the sea as

a sediment slurry.

The diamond-bearing gravel is bagged and transported

to the nearest processing facility for diamond recovery.

Figure 4: “Walpomp” (beach pumping) mining method.

A modified tractor drives the pump (Source:

J. Blood)

4.2.3 COFFER DAM MINING

Surf zone and sub-tidal mining using coffer dams occurs

from the high-water mark to potentially up to

approximately 300 m seaward of the low water mark

(see Figure 5).

This type of mining involves the removal of beach sand

overburden with heavy machinery to access target

gravels overlying the bedrock. The submerged bedrock

below the beach sand is often below mean sea level,

hence the construction of sea walls to prevent flooding

during mining operations. The material used to

construct these breakwaters typically consists of a basal

core of quarried material, which gets progressively

coarser towards the outside and is covered by an outer

layer of large armour rock. Coffer dams are constantly

maintained to restrict the inflow of sea water into the

active mining block. When sea water ingresses into the

mining area, submersible pumps are used to pump the

water back into the sea.

Overburden material from the mine block is commonly

used in the construction/maintenance of the sea wall.

The target gravel is screened at a nearby infield

screening facility and the separated size fraction is

transported to the nearest processing plant for further

treatment.

Figure 5: Coffer dam mining operations in Mining

Right 554MRC (2017)

4.2.4 INTER-TIDAL BEACH MINING USING MOBILE PUMP

UNITS

An alternative mining technique deployed in the surf

zone is a dredging unit mounted on an excavator or on a

jack-up rig (see Figure 6). Both systems make use of a

remotely operated articulated dredging arm, which

scours / dredges the seafloor.

Areas with generally lower grade, larger volumes of

gravel and thicker sand overburden are optimally mined

using these methods. Material is pumped from the

seafloor and screened through a classifier, which is

normally mounted on-board the mining platform or

mobile unit. The screened material is pumped ashore

into storage bins, which are transported to the onshore

processing plants for diamond recovery.

SLR & PRM Page x

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5: Jack-up rig / platform

(Source: Namdeb/ADP)

4.2.5 VESSEL-BASED REMOTE DREDGE PUMP MINING

This mining method is typically used in the ‘a’ and ‘b’ sea

concessions in water depths typically less than 30 m.

These vessels are smaller than those used in remote

airlift and crawler mining described below and can

operate out of Port Nolloth and Alexander Bay.

The mining system uses vessel mounted pumps to

dredge sediments from the seabed via hoses and a

digging head (see Figure 6). The mining tool is

suspended over the side from the aft or along either side

of the vessel. On-board screening and processing is

self-contained with final recovery of diamonds taking

pace on the vessel.

Figure 6: Illustration of remote dredge pump

mining (Source: GEMPR, Alexkor)

4.2.6 VESSEL-BASED AIRLIFT MINING

This system is similar in many respects to the dredge

pump mining method. However, in the airlift mining

method air is pumped down to the digging head, which

creates a pressure differential between aerated

seawater in the return hose and that of ambient

seawater, which in turn draws up (sucks) the gravel and

sediment to the surface (see Figure 7).

This mining method can operate in greater water depths

and is typically used in the ‘b’ and ‘c’ concessions in

water depths typically between 30 m and 150 m. The

mining tool is suspended from davits (cranes) situated

along the side of the vessel. On-board screening and

processing is self-contained with final recovery of

diamonds taking pace on the vessel.

Figure 7: Illustration of airlift mining (Source:

BENCO)

4.2.7 VESSEL-BASED REMOTE CRAWLER MINING

This mining method uses a remotely operated crawler to

mine in the ‘b’ and ‘c’ sea concessions in water depths

between 30 m and 200 m (see Figure 8). The mining

vessel operates on a 4-point mooring spread with

dynamic positioning to assist the crawler mining

operations.

Figure 8: Illustration of remote crawler mining

(Source: De Beers Group)

The crawler is then lowered to the seabed by a winch

system over the stern of the vessel. The seabed crawler

is track-driven and equipped with a dredge pump

system, hydraulic power pack and a jet-water system to

facilitate the agitation and suction of unconsolidated

surficial sediments up to the mining vessel. The seabed

crawler can remove seabed sediments to a depth of up

to 5 m in a set path within the mine target area.

As the sediment is removed from the seabed it is

pumped to the surface for on-board screening and

processing. Unwanted material is discarded overboard.

SLR & PRM Page xi

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The mining and processing operation is fully self-

contained on the mining vessel with final recovery of

diamonds taking place on the vessel.

5. DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

5.1 GEOPHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

The continental shelf along the West Coast is generally

wide and deep, although large variations in both depth

and width occur. The shelf maintains a general north-

northwest trend, widening north of Cape Columbine and

reaching its widest off the Orange River (180 km). The

immediate nearshore area consists mainly of a narrow

(about 8 km wide) rugged rocky zone, sloping steeply

seawards to a depth of around 80 m. The middle and

outer shelf typically lacks relief, sloping gently seawards

before reaching the shelf break at a depth of

approximately 300 m. Two key seabed features include

Child’s Bank and Tripp Seamount, both of which are

located over 200 km from the mining right areas.

As a result of erosion on the continental shelf, the

unconsolidated surface sediment cover is generally thin,

often less than 1 m. Sediments are finer seawards,

changing from sand on the inner and outer shelves to

muddy sand and sandy mud in deeper water. However,

this general pattern has been modified considerably by

biological deposition and localised river input.

5.2 BIOPHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

The West Coast is strongly influenced by the Benguela

Current system. It is characterised by coastal upwelling

of cold nutrient-rich water and is an important centre of

plankton production, which supports a global reservoir of

biodiversity and biomass of sea life.

Winds are one of the main physical drivers of the

nearshore Benguela region. Virtually all winds in

summer come from the south-east to south-west. Winter

remains dominated by southerly to south-easterly winds,

but the closer proximity of the winter cold-front systems

results in a significant south-westerly to north-westerly

component

The wave regime along the southern African West Coast

shows only moderate seasonal variation in direction,

with virtually all swells throughout the year coming from

the south to south-west direction. Winter swells are

strongly dominated by those from the south-west to

south-south-west.

The Benguela system is characterised by large areas of

very low oxygen concentrations, which are attributed to

nutrient remineralisation in the bottom waters. The two

main areas of low-oxygen water formation in the

southern Benguela region are in the Orange River Bight

and St Helena Bay. Upwelling processes can move low-

oxygen water up onto the inner shelf and into nearshore

waters, often with devastating effects on marine

communities.

5.3 BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Biogeographically, the mining right areas fall within the

cold temperate Namaqua Bioregion. The coastal, wind-

induced upwelling characterising the Namibian coastline,

is the principal physical process that shapes the marine

ecology of the central Benguela region. The Benguela

system is characterised by the presence of cold surface

water, high biological productivity, and highly variable

physical, chemical and biological conditions.

The coastline from Orange River mouth to Kleinzee is

dominated by rocky shores, interspersed by isolated

short stretches of sandy shores. Sandy beaches are

one of the most dynamic coastal environments. Rocky

shore and sandy beach habitats are generally not

particularly sensitive to disturbance with natural recovery

occurring within 2 to 5 years. However, much of the

Namaqualand coastline has been subjected to decades

of disturbance by shore-based diamond mining

operations. These cumulative impacts and the lack of

biodiversity protection have resulted in some of the

coastal habitat types in Namaqualand being assigned a

threat status. Four ‘critically endangered’ habitats

(Namaqua Inshore Hard Grounds, Namaqua Inshore

Reef, Namaqua Sandy Inshore and Namaqua Sheltered

Rocky Coast) and one ‘endangered’ habitat (Namaqua

Mixed Shore) fall within the four marine mining right

areas.

The marine mining right areas lie within the influence of

the Namaqua upwelling cell, and seasonally high

phytoplankton abundance can be expected in the

southern areas. However, in the Orange River Cone

area immediately to the north of the upwelling cell, high

turbulence and deep mixing in the water column result in

diminished phytoplankton biomass and consequently the

area is considered to be an environmental barrier to the

transport of ichthyoplankton from the southern to the

northern Benguela upwelling ecosystems.

Phytoplankton, zooplankton and ichthyoplankton

abundances in the northern mining areas (Sea

Concessions 1a, 1b, 1c and 2a) are thus expected to be

comparatively low.

Due to the cold temperate nature of the region, the fish

fauna off the West Coast is characterised by a relatively

low diversity of species compared with warmer oceans.

However, the upwelling nature of the region results in

huge biomasses of specific species that supports a

commercially important fishery.

SLR & PRM Page xii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The West Coast sustains large populations of breeding

and foraging seabird and shorebird species. Most of the

seabird species along the West Coast feed relatively

close inshore (10-30 km). Cape gannets, however, are

known to forage up to 140 km offshore. However, the

nearest nesting ground for Cape Gannets is at Bird

Island in Lambert’s Bay, which is approximately 300 km

to the south of the mining right area. Most of the pelagic

seabird species in the region reach highest densities

offshore of the shelf break (200 to 500 m depth), which

is offshore of the mining right area. As Sea Concessions

1a, 2a, 3a and 1b fall within 30 km of the coast,

encounters with seabirds are highly likely.

Five species of turtles occur off the West Coast. Only

one, the Leatherback turtle, is likely to be encountered

within the mining right areas, but abundance is expected

to be low.

Thirty-four species of whales and dolphins are known or

likely to occur in South African waters. The distribution

of cetaceans in Namibian waters can largely be split into

those associated with the continental shelf and those

that occur in deep, oceanic water. Importantly, species

from both environments may be found in the continental

slope (200 to 2 000 m) making this the most species-rich

area for cetaceans. Cetacean density on the continental

shelf is usually higher than in pelagic waters, as species

associated with the pelagic environment tend to be wide

ranging.

The Cape fur seal is the only seal species that has

breeding colonies along the West Coast. Seals are

highly mobile animals with a general foraging area

covering the continental shelf up to 120 nm

(approximately 220 km) offshore. Since the Bucchu

Twins seal colony occurs within Sea Concession 1a,

numbers can be expected to be high. There is a further

seal colony at Kleinzee (incorporating Robeiland).

5.4 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

5.4.1 Fishing

Information on the spatial distribution and catch effort of

the commercial fishing sectors that operate off the West

Coast are given below.

• Demersal trawl: This fishery operates between

depths of 300 m and 1 000 m, which is offshore of

the mining right areas.

• Small pelagic purse-seine: Fishing grounds occur

primarily along the Western Cape and Eastern

Cape coast up to a distance of 100 km offshore,

but usually closer inshore. There has been no

reported effort within the marine mining right areas

between the years 2000 and 2016.

• Large pelagic long-line: Fishing effort is widespread

predominantly along the shelf break seawards of

the 500 m depth contour. The marine mining right

areas occur inshore of these fishing grounds.

• Demersal long-line: Targeted fishing areas by the

hake-directed trawl fleet are situated at least 90 km

from the marine mining right areas.

• Tuna pole: Fishing activity occurs along the entire

South African West Coast beyond the 200 m

bathymetric contour. Although negligible levels of

fishing effort have been reported in close proximity

to the marine mining right areas, no expected

overlap with grounds fished by the tuna pole sector

is expected.

• Traditional line-fish: Fishing vessels generally

range up to a maximum of 40 nm offshore,

although fishing at the outer limit of this range is

sporadic. Over the period 2000 and 2015, the

fishery landed an average of 2.7 tons of tuna per

year within the mining right areas (i.e. 0.02 – 0.04%

of national catch).

• West Coast Rock lobster: The mining right areas

fall within Management Area 1 of the commercial

rock lobster fishing zones, which extends from the

Orange River Mouth to Kleinzee. The fishery

operates seasonally, with closed seasons

applicable to different zones; Management Area 1

operates from 1 October to 30 April. Over the this

period, the fishery landed an average of 14.1 tons

of West Coast rock lobster per year within Mining

Right 544MRC (i.e. 3.2% of national catch). Over

the same period, the fishery set an average of

5 790 traps year (i.e. 9.8% of national effort). No

catch or effort has been reported for the other

marine mining right areas.

• Abalone ranching: Sea Concessions 1a, 2a, 3a and

4a overlap with ranching Concession Areas 1 and

2. To date, there has been no seeding in Areas 1

or 2 (partly due to the uncertainty relating to user

conflict).

• Beach-seine and gill-net fisheries: There are a

number of active beach-seine and gill-net operators

throughout South Africa. Gill-net and beach-seine

landings at Port Nolloth account for less than 10%

of the national landings.

5.4.2 Shipping

The majority of the international shipping traffic is

located on the outer edge of the continental shelf.

Traffic inshore of the continental shelf along the West

Coast largely comprises fishing and mining vessels,

especially between Kleinzee and Oranjemund.

International shipping routes fall outside of the mining

right areas.

SLR & PRM Page xiii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.4.3 Conservation areas

The McDougall’s Bay rock lobster sanctuary near Port

Nolloth overlaps with Sea Concession 3a. The

sanctuary, which extends 1 nm seawards of the high

water mark between the promontory at the northern end

of McDougall's Bay and the promontory at the southern

extremity of McDougall's Bay.

5.4.4 Archaeological sites

Fossilised forests have been found during previous

marine diamond exploration and/or mining activities off

the West Coast (sea Concessions 2c to 5c), none of

which occur within the mining right areas.

Over 2 000 shipwrecks are present along the South

African coastline. The majority of known wrecks along

the West Coast are located in relatively shallow water

close inshore (within the 100 m isobath). At least 25

known shipwreck sites occur near Alexander Bay, Port

Nolloth and Kleinzee. The majority of the wrecks found

in the vicinity of the mining right areas were boats that

sunk in the 19th century. It is, however, noted that the

precise location of all these wrecks is unknown as they

have been documented only through survivor accounts,

archival descriptions and eyewitness reports recorded in

archives and databases.

5.5 ORANGE RIVER ENVIRONMENT

The Orange River has been significantly impacted by

anthropogenic activities along its banks and within its

floodplain (including historic mining and associated

activities). A major consequence of this is the

degradation of the desiccated saltmarsh on the south

side of the estuary.

Key mining- and agricultural-related structures that have

contributed to the degradation of the saltmarsh include:

• Road embankment: The construction of a road

embankment in 1964 isolated approximately a third

of the estuary from the active system. In 1997 the

seaward end of this embankment was breached in

an attempt to re-activate the saltmarsh in the area.

• Scrap machinery (“Detroit riprap”): The seaward

end of the embankment was “anchored” or “pinned”

in position by means of scrap machinery being

embedded in the beach berm. The scrap

machinery has prevented the mouth from migrating

southwards to its fullest possible extent and thus

has also limited the ingress of seawater into the

saltmarsh.

• Dunvlei dyke: The construction of the dyke to

protect the Dunvlei Farm and extend agricultural

land blocked the southernmost channel feeding the

saltmarsh in the south-western corner of the

estuary.

• Sewage oxidation ponds: Sewage oxidation ponds

were also constructed in the floodplain, which also

blocked the southernmost channel feeding the

saltmarsh.

5.6 KEY RECEPTORS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR

PROSPECTING AND MINING

Receptor /

Variable

Implications for proposed project

1. Bio-physical considerations

Sensitive

benthic habitats

Much of the Namaqualand coastline has

been subjected to decades of disturbance by

shore-based diamond mining operations. As

a result some habitats have been assigned

an ‘endangered’ (Namaqua Mixed Shore)

and ‘critically endangered’ habitats

(Namaqua Inshore Hard Grounds, Namaqua

Inshore Reef, Namaqua Sandy Inshore and

Namaqua Sheltered Rocky Coast) status.

Mining within these areas should be

restricted and/or avoided.

Bucchu Twins

seal colony

The Bucchu Twins seal colony occurs within

Sea Concession 1a.

Helicopters operating between Oranjemund

or Kleinzee and larger mining vessels would

need to avoid this seal colony.

Orange River

Mouth Estuary

The Orange River Mouth wetland is an

Important Bird Area, as it serves as an

important habitat for a wide variety of waders

and coastal birds.

Helicopter flight paths would need to be

planned to avoid this area.

Orange River

Mouth saltmarsh

Anthropogenic activities (including historic

mining and associated activities) have

resulted in the degradation of the desiccated

saltmarsh on the south side of the estuary.

Remediation measures are required to

restore the connection between the

saltmarsh and the estuary basin.

2. Socio-economic considerations

Fishing Fishing plays a significant role in providing

livelihoods and income for local communities

living in and around Port Nolloth. Key

sectors include: traditional line-fish; West

Coast rock lobster and beach-seine and gill-

net fisheries.

Key stakeholders would need to receive

adequate notification regarding prospecting

and mining activities.

Mining vessels would also need to avoid

other fishing vessels that are limited in their

manoeuvrability.

Heritage/

archaeology

At least 25 known shipwreck sites occur

near Alexander Bay, Port Nolloth and

Kleinzee; the precise location of some of

these is unknown.

Mining would need to avoid known

shipwrecks

SLR & PRM Page xiv

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

SLR & PRM Page xv

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017




TABLE OF CONTENTS

DOCUMENT INFORMATION .............................................................................................................................. i

VOLUMES OF THE EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS .................................................................................... iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... v

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................... xv

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 KEY LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................... 1-1

1.3 APPROACH TO THE EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS .......................................................... 1-4

1.4 STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT (VOLUME 1) ........................................................................ 1-4

1.5 INVITATION TO COMMENT ..................................................................................................... 1-5

2. LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................................ 2-1

2.1 MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2002 ............................ 2-1

2.1.1 EMPR Amendment ..................................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT, 1998 .................................................... 2-2

2.2.1 EIA Regulations 2014 ................................................................................................. 2-2

2.3 NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ACT, 1999.................................................................... 2-2

2.4 NATIONAL WATER ACT, 1989 ................................................................................................. 2-3

2.5 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: WASTE ACT, 2008 ..................................... 2-4

2.6 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: AIR QUALITY ACT, 2004 ........................... 2-4

2.7 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: PROTECTED AREAS ACT, 2003 .............. 2-4

2.8 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: BIODIVERSITY ACT, 2004 ........................ 2-5

2.9 MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT, 1998 .............................................................................. 2-5

2.10 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: INTEGRATED COASTAL ACT, 2008 ......... 2-5

2.10.1 Dumping at sea regulations ........................................................................................ 2-6

2.10.2 Regulations for the control of use of vehicles in the coastal area .............................. 2-7

2.11 OTHER RELEVANT LEGISLATION .......................................................................................... 2-7

3. APPROACH TO EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ......................... 3-1

3.1 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS ......................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS OBJECTIVES ...................................................................... 3-1

3.3 EAP PROJECT TEAM ............................................................................................................... 3-1

3.4 EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS .............................................................................................. 3-2

3.4.1 Project initiation .......................................................................................................... 3-2

3.4.1.1 Project initiation......................................................................................... 3-2

3.4.1.2 Site visit ..................................................................................................... 3-3

3.4.1.3 Authority pre-application meeting ............................................................. 3-3

3.4.1.4 Application for EMPR amendment............................................................ 3-4

3.4.2 Initial public participation process ............................................................................... 3-4

3.4.3 Compilation of specialist studies ................................................................................ 3-5

3.4.4 Compilation and review of amended EMPRs ............................................................. 3-5

SLR & PRM Page xvi

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

3.4.5 Completion of the EMPR amendment process .......................................................... 3-6

4. OVERVIEW OF MINING WORKS PROGRAMME .............................................................................. 4-1

4.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 4-1

4.2 MARINE PROSPECTING .......................................................................................................... 4-4

4.2.1 Geophysical surveys ................................................................................................... 4-4

4.2.2 Sampling ..................................................................................................................... 4-5

4.3 MARINE MINING ....................................................................................................................... 4-6

4.3.1 Vessel-and shore based diver assisted mining .......................................................... 4-6

4.3.1.1 Vessel-based diver assisted mining ......................................................... 4-6

4.3.1.2 Shore-based diver assisted mining .......................................................... 4-6

4.3.2 Coffer dam mining ...................................................................................................... 4-7

4.3.3 Inter-tidal beach mining using mobile pump units ...................................................... 4-8

4.3.4 Large vessel mining .................................................................................................... 4-9

4.3.4.1 Vessel-based remote dredge pump mining .............................................. 4-9

4.3.4.2 Vessel-based airlift mining ........................................................................ 4-9

4.3.4.3 Vessel-based remote crawler mining ..................................................... 4-11

5. DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ...................................................................... 5-1

5.1 MARINE ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................................................... 5-1

5.1.1 Geophysical characteristics ........................................................................................ 5-1

5.1.1.1 Bathymetry ................................................................................................ 5-1

5.1.1.2 Coastal and inner-shelf geology and seabed geomorphology ................. 5-2

5.1.2 Biophysical characteristics .......................................................................................... 5-3

5.1.2.1 Wind patterns ............................................................................................ 5-3

5.1.2.2 Large-scale circulation and coastal currents ............................................ 5-5

5.1.2.3 Waves and tides ....................................................................................... 5-6

5.1.2.4 Water ........................................................................................................ 5-6

5.1.2.5 Upwelling and organic inputs .................................................................... 5-8

5.1.2.6 Low oxygen events ................................................................................... 5-8

5.1.2.7 Turbidity .................................................................................................... 5-9

5.1.3 Biological oceanography ........................................................................................... 5-11

5.1.3.1 Threat status ........................................................................................... 5-11

5.1.3.2 Sandy and unconsolidated substrate habitats and biota ........................ 5-13

5.1.3.3 Rocky substrate habitats and biota ........................................................ 5-19

5.1.3.4 Water column .......................................................................................... 5-24

5.1.4 Human use................................................................................................................ 5-41

5.1.4.1 Commercial fishing ................................................................................. 5-41

5.1.4.2 Recreational fishing ................................................................................ 5-60

5.1.4.3 Shipping transport ................................................................................... 5-60

5.1.4.4 Mining ..................................................................................................... 5-60

5.1.4.5 Hydrocarbons.......................................................................................... 5-62

5.1.4.6 Kelp collecting ......................................................................................... 5-64

5.1.4.7 Conservation areas and Marine Protected Areas ................................... 5-67

5.1.4.8 Other uses .............................................................................................. 5-67

5.2 ORANGE RIVER ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................................... 5-73

5.2.1 Geomorphology ........................................................................................................ 5-74

5.2.1.1 Riparian zone .......................................................................................... 5-74

5.2.1.2 Estuarine zone ........................................................................................ 5-74

5.2.1.3 Estuary mouth ......................................................................................... 5-74

5.2.1.4 Sediments ............................................................................................... 5-76

5.2.2 Hydrology .................................................................................................................. 5-76

SLR & PRM Page xvii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.2.2.1 River inflows ............................................................................................ 5-76

5.2.2.2 Mouth closure ......................................................................................... 5-76

5.2.2.3 Tidal range .............................................................................................. 5-77

5.2.2.4 Salinity and circulation ............................................................................ 5-78

5.2.3 Biological components .............................................................................................. 5-78

5.2.3.1 Riparian vegetation ................................................................................. 5-78

5.2.3.2 Estuarine vegetation ............................................................................... 5-78

5.2.3.3 Invertebrates ........................................................................................... 5-83

5.2.3.4 Fish ......................................................................................................... 5-84

5.2.3.5 Birds ........................................................................................................ 5-86

5.2.3.6 Mammals ................................................................................................ 5-87

5.2.4 Conservation status .................................................................................................. 5-88

5.2.4.1 Wetland of international importance (Ramsar site) and protected area . 5-78

5.2.4.2 Estuarine Management Plan .................................................................. 5-78

6. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 6-1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Location map of the PSJV’s existing Mining Rights on and off the West Coast of

South Africa ........................................................................................................................... 1-2

Figure 3.1: EMPR amendment process .................................................................................................. 3-3

Figure 4.1: Schematic cross section of the mining concession areas .................................................... 4-1

Figure 4.2: Historical and current (1 March 2016 to 28 February 2017) mining activity. ........................ 4-2

Figure 4.3: Future marine mining locations. ............................................................................................ 4-3

Figure 4.4: Vessel using multi-beam depth echo sounders (Source: http://www.gns.cri.nz). ................. 4-4

Figure 4.5: Grab sampler (Source: http://www.jochemnet.de/fiu/OCB3043_35.html) ............................ 4-5

Figure 4.6: Typical vessel-based diver assisted mining operation (Source: J. Blood)............................ 4-6

Figure 4.7: “Walpomp” (beach pumping) mining method (Source: J. Blood). ......................................... 4-7

Figure 4.8: Coffer dam mining operations in Mining Right 554MRC (2017) (Source: Google

Earth). ................................................................................................................................... 4-8

Figure 4.9: Dredging unit mounted on an excavator (Source: Hannesko) .............................................. 4-8

Figure 4.10: Jack-up rig / platform (Source: Namdeb/ADP) ..................................................................... 4-9

Figure 4.11 Illustration of remote dredge pump mining (Source: GEMPR, Alexkor) ............................. 4-10

Figure 4.12: Illustration of airlift mining (Source: BENCO) ...................................................................... 4-10

Figure 4.13: Illustration of remote crawler mining (Source: De Beers Group) ........................................ 4-11

Figure 5.1: Mining Licence Areas in relation to the regional bathymetry and showing proximity

of prominent seabed features ............................................................................................... 5-1

Figure 5.2: Mining Licence Areas in relation to sediment distribution on the continental shelf

(Adapted from Rogers 1977) ................................................................................................ 5-2

Figure 5.3: VOS Wind Speed vs Wind Direction data for the offshore area 28°-29°S; 15°-16°E

(Oranjemund) (Source: Voluntary Observing Ship data from the Southern Africa

Data Centre for Oceanography) ............................................................................................ 5-4

Figure 5.4: Satellite sea-surface temperature images showing upwelling intensity in the three

upwelling cells along the South African West Coast on two days in December

1996. The location of the Sea Concession 3a, 4a and 4b (white polygon) is

indicted (Source: Lane & Carter 1999) ................................................................................. 5-5

Figure 5.5: VOS Wave Height vs Wave Direction data for the offshore area (28°-29°S; 15°-

16°E recorded during the period 1 February 1906 and 12 June 2006) (Source:

Voluntary Observing Ship data from the Southern African Data Centre for

Oceanography) ..................................................................................................................... 5-7

SLR & PRM Page xviii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5.6: Mining Licence areas in relation to a substantial sediment plume emanating from

the Orange River Mouth on 11 April 2001 (Satellite image source:

eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov) .................................................................................................... 5-10

Figure 5.7: Marine mining right areas in relation to the South African inshore and offshore

bioregions (Adapted from Lombard et al. 2004) ................................................................. 5-12

Figure 5.8: Future mining areas (green areas) and Sea Concessions 1a, 1b and 1c in relation

to benthic and coastal habitats off the West Coast............................................................. 5-13

Figure 5.9: Future mining areas (red lines) and Sea Concessions 2a and 3a in relation to

benthic and coastal habitats off the West Coast ................................................................. 5-14

Figure 5.10: Future mining areas and Sea Concessions 4a and 4b in relation to benthic and

coastal habitats off the West Coast .................................................................................... 5-15

Figure 5.11: Schematic representation of the West Coast intertidal beach zonation. Species

commonly occurring on the Namaqualand beaches are listed (Adapted from

Branch & Branch 1981) ....................................................................................................... 5-17

Figure 5.12: Generalised scheme of zonation on sandy shores (Modified from Brown &

MacLachlan 1990) .............................................................................................................. 5-18

Figure 5.13: Schematic representation of the West Coast intertidal zonation (Adapted from

Branch & Branch 1981) ....................................................................................................... 5-20

Figure 5.14: The canopy-forming kelp Ecklonia maxima provides an important habitat for a

diversity of marine biota (Photo: Geoff Spiby) .................................................................... 5-22

Figure 5.15: Gorgonians and bryozoans communities recorded on deep water reefs (100-120

m) off the southern African West Coast (Photos: De Beers Marine) .................................. 5-24

Figure 5.16: Mining Licence Areas (red polygons) in relation to major spawning areas in the

southern Benguela region (Adapted from Cruikshank 1990) ............................................. 5-26

Figure 5.17: The post-nesting distribution of nine satellite tagged leatherback females (1996 –

2006; Oceans and Coast, unpublished data) ..................................................................... 5-30

Figure 5.18 African penguin breeding colonies on the South African West Coast ................................ 5-32

Figure 5.19: Project - environment interaction points on the West Coast ............................................... 5-40

Figure 5.20: Marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of fishing effort

expended by the demersal trawl sector (2000 – 2014)....................................................... 5-42

Figure 5.21: Schematic diagram of trawl gear typically used by the South African hake trawl

vessels (Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/trawling) ...................................... 5-43

Figure 5.22: Marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of effort expended by

the South African hake-directed demersal long-line sector (2000 – 2014)......................... 5-44

Figure 5.23: Typical configuration of demersal (bottom-set) hake long-line gear (Source:

http://www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/longlining ................................................................ 5-45


the South African shark-directed demersal long-line sector (2007 – 2013) ....................... 5-46


the Namibian and South African large pelagic long-line sector (2000 – 2014) .................. 5-48

Figure 5.26: Typical pelagic long-line gear configuration (Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/

portfolio-item/longlining) ...................................................................................................... 5-49

Figure 5.27: Marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of effort by the South

African tuna pole sector (2003 – 2014) ............................................................................... 5-50

Figure 5.28: Schematic diagram of pole and line operation (Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/

portfolio-item/minor-lines/) .................................................................................................. 5-51


African traditional line-fish sector (2000 – 2015) ................................................................ 5-52

Figure 5.30: Schematic of typical purse-seine gear deployed in the “small” pelagic fishery

(Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/purse-seine) ............................................. 5-53

SLR & PRM Page xix

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017


African small pelagic purse-seine (2000 – 2016) ................................................................ 5-54

Figure 5.32: Marine mining right areas in relation to the average catch per season of West

Coast rock lobster (2006 – 2016)........................................................................................ 5-56

Figure 5.33: Marine mining right areas in relation to abalone ranching concession areas ..................... 5-58

Figure 5.34: Beach-seine and gillnet fishing areas and TAE (Source: DAFF, 2014) .............................. 5-59

Figure 5.35: The major shipping routes along the West Coast of South Africa. Approximate

location of the marine mining right areas is also shown (Data from the South

African Centre for Oceanography) ...................................................................................... 5-61

Figure 5.36: Mining rights areas in relation to marine diamond mining concessions and ports for

commercial and fishing vessels .......................................................................................... 5-61

Figure 5.37: Location of glauconite and phosphorite prospecting areas off the West Coast of

South Africa ......................................................................................................................... 5-63

Figure 5.38: Mining Licence Areas in relation to hydrocarbon licence blocks, existing wellheads,

proposed areas for exploratory wells and the routing of the proposed Ibhubesi gas

production pipeline .............................................................................................................. 5-64

Figure 5.39: Mining rights areas in relation to seaweed rights areas ..................................................... 5-66

Figure 5.40: Configuration of the current African undersea cable systems (Source:

http://www.manypossibilities.net) ........................................................................................ 5-69

Figure 5.41: The Orange River component of Marine Diamond Licence 554 MRC running from

Arrisdrif to the sea (Source: http://www.ramsar.org/wetland/south-africa) ......................... 5-73

Figure 5.42: The Orange River Estuary. The red line is the 5 mamsl contour demarcating the

estuarine functional zone .................................................................................................... 5-74

Figure 5.43: Structures impacting the Orange River Estuary ................................................................. 5-75

Figure 5.44: Scrap machinery (“Detroit riprap”) used to anchor the seaward end of the road

embankment, which was built in 1964. The scrap limits the southward migration of

the estuary mouth (Photo: S. Lamberth, August 2013........................................................ 5-76

Figure 5.45: Riparian thicket lining the river banks at Arrisdrif (Photo: P. Morant, July 2017) ............... 5-79

Figure 5.46: Seasonally flooded sandbanks used as pasture near Brandkaros (Photo: P.

Morant, July 2017) .............................................................................................................. 5-79

Figure 5.47: Habitats and vegetation of the Orange Estuary (Source: Veldkornet and Adams

2013) ................................................................................................................................... 5-80

Figure 5.48: Intertidal saltmarsh (Photo: P. Morant, July 2017) .............................................................. 5-83

Figure 5.49: Desertified saltmarsh (Photo: P. Morant, July 2017) .......................................................... 5-83

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Details of the Alexkor RMC JV’s Mining Rights .................................................................... 2-1

Table 3.1: EIA project team.................................................................................................................... 3-2

Table 5.1: Ecosystem threat status for marine and coastal habitat types in the marine mining

right areas (adapted from Sink et al. 2011). Those habitats potentially affected by

marine mining are shaded .................................................................................................. 5-12

Table 5.2: Demersal cartilaginous species found on the continental shelf along the West

Coast, with approximate depth range at which the species occurs (Compagno et al.

1991)…………………………………………….. ................................................................... 5-27

Table 5.3: Some of the more important large migratory pelagic fish likely to occur in the

offshore regions of the West Coast..................................................................................... 5-29

Table 5.4: Pelagic seabirds common in the southern Benguela region (Crawford et al. 1991). ......... 5-31

Table 5.5: Breeding resident seabirds present along the West Coast (CCA & CMS 2001) ................ 5-33

SLR & PRM Page xx

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Table 5.6: Cetaceans occurrence off the West Coast of South Africa, their seasonality, likely

encounter frequency with offshore mining operations and IUCN conservation status ....... 5-34

Table 5.7: TAC and Actual landed catch (tonnes) for Management Area 1 in the Northern

Cape during the 2006 to 2017 fishing seasons (Data source: Rock Lobster Section,

DAFF) .................................................................................................................................. 5-55

Table 5.8: Allocated abalone ranching areas in the Northern Cape .................................................... 5-57

Table 5.9: Beach-cast collections (in kg dry weight) for kelp concessions north of Lamberts

Bay since 2010 (Data source: Seaweed Section, DAFF) ................................................... 5-65

Table 5.10: The estimated total area of kelp beds for each of the kelp concessions between the

Orange River mouth and Cape Columbine (Rand 2006) ................................................... 5-65

Table 5.11: Shipwrecks listed near Alexander Bay, Port Nolloth and Kleinzee (ACHA, 2015) ............. 5-70

Table 5.12: Archaeological sites identifies along the coast of Sea Concessions 1a, 2a, 3a and

4a (ACHA, 2015) ................................................................................................................. 5-72

Table 5.13: Changes in habitat cover of the Orange Estuary (Veldkornet and Adams 2013) ............... 5-80

Table 5.14: Macrophyte species and associated habitats recorded in 2012 (Veldkornet and

Adams 2013) ....................................................................................................................... 5-81

Table 5.15: A list of all 36 species recorded in the Orange / Gariep River Estuary (Brown 1959;

Day 1981; Cambray 1984; DWAF 1986; Morant and O’Callaghan 1990; Harrison

1997; Seaman and van As 1998; Lamberth 2013) ............................................................. 5-85

Table 5.16: Water bird species recorded at the Orange River Estuary, 2012 (Anderson 2013) ........... 5-86

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Public Participation Process:

Appendix 1.1: Minutes of authority pre-application meeting

Appendix 1.2: I&AP database

Appendix 1.3: I&AP notification letters and Background Information Document

Appendix 1.4: Advertisements

Appendix 1.5: Correspondence from I&APs

Appendix 1.6: Comments and Responses Report

Appendix 2: Specialist Studies

Appendix 2.1: Convention for assigning significance ratings to impacts

Appendix 2.2: Marine and Coastal Ecology Assessment

Appendix 2.3: Orange River Estuarine Assessment

Appendix 2.3: Fisheries Spatial Distribution

SLR & PRM Page xxi

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Below a list of acronyms, abbreviations and units used in this report.

Acronyms /

Abbreviations Definition

ACE African Coast to Europe

AEL Atmospheric Emission Licence

CBAs Critical Biodiversity Areas

CBD Convention of Biological Diversity

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species

Chirp Compressed High Intensity Radar Pulse

COGSA Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1986 (No. 1 of 1986)

DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

DBCM De Beers Consolidated Mines (Pty) Ltd

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DMR Department of Mineral Resources

EBSA Ecologically or Biologically Significant Area

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone

EMFs Environmental Management Frameworks

EMPR Environmental Management Programme

EASSy Eastern Africa Submarine Cable System

GN Government Notice

I&AP interested and affected partiers

IDPs Integrated Development Plans

IEM Integrated Environmental Management

IMO International Maritime Organisation

IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature

MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973/1978

MPA Marine Protected Area

MPRDA Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (No. 28 of 2002)

MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield

MWP Mines and Work Programme

NCMP National Coastal Management Plan

NEMA National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (No. 108 of 1998)

NEM:AQA National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (No. 39 of 2004)

NEM:BA Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (No. 10 of 2004)

NEM:ICMA National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (No. 24 of 2008)

NEM:PAA National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (No. 57 of 2003)

NEM:WA National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (No. 59 of 2008)

NHRA National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (No. 25 of 1999)

NMMU Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University

NWA National Water Act, 1989 (No. 36 of 1998)

ORASEDOM Orange-Senqu River Commission

PRM Placer Resource Management (Pty) Ltd

PSJV Pooling Shareing Joint Venture

RMC Richtersveld Mining Company (Pty) Ltd

SAFE South Africa Far East

SAMSA South African Maritime Safety Association ()

SANBI South African National Biodiversity Institute

SDFs Spatial Development Frameworks

SLR & PRM Page xxii

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Acronyms /

Abbreviations Definition

SLR SLR Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd

TAC Total Allowable Catch

TAE Total Allowable Effort

UNCLOS United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea, 1982

WASC West African Submarine Cable

Unit Definition

cm centimetres

cm/s centimetres per second

dB Decibel

g/m2 Grams per square metre

g/m3 Grams per cubic metre

km Kilometre

kts Knots

m Metres

m2 Square metres

m3 Cubic metre

mg/l Milligrams per litre

mm Millimetres

m/s Metres per second

mT Metric tons

nm Nautical mile (1 nm = 1.852 km)

psi Per square inch

t Tons

µg Micrograms

µm Micrometre

µg/l Micrograms per litre

µPa Micro Pascal

°C Degrees Centigrade

% Percent

‰ Parts per thousand

< Less than

> Greater than

" Inch

SLR & PRM Page 1-1

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017



VOLUME 1: EMPR AMENDMENT OVERVIEW

1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the project background, summarises the legislative authorisation requirements,

outlines the opportunity for comment, and describes the structure of the report and associated volumes.

1.1 BACKGROUND

In 2011, Alexkor SOC Limited (Alexkor) and the Richtersveld Mining Company (Pty) Ltd (RMC) formed a

Pooling and Sharing Joint Venture (hereafter referred to as “PSJV”), as per the 2007 Deed of Settlement, in

order to oversee all current and future mining activities relating to Alexkor’s mining rights. Alexkor and RMC

hold 51% and 49% interest in the joint venture, respectively.

The PSJV thus manages an onshore and four marine Mining Rights on and off the West Coast of South

Africa. These are roughly located between the Orange River in the north and Kleinzee in the south

(see Figure 1-1 and Box 1-1). The mining methods employed in these areas include:

• Conventional open cast terrestrial mining;

• Shore-based beach pumping in the shallow surf zone using small-scale diver-assisted suction

equipment (referred to locally as “walpomp”);

• Boat-based diver assisted mining;

• Coffer dam mining; and

• Large vessel mining using airlift or bottom deployed remotely operated mining systems.

The current mining activities are approved and executed under three Environmental Management

Programmes (EMPRs), as amended (CSIR, 1994; Site Plan, 2008; Myezo, 2013), two of which are

applicable to the marine Mining Rights.

The PSJV is amending its EMPRs for the marine Mining Rights to comply with the current requirements of

the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (No. 108 of 1998) (NEMA) and the Environmental Impact

Assessment (EIA) Regulations 2014, as amended, and to ensure alignment with each other, all new

legislation, environmental standards, as well as internal PSJV Performance Assessment Reports. The

EMPR for the onshore Mining Right 550MRC, which was approved in April 2017, is not being amended as

part of this process as agreed to with the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR).

SLR Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd (“SLR”), in association with Placer Resource Management (Pty) Ltd

(“PRM”), has been appointed by the PSJV as the independent environmental consultant to amend the

existing EMPRs for Mining Rights 554MRC, 10025MR, 512MRC and 513MRC and undertake the associated

public participation process. PRM is under subcontract to SLR.

SLR & PRM Page 1-2

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 1-1: Location map of the PSJV’s existing Mining Rights on and off the West Coast

of South Africa

SLR & PRM Page 1-3

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

1.2 KEY LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

The key legislative requirements and guiding principles underpinning the EMPR amendment process are

outlined below and presented in more detail in Chapter 2.

• Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002

Section 102 of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002 (No. 28 of 2002)

(MPRDA), as amended, provides for the amendment to an existing EMPR prepared in terms of the

MPRDA and requires that it be approved by the Minister of Minerals and Energy (or the delegated

authority).

With the repeal of Section 39 of the MPRDA and the effect of Section 12(4) of the National

Environmental Management Amendment Act, 2008 (No. 62 of 2008), any amendment of an EMPR

after 8 December 2014 is to take place in accordance with NEMA and the EIA Regulations 2014 (as

amended in April 2017).

• National Environmental Management Act, 1998 and EIA Regulations 2014

Section 24N(6) of NEMA provides for the amendment of an EMPR prepared in both NEMA and the

MPRDA, as defined in Section 37 of the EIA Regulations 2014, as amended. The current EMPR

amendment process is thus being undertaken in compliance with this legislation.

Box 1-1: Alexkor RMC JV’s mining right areas

• Mining Right 550MRC, comprising:

> Farm No.1;

> Farm No. 155;

> Arrisdrift (Farm No. 616);

> Brandkaros (Farm No. 517);

> Remainder of Gypsum (Farm No. 5);

> Corridor-Wes (Farm No. 2);

> Portion 17 (a portion of Portion 8);

> Portion 16 (a portion of Portion 9);

> Portion 14 (a portion of Portion 12); and

> Portion 15 (a portion of Portion 10).

• Mining Right 554MRC, comprising:

> Middle of the Orange River to the bank of the following properties: Farm No. 1, Brandkaros No 517, Arrisdrif

No. 616 and Portions 15, 16 & 17 of Corridor-Wes No. 2;

> Surf zone along Farm No. 1 and Farm No. 155;

> Sea Concession 1a;

> Sea Concession 1b;

> Sea Concession 2a; and

> Sea Concession 3a.

• Mining Right 10025MR, comprising Sea Concession 1c;

• Mining Right 512MRC, comprising Sea Concession 4a; and

• Mining Right 513MRC, comprising Sea Concession 4b.

SLR & PRM Page 1-4

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

1.3 APPROACH TO THE EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS

Although the intention is to prepare separate EMPRs for each of the four marine Mining Rights, the

amendment and public participation processes have, where possible, been combined and undertaken in

parallel in order to avoid duplication. As a result, some of the information gathered as part of this combined

process is applicable to all four amendment applications. Based on this approach, five separate reports (or

volumes) have been prepared as part of this EMPR amendment process. These include:

• Volume 1: EMPR Amendment Overview - this report

This volume includes all supporting information that is applicable to all four marine mining right areas,

including the key legislative requirements, public participation process, specialist studies and baseline

description.

• Volume 2: Mining Right 554MRC

This volume deals specifically with the coastal and marine mining operations in Sea Concession 1a,

2a, 3a and 1b), as well as the management of the Orange River.

• Volume 3: Mining Right 10025MR

This volume will deal specifically with the marine mining operations pertaining to Sea Concession 1c.


This volume will deal specifically with the marine mining operations pertaining to Sea Concession 4a.


This volume will deal specifically with the marine mining operations pertaining to Sea Concession 4b.

An overview of the structure and content of this report, Volume 1, is presented in Section 1.4.

1.4 STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT (VOLUME 1)

An overview of the structure and content of this report is presented below.

Section Contents

Executive Summary Provides a comprehensive synopsis of this report.

Chapter 1 Introduction

Describes the project background, summarises the legislative authorisation requirements,

outlines the purpose of this report and opportunity for comment, and describes the structure of

the report and associated volumes.

Chapter 2 Legislative requirements

Outlines the key legislative requirements and guiding principles underpinning the EMPR

amendment process and current marine operations.

Chapter 3 EMPR amendment process and public participation

Presents the project assumptions and limitations and outlines the EMPR amendment, including

the assessment methodology and I&AP consultation process.

Chapter 4 Mining Works Programme

Provides an overview of the current Mining Works Programme for the four marine Mining

Rights on which the amendment process is based.

Chapter 5 Description of the receiving environment

Describes the existing biophysical and social environment that could potentially be affected by

the proposed exploration activities.

Chapter 6 References

Provides a list of the references used in compiling this report.

SLR & PRM Page 1-5

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Section Contents

Appendices Appendix 1: Public Participation Process:

Appendix 1.1: Minutes of authority pre-application meeting

Appendix 1.2: I&AP database

Appendix 1.3: I&AP notification letters and Background Information Document

Appendix 1.4: Advertisements

Appendix 1.5: I&AP correspondence

Appendix 1.6: Comments and Responses Report

Appendix 2: Specialist Studies

Appendix 2.1: Convention for assigning significance ratings to impacts

Appendix 2.2: Marine and Coastal Ecology Assessment

Appendix 2.3: Orange River Estuarine Assessment

Appendix 2.4: Fisheries Spatial Distribution

1.5 INVITATION TO COMMENT

All reports prepared as part of the EMPR amendment process (5 volumes in total) have been made available

for a 30-day review and comment period from 10 November to 11 December 2017 in order to provide

interested and affected parties (I&AP) with an opportunity to comment on the proposed amendments and to

raise any issues of concern.

The full reports are available on the SLR website (http://slrconsulting.com/za/slr-documents/alexkor) and

hardcopies are available for individual reading and referencing at the following locations:

Location Name of facility Physical address

Alexander Bay Alexander Bay Library Orange Road, Alexander Bay

Port Nolloth AJ Bekeur Library Robson Street, Port Nolloth

Kuboes Kuboes Library 89 Kwaggastraat, Kuboes

Sandrift Sandrift Library 184Reierlaan, Sandrift

Eksteenfontein Eksteenfontein Library 120 Hofstraat, Eksteenfontein

Lekkersing Lekkersing Library Hoek van Linkstraat, Lekkersing

Comments should be forwarded to SLR at the address, telephone/fax numbers or e-mail address shown

below by no later than 11 December 2017.

After closure of the comment period, the reports will be finalised by incorporating all comments received on

the draft reports, where applicable and appropriate. The final reports will be submitted to the Department of

Mineral Resources (DMR) for decision-making.

SLR Consulting (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd

Attention: Mandy Kula

PO Box 10145, Caledon Square, 7905, CAPE TOWN

Tel: 021 461 1118; Fax: 021 461 1120

E-mail: [email protected]

SLR & PRM Page 1-6

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

SLR & PRM Page 2-1

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

2 LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

This chapter outlines the key legislative requirements underpinning the EMPR amendment process and

current marine operations.

2.1 MINERAL AND PETROLEUM RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT, 2002

The MPRDA states that mineral and petroleum resources are the common heritage of all South Africans and

the State is the custodian thereof for the benefit of all South Africans. The State is entitled to issue rights to

ensure the sustainable development of South Africa’s mineral and petroleum resources within a framework

of national environmental policy, while promoting economic and social development.

The PSJV holds four Mining Rights for its marine rights areas (see Table 2-1). Mining activities in these

areas are currently undertaken in terms of two approved EMPRs, namely:

• CSIR (1994): This EMPR is applicable to 554MRC, 512MRC and 513MRC, and was approved in

11 October 1995; and

• Myezo (2013): This EMPR is applicable to 10025MRC and was approved in 25 March 2015.

Table 2-1: Details of the Alexkor RMC JV’s marine Mining Rights

No. Reference number MPT number Description of mining area

1 554MRC SNC 30/5/1/2/2/554 MRC • Centre line of the Orange River, to the bank of

along the following properties: Corridor-Wes

(Farm No. 2), Portion 17 (a portion of Portion

8), Portion 16 (a portion of Portion 9), Portion

15 (a portion of Portion 10), Arrisdrift (Farm No.

616), Farm No. 1, and Farm Brandkaros (Farm

No. 517);

• Surf zone along Farm No. 1 and Farm No. 155;

• Sea Concession 1a;

• Sea Concession 1b;

• Sea Concession 2a; and

• Sea Concession 3a.

2 10025MR NC 30/5/1/2/2/10025 MR • Sea Concession 1c

3 512MRC NC-S 5/3/2/19 • Sea Concession 4a

4 513MRC NC-S 5/3/2/67 • Sea Concession 4b

2.1.1 EMPR AMENDMENT

Section 102 of the MPRDA allows for the amendment of an EMPR, prepared in terms of the MPRDA, subject

to the approval by the Minister of Mineral Resources (or the delegated authority). With the implementation of

the “One Environmental System” on 8 December 2014, which removed environmental regulation from the

scope of the MPRDA and placed it under NEMA, DMR no longer has the statutory power in terms of the

MPRDA to approve an amendment to an EMPR prepared in terms of the MPRDA (due to the repeal of

Section 39(6) of the MPRDA).

SLR & PRM Page 2-2

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

DMR does, however, have the authority to approve an amendment to an EMPR prepared in terms of NEMA.

This is due to Section 12(4) of the National Environmental Management Amendment Act, 2008 (No. 62 of

2008), which states that an EMPR prepared in terms of the MPRDA is deemed to be an EMPR approved in

terms of Section 24N of NEMA. Therefore, any amendment of an EMPR (prepared in terms of either NEMA

or the MPRDA), after 8 December 2014, should take place in accordance with NEMA and the EIA

Regulations 2014 (or any amendments thereto) (see Section 2.2 below).

2.2 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT, 1998

NEMA establishes principles and provides a regulatory framework for decision-making on matters affecting

the environment. Section 2 of NEMA sets out a range of environmental principles that are to be applied by

all organs of state when taking decisions that significantly affect the environment. Included amongst the key

principles is that all development must be socially, economically and environmentally sustainable and that

environmental management must place people and their needs at the forefront of its concern, and serve their

physical, psychological, developmental, cultural and social interests equitably. The participation of I&APs is

stipulated, as is that decisions must take into account the interests, needs and values of all I&APs.

Chapter 5 of NEMA provides a framework for the integration of environmental issues into the planning,

design, decision-making and implementation of plans and development proposals. Section 24 provides a

framework for granting of environmental authorisations. To give effect to the general objectives of Integrated

Environmental Management (IEM), the potential impacts on the environment of listed or specified activities

must be considered, investigated, assessed and reported on to the competent authority. Section 24(4)

provides the minimum requirements for procedures for the investigation, assessment, management and

communication of the potential impacts.

In terms of the management of impacts on the environment Section 24N details the requirements for an

EMPR, while Section 24N(6) provides for the amendment of an EMPR.

2.2.1 EIA REGULATIONS 2014

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations 2014, as amended in April 2017, promulgated in

terms of Chapter 5 of NEMA, and published in Government Notice (GN) No. R982, controls certain listed

activities. These activities are listed in GN No. R983 (Listing Notice 1), R984 (Listing Notice 2) and R985

(Listing Notice 3) of 4 December 2014, and are prohibited until Environmental Authorisation has been

obtained from the competent authority.

The PSJV currently has in place the necessary approvals in terms of the MPRDA to undertake mining

activities in its four marine concession areas (including marine Mining Rights and approved EMPRs). Since

there has been no change in the scope of the activities originally approved and undertaken within the mining

right areas, and no additional activities are planned, no further Environmental Authorisation in terms of the

EIA Regulations 2014 is required.

Section 37 of the EIA Regulations 2014 provides for the amendment of an EMPR, and it is in terms of this

section that the current EMPR amendment process is being undertaken. The amended EMPR will also

comply with the content requirements listed in Appendix 4 of the EIA Regulations 2014.

2.3 NATIONAL HERITAGE RESOURCES ACT, 1999

The National Heritage Resources Act, 1999 (No. 25 of 1999) (NHRA) provides for the identification,

assessment and management of the heritage resources of South Africa.

SLR & PRM Page 2-3

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Section 38(1) of the Act lists various development activities that require authorisation by the responsible

heritage resources authority (e.g. any development that will change the character of a site by more than

0.5 ha and the construction of a road exceeding 300 m in length). However, the provisions of Section 38 do

not apply if an evaluation of the heritage impact was required in terms of any other legislation. Since the

potential impact on heritage resources due to mining has already been considered, assessed and approved

as part of the issuing of the four marine Mining Rights, the responsible heritage resources authority does not

need to be notified of such developments in these areas.

However, a permit may still be required in order to destroy, damage, deface, excavate, alter or remove a

heritage resource. A permit would be required for the following:

• Altering or demolishing any structure or part of a structure which is older than 60 years [Section 34(1)];

• Destroying, damaging, excavating, altering, defacing, disturbing, removing, or collecting, any

archaeological or palaeontological material / object, or any meteorite [Section 35(4)]; and

• Destroying, damaging, altering, exhuming or removing from its original position or otherwise disturbing

any grave or burial ground older than 60 years [Section 36(3)].

2.4 NATIONAL WATER ACT, 1989

The National Water Act, 1989 (No. 36 of 1998) (NWA) provides a legal framework for the effective and

sustainable management of water resources1 in South Africa. It serves to protect, use, develop, conserve,

manage and control water resources as a whole, promoting the integrated management of water resources

with the participation of all stakeholders.

This Act also provides national norms and standards, and the requirement for authorisation (Water Use

Licence or General Authorisation) of uses listed in Section 21. In terms of Section 22 of the Act, a Water

Use Licence is required for any new water use that is not listed in Schedule 1 or that is not covered by a

General Authorisation. Since Mining Right 554MRC includes a portion of the Orange River, the following

water uses may be applicable to this right:

• Taking water from a water resource [Section 21(a)];

• Storing water [Section 21(b)];

• Impeding and diverting the flow of water in a watercourse [Section 21(c)];

• Discharging waste or water containing waste into a water resource through a pipe, canal, sewer, sea

outfall or other conduit [Section 21(f)];

• Disposing of waste in a manner which may detrimentally impact on a water resource [Section 21(g)];

• Disposing water which contains waste from any industrial process [Section 21(h)]; and

• Altering the bed, banks, course or characteristics of a watercourse [Section 21(i)].

Although activities in the coastal portions of Mining Right 554MRC (including Sea Concession 1a, 2a and 3a)

and Mining Right 512MRC (i.e. Sea Concession 4a) are unlikely to require a Water Use Licence or General

Authorisation, associated activities may trigger the need (e.g. construction of an access road through a

watercourse or wetland).

Alexkor SOC Limited has a Water Use Licence (No. 14/D82L/G/2403; date 11 January 2015) for Section

21(c), (g) and (i) water uses on Portion 9 (Remaining Extent) of Farm Korridor Wes 2 and Portion 0

(Remaining extent) of Farm 1). The licence is valid for 20 years.

1 A water resource includes a watercourse, surface water, estuary or aquifer, and, where relevant, its bed and banks. A watercourse

means a river or spring; a natural channel in which water flows regularly or intermittently; a wetland, lake or dam, into which or from

which water flows; and any collection of water that the Minister may declare to be a watercourse.

SLR & PRM Page 2-4

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

2.5 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: WASTE ACT, 2008

The National Environmental Management: Waste Act, 2008 (No. 59 of 2008) (NEM:WA) regulates all

aspects of waste management and has an emphasis on waste avoidance and minimisation. NEM:WA

creates a system for listing and licensing waste management activities. Listed waste management activities

above certain thresholds are subject to a process of impact assessment and licensing. Activities listed in

Category A require a Basic Assessment process, while activities listed in Category B require an EIA process.

NEM:WA also provides for the setting of norms and standards for the storage and disposal of waste. These

norms and standards are listed in GN R926 of 2013 (storage) and GN R636 of 2013 (disposal).

Alexkor has various licences for the operation of four landfill sites (Alexkor, Gifkop, Brandkaros and

Beauvallon) and the Alexander Bay Waste Water Treatment Plant. The PSJV is also are registered

Hazardous Waste Generator (WIR No. D11056-01; IPWIS No. W401005474) due to the removal of asbestos

from historic buildings and structures.

The Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) has indicated that NEM:WA is not applicable to offshore

activities. Thus, a Waste Management Licence would not be required for offshore waste management

activities, such as those related to mining vessels. These aspects would be managed in terms of and

comply with the requirements of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

(MARPOL 73/78).

2.6 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: AIR QUALITY ACT, 2004

The National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (No. 39 of 2004) (NEM:AQA) regulates all

aspects of air quality, including: prevention of pollution and environmental degradation; providing for national

norms and standards regulating air quality monitoring, management and control; and licencing of activities

that result in atmospheric emissions and have or may have a significant detrimental effect on the

environment. In terms of Section 22 of NEM:AQA, no person may conduct a listed activity (as per GN No.

893, 22 November 2013) without an Atmospheric Emission Licence (AEL).

The incineration of waste is one such activity (Category 8.1) and thus requires an AEL. DEA: Air Quality

Management Services has previously indicated that this category is also applicable to offshore incineration

(on board a vessel). Thus, should a Contractor propose to incinerate waste on board a mining vessel, an

application for an AEL would need to be made to the relevant authority.

2.7 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: PROTECTED AREAS ACT, 2003

The National Environmental Management: Protected Areas Act, 2003 (No. 57 of 2003) (NEM:PAA), as

amended, provides for the protection and conservation of ecologically viable areas representative of South

Africa’s biological diversity and it natural landscapes and seascapes. In terms of Section 48(1)(c) of the Act,

no prospecting or mining is allowed to occur within a protected area.

Mining Right 554MRC (specifically Sea Concession 3a) overlaps with the McDougall’s Bay Rock Lobster

Sanctuary, which includes 2.5 km of coastline, 3 km south of Port Nolloth. It should also be noted that it is

the intention of DEA to declare the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site as a Protected Area under NEM:PAA.

SLR & PRM Page 2-5

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

2.8 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: BIODIVERSITY ACT, 2004

National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act, 2004 (No. 10 of 2004) (NEM:BA) provides for the

management and conservation of South Africa’s biodiversity and the protection of species and ecosystems

that warrant national protection.

NEM:BA regulates the carrying out of restricted activities that may harm listed threatened or protected

species or activities that encourage the spread of alien or invasive species subject to a permit. The list of

restricted activities does not directly apply to marine prospecting and mining activities directly as they relate

to the keeping, moving, having in possession, importing, exporting and selling of species.

NEM:BA also makes provision for the publication of bioregional plans (e.g. Namaqua District Bioregional

Plan) and the listing of ecosystems and species that are threatened or in need of protection. Within the

published bioregional (spatial) plan, terrestrial and aquatic features that are critical for conserving biodiversity

and maintaining ecosystem functioning are indicated as Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs). Bioregional plans

provide the guidelines for avoiding the loss or degradation of natural habitat in CBAs with the aim of

informing EIAs and land-use planning, including Environmental Management Frameworks (EMFs), Spatial

Development Frameworks (SDFs) and Integrated Development Plans (IDPs).

Chapter 3 of the “Guideline Regarding The Determination Of Bioregions And The Preparation Of And

Publication Of Bioregional Plans” requires environmental decision-makers who are required by NEMA to

apply the NEMA Section 2 principles in their decision-making to consider, amongst other things, sensitive,

vulnerable, highly dynamic or stressed ecosystems, such as coastal shores, estuaries, wetlands and similar

systems, which require specific attention in management and planning procedures, especially where they are

subject to significant human resource usage and development pressure. CBAs identified in a bioregional

plan should be considered to be such areas and should, therefore, be considered by decision-makers in the

course of the decision making process. This would mean that bioregional plans should be considered by,

amongst others, DMR in their authorisation for prospecting and mining.

The marine Mining Rights areas do not overlap with any declared Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) off the

West Coast. Mining Right 544MRC does, however, include a portion of the Orange River, which is a Ramsar

Site (i.e. Wetland of International Importance). Although no prospecting or mining is currently proposed for

the Orange River, the Ramsar Site and any other onshore CBAs should be taken into consideration for the

siting of any associated activities (e.g. access roads, stockpiles, etc.).

2.9 MARINE LIVING RESOURCES ACT, 1998

The Marine Living Resources Act, 1998 (No. 18 of 1998) governs MPAs and states that no person shall in

any MPA, without permission, take or destroy any fauna and flora other than fish; dredge, extract sand or

gravel, discharge or deposit waste or any other polluting matter; or in any way disturb, alter or destroy the

natural environment; and carry on any activity which may adversely impact on the ecosystems of that area.

As noted in in Section 2.7 above, thee marine Mining Rights areas do not overlap with any declared MPAs

off the West Coast.

2.10 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: INTEGRATED COASTAL MANAGEMENT ACT, 2008

The National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (No. 24 of 2008)

(NEM:ICMA) establishes a system of integrated coastal and estuarine management in South Africa,

including norms, standards and policies, in order to promote the conservation of the coastal zone, and to

SLR & PRM Page 2-6

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

maintain the natural attributes of coastal landscapes and seascapes, and to ensure the development and the

use of natural resources within the coastal region is socially and economically justifiable, as well as

ecologically sustainable.

Chapter 4 of the Act provides for the management of estuaries in South Africa in accordance with a National

Estuarine Management Protocol. This requires that where an estuary straddles an international boundary,

DEA in collaboration with the responsible authority of the affected neighbouring state must develop the

Estuarine Management Plan in consultation with the relevant government departments of the affected states.

The plan for the Orange River Mouth Estuary is intended to be a strategic five-year plan providing direction

for the management of the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site. The purpose of the Plan is to:

• facilitate co-operative management of the Ramsar Site through the development of a shared vision

and strategic objectives for the management of the site;

• provide for the formal establishment of a governance structure that will oversee the implementation of

the plan;

• provide the primary strategic tool for management of the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site, informing

the need for specific programmes and operational procedures;

• enable stakeholders to manage and use the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site in such a way that its

values and purpose for which it was declared are protected;

• provide a basis for integrating site management into broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning;

• Provide motivations for budgets and future funding and providing indicators that available funds are

spent correctly;

• build accountability into the management of the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site; and

• provide for capacity building, future thinking and continuity of management.

Chapter 7 of the Act establishes integrated permitting procedures and other measures to ensure the

protection and sustainable use of the coastal zone and its resources. This includes the requirement that

adequate consideration be given to the objectives of this Act when considering applications for

Environmental Authorisation for any development within the coastal zone, and the consideration of impacts

on coastal public property, the coastal protection zone (defined as being within 1 km of the shoreline in rural

areas) and coastal access land. In terms of Section 60 of NEM:ICMA, the Minister or MEC may issue a

written notice to a person for the repair or removal of a structure that is having or likely to have an adverse

effect on the coastal environment.

Chapter 8 and Schedule 2 provide integrated procedures for regulating the disposal of effluent and waste

into the sea. NEM:ICMA intends to regulate the discharge of effluent into coastal waters from vessels

(Sections 70 and 71) by requiring permits to authorise such discharges. Section 70 prohibits incineration at

sea (note: this does not include the combustion of operational waste from a vessel at sea) and restricts

dumping at sea (note: this does not include operational waste from a vessel, aircraft, platform or

other man-made structure at sea) in accordance with South Africa’s obligations under international law.

Section 71 provides requirements applicable to dumping permits. DEA (Branch Oceans and Coasts) has

indicated that a dumping permit is not required for coffer dam mining (refer DEA correspondence in

Appendix 1.5 and 1.6).

2.10.1 DUMPING AT SEA REGULATIONS

These regulations, promulgated in terms of Section 83(1) of NEMA:ICMA and published in GN R711 of 2017,

provide for the control of dumping into the sea. As noted above, DEA has indicated that a dumping permit is

not required for coffer dam mining.

SLR & PRM Page 2-7

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

2.10.2 REGULATIONS FOR THE CONTROL OF USE OF VEHICLES IN THE COASTAL AREA

These regulations, promulgated in terms of Section 83(1) of NEMA:ICMA and published in GN R496 of 2014,

provide for the control of vehicle use in the coastal zone. In terms of Regulation 4, any person intending to

drive in the coastal area requires a permit from the DEA: Coastal Conservation Strategies Directorate, unless

it is a permissible use.

In terms of Regulation 3(1)(a)(iv), the use of a vehicle within a mining area as defined in Section 1 of the

MPRDA is a permissible use. Thus, permits are not required within the Mining Rights areas.

2.11 OTHER RELEVANT LEGISLATION

In addition to the foregoing, the table below provides a summary of other relevant national and international

legislation and conventions.

NO. TITLE DESCRIPTION

1. Other South African legislation

1.1 Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 1986

(No. 1 of 1986) (COGSA)

This Act provides for the carriage of goods by sea and applies

where: (a) the port of shipment is a port in South Africa; (2) the bill of

lading is issued in a state which applies the Hague-Visby Rules; (3)

the carriage is from a port in a contracting state; and (4) the contract

contained in or evidenced by the bill of lading provides that the

South African COGSA applies.

1.2 Dumping at Sea Control Act, 1980

(No. 73 of 1980)

This Act controls the dumping of substances at sea. The Act lists

substances that are prohibited to be dumped at sea (Schedule 1)

and substances that are restricted when dumping at sea (Schedule

2). The Director-General may on application grant a special permit

authorising the dumping of substances listed in Schedule 1 or 2.

1.3 Financial Provision Regulations, 2015

(GN No. R1147)

These regulations set the requirements for financial provision as

contemplated in NEMA for the costs associated with the undertaking

of management, rehabilitation and remediation of environmental

impacts of prospecting, exploration, mining or production operations

through the lifespan of such operations and latent or residual

environmental impacts that may become known in the future.

1.4 General Authorisation for taking water

from a resource (GN R399, 2004), as

amended by Notice 538 of 2016

The General Authorisation permitted in terms of this Schedule

replaces the need for a water user to apply for a licence in terms of

the NWA for the taking or storage of water from a water resource,

provided that the taking or storage is within the limits and conditions

set out in this authorisation. The General Authorisation includes

specific limitations for the taking of surface and groundwater per

catchment per property.

1.5 General Authorisation for water uses as

defined in Section 21(c) and 21(i)

(Notice 509, 2016)

The General Authorisation permitted in terms of this Schedule

replaces the need for a water user to apply for a licence in terms of

the NWA for impeding or diverting the flow of water in a watercourse

(Section 21(c)) or altering the bed, banks, course or characteristics

of a watercourse (Section 21(i)). The regulated area of a

watercourse in terms of this notice means:

• The outer edge of the 1:100 year flood line …;

• In the absence of a determined 1:100 year flood line, the area

within 100 m from the edge of a watercourse where …; or

• A 500 m radius from the delineated boundary (extent) of any

wetland or pan.

SLR & PRM Page 2-8

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017


1.6 Hazardous Substances Act, 1983 and

Regulations (No. 85 of 1983)

This Act provides for the control of substances which may cause

injury or ill-health to or death of human. No person may, without a

licence:

(1) sell any Group I Hazardous Substance; (2) use, operate or apply

any Group III Hazardous Substance (listed electronic products); and

(3) install or keep any Group Ill Hazardous Substance.

Authorisation is required to be in procession of, use or dispose of

any Group IV Hazardous Substance (which include includes

radioactive material).

1.7 Marine Traffic Act, 1981 (No. 2 of 1981) This Act regulates marine traffic in South Africa’s territorial waters.

It regulates the entry and dropping of anchor within 500 m safety

zone of installations.

1.8 Marine Pollution (Control and Civil

Liability) Act, 1981 (No. 6 of 1981)

The purpose of this Act is to provide protection of the marine

environment from pollution by oil and other harmful substances, by

giving power to the South African Maritime Safety Association

(SAMSA) to take steps to prevent harmful substances being

discharged from vessels.

1.9 Marine Pollution (Prevention of

Pollution from Ships) Act, 1986 (No. 2

of 1986)

This Act regulates pollution from ships, tankers and offshore

installations, and for that purpose gives effect to MARPOL 73/78. In

terms of the Act, it is an offence to discharge any oil from a ship,

tanker or offshore installation within 12 miles (19 km) off the South

African coast. The discharge of oily water or oil and any other

substance which contains more than a hundred parts per million of

oil is prohibited between 19 – 80 km offshore.

1.10 Marine Pollution (Intervention) Act,

1987 (No. 65 of 1987)

This Act implements to the international convention relating to the

Intervention of the High Seas in cases of oil pollution casualties, and

to the Protocol relating to Intervention of the High Seas in cases of

Marine Pollution by substances other than Oil in South African

Waters.

1.11 Maritime Safety Authority Act, 1998

(No. 5 of 1998)

This Act provides for the establishment and functions of SAMSA.

The objectives of the Act are to, inter alia: (1) ensure safety of life

and property at sea; (2) prevent and combat pollution of the marine

environment by ship; and (3) promote South Africa’s maritime

interests.

1.12 Maritime Safety Authority Levies Act,

1998 (No. 6 of 1998)

This Act provides for the imposition of levies by SAMSA. SAMSA is

permitted to raise and collect a levy on all vessels calling at South

African ports and operating in South African waters.

1.13 Maritime Zones Act 1994 (No. 15 of

1994)

The Act defines the maritime zones, including territorial waters,

contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf.

Section 9(1) states that any law in force in South Africa shall also

apply on and in respect of an installation.

1.14 Merchant Shipping Act, 1951 (No. 57 of

1951)

This Act provides for the control of merchant shipping and matters

incidental thereto.

1.16 Mine Health and Safety Act, 1996 (No.

29 of 1996)

This Act provides for health and safety requirements for mining

operations and includes hazard and risk assessments, monitoring

and awareness training.

1.17 Mine Health and Safety Act Regulations

(GN R93 of 1997)

Mining must be undertaken in terms of the relevant provisions of the

Regulations.

SLR & PRM Page 2-9

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017


1.18 National Ports Act, 2005 (No. 12 of

2005)

This Act regulates and controls navigation within port limits and the

approaches to ports, cargo handling, and the pollution and the

protection of the environment within the port limits. The Act

specifies a requirement for an agreement with or a license from the

National Ports Authority to operate a port facility or service.

1.19 Occupational Health and Safety Act,

1993 (No. 85 of 1993) and Major

Hazard Installation Regulations

This Act provides for the health and safety of persons at work and

the protection of persons other than persons at work against

hazards to health and safety arising out of or in connection with the

activities of persons at work. Every employer shall provide and

maintain, as far as is reasonably practicable, a working environment

that is safe and without risk to the health of his employees.

1.20 Regulations on use of water for mining

and related activities aimed at the

protection of water resources (GN

R704)

These Regulations, promulgated under the NWA, were made in

respect of the use of water for mining and related activities, and are

aimed at the protection of water resources.

Regulation 4(b) sets out that no person in charge of an activity may

“except in relation to a matter contemplated in regulation 10, carry

on any underground or opencast mining, prospecting or any other

operation or activity under or within the 1:50 year flood-line or within

a horizontal distance of 100 m from any watercourse or estuary,

whichever is the greatest”.

Regulation 10(1) states that no person may:

(a) extract alluvial minerals or other mineral from the channel of a

watercourse or estuary, unless reasonable precautions are

taken to:

(i) ensure that the stability of the watercourse or estuary is

not affected by such operations;

(ii) prevent scouring and erosion of the watercourse or

estuary which may result from such operations or work

incidental thereto;

(iii) prevent damage to in-stream or riparian habitat through

erosion, sedimentation, alteration of vegetation or

structure of the watercourse or estuary, or alteration of

the flow characteristics of the watercourse or estuary;

(b) establish any slimes dam or settling pond within the 1:50 year

flood-line or within a horizontal distance of 100 m of any

watercourse or estuary.

Regulation 10(2) states that every person winning sand, alluvial

minerals or other materials from the bed of a watercourse or

estuary must:

(i) construct treatment facilities to treat the water to the

standard prescribed in GN No. R.991 or by any

subsequent regulation under the Act before returning the

water to the watercourse or estuary;

(ii) limit stockpiles or sand dumps established on the bank of

any watercourse or estuary to that realised in two days of

production, and all other production must be stockpiled

or dumped outside of the 1:50 year flood-line or more

than a horizontal distance of 100 m from any

watercourse or estuary.

1.21 Regulations regarding the planning and

management of residue stockpiles and

residue deposits, 2015 (GN R632).

The purpose of these Regulations is to regulate the planning and

management of residue stockpiles and residue deposits from a

prospecting, mining, exploration or production operation.

SLR & PRM Page 2-10

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017


1.22 Sea-Shore Act, 1935 (No. 21 of 1935) This Act declares the State President the owner of the seashore and

the sea within the territorial waters of South Africa and provides for

the grant of rights in respect of the seashore and the sea and for the

alienation of portions of the seashore and the sea.

1.23 Sea Birds and Seals Protection Act,

1973 (No. 46 of 1973)

This Act provides for the control over certain islands and the

protection of seabirds and seals. It is an offence to wilfully disturb

seabirds and seals on the coast or on offshore islands, unless in

possession of a permit.

1.24 Ship Registration Act, 1998 (No. 58 of

1998)

This Act provides for the registration of ships in South Africa.

1.25 Mining and Biodiversity Guidelines This guideline provides a tool to facilitate the sustainable

development of South Africa’s mineral resources in a way that

enables regulators, industry and practitioners to minimise the impact

of mining on the country’s biodiversity and ecosystem services.

The Guideline distinguishes between four categories of biodiversity

priority areas in relation to their importance from a biodiversity and

ecosystem service point of view, as well as the implications for

mining in these areas. These include areas designated as: 1)

Legally Protected, 2) Highest Biodiversity Importance, 3) High

Biodiversity Importance, and 4) Moderate Biodiversity Importance.

The ‘Highest Biodiversity Importance’ category is based on the

mapped extent of Critically Endangered and Endangered

ecosystems, Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs), river and wetland

Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas (FEPAs) with a 1 km buffer

and Ramsar sites.

The Guidelines indicates that if the presence of biodiversity features,

leading to the categorisation as a ‘Highest Biodiversity Importance’

area, are confirmed then this could be a fatal flaw or pose significant

limitations for new mining projects. An environmental assessment

should inform whether or not mining is acceptable, including

potentially limiting specific types of prospecting or mining which may

be deemed not acceptable due to the impact on biodiversity and

associated ecosystem services found in the priority area. Mining in

such areas may be considered out of place and authorisations may

well not be granted. If granted, the authorisation may set limits on

allowed activities and methods, the extent thereof and impacts.

1.26 Wreck and Salvage Act, 1995 (No. 94

of 1995)

This Act regulates the law of salvage in South Africa and provides

for the application in South Africa of the International Convention of

Salvage, 1989.

2. International Marine Pollution Conventions

2.1 International Convention for the

Prevention of Pollution from Ships,

1973/1978 (MARPOL)

MARPOL is the main international convention covering prevention of

pollution of the marine environment by ships from operational or

accidental causes

2.2 Amendment of the International

Convention for the Prevention of

Pollution from Ships, 1973/1978

(MARPOL) (Bulletin 567 – 2/08)

2.3 International Convention on Oil

Pollution Preparedness, Response and

Co-operation, 1990 (OPRC

Convention)

OPRC is an international maritime convention establishing

measures for dealing with marine oil pollution incidents nationally

and in co-operation with other countries.

SLR & PRM Page 2-11

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017


2.4 United Nations Convention on Law of

the Sea, 1982 (UNCLOS)

UNCLOS defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with

respect to their use of the world's oceans, establishing guidelines for

businesses, the environment, and the management of marine

natural resources.

2.5 Convention on the Prevention of Marine

Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and

Other Matter, 1972 (the London

Convention) and the 1996 Protocol (the

Protocol)

The London Convention is an agreement to control pollution of the

sea from dumping and to encourage regional agreements

supplementary to the Convention. It covers the deliberate disposal

at sea of wastes or other matter from vessels, aircraft and platforms.

It does not cover discharges from land-based sources, such as

pipes and outfalls, wastes generated incidental to normal operation

of vessels, or placement of materials for purposes other than mere

disposal, providing such disposal is not contrary to aims of the

Convention.

2.6 International Convention relating to

Intervention on the High Seas in case

of Oil Pollution Casualties (1969) and

Protocol on the Intervention on the High

Seas in Cases of Marine Pollution by

substances other than oil (1973)

This Convention is an international maritime convention affirming

the right of a coastal State to "take such measures on the high seas

as may be necessary to prevent, mitigate or eliminate grave and

imminent danger to their coastline or related interests from pollution

or threat of pollution of the sea by oil, following upon a maritime

casualty or acts related to such a casualty”.

2.7 Basel Convention on the Control of

Trans-boundary Movements of

Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal

(1989)

This Convention is an international treaty that was designed to

reduce the movements of hazardous waste between nations, and

specifically to prevent transfer of hazardous waste from developed

to less developed countries. It does not, however, address the

movement of radioactive waste.

2.8 Convention on Biological Diversity

(1992)

This Convention has three main goals: (1) conservation of biological

diversity (or biodiversity); (2) sustainable use of its components; and

(3) fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from genetic

resources. Its objective is to develop national strategies for the

conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

SLR & PRM Page 2-12

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

SLR & PRM Page 3-1

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

3 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the project assumptions and limitations and outlines the EMPR addendum process,

including the assessment methodology and I&AP consultation process.

3.1 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS

The assumptions and limitations pertaining to this EMPR amendment process are listed below:

• It is assumed that SLR and PRM have been provided with all relevant project information and that it

was correct and valid at the time it was provided;

• This EMPR amendment process is based on the updated Mining Works Programme (MWP), which

has been submitted to DMR for approval. Any amendments to the MWP may require similar

amendments to the four EMPRs prepared as part of this process;

• There will be no significant changes to the surrounding environment or project activities on which this

EMPR amendment process is based that could substantially influence findings and recommendations

with respect to mitigation and management;

• This process assumes that all four mining areas have valid mining rights and approved EMPRs;

• All existing activities and areas have been previously authorised and no further Environmental

Authorisation is considered necessary; and

• All other necessary approval, licences and / or permits are in place.

3.2 EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS OBJECTIVES

The EMPR amendment process has the following objectives:

• To ensure the four marine EMPRs are aligned with each other, with all new legislation and

environmental standards, as well as the findings of internal PSJV Performance Assessment Reports;

• To ensure the four marine EMPRs are aligned with the amended MWP, including current and future

operations;

• To review all risks associated with current marine prospecting and mining operations and reassess all

anticipated impacts on the biophysical environment;

• To review all existing management measures (as per approved EMPRs) and, where necessary,

identify additional measures to ensure impacts are avoided and where they cannot be avoided are

minimised; and

• To provide a reasonable opportunity for I&APs to be involved in the process;

Through the above, to ensure informed, transparent and accountable decision-making by the relevant

authorities.

3.3 EAP PROJECT TEAM

The project team (including specialists) appointed to undertake the EMPR amendment process is presented

in Table 3-1. SLR, PRM and specialist consultants have no vested interest in the proposed project.

SLR & PRM Page 3-2

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Table 3-1: EIA Project Team

Company Name Qualifications Experience

(years) Tasks and roles

SLR

Mr Andrew

Bradbury

M.Sc. (Env. Assessment &

Mgt), Oxford Brookes

University

24 Project Director - Report review

and quality control

Mr Jeremy

Blood

M.Sc. (Cons. Ecol.), University

of Stellenbosch 18

SLR Project Manager -

Management of the EMPR

amendment process, including

process review, specialist study

review and report compilation

Ms Mandy

Kula

Env. Health, Cape Peninsula

University of

Technology

9

Public participation process -

I&AP database, I&AP liaison and

assimilation of comments

PRM

Mr Neil

Fraser

B.Sc Hons Oceanography,

University of Cape Town 32

PRM Project Manager / Reviewer

- Report review and quality control

Mr Carel

Neethling

B.Sc Hons (Geology),

University of Stellenbosch 24

Reviewer - Report review and

quality control

Mr Jeremy

Midgely

M.Sc. (Env. & Geog. Sci.),

University of Natal 30

Process review, specialist study

review and report compilation

Mr Pat

Morant

M.Sc (Env Studies),

University of Cape Town 38 Estuarine Assessment

Pisces

Environmental

Services

Dr Andrea

Pulfrich

PhD (Fisheries Biology),

Christian-Albrechts University,

Kiel, Germany

22 Marine and Coastal Ecology

Assessment

Capricorn Marine

Environmental

Mr Dave

Japp

MSc (Ichthyology and

Fisheries Science), Rhodes

University

29 Input into fishery assessment

(namely spatial and temporal

mapping) Ms Sarah

Wilkinson

BSc (Hons) (Botany),

University of Cape Town 14

3.4 EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS

The EMPR amendment process consists of a series of activities to ensure compliance with Section 37 of the

EIA Regulations 2012, as set out in Government Notice (GN) No. 30, and the objectives listed above. The

process involves an open, participatory approach to ensure that all impacts and management measures are

confirmed and that decision-making takes place in an informed, transparent and accountable manner.

A flowchart indicating the entire EMPR amendment process is presented in Figure 3-1.

3.4.1 PROJECT INITIATION

3.4.1.1 Project initiation

The PSJV, SLR and PRM held an initiation meeting on 13 June 2017. The purpose of this meeting was to,

inter alia:

• Confirm the scope of and approach to the EMPR amendment process;

• Obtain an overview of current prospecting and mining operations within the mining right areas; and

• Confirm the information requirements for the process.

SLR & PRM Page 3-3

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 3-1: EMPR amendment process

3.4.1.2 Site visit

A site visit was undertaken with key specialists from 24 to 26 June 2017 in order to obtain a better

understanding of the current mining activities and the various local environments (nearshore, coastal and

Orange River).

3.4.1.3 Authority pre-application meeting

The PSJV, SLR and PRM met with DMR on 27 June 2017. The purpose of this pre-application meeting was

to provide notification of the commencement of the EMPR amendment process and to inform DMR on the

process to be followed, as well as to obtain clarity thereon. Minutes of DMR pre-application meeting are

presented in Appendix 1.1.

SLR & PRM Page 3-4

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

3.4.1.4 Application for EMPR amendment

Four online amendment applications were made in terms of Section 102 of the MPRDA using DMR’s

SAMRAD portal.

3.4.2 INITIAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS

The objective of the initial public participation process was to ensure that I&APs were notified about the

EMPR amendment process, given a reasonable opportunity to register on the project database and to

provide initial comments. Steps undertaken during this phase are summarised in Box 3-1 and all supporting

information is presented in appendices to this report.

A total of 13 written submissions were received during the initial public participation process (see Box 3-2

and Appendix 1.5). These comments relate mainly to:

• Impact on the Orange River Estuary;

• Impact on maritime cultural heritage;

• Coffer dam mining, specifically the requirement for a dumping permit; and

• I&AP registration.

These submissions have been collated, and responded to, in a Comments and Responses Report

(see Appendix 1.6).

Box 3-1: Tasks undertaken during the initial public participation process

• I&AP identification

A preliminary I&AP database of authorities, Non-Governmental Organisations, Community-based Organisations

and other key stakeholders was compiled using the PSJV’s existing database, as well as other databases of

previous studies undertaken in the area. Additional I&APs were added to the database based on the tasks

below. To date 178 I&APs have been registered on the project database, excluding the project team

(see Appendix 1.2).

• Notification letter and Background Information Document (BID)

All identified I&APs were notified of the application and EMPR amendment process by means of a notification

letter (in English and Afrikaans) and BID (see Appendix 1.3 for letter, BID and proof of distribution). The BID was

compiled to provide introductory information on the project, to encourage people to register on the I&APs

database and to provide an initial opportunity to comment. The BID was distributed for a 30-day review and

comment period from 16 August to 15 September 2017.

• Advertisements

Advertisements announcing the proposed project, the availability of the BID and the I&AP registration / comment

period were placed in the following regional and local newspapers (see Appendix 1.4 for copies of the adverts):

> Regional National newspapers:

− 16 August 2017: Cape Times (English)

− 16 August 2017: Die Burger (Afrikaans)

> Local newspapers:

− 18 August 2017: Die Plattelander

− 18 August 2017: Die Namakwalander

− 18 August 2017: Die Gemsbok

SLR & PRM Page 3-5

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

3.4.3 COMPILATION OF SPECIALIST STUDIES

A large amount of information currently exists, especially for onshore mining and rehabilitation activities.

However, additional specialist input was considered necessary for the marine and estuarine / riverine areas

in order to determine where management measures are lacking and what additional mitigation measures are

required to be included in the amended EMPR.

The following three specialist studies were undertaken as part of the amendment process:

• Marine and Coastal Ecology Assessment: This study focused on the shore and surf zone of Sea

Concessions 1a, 2a, 3a, 4a, 1b, 4b and 1c, and involved the gathering of data relevant to confirming

and reassessing environmental impacts that may occur as a result of mining in these areas, as well as

identifying additional mitigation measures for the avoidance / minimisation of impacts. Impacts were

assessed according to pre-defined rating scales (see Appendix 2.1). The Marine and Coastal Ecology

Assessment is presented in Appendix 2.2;

• Orange River Estuarine Assessment: This study focused on the Orange River estuary and river, and

the management thereof. Since no prospecting or mining are being considered for inclusion in the

amendment of the EMPR for 554MRC, the purpose was mainly to describe the current state of the

river and identify additional measures required to manage the estuary in light of the proposal by the

DEA to declare it a protected area in terms of the NEM:PAA. The Orange River Estuarine

Assessment is presented in Appendix 2.3; and

• Fisheries Spatial Distribution: This study focused on providing a spatial assessment on the distribution

of commercial fisheries off the West Coast in the vicinity of the marine mining right areas

(see Appendix 2.4).

3.4.4 COMPILATION AND REVIEW OF AMENDED EMPRS

The EMPRs for the four marine Mining Right areas (Volumes 1 to 5) have been amended in compliance with

Section 37 and Appendix 4 of the EIA Regulations 2014, as amended (see Table 3-2). The specialist

studies and other relevant information / assessments have been integrated into these reports.

Box 3-2: I&APs that submitted written correspondence during the initial public participation process

Organs of State

• Department of Environmental Affairs - Chantal Engelbrecht

• Department of Mineral Resources - Johannes Nematatani

• Department of Mineral Resources - Takalani Khorombi

• South African Heritage Resources Agency - Briege Williams

Organisations

• Asijiki Development - Ben Mokoena

• De Beers Marine - Lesley Roos

• Endangered Wildlife Trust - Grant Smith

• Namdeb Diamond Corporation - Gary Van Eck

• Namdeb Diamond Corporation - Julien Cloete

• Richtersveld Mining Company - Craig Matthews

• Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa - Patrick Obies

Private

• Gavin Craythorne (Small-scale Marine Diamond Miner)

• Gregor Calderwood (registered student)

SLR & PRM Page 3-6

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The reports aim to present all information in a clear and understandable format suitable for easy

interpretation by I&APs and authorities and provide an opportunity for I&APs to comment on the proposed

amendments and findings of the EMPR amendment process (see Section 1.5 for details of the comment

period).

3.4.5 COMPLETION OF THE EMPR AMENDMENT PROCESS

The following steps are envisaged for the remainder of the process:

• After closure of the comment period, the draft reports will be finalised. All comments received on the

draft reports will be assimilated and, where relevant, responded to in an updated Comments and

Responses Report that will be appended to Volume 1; and

• The final amended EMPRs will be submitted to DMR for decision-making.

SLR & PRM Page 4-1

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

4 OVERVIEW OF MINING WORKS PROGRAMME

This chapter provides an overview of the recently updated Mines and Work Programme (MWP), on which the

current marine EMPR amendment process is based. Details of geophysical surveying, prospecting,

sampling and mining methods, as well as their locations, is provided in Volumes 2 to 5.

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The MWP provides details on the location and extent of known and probable diamond bearing gravels

occurring within all five mining right areas (onshore and marine), which extend from the land (above the high

water mark) through the surf zone to the various sea concessions (a, b and c) (see Figures 1-1 and 4-1).

Historical and current (1 March 2016 to 28 February 2017) mining areas associated with the marine Mining

Rights are indicated in Figure 4-2, while potential future mining areas are presented in Figure 4-3. Although

the PSJV has a right to prospect and mine portions of the Orange River, no prospecting or mining activities

are being considered for inclusion in this amendment of the EMPR for Mining Right 554MRC.

Similar to the onshore operations, the PSJV outsources the majority of the marine prospecting and mining

operations to contractors. The current and potential future prospecting and mining methods are described in

the sections below.

Figure 4-1: Schematic cross section of the mining concession areas

SLR & PRM Page 4-2

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 4-2: Historical and current (1 March 2016 to 28 February 2017) mining activity

SLR & PRM Page 4-3

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 4-3: Future marine mining locations

SLR & PRM Page 4-4

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

4.2 MARINE PROSPECTING

4.2.1 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS

Geophysical surveys are undertaken to investigate the structure and makeup of seabed and underlying

sediment sequences. A number of surveying tools can be used, including:

• Single beam echo sounder.

• Bottom profiler.

• Multi beam or swat bathymetry (see Figure 4-4).

• Side Scan Sonar.

• Topas.

• Compressed High Intensity Radar Pulse (Chirp).

• Boomer.

• Sparker.

These surveys can be undertaken from a small ski boat or large ocean going survey vessel, depending

primarily on the water depths over which the survey is to be conducted. Shallow water surveys (< 20 m)

would be conducted from ski boats, which would return to port daily. Mid- to deep-water surveys (> 20 m)

would be undertaken from larger survey vessels that are capable of remaining at sea for several days at a

time.

Outputs from these surveys commonly produce detailed images of the seabed, showing topographical

features, sediment characterisation (which may subsequently be ground-truthed in order to obtain actual

samples from the seabed). Images can also be generated that indicate the sub surface layers below the

seabed. From this information dataset, trap sites (depressions, gulley’s, cliff lines and other features) are

identified for further prospecting or mining.

Figure 4-4: Vessel using multi-beam depth echo sounders

(Source: http://www.gns.cri.nz)

SLR & PRM Page 4-5

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

4.2.2 SAMPLING

Following geophysical survey data acquisition, samples are collected to gain an understanding of the

distribution and grade (number of stones and carats) of diamonds within the target gravel horizon. The

larger the sample size and number of samples, the more reliable the statistical interpretation and

confirmation of the resource potential. The larger and more expensive marine operations typically require an

extensive data set to verify the economic potential of the deposit.

Various methods are used to ground-truth geophysical survey interpretations, including:

• Coring (e.g. vibrocoring / drop coring): This technique is used for collecting core samples of

subsurface sediments. Cores typically comprise of a 10-15 cm diameter samples up to 9 m in length;

• Grab samples (see Figure 4-5) or box coring: This technique targets the upper 20 to 30 cm of the

seabed surface. The size of sample collected ultimately depends on the grab size.

• Drill sampling (e.g. Wirth or Mega Drill): Large vessel-mounted vertical drill tools are capable for

working in water depths of approximately 40 m to 130 m. This sampling method can recover sediment

to depths of up to 8 m and is the most sophisticated sampling technology available presently.

• Bulk sampling: If initial reconnaissance sampling indicates positive results, in-fill bulk sampling may be

undertaken. The spacing between the reconnaissance sample locations is reduced by the in-fill

sampling, thereby providing a more accurate understanding of the distribution of the prospective

deposit. This is sampling is typically undertaken by a large mining vessel where a series of trenches

(up to 22 m wide) are excavated across the prospective deposit using a subsea crawler (see

Section 4.3.4.3).

• Small vessel-based diver assisted and mobile pump unit sampling: Prospecting in the surf zone and

nearshore areas is essentially undertaken by the boat-based diver operations on trial and error basis.

Local knowledge gained from historical mining of coastal structures (e.g. linear features, gullies and

ridges) is used for diamond data mapping and interpretation. The dredging equipment and techniques

used by the boat-based diver operations for prospecting are the same as the equipment used for

mining. Mobile pump units (e.g. excavators with extended booms) could also be used for prospecting

in the surf zone and nearshore areas.

Figure 4-5: Grab sampler

(Source: http://www.jochemnet.de/fiu/OCB3043_35.html)

SLR & PRM Page 4-6

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

4.3 MARINE MINING

4.3.1 VESSEL- AND SHORE-BASED DIVER ASSISTED MINING

Shallow water (or nearshore) mining operations utilise either a vessel to support operations or shore-based

support to run the dredge pump and supply air to the divers. These methods are described below.

4.3.1.1 Vessel-based diver assisted mining

The diver operations commonly operate in water depths of less than 12 m (‘a’ concessions). A vessel-

based operation typically consists of a 10 - 12 m vessel (see Figure 4-6) with 6 to 8 operational personnel.

These vessels are small enough to operate out of Alexander Bay or Port Nolloth. There are currently

approximately 23 vessel-based contractors operating in the PSJV shallow water concession areas.

The dredging operations are typically conducted using vessel mounted suction pumps and hoses, which

are guided by divers into gullies, potholes and bedrock depressions to retrieve the diamond-bearing gravel.

The divers operate via a surface supplied airline, with air generated from a vessel based air compressor.

The gravel is pumped up through the hose gravel pump system to the on-board screening system

(trommel). Fine material (<2 mm) and oversized material (>20 mm) is discharged from the screening unit,

washing directly back into the sea. The diamond-bearing gravel is bagged and transported to the onshore

processing plants for further processing.

Figure 4-6: Typical vessel-based diver assisted mining operation

(Source: J. Blood)

4.3.1.2 Shore-based diver assisted mining

Mining in the surf zone to water depths of up to 12 m can also be shore-based and locally referred to as

“Walpomp” (beach pumping units). There are currently at least 64 shore-based units operating in the surf

zone area, each consisting of 2 to 4 divers (working in shifts) and additional personnel to manage the

onshore equipment and bag the recovered gravels.

SLR & PRM Page 4-7

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

These mining operations are typically confined to small trap sites. The submerged target gravels are mined

by at least two diver-guided suction hoses. The hoses are connected to a shore based tractor that is

modified to drive a centripetal pump (see Figure 4-7), which feeds the gravel into a rotary classifier

(trommel). The classifier screens the pumped material and separates the size fraction of interest (2 to

20 mm). The large size fraction tailings (>20 mm) accumulate around the classifier (being later dispersed

during the high tide or mechanically redistributed over the beach), while the fine tailings (<2 mm) are

returned directly to the sea as a sediment slurry.

The diamond-bearing gravel is bagged and transported to the nearest processing facility for diamond

recovery.

Figure 4-7: “Walpomp” (beach pumping) mining method

(Source: J. Blood)

4.3.2 COFFER DAM MINING

Surf zone and sub-tidal mining using coffer dams occurs from the high-water mark to potentially up to

approximately 300 m seaward of the low water mark (see Figure 4-8).

This type of mining involves the removal of beach sand overburden with heavy machinery to access target

gravels overlying the bedrock. The submerged bedrock below the beach sand is often below mean sea

level, hence the construction of sea walls to prevent flooding during mining operations. Temporary coffer

dam construction is considered to be an efficient mining method for accessing diamondiferous gravels

located below the low water mark. The material used to construct these breakwaters typically consists of a

basal core of quarried material, which gets progressively coarser towards the outside and is covered by an

outer layer of large armour rock. Coffer dams are constantly maintained to restrict the inflow of sea water

into the active mining block. When sea water ingresses into the mining area, submersible pumps are used

to pump the water back into the sea.

Overburden material from the mine block is commonly used in the construction/maintenance of the sea

wall. The target gravel is screened at a nearby infield screening facility and the separated size fraction is

transported to the nearest processing plant for further treatment.

Coffer dams are typically in operation for up to a three year period after which the berms are levelled to the

low water mark and the sea then naturally under wave action remediates the former mined area.

SLR & PRM Page 4-8

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 4-8: Coffer dam mining operations in Mining Right 554MRC (2017)

(Source: Google Earth)

4.3.3 INTER-TIDAL BEACH MINING USING MOBILE PUMP UNITS

An alternative mining technique deployed in the intertidal (surf) zone is a dredging unit mounted on an

excavator or on a jack-up rig (see Figures 4-9 and 4-10). Both systems make use of a remotely operated

articulated dredging arm, which scours / dredges the seafloor.

Areas with generally lower grade, larger volumes of gravel and thicker sand overburden are optimally

mined using these methods.

Material is pumped from the seafloor and screened through a classifier, which is normally mounted

on-board the mining platform or mobile unit. The screened material is pumped ashore into storage bins,

which are transported to the onshore processing plants for diamond recovery.

Figure 4-9: Dredging unit mounted on an excavator

(Source: Hannesko)

SLR & PRM Page 4-9

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 4-10: Jack-up rig / platform

(Source: Namdeb/ADP)

4.3.4 LARGE VESSEL MINING

Large vessel mining operations are restricted to Sea Concessions 1c, 1b & 4b, however, vessel mounted

dredge pump operations may access the deeper portions of the ‘a’ concessions. A variety of methods are

used to mine these marine diamonds deposits depending on the water depth and topography of the sea

floor. These methods are described below.

4.3.4.1 Vessel-based remote dredge pump mining

This mining method is typically used in the ‘a’ and ‘b’ sea concessions in water depths typically less than

30 m. These vessels are smaller than those used in remote airlift and crawler mining described below and

can operate out of Port Nolloth and Alexander Bay.

The mining system uses vessel mounted pumps to dredge sediments from the seabed via hoses and a

digging head (see Figure 4-11). The mining tool consists of a steel pipe fitted with a mining head, which

can also be fitted with high pressure water jetting nozzles to agitate the gravel on the seabed. The mining

tool is suspended over the side from the aft or along either side of the vessel.

On-board screening and processing is self-contained with final recovery of diamonds taking pace on the

vessel.

4.3.4.2 Vessel-based airlift mining

This system is similar in many respects to the dredge pump mining method. However, in the airlift mining

method air is pumped down to the digging head, which creates a pressure differential between aerated

seawater in the return hose and that of ambient seawater, which in turn draws up (sucks) the gravel and

sediment to the surface. This mining method can operate in greater water depths and is typically used in the

‘b’ and ‘c’ concessions in water depths typically between 30 m and 150 m.

The airlift mining system typically comprises a suspended steel mining tool, suction hoses and on-board air

compressors to supply the air chamber at the digging head (see Figure 4-12). The mining tool itself

SLR & PRM Page 4-10

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

consists of a steel pipe fitted with a digging head, which is an opening fitted with ”grizzly” bars to allow

sized gravel to pass through and prevent blockages in the delivery hose. The digging head can be fitted

with high pressure water jetting nozzles, which agitates the gravel on the seabed. The mining tool is

suspended from davits (cranes) situated along the side of the vessel. On-board screening and processing

is self-contained with final recovery of diamonds taking pace on the vessel.

Figure 4-11: Illustration of remote dredge pump mining (Source: GEMPR, Alexkor)

Figure 4-12: Illustration of airlift mining

(Source: BENCO)

SLR & PRM Page 4-11

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

4.3.4.3 Vessel-based remote crawler mining

The mining method uses a remotely operated crawler to mine in the ‘b’ and ‘c’ sea concessions in water

depths between 30 m and 200 m (see Figure 4-13). The mining vessel operates on a 4-point mooring

spread with dynamic positioning to assist the crawler mining operations.

Prior to the launching of the seabed crawler, the vessel anchors over a planned mining area. The crawler

is then lowered to the seabed by a winch system over the stern of the vessel. The seabed crawler is track-

driven and equipped with a dredge pump system, hydraulic power pack and a jet-water system to facilitate

the agitation and suction of unconsolidated surficial sediments up to the mining vessel. The seabed

crawler can remove seabed sediments to a depth of up to 5 m in a set path within the mine target area.

As the sediment is removed from the seabed it is pumped to the surface for on-board screening and

processing. Unwanted material is discarded overboard. The mining and processing operation is fully self-

contained on the mining vessel with final recovery of diamonds taking place on the vessel.

Figure 4-13: Illustration of remote crawler mining

(Source: De Beers Group)

SLR & PRM Page 4-12

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

SLR & PRM Page 5-1

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5 DESCRIPTION OF THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT

This chapter provides a description of the biophysical and socio-economic environment along the South

African West Coast focusing primarily on the area between the Orange River mouth and Hondeklipbaai. The

chapter provides the marine baseline environmental context within which the proposed marine diamond

mining would take place.

5.1 MARINE ENVIRONMENT

5.1.1 GEOPHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

5.1.1.1 Bathymetry

The continental shelf along the West Coast is generally wide and deep, although large variations in both

depth and width occur. The shelf maintains a general north-northwest trend, widening north of Cape

Columbine and reaching its widest off the Orange River (180 km) (see Figure 5-1). Between Cape

Columbine and the Orange River, there is usually a double shelf break, with the distinct inner and outer

slopes, separated by a gently sloping ledge. The immediate nearshore area consists mainly of a narrow

(about 8 km wide) rugged rocky zone, sloping steeply seawards to a depth of around 80 m. The middle and

outer shelf typically lacks relief, sloping gently seawards before reaching the shelf break at a depth of

approximately 300 m.

Figure 5-1: Mining Licence Areas in relation to the regional bathymetry and showing proximity of

prominent seabed features

SLR & PRM Page 5-2

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Banks on the continental shelf include the Orange Bank (Shelf or Cone), a shallow (160 - 190 m) zone that

reaches maximal widths (180 km) offshore of the Orange River, and Child’s Bank, situated approximately

150 km offshore at about 31°S, and approximately 200 km south-south-west of Sea Concession 4b

(see Figure 5-1). Tripp Seamount is a geological feature located approximately 250 km to the west-south-

west of Sea Concession 1c, which rises from approximately 1 000 m to a depth of 150 m.

5.1.1.2 Coastal and inner-shelf geology and seabed geomorphology

Figure 5-2 illustrates the distribution of seabed surface sediment types off the northern West Coast of South

Africa. The inner shelf is underlain by Precambrian bedrock (also referred to as Pre-Mesozoic basement),

whilst the middle and outer shelf areas are composed of Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments (Dingle 1973;

Birch et al. 1976; Rogers 1977; Rogers & Bremner 1991).

As a result of erosion on the continental shelf, the unconsolidated surface sediment cover is generally thin,

often less than 1 m. Sediments are finer seawards, changing from sand on the inner and outer shelves to

muddy sand and sandy mud in deeper water. However, this general pattern has been modified considerably

by biological deposition (large areas of shelf sediments contain high levels of calcium carbonate) and

localised river input.

An approximately 500 km long mud belt (up to 40 km wide, and of 15 m average thickness) is situated over

the inner edge of the middle shelf between the Orange River and St Helena Bay (Birch et al. 1976). Further

offshore, sediment is dominated by muddy sands, sandy muds, mud and some sand. The continental slope,

seaward of the shelf break, has a smooth seafloor, underlain by calcareous ooze.

Figure 5-2: Mining Licence Areas in relation to sediment distribution on the continental shelf

(Adapted from Rogers 1977)

SLR & PRM Page 5-3

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Present day sedimentation is limited to input from the Orange River. As these sediments are generally

transported northward, most of the sediment in the project area is considered to be relict deposits by now

ephemeral rivers active during wetter climates in the past. The Orange River, when in flood, still contributes

largely to the mud belt as suspended sediment is carried southward by poleward flow. In this context, the

absence of large sediment bodies on the inner shelf reflects on the paucity of terrigenous sediment being

introduced by the few rivers that presently drain the South African West Coast coastal plain.

5.1.2 BIOPHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

5.1.2.1 Wind patterns

Winds are one of the main physical drivers of the nearshore Benguela region, both on an oceanic scale,

generating the heavy and consistent south-westerly swells that impact this coast, and locally, contributing to

the northward-flowing longshore currents, and being the prime mover of sediments in the terrestrial

environment. Consequently, physical processes are characterised by the average seasonal wind patterns,

and substantial episodic changes in these wind patterns have strong effects on the entire Benguela region.

The prevailing winds in the Benguela region are controlled by the perennial South Atlantic subtropical

anticyclone, the eastward moving mid-latitude cyclones south of southern Africa, and the seasonal

atmospheric pressure field over the subcontinent. The south Atlantic anticyclone undergoes seasonal

variations, being strongest in the austral summer, when it also attains its southernmost extension, lying south

west and south of the subcontinent. In winter, the south Atlantic anticyclone weakens and migrates north-

westwards. These seasonal changes result in substantial differences between the typical summer and

winter wind patterns in the region, as the southern hemisphere anti-cyclonic high-pressures system, and the

associated series of cold fronts, moves northwards in winter, and southwards in summer.

The strongest winds occur in summer, during which winds blow 99% of the time. Virtually all winds in

summer come from the south-east to south-west (see Figure 5-3), strongly dominated by southerlies which

occur over 40% of the time, averaging 20 - 30 kts and reaching speeds in excess of 100 km/h (60 kts).

South-easterlies are almost as common, blowing about one-third of the time, and also averaging 20 - 30 kts.

The combination of these southerly/south-easterly winds drives the offshore movements of surface water,

and the resultant strong upwelling of nutrient-rich bottom waters, which characterise this region.

Winter remains dominated by southerly to south-easterly winds, but the closer proximity of the winter cold-

front systems results in a significant south-westerly to north-westerly component (see Figure 5-3). This

‘reversal’ from the summer condition results in cessation of upwelling, movement of warmer mid-Atlantic

water shorewards and breakdown of the strong thermoclines which develop in summer. There are more

calms in winter, occurring about 3% of the time, and wind speeds generally do not reach the maximum

speeds of summer. However, the westerlies winds blow in synchrony with the prevailing south-westerly

swell direction, resulting in heavier swell conditions in winter.

Another important wind type that occurs along the West Coast is the katabatic ‘berg’ wind during the

formation of a high-pressure system (lasting a few days) over, or just south of, the south-eastern part of the

subcontinent. This results in the movement of dry adiabatically heated air offshore (typically at 29 knots).

At times, such winds may blow along a large proportion of the West Coast north of Cape Point and can be

intensified by local topography. Aeolian transport of fine sand and dust may occur up to 150 km offshore.

SLR & PRM Page 5-4

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-3: VOS Wind Speed vs Wind Direction data for the offshore area 28°-29°S; 15°-16°E

(Oranjemund)

(Source: Voluntary Observing Ship data from the Southern Africa Data Centre for Oceanography)

SLR & PRM Page 5-5

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.2.2 Large-scale circulation and coastal currents

The West Coast is strongly influenced by the Benguela Current, with current velocities in continental shelf

areas ranging between 10–30 cm/s (Boyd & Oberholster 1994). On its western side, flow is more transient

and characterised by large eddies shed from the retroflection of the Agulhas Current. The Benguela current

widens northwards to 750 km, with flows being predominantly wind-forced, barotropic and fluctuating

between poleward and equatorward flow (Shillington et al. 1990; Nelson & Hutchings 1983). Fluctuation

periods of these flows are 3 - 10 days, although the long-term mean current residual is in an approximate

north-west (alongshore) direction. Near-bottom shelf flow is mainly poleward (Nelson 1989) with low

velocities of typically 5 cm/s.

The major feature of the Benguela Current is upwelling and the consequent high nutrient supply to surface

waters leads to high biological production and large fish stocks. The prevailing longshore, equatorward

winds move nearshore surface water northwards and offshore. To balance the displaced water, cold, deeper

water wells up inshore. Although the rate and intensity of upwelling fluctuates with seasonal variations in

wind patterns, the most intense upwelling tends to occur where the shelf is narrowest and the wind strongest.

There are three upwelling centres in the southern Benguela, namely the Namaqua (30°S), Cape Columbine

(33°S) and Cape Point (34°S) upwelling cells (Taunton-Clark 1985) (Figure 5-4). The project area falls into

the Namaqua cell. Upwelling in these cells is seasonal, with maximum upwelling occurring between

September and March. An example of one such strong upwelling event in December 1996, followed by

relaxation of upwelling and intrusion of warm Agulhas waters from the south, is shown in the satellite images

in Figure 5-4.

Figure 5-4: Satellite sea-surface temperature images showing upwelling intensity in the three

upwelling cells along the South African West Coast on two days in December 1996.

The location of the Sea Concession 3a, 4a and 4b (white polygon) is indicted

(Source: Lane & Carter 1999)

SLR & PRM Page 5-6

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Where the Agulhas Current passes the southern tip of the Agulhas Bank (Agulhas Retroflection area), it may

shed a filament of warm surface water that moves north-westward along the shelf edge towards Cape Point,

and Agulhas Rings, which similarly move north-westwards into the South Atlantic Ocean. These rings may

extend to the seafloor and west of Cape Town may split, disperse or join with other rings (see Figure 5-4).

During the process of ring formation, intrusions of cold sub-Antarctic water moves into the South Atlantic.

The contrast in warm (nutrient-poor) and cold (nutrient-rich) water is thought to be reflected in the presence

of cetaceans and large migratory pelagic fish species (Best 2007).

5.1.2.3 Waves and tides

Most of the West Coast of southern Africa is classified as exposed, experiencing strong wave action, rating

between 13-17 on the 20 point exposure scale (McLachlan 1980). Much of the coastline is, therefore,

impacted by heavy south-westerly swells generated in the roaring forties, as well as significant sea waves

generated locally by the prevailing southerly winds. The peak wave energy periods fall in the range 9.7 to

15.5 seconds.

Typical seasonal swell-height rose-plots off Oranjemund are shown in Figure 5-5. The wave regime along

the southern African West Coast shows only moderate seasonal variation in direction, with virtually all swells

throughout the year coming from the south to south-west direction. Winter swells are strongly dominated by

those from the south-west to south-south-west, which occur almost 80% of the time, and typically exceed

2 m in height, averaging about 3 m, and often attaining over 5 m. With wind speeds capable of reaching 100

km/h during heavy winter south-westerly storms, winter swell heights can exceed 10 m.

In comparison, summer swells tend to be smaller on average, typically around 2 m, not reaching the

maximum swell heights of winter. There is also a slightly more pronounced southerly swell component in

summer. These southerly swells tend to be wind-induced, with shorter wave periods (approximately

8 seconds), and are generally steeper than swell waves (CSIR 1996). These wind-induced southerly waves

are relatively local and, although less powerful, tend to work together with the strong southerly winds of

summer to cause the northward-flowing nearshore surface currents, and result in substantial nearshore

sediment mobilisation, and northwards transport, by the combined action of currents, wind and waves.

In common with the rest of the southern African coast, tides are semi-diurnal, with a total range of some

1.5 m at spring tide, but only 0.6 m during neap tide periods.

5.1.2.4 Water

South Atlantic Central Water (SACW) comprises the bulk of the seawater in the project area, either in its

pure form in the deeper regions or mixed with previously upwelled water of the same origin on the

continental shelf (Nelson & Hutchings 1983). Salinities range between 34.5‰ and 35.5‰ (Shannon 1985).

Seawater temperatures on the continental shelf typically vary between 6°C and 16°C. Well-developed

thermal fronts exist, demarcating the seaward boundary of the upwelled water. Upwelling filaments are

characteristic of these offshore thermal fronts, occurring as surface streamers of cold water, typically 50 km

wide and extending beyond the normal offshore extent of the upwelling cell. Such fronts typically have a

lifespan of a few days to a few weeks, with the filamentous mixing area extending up to 625 km offshore.

The continental shelf waters of the Benguela system are characterised by low oxygen concentrations,

especially on the bottom. SACW itself has depressed oxygen concentrations (~80% saturation value), but

lower oxygen concentrations (<40% saturation) frequently occur (Bailey et al. 1985; Chapman & Shannon

1985).

SLR & PRM Page 5-7

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-5: VOS Wave Height vs Wave Direction data for the offshore area (28°-29°S; 15°-16°E

recorded during the period 1 February 1906 and 12 June 2006))

(Source: Voluntary Observing Ship data from the Southern African Data Centre for Oceanography)

SLR & PRM Page 5-8

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Nutrient concentrations of upwelled water attain 20 µm nitrate-nitrogen, 1.5 µm phosphate and 15-20 µm

silicate, indicating nutrient enrichment (Chapman & Shannon 1985). This is mediated by nutrient

regeneration from biogenic material in the sediments (Bailey et al. 1985). Modification of these peak

concentrations depends upon phytoplankton uptake which varies according to phytoplankton biomass and

production rate. The range of nutrient concentrations can thus be large but, in general, concentrations are

high.

5.1.2.5 Upwelling and organic inputs

As noted previously, the project area falls into the Namaqua upwelling cell (see Section 5.1.2.2).

The cold, upwelled water is rich in inorganic nutrients, the major contributors being various forms of nitrates,

phosphates and silicates (Chapman & Shannon 1985). During upwelling the comparatively nutrient-poor

surface waters are displaced by enriched deep water, supporting substantial seasonal primary phytoplankton

production. These plankton blooms in turn serve as the basis for a rich food chain up through pelagic

baitfish (anchovy, pilchard, round-herring and others), to predatory fish (snoek), mammals (primarily seals

and dolphins) and seabirds (jackass penguins, cormorants, pelicans, terns and others). High phytoplankton

productivity in the upper layers again depletes the nutrients in these surface waters. This results in a wind-

related cycle of plankton production, mortality, sinking of plankton detritus and eventual nutrient re-

enrichment occurring below the thermocline as the phytoplankton decays.

Balanced multi-species ecosystem models have estimated that during the 1990s the Benguela Region

supported biomasses of 76.9 tons/km2 of phytoplankton and 31.5 tons/km

2 of zooplankton alone (Shannon et

al. 2003). Thirty-six percent of the phytoplankton and 5% of the zooplankton are estimated to be lost to the

seabed annually. This natural annual input of millions of tons of organic material onto the seabed off the

southern African West Coast has a substantial effect on the ecosystems of the Benguela region. It provides

most of the food requirements of the particulate and filter-feeding benthic communities that inhabit the sandy-

muds of this area, and results in the high organic content of the muds in the region. As most of the organic

detritus is not directly consumed, it enters the seabed decomposition cycle, resulting in subsequent depletion

of oxygen in deeper waters.

An associated phenomenon ubiquitous to the Benguela system are red-tides (dinoflagellate and/or ciliate

blooms) (see Shannon & Pillar 1985; Pitcher 1998). Also referred to as Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs), these

red-tides can reach very large proportions, extending over several square kilometres of ocean. Toxic

dinoflagellate species can cause extensive mortalities of fish and shellfish through direct poisoning, while

degradation of organic-rich material derived from both toxic and non-toxic blooms results in oxygen depletion

of subsurface water.

5.1.2.6 Low oxygen events

The continental shelf waters of the Benguela system are characterised by low oxygen concentrations with

less than 40% saturation occurring frequently (e.g. Visser 1969; Bailey et al. 1985). The low oxygen

concentrations are attributed to nutrient remineralisation in the bottom waters of the system (Chapman &

Shannon 1985). The absolute rate of this is dependent upon the net organic material build-up in the

sediments, with the carbon rich mud deposits playing an important role. As the mud on the shelf is

distributed in discrete patches (see Figure 5-2), there are corresponding preferential areas for the formation

of oxygen-poor water. The two main areas of low-oxygen water formation in the southern Benguela region

are in the Orange River Bight and St Helena Bay (Bailey 1991; Shannon & O’Toole 1998; Bailey 1999;

Fossing et al. 2000).

SLR & PRM Page 5-9

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The spatial distribution of oxygen-poor water in each of the areas is subject to short- and medium-term

variability in the volume of hypoxic water that develops. It has been shown that the occurrence of low

oxygen water off Lambert’s Bay is seasonal, with highest development in summer/autumn (De Decker 1970).

Bailey & Chapman (1991), on the other hand, demonstrated that in the St Helena Bay area daily variability

exists as a result of downward flux of oxygen through thermoclines and short-term variations in upwelling

intensity. Subsequent upwelling processes can move this low-oxygen water up onto the inner shelf, and into

nearshore waters, often with devastating effects on marine communities.

Periodic low oxygen events in the nearshore region can have catastrophic effects on the marine communities

leading to large-scale stranding of rock lobsters, and mass mortalities of marine biota and fish (Matthews &

Pitcher 1996; Pitcher 1998; Cockcroft et al. 2000). The development of anoxic conditions as a result of the

decomposition of huge amounts of organic matter generated by algal blooms is the main cause for these

mortalities and walkouts. The blooms develop over a period of unusually calm wind conditions when sea

surface temperatures were high. Algal blooms usually occur during summer-autumn (February to April) but

can also develop in winter during the ‘berg’ wind periods, when similar warm windless conditions occur for

extended periods.

5.1.2.7 Turbidity

Turbidity is a measure of the degree to which the water loses its transparency due to the presence of

suspended particulate matter. Total Suspended Particulate Matter (TSPM) can be divided into Particulate

Organic Matter (POM) and Particulate Inorganic Matter (PIM), the ratios between them varying considerably.

The POM usually consists of detritus, bacteria, phytoplankton and zooplankton, and serves as a source of

food for filter-feeders. Seasonal microphyte production associated with upwelling events will play an

important role in determining the concentrations of POM in coastal waters. PIM, on the other hand, is

primarily of geological origin consisting of fine sands, silts and clays. Off Namaqualand, the PIM loading in

nearshore waters is strongly related to natural inputs from the Orange River (see Figure 5-6) or from ‘berg’

wind events . ‘Berg’ wind events can potentially contribute the same order of magnitude of sediment input as

the annual estimated input of total sediment by the Orange River (Zoutendyk 1992, 1995; Shannon &

O’Toole 1998; Lane & Carter 1999).

Concentrations of suspended particulate matter in shallow coastal waters can vary both spatially and

temporally, typically ranging from a few mg/l to several tens of mg/l (Fegley et al. 1992). Field

measurements of TSPM and PIM concentrations in the Benguela current system have indicated that outside

of major flood events, background concentrations of coastal and continental shelf suspended sediments are

generally <12 mg/l, showing significant long-shore variation (Zoutendyk 1995). Considerably higher

concentrations of PIM have, however, been reported from southern African West Coast waters under

stronger wave conditions associated with high tides and storms, or under flood conditions. During storm

events, concentrations near the seabed may even reach up to 10,000 mg/l (Miller & Sternberg 1988). In the

vicinity of the Orange River mouth, where river outflow strongly influences the turbidity of coastal waters,

measured concentrations ranged from 14.3 mg/l at Alexander Bay just south of the mouth (Zoutendyk 1995)

to peak values of 7 400 mg/l immediately upstream of the river mouth during the 1988 Orange River flood

(Bremner et al. 1990).

The major source of turbidity in the swell-influenced nearshore areas off the West Coast is the redistribution

of fine inner shelf sediments by long-period Southern Ocean swells. The current velocities typical of the

Benguela (10-30 cm/s) are capable of resuspending and transporting considerable quantities of sediment

equatorwards. Under relatively calm wind conditions, however, much of the suspended fraction (silt and clay)

that remains in suspension for longer periods becomes entrained in the slow poleward undercurrent

(Shillington et al. 1990; Rogers & Bremner 1991).

SLR & PRM Page 5-10

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-6: Mining Licence areas in relation to a substantial sediment plume emanating from the

Orange River Mouth on 11 April 2001

(Satellite image source: eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov)

Superimposed on the suspended fine fraction, is the northward littoral drift of coarser bedload sediments,

parallel to the coastline. This northward, nearshore transport is generated by the predominantly south-

westerly swell and wind-induced waves. Longshore sediment transport varies considerably in the shore-

perpendicular dimension, being substantially higher in the surf-zone than at depth, due to high turbulence

and convective flows associated with breaking waves, which suspend and mobilise sediment (Smith &

Mocke 2002).

On the inner and middle continental shelf, the ambient currents are insufficient to transport coarse sediments

typical of those depths, and re-suspension and shoreward movement of these by wave-induced currents

occur primarily under storm conditions. Data from Port Nolloth indicates that 2 m waves are capable of

re-suspending medium sands (200 µm diameter) at approximately 10 m depth, whilst 6 m waves achieve this

at approximately 42 m depth. Low-amplitude, long-period waves will, however, penetrate even deeper.

Most of the sediment shallower than 90 m can therefore be subject to re-suspension and transport by heavy

swells (Lane & Carter 1999).

Mean sediment deposition is naturally higher near the seafloor due to constant re-suspension of coarse and

fine PIM by tides and wind-induced waves. Aggregation or flocculation of small particles into larger

aggregates occurs as a result of cohesive properties of some fine sediments in saline waters. The

combination of re-suspension of seabed sediments by heavy swells, and the faster settling rates of larger

inorganic particles, typically causes higher sediment concentrations near the seabed. Significant

SLR & PRM Page 5-11

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

re-suspension of sediments can also occur up into the water column under stronger wave conditions

associated with high tides and storms. Re-suspension can result in dramatic increases in PIM

concentrations within a few hours (Sheng et al. 1994). Wind speed and direction have also been found to

influence the amount of material re-suspended.

Although natural turbidity of seawater is a global phenomenon, there has been a worldwide increase of water

turbidity and sediment load in coastal areas as a consequence of anthropogenic activities. These include

dredging associated with the construction of harbours and coastal installations, beach replenishment,

accelerated runoff of eroded soils as a result of deforestation or poor agricultural practices, discharges from

terrestrial, coastal and marine mining operations (Airoldi 2003), and sediment plumes as a result of bottom

trawling fishery activities. Such increase of sediment loads has been recognised as a major threat to marine

biodiversity at a global scale (UNEP 1995).

5.1.3 BIOLOGICAL OCEANOGRAPHY

Biogeographically, the marine mining right areas fall into the cold temperate Namaqua Bioregion, which

extends from Sylvia Hill, north of Lüderitz in Namibia southwards to Cape Columbine (Emanuel et al. 1992;

Lombard et al. 2004) (see Figure 5-7). The coastal, wind-induced upwelling characterising the Western

Cape coastline, is the principle physical process which shapes the marine ecology of the southern Benguela

region. The Benguela system is characterised by the presence of cold surface water, high biological

productivity, and highly variable physical, chemical and biological conditions. The West Coast is, however,

characterised by low marine species richness and low endemicity (Awad et al. 2002).

Communities within marine habitats are largely ubiquitous throughout the southern African West Coast

region, being particular only to substrate type (i.e. hard vs. soft bottom), exposure to wave action, or water

depth. These biological communities consist of many hundreds of species, often displaying considerable

temporal and spatial variability (even at small scales). The marine mining right areas extend from the high

water mark to just beyond the 100 m depth contour (see Figure 4-1). The benthic and coastal habitats of

South Africa have been mapped by Sink et al. (2011). Those specific to the study area can be broadly

grouped into:

• Sandy intertidal and unconsolidated subtidal substrates, and

• Intertidal rocky shores and subtidal reefs.

The biological communities ‘typical’ of these habitats are described briefly below, focussing both on

dominant, commercially important and conspicuous species, as well as potentially threatened or sensitive

species, which may be affected by the proposed mining activities.

5.1.3.1 Threat status

The benthic and coastal habitats potentially affected by diamond mining are shown in Figures 5-8 to 5.10.

Rocky shore and sandy beach habitats are generally not particularly sensitive to disturbance with natural

recovery occurring within 2 to 5 years. However, much of the Namaqualand coastline has been subjected to

decades of disturbance by shore-based diamond mining operations (Penney et al. 2008). These cumulative

impacts and the lack of biodiversity protection have resulted in some of the coastal habitat types in

Namaqualand being assigned a threat status of ‘critically endangered’ (Lombard et al. 2004; Sink et al. 2012)

(Table 10).

Four ‘critically endangered’ habitats, one ‘endangered’ habitat and one habitat ‘vulnerable’ habitat fall within

the four marine mining right areas (see Table 5-1).

SLR & PRM Page 5-12

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-7: Marine mining right areas in relation to the South African inshore and offshore

bioregions

(Adapted from Lombard et al. 2004)

Table 5-1: Ecosystem threat status for marine and coastal habitat types in the marine mining

right areas (adapted from Sink et al. 2011). Those habitats potentially affected by

marine mining are shaded

No. Habitat Type Threat Status

1 Namaqua Exposed Rocky Coast Least Threatened

2 Namaqua Hard Inner Shelf Least Threatened

3 Namaqua Inshore Hard Grounds Critically Endangered

4 Namaqua Inshore Reef Critically Endangered

5 Namaqua Mixed Shore Endangered

6 Namaqua Muddy Inner Shelf Least Threatened

7 Namaqua Sandy Inner Shelf Least Threatened

8 Namaqua Sandy Inshore Critically Endangered

9 Namaqua Sheltered Rocky Coast Critically Endangered

10 Namaqua Very Exposed Rocky Coast Vulnerable

11 Southern Benguela Dissipative-Intermediate Sandy Coast Least Threatened

12 Southern Benguela Dissipative Sandy Coast Least Threatened

13 Southern Benguela Estuarine Shore Least Threatened

14 Southern Benguela Intermediate Sandy Coast Least Threatened

15 Southern Benguela Reflective Sandy Coast Least Threatened

16 Southern Benguela Sandy Outer Shelf Least Threatened

SLR & PRM Page 5-13

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-8: Future mining areas (green areas) and Sea Concessions 1a, 1b and 1c in relation to

benthic and coastal habitats off the West Coast

5.1.3.2 Sandy and unconsolidated substrate habitats and biota

The benthic biota of unconsolidated marine sediments constitute invertebrates that live on (epifauna) or

burrow within (infauna) the sediments, and are generally divided into macrofauna (animals >1 mm) and

meiofauna (<1 mm).

5.1.3.2.1 Intertidal sandy beaches

The coastline from Orange River mouth to Kleinzee mouth is dominated by rocky shores, interspersed by

isolated short stretches of sandy shores. Sandy beaches are one of the most dynamic coastal

environments.

With the exception of a few beaches in large bay systems (such as St Helena Bay, Saldanha Bay and Table

Bay), the beaches along the South African West Coast are typically highly exposed. Exposed sandy shores

consist of coupled surf-zone, beach and dune systems, which together form the active littoral sand transport

zone (Short & Hesp 1985).

SLR & PRM Page 5-14

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-9: Future mining areas (red lines) and Sea Concessions 2a and 3a in relation to benthic

and coastal habitats off the West Coast

SLR & PRM Page 5-15

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-10: Future mining areas and Sea Concessions 4a and 4b in relation to benthic and coastal

habitats off the West Coast

SLR & PRM Page 5-16

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The composition of their faunal communities is largely dependent on the interaction of wave energy, beach

slope and sand particle size, which is termed beach morphodynamics. Three morphodynamic beach types

are described: dissipative, reflective and intermediate beaches (McLachlan et al. 1993). Three

morphodynamic beach types are described: dissipative, reflective and intermediate beaches (McLachlan et

al. 1993):

• Dissipative beaches are relatively wide and flat with fine sands and low wave energy. Waves start to

break far from the shore in a series of spilling breakers that ‘dissipate’ their energy along a broad surf

zone. This generates slow swashes with long periods, resulting in less turbulent conditions on the

gently sloping beach face. These beaches usually harbour the richest intertidal faunal communities.

• Reflective beaches in contrast, have high wave energy, and are coarse grained (>500 µm sand) with

narrow and steep intertidal beach faces. The relative absence of a surf-zone causes the waves to

break directly on the shore causing a high turnover of sand. The result is depauperate faunal

communities.

• Intermediate beaches exist between these extremes and have a very variable species composition

(McLachlan et al. 1993; Jaramillo et al. 1995, Soares 2003). This variability is mainly attributable to

the amount and quality of food available. Beaches with a high input of e.g. kelp wrack have a rich and

diverse drift-line fauna, which is sparse or absent on beaches lacking a drift-line (Branch & Griffiths

1988). As a result of the combination of typical beach characteristics, and the special adaptations of

beach fauna to these, beaches act as filters and energy recyclers in the nearshore environment

(Brown & McLachlan 2002).

Numerous methods of classifying beach zonation have been proposed, based either on physical or biological

criteria. The general scheme proposed by Branch & Griffiths (1988) is used below (Figure 5-11),

supplemented by data from various publications on West Coast sandy beach biota (e.g. Bally 1987; Brown et

al. 1989; Soares et al. 1996, 1997; Nel 2001; Nel et al. 2003; Soares 2003; Branch et al. 2010; Harris 2012).

The macrofaunal communities of sandy beaches are generally ubiquitous throughout the southern African

West Coast region, being particular only to substratum type, wave exposure and/or depth zone. Due to the

exposed nature of the coastline in the study area, most beaches are of the intermediate to reflective type.

The macrofauna occurring in the different zones off the beach (Figure 5-12) can be described as follows:

• The supralittoral zone is situated above the high water spring (HWS) tide level, and receives water

input only from large waves at spring high tides or through sea spray. This zone is characterised by a

mixture of air breathing terrestrial and semi-terrestrial fauna, often associated with and feeding on kelp

deposited near or on the drift line. Terrestrial species include a diverse array of beetles and arachnids

and some oligochaetes, while semi-terrestrial fauna include the oniscid isopod Tylos granulatus, and

amphipods of the genus Talorchestia.

• The intertidal zone or mid-littoral zone has a vertical range of about 2 m. This mid-shore region is

characterised by the cirolanid isopods Pontogeloides latipes, Eurydice (longicornis=) kensleyi and

Excirolana natalensis, the polychaetes Scolelepis squamata, Orbinia angrapequensis, Nepthys

hombergii and Lumbrineris tetraura, and amphipods of the families Haustoridae and Phoxocephalidae.

In some areas, juvenile and adult sand mussels Donax serra may also be present in considerable

numbers.

• The inner turbulent zone extends from the Low Water Spring mark to about -2 m depth. The mysid

Gastrosaccus psammodytes (Mysidacea, Crustacea), the ribbon worm Cerebratulus fuscus

(Nemertea), the cumacean Cumopsis robusta (Cumacea) and a variety of polychaetes including

Scolelepis squamata and Lumbrineris tetraura, are typical of this zone, although they generally extend

partially into the midlittoral above. In areas where a suitable swash climate exists, the gastropod Bullia

digitalis (Gastropoda, Mollusca) may also be present in considerable numbers, surfing up and down

the beach in search of carrion.

SLR & PRM Page 5-17

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

• The transition zone spans approximately 2 - 5 m depth beyond the inner turbulent zone. Extreme

turbulence is experienced in this zone, and as a consequence this zone typically harbours the lowest

diversity on sandy beaches. Typical fauna include amphipods such as Cunicus profundus and

burrowing polychaetes such as Cirriformia tentaculata and Lumbrineris tetraura.

• The outer turbulent zone extends below 5 m depth, where turbulence is significantly decreased and

species diversity is again much higher. In addition to the polychaetes found in the transition zone,

other polychaetes in this zone include Pectinaria capensis, and Sabellides ludertizii. The sea pen

Virgularia schultzi (Pennatulacea, Cnidaria) is also common as is a host of amphipod species and the

three spot swimming crab Ovalipes punctatus (Brachyura, Crustacea).

Figure 5-11: Schematic representation of the West Coast intertidal beach zonation. Species

commonly occurring on the Namaqualand beaches are listed

(Adapted from Branch & Branch 1981)

SLR & PRM Page 5-18

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-12: Generalised scheme of zonation on sandy shores

(Modified from Brown & MacLachlan 1990)

5.1.3.2.2 Intertidal sandy beaches

Three macro-infauna communities have been identified on the inner- (0-30 m depth) and mid-shelf

(30-150 m depth) (Karenyi unpublished data) off the West Coast. These are described below.

• The inner-shelf community, which is affected by wave action, is characterised by various mobile

predators (e.g. the gastropod Bullia laevissima and polychaete Nereis sp.), sedentary polychaetes and

isopods.

• The mid-shelf community inhabits the mudbelt and is characterised by the mud prawns Callianassa

sp. and Calocaris barnardi. A second mid-shelf sandy community occurring in sandy sediments is

characterised by various polychaetes including deposit-feeding Spiophanes soederstromi and

Paraprionospio pinnata.

Mostert et al. (2016) similarly reported a distinct community inhabiting the very fine sediments characterising

Sea Concession 1c, with two naturally highly variable assemblages occurring further inshore in Sea

Concession 1b, where sediment types were more variable. Polychaetes, crustaceans and molluscs make up

the largest proportion of individuals, biomass and species on the West Coast, with a total of 57 species being

identified in Sea Concessions 1b and 1c.

The distribution of species within these communities is inherently patchy reflecting the high natural spatial

and temporal variability associated with macro-infauna of unconsolidated sediments (e.g. Kenny et al. 1998;

Kendall & Widdicombe 1999; van Dalfsen et al. 2000; Zajac et al. 2000; Parry et al. 2003), with evidence of

mass mortalities and substantial recruitments recorded on the South African West Coast (Steffani & Pulfrich

2004). Given the state of our current knowledge of South African macro-infauna it is not possible to

determine the threat status or endemicity of macro-infauna species on the West Coast, although such

research is currently underway (N. Karenyi, pers. comm. SANBI and NMMU). The marine component of the

2011 National Biodiversity Assessment (Sink et al. 2012), rated portions of the outer continental shelf on the

West Coast as ‘vulnerable’ and ‘critically endangered’ (see Figures 5-8 to 5-10).

Generally species richness increases from the inner-shelf across the mid-shelf and is influenced by sediment

type (Karenyi unpublished data). The highest total abundance and species diversity was measured in sandy

sediments of the mid-shelf. Biomass is highest in the inshore (± 50 g/m2 wet weight) and decreases across

SLR & PRM Page 5-19

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

the mid-shelf averaging around 30 g/m2 wet weight. This is contrary to Christie (1974) who found that

biomass was greatest in the mudbelt at 80 m depth off Lamberts Bay, to the south of the project area, where

the sediment characteristics and the impact of environmental stressors (such as low oxygen events) are

likely to differ from those occurring further north.

Benthic communities are known to be structured by the complex interplay of a large array of environmental

factors, including water depth, sediment grain size, shear bed stress (a measure of the impact of current

velocity on sediment), oxygen concentration, productivity, organic carbon and seafloor temperature. Other

natural processes operating in the deep water shelf areas of the West Coast can over-ride the suitability of

sediments in determining benthic community structure, and it is likely that periodic intrusion of low oxygen

water masses is a major cause of this variability (Monteiro & van der Plas 2006; Pulfrich et al. 2006). In

areas of frequent oxygen deficiency, benthic communities will be characterised either by species able to

survive chronic low oxygen conditions or colonising and fast-growing species able to rapidly recruit into areas

that have suffered oxygen depletion.

The invertebrate macrofauna are important in the marine benthic environment as they influence major

ecological processes (e.g. remineralisation and flux of organic matter deposited on the sea floor, pollutant

metabolism and sediment stability) and serve as important food source for commercially valuable fish

species and other higher order consumers.

Also associated with soft-bottom substrates are demersal communities that comprise epifauna and bottom-

dwelling vertebrate species, many of which are dependent on the invertebrate benthic macrofauna as a food

source. According to Lange (2012) the continental shelf on the West Coast between depths of 100 m and

250 m, contained a single epifaunal community characterised by the hermit crabs Sympagurus dimorphus

and Parapaguris pilosimanus, the prawn Funchalia woodwardi and the sea urchin Brisaster capensis.

5.1.3.3 Rocky substrate habitats and biota

The biological communities of rocky intertidal and subtidal reefs are generally ubiquitous throughout the

southern African West Coast region, being particular only to wave exposure, turbulence and/or depth zone.

5.1.3.3.1 Intertidal rocky shores

West Coast rocky intertidal shores can be divided into five zones on the basis of their characteristic biological

communities: The Littorina, Upper Balanoid, Lower Balanoid, Cochlear/Argenvillei and the Infratidal Zones

(see Figure 5-13). These biological zones correspond roughly to zones based on tidal heights.

Several studies on the West Coast of southern Africa have documented the important effects of wave action

on the intertidal rocky-shore community. Wave action enhances filter-feeders by increasing the

concentration and turnover of particulate food, leading to an elevation of overall biomass despite a low

species diversity (McQuaid & Branch 1985, Bustamante & Branch 1995a, 1996a, Bustamante et al. 1997).

Conversely, sheltered shores are diverse with a relatively low biomass, and only in relatively sheltered

embayments does drift kelp accumulate and provide a vital support for kelp trapping limpets. In the subtidal,

these differences diminish as wave exposure is moderated with depth.

SLR & PRM Page 5-20

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-13: Schematic representation of the West Coast intertidal zonation

(Adapted from Branch & Branch 1981)

SLR & PRM Page 5-21

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Biota found in these different habitats is described below.

• The uppermost part of the shore is the supralittoral fringe, which is the part of the shore that is most

exposed to air, perhaps having more in common with the terrestrial environment. The supralittoral is

characterised by low species diversity, with the tiny periwinkle Afrolittorina knysnaensis, and the red

alga Porphyra capensis constituting the most common macroscopic life.

• The upper mid-littoral or upper balanoid zone is characterised by the limpet Scutellastra granularis,

which is present on all shores. The gastropods Oxystele variegata, Nucella dubia and Helcion

pectunculus are variably present, as are low densities of the barnacles Tetraclita serrata, Octomeris

angulosa and Chthalamus dentatus. Flora is best represented by the green algae Ulva spp.

• Toward the lower mid-littoral or lower balanoid zone, biological communities are determined by

exposure to wave action. On sheltered and moderately exposed shores, a diversity of algae abounds,

namely green algae; brown algae – Splachnidium rugosum; and red algae – Aeodes orbitosa,

Mazzaella (=Iridaea) capensis, Gigartina polycarpa (=radula), Sarcothalia (=Gigartina) stiriata and with

increasing wave exposure Plocamium rigidum and P. cornutum and Champia lumbricalis. The

gastropods Cymbula granatina and Burnupena spp. are also common, as is the reef building

polychaete Gunnarea capensis, and the small cushion starfish Patiriella exigua. On more exposed

shores, the alien mussel Mytilus galloprovinciali is found. It is now the most abundant and widespread

invasive marine species along the entire West Coast and parts of the South Coast (Robinson et al.

2005). Recently, another alien invasive has been recorded, the acorn barnacle Balanus glandul.

• Along the sublittoral fringe or cochlear zone, the large kelp-trapping limpet Scutellastra argenvillei

dominates forming dense, almost monospecific stands. Similarly, C. granatina is the dominant grazer

on more sheltered shores. On more exposed shores M. galloprovincialis dominates and as the cover

of M. galloprovincialis increases, the abundance and size of S. argenvillei declines. Semi-exposed

shores do, however, offer a refuge preventing global extinction of the limpet. The anemone Aulactinia

reynaudi, numerous whelk species and the sea urchin Parechinus angulosus are also found. Very

recently, the invasion of West Coast rocky shores by another mytilid, the small Semimytilus algosus,

was noted (de Greef et al. 2013).

5.1.3.3.2 Rocky habitats and kelp beds

Biological communities of the rocky sublittoral can be broadly grouped into an inshore zone from the

sublittoral fringe to a depth of about 10 m dominated by flora and an offshore zone below 10 m depth

dominated by fauna.

From the sublittoral fringe to a depth of between 5 and 10 m, the benthos is largely dominated by algae, in

particular two species of kelp, namely the canopy forming kelp Ecklonia maxima (see Figure 5-14) and the

smaller Laminaria pallida, which forms a sub-canopy to a height of about 2 m. Ecklonia maxima is the

dominant species from west of Cape Agulhas to north of Cape Columbine, but decreasing in abundance

northwards. Laminaria pallida becomes the dominant kelp north of Cape Columbine and thus in the project

area, extending from Danger Point east of Cape Agulhas to Rocky Point in northern Namibia (Stegenga et al.

1997; Rand 2006).

Kelp beds absorb and dissipate much of the typically high wave energy reaching the shore, thereby

providing important partially-sheltered habitats for a high diversity of marine flora and fauna, resulting in

diverse and typical kelp-forest communities being established. There is substantial spatial and temporal

variability in the density and biomass of kelp beds, depending on the action of storms, seabed topography,

and the presence or absence of sand and grazers.

SLR & PRM Page 5-22

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-14: The canopy-forming kelp Ecklonia maxima provides an important habitat for a

diversity of marine biota

(Photo: Geoff Spiby)

Growing beneath the kelp canopy, and epiphytically on the kelps themselves, are a diversity of understorey

algae. Representative algae include Botryocarpa prolifera, Neuroglossum binderianum, Botryoglossum

platycarpum, Hymenena venosa and Rhodymenia (=Epymenia) obtusa, various coralline algae, as well as

subtidal extensions of some algae occurring primarily in the intertidal zones (Bolton 1986). Epiphytic species

include Polysiphonia virgata, Gelidium vittatum (=Suhria vittata) and Carpoblepharis flaccida. In particular,

the presence of coralline crusts is thought to be a key factor in supporting a rich shallow-water community by

providing substrate, refuge and food to a wide variety of infaunal and epifaunal invertebrates (Chenelot et al.

2008).

The sublittoral invertebrate fauna is dominated by suspension and filter-feeders, such as the mussels

Aulacomya ater and Choromytilus meriodonalis, and the Cape reef worm Gunnarea capensis, and a variety

of sponges and sea cucumbers. Grazers are less common, with most herbivory being restricted to grazing

of juvenile algae or debris-feeding on detached macrophytes. The dominant herbivore is the sea urchin

Parechinus angulosus, with lesser grazing pressure from limpets, the isopod Paridotea reticulata and the

amphipod Ampithoe humeralis. The abalone Haliotis midae, an important commercial species present in

kelp beds south of Cape Columbine, but is naturally absent north thereof.

Key predators in the sub-littoral include the commercially important West Coast rock lobster Jasus lalandii

and the octopus Octopus vulgaris. The rock lobster acts as a keystone species as it influences community

structure via predation on a wide range of benthic organisms (Mayfield et al. 2000) including the reduction in

density, or even elimination, of black mussel Choromytilus meriodonalis, and ribbed mussels Aulacomya

ater.

SLR & PRM Page 5-23

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Of lesser importance as predators, although numerically significant, are various starfish, feather and brittle

stars, and gastropods, including the whelks Nucella spp. and Burnupena spp. Fish species commonly found

in kelp beds off the West Coast include hottentot Pachymetopon blochii, two tone finger fin Chirodactylus

brachydactylus, red fingers Cheilodactylus fasciatus, galjoen Dichistius capensis, rock suckers

Chorisochismus dentex and the catshark Haploblepharus pictus (Branch et al. 2010).

5.1.3.3.3 Deep water coral and seamount communities

Deep water corals are benthic filter-feeders and generally occur at depths below 150 m with some species

being recorded from as deep as 3 000 m. Some species form reefs while others are smaller and remain

solitary. Corals add structural complexity to otherwise uniform seabed habitats thereby creating areas of

high biological diversity (Breeze et al. 1997; MacIssac et al. 2001).

Two geological features of note in the vicinity of marine mining right areas are Child’s Bank, situated roughly

150 km offshore at about 31°S (approximately 200 km south-south-west of Sea Concession 4b), and Tripp

Seamount situated approximately 250 km offshore at about 29°40’S and some 250 km to the west-south-

west of Sea Concession 1c. Child’s Bank was described by Dingel et al. (1987) to be a carbonate mound

(bioherm). Composed of sediments and the calcareous deposits from an accumulation of carbonate

skeletons of sessile organisms (e.g. cold-water coral, foraminifera or marl), such features typically have

topographic relief, forming isolated seabed knolls in otherwise low profile homogenous seabed habitats

(Kopaska-Merkel & Haywick 2001; Kenyon et al. 2003, Wheeler et al. 2005, Colman et al. 2005). Features

such as banks, knolls and seamounts (referred to collectively here as “seamounts”), which protrude into the

water column, are subject to, and interact with, the water currents surrounding them. The effects of such

seabed features on the surrounding water masses can include the upwelling of relatively cool, nutrient-rich

water into nutrient-poor surface water thereby resulting in higher productivity (Clark et al. 1999), which can in

turn strongly influence the distribution of organisms on and around seamounts.

Evidence of enrichment of bottom-associated communities and high abundances of demersal fishes has

been regularly reported over such seabed features. They provide an important habitat for commercial deep

water fish stocks such as orange roughy, oreos, alfonsino and Patagonian toothfish, which aggregate around

these features for either spawning or feeding (Koslow 1996). Such complex benthic ecosystems in turn

enhance foraging opportunities for many other predators, serving as mid-ocean focal points for a variety of

pelagic species with large ranges (turtles, tunas and billfish, pelagic sharks, cetaceans and pelagic seabirds).

Seamounts thus serve as feeding grounds, spawning and nursery grounds and possibly navigational

markers for a large number of species (SPRFMA 2007).

Enhanced currents, steep slopes and volcanic rocky substrata, in combination with locally generated detritus,

favour the development of suspension feeders in the benthic communities characterising seamounts (Rogers

1994). Deep- and cold-water corals (including stony corals, black corals and soft corals) (see Figure 5-15)

are a prominent component of many seamounts, accompanied by barnacles, bryozoans, polychaetes,

molluscs, sponges, sea squirts, basket stars, brittle stars and crinoids (reviewed in Rogers 2004). There is

also associated mobile benthic fauna that includes echinoderms (sea urchins and sea cucumbers) and

crustaceans (crabs and lobsters) (reviewed by Rogers 1994; Kenyon et al. 2003).

Levels of endemism on seamounts are relatively high and have been identified as Vulnerable Marine

Ecosystems (VMEs). They are known to being particularly sensitive to anthropogenic disturbance (primarily

deep water trawl fisheries and mining), and once damaged are very slow to recover, or may never recover

(FAO 2008). It is not always the case that seamount habitats are VMEs, as some seamounts may not host

communities of fragile animals or be associated with high levels of endemism. South Africa’s seamounts

SLR & PRM Page 5-24

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

and their associated benthic communities have not been extensively sampled by either geologists or

biologists (Sink & Samaai 2009). Deep water corals are known from Child’s Bank as well as the Ibhubesi

Reef to the south-east of Child’s Bank. Furthermore, evidence from video footage taken on hard-substrate

habitats in 100 - 120 m depth off southern Namibia (De Beers Marine, unpublished data) suggest that

vulnerable communities including gorgonians, octocorals and reef-building sponges do occur on the

continental shelf, and similar communities may thus be expected in Sea Concession 1c.

Figure 5-15: Gorgonians and bryozoans communities recorded on deep water reefs (100-120 m) off

the southern African West Coast

(Photos: De Beers Marine)

5.1.3.4 Water column

5.1.3.4.1 Plankton

Plankton is particularly abundant in the shelf waters off the West Coast, being associated with the upwelling

characteristic of the area. Plankton range from single-celled bacteria to jellyfish of 2-m diameter, and include

bacterio-plankton, phytoplankton, zooplankton, and ichthyoplankton.

Phytoplankton are the principle primary producers with mean productivity ranging from 2.5 - 3.5 g C/m2/day

for the midshelf region and decreasing to 1 g C/m2/day inshore of 130 m (Shannon & Field 1985; Mitchell-

Innes & Walker 1991; Walker & Peterson 1991). The phytoplankton is dominated by large-celled organisms,

which are adapted to the turbulent sea conditions. The most common diatom genera are Chaetoceros,

Nitschia, Thalassiosira, Skeletonema, Rhizosolenia, Coscinodiscus and Asterionella (Shannon & Pillar

1985). Diatom blooms occur after upwelling events, whereas dinoflagellates (e.g. Prorocentrum, Ceratium

and Peridinium) are more common in blooms that occur during quiescent periods, since they can grow

rapidly at low nutrient concentrations. In the surf zone, diatoms and dinoflagellates are nearly equally

important members of the phytoplankton, and some silicoflagellates are also present.

Red-tides are ubiquitous features of the Benguela system (see Shannon & Pillar, 1986). The most common

species associated with red tides (dinoflagellate and/or ciliate blooms) are Noctiluca scintillans, Gonyaulax

tamarensis, G. polygramma and the ciliate Mesodinium rubrum. Gonyaulax and Mesodinium have been

linked with toxic red tides. Most of these red-tide events occur quite close inshore although Hutchings et al.

(1983) have recorded red-tides 30 km offshore. They are unlikely to occur in the offshore regions of the

mining right area, namely Sea Concession 1c.

SLR & PRM Page 5-25

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The mesozooplankton (≥200 µm) is dominated by copepods, which are overall the most dominant and

diverse group in southern African zooplankton. Important species are Centropages brachiatus, Calanoides

carinatus, Metridia lucens, Nannocalanus minor, Clausocalanus arcuicornis, Paracalanus parvus,

P. crassirostris and Ctenocalanus vanus. All of the above species typically occur in the phytoplankton rich

upper mixed layer of the water column, with the exception of M. lucens which undertakes considerable

vertical migration.

The macrozooplankton (≥1,600 µm) are dominated by euphausiids of which 18 species occur in the area.

The dominant species occurring in the nearshore are Euphausia lucens and Nyctiphanes capensis, although

neither species appears to survive well in waters seaward of oceanic fronts over the continental shelf (Pillar

et al. 1991).

Standing stock estimates of mesozooplankton for the southern Benguela area range from 0.2 - 2.0 g C/m2,

with maximum values recorded during upwelling periods. Macrozooplankton biomass ranges from 0.1-1.0 g

C/m2, with production increasing north of Cape Columbine (Pillar 1986). Although it shows no appreciable

onshore-offshore gradients, standing stock is highest over the shelf, with accumulation of some mobile

zooplanktors (euphausiids) known to occur at oceanographic fronts. Beyond the continental slope biomass

decreases markedly.

Zooplankton biomass varies with phytoplankton abundance and, accordingly, seasonal minima will exist

during non-upwelling periods when primary production is lower (Brown 1984; Brown & Henry 1985), and

during winter when predation by recruiting anchovy is high. More intense variation will occur in relation to the

upwelling cycle; newly upwelled water supporting low zooplankton biomass due to paucity of food, whilst

high biomasses develop in aged upwelled water subsequent to significant development of phytoplankton.

Irregular pulsing of the upwelling system, combined with seasonal recruitment of pelagic fish species into

West Coast shelf waters during winter, thus results in a highly variable and dynamic balance between

plankton replenishment and food availability for pelagic fish species.

The marine mining right areas lie within the influence of the Namaqua upwelling cell, and seasonally high

phytoplankton abundance can be expected in the southern areas, providing favourable feeding conditions for

micro-, meso- and macrozooplankton, and for ichthyoplankton. However, in the Orange River Cone area

immediately to the north of the upwelling cell, high turbulence and deep mixing in the water column result in

diminished phytoplankton biomass and consequently the area is considered to be an environmental barrier

to the transport of ichthyoplankton from the southern to the northern Benguela upwelling ecosystems.

Important pelagic fish species, including anchovy, redeye round herring, horse mackerel and shallow-water

hake, are reported as spawning on either side of the Orange River Cone area, but not within it (see

Figure 5-16). Phytoplankton, zooplankton and ichthyoplankton abundances in the northern mining areas

(Sea Concessions 1a, 1b, 1c and 2a) are thus expected to be comparatively low.

5.1.3.4.2 Cephalopods

The major cephalopod resource in the southern Benguela are sepiods / cuttlefish (Lipinski 1992; Augustyn et

al. 1995). Most of the cephalopod resource is distributed on the mid-shelf with Sepia australis being most

abundant at depths between 60-190 m, whereas S. hieronis densities were higher at depths between 110-

250 m. Rossia enigmatica occurs more commonly on the edge of the shelf to depths of 500 m. Biomass of

these species was generally higher in the summer than in winter.

Cuttlefish are largely epi-benthic and occur on mud and fine sediments in association with their major prey

item; mantis shrimps (Augustyn et al. 1995). They form an important food item for demersal fish.

SLR & PRM Page 5-26

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-16: Mining Licence Areas (red polygons) in relation to major spawning areas in the southern Benguela region

(Adapted from Cruikshank 1990)

SLR & PRM Page 5-27

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.3.4.3 Fish

Marine fish can generally be divided in three different groups, namely demersal (those associated with the

substratum), pelagic (those species associated with water column) or meso-pelagic (fish found generally in

deeper water and may be associated with both the seafloor and the pelagic environment). Demersal fish can

be grouped according to the substratum with which they are associated, for example rocky reef or soft

substrata. Pelagic species include two major groups, the planktivorous clupeid-like fishes such as anchovy

or pilchard and piscivorous predatory fish. It must be noted that such divisions are generally simplistic, as

certain species associate with more than one community.

(a) Demersal fish species

As many as 110 species of bony and cartilaginous fish have been identified in the demersal communities on

the continental shelf of the West Coast (Roel 1987). Changes in fish communities occur with increasing

depth (Roel 1987; Smale et al. 1993; Macpherson & Gordoa 1992; Bianchi et al. 2001; Atkinson 2009), with

the most substantial change in species composition occurring in the shelf break region between 300 m and

400 m depth (Roel 1987; Atkinson 2009), well offshore of Sea Concession 1c. The shelf community (<380

m) is dominated by the Cape hake Merluccius capensis, and includes jacopever Helicolenus dactylopterus,

Izak catshark Holohalaelurus regain, soupfin shark Galeorhinus galeus and whitespotted houndshark

Mustelus palumbes. The more diverse deeper water community is dominated by the deep water hake M.

paradoxus, monkfish Lophius vomerinus, kingklip Genypterus capensis, bronze whiptail Lucigadus ori and

hairy conger Bassanago albescens and various squalid shark species. There is some degree of species

overlap between the depth zones.

Roel (1987) showed seasonal variations in the distribution ranges shelf communities, with species such as

the pelagic goby Sufflogobius bibarbatus, and West Coast sole Austroglossus microlepis only occurring in

shallow water north of Cape Point during summer. The deep-sea community was found to be homogenous

both spatially and temporally. However, two long-term community shifts in demersal fish communities have

been noted; the first (early to mid-1990s) being associated with an overall increase in density of many

species, whilst many species decreased in density during the second shift (mid-2000s). These community

shifts correspond temporally with regime shifts detected in environmental forcing variables (sea surface

temperatures and upwelling anomalies) (Howard et al. 2007) and with the eastward shifts observed in small

pelagic fish species and rock lobster populations (Coetzee et al. 2008, Cockcroft et al. 2008)

The diversity and distribution of demersal cartilagenous fishes on the West Coast is discussed by Compagno

et al. (1991). The species that may occur in the Mining Rights areas, and their approximate depth range, are

listed in Table 5-2.

Table 5-2: Demersal cartilaginous species found on the continental shelf along the West Coast,

with approximate depth range at which the species occurs (Compagno et al. 1991)

Common Name Scientific name Depth Range (m)

Six gill cowshark Hexanchus griseus 150-600

Bramble shark Echinorhinus brucus 55-285

Spotted spiny dogfish Squalus acanthias 100-400

Shortnose spiny dogfish Squalus megalops 75-460

Shortspine spiny dogfish Squalus mitsukurii 150-600

Sixgill sawshark Pliotrema warreni 60-500

Tigar catshark Halaelurus natalensis 50-100

Izak catshark Holohalaelurus regani 100-500

SLR & PRM Page 5-28

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Common Name Scientific name Depth Range (m)

Yellowspotted catshark Scyliorhinus capensis 150-500

Soupfin shark/Vaalhaai Galeorhinus galeus <10-300

Houndshark Mustelus mustelus <100

Little guitarfish Rhinobatos annulatus >100

Atlantic electric ray Torpedo nobiliana 120-450

Thorny skate Raja radiata 50-600

Slime skate Raja pullopunctatus 15-460

Rough-belly skate Raja springeri 85-500

Yellowspot skate Raja wallacei 70-500

Biscuit skate Raja clavata 25-500

Bigthorn skate Raja confundens 100-800

Spearnose skate Raja alba 75-260

St Joseph Callorhinchus capensis 30-380

(b) Pelagic fish species

The structure of the nearshore and surf zone fish community varies greatly with the degree of wave

exposure. Species richness and abundance is generally high in sheltered and semi-exposed areas but

typically very low off the more exposed beaches (Clark 1997a, 1997b).

The surf-zone and outer turbulent zone habitats of sandy beaches are considered to be important nursery

habitats for marine fishes (Modde 1980; Lasiak 1981; Kinoshita & Fujita 1988; Clark et al. 1994). Surf-zone

fish communities off the South African West Coast have relatively high biomass, but low species diversity.

Typical surf-zone fish include harders (Liza richardsonii), white stumpnose (Rhabdosargus globiceps), Cape

sole (Heteromycteris capensis), Cape gurnard (Chelidonichthys capensis), False Bay klipfish (Clinus

latipennis), sandsharks (Rhinobatos annulatus), eagle ray (Myliobatis aquila), and smooth-hound (Mustelus

mustelus) (Clark 1997b).

Fish species commonly found in kelp beds off the West Coast include hottentot Pachymetopon blochii,

twotone fingerfin Chirodactylus brachydactylus, red fingers Cheilodactylus fasciatus, galjoen Dichistius

capensis, rock suckers Chorisochismus dentex, maned blennies Scartella emarginata and the catshark

Haploblepharus pictus (Sauer et al. 1997; Brouwer et al. 1997; Branch et al. 2010).

Small pelagic species occurring beyond the surfzone and generally within the 200 m contour include the

sardine/pilchard (Sadinops ocellatus), anchovy (Engraulis capensis), chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus),

horse mackerel (Trachurus capensis) and round herring (Etrumeus whiteheadi). These species typically

occur in mixed shoals of various sizes (Crawford et al. 1987), and exhibit similar life history patterns involving

seasonal migrations between the West and South Coasts.

The spawning areas of the major pelagic fish species (see Figure 5-16) are distributed on the continental

shelf and along the shelf edge extending from south of St Helena Bay to Mossel Bay on the South Coast

(Shannon & Pillar 1985). They spawn downstream of major upwelling centres in spring and summer, and

their eggs and larvae are subsequently carried around Cape Point and up the coast in northward flowing

surface waters.

At the start of winter every year, juveniles of most small pelagic shoaling species recruit into coastal waters

in large numbers between the Orange River and Cape Columbine. They gradually move southwards in the

inshore flowing surface current, towards the major spawning grounds east of Cape Point.

SLR & PRM Page 5-29

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Two species that migrate along the West Coast following the shoals of anchovy and pilchards are snoek

Thyrsites atun and chub mackerel Scomber japonicas. Their appearance along the West and South-West

coasts are highly seasonal. Snoek migrating along the southern African West Coast reach the area between

St Helena Bay and the Cape Peninsula between May and August. They spawn in these waters between

July and October before moving offshore and commencing their return northward migration (Payne &

Crawford 1989). They are voracious predators occurring throughout the water column, feeding on both

demersal and pelagic invertebrates and fish. Chub mackerel similarly migrate along the southern African

West Coast reaching South-Western Cape waters between April and August. They move inshore in June

and July to spawn before starting the return northwards offshore migration later in the year (Payne &

Crawford 1989).

Large pelagic species include tunas, billfish and pelagic sharks, which migrate throughout the southern

oceans, between surface and deep waters (>300 m) and have a highly seasonal abundance in the

Benguela. Many of the large migratory pelagic species are considered threatened by the International Union

for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), primarily due to overfishing (see Table 5-3). The distribution of these

species is dependent on food availability in the mixed boundary layer between the Benguela and warm

central Atlantic waters. Concentrations of large pelagic species are also known to occur associated with

underwater feature such as canyons and seamounts as well as meteorologically induced oceanic fronts

(Penney et al. 1992).

Tuna and swordfish are targeted by high seas fishing fleets and illegal overfishing has severely damaged the

stocks of many of these species. Similarly, pelagic sharks are either caught as bycatch by the pelagic long-

line fishery or are specifically targeted for their fins.

Table 5-3: Some of the more important large migratory pelagic fish likely to occur in the offshore

regions of the West Coast

Common Name Species IUCN Conservation Status

Tunas

Southern Bluefin Tuna Thunnus maccoyii Critically Endangered

Bigeye Tuna Thunnus obesus Vulnerable

Longfin Tuna/Albacore Thunnus alalunga Near Threatened

Yellowfin Tuna Thunnus albacares Near Threatened

Frigate Tuna Auxis thazard Least concern

Skipjack Tuna Katsuwonus pelamis Least concern

Billfish

Blue Marlin Makaira nigricans Vulnerable

Sailfish Istiophorus platypterus Least concern

Swordfish Xiphias gladius Least concern

Black Marlin Istiompax indica Data deficient

Pelagic Sharks

Pelagic Thresher Shark Alopias pelagicus Vulnerable

Common Thresher Shark Alopias vulpinus Vulnerable

Great White Shark Carcharodon carcharias Vulnerable

Shortfin Mako Isurus oxyrinchus Vulnerable

Longfin Mako Isurus paucus Vulnerable

Blue Shark Prionace glauca Near Threatened

Oceanic Whitetip Shark Carcharhinus longimanus Vulnerable

SLR & PRM Page 5-30

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.3.4.4 Turtles

Three species of turtle occur along the West Coast, namely the Leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), and

occasionally the Loggerhead (Caretta caretta) and the Green (Chelonia mydas) turtle. Loggerhead and

Green turtles are expected to occur only as occasional visitors along the West Coast. The Leatherback is

the only turtle likely to be encountered in the offshore waters of west South Africa.

The Benguela ecosystem, especially the northern Benguela where jelly fish numbers are high, is increasingly

being recognised as a potentially important feeding area for leatherback turtles from several globally

significant nesting populations in the south Atlantic (Gabon, Brazil) and south east Indian Ocean (South

Africa) (Lambardi et al. 2008, Elwen & Leeney 2011; SASTN 2011). Leatherback turtles from the east South

Africa population have been satellite tracked swimming around the west coast of South Africa and remaining

in the warmer waters west of the Benguela ecosystem (Lambardi et al. 2008) (see Figure 5-17).

Figure 5-17: The post-nesting distribution of nine satellite tagged leatherback females (1996 –

2006; Oceans and Coast, unpublished data)

Leatherback turtles inhabit deeper waters and are considered a pelagic species, travelling the ocean

currents in search of their prey (primarily jellyfish). While hunting they may dive to over 600 m and remain

submerged for up to 54 minutes (Hays et al. 2004). Their abundance in the study area is unknown but

expected to be low. Leatherbacks feed on jellyfish and are known to have mistaken plastic marine debris for

their natural food. Ingesting this can obstruct the gut, lead to absorption of toxins and reduce the absorption

of nutrients from their real food. Leatherback turtles are listed as “Critically Endangered” worldwide by the

IUCN and are in the highest categories in terms of need for conservation in CITES (Convention on

International Trade in Endangered Species), and Convention on Migratory Species. Loggerhead and green

turtles are listed as “Endangered”. As a signatory of the Convention on Migratory Species, South Africa has

endorsed and signed an International Memorandum of Understanding specific to the conservation of marine

turtles. South Africa is thus committed to conserve these species at an international level.

SLR & PRM Page 5-31

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.3.4.5 Seabirds

There are a total of 49 species of seabirds occurring within the southern Benguela area, of which 14 are

resident species, 25 are migrants from the Southern Ocean and 10 are visitors from the northern

hemisphere. Table 5-4 provides a list of the common species occurring within the study area.

Table 5-4: Pelagic seabirds common in the southern Benguela region (Crawford et al. 1991).

Common Name Species name Global IUCN

Shy albatross Thalassarche cauta Near Threatened

Black browed albatross Thalassarche melanophrys Endangered1

Yellow nosed albatross Thalassarche chlororhynchos Endangered

Giant petrel sp. Macronectes halli/giganteus Near Threatened

Pintado petrel Daption capense Least concern

Great winged petrel Pterodroma macroptera Least concern

Soft plumaged petrel Pterodroma mollis Least concern

Prion spp Pachyptila spp. Least concern

White chinned petrel Procellaria aequinoctialis Vulnerable

Cory’s shearwater Calonectris diomedea Least concern

Great shearwater Puffinus gravis Least concern

Sooty shearwater Puffinus griseus Near Threatened

European Storm petrel Hydrobates pelagicus Least concern

Leach’s storm petrel Oceanodroma leucorhoa Least concern

Wilson’s storm petrel Oceanites oceanicus Least concern

Black bellied storm petrel Fregetta tropica Least concern

Skua spp. Catharacta/Stercorarius spp. Least concern

Sabine’s gull Larus sabini Least concern

1 May move to Critically Endangered if mortality from long-lining does not decrease.

The area between Cape Point and the Orange River supports 38% and 33% of the overall population of

pelagic seabirds in winter and summer, respectively. Most of the species in the region reach highest

densities offshore of the shelf break (200 to 500 m depth), with highest population levels during their non-

breeding season (winter).

The availability of breeding sites is an extremely important determinant in the distribution of resident

seabirds. Breeding areas are distributed along the whole coast, but islands are especially important.

Fourteen species breed in southern Africa, including Cape gannet, African penguin, four species of

cormorant, white pelican, three gull and four tern species (Table 5-5).

Most of these species feed on fish (with the exception of the gulls, which scavenge, and feed on molluscs

and crustaceans). Feeding strategies can be grouped into surface plunging (gannets and terns), pursuit

diving (cormorants and penguins) and scavenging and surface seizing (gulls and pelicans). Most of the

breeding seabird species forage at sea with most birds being found relatively close inshore (10-30 km).

Cape gannets, however, are known to forage up to 140 km offshore (Dundee 2006; Ludynia 2007), and

African penguins have also been recorded as far as 60 km offshore.

African penguin colonies occur at 27 localities around the coast of South Africa and Namibia

(see Figure 5-18). The species forages at sea with most birds being found within 20 km of their colonies.

African penguin distribution at sea is consistent with that of the pelagic shoaling fish, which generally occur

within the 200 m isobath.

SLR & PRM Page 5-32

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The Cape gannet and bank cormorant are listed in the South African Red Data Book as "Vulnerable". The

Caspian tern, Cape cormorant and crowned cormorant are listed in the South African Red Data Book as

"Near-threatened", while the African penguin and Damara tern is listed as "Endangered". The decline in the

African penguin population is ascribed primarily to the removal of the accumulated guano from the islands

during the nineteenth century. Penguins used to breed in burrows in the guano and are now forced to nest

in the open, thereby being exposed to much greater predation and thermal stress.

The Cape gannet, a plunge diver feeding on epipelagic fish, is thought to have declined as a result of the

collapse of the pilchard, whereas the Cape cormorant was able to shift its diet to pelagic goby. Furthermore,

the recent increase in the seal population has resulted in seals competing for island space to the detriment of

the breeding success of both gannets and penguins.

Figure 5-18: African penguin breeding colonies on the South African West Coast

SLR & PRM Page 5-33

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Table 5-5: Breeding resident seabirds present along the West Coast (CCA & CMS 2001).

Common name Species name Global IUCN Status

African Penguin

Spheniscus demersus

Endangered

Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo Least Concern

Cape Cormorant

Phalacrocorax capensis

Near Threatened

Bank Cormorant

Phalacrocorax neglectus

Endangered

Crowned Cormorant

Phalacrocorax coronatus

Least Concern

White Pelican

Pelecanus onocrotalus

Least Concern

Cape Gannet

Morus capensis

Vulnerable

Kelp Gull

Larus dominicanus

Least Concern

Grey headed Gull

Larus cirrocephalus

Least Concern

Hartlaub's Gull

Larus hartlaubii

Least Concern

Caspian Tern

Hydroprogne caspia

Vulnerable

Swift Tern

Sterna bergii

Least Concern

Roseate Tern

Sterna dougallii

Least Concern

Damara Tern Sterna balaenarum Near Threatened

5.1.3.4.6 Cetaceans (whales and dolphins)

Thirty-four species of whales and dolphins are known (based on historic sightings or strandings records) or

likely (based on habitat projections of known species parameters) to occur in South African waters

(see Table 5-6).

The distribution of cetaceans in Namibian waters can largely be split into those associated with the

continental shelf and those that occur in deep, oceanic water. Importantly, species from both environments

may be found in the continental slope (200 to 2 000 m) making this the most species-rich area for cetaceans.

Cetacean density on the continental shelf is usually higher than in pelagic waters, as species associated with

the pelagic environment tend to be wide ranging. As the mining right areas are located on the continental

shelf, cetacean diversity in the area can be expected to be high. In the offshore portions of Concession 1c

abundances will, however, be low compared to further inshore.

Cetaceans can be divided into two major groups, the mysticetes or baleen whales which are largely

migratory, and the toothed whales or odontocetes which may be resident or migratory.

(a) Mysticetes

The majority of mysticetes whales fall into the family Balaenidae. Those occurring in the study area include

the Blue, Fin, Sei, Antarctic Minke, Dwarf Minke, Bryde’s, Humpback, Southern Right and Pygmy Right

whale. The majority of these species occur in pelagic waters with only occasional visits to shelf waters. All

of these species show some degree of migration either to, or through, the latitudes encompassed by the

proposed survey area when en route between higher latitude (Antarctic or Subantarctic) feeding grounds and

lower latitude breeding grounds. Depending on the ultimate location of these feeding and breeding grounds,

seasonality in Namibian waters can be either unimodal, usually in winter months (June to September), or

bimodal (e.g. May-July and October-November) reflecting a northward and southward migration through the

area. Northward and southward migrations may take place at difference distances from the coast due to

whales following geographic or oceanographic features, thereby influencing the seasonality of occurrence at

different locations. Due to the complexities of the migration patterns, each species is discussed in further

detail below.

SLR & PRM Page 5-34

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Table 5-6: Cetaceans occurrence off the West Coast of South Africa, their seasonality, likely encounter frequency with offshore mining operations

and IUCN conservation status

Common Name Species Shelf Offshore Seasonality Likely encounter

frequency

Delphinids

Dusky dolphin Lagenorhynchus obscurus Yes (0- 800 m) No Year round Daily

Heaviside’s dolphin Cephalorhynchus heavisidii Yes (0-200 m) No Year round Daily

Common bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus Yes Yes Year round Monthly

Common (short beaked) dolphin Delphinus delphis Yes Yes Year round Monthly

Southern right whale dolphin Lissodelphis peronii Yes Yes Year round Occasional

Striped dolphin Stenella coeruleoalba No ? ? Very rare

Pantropical spotted dolphin Stenella attenuata Edge Yes Year round Very rare

Long-finned pilot whale Globicephala melas Edge Yes Year round <Weekly

Short-finned pilot whale Globicephala macrorhynchus ? ? ? Very rare

Rough-toothed dolphin Steno bredanensis ? ? ? Very rare

Killer whale Orcinus orca Occasional Yes Year round Occasional

False killer whale Pseudorca crassidens Occasional Yes Year round Monthly

Pygmy killer whale Feresa attenuata ? Yes ? Occasional

Risso’s dolphin Grampus griseus Yes (edge) Yes ? Occasional

Sperm whales

Pygmy sperm whale Kogia breviceps Edge Yes Year round Occasional

Dwarf sperm whale Kogia sima Edge ? ? Very rare

Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus Edge Yes Year round Occasional

SLR & PRM Page 5-35

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Common Name Species Shelf Offshore Seasonality Likely encounter

frequency

Beaked whales

Cuvier’s Ziphius cavirostris No Yes Year round Occasional

Arnoux’s Beradius arnouxii No Yes Year round Occasional

Southern bottlenose Hyperoodon planifrons No Yes Year round Occasional

Layard’s Mesoplodon layardii No Yes Year round Occasional

True’s M. mirus No Yes Year round

Gray’s M. grayi No Yes Year round Occasional

Blainville’s M. densirostris No Yes Year round

Baleen whales

Antarctic Minke Balaenoptera bonaerensis Yes Yes >Winter Monthly

Dwarf minke B. acutorostrata Yes Yes Year round Occasional

Fin whale B. physalus Yes Yes MJJ & ON, rarely in summer Occasional

Blue whale B. musculus No Yes ? Occasional

Sei whale B. borealis Yes Yes MJ & ASO Occasional

Bryde’s (offshore) B. brydei Yes Yes Summer (JF) Occasional

Bryde’s (inshore) B brydei (subspp) Yes Yes Year round Occasional

Pygmy right Caperea marginata Yes ? Year round Occasional

Humpback Megaptera novaeangliae Yes Yes Year round, higher in SONDJF Daily*

Southern right Eubalaena australis Yes No Year round, higher in SONDJF Daily*

SLR & PRM Page 5-36

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

• Southern right and humpback whales: The most abundant baleen whales off the coast of South Africa

are Southern Right and Humpback whales. In the last decade, both species have been increasingly

observed to remain on the West Coast of South Africa well after the ‘traditional’ South African whale

season (June – November) into spring and early summer (October – February) where they have been

observed feeding in upwelling zones, especially off Saldanha and St Helena Bay (Barendse et al.

2011; Mate et al. 2011).

The majority of Humpback whales passing through the Benguela are migrating to breeding grounds off

tropical west Africa, between Angola and the Gulf of Guinea (Rosenbaum et al. 2009; Barendse et al.

2010). In coastal waters, the northward migration stream is larger than the southward peak (Best &

Allison 2010; Elwen et al. 2013), suggesting that animals migrating north strike the coast at varying

places north of St Helena Bay, resulting in increasing whale density on shelf waters and into deeper

pelagic waters as one moves northwards, but no clear migration ‘corridor’. On the southward

migration, many Humpbacks follow the Walvis Ridge offshore then head directly to high latitude

feeding grounds, while others follow a more coastal route (including the majority of mother-calf pairs)

possibly lingering in the feeding grounds off west South Africa in summer (Elwen et al. 2013,

Rosenbaum et al. in press). Recent abundance estimates put the number of animals in the west

African breeding population to be in excess of 9 000 individuals in 2005 (IWC 2012) and it is likely to

have increased since this time at about 5% per annum (IWC 2012). Humpback whales are thus likely

to be the most frequently encountered baleen whale in the project area, ranging from the coast out

beyond the shelf, with year-round presence but numbers peaking in July – February associated with

the breeding migration and subsequent feeding in the Benguela.

The southern African population of Southern Right whales historically extended from southern

Mozambique (Maputo Bay) to southern Angola (Baie dos Tigres) and is considered to be a single

population within this range (Roux et al. 2011). The most recent abundance estimate for this

population is available for 2008 which estimated the population at approximately 4 600 individuals

including all age and sex classes, which is thought to be at least 23% of the original population size

(Brandaõ et al. 2011). Since the population is still continuing to grow at approximately 7% per year

(Brandaõ et al. 2011), the population size in 2013 would number more than 6 000 individuals. When

the population numbers crashed, the range contracted down to just the South Coast of South Africa,

but as the population recovers, it is repopulating its historic grounds including Namibia (Roux et al.

2001) and Mozambique (Banks et al. 2011). Southern Right whales are seen regularly in the

nearshore waters of the West Coast (<3 km from shore), extending north into southern Namibia (Roux

et al. 2001, 2011). Southern Right whales have been recorded off the West Coast in all months of the

year, but with numbers peaking in winter (June - September).

In the last decade, deviations from the predictable and seasonal migration patterns of these two

species have been reported from the Cape Columbine – Yzerfontein area (Best 2007; Barendse et al.

2010). High abundances of both Southern Right and Humpback whales in this area during spring and

summer (September-February), indicates that the upwelling zones off Saldanha and St Helena Bay

may serve as an important summer feeding area (Barendse et al. 2011, Mate et al. 2011). It was

previously thought that whales feed only rarely while migrating (Best et al. 1995), but these localised

summer concentrations suggest that these whales may in fact have more flexible foraging habits.

• Bryde’s whales: Two genetically and morphologically distinct populations of Bryde’s whales occur off

the coast of southern Africa (Best 2001; Penry 2010). The “offshore population” lives beyond the shelf

(>200 m depth) off west Africa and migrates between wintering grounds off equatorial west Africa

(Gabon) and summering grounds off western South Africa. Its seasonality on the West Coast is thus

opposite to the majority of the balaenopterids with abundance likely to be highest in the broader

SLR & PRM Page 5-37

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

project area in January - March. The “inshore population” of Bryde’s, which lives on the continental

shelf and Agulhas Bank, is unique amongst baleen whales in the region by being non-migratory.

It may move further north into the Benguela current areas of the west of coast of South Africa and

Namibia, especially in the winter months (Best 2007).

• Sei whales: Sei whales migrate through South African waters, where they were historically hunted in

relatively high numbers, to unknown breeding grounds further north. Their migration pattern thus

shows a bimodal peak with numbers west of Cape Columbine highest in May and June, and again in

August, September and October. All whales were caught in waters deeper than 200 m with most

deeper than 1 000 m (Best & Lockyer 2002). Almost all information is based on whaling records 1958-

1963 and there is no current information on abundance or distribution patterns in the region.

• Fin whales: Fin whales were historically caught off the West Coast of South Africa, with a bimodal

peak in the catch data suggesting animals were migrating further north during May-June to breed,

before returning during August-October en route to Antarctic feeding grounds. Some juvenile animals

may feed year-round in deeper waters off the shelf (Best 2007). There are no recent data on

abundance or distribution of fin whales off western South Africa.

• Blue whales: Antarctic blue whales were historically caught in high numbers during commercial

whaling activities, with a single peak in catch rates during July in Walvis Bay, Namibia and at Namibe,

Angola suggesting that in the eastern South Atlantic these latitudes are close to the northern migration

limit for the species (Best 2007). Only two confirmed sightings of blue whales have occurred off the

entire West Coast of Africa since 1973 (Branch et al. 2007), although search effort (and thus

information), especially in pelagic waters is very low. This suggests that the population using the area

may have been extirpated by whaling and there is a low chance of encountering the species in the

mining right areas.

• Minke whales: Two forms of minke whale occur in the southern Hemisphere, the Antarctic minke

whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) and the dwarf minke whale (B. acutorostrata subsp.); both species

occur in the Benguela (Best 2007). Antarctic minke whales range from the pack ice of Antarctica to

tropical waters and are usually seen more than approximately 50 km offshore. Although adults

migrate from the Southern Ocean (summer) to tropical/temperate waters (winter) to breed, some

animals, especially juveniles, are known to stay in tropical/temperate waters year-round. The dwarf

minke whale has a more temperate distribution than the Antarctic minke and they do not range further

south than 60-65°S. Dwarf minkes have a similar migration pattern to Antarctic minkes with at least

some animals migrating to the Southern Ocean during summer. Dwarf minke whales occur closer to

shore than Antarctic minkes. Both species are generally solitary and densities are likely to be low in

the project area.

• Pygmy right whale: The smallest of the baleen whales, the pygmy right whale occurs in the Benguela

region (Leeney et al. 2013). The species is more commonly associated with cool temperate waters

between 30°S and 55°S. There are no data on the abundance or conservation status of this species.

As it was not subjected to commercial whaling, the population is expected to be near to original

numbers. Sightings of this species at sea are rare (Best 2007) due in part to their small size and

inconspicuous blows. Density in the study area is likely to be low.

SLR & PRM Page 5-38

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

(b) Odontocetes

The Odontoceti are a varied group of animals including the dolphins, porpoises, beaked whales and sperm

whales. Species occurring within the broader study area display a diversity of features, for example their

ranging patterns vary from extremely coastal and highly site specific to oceanic and wide ranging. There is

almost no data available on the abundance, distribution or seasonality of the smaller odontocetes (including

the beaked whales and dolphins) known to occur in oceanic waters off the shelf of the West Coast. Beaked

whales are all considered to be true deep water species usually being seen in waters in excess of 1 000 –

2 000 m depth (Best 2007). Their presence in the area may fluctuate seasonally, but insufficient data exist to

define this clearly.

• Sperm whales: Sperm whales are the largest of the toothed whales and have a complex, well-

structured social system with adult males behaving differently from younger males and female groups.

They live in deep ocean waters, usually greater than 1 000 m depth, occasionally coming into depths

of 500 - 200 m on the shelf (Best 2007). Seasonality of catches suggest that medium- and large-sized

males are more abundant during winter, while female groups are more abundant in autumn (March-

April), although animals occur year round (Best 2007). Sperm whales feed at great depth, during dives

in excess of 30 minutes, making them difficult to detect visually. Sperm whales in the project area are

likely to be encountered in relatively high numbers in deeper waters (>500 m), predominantly in the

winter months (April - October).

• Pygmy and dwarf sperm whales: Dwarf sperm whales are associated with the warmer waters south

and east of St Helena Bay. Abundance in the study area is likely to be very low and only in the

warmer waters west of the Benguela current. Pygmy sperm whales are recorded from both the

Benguela and Agulhas ecosystem (Best 2007) and occur in waters deeper than 1 000 m.

• Killer whales: Killer whales have a circum-global distribution being found in all oceans from the equator

to the ice edge (Best 2007). Killer whales occur year round in low densities off western South Africa

(Best et al. 2010), Namibia (Elwen & Leeney 2011) and in the Eastern Tropical Atlantic (Weir et al.

2010). Killer whales are found in all depths from the coast to deep open ocean environments and may

thus be encountered in the study area at low levels.

• False killer whales: The false killer whale has a tropical to temperate distribution and most sightings off

southern Africa have occurred in water deeper than 1 000 m, but with a few recorded close to shore

(Findlay et al. 1992). They usually occur in groups ranging in size from 1 - 100 animals (Best 2007).

The strong bonds and matrilineal social structure of this species makes it vulnerable to mass stranding

(8 instances of 4 or more animals stranding together have occurred in the Western Cape, all between

St Helena Bay and Cape Agulhas). There is no information on population numbers or conservation

status and no evidence of seasonality in the region (Best 2007).

• Long-finned pilot whales: Long finned pilot whales display a preference for temperate waters and are

usually associated with the continental shelf or deep water adjacent to it (Mate et al. 2005; Findlay et

al. 1992; Weir 2011). They are regularly seen associated with the shelf edge by marine mammal

observers and fisheries observers and researchers. The distinction between long-finned and short-

finned pilot whales is difficult to make at sea. As the latter are regarded as more tropical species (Best

2007), it is likely that the vast majority of pilot whales encountered in the study area will be long-finned.

• Common bottlenose dolphins: Two species of bottlenose dolphins occur around southern Africa, the

smaller Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin, which occurs exclusively to the east of Cape Point in water

usually less than 30 m deep, and the larger common bottlenose dolphin forms. The larger common

bottlenose dolphin species occur in two forms. The inshore form occurs as a small and apparently

isolated population that occupies the very coastal (usually <15 m deep) waters of the central Namibian

SLR & PRM Page 5-39

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

coast as far south as Lüderitz and is unlikely to be encountered in the project area. Little is known

about the offshore form in terms of their population size or conservation status. They sometimes

occur in association with other species such as pilot whales (NDP unpublished data) or false killer

whales (Best 2007) and are likely to be present year round in waters deeper than 200 m.

• Common dolphin: The common dolphin is known to occur offshore in West Coast waters (Findlay et al.

1992; Best 2007). The extent to which they occur in the study area is unknown, but likely to be low.

Group sizes of common dolphins can be large, averaging 267 (± SD 287) for the South Africa region

(Findlay et al. 1992) and 92 (± SD 115) for Angola (Weir 2011) and 37 (± SD 31) in Namibia (NDP

unpubl. data). They are more frequently seen in the warmer waters offshore and to the north of the

country, seasonality is not known.

• Southern right whale dolphins: The cold waters of the Benguela provide a northwards extension of the

normally subantarctic habitat of this species (Best 2007). Most records in the region originate in a

relatively restricted region between 26˚S and 28˚S off Lüderitz (Rose & Payne 1991) in water 100 –

2 000 m deep (Best, 2007), where they are seen several times per year (Findlay et al. 1992; JP Roux1

pers comm.). It is possible that the Namibian sightings represent a resident population (Findlay et al.

1992). Encounters in the study area are unlikely.

• Dusky dolphins: In water <500 m deep, dusky dolphins are likely to be the most frequently

encountered small cetacean as they are very “boat friendly” and often approach vessels to bowride.

The species is resident year round throughout the Benguela ecosystem in waters from the coast to at

least 500 m deep (Findlay et al. 1992). Although no information is available on the size of the

population, they are regularly encountered in near shore waters between Cape Town and Lamberts

Bay (Elwen et al. 2010a; NDP unpubl. data) with group sizes of up to 800 having been reported

(Findlay et al. 1992). A hiatus in sightings (or low density area) is reported between ~27°S and 30°S,

associated with the Lüderitz upwelling cell (Findlay et al. 1992). Dusky dolphins are resident year

round in the Benguela.

• Heaviside’s dolphins: This species is relatively abundant in the Benguela ecosystem within the region

of 10 000 animals estimated to live in the 400 km of coast between Cape Town and Lamberts Bay

(Elwen et al. 2009). Individuals show high site fidelity to small home ranges, 50 - 80 km along shore

(Elwen et al. 2006) and may thus be more vulnerable to threats within their home range. This species

occupies waters from the coast to at least 200 m depth (Elwen et al. 2006; Best 2007), and may show

a diurnal onshore-offshore movement pattern (Elwen et al. 2010b), but this varies throughout the

species range. Heaviside’s dolphins are resident year round.

• Beaked whales (various species): Beaked whales were never targeted commercially and their pelagic

distribution makes them largely inaccessible to most researchers making them the most poorly studied

group of cetaceans. All the beaked whales that may be encountered in the study area are pelagic

species that tend to occur in small groups usually less than five, although larger aggregations of some

species are known (MacLeod & D’Amico 2006; Best 2007). The long, deep dives of beaked whales

make them difficult to detect visually.

• Other delphinids: Several other species of dolphins that might occur in deeper waters at low levels

include the pygmy killer whale, Risso’s dolphin, rough toothed dolphin, pan tropical spotted dolphin

and striped dolphin (Findlay et al. 1992; Best 2007). Nothing is known about the population size or

density of these species in the project area but it is likely that encounters would be rare.

1 Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources (Namibia).

SLR & PRM Page 5-40

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.3.4.7 Pinnipeds (seals)

The Cape fur seal (Arctocephalus pusillus pusillus) is the only species of seal resident along the West Coast

of Africa, occurring at numerous breeding and non-breeding sites on the mainland and on nearshore islands

and reefs (see Figure 5-19). Vagrant records from four other species of seal more usually associated with

the subantarctic environment have also been recorded: southern elephant seal (Mirounga leoninas),

subantarctic fur seal (Arctocephalus tropicalis), crabeater (Lobodon carcinophagus) and leopard seals

(Hydrurga leptonyx) (David 1989).

There are a number of Cape fur seal colonies within the broader area:

• Kleinzee (incorporating Robeiland): This colony has the highest seal population and produces the

highest seal pup numbers on the South African Coast (Wickens 1994);

• Bucchu Twins near Alexander Bay (inshore of Sea Concession 1a): This colony at Buchu Twins,

formerly a non-breeding colony, has also attained breeding status (M. Meyer, SFRI, pers. comm.);

• Strandfontein Point (south of Hondeklipbaai) and Bird Island at Lamberts Bay: These are a non-

breeding colonies; and

• McDougall’s Bay islands and Wedge Point: These sites are haul-out sites only and are not

permanently occupied by seals.

Seals are highly mobile animals with a general foraging area covering the continental shelf up to 120 nm

offshore (Shaughnessy 1979), with bulls ranging further out to sea than females. The timing of the annual

breeding cycle is very regular, occurring between November and January. Breeding success is highly

dependent on the local abundance of food, territorial bulls and lactating females being most vulnerable to

local fluctuations as they feed in the vicinity of the colonies prior to and after the pupping season (Oosthuizen

1991).

Figure 5-19: Project - environment interaction points on the West Coast

SLR & PRM Page 5-41

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.4 HUMAN USE

5.1.4.1 Commercial fishing

The South African fishing industry consists of approximately 20 commercial sectors operating within the

200 nm Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The western coastal shelf is a highly productive upwelling

ecosystem (Benguela current) and supports a number of fisheries.

The largest and most economically valuable of these are the demersal trawl and long-line fisheries, targeting

the cape hakes Merluccius paradoxus and M. capensis, and the pelagic purse-seine fishery targeting

pilchard (Sardinops sagax), anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) and red-eye round herring (Etrumeus

whitheadii). Secondary commercial species in the hake-directed fisheries include an assemblage of

demersal (bottom-dwelling) fish of which monk fish (Lophius vomerinus) and snoek (Thyrsites atun) are the

most important commercial species. Other fisheries active on the West Coast are the pelagic long-line

fishery for tunas and swordfish and the tuna pole and traditional line-fish sectors. West Coast rock lobster

(Jasus lalandi) is an important trap fishery exploited close to the shoreline (waters shallower than 100 m)

including the intertidal zone and kelp beds off the West Coast.

On the West Coast of South Africa, major fishing grounds tend to be centred along the shelf break which is

located approximately along the 500 m isobath. Historically and currently the bulk of the main commercial

fish stocks caught on the northern West Coast of South Africa have been landed and processed at the

Western Cape ports of Cape Town and Saldanha (less than 1% of the South African commercial allowable

catch is landed in the Northern Cape Province). The main reasons for this include lack of local infrastructure,

distance to market and relatively low volumes of fish landings.

The Mining Rights areas are situated close to the fishing harbour of Port Nolloth, a regional fishing node

which operates at a low level of development. Historically, the harbour accommodated a West Coast rock

lobster fishery, an experimental hake-long-line fishery and a small experimental trawl fishery during the

1980’s (targeting gurnards and sole). Currently there is little fishing activity taking place from Port Nolloth

(only inshore West Coast rock lobster and traditional line fishing). As the harbour is relatively shallow and

does not have a breakwater, it becomes inaccessible to vessels during rough weather conditions and cannot

accommodate larger vessels (length greater than 22 m). This has been a restrictive factor to the

development of fisheries in the region.

The main commercial sectors operating in the vicinity of the study area are discussed below.

5.1.4.1.1 Demersal Trawl

The hake-directed trawl fishery is the most valuable sector of the South African fishing industry and is split

into two sub-sectors: the offshore (“deep-sea”) sector which is active off both the South and West Coasts,

and the much smaller inshore trawl sector which is active off the South Coast. A fleet of 45 trawlers operate

within the offshore sector targeting the Cape hakes (Merluccius capensis and M. paradoxus). Main by-catch

species include monkfish (Lophius vomerinus), kingklip (Genypterus capensis) and snoek (Thyrsites atun).

Trawls are usually conducted along specific trawling lanes on “trawl friendly” substrate (flat, soft ground). On

the West Coast, these grounds extend in a continuous band along the shelf edge between the 300 m and

1 000 m bathymetric contours. Monk-directed trawlers tend to fish shallower waters than hake-directed

vessels on mostly muddy substrates. Trawl nets are generally towed along depth contours (thereby

maintaining a relatively constant depth) running parallel to the depth contours in a north-westerly or south-

SLR & PRM Page 5-42

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

easterly direction. Trawlers also target fish aggregations around bathymetric features, in particular

seamounts and canyons (i.e. Cape Columbine and Cape Canyon), where there is an increase in seafloor

slope and in these cases the direction of trawls follow the depth contours. Trawlers are prohibited from

operating within 5 nm of the coastline. The fishery is active year-round, with a relatively constant amount of

effort expended each month.

The mining right areas in relation to the demersal trawl grounds are shown in Figure 5-20. The marine

mining right areas do not coincide with the trawling grounds.

Figure 5-20: Marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of fishing effort

expended by the demersal trawl sector (2000 – 2014)

SLR & PRM Page 5-43

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The offshore fleet is segregated into wetfish and freezer vessels which differ in terms of the capacity for the

processing of fish at sea and in terms of vessel size and capacity. While freezer vessels may work in an area

for up to a month at a time, wetfish vessels may only remain in an area for about a week before returning to

port. Wetfish vessels range between 24 m and 56 m in length while freezer vessels are usually larger,

ranging up to 80 m in length. The gear configurations are similar for both freezer and wet fish vessels. Trawl

gear is deployed astern of the vessel.

The towed gear typically consists of trawl warps, bridles and trawl doors, a footrope, headrope, net and

codend (see Figure 5-21). The monk-directed trawlers use slightly heavier trawl gear, trawl at slower speeds

and for longer periods (up to eight hours) compared to the hake-directed trawlers (60 minutes to four hours).

Monk gear includes the use of “tickler” chains positioned ahead of the footrope to chase the monk off the

substrate and into the net.

Figure 5-21: Schematic diagram of trawl gear typically used by the South African hake trawl

vessels

(Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/trawling)

5.1.4.1.2 Demersal long-line

(a) Hake-Directed demersal long-line

The demersal long-line fishing technique is used to target bottom-dwelling species of fish. Two fishing

sectors utilize this method of capture, namely the hake long-line fishery targeting the Cape hakes

(M. capensis and M. paradoxus) and the shark long-line sector targeting only demersal species of shark.

The fishery operates year-round with a slight increase in activity between August and December.

SLR & PRM Page 5-44

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Demersal long-line fishing grounds are similar to those targeted by the hake-directed trawl fleet. Lines are

set parallel to bathymetric contours, along the shelf edge up to the 1 000 m isobath. Figure 5-22 shows the

marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of hake-directed long-line effort recorded off

the West Coast of South Africa between 2000 and 2014. Targeted fishing areas are situated at least 90 km

from the marine mining right areas.

Figure 5-22: Marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of effort expended by

the South African hake-directed demersal long-line sector (2000 – 2014)

SLR & PRM Page 5-45

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Long-line vessels vary from 18 m to 50 m in length and remain at sea for four to seven days at a time and

retain their catch on ice. A demersal long-line vessel may deploy either a double or single line which is

weighted along its length to keep it close to the seafloor (see Figure 5-23). Steel anchors are placed at the

ends of each line to anchor it. These anchor positions are marked with an array of floats. If a double line

system is used, top and bottom lines are connected by means of dropper lines. Since the topline is more

buoyant than the bottom line, it is raised off the seafloor and minimises the risk of snagging or fouling. The

purpose of the topline is to aid in gear retrieval if the bottom line breaks at any point along the length of the

set line, which may be up to 30 nm in length. Baited hooks are attached to the bottom line at regular

intervals by means of a snood. Gear is usually set at night at a speed of 5 to 9 knots. Once deployed the

line is left to soak for up to eight hours before retrieval. A line hauler is used to retrieve gear at a speed of

approximately 1 knot and usually takes six to ten hours to complete. During hauling operations the vessel’s

manoeuvrability is severely restricted.

Figure 5-23: Typical configuration of demersal (bottom-set) hake long-line gear

(Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/longlining)

(b) Shark-directed demersal long-line

Capture of demersal shark species occurs primarily in the demersal shark long-line fishery whilst catches of

pelagic shark species occurs primarily in the large pelagic sector that targets tuna and swordfish. Prior to

2006, both demersal and pelagic shark catches were managed as a single shark fishery.

The demersal shark fishery targets soupfin shark (Galeorhinus galeus), smooth-hound shark (Mustelus spp),

spiny dogfish (Squalus spp), St Joseph shark (Callorhinchus capensis), Charcharhinus spp., rays and

skates. Other species which are not targeted but may be landed include cape gurnards (Chelidonichthys

capensis), jacopever (Sebastichthys capensis) and smooth hammerhead shark (Sphyrna zygaena). Catches

are landed at the harbours of Cape Town, Hout Bay, Mossel Bay, Plettenberg Bay, Cape St Francis,

Saldanha Bay, St Helena Bay, Gansbaai and Port Elizabeth and currently six permit holders have been

issued with long-term rights to operate within the fishery.

SLR & PRM Page 5-46

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The fishery was first formerly introduced with the allocation of medium-term fishing rights in 2002. With only

six rights allocated and vessels limited in size, fishing effort has remained relatively low. The fishery

operates in coastal waters around the South-Western Cape, predominantly inshore of the 150 m isobaths,

which is well to the south of the marine mining right areas (see Figure 5-24).


the South African shark-directed demersal long-line sector (2007 – 2013)

SLR & PRM Page 5-47

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.4.1.3 Large pelagic long-line

The large pelagic long-line fishery operates year-round, extensively within the South African EEZ targeting

primarily tuna and swordfish. Due to the highly migratory nature of these species, stocks straddle the EEZ of

a number of countries and international waters. As such they are managed as a “shared resource” amongst

various countries. There are approximately 30 commercial large pelagic fishing rights issued for South

African waters, with approximately 30 vessels active in the fishery. The fishery operates year-round with a

relative increase in effort during winter and spring.

The fishery operates extensively from the continental shelf break into deeper waters, year-round. Pelagic

long-line vessels are primarily concentrated seawards of the 500 m depth contour where the continental

slope is steepest. The marine mining right areas in relation to the large pelagic long-line effort between 2000

and 2017 are shown in Figure 5-25. The marine mining right areas do not coincide with the large pelagic

long-line fishing grounds.

Pelagic long-line vessels set a drifting mainline, which are up to 100 km in length. The mainline is kept near

the surface or at a certain depth by means of buoys (connected via “buoy-lines”), which are spaced

approximately 500 m apart along the length of the mainline (see Figure 5-26). Hooks are attached to the

mainline on relatively short sections of monofilament line (“snoods”) which are clipped to the mainline at

intervals of 20 to 30 m. A single main line consists of twisted tarred rope (6 to 8 mm diameter), nylon

monofilament (5 to 7.5 mm diameter) or braided monofilament (6 mm diameter). Various types of buoys are

used in combinations to keep the mainline near the surface and locate it should the line be cut or break for

any reason. Each end of the line is marked by a Dahn Buoy and Radar reflector, which marks its position for

later retrieval by the fishing vessel. A line may be left drifting for up to 18 hours before retrieval by means of

a powered hauler at a speed of approximately 1 knot. During hauling a vessel’s manoeuvrability is severely

restricted and, in the event of an emergency, the line may be dropped to be hauled in at a later stage.

5.1.4.1.4 Tuna pole

Poling for tuna (predominantly albacore tuna, yellowfin tuna and bigeye tuna), from mostly small boats

(< 25 m), is common off the South African West Coast and in southern Namibian waters. Albacore tuna

migrate and are particularly important for fisheries in the Benguela ecosystem. Movement of albacore tuna

between South Africa and Namibia is not clear although it is believed the fish move northwards following

bathymetric features generally deeper than 200 m water depth. The South African fleet consists of

approximately 128 pole-and-line vessels, which are based at the ports of Cape Town, Hout Bay and

Saldanha Bay. The fishery is seasonal with vessel activity mostly between December and May and peak

catches in February and March.

SLR & PRM Page 5-48

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017


the Namibian and South African large pelagic long-line sector (2000 – 2014)

SLR & PRM Page 5-49

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-26: Typical pelagic long-line gear configuration

(Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/longlining)

Fishing activity occurs along the entire South African West Coast beyond the 200 m bathymetric contour.

Activity would be expected to occur along the shelf break with favoured fishing grounds including areas north

of Cape Columbine and between 60 km and 120 km offshore from Saldanha Bay. Within Namibian waters,

the fishery operates southwards of 25°S between the 200 m and 500 m bathymetric contours. Aggregations

of albacore tuna are known to occur in the vicinity of the Tripp Seamount (approximately 250 km to the west-

south-west of the western extent of Sea Concession 1c).

The marine mining right areas in relation to tuna pole effort between 2003 and 2014 is shown in Figure 5-27.

Although negligible levels of fishing effort have been reported in close proximity to the marine mining right

areas, no expected overlap with grounds fished by the tuna pole sector is expected.

Whilst at sea, the majority of time is spent searching for fish with actual fishing events taking place over a

relatively short period of time. Sonars and echo sounders are used to locate schools of tuna. At the start of

fishing, water is sprayed outwards from high-pressure nozzles to simulate small baitfish aggregating near the

water surface, thereby attracting tuna to the surface. Live bait is flung out to entice the tuna to the surface

(chumming). Tuna swimming near the surface are caught with hand-held fishing poles. The ends of the 2 to

3 m poles are fitted with a short length of fishing line leading to a hook. Hooked fish are pulled from the

water and many tons can be landed in a short period of time. In order to land heavier fish, lines may be

strung from the ends of the poles to overhead blocks to increase lifting power (see Figure 5-28).

SLR & PRM Page 5-50

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-27 Marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of effort by the South

African tuna pole sector (2003 – 2014)

SLR & PRM Page 5-51

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-28: Schematic diagram of pole and line operation

(Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/minor-lines/)

5.1.4.1.5 Traditional line-fish

This fishery includes commercial, subsistence and recreational sectors. The South African commercial line

fishery is the country’s third most important fishery in terms of total tons landed and economic value. The

bulk of the fishery catch is made up of about 35 different species of reef fish as well as pelagic and demersal

species which are mostly marketed locally as “fresh fish”. In South Africa effort is managed geographically

with the spatial effort of the fishery divided into three zones. The majority of the catch (up to 95%) is landed

by the Cape commercial fishery, which operates on the continental shelf mostly up to a depth of 200 m from

the Namibian border on the West Coast to the Kei River in the Eastern Cape. Up to 3 000 boats are involved

in the fishery on the national level, 450 of which are involved in the commercial fishery.

Fishing vessels generally range up to a maximum of 40 nm offshore, although fishing at the outer limit of this

range is sporadic. The traditional line-fish catch between 2000 and 2015 in relation to the marine mining

right areas is shown in Figure 5-29. Over the period 2000 and 2015, the fishery landed an average of 2.7

tons of tuna per year within the mining right areas (i.e. 0.02 – 0.04% of national catch).

Line fishing techniques consist of hook and line deployments (up to 10 hooks per line) and differ from the

pelagic long-line fishing technique in that the use of set long-lines is not permitted.

SLR & PRM Page 5-52

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-29: Marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of effort by the South

African traditional line-fish sector (2000 – 2015)

SLR & PRM Page 5-53

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.4.1.6 Small pelagic purse-seine

The South African small pelagic purse seine fishery is the largest fishery by volume and the second most

important in terms of value. The pelagic purse-seine fishery targets small mid-water and surface-shoaling

species such as sardine, anchovy, juvenile horse mackerel and round herring using purse-seine fishing

techniques.

Once a shoal has been located the vessel steams around it and encircle it with a large net. The depth of the

net is usually between 60 m and 90 m. Netting walls surround aggregated fish both from the sides and from

underneath, thus preventing them from escaping by diving downwards. These are surface nets framed by

lines: a float line on top and lead line at the bottom (see Figure 5-30). Once the shoal has been encircled the

net is pursed and hauled in and the fish are pumped onboard into the hold of the vessel. After the net is

deployed the vessel has no ability to manoeuvre until the net has been fully recovered onboard, which may

take up to 1.5 hours. Vessels usually operate overnight and return to offload their catch the following day.

The South African fishery, consisting of approximately 100 vessels, is active all year round with a short break

from mid-December to mid-January (to reduce impact on juvenile sardine), with seasonal trends in the

specific species targeted. The geographical distribution and intensity of the fishery is largely dependent on

the seasonal fluctuation and geographical distribution of the targeted species. Fishing grounds occur

primarily along the Western Cape and Eastern Cape coast up to a distance of 100 km offshore, but usually

closer inshore. The sardine-directed fishery tends to concentrate effort in a broad area extending from

St Helena Bay, southwards past Cape Town towards Cape Point and then eastwards along the coast to

Mossel Bay and Port Elizabeth. The anchovy-directed fishery takes place predominantly on the South-West

Coast from St Helena Bay to Cape Point and is most active in the period from March to September. Round

herring (non-quota species) is targeted when available and specifically in the early part of the year (January

to March) and is distributed South of Cape Point to St Helena Bay. There has been no reported effort within

the marine mining right areas between the years 2000 and 2016 (see Figure 5-31).

Figure 5-30: Schematic of typical purse-seine gear deployed in the “small” pelagic fishery

(Source: http://www.afma.gov.au/portfolio-item/purse-seine).

SLR & PRM Page 5-54

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-31: Marine mining right areas in relation to the spatial distribution of effort by the South

African small pelagic purse-seine (2000 – 2016)

SLR & PRM Page 5-55

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.4.1.7 West Coast rock lobster

The West Coast rock lobster Jasus lalandii is a valuable resource of the South African West Coast and

consequently an important income source for West Coast fishermen. Following the collapse of the rock

lobster resource in the early 1990s, fishing has been controlled by a Total Allowable Catch (TAC), a

minimum size, restricted gear, a closed season and closed areas (Crawford et al. 1987, Melville-Smith et al.

1995).

The fishery is divided into the offshore fishery (30 m to 100 m depth) and the near-shore fishery (< 30 m

depth), thereby overlapping with the marine mining right areas. Management of the resource is

geographically specific, with the TAC annually allocated by area. The mining right areas fall within

Management Area 1 of the commercial rock lobster fishing zones, which extends from the Orange River

Mouth to Kleinzee. The fishery operates seasonally, with closed seasons applicable to different zones;

Management Area 1 operates from 1 October to 30 April.

Commercial catches of rock lobster in Management Area 1 are confined to shallower water (<30 m) with

almost all the catch being taken in <15 m depth, therefore overlapping directly with diver-assisted vessel-

based mining operations. Actual rock-lobster fishing, however, takes place only at discrete suitable reef

areas along the shore within this broad depth zone.

Lobster fishing is conducted from a fleet of small dinghies/bakkies. The majority of these operate directly

from the shore within a few nautical miles of the harbours, with only 30% of the total numbers of bakkies

partaking in the fishery being deployed from larger deck boats. As a result, lobster fishing tends to be

concentrated close to the shore within a few nautical miles of Port Nolloth and Hondeklip Bay. Landings of

rock lobster recorded within Management Area 1 have been reported at an average total rock lobster tail

weight of 16 tons per year (2008 – 2012). All landings were reported by bakkies, with no landings made by

the offshore sector. This amounts to 0.8% of the total landings recorded by the West Coast rock lobster

fishery (inclusive of both the near-shore and offshore fisheries) and 4.1% of the total landings recorded by

the bakkie fleet.

The West Coast rock lobster catch from Management Area 1 in relation to the marine mining right areas is

shown in Figure 5-32 (2006 and 2016) and Table 5-7 (2006 and 2017). Over the this period, the fishery

landed an average of 14.1 tons of West Coast rock lobster per year within Mining Right 544MRC (i.e. 3.2%

of national catch). Over the same period, the fishery set an average of 5 790 traps year (i.e. 9.8% of national

effort). No catch or effort has been reported for the other marine mining right areas.

Table 5-7: TAC and Actual landed catch (tonnes) for Management Area 1 in the Northern Cape

during the 2006 to 2017 fishing seasons (Data source: Rock Lobster Section, DAFF)

Year TAC Area 1 Year TAC Area 1

2006 30 000 27 595 2012 24 000 4 680

2007 30 000 14 983 2013 24 000 6 242

2008 30 000 21 901 2014 24 000 8 960

2009 24 000 20 891 2015 20 000 3 163

2010 24 000 15 482 2016 24 000 6 201

2011 24 000 8 223 2017 24 000 2 966*

* Data incomplete

SLR & PRM Page 5-56

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-32: Marine mining right areas in relation to the average catch per season of West Coast

rock lobster (2006 – 2016)

SLR & PRM Page 5-57

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.4.1.8 Abalone ranching

Although the Northern Cape coast lies beyond the northern-most distribution limit of abalone (Haliotis midae)

on the West Coast, ranching experiments have been undertaken in the region since 1995 (Sweijd et al.

1998; de Waal & Cook 2001; de Waal 2004). As some sites have shown high survival of seeded juveniles,

The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) published criteria for allocating rights to

engage in abalone ranching or stock enhancement (Government Gazette No. 33470, Schedule 2, 20 August

2010) in four areas along the Namaqualand Coast (see Table 5-8). Ranching in these areas is currently

being investigated at the pilot phase. Sea Concessions 1a, 2a, 3a and 4a overlap with ranching Concession

Areas 1 and 2 (see Figure 5-33).

Associated with the ranching projects are land-based abalone hatcheries located at North Point near Port

Nolloth, at Kleinzee and at Hondeklipbaai (Anchor Environmental Consultants 2010). To date, there has

been no seeding in Areas 1 or 2 (partly due to the uncertainty relating to user conflict). Seeding has taken

place in Areas 3 and 4.

Table 5-8: Allocated abalone ranching areas in the Northern Cape

Area Description Latitude Longitude Rights Holder

1 Boegoeberg North 28°45′41.35″S 16°33′41.93″E

Turnover Trading Beach north of North Point 29°14′07.65″S 16°51′14.08″E

2 South-end of McDougall Bay 29°17′34.23″S 16°52′32.08″E Really Useful

Investments No 72 Rob Island 29°40′07.12″S 16°59′50.45″E

3 Beach at Kleinzee 29°43′43.09″S 17°03′03.50″E Port Nolloth Sea

Farms Swartduine 30°02′52.04″S 17°10′39.69″E

4 Skulpfontein 30°06′08.15″S 17°11′08.03″E Diamond Coast

Abalone 2 rocks 200 m from shore 30°25′56.26″S 17°20′05.43″E

5.1.4.1.9 Beach-seine and gill-net fisheries

There are a number of active beach-seine and gill-net operators throughout South Africa (collectively

referred to as the “netfish” sector). Initial estimates indicate that there are at least 7 000 fishermen active in

this sector, mostly (86%) along the West and South coasts. These fishermen utilise 1 373 registered and

458 illegal nets and report an average catch of 1 600 tons annually, constituting 60% harders (Liza

richardsonii), 10% St Joseph shark (Callorhinchus capensis) and 30% "bycatch" species such as galjoen

(Dichistius capensis), yellowtail (Seriola lalandii) and white steenbras (Lithognathus lithognathus). Catch-

per-unit-effort declines eastwards from 294 and 115 kg net-day−1

for the beach-seine and gill-net fisheries,

respectively, off the West Coast to 48 and 5 kg·net-day−1

off KwaZulu-Natal. Consequently, the fishery

changes in nature from a largely commercial venture on the West Coast to an artisanal/subsistence fishery

on the East Coast.

The fishery is managed on a Total Allowable Effort (TAE) basis with a fixed number of operators in each of

15 defined areas. The number of rights holders for 2014 was listed as 28 and 162 for beach-seine and gill-

net, respectively. Permits are issued solely for the capture of harders, St Joseph and species that appear on

the ‘bait list’. The exception is False Bay, where right holders are allowed to target line-fish species that they

traditionally exploited.

SLR & PRM Page 5-58

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-33: Marine mining right areas in relation to abalone ranching concession areas

SLR & PRM Page 5-59

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-34 shows fishing areas and associated effort (indicated as the number of right holders) for both the

beach-seine and gillnet sectors. Mining Right 554MRC coincides with Management Area 3 (now referred to

as area A), which is situated off Port Nolloth.

The beach-seine fishery operates primarily on the West Coast between False Bay and Port Nolloth. Beach-

seining is an active form of fishing in which woven nylon nets are rowed out into the surf zone to encircle a

shoal of fish. They are then hauled shorewards by a crew of 6 to 30 persons, depending on the size of the

net and the length of the haul. Nets range in length from 120 m to 275 m. Fishing effort is coastal and net

depth may not exceed 10 m. Three of the 28 right holders operate within Mining Right 554MRC.

The gill-net fishery also operates on the West Coast from Yzerfontein to Port Nolloth. Surface set gill-nets

(targeting mullet) are restricted in size to 75 m x 5 m and bottom-set gillnets (targeting St Joseph shark) are

restricted to 75 m x 2.5 m. Gill-nets are set in waters shallower than 50 m. Four of the 162 right holders

operate within 554MRC. The spatial distribution of effort is represented as the annual number of nets set per

kilometre of coastline, which ranges up to 15 off St Helena Bay.

Gill-net and beach-seine landings at Port Nolloth account for less than 10% of the national landings (Steve

Lamberth, DAFF, pers. comm.).

Figure 5-34: Beach-seine and gillnet fishing areas and TAE

(Source: DAFF, 2014)

SLR & PRM Page 5-60

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.4.2 Recreational fishing

Recreational and subsistence fishing on the West Coast is small in scale when compared with the south and

east coasts of South Africa. The population density in Namaqualand is low, and poor road infrastructure and

ownership of much of the land by diamond companies in the northern parts of the West Coast has historically

restricted coastal access to the towns and recreational areas of Port Nolloth, McDougall’s Bay,

Hondeklipbaai and the Groenrivier mouth.

Recreational line-fishing is confined largely to rock and surf angling in places such as Brand-se-Baai, well to

the south of the mining right areas, and the more accessible coastal stretches in the regions. Boat angling is

not common along this section of the coast due to the lack of suitable launch sites and the exposed nature of

the coastline. Fishing effort has been estimated at 0.12 angler/km north of Doringbaai. These fishers

expended effort of approximately 200 000 angler days/year with a catch-per-unit-effort of 0.94 fish/angler/day

(Brouwer et al. 1997; Sauer & Erasmus 1997). Target species consist mostly of hottentot, white stumpnose,

kob, steenbras and galjoen, with catches being used for domestic consumption, or are sold.

Recreational rock lobster catches are made primarily by diving or shore-based fishing using bait bags.

Hoop-netting for rock lobster from either outboard or rowing boats is not common along this section of the

coast (Cockcroft & McKenzie 1997). Most of the recreational catch is made early in the season, with 60% of

the annual catch landed by the end of January. The majority of the recreational take of rock lobster

(approximately 68%) is made by locals resident in areas close to the resource. Due to the remoteness of the

area and the lack of policing, poaching of rock lobsters by the locals, seasonal visitors as well as the shore-

based mining units is becoming an increasing problem. Large numbers of rock lobsters are harvested in

sheltered bays along the Namaqualand coastline by recreational divers who disregard bag-limits, size-limits

or closed seasons. This potentially has serious consequences for the sustainability of the stock in the area.

5.1.4.3 Shipping transport

The majority of shipping traffic is located on the outer edge of the continental shelf, with traffic inshore of the

continental shelf along the West Coast largely comprising fishing and mining vessels, especially between

Kleinsee and Oranjemund (see Figure 5-35). Charted Traffic Separation Schemes, which are International

Maritime Organisation (IMO) adapted, and other relevant information are listed in the South African Annual

Notice to Mariners No 5. International shipping routes fall outside of the mining right areas.

5.1.4.4 Mining

5.1.4.4.1 Diamond mining

The coastal mining licence areas extend some distance inland, and as a consequence public access to the

coast is restricted, and recreational activities between Alexander Bay and Hondeklipbaai is limited to the

area around Port Nolloth and McDougall’s Bay.

The marine diamond mining concession areas are split into four or five zones (Surf zone and (a) to (c) or (d)-

concessions), which together extend from the high water mark out to approximately 500 m depth

(see Figures 4-1 and 5-36). No deep-water diamond mining is currently underway in the adjacent South

African offshore concession areas, since mining activities in De Beers Marine’s Mining Licence (SASA MPT

25/2011) ceased in 2010. In Namibian waters, to the north and adjacent to Sea Concessions 1b and 1c,

deep-water diamond mining by De Beers Marine Namibia is currently operational in the Atlantic 1 Mining

Licence Area.

SLR & PRM Page 5-61

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-35: The major shipping routes along the West Coast of South Africa. Approximate

location of the marine mining right areas is also shown

(Data from the South African Centre for Oceanography)

Figure 5-36: Mining rights areas in relation to marine diamond mining concessions and ports for

commercial and fishing vessels

Cape Town

Saldanha

Port Nolloth

Port Elizabeth

30ºS

20ºE

SLR & PRM Page 5-62

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.4.4.2 Heavy mineral mining

Heavy mineral sands containing, amongst other minerals, zircon, ilmenite, garnet and rutile may be found

offshore of the West Coast. Although a literature search has not identified any published studies that detail

the distribution of heavy minerals offshore, concentrations are known to exist onshore. Tronox’s Namakwa

Sands is currently exploiting heavy minerals from onshore deposits near Brand-se-Baai (approximately 385

km north of Cape Town).

De Beers Consolidated Mines (Pty) Ltd (DBCM) holds prospecting rights over a number of sea concessions

off the West Coast for gold, heavy minerals, platinum group metals and sapphires. De Beers Marine (Pty)

Ltd is, however, the operator of these prospecting areas. Applications for renewal for these rights have been

granted and executed, in portions of Sea Concessions 2c – 10c, thus do not overlap with the mining right

areas.

5.1.4.4.3 Glauconite and phosphate

Glauconite pellets (an iron and magnesium rich clay mineral) and bedded and peletal phosphorite occur on

the seafloor over large areas of the continental shelf on the West Coast. These represent potentially

commercial resources that could be considered for mining as a source of agricultural phosphate and

potassium (Birch 1979a & b; Dingle et al. 1987; Rogers and Bremner 1991).

A number of prospecting areas for glauconite and phosphorite / phosphate are located off the West Coast

(see Figure 5-37), although none overlap with the mining right areas. Green Flash Trading received their

prospecting rights for Areas 251 and 257 in 2012/2013. The prospecting rights for Agrimin1, Agrimin2 and

SOM1 have expired (Jan Briers, DMR pers. comm., December 2013).

5.1.4.4.4 Manganese

Rogers (1995) and Rogers and Bremner (1991) report that manganese nodules enriched in valuable metals

occur in deep water areas (>3 000 m) off the West Coast, well offshore of the mining right areas. The nickel,

copper and cobalt contents of the nodules fall below the current mining economic cut-off grade of 2% over

most of the area, but the possibility exists for mineral grade nodules in the areas north of 33°S in the Cape

Basin and off northern Namaqualand.

5.1.4.5 Hydrocarbons

The South African continental shelf and EEZ have similarly been partitioned into licence blocks for petroleum

exploration and production activities. Exploration has included extensive 2D and 3D seismic surveys and the

drilling of numerous exploration wells, with approximately 40 wells having been drilled in the Namaqua

Bioregion since 1976 (see Figure 5-38), with 35 wellheads remaining on the seabed. There is no current

development or production from the South African West Coast offshore. The Ibhubesi Gas Field (Block 2A)

and Kudu Gas Field (which lies several hundred kilometres to the north-west off the coast of southern

Namibia) have been identified for development.

Although no wells have recently been drilled in the area, further exploratory drilling is proposed for inshore

and offshore portions of Block 1, with further target areas in Block 2B and the Orange Basin (although the

operator has recently relinquished this area). A subsea pipeline to export gas from the Ibhubesi Gas Field to

a location either on the Saldanha Peninsula and to Ankerlig, approximately 25 km north of Cape Town, is

also proposed.

SLR & PRM Page 5-63

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-37: Location of glauconite and phosphorite prospecting areas off the West Coast of South

Africa

SLR & PRM Page 5-64

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-38: Mining Licence Areas in relation to hydrocarbon licence blocks, existing wellheads,

proposed areas for exploratory wells and the routing of the proposed Ibhubesi gas

production pipeline

5.1.4.6 Kelp collecting

The West Coast is divided into numerous seaweed concession areas (see Figure 5-39). The Sea

Concessions 1a, 2a, 3a and 4a mining licence areas overlap with Seaweed Concessions 16, 18 and 19.

Access to a seaweed concession is granted by means of a permit from the Fisheries Branch of DAFF for a

period of five years. The seaweed industry was initially based on sun dried beach-cast seaweed, with

harvesting of fresh seaweed occurring in small quantities only (Anderson et al. 1989). The actual level of

beach-cast kelp collection varies substantially through the year, being dependent on storm action to loosen

kelp from subtidal reefs (see Table 5-9). Permit holders collect beach casts of the both Ecklonia maxima and

Laminaria pallida from the driftline of beaches. The kelp is initially dried just above the high water mark

before being transported to drying beds in the foreland dune area. The dried product is ground before being

exported for production of alginic acid (alginate). In the areas around abalone hatcheries fresh beach-cast

kelp is also collected as food for cultured abalone, although quantities have not been reported to DAFF.

Further south, around Cape Columbine, permits also allow the harvesting of live kelp by hand from a boat.

Two methods of harvesting are practiced. The first involves the removal of the whole kelp primary blade and

fronds thereby killing the plant. The second method involves harvesting the distal frond only, allowing the

frond to re-grow, thereby resulting in a 4-5 times greater yield of frond material over the long term (Levitt et

al. 2002; Rand 2006). As only those plants that reach the surface at low tide are cut, this practice is

restricted to kelp beds further south that are dominated by Ecklonia. No kelp plants with a stipe <50 cm long

may be cut or harmed. The Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) for the harvested product is set annually

(Anderson et al. 2003) and is based on the estimated kelp biomass in the concession area determined from

the total area of kelp beds and the mean biomass within them (see Table 5-10).

SLR & PRM Page 5-65

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Table 5-9: Beach-cast collections (in kg dry weight) for kelp concessions north of Lamberts Bay

since 2010 (Data source: Seaweed Section, DAFF)

Concession Number

13 14 15 16 18 19

Concession

Holder

Eckloweed

Industries

Eckloweed

Industries

Rekaofela

Kelp

Rekaofela

Kelp FAMDA

Premier

Fishing

2005 65 898 165 179 10 300 35 920 0 0

2006 94 914 145 670 19 550 28 600 0 0

2007 122 095 79 771 0 84 445 0 0

2008 61 949 204 365 23 646 16 804 0 0

2009 102 925 117 136 0 0 0 0

2010 53 927 166 106 0 0 0 0

2011 40 511 72 829 0 0 0 0

2012 43 297 151 561 160 500 156 000 0 0

2013 20 485 97 283 36 380 24 000 0 0

2014 19 335 136 266 74 300 75 743 0 0

2015 52 827 158 184 0 0 0 0

2016 69 363 154 010 0 0 0 0

Table 5-10: The estimated total area of kelp beds for each of the kelp concessions between the

Orange River mouth and Cape Columbine (Rand 2006)

Kelp Concession/Area Kelp bed area (ha) Length of rocky

coastline (km)

19 254.95 48.5

18 976.0 18.25

16 206.44 5.0

15 732.22 104.5

Groen-Spoeg 71.94 ~15.0

14 206.64 63.75

13 10.8 4.25

Strandfontein no data ~15

12 15.9 1.25

11 617.95 28.75

SLR & PRM Page 5-66

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-39: Mining rights areas in relation to seaweed rights areas

SLR & PRM Page 5-67

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.1.4.7 Conservation Areas and Marine Protected Areas

Numerous conservation areas and marine protected areas (MPA) exist off the West Coast.

The Rocher Pan MPA, which stretches 500 m offshore of the high water mark of the adjacent Rocher Pan

Nature Reserve, was declared in 1966. The MPA primarily protects a stretch of beach important as a

breeding area to numerous waders. This MPA is located approximately 360 km to the south of the mining

right areas.

The West Coast National Park, which was established in 1985 incorporates the Langebaan Lagoon and

Sixteen Mile Beach MPAs, as well the islands Schaapen (29 ha), Marcus (17 ha), Malgas (18 ha) and Jutten

(43 ha). These MPAs are located approximately 400 km to the south of the mining right areas. Langebaan

Lagoon was designated as a Ramsar site in April 1988 under the Convention on Wetlands of International

Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat. The lagoon is divided into three different utilisation zones

namely: wilderness, limited recreational and multi-purpose recreational areas. The wilderness zone has

restricted access and includes the southern end of the lagoon and the inshore islands, which are the key

refuge sites of the waders and breeding seabird populations respectively. The limited recreation zone

includes the middle reaches of the lagoon, where activities such as sailing and canoeing are permitted. The

mouth region is a multi-purpose recreation zone for power boats, yachts, water-skiers and fishermen.

However, no collecting or removal of abalone and rock lobster is allowed. The length of the combined

shorelines of Langebaan Lagoon MPA and Sixteen Mile Beach is 66 km. The uniqueness of Langebaan lies

in its being a warm oligotrophic lagoon, along the cold, nutrient-rich and wave exposed West Coast.

No rock lobster may be caught in Saldanha Bay eastwards of a line between North Head and South Head.

There is also a Rock Lobster Sanctuary in St Helena Bay. Further marine conservation areas in the

Saldanha/Cape Columbine region include:

• Paternoster Rocks – Egg and Seal Island reserves for seabirds and seals

• Jacob’s Reef - Island reserve for seabirds and seals

• An area within the military base, SAS Saldanha

• Vondeling Island

The only conservation area in which restrictions apply is the McDougall’s Bay rock lobster sanctuary near

Port Nolloth, which is closed to commercial exploitation of rock lobsters (see Figure 5-18). The sanctuary,

which extends 1 nm seawards of the high water mark between the promontory at the northern end of

McDougall's Bay and the promontory at the southern extremity of McDougall's Bay, overlaps with Sea

Concession 3a.

Using biodiversity data mapped for the 2004 and 2011 National Biodiversity Assessments a systematic

biodiversity plan was developed for the West Coast with the objective of identifying coastal and offshore

priority focus areas for MPA expansion (Sink et al. 2011; Majiedt et al. 2013) and both coastal and offshore

priority areas for MPA expansion were identified. To this end, numerous offshore focus areas were identified

for protection on the South African West Coast between Cape Columbine and the South African – Namibian

border. These focus areas were carried forward during Operation Phakisa, which identified potential MPAs.

The draft regulations for the proposed MPAs were published in February 2016 and are currently out for

review. Potentially vulnerable marine ecosystems (VMEs) that were explicitly considered during the planning

included the shelf break, seamounts, submarine canyons, hard grounds, submarine banks, deep reefs and

cold water coral reefs. The proposed MPAs within the broad project area are shown in Figure 5-18.

Of principal importance in the general project area is the proposed Namaqua Fossil Forest MPA, situated

SLR & PRM Page 5-68

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

about 30 km offshore between Port Nolloth and Kleinsee in 135-140 m depth. The small seabed outcrop

(approximately 2 km2), which is unique to the area, is composed of fossilised yellow-wood trees colonised by

fragile, habitat forming scleractinian corals. This area lies well offshore of Sea Concession 4b.

In the spatial marine biodiversity assessment undertaken for Namibia (Holness et al. 2014), the Orange Shelf

Edge area, which includes Tripp Seamount and a shelf-indenting submarine canyon, was identified as being

of high priority for place-based conservation measures. To this end, an Ecologically or Biologically

Significant Area (EBSA) spanning the border between Namibia and South Africa was proposed and inscribed

under the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD). The EBSA comprises shelf/shelf edge habitat with hard

and unconsolidated substrates, including at least eleven offshore benthic habitat types of which four habitat

types are ‘Threatened’, one is ‘Critically Endangered’ and one ‘Endangered’. The proposed Orange Shelf

Edge EBSA is one of few places where these threatened habitat types are in relatively natural/pristine

condition. The local habitat heterogeneity is also thought to contribute to the Orange Shelf Edge being a

persistent hotspot of species richness for demersal fish species. Although focussed primarily on the

conservation of benthic biodiversity and threatened benthic habitats, the EBSA also considers the pelagic

habitat, which is characterised by medium productivity, cold to moderate Atlantic temperatures (SST mean =

18.3°C) and moderate chlorophyll levels related to the eastern limit of the Benguela upwelling on the outer

shelf. A more focussed version of the EBSA has been submitted and is currently undergoing discussions at

national and transboundary level, following which it will be submitted to the CBD for official recognition at the

Review Workshop scheduled for early 2018. The principal objective of the EBSA is identification of features

of higher ecological value that may require enhanced conservation and management measures. No specific

management actions have been formulated for the Orange Shelf Edge area at this stage. The area lies well

offshore of the mining licence areas (see Figure 5-18).

5.1.4.8 Other uses

5.1.4.8.1 Undersea cables

There are a number of submarine telecommunications cable systems across the Atlantic and the Indian

Ocean (see Figure 5-40), including inter alia:

• South Atlantic Telecommunications cable No.3 / West African Submarine Cable / South Africa Far

East (SAT3/WASC/SAFE): This cable system is divided into two sub-systems, SAT3/WASC in the

Atlantic Ocean and SAFE in the Indian Ocean. The SAT3/WASC sub-system connects Portugal

(Sesimbra) with South Africa (Melkbosstrand). From Melkbosstrand the SAT-3/WASC sub-system is

extended via the SAFE sub-system to Malaysia (Penang) and has intermediate landing points at

Mtunzini South Africa, Saint Paul Reunion, Bale Jacot Mauritius and Cochin India (www.safe-

sat3.co.za).

• Eastern Africa Submarine Cable System (EASSy): This is a high bandwidth fibre optic cable system,

which connects countries of eastern Africa to the rest of the world. EASSy runs from Mtunzini (off the

East Coast) in South Africa to Port Sudan in Sudan, with landing points in nine countries, and

connected to at least ten landlocked countries.

• West Africa Cable System (WACS): WACS is 14 530 km in length, linking South Africa (Yzerfontein)

and the United Kingdom (London). It has 14 landing points, 12 along the western coast of Africa

(including Cape Verde and Canary Islands) and 2 in Europe (Portugal and England) completed on

land by a cable termination station in London.

• African Coast to Europe (ACE): The ACE submarine communications cable is a 17 000 km cable

system along the West Coast of Africa between France and South Africa (Yzerfontein).

SLR & PRM Page 5-69

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Where seafloor conditions permitted, the cables are buried 0.7 m below the seafloor from the landing points

to 1 000 m water depth. There is an activity exclusion zone applicable to the telecommunication cables one

nautical mile (approximately 1.9 km) each side of the cable in which no anchoring is permitted.

All existing and planned cable locations lie offshore of the mining right areas

Figure 5-40: Configuration of the current African undersea cable systems

(Source: http://www.manypossibilities.net)

5.1.4.8.2 Archaeological sites

As the West Coast contains a wealth of shell middens, cave deposits, historical artefacts, palaeontological

sites and shipwrecks close to the shore, the occurrence of such sites further offshore cannot be excluded.

(a) Palaeontological sites

Various sites comprising fossilised forests have been found during previous marine diamond exploration

and/or mining activities with Sea Concessions 2c to 5c. Bamford and Corbett (1994) described various

specimens of fossil wood, which were recovered from the continental shelf between the mouth of the Orange

River and Kleinzee. The wood was collected in water depths of 100 to 150 m during exploration of the shelf

by De Beers Marine (Pty) Ltd and the species were found to be predominately Podocarpaceae species.

Stevenson & Bamford (2003) describe an abundance of in-situ fossilised yellowwood tree trunks in an

approximate 2 km2 area of seabed outcrop in 136-140 m depth, about 32 km offshore in Sea Concession 4c.

The fossilised wood and accompanying cold water coral colonies are considered vulnerable to any activities

SLR & PRM Page 5-70

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

that could impact on the seabed (Rogers et al. 2008; Sink et al. 2012a, b). As noted in Section 5.1.4.7, this

area is included in the proposed Namaqua Fossil Forest MPA.

(b) Shipwrecks

Over 2 000 shipwrecks are present along the South African coastline. The majority of known wrecks along

the West Coast are located in relatively shallow water close inshore (within the 100 m isobath). Table 5-11

contains a list2 of known shipwreck sites occurring near Alexander Bay, Port Nolloth and Kleinzee (ACHA,

2015). The majority of the wrecks found in the vicinity of the mining right areas were boats that sunk in the

19th century, a golden age for shipping around the South African coast. It is, however, noted that the precise

location of all these wrecks is unknown as they have been documented only through survivor accounts,

archival descriptions and eyewitness reports recorded in archives and databases.

Wrecks older than 60 years old have National Monument status. In terms of the NHRA, no person may,

without a permit:

• Destroy, damage, excavate, alter, deface or otherwise disturb any wreck site;

• Destroy, damage, excavate or remove from its original position, collect or own any wreck object or

artifact;

• Trade in, sell for private gain, export or attempt to export from the Republic any category of wreck

object or artefact; and

• Bring onto or use at a wreck site any excavation equipment or any equipment which assists in the

detection or recovery of metals or wreck objects or artefacts.

Table: 5-11: Shipwrecks listed near Alexander Bay, Port Nolloth and Kleinzee (ACHA, 2015)

Ship Name Place Date Notes

Unknown Port Nolloth Unknown Unknown stranded wreck. Deleted from BA charts 1969 (SA

Notice 57/69) SAN 113 & 1003

Unknown Port Nolloth Unknown Unknown Deleted from BA Charts 1969 (SA Notice 57/69) SAN

113 & 1003

Unknown Port Nolloth Unknown Unknown stranded wreck SAN 113 & 1003

Dunkeld Port Nolloth 52/02/27 No lives lost.

Flying Fish Port Nolloth 1854/04/15 Vessel apparently wrecked while trying to enter the bay. Marsh

suggest 1855.

Rosalind Port Nolloth 1869/06/25 Wrecked at night. No lives lost.

Shrimp Alexander Bay 1854/05/17 None

Valkyrie Off of Port

Nolloth 1894/05/16 None

Veronica Port Nolloth 1886/02/08 Collided with the barque 'Marquis of Worcester' and wrecked in a

south easterly gale. No lives lost.

Lieutenant

Maury

Port Nolloth

(Anchorage?) 1892/02/10

Vessel took fire while at anchor on 10 February and sank the

same day. The cause of the blaze was not established. Only one

lifeboat and two charred and burned stunsail booms were saved.

Was carrying 150 tons of copper ore bound for Swansea. No lives

lost.

Ocean King

Penguin Rock

- 32.2km s.of

Port Nolloth

1881/01/22

20 miles (32.2km) south of Port Nolloth, out to sea. The vessel

was registered in Swansea, Wales, and seems to have been

employed for a number of years around the South African coast

carrying coal - reference in Gov. Gazette of 1880. No lives lost.

Foundered within 20 minutes of striking.

Stranger Port Nolloth 1878/08/27 Caught alight and abandoned. No lives lost.

Mincio Port Nolloth 1908/06/27 Grounded.

2 This list was compiled from various source databases, documentary resources and archives and is not exhaustive. Those without a

location have been excluded from this list

SLR & PRM Page 5-71

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Ship Name Place Date Notes

Hellopes 7 miles south

of Port Nolloth 1911/04/16

Struck a submerged object in thick fog. She was refloated and

kept afloat with pumps while her cargo was discharged.

Frida Port Nolloth 1882/10/25

GG Notice # 1259 indicates that the vessel arrived in Port Nolloth

on 12 October. She drifted ashore in a south-easterly gale after

dragging her anchors, and was wrecked on the 25th. No live were

lost.

Gertrud

Woermann

South of Port

Nolloth

(12 miles /

19km)

1903/08/22

Lost in fog and vessel became a total wreck. Wreck still visible.

No lives lost. According to Gert Koegelenberg of Ovenstones in

Port Nolloth, the wreck is lying in about 10 m of water. The site is

rocky and covered in kelp which makes seeing the wreck difficult.

The site is flat with the decks having collapsed. Prop shaft is

visible, but prop is missing. Navpos co-ordinates suggest the

wreck is in Namibia (22.31,60S 14.29,62E).

Jessie Smith Alexander Bay 1853/08/23

The Jessie Smith was a Port Elizabeth owned vessel which was

involved in the flourishing copper trade from the Namaqualand

coast. 4 lives lost.

La Porte 80 km north of

Port Nolloth 1904/06/09

Lost 50 miles (80 km) north of Port Nolloth, and lies about 100 m

offshore.

Lion Port Nolloth 1878/10/20 Wrecked in a south-easterly gale. No lives lost.

Lizzie 3.2 km north of

Port Nolloth 1874/05/ Lost after cables parted.

Lochinvar North of / opp.

Muisvlakte Approximate position: 29.12.46S, 16.50.32E

Piratiny

South of

Kleinzee /

Schulp Point

1943 Carrying soft goods from South America. Ex Carla. Still visible in

1995.

Ticino

8 km (5 m) s of

Port Nolloth

near Goap

1908/08/30

Wrecked as a result of a strong current, and the fact that the bar

into Port Nolloth was impassable. She lost her two anchors and

went ashore to become a total wreck. No lives lost.

Dunotter Just north of

Port Nolloth 1950 None

Dundoon South of Port

Nolloth 1949 None

(c) Shell middens

Although not in the marine environment, numerous shell middens occur in the coastal zone along the West

Coast. Given the proximity of Sea Concessions 1a, 2a, 3a and 4a to the coast, activities associate with

mining (e.g. coffer dams and “walpomp” operations) could impact such archaeological sites.

Research has shown that the majority of archaeological sites occur within about 300 m of the high water

mark, with most of these sites situated close to rocky shorelines and wave cut headlands. Recent studies,

however, also indicate that the dunes aligned alongside sandy beaches also support many archaeological

sites (ACRM 2008).

Surveys undertaken south of Port Nolloth have shown that there is an almost continuous distribution of shell

midden and wind-deflated sites along the rocky shoreline and adjacent to dune ridges and sandy beaches.

ACRM (2008) identified a number of archaeological sites along the coast adjacent to Sea Concessions 1a,

2a, 3a and 4a (see Table 5-12).

SLR & PRM Page 5-72

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Table: 5-12: Archaeological sites identifies along the coast of Sea Concessions 1a, 2a, 3a and 4a

(ACHA, 2015)

No. Co-ordinates Type Notes

A1 S 28° 39 008

E 16° 29 090

Shell

midden

The site is located at the old HMS mine on the coast in the northern portion of

the concession area. Site includes shellfish and Later Stone Age (LSA) tools.

The site has been severely damaged by mining related activities.

A9 S 29° 12 045

E 16° 50 759

Shell

midden

Large amounts of shell midden material occur on both slopes of the prospecting

trench at Muisvlakte. The remains are dominated by limpets with relatively

large amounts of Black mussel also occurring. Lithics are numerous on the site,

and include flakes, chunks, hammerstones, grindstone fragments and

manuports, in quartz, quartzite, indurated shale and chalcedony. A few pieces of

haematite were also found. Relatively large numbers of ostrich eggshell is also

present. The site has been badly damaged by prospecting.

A10 S 29° 12 029

E 16° 50 794

Shell

midden

The remains of a large shell midden occur at the car park at Muisvlakte. The site

has been destroyed by the car park, but scatters of shellfish (mainly limpets) and

stone tools occur on the margins of the car park and in the surrounding veld.

A11 S 29° 06 037

E 16° 49 174

Shell

midden

This is the well-known `The Cliffs’ site, which is a large prospecting trench north

of Muisvlakte. Extensive scatters of shellfish, stone tool assemblages, terrestrial

and marine fauna, many pieces of ostrich eggshell and pottery occur mainly on

the north facing sand dunes overlooking the prospecting trench. Much shellfish

has also spilled over the edges of the trench and into the excavation. Shellfish

and stone tools also occur on some of the flatter south facing slopes nearer to

the coast.

Large amounts of weathered and bleached fossil shell were also noted in the

aeolianites (fossil dunes) about 2 m below the sand overburden in the large

prospecting trench. Numerous remains of large vertebrate fossil (bone) were

also found in weathered aeolianite and orange coloured sands, more than 4

meters below the overburden.

A12 S 29° 10 361

E 16° 50 456

Shell

midden

Large scatters of shellfish were documented on a series of shifting and wind-

deflated dunes about 500 m east of the `spring’ at Muisvlakte. The shellfish is

dominated by both marine species, as well as freshwater shell. Very few flakes

were documented, but several large grindstone fragments and manuports were

noted.

A13 S 28° 47 774

E 16° 34 931

Shell

midden

This site is located at the coast between Boegoeberg and Rietfontein North, and

is known as `Kenny’s Midden’. It is highly visible from the road and has already

been severely damaged as a result of road works cutting through the dunes to

gain access to the beach. The shellfish on the site is dominated by limpets, with

large numbers of whole shell occurring. It is estimated that the shellfish deposits

below the dunes are several meters deep, representing several thousand cubic

meters of archaeological deposit.

Many stone tools also occur over the site, with discreet and coherent stone

working activity areas also present. Many quartz and quartzite flakes, cores,

chunks and chips were found, as well as chalcedony, indurated shale and

silcrete flakes, retouched pieces and tools, including wood working adzes and

scrapers. Large lower grindstones, manuports, grindstone fragments, upper

grindstones, hammerstones and several anvils were counted.

Many pieces of ostrich eggshell cover a large area of the site.

Large numbers of pottery were documented on the site, including bosses, lugs,

nipple base and several large refits (of bowls and cups), as well as decorated rim

and body sherds.

Bone, including tortoise, bird, seal, bovid, fish, crayfish and unidentified bone

was also found on the site.

A15 S 28° 40 556

E 16° 30 793

Grave The graves of two shipwreck victims are situated alongside a long, shallow

trench, very close to the rocky shoreline, about 1 km south of the Alexander Bay

Harbour. The two graves are covered with large slabs of mudstone and shale.

Some skeletal remains have already eroded from one of the graves.

SLR & PRM Page 5-73

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

A16 No GPS

reading taken

Cave The site is a small schist cave in a coastal gulley west of the smaller

Boegoesberg Noord inselberg. The cave is almost completely buried by aeolian

sand. Deposits in the cave comprise various marine gravels and cobble beach

levels with fossil shell and lenses of organic material. In the top 30 cm there are

many bones (including seal, carnivores, bovid and even possibly human)

embedded in a schist scree formed by roof deterioration.

5.2 ORANGE RIVER ENVIRONMENT

The PSJV is the holder of Mining Right 554 MRC, which includes the lowermost reaches of the Orange River

between Arrisdrif and the sea (Figure 5-41). More specifically this riverine-estuarine area extends from the

centre line of the Orange River to the banks of the following properties:

a) Farm Corridor Wes No. 2;

b) Portion 17 (a portion of Portion 8);

c) Portion 16 (a portion of Portion 9);

d) Portion 15 (a portion of Portion 10);

e) Arrisdrif No. 616;

f) Farm No. 1; and

g) Farm Brandkaros No. 517.

Figure 5-41: The Orange River component of Marine Diamond Licence 554 MRC running from

Arrisdrif to the sea

(Source: http://www.ramsar.org/wetland/south-africa)

SLR & PRM Page 5-74

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.2.1 GEOMORPHOLOGY

5.2.1.1 Riparian zone

The Orange River between Arrisdrif and the Sir Ernest Oppenheimer Bridge is confined between its banks,

which are bordered by alluvial terraces that may be over-topped during major floods. Within the channel

these sand and mud terraces (or banks) are exposed under low flow conditions. These sand and mud

terraces are often vegetated and quite stable, but may be re-shaped during major floods.

5.2.1.2 Estuarine zone

The estuary below the Sir Ernest Oppenheimer Bridge is an elongated fan in shape with numerous channels

and islands. Most of the islands are vegetated and exhibit a high degree of morphological stability. Some

small islands close to the mouth are ephemeral in nature in response to the location of the estuary mouth

(see Figure 5-42).

Part of the estuary has been isolated from the active system by a road embankment (Figure 5-43). The

seaward end of this embankment has, however, been breached in an attempt to re-activate the saltmarsh in

the area. The Dunvlei channel which fed river flow along the southern side of the estuary was closed by a

dyke in 1974, which contributed significantly to the degradation of the saltmarsh.

Figure 5-42: The Orange River Estuary. The red line is the 5 mamsl contour demarcating the

estuarine functional zone

5.2.1.3 Estuary mouth

The estuary mouth may migrate between the end of the causeway in the south to the extreme north of the

beach berm on the Namibian side of the estuary. The location of the mouth is a result of a combination of

sea state, river flow conditions and actions taken by either the PSJV or Namdeb in the breaching of the berm

after a period of mouth closure. Consequently the mouth is closer to the north bank if the breaching was

undertaken by Namdeb and closer to the south bank if undertaken by the PSJV.

SLR & PRM Page 5-75

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

The migration of the mouth to the south is limited by scrap machinery (“Detroit riprap”) used to anchor the

end of the road embankment on the beach berm (see Figures 5-42 and 5-43). Removal of this material

would enable the mouth to migrate further south, which could be of benefit to the presently desertified

saltmarsh on the south bank.

Figure 5-43: Structures impacting the Orange River Estuary

SLR & PRM Page 5-76

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-44: Scrap machinery (“Detroit riprap”) used to anchor the seaward end of the road

embankment, which was built in 1964. The scrap limits the southward migration of

the estuary mouth

(Photo: S. Lamberth, August 2013)

5.2.1.4 Sediments

The sediments in the estuary and along its banks are almost entirely of fluvial origin. The majority of the

sediments are fine-grained consisting of silts and muds, including clays.

Large dams in the upper catchment trap a considerable proportion of the eroded sediments from the area.

Erosion, primarily, due to overgrazing in the lower catchment, may to some extent offset this reduction in

sediment load (ORASECOM 2012). However, the proposed Lower Orange River Dam upstream from

Vioolsdrif will trap this sediment. Similarly, the Neckartal Dam being constructed on the Fish River will trap

much of the sediment from that system. Consequently, in future far less sediment will reach the Orange

River Estuary than at present.

The reduction in smaller floods (see Section 5.2.2.1 below) has resulted in the meandering channels in the

upper estuary becoming more stable and shallower than hitherto. The reduction in the variability of the river

flow has led to the more permanent exposure of the sandbanks and, therefore, they have become more

vegetated. This stabilisation of the sandbanks by vegetation suggests that much larger floods are required

to remove them.

5.2.2 HYDROLOGY

5.2.2.1 River inflows

River inflow is the main driving force shaping the nature of an estuary. The Orange River catchment is

approximately 1 000 000 km2 in extent and the natural mean annual runoff (MAR) is estimated to be 11 306

million m3. The entire Orange River system is highly regulated and the catchment contains twenty three

major impoundments besides myriad smaller dams on the tributaries. Water is drawn for the industries and

metropolitan areas of the Witwatersrand, as well as for agriculture along almost its entire length to the sea.

The consequence of this is that by 1989 the MAR had been reduced to approximately 50% of the natural

level (DW, 1990) and to 40% of MAR at present.

SLR & PRM Page 5-77

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Besides this significant reduction in flow volume, the variability of the flow has also been greatly reduced as a

result of the dams in the catchment and the regulated releases from them. As a result low flows (dry season)

are elevated and flood peaks reduced (captured by the dams). The consequences for the Orange River

Estuary of these changes in the flow regime are summarised below:

• Large floods: the frequency of occurrence and magnitude of large floods has been reduced. Orange

River floods normally occur during the summer;

• Small floods: the frequency of occurrence and magnitude of smaller floods with return periods of 1:1 to

1:10 years have been greatly reduced. These floods normally occur in the summer. This decrease in

flood frequency has resulted in a considerable reduction in the flooding of the saltmarsh at the estuary

mouth. The duration of these floods generally would have been a few weeks;

• Low flow periods: the almost continuous release from the dams for electricity generation and irrigation

has resulted in an elevated base flow. Consequently the occurrence of periods of very low flow in the

winter, causing estuary mouth closure and back-flooding of the supratidal saltmarsh, has been

reduced significantly.

5.2.2.2 Mouth closure

Since the 1988 Orange River flood there have been only three documented mouth closure events (CSIR

2004). These included the prolonged period of closure in 1993 (spring) and two brief periods in December

1994 and December 1995.

The exact flow conditions giving rise to mouth closure have not been established (Van Niekerk 2013),

although mouth closure does occur at flows of 5 m3/s or less. However, under certain conditions the mouth

may close at higher river flows (10 – 20 m3/s).

When mouth closure occurs at low flows (< 5 m3/s) the water level in the estuary rises until it stabilises as a

result of seepage through the sea berm and evaporation. Under these conditions the mouth remains closed

until the river flow increases, the berm is overtopped and a new mouth is established. In 1993 the mouth

was closed for four months, before it was finally breached artificially in December 1993.

If closure occurs at flows higher than 5 m3/s the water level in the estuary rises rapidly leading to natural

breaching of the sea berm. In December 1994 the mouth closed for three days prior to which the median

flow for a 45-day period was 15 m3/s (min. 3 m

3/s and max. 25 m

3/s).

5.2.2.3 Tidal range

The mean tidal range at the mouth of the Orange River is approximately 0.4 m and can reach 1 m during

spring tides. This pattern extends to 6 km upstream from the mouth (the location of the old bridge), after

which tidal influence is very limited, and at low river flow and spring tide the range at the Sir Ernest

Oppenheimer Bridge is 20 mm or less.

Tidal penetration into the saltmarsh area to the south of the road embankment depends upon the

connectivity with the main water body. The inability of the mouth to migrate south of the road embankment,

which was “anchored” to the beach berm by old heavy machinery (see Figure 5-44) probably prevents the

development of a more permanent tidal inflow into the saltmarsh area.

SLR & PRM Page 5-78

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.2.2.4 Salinity and circulation

The salinity regime in the Orange River Estuary is dynamic and results from interaction between the

variability in river flow, the position of the estuary mouth and the constantly changing distribution of braided

channels.

At low flows (< 20 m3/s) the estuary is relatively well mixed becoming highly stratified under high flow

conditions (> 50 m3/s). During river flows of 20 – 50 m

3/s the estuary is relatively well mixed on the flood tide

and stratified on the ebb when the fresh river water runs over the denser, underlying salt water.

The location of the mouth has a major influence on the salinity of the water reaching the saltmarsh and the

re-opened long-shore channel on the southern bank. When the mouth is at its southern-most position the

amount of seawater entering the saltmarsh and long-shore channel area at spring tides is considerable.

However, if the mouth is adjacent to the northern bank the water entering the saltmarsh area is of much

lower salinity being diluted with river water.

Broadly the salinity regime of the Orange River Estuary can be summarised as follows:

• High river flow (> 50 m3/s): salinity will be low throughout the system with limited intrusion of seawater,

mainly at spring high tide.

• Intermediate river flow (20 – 50 m3/s): the estuary is open to the sea with regular tidal penetration.

Vertical stratification in the deeper basin in the lower reaches occurs with bottom water salinity of

> 20 ppt and surface water salinity of 0 – 10 ppt. Approximately 6 km upstream from the mouth the

water is fresh.

• Low river flow (5 – 20 m3/s): vertical stratification still occurs near the mouth with the salinity close to

that of seawater. There is a general salinity gradient upstream to 7 – 8 km from the mouth where the

water becomes fresh.

5.2.3 BIOLOGICAL COMPONENTS

5.2.3.1 Riparian vegetation

The Orange River between Arrisdrif and the Sir Ernest Oppenheimer Bridge is confined between its banks.

The vegetation comprises Lower Gariep Alluvial Vegetation (Mucina and Rutherford 2006). The flat alluvial

terraces and riverine islands support riparian thickets, dominated by Ziziphus mucronata, Euclea

pseudebenus and Tamarix usneoides (see Figure 5-45). The reed Phragmites australis lines much of the

channel and the seasonally-flooded sand banks. The lower alluvial terraces are covered with grasslands and

herblands supporting graminoid species such as Cynodon dactylon, Eragrostis echinochloa and Stipagrostis

namaquensis and herbs such as Amaranthus praetermissus and Coronopus integrifolius (see Figure 5-46).

5.2.3.2 Estuarine vegetation

The Sir Ernest Oppenheimer Bridge is considered to be the head of the Orange River Estuary. The

estuarine area is some 2 709 ha in extent and responds dynamically to the river flow regime.

Veldkornet and Adams (2013) mapped the habitat types within the estuary (see Figure 5-47) and compared

the situation in 2012 with the Reference Condition used to benchmark changes within the system (see Table

5-13). The most notable change has been the loss of approximately 50% of the saltmarsh (ca. 300 ha) to

desertification, as a result of anthropogenic activities.

The Orange River Estuary has a unique diversity of macrophyte species (see Table 5-14).

SLR & PRM Page 5-79

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-45: Riparian thicket lining the river banks at Arrisdrif

(Photo: P. Morant, July 2017)

Figure 5-46: Seasonally flooded sandbanks used as pasture near Brandkaros


Table: 5-13: Changes in habitat cover of the Orange Estuary (Veldkornet and Adams 2013)

Habitat type Reference Condition (ha) Status in 2012 (ha)

Channel 630 609

Sand/mudbanks 101 144

Reeds and sedges 300 316

Submerged macrophytes 0 <1

Supratidal saltmarsh 1 144 602

Macroalgae 0.5 1

Intertidal saltmarsh 134 144

Desertified saltmarsh 0 511

Terrestrial vegetation 399.5 383

TOTAL 2 709 2 709

SLR & PRM Page 5-80

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-47: Habitats and vegetation of the Orange Estuary

(Source: Veldkornet and Adams 2013)

SLR & PRM Page 5-81

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Table 5-14: Macrophyte species and associated habitats recorded in 2012 (Veldkornet and Adams

2013)

Species Habitat

Apium graveolens L. Intertidal saltmarsh

Beta vulgarus subsp. maritima (L.) Arcang. Intertidal saltmarsh

Cotula coronopifolia L. Intertidal saltmarsh

Juncus kraussii Hochst. Intertidal saltmarsh

Plantago lanceolata L. Intertidal saltmarsh

Samolus porosus (L.f.) Thunb. Intertidal saltmarsh

Sarcocornia decumbens (Toelken) A.J. Scott Intertidal saltmarsh

Sarcocornia natalensis (Bunge ex. Ung-Sternb.) A.J.Scott Intertidal saltmarsh

Sarcocornia tegetaria S. Steffen, Mucina & G. Kadereit Intertidal saltmarsh

Spergularia media (L.) C.Presl ex Griseb Intertidal saltmarsh

Tetragonia decumbens Mill. Intertidal saltmarsh

Triglochin bulbosa L. Intertidal saltmarsh

Polysiphonia incompta Harvey Macroalgae

Ulva capensis J.E. Areschoug Macroalgae

Ulva intestinalis L. Macroalgae

Bolboschoenus maritimus (L.) Palla Reeds and Sedges

Ficinia lateralis (Vahl) Kunth Reeds and Sedges

Phragmites australis (Cav.) Steud. Reeds and Sedges

Schoenoplectus scirpoides (Schrad.) Browning Reeds and Sedges

Stuckenia pectinata (L.) Boerner Submerged macrophtytes

Atriplex vestita (Thunb.) Aellen Supratidal saltmarsh

Atriplex semibaccata R.Br. Supratidal saltmarsh

Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. Supratidal saltmarsh

Lagurus ovatus L. Supratidal saltmarsh

Psilocaulon dinteri Schwantes Supratidal saltmarsh

Salsola aphylla Spreng. Supratidal saltmarsh

Sarcocornia pillansii (Moss) A.J.Scott Supratidal saltmarsh

Sporobolus virginicus (L.) Kunth. Supratidal saltmarsh

Suaeda fruticosa (L.) Forssk. Supratidal saltmarsh

Aspalathus sp Terrestrial Fringe

Datura stramonium L. Terrestrial Fringe

Gomphocarpus fruticosus (L.) Aiton f. Terrestrial Fringe

Sporobolus africanus (Poir.) Robyns & Tournay Terrestrial Fringe

5.2.3.2.1 Habitat types and their ecological function

(a) Open water/channels

The open water areas near the mouth and the channels further upstream serve as habitat for both marine-

derived and fluvial phytoplankton. Their distribution is controlled primarily by their salinity tolerance. The

structure and distribution of the phytoplankton community responds dynamically to the tidal and fluvial

regimes.

SLR & PRM Page 5-82

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Phytoplankton chlorophyll a (used to determine the most productive areas) was found to be lowest at the

mouth of the estuary (1.5 µg/litre) and highest 1 km upstream (27.6 ± 7.1 µg/litre) (Snow 2013). Snow

(2013) also found flagellates to be the dominant group near the mouth whereas further upstream, 3.5 km

from the mouth, diatoms and chlorophytes in bloom densities (> 10 000 cells/ml) were present.

(b) Intertidal sand and mud flats

The distribution of the channels and associated mud and sand flats in the estuary responds to river flow and

the location of the estuary mouth. Temporary islands may form, which are used as roosts by cormorants,

pelicans and gulls. In August 2012 the area covered by intertidal sand and mud flats was 50% greater than

under Reference Conditions (see Table 5-13).

(c) Submerged macrophytes

The strong flow regime and high turbidity of the Orange River Estuary provides little opportunity for

submerged macrophytes to become established on a significant scale. During the August 2012 survey the

rooted submerged macrophyte Stuckenia pectinata (pond weed) was found in the upper reaches of small

channels where the salinity was low (below 10 ppt) (Veldkornet and Adams 2013).

(d) Macroalgae

In 2012 abundant growths of the green algae Ulva capensis and Ulva intestinalis and the red alga

Polysiphonia sp. were present along the west bank (Veldkornet and Adams 2013). This is the first record of

such species in the Orange River Estuary indicating the system has become more marine-dominated than

hitherto.

(e) Intertidal saltmarsh

There are two areas of intertidal saltmarsh (see Figure 5-48) on either side of the main channel in the lower

reaches of the estuary (see Figure 5-47) comprising a diversity of Sarcocornia species including an

ecomorphotype of Sarcocornia pillansii (Moss) that displays a unique morphology characterised by corky,

swollen internodes (Steffen et al. 2010). Cotula coronopifolia grows in intertidal saltmarsh areas where the

salinity does not exceed 20 ppt.

(f) Supratidal saltmarsh

The dominant species in the supratidal saltmarsh is the salt and drought-tolerant Sarcocornia pillansii.

However, approximately 50% (ca. 300 hectares) of the supratidal saltmarsh areas has been lost to

desertification (see Figure 5-49) as a result of a number of human interventions, including the construction of

a road embankment, dykes (to protect the Dunvlei Farm) and sewage treatment ponds. These activities

starved the supratidal saltmarsh of freshwater and as a result it began to die.

The sewage treatment ponds have subsequently been removed from the estuary. In 1997 the seaward end

of the road embankment was breached to allow water to enter the dried-out saltmarsh. This was partially

successful but the breach was too small to permit large volumes of water to enter the saltmarsh. In addition,

the failure to remove the scrap machinery, which had been used to “anchor” the seaward end of the road

embankment onto the beach berm, prevented the estuary mouth from migrating southwards, which also

restricted the water exchange to the saltmarsh.

(g) Reeds and sedges

Dense stands of Phragmites australis are present along the channels where the salinity does not exceed

15 ppt. The reed beds provide an important habitat for invertebrates, fish and birds. In some areas the

sedge Schoenoplectus scirpoides dominates the channel banks.

SLR & PRM Page 5-83

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Figure 5-48: Intertidal saltmarsh


Figure 5-49: Desertified saltmarsh


5.2.3.3 Invertebrates

There is little published information on the invertebrate fauna of the Orange River Estuary. Brown (1959)

described the estuarine fauna of lower reaches of the Orange River near the mouth as “extremely poor”

attributing this to the extremes of salinity between summer and winter. Brown (1959), Day (1981) and

Whitfield (2000) concluded that the Orange River does not have a “real estuary” i.e. it does not have an

established, temporally stable estuarine mixing zone.

The study undertaken by Wooldridge (2013) is the first attempt to provide a systematic quantified analysis of

the invertebrate fauna of the Orange River Estuary. A summary of this analysis is provided below.

SLR & PRM Page 5-84

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.2.3.3.1 Zooplankton

The species richness of the zooplankton is strongly related to the salinity regime. Up to 25 species were

present when the salinity was relatively high. Neritic copepod species, e.g. Centropagids, Clausocalanids

and Clytemnestrids, dominate the plankton. Species richness was low when the salinity was low with only

few neritic species were present near the mouth.

There are two broad categories of mesozooplankton in the Orange River Estuary; the distribution of which is

primarily linked to the volume of freshwater entering the system. A typical euryhaline zooplanktonic

community is not well developed and is represented by a few species occurring in low numbers.

A freshwater-associated community is present in the upper reaches and its extent depends on the strength

of the flow.

5.2.3.3.2 Hyperbenthos

The mysid shrimp Mesopodopsis wooldridgei numerically dominated the hyperbenthic community.

In comparison with the zooplankton mysid abundance was relatively high in the hyperbenthos. Mysids are

relatively mobile moving into the estuary from the nearshore when conditions become favourable. M. major

is a transient species entering the estuary with the high tide and returning to sea on the ebb.

5.2.3.3.3 Macrozoobenthos

The macrozoobenthic community is poorly represented with only seven species recorded in three surveys.

Polychaete worms were the dominant group with Ceratonereis keiskama and Desdemona ornata dominating

the community numerically and being widely distributed throughout the estuary.

The invertebrate fauna of the Orange River Estuary is species-poor and atypical of tidal estuaries along the

West Coast of South Africa. The species resident in the estuary are tolerant of a highly variable physico-

chemical environment, although the populations fluctuate in response to the fluvial flow regime. The

invertebrate groups with the highest biomass are linked either to the benthos or hyperbenthos. The

euryhaline zooplankton community is particularly poor and species that often dominate euryhaline

mesozooplankton communities are absent (e.g. Acartia longipatella) or present in very low numbers

(e.g. Pseudodiaptomus hessei).

5.2.3.4 Fish

5.2.3.4.1 Fish fauna

Thirty-six species of fish have been recorded from the Orange River Estuary (Brown 1959; Day 1981;

Cambray 1984; Morant and O’Callaghan 1990; Harrison 1997; Seaman and van As 1998; Lamberth 2013)

(see Table 5-15). Overall, 31% of the fish species recorded from the Orange River Estuary are either

partially or completely dependent on estuaries for their survival, 22% are marine and 47% freshwater in

origin.

Six of these, the estuarine round herring Gilchristella aestuaria, Cape silverside Atherina breviceps,

barehead goby Caffrogobius nudiceps, commafin goby Caffrogobius saldhana, klipvis Clinus superciliosus

and pipefish Syngnathus temminckii live and breed in estuaries. With the exception of G. aestuaria, these

fish also have marine breeding populations.

Three species, white steenbras Lithognathus lithognathus, leervis Lichia amia and the flathead mullet Mugil

cephalus are dependent on estuaries for at least their first year of life whereas another two, elf Pomatomus

saltatrix and harder Liza richardsonii are partially estuarine dependent.

SLR & PRM Page 5-85

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Eight species such as West Coast steenbras Lithognathus aureti and silver kob Argyrosomus inodorus are

marine species that occasionally venture into estuaries whereas 15 species, such as largemouth yellowfish

Labeobarbus kimberleyensis, river sardine Mesobola brevianalis and the introduced carp Cyprinus carpio are

euryhaline freshwater species whose penetration into the estuary is determined by salinity tolerance.

One catadromous species, the longfin eel Anguilla mossambica, has been recorded from the Orange River

near Kakamas and it is assumed that recruitment occurred through the estuary notwithstanding the (more

likely) possibility that it entered the system through one of the inter-basin transfer schemes that connect the

catchment with rivers on the east coast of South Africa.

Table 5-15: A list of all 36 species recorded in the Orange / Gariep River Estuary (Brown 1959; Day

1981; Cambray 1984; DWAF 1986; Morant and O’Callaghan 1990; Harrison 1997;

Seaman and van As 1998; Lamberth 2013)

Family Species Common name

Anguillidae Anguilla mossambica Longfin eel

Atherinidae Atherina breviceps Cape silverside

Austroglanididae Austroglanis sclateri Rock catfish

Carangidae Lichia amia Leervis

Cichlidae

Oreochromis mossambicus Mozambique tilapia

Pseudocrenilabris philander Southern mouthbrooder

Tilapia sparrmanii Banded tilapia

Clariidae Clarias gariepinus Sharptooth catfish

Clinidae Clinus sp. Klipvis

Clinus superciliosus Super klipvis

Clupeidae Gilchristella aestuaria Estuarine round-herring

Sardinops sagax Sardine

Cynoglossidae Cynoglossus capensis Sand tonguefish

Cyprinidae

Barbus hospes Namaqua barb

Barbus paludinosus Straightfin barb

Barbus trimaculatus Threespot barb

Cyprinus carpio Carp

Labeo capensis Orange River mudfish

Labeo umbratus Moggel

Labeobarbus aeneus Smallmouth yellowfish

Labeobarbus kimberleyensis Largemouth yellowish

Mesobola brevianalis River sardine

Gobiidae Caffrogobius nudiceps Barehead goby

Caffrogobius saldhana Commafin goby

Mugilidae Liza richardsonii Southern mullet / harder

Mugil cephalus Flathead mullet

Poecillidae Gambusia affinnis Mosquito fish

Pomatomidae Pomatomus saltatrix Elf

Rajidae Raja spp. Skates

Sciaenidae Argyrosomus coronus West coast dusky kob

Argyrosomus inodorus Silver kob

Sparidae

Diplodus cervinus Wildeperd / zebra

Lithognathus aureti West coast steenbras

Lithognathus lithognathus White steenbras

Syngnathidae Syngnathus temminckii. Longsnout pipefish

Triglidae Chelidonichthys capensis Cape gurnard

SLR & PRM Page 5-86

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.2.3.4.2 Flow regime and mouth condition

During floods and high flows fish tend to find refuge in the shallow marginal areas on the floodplain and / or

amongst saltmarsh and reed beds. In the Orange River Estuary, flow velocities are higher during the

summer months. High flow velocities generate numerous eddies that provide refuge and concentrate prey,

as well as standing waves that fish use to recruit into the estuary or move upstream. Most estuary

associated fish are adapted to take advantage of both high and low flow velocities. If reduced flow velocities

translate into increased phytoplankton, zooplankton and benthic algae production, fish will benefit from this

abundant prey.

During the summer months, open mouth conditions maintain a substantial warm, turbid plume that provides

a refuge from cool up-welled water in the nearshore and cues for fish attempting to recruit into the estuary.

Under closed mouth conditions increased phytoplankton and zooplankton production favours the growth of

all species and spawning success, survival and population size of estuary breeders increases. Whilst

closed, inundated floodplain and saltmarsh areas increase the available foraging habitat. Prolonged mouth

closure will likely see salinity levels decrease and freshwater species moving into the lower reaches of the

estuary.

5.2.3.5 Birds

The Orange River Estuary has been recognised as one of the most important in South Africa in terms of its

water bird populations (Turpie et al. 2002; Turpie and Clark 2007). It has also been designated as an

Important Bird Area (Barnes and Anderson, 1998).

During the 1980s the bird population was considerably greater than at present; where numbers exceeded

20 000 individuals. Twenty years later (2000 – 2005) the numbers had declined to approximately 6 500 both

in summer and winter. In contrast, the number of species of water birds recorded at the estuary has been

fairly constant during the past 25 years. The average number of species recorded per count is 52 (Anderson

2006 and Table 5-16).

There has been dramatic decline in the members of cormorants, waders and terns from 1980 to 2012. The

decline in numbers of Cape Cormorants at the Orange River Estuary is almost certainly a reflection of the

precipitous decline in the overall Cape Cormorant population primarily due to the decline in anchovies and

pilchards as a result of over-fishing. Other factors affecting the number of Cape Cormorants at the Orange

River Estuary include the lack of suitable islands for breeding and roosting and human disturbance.

Since the 1980s the number of waders and terms have also declined dramatically. Anderson et al. (2003)

suggest that the change in the geomorphological form of the estuary mouth and islands may have made it

less suitable for roosting terms. They also suggest that other large nearby wetlands in Namibia currently

may be more suitable and attract birds that formerly used the Orange River Estuary.

Table 5-16: Water bird species recorded at the Orange River Estuary, 2012 (Anderson 2013)

Name Upper

estuary

Lower

estuary

Salt

Marsh Mouth Total

Avocet, Pied (Recurvirostra avosetta) 3 30 6 39

Coot, Red-knobbed (Fulica cristata) 72 72

Cormorant, Cape (Phalacrocorax capensis) 4 11 172 187

Cormorant, Reed (Phalacrocorax africanus) 7 1 8

Cormorant, White-breasted (Phalacrocorax carbo) 26 2 36 64

Curlew, Eurasian (Numenius arquata) 1 1

Duck, Yellow-billed (Anas undulata) 7 8 15

SLR & PRM Page 5-87

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

Name Upper

estuary

Lower

estuary

Salt

Marsh Mouth Total

Egret, Cattle (Bubulcus ibis) 1 1

Egret, Little (Egretta garzetta) 9 26 35

Egret, Yellow-billed (Egretta intermedia) 2 2

Fish-Eagle, African (Haliaeetus vocifer) 7 7

Flamingo, Greater (Phoenicopterus ruber) 15 5 111 4 135

Flamingo, Lesser (Phoeniconaias minor) 137 15 152

Goose, Egyptian (Alopochen aegyptiacus) 134 121 11 266

Goose, Spur-winged (Plectropterus gambensis) 4 4

Grebe, Little (Tachybaptus ruficollis) 4 1 5

Greenshank, Common (Tringa nebularia) 4 3 1 3 11

Gull, Hartlaub's (Larus hartlaubii) 40 4 43 87

Gull, Kelp (Larus dominicanus) 2 56 16 4 78

Heron, Grey (Ardea cinerea) 2 6 2 10

Ibis, African Sacred (Threskiornis aethiopicus) 1 1

Kingfisher, Malachite (Alcedo cristata) 1 1

Kingfisher, Pied (Ceryle rudis) 6 30 3 39

Lapwing, Blacksmith (Vanellus armatus) 21 21

Night-Heron, Black-crowned (Nycticorax nycticorax) 27 27

Oystercatcher, African Black (Haematopus moquini) 1 1

Pelican, Great White (Pelecanus onocrotalus) 19 1 50 70

Plover, Chestnut-banded (Charadrius pallidus) 82 82

Plover, Common Ringed (Charadrius hiaticula) 9 29 2 1 41

Plover, Grey (Pluvialis squatarola) 1 1 1 3

Plover, Kittlitz's (Charadrius pecuarius) 23 4 1 2 30

Plover, Three-banded (Charadrius tricollaris) 8 8

Plover, White-fronted (Charadrius marginatus) 15 1 4 20

Pochard, Southern (Netta erythrophthalma) 5 5

Sandpiper, Common (Actitis hypoleucos) 5 2 7

Sandpiper, Curlew (Calidris ferruginea) 36 61 25 3 125

Sandpiper, Marsh (Tringa stagnatilis) 4 4

Shelduck, South African (Tadorna cana) 16 20 32 68

Shoveler, Cape (Anas smithii) 1 1

Spoonbill, African (Platalea alba) 1 42 43

Stilt, Black-winged (Himantopus himantopus) 2 2

Stint, Little (Calidris minuta) 79 33 106 1 219

Swamphen, African Purple (Porphyrio

madagascariensis) 1 1

Teal, Cape (Anas capensis) 2 7 5 14

Teal, Red-billed (Anas erythrorhyncha) 2 5 7

Tern, Caspian (Sterna caspia) 1 9 14 11

Tern, Common (Sterna hirundo) 7 4 24 16

Tern, Sandwich (Sterna sandvicensis) 10 420 287

Tern, Swift (Sterna bergii) 8 11 1 81 46

Wagtail, Cape (Motacilla capensis) 19 7 7 3 36

Harrier, African Marsh 1 1

Whimbrel, Common (Numenius phaeopus) 1 1

Total no. of individual;s 468 705 583 891 2 417

Total no. of species 21 46 27 22 52

SLR & PRM Page 5-88

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

5.2.3.6 Mammals

The wetlands of the lower reaches of the Orange River and its estuary serve as an oasis in an otherwise arid

region. Gemsbok Oryx gazella and springbok Antidorcas marsupialis graze on the vegetated islands in the

estuary and upstream of the Oppenheimer Bridge. The Cape clawless otter Aonyx capensis and the water

mongoose Atilax paludinosus are present particularly in the channels on the southern side of the estuary.

It is not known what impact the increasingly estuarine nature of the system has on the otter population.

Cape fur seals Arctocephalus pusillus may enter the estuary mouth area on occasion.

5.2.4 CONSERVATION STATUS

5.2.4.1 Wetland of international importance (Ramsar site) and proposed protected area

The Orange River Estuary was designated as a Wetland of International Importance in terms of the Ramsar

Convention on 28 June 1991. Key attributes leading to the designation of the Orange River mouth as a

Ramsar Site included:

• The Orange River Estuary is one of only nine perennial coastal wetlands on the predominantly arid

west coast of southern Africa;

• The estuary supports more than 20 000 water birds of more than 60 species;

• The estuary supports an assemblage of rare and endangered water bird species;

• The estuary supports more than 1% of the world and southern African populations of several species

of water birds including the Black-necked grebe, Lesser flamingo, Chestnut-banded Plover, Curlew

Sandpiper Swift Tern and Caspian Tern.

Additional attributes associated with the Orange River mouth Ramsar site include:

• The estuary supports a high diversity and abundance of estuarine-dependent and marine fish species

and is believed to play an important role in linking fish populations in South Africa, Namibia and

Angola; and

• The floodplain is an important source of grazing for wild animals in an extremely arid environment.

The estuary has been recognised as one of the most important in South Africa in terms of its water bird

populations (Turpie et al. 2002; Turpie and Clark 2007). It has also been designated as an Important Bird

Area (Barnes and Anderson 1998).

Despite the location of the border between South Africa and Namibia in the estuary not having been

resolved, Namibia designated the Orange River Estuary as a Ramsar site on 23 August 1995, thereby

creating a transboundary Ramsar site. Subsequent to this (September 1995) the Orange River

Transboundary Ramsar site was placed on the Montreux Record principally because of the dramatic decline

in bird numbers but also because of the desertification of large areas of saltmarsh on the southern (South

African) side.

It is the intention of DEA to declare the Ramsar site as a Protected Area under the NEM:PAA.

5.2.4.2 Estuarine Management Plan

In terms of the National Estuarine Management Protocol where an estuary straddles an international

boundary, DEA in collaboration with the responsible authority of the affected neighbouring state must

develop an Estuarine Management Plan in consultation with the relevant government departments of the

affected states. In addition, Section 34(1)(b)(i & ii) of NEM:ICMA states that the Estuary Management Plan

SLR & PRM Page 5-89

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

must be consistent with the National Estuarine Management Protocol and the National Coastal Management

Plan (NCMP). The NCMP requires DEA to develop Estuarine Management Plans for all estuaries assigned

to national government; this includes the Orange River Estuary.

The Estuarine Management Plan is intended to be a strategic five-year document providing direction for the

management of the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site. The purpose of the Plan is to:

• Facilitate co-operative management of the Ramsar Site through the development of a shared vision

and strategic objectives for the management of the site;

• Provide for the formal establishment of a governance structure that will oversee the implementation of

the plan;

• Provide the primary strategic tool for management of the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site, informing

the need for specific programmes and operational procedures;

• Enable stakeholders to manage and use the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site in such a way that its

values and purpose for which it was declared are protected;

• Provide a basis for integrating site management into broad-scale landscape and ecosystem planning;

• Provide motivations for budgets and future funding and providing indicators that available funds are

spent correctly;

• Build accountability into the management of the Orange River Mouth Ramsar Site; and

• Provide for capacity building, future thinking and continuity of management.

The effectiveness of the Plan depends upon it being integrated into international, national, regional and local

plans. At the international level the Orange-Senqu River Commission’s (ORASEDOM) Orange River

Integrated Water Resources Management Plan is of critical important to the Orange River Estuary as it

ultimately governs the flow pattern and quantity of water reaching the estuary.

SLR & PRM Page 5-90

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

SLR & PRM Page 6-1

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

6 REFERENCES

AGENCY FOR CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (ACRM). 2008. The archaeological and

paleontological importance of the Alexkor diamond mining area Northern Cape Province. Prepared for Site

Plan Consulting. Feb 2008.

AFRICAN CENTRE FOR HERITAGE ACTIVITIES (ACHA). 2015. Underwater Heritage Impact Assessment

for Sediment Sampling West Coast of South Africa. Northern Cape. Prepared for CCA Environmental. Feb

2015.

AIROLDI, L., 2003. The effects of sedimentation on rocky coast assemblages. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann.

Rev., 41: 161–236.

ANCHOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, 2010. Marine Specialist Impact Assessment for a Proposed

Reverse Osmosis Desalination Plant at Port Nolloth. Prepared for BV1 Consulting Engineers (Springbok).

October 2010. 50pp.

ANDERSON, R.J., BOLTON, J.J., MOLLOY, F.J. and K.W.G. ROTMANN, 2003. Commercial seaweeds in

southern Africa. Proceedings of the 17th International Seaweed Symposium 17: 1-12

ANDERSON, R.J., SIMONS, R.H. and N.G. JARMAN, 1989. Commercial seaweeds in southern Africa: a

review of utilization and research. South African Journal of Marine Science 8: 277-299.

ATKINSON, L.J., 2009. Effects of demersal trawling on marine infaunal, epifaunal and fish assemblages:

studies in the southern Benguela and Oslofjord. PhD Thesis. University of Cape Town, pp 141.

AUGUSTYN C.J., LIPINSKI, M.R. and M.A.C. ROELEVELD, 1995. Distribution and abundance of sepioidea

off South Africa. S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 16: 69-83.

AWAD, A.A., GRIFFITHS, C.L. & J.K. TURPIE, 2002. Distribution of South African benthic invertebrates

applied to the selection of priority conservation areas. Diversity and Distributions 8: 129-145.

BAILEY, G.W., 1991. Organic carbon flux and development of oxygen deficiency on the modern Benguela

continental shelf south of 22°S: spatial and temporal variability. In: TYSON, R.V., PEARSON, T.H. (Eds.),

Modern and Ancient Continental Shelf Anoxia. Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ., 58: 171–183.

BAILEY, G.W., 1999. Severe hypoxia and its effect on marine resources in the southern Benguela upwelling

system. Abstract, International Workshop on Monitoring of Anaerobic processes in the Benguela Current

Ecosystem off Namibia.

BAILEY, G.W., BEYERS, C.J. DE B. and S.R. LIPSCHITZ, 1985. Seasonal variation of oxygen deficiency in

waters off southern South West Africa in 1975 and 1976 and its relation to catchability and distribution of the

Cape rock-lobster Jasus lalandii. S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 3: 197-214.

BAILEY G.W. and P. CHAPMAN, 1991. Chemical and physical oceanography. In: Short-term variability

during an Anchor Station Study in the southern Benguela Upwelling system. Prog. Oceanogr., 28: 9-37.

BALLY, R., 1987. The ecology of sandy beaches of the Benguela ecosystem. S. Afr. J. mar. Sci., 5: 759-770

BANKS, A. BEST, P.B., GULLAN, A., GUISSAMULO, A., COCKCROFT, V. and K. FINDLAY, 2011. Recent

sightings of southern right whales in Mozambique. Document SC/S11/RW17 submitted to IWC Southern

Right Whale Assessment Workshop, Buenos Aires 13-16 Sept. 2011.

BARNES, K.N. AND ANDERSON, M.D. (1998) Important bird areas of the Northern Cape. In: Barnes KN

(ed) The Important Bird Areas of Southern Africa. pp 103-122. Bird Life South Africa, Johannesburg, South

Africa.

SLR & PRM Page 6-2

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

BARENDSE, J., BEST, P.B., THOMTON, M., POMILLA, C. CARVALHO, I. and H.C. ROSENBAUM, 2010.

Migration redefined. Seasonality, movements and group composition of humpback whales Megaptera

novaeangliae off the west coast of South Africa. Afr. J. mar. Sci., 32(1): 1-22.

BARENDSE, J., BEST, P.B., THORNTON, M., ELWEN, S.H., ROSENBAUM, H.C., CARVALHO, I.,

POMILLA, C., COLLINS, T.J.Q. and M.A. MEŸER, 2011. Transit station or destination? Attendance

patterns, regional movement, and population estimate of humpback whales Megaptera novaeangliae off

West South Africa based on photographic and genotypic matching. African Journal of Marine

BEST, P.B., 2001. Distribution and population separation of Bryde’s whale Balaenoptera edeni off southern

Africa. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 220: 277 – 289.

BEST, P.B., 2007. Whales and Dolphins of the Southern African Subregion. Cambridge University Press,

Cape Town, South Africa.

BEST, P.B. and C. ALLISON, 2010. Catch History, seasonal and temporal trends in the migration of

humpback whales along the west coast of southern Africa. IWC sc/62/SH5.

BEST, P.B. and C.H. LOCKYER, 2002. Reproduction, growth and migrations of sei whales Balaenoptera

borealis off the west coast of South Africa in the 1960s. South African Journal of Marine Science, 24: 111-

133.

BEST P.B., MEŸER, M.A. and C. LOCKYER, 2010. Killer whales in South African waters – a review of their

biology. African Journal of Marine Science. 32: 171–186.

BEST, P.B., SEKIGUCHI, K. and K.P. FINDLAY, 1995. A suspended migration of humpback whales

Megaptera novaeangliae on the west coast of South Africa. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 118: 1–12.

BIANCHI, G., HAMUKUAYA, H. and O. ALVHEIM, 2001. On the dynamics of demersal fish assemblages off

BIRCH, G.F. 1979a. The nature and origin of mixed apatite/glauconite pellets from the continental shelf off

South Africa. Mar. Geol. 29: 313-334.

BIRCH, G.F. 1979b. Phosphorite pellets and rock from the western continental margin and adjacent coastal

terrace of South Africa. Mar. Geol. 33: 91-116.

BIRCH G.F., ROGERS J., BREMNER J.M. and G.J. MOIR, 1976. Sedimentation controls on the continental

margin of Southern Africa. First Interdisciplinary Conf. Mar. Freshwater Res. S. Afr., Fiche 20A: C1-D12.

BOLTON, J.J., 1986. Seaweed biogeography of the South African west coast - A temperature dependent

perspective. Bot. Mar., 29: 251-256.

BOYD, A..J. and G.P.J. OBERHOLSTER, 1994. Currents off the west and south coasts of South Africa. S.

Afr. Shipping News and Fish. Ind. Rev., 49: 26-28.

BRANCH, G. and M. BRANCH, 1981. The Living Shores of Southern Africa. Struik. Cape Town, South

Africa.

BRANCH, G.M. and C.L. GRIFFITHS, 1988. The Benguela ecosystem part V: the coastal zone. Oceanog.

Marine Biology: An Annual Review, 26: 395-486.

BRANCH, G.M., GRIFFITHS. C.L., BRANCH, M.L. and L.E. BECKLEY, 2010. Two Oceans - A guide to the

marine life of Southern Africa, David Philip, Cape Town and Johannesburg. Revised edition

BRANCH, T.A., STAFFORD, K.M., PALACIOS, D.M., ALLISON, C., BANNISTER, J.L., BURTON, C.L.K.,

CABRERA, E., CARLSON, C.A., GALLETTI VERNAZZANI, B., GILL, P.C., HUCKE-GAETE, R., JENNER,

K.C.S., JENNER, M.-N.M., MATSUOKA, K., MIKHALEV, Y.A., MIYASHITA, T., MORRICE, M.G.,

NISHIWAKI, S., STURROCK, V.J., TORMOSOV, D., ANDERSON, R.C., BAKER, A.N., BEST, P.B.,

SLR & PRM Page 6-3

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

BORSA, P., BROWNELL JR, R.L., CHILDERHOUSE, S., FINDLAY, K.P., GERRODETTE, T.,

ILANGAKOON, A.D., JOERGENSEN, M., KAHN, B., LJUNGBLAD, D.K., MAUGHAN, B., MCCAULEY, R.D.,

MCKAY, S., NORRIS, T.F., OMAN WHALE AND DOLPHIN RESEARCH GROUP, RANKIN, S., SAMARAN,

F., THIELE, D., VAN WAEREBEEK, K. and R.M. WARNEKE, 2007. Past and present distribution, densities

and movements of blue whales in the Southern Hemisphere and northern Indian Ocean. Mammal Review,

37 (2): 116-175.

BRANDÃO, A., BEST, P.B. and D.S. BUTTERWORTH, 2011. Monitoring the recovery of the southern right

whale in South African waters. Paper SC/S11/RW18 submitted to IWC Southern Right Whale Assessment

Workshop, Buenos Aires 13-16 Sept. 2011.

BREEZE, H., DAVIS, D.S. BUTLER, M. and V. KOSTYLEV, 1997. Distrbution and status of deep sea corals

off Nova Scotia. Marine Issues Special Committee Special Publication No. 1. Halifax, NS: Ecology Action

Centre. 58 pp.

BREMNER, J.M., ROGERS, J. and J.P. WILLIS, 1990. Sedimentological aspects of the 1988 Orange River

floods. Trans. Roy. Soc. S. Afr. 47 : 247-294.

BREMNER, J.M. and J.P. WILLIS, 1990. Mineralogy and geochemistry of the clay mineral fraction of

sediments from the Namibian continental margin and the adjacent hinterland. Mar. Geol., 115: 85-116.

BROUWER, S.L., MANN, B.Q., LAMBERTH, S.J., SAUER, W.H.H. and C. ERASMUS, 1997. A survey of

the South African shore angling fishery. South African Journal of Marine Science 18: 165-178.

BROWN, A.C. AND A. McLACHLAN, 2002. Sandy shore ecosystems and the treats facing them: some

predictions for the year 2025. Environmental Conservation, 29 (1):1-16.

BROWN, A.C., STENTON-DOZEY, J.M.E. and E.R. TRUEMAN, 1989. Sandy beach bivalves and

gastropods: a comparison between Donax serra and Bullia digitalis. Adv. Mar. Biol., 25: 179-247.

BROWN, P.C., 1984. Primary production at two contrasting nearshore sites in the southern Benguela

upwelling region, 1977-1979. S. Afr. J. mar. Sci., 2 : 205-215.

BROWN, P.C. and J.L. HENRY, 1985. Phytoplankton production, chlorophyll a and light penetration in the

southern Benguela region during the period between 1977 and 1980. In: SHANNON, L.V. (Ed.)

BROWN, A.C. (1959). The ecology of South African estuaries Part IX: Notes on the estuary of the Orange

River. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, 35: 463-473.

BUSTAMANTE, R.H. and G.M. BRANCH, 1996a. Large scale patterns and trophic structure of southern

BUSTAMANTE, R.H., BRANCH, G.M. and S. EEKHOUT, 1995. Maintenance of exceptional intertidal grazer

biomass in South Africa: Subsidy by subtidal kelps. Ecology 76(7): 2314-2329.

BUSTAMANTE, R.H., BRANCH, G.M. and S. EEKHOUT, 1997. The influences of physical factors on the

distribution and zonation patterns of South African rocky-shore communities. S. Afr. J. mar. Sci., 18: 119-

136.

CAMBRAY, J. (1984). Fish populations in the middle and lower Orange River, with special reference to the

effect on stream regulation. Journal of the Limnological Society of South Africa, 10 (2):, 32-49.

CHAPMAN, A.R.O. and C.R. JOHNSON, 1990. Disturbance and organization of macroalgal assemblages in

the Northwest Atlantic. Hydrobiologia, 192: 77-121.

CHAPMAN, P. and L.V. SHANNON, 1985. The Benguela Ecosystem. Part II. Chemistry and related

processes. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev., 23: 183-251.

SLR & PRM Page 6-4

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

CHENELOT, H., JEWETT, S. & M. HOBERG, 2008. Invertebrate Communities Associated with Various

Substrates in the Nearshore Eastern Aleutian Islands, with Emphasis on Thick Crustose Coralline Algae. In:

BRUEGGEMAN, P. & N.W. POLLOCK (eds.) Diving for Science. Proceedings of the American Academy of

Underwater Sciences 27th Symposium. Dauphin Island, Alaska, AAUS, pp13-36.

CHRISTIE, N.D., 1974. Distribution patterns of the benthic fauna along a transect across the continental

shelf off Lamberts Bay, South Africa. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cape Town, 110 pp & Appendices.

CLARK, B.M., 1997a. Variation in surf zone fish community structure across a wave exposure gradient.

Estuarine & Coastal Shelf Science 44: 659-674.

CLARK, B.M., 1997b. Dynamics and Utilisation of Surf Zone Habitats by Fish in the South-Western Cape,

South Africa. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Cape Town.

CLARK, B.M., BENNETT, B.A. and S.J. LAMBERTH, 1994. A comparison of the ichthyofauna of two

estuaries and their adjacent surf-zones, with an assessment of the effects of beach-seining on the nursery

function of estuaries for fish. South African Journal of Marine Science 14: 121-131.

CLARK, B.M., MEYER, W.F., EWART-SMITH, C, PULFRICH, A. and J. HUGHES, 1999. Synthesis and

assessment of information on the BCLME, Thematic Report 3: Integrated overview of diamond mining in the

Benguela Current region. AEC Report # 1016/1 to the BCLME. 63pp.

CLARK, M.R., O’SHEA, S., TRACEY, D. and B. GLASBY, 1999. New Zealand region seamounts. Aspects

of their biology, ecology and fisheries. Report prepared for the Department of Conservation, Wellington, New

Zealand, August 1999. 107 pp.

COCKCROFT, A. and A.J. MACKENZIE, 1997. The recreational fishery for West Coast rock lobster Jasus

lalandii in South Africa. South African Journal of Marine Science, 18: 75-84

COCKCROFT, A.C, SCHOEMAN, D.S., PITCHER, G.C., BAILEY, G.W.AND D.L. VAN ZYL, 2000. A mass

stranding, or ‘walk out’ of west coast rock lobster, Jasus lalandii, in Elands Bay, South Africa: Causes, results

and implications. In: VON VAUPEL KLEIN, J.C. and F.R. SCHRAM (Eds), The Biodiversity Crisis and

Crustacea: Proceedings of the Fourth International Crustacean Congress, Published by CRC press.

COCKCROFT, A.C., VAN ZYL, D. AND L. HUTCHINGS, 2008. Large-Scale Changes in the Spatial

Distribution of South African West Coast Rock Lobsters: An Overview. African Journal of Marine Science

2008, 30 (1) : 149–159.

COETZEE, J.C., VAN DER LINGEN, C.D., HUTCHINGS, L. and T.P. FAIRWEATHER, 2008. Has the

fishery contributed to a major shift in the distribution of South African sardine? ICES Journal of Marine

Science 65: 1676–1688.

COLMAN, J.G., GORDON, D.M., LANE, A.P., FORDE, M.J. and J.J. FITZPATRICK, 2005. Carbonate

mounds off Mauritania, Northwest Africa: status of deep-water corals and implications for management of

fishing and oil exploration activities. In: Cold-water Corals and Ecosystems, Freiwald, A and Roberts, J. M.

(eds). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg pp 417-441.

COMPAGNO, L.J.V., EBERT, D.A. and P.D. COWLEY, 1991. Distribution of offshore demersal cartilaginous

fish (Class Chondrichthyes) off the West Coast of southern Africa, with notes on their systematics. S. Afr. J.

Mar. Sci. 11: 43-139.

CRAWFORD R.J.M., RYAN P.G. and A.J. WILLIAMS. 1991. Seabird consumption and production in the

Benguela and western Agulhas ecosystems. S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 11: 357-375.

CRAWFORD, R.J.M., SHANNON, L.V. and D.E. POLLOCK, 1987. The Benguela ecosystem. 4. The major

fish and invertebrate resources. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev., 25: 353 - 505.

SLR & PRM Page 6-5

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

CRUIKSHANK, R.A., 1990. Anchovy distribution off Namibiadeduced from acoustic surveys with an

interpretation of migration by adults and recruits. S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 9: 53-68.

CSIR, 1994. Alexkor Environmental Management Programme. Vol. 3. Environmental Management

Programme. Report No. EMAS-C 94037(3), Stellenbosch.

CSIR, 1996. Elizabeth Bay monitoring project: 1995 review. CSIR Report ENV/S-96066.

CSIR. 2004. Preliminary ecological reserve determinations for estuaries. Determination of the Preliminary

Ecological Reserve on a Rapid Level for Orange River Estuary. Final Draft. Report prepared for DWAF by

CSIR. CSIR Report ENV-S-C 2003-114. Stellenbosch, South Africa.

DAFF. 2014. Status of the South African marine fishery resources. Department of Agriculture, Forestry and

Fisheries, Cape Town.

DAY, J.H. (1981). Chapter 14. Summaries of current knowledge of 43 estuaries in southern Africa. In: Day

J.H. (ed), Estuarine Ecology with particular reference to southern Africa. A.A. Balkema, Cape Town. pp.

251-329.AVID, J.H.M, 1989., Seals. In: Oceans of Life off Southern Africa, Eds. Payne, A.I.L. and Crawford,

R.J.M.

DE DECKER, A.H., 1970. Notes on an oxygen-depleted subsurface current off the west coast of South

Africa. Invest. Rep. Div. Sea Fish. South Africa, 84, 24 pp.

DE GREEF, K., GRIFFITHS, C.L. and Z. ZEEMAN, 2013. Deja vu? A second mytilid mussel, Semimytilus

algosus, invades South Africa’s west coast. African Journal of Marine Science 35(3): 307-313.

DE WAAL, S.W.P., 2004. Stock assessment, Port Nolloth Sea Farms abalone (Haliotis midae) ranching

project. Report to The Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa (Ltd), 58p.

DE WAAL, S.W.P. and P. COOK, 2001. Quantifying the physical and biological attributes of successful

DINGLE, R.V., 1973. The Geology of the Continental Shelf between Lüderitz (South West Africa) and Cape

Town with special reference to Tertiary Strata. J. Geol. Soc. Lond., 129: 337-263.

DINGLE, R.V., BIRCH, G.F., BREMNER, J.M., DE DECKER, R.H., DU PLESSIS, A., ENGELBRECHT, J.C.,

FINCHAM, M.J., FITTON, T, FLEMMING, B.W. GENTLE, R.I., GOODLAD, S.W., MARTIN, A.K., MILLS,

E.G., MOIR, G.J., PARKER, R.J., ROBSON, S.H., ROGERS, J. SALMON, D.A., SIESSER, W.G.,

SIMPSON, E.S.W., SUMMERHAYES, C.P., WESTALL, F., WINTER, A. and M.W. WOODBORNE, 1987.

Deep-sea sedimentary environments around Southern Africa (South-east Atlantic and South-west Indian

Oceans). Annals of the South African Museum 98(1).

DUNDEE, B.L., 2006. The diet and foraging ecology of chick-rearing gannets on the Namibian islands in

relation to environmental features: a study using telemetry. MSc thesis, University of Cape Town, South

Africa.

ELWEN, S.H., GRIDLEY, T., ROUX, J.-P., BEST, P.B. and M.J. SMALE, 2013. Records of Kogiid whales in

Namibia, including the first record of the dwarf sperm whale (K. sima). Marine Biodiversity Records. 6, e45

doi:10.1017/S1755267213000213.

ELWEN, S.H. and R.H. LEENEY, 2011. Interactions between leatherback turtles and killer whales in

Namibian waters, including predation. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 41(2): 205-209.

ELWEN, S.H. MEŸER, M.A.M, BEST, P.B., KOTZE, P.G.H, THORNTON, M. and S. SWANSON, 2006.

Range and movements of a nearshore delphinid, Heaviside's dolphin Cephalorhynchus heavisidii a

determined from satellite telemetry. Journal of Mammalogy, 87(5): 866–877.

SLR & PRM Page 6-6

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

ELWEN, S.H., BEST, P.B., REEB, D. and M. THORNTON, 2009. Near-shore diurnal movements and

behaviour of Heaviside’s dolphins (Cephalorhynchus heavisidii), with some comparative data for dusky

dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obscurus). South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 39(2): 143-154.

ELWEN, S.H., BEST, P.B., THORNTON, M., and D. REEB, 2010. Near-shore distribution of Heaviside's

(Cephalorhynchus heavisidii) and dusky dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obscurus) at the southern limit of their

range in South Africa. African Zoology, 45(1).

ELWEN S.H., REEB D., THORNTON M. and P.B. BEST, 2009. A population estimate of Heaviside's

dolphins Cephalorhynchus heavisidii in the southern end of their range. Marine Mammal Science 25: 107-

124.

ELWEN S.H., SNYMAN L. and R.H. LEENEY, 2010a. Report of the Namibian Dolphin Project 2010:

Ecology and conservation of coastal dolphins in Namibia. Submitted to the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine

Resources, Namibia. Pp. 1-36.

ELWEN S.H., THORNTON M., REEB D. and P.B. BEST, 2010b. Near-shore distribution of Heaviside’s

(Cephalorhynchus heavisidii) and dusky dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obscurus) at the southern limit of their

range in South Africa. African Journal of Zoology 45: 78-91.

ELWEN, S.H., TONACHELLA, N., BARENDSE, J,. COLLINS, T.J.Q., BEST, P.B., ROSENBAUM, H.C.,

LEENEY, R.H. and T. GRIDLEY, 2013. Humpback whales in Namibia 2005-2012: occurrence, seasonality

and a regional comparison of photographic catalogues and scarring rates with Gabon and West South Africa.

Paper SC/65a/SH24 to the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission.

EMANUEL, B.P., BUSTAMANTE, R.H., BRANCH, G.M., EEKHOUT, S. and F.J. ODENDAAL, 1992. A

zoogeographic and functional approach to the selection of marine reserves on the west coast of South

Africa. S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 12: 341-354.

FAO, 2008. International Guidelines for the Management of Deep-Sea Fisheries in the High Seas.

SPRFMO-VI-SWG-INF01

FEGLEY, S.R., MACDONALD, B.A. and T.R. JACOBSEN, 1992. Short-term variation in the quantity and

quality of seston available to benthic suspension feeders. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci., 34: 393–412.

FINDLAY K.P., BEST P.B., ROSS G.J.B. and V.C. COCKROFT. 1992. The distribution of small odontocete

cetaceans off the coasts of South Africa and Namibia. S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 12: 237-270.

FOSSING, H., FERDELMAN, T.G. and P. BERG, 2000. Sulfate reduction and methane oxidation in

continental margin sediments influenced by irrigation (South-East Atlantic off Namibia). Geochim.

Cosmochim. Acta. 64(5): 897–910.

HARRIS, L.R., 2012. An ecosystem-based spatial conservation plan for the South African sandy beaches.

Published PhD Thesis, Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth

HARRISON, T.D. (1997). A preliminary survey of coastal river systems on the South African west coast,

Orange River – Groot Berg, with particular reference to the fish fauna. Transactions of the Royal Society of

South Africa, 52 (2): 277-321.

HAYS, G.C. HOUGHTON, J.D.R., ISAACS, C. KING, R.S. LLOYD, C. and P. LOVELL, 2004. First records

of oceanic dive profiles for leatherback turtles, Dermochelys coriacea, indicate behavioural plasticity

associated with long-distance migration. Animal Behaviour, 67: 733-743.

HOLNESS, S., KIRKMAN, S., SAMAAI, T., WOLF, T., SINK, K., MAJIEDT, P., NSIANGANGO, S., KAINGE,

P., KILONGO, K., KATHENA, J., HARRIS, L., LAGABRIELLE, E., KIRCHNER, C., CHALMERS, R. and M.

SLR & PRM Page 6-7

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

LOMBARD, 2014. Spatial Biodiversity Assessment and Spatial Management, including Marine Protected

Areas. Final report for the Benguela Current Commission project BEH 09-01.

HOWARD, J.A.E., JARRE, A., CLARK, A.E. and C.L. MOLONEY, 2007. Application of the sequential t-test

algorithm or analysing regime shifts to the southern Benguela ecosystem. African Journal of Marine Science

29(3): 437-451.

HUTCHINGS L., NELSON G., HORSTMANN D.A. and R. TARR, 1983. Interactions between coastal

plankton and sand mussels along the Cape coast, South Africa. In: Sandy Beaches as Ecosystems.

Mclachlan A and T E Erasmus (eds). Junk, The Hague. pp 481-500.

IUCN, 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on 5

June 2012.

IWC, 2012. Report of the Scientific Committee. Annex H: Other Southern Hemisphere Whale Stocks

Committee 11–23.

JARAMILLO, E., MCLACHLAN, A. and J. DUGAN, 1995. Total sample area and estimates of species

richness in exposed sandy beaches. Marine Ecology Progress Series 119: 311-314.

KENDALL, M.A. and S. WIDDICOMBE, 1999. Small scale patterns in the structure of macrofaunal

assemblages of shallow soft sediments. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 237:127-140.

KENNY, A.J., REES, H.L., GREENING, J. and S. CAMPBELL, 1998. The effects of marine gravel extraction

on the macrobenthos at an experimental dredge site off north Norfolk, U.K. (Results 3 years post-dredging).

ICES CM 1998/V:14, pp. 1-8.

KENYON, N.H., AKHMETZHANOV, A.M, WHEELER, A.J., VAN WEERING, T.C.E., DE HAAS, H. and M.K.

IVANOV, 2003. Giant carbonate mud mounds in the southern Rockall Trough. Marine Geology 195: 5-30.

KINOSHITA, I. and S. FUJITA, 1988. Larvae and juveniles of blue drum, Nibea mitsukurii, occurring in the

surf zone of Tosa Bay, Japan. Jap. J. Ichthyology, 35: 25-30.

KOPASKA-MERKEL D.C. and D.W. HAYWICK, 2001. Carbonate mounds: sedimentation, organismal

response, and diagenesis. Sedimentary Geology, 145: 157-159.

KOSLOW, J.A., 1996. Energetic and life history patterns of deep-sea benthic, benthopelagic and seamount

associated fish. Journal of Fish Biology, 49A: 54-74.

LAMBARDI, P., LUTJEHARMS, J.R.E., MENACCI, R., HAYS, G.C. and P. LUSCHI, 2008. Influence of

ocean currents on long-distance movement of leatherback sea turtles in the Southwest Indian Ocean. Marine

Ecology Progress Series, 353: 289–301.

LAMBERTH, S. (2013). Chapter 6: Estuarine Fish Report in: Volume 2: Orange Estuary Supporting

Information. Orange-Senqu River Commission Research Project on Environmental Flow Requirements of the

Fish River and the Orange-Senqu River Mouth. Technical Report 33. Ver. 1, 1 May 2013. UNDP-GEF

Orange-Senqu Strategic Action Programme (Atlas Project ID 71598).

LANE, S.B. and R.A. CARTER, 1999. Generic Environmental Management Programme for Marine Diamond

MIning off the West Coast of South Africa. Marine Diamond Mines Association, Cape Town, South Africa. 6

Volumes.

LANGE, L., 2012. Use of demersal bycatch data to determine the distribution of soft-bottom assemblages off

the West and South Coasts of South Africa. PhD thesis, University of Cape Town

LASIAK, T.A. 1981. Nursery grounds of juvenile teleosts: evidence from surf zone of King's beach, Port

Elizabeth. S. Afr. J. Sci., 77: 388-390.

SLR & PRM Page 6-8

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

LEENEY, R.H., POST, K., HAZEVOET, C.J. AND S.H. ELWEN, 2013. Pygmy right whale records from

Namibia. African Journal of Marine Science 35(1): 133-139.

LEVITT, G.J., ANDERSON, R.J., BOOTHROYD, C.J.T. and F.A. KEMP, 2002. The effects of kelp

harvesting on its regrowth and the understorey benthic community at Danger Point, South Africa, and a new

method of harvesting kelp fronds. South African Journal of Marine Science 24: 71-85.

LIPINSKI, M.R., 1992. Cephalopods and the Benguela ecosystem: trophic relationships and impacts. S. Afr.

J. Mar. Sci., 12 : 791-802.

LOMBARD, A.T., STRAUSS, T., HARRIS, J., SINK, K., ATTWOOD, C. and HUTCHINGS, L. (2004) National

Spatial Biodiversity Assessment 2004: South African Technical Report Volume 4: Marine Component

LUDYNIA, K., 2007. Identification and characterisation of foraging areas of seabirds in upwelling systems:

biological and hydrographic implications for foraging at sea. PhD thesis, University of Kiel, Germany.

MacISSAC, K., BOURBONNAIS, C., KENCHINGTON, E.D., GORDON JR. and S. GASS, 2001.

Observations on the occurrence and habitat preference of corals in Atlantic Canada. In: (eds.) J.H.M.

WILLISON, J. HALL, S.E. GASS, E.L.R. KENCHINGTON, M. BUTLER, and P. DOHERTY. Proceedings of

the First International Symposium on Deep-Sea Corals. Ecology Action Centre and Nova Scotia Museum,

Halifax, Nova Scotia.

MacLEOD, C.D. and A. D’AMICO, 2006. A review of beaked whale behaviour and ecology in relation to

assessing and mitigating impacts of anthropogenic noise. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management

7(3): 211–221.

MacPHERSON, E. and A. GORDOA, 1992. Trends in the demersal fish community off Namibia from 1983 to

1990. South African Journal of Marine Science 12: 635-649.

MAJIEDT, P., HOLNESS, S., SINK, K., OOSTHUIZEN, A. and P. CHADWICK, 2013. Systematic Marine

Biodiversity Plan for the West Coast of South Africa. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Cape

Town. Pp 46.

MATE, B.R., BEST, P.B., LAGERQUIST, B.A. and , M.H. WINSOR, 2011. Coastal, offshore and migratory

movements of South African right whales revealed by satellite telemetry. Marine Mammal Science, 27(3):

455-476.

MATE, B.R., LAGERQUIST, B.A., WINDSOR, M., GERACI, J. and J.H. PRESCOTT, 2005. Movements and

dive habits of a satellite-monitoring longfinned pilot whales (Globicephala melas) in the northwest Atlantic.

Marine Mammal Science 21(10): 136-144.

MATTHEWS, S.G. and G.C. PITCHER, 1996. Worst recorded marine mortality on the South African coast.

In: YASUMOTO, T, OSHIMA, Y. and Y. FUKUYO (Eds), Harmful and Toxic Algal Blooms. Intergovernmental

Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO, pp 89-92.

MAYFIELD, S., BRANCH, G.M. and A.C. COCKCROFT, 2000. Relationships among diet, growth rate and

food availability for the South African rock lobster, Jasus lalandii. Crustaceana 73(7): 815–834.

McLACHLAN, A., 1980. The definition of sandy beaches in relation to exposure: a simple rating system. S.

Afr. J. Sci., 76: 137-138.

McLACHLAN, A., JARAMILLO, E., DONN, T.E. and F. WESSELS. 1993. Sandy beach macrofauna

communities and their control by the physical environment: a geographical comparison. Journal of coastal

Research, Special Issue, 15: 27-38.

McQUAID, C.D. and G.M. BRANCH, 1985. Trophic structure of rocky intertidal communities: response to

wave action and implications for energy flow. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 22: 153-161.

SLR & PRM Page 6-9

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

MELVILLE-SMITH, R., GOOSEN, P.C. and T.J. STEWART, 1995. The spiny lobster Jasus lalandii (H. Milne

Edwards, 1837) off the South African coast: inter-annual variations in male growth and female fecundity.

Crustaceana 68(2): 174-183

MILLER, D.C. and R.W. STERNBERG, 1988. Field measurements of the fluid and sediment dynamic

environment of a benthic deposit feeder. J. Mar. Res., 46: 771-796.

MITCHELL-INNES, B.A. and D.R. WALKER. 1991. Short-term variability during an Anchor Station study in

the southern Benguela upwelling system. Phytoplankton production and biomass in relation to species

changes. Prog. Oceanogr., 28: 65-89.

MODDE, T. 1980. Growth and residency of juvenile fishes within a surf zone habitat in the Gulf of Mexico.

Gulf Research Reports, 6: 377-385.

MONTEIRO, P.M.S. and A.K. VAN DER PLAS, 2006. Low Oxygen Water (LOW) variability in the Benguela

System: Key processes and forcing scales relevant to forecasting. In: SHANNON, V., HEMPEL, G.,

MALANOTTE-RIZZOLI, P., MOLONEY, C. and J. WOODS (Eds). Large Marine Ecosystems, Vol. 15, pp 91-

109.

MOSTERT B.P., BICCARD, A.B., DUNA, O.O., and B.M. CLARK. 2016. Baseline survey of the benthic

marine environment in the South African diamond mining Concession areas: 1B and 1C. Report prepared for

Alexkor and Placer Resource Management by Anchor Environmental Consultants. Report no. 1696/1.

MORANT, P.D. AND O' CALLAGHAN, M. (1990). Some observations of the impact of the March 1988 flood

on the Biota of the Orange River mouth. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, 47 (3): 295-305.

MUCINA, L. AND RUTHERFORD, M.C. (eds) (2006). The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and

Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. 808 pp.

MYEZO ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (MEYEZO). 2013. Environmental Management Programme Report

for the proposed mining activities over Sea Concession 1(C) within the Administrative District of

Namaqualand: August 2013, Pretoria.

NEL, P., 2001. Physical and biological factors structuring sandy beach macrofauna communities. PhD

Thesis, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa: pp 202

NEL, R., PULFRICH, A. and A.J. PENNEY, 2003. Impacts of Beach Mining Operations on Sandy Beach

Macrofaunal Communities on the Beaches of Geelwal Karoo. Pisces Environmental Services (Pty) Ltd.

Report to Trans Hex Operations (Pty) Ltd. October 2003, 54pp.

NELSON, G., 1989. Poleward motion in the Benguela area. In: Poleward Flows along Eastern Ocean

Boundaries. NESHYBA et al. (eds) New York; Springer: 110-130 (Coastal and Estuarine Studies 34).

NELSON G. and L. HUTCHINGS, 1983. The Benguela upwelling area. Prog. Oceanogr., 12: 333-356.

OOSTHUIZEN W.H., 1991. General movements of South African (Cape) fur seals Arctocephalus pusillus

from analysis of recoveries of tagged animals. S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 11: 21-30.

ORASECOM, (2012). From Source to Sea: Interactions between the Orange-Senqu River Basin and the

Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem. Orange-Senqu River Commission (ORASECOM);

www.orasecom.org 38 pp.

PARRY, D.M., KENDALL, M.A., PILGRIM, D.A. and M.B. JONES, 2003. Identification of patch structure

within marine benthic landscapes using a remotely operated vehicle. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 285– 286: 497–

511.

SLR & PRM Page 6-10

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

PAYNE, A.I.L. and R.J.M. CRAWFORD, 1989. Oceans of Life off Southern Africa. Vlaeberg, Cape Town,

380 pp.

PENNEY, A.J., KROHN, R.G. and C.G. WILKE. 1992. A description of the South African tuna fishery in the

southern Atlantic Ocean. ICCAT Col. Vol. Sci. Pap. XXIX(1) : 247-253.

PENNEY, A.J., PULFRICH, A., ROGERS, J., STEFFANI, N. and V. MABILLE, 2008. Project:

BEHP/CEA/03/02: Data Gathering and Gap Analysis for Assessment of Cumulative Effects of Marine

Diamond Mining Activities on the BCLME Region. Final Report to the BCLME mining and petroleum

activities task group. December 2007. 410pp.

PENRY, G.S., 2010. Biology of South African Bryde’s whales. PhD Thesis. University of St Andrews,

Scotland, UK.

PILLAR, S.C., 1986. Temporal and spatial variations in copepod and euphausid biomass off the southern

and south-western coasts of South Africa in 1977/78. S. Afr. J. mar. Sci., 4: 219-229.

PILLAR, S.C., BARANGE, M. and L. HUTCHINGS, 1991. Influence of the frontal system on the cross-shelf

distribution of Euphausia lucens and Euphausia recurva (Euphausiacea) in the Southern Benguela System.

S. Afr. J. mar. Sci., 11 : 475-481.

PITCHER, G.C., 1998. Harmful algal blooms of the Benguela Current. IOC, World Bank and Sea Fisheries

Research Institute Publication. 20 pp.

PULFRICH, A., PENNEY, A.J., BRANDÃO, A., BUTTERWORTH, D.S. and M. NOFFKE, 2006. Marine

Dredging Project: FIMS Final Report. Monitoring of Rock Lobster Abundance, Recruitment and Migration on

the Southern Namibian Coast. Prepared for De Beers Marine Namibia, July 2006. 149pp.

RAND, A.M., 2006. Using Geographic Information Systems and Remote Sensing to improve the

ROEL, B.A., 1987. Demersal communities off the west coast of South Africa. South African Journal of Marine

Science 5: 575-584.

ROBINSON, T., GRIFFITHS, C., McQUAID, C. and M. RIUS, 2005. Marine alien species of South Africa -

status and impacts. African Journal of Marine Science 27: 297-306.

ROGERS, A.D., 1994. The biology of seamounts. Advances in Marine Biology, 30: 305–350.

ROGERS, A.D., CLARK, M.R., HALL-SPENCER, J.M. and K.M. GJERDE, 2008. The Science behind the

Guidelines: A Scientific Guide to the FAO Draft International Guidelines (December 2007) For the

Management of Deep-Sea Fisheries in the High Seas and Examples of How the Guidelines May Be

Practically Implemented. IUCN, Switzerland, 2008.

ROGERS, J. 1995. A comparative study of manganese nodules off southern Africa. S. Afr. J. Geol. 98: 208-

216.

ROGERS, J. 1977. Sedimentation on the continental margin off the Orange River and the Namib Desert.

Unpubl. Ph.D. Thesis, Geol. Dept., Univ. Cape Town. 212 pp.

ROGERS, J. and J.M. BREMNER, 1991. The Benguela Ecosystem. Part VII. Marine-geological aspects.

Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev., 29: 1-85.

ROSE, B. and A. PAYNE, 1991. Occurrence and behaviour of the Southern right whale dolphin Lissodelphis

peronii off Namibia. Marine Mammal Science 7: 25-34.

SLR & PRM Page 6-11

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

ROSENBAUM, H.C., POMILLA, C., MENDEZ, M., LESLIE, M.S., BEST, P.B., FINDLAY, K.P., MINTON, G.,

ERSTS, P.J., COLLINS, T., ENGEL, M.H., BONATTO, S., KOTZE, P.G.H., MEŸER, M., BARENDSE, J.,

THORNTON, M., RAZAFINDRAKOTO, Y., NGOUESSONO, S., VELY, M. and J. KISZKA, 2009. Population

structure of humpback whales from their breeding grounds in the South Atlantic and Indian Oceans. PLoS

One, 4 (10): 1-11.

ROSENBAUM, H.C., MAXWELL, S., KERSHAW, F. and B.R. MATE, 2014. Quantifying long-range

movements and potential overlap with anthropogenic activities of humpback whales in the South Atlantic

Ocean. In press. Conservation Biology.

ROUX, J-P., BEST, P.B. and P.E. STANDER. 2001. Sightings of southern right whales (Eubalaena

australis) in Namibian waters, 1971-1999. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. (Special Issue). 2: 181–185.

ROUX, J-P., BRADY, R. and P.B. BEST, 2011. Southern right whales off Namibian and their relationship

with those off South Africa. Paper SC/S11/RW16 submitted to IWC Southern Right Whale Assessment

Workshop, Buenos Aires 13-16 Sept. 2011.

SAUER, W.H.H., PENNEY, A.J., ERASMUS, C., MANN, B.Q., BROUWER, S.L.,. LAMBERTH, S.J. and T.J.

STEWART, 1997. An evaluation of attitudes and responses to monitoring and management measures for

the South African boat-based line fishery. S. Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 18: 147-164.

SAUER, W.H.H. and C. ERASMUS, 1997. Evaluation of the line and net fisheries along the west coast of

South Africa. Internal Report, Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Cape Town. 26pp

SEAMAN, M.T. AND J.G. VAN AS. (1998). The environmental status of the Orange River mouth as

reflected by the fish community. Water Research Commission Report No 505/1/98, 73 pp.

SHANNON, L.V., 1985. The Benguela Ecosystem. Part 1. Evolution of the Benguela, physical features and

processes. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Ann. Rev., 23: 105-182.

SHANNON, L.J., C.L. MOLONEY, A. JARRE and J.G. FIELD, 2003. Trophic flows in the southern Benguela

during the 1980s and 1990s. Journal of Marine Systems, 39: 83 - 116.

SHANNON, L.V. and J.G. FIELD, 1985. Are fish stocks food-limited in the southern Benguela pelagic

ecosystem ? Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 22(1) : 7-19.

SHANNON L.V. and S. PILLAR, 1985. The Benguela Ecosystem III. Plankton. Oceanography & Marine

Biology: An Annual Review, 24: 65-170.

SHANNON, L.V. and M.J. O’TOOLE, 1998. BCLME Thematic Report 2: Integrated overview of the

oceanography and environmental variability of the Benguela Current region. Unpublished BCLME Report,

58pp

SHAUGHNESSY P.D., 1979. Cape (South African) fur seal. In: Mammals in the Seas. F.A.O. Fish. Ser., 5, 2:

37-40.

SHENG, Y.P., CHEN, X. and E.A. YASSUNDA, 1994. Wave-induced sediment resuspension and mixing in

shallow waters. Coastal Engineering : 3281-3294.

SHILLINGTON, F. A., PETERSON, W. T., HUTCHINGS, L., PROBYN, T. A., WALDRON, H. N. and J. J.

AGENBAG, 1990. A cool upwelling filament off Namibia, South West Africa: Preliminary measurements of

physical and biological properties. Deep-Sea Res., 37 (11A): 1753-1772.

SHORT, A.D. and P.A. HESP, 1985. Wave, beach and dune interactions in southern Australia. Marine

Geology, 48: 259-284.

SLR & PRM Page 6-12

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

SINK, K. and T. SAMAAI, 2009. Identifying Offshore Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems in South Africa.

Unpublished Report for South African National Biodiversity Institute, 29 pp.

SINK, K.J., ATTWOOD, C.G., LOMBARD, A.T., GRANTHAM, H., LESLIE, R., SAMAAI, T., KERWATH, S.,

MAJIEDT, P., FAIRWEATHER, T., HUTCHINGS, L., VAN DER LINGEN, C., ATKINSON, L.J., WILKINSON,

S., HOLNESS, S. and T. WOLF, 2011. Spatial planning to identify focus areas for offshore biodiversity

protection in South Africa. Unpublished Report. Cape Town: South African National Biodiversity Institute.

SINK, K., HOLNESS, S., HARRIS, L., MAJIEDT, P., ATKINSON, L., ROBINSON, T., KIRKMAN, S.,

HUTCHINGS, L., LESLIE, R., LAMBERTH, S., KERWATH, S., VON DER HEYDEN, S., LOMBARD, A.,

ATTWOOD, C., BRANCH, G., FAIRWEATHER, T., TALJAARD, S., WEERTS, S., COWLEY, P., AWAD, A.,

HALPERN, B., GRANTHAM, H. and T. WOLF, 2012. National Biodiversity Assessment 2011: Technical

Report. Volume 4: Marine and Coastal Component. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria.

SITE PLAN. 2008. Alexkor 2008 – Revised Environmental Management Programme. Report: #2385

EMP/R2, Strand.

SMALE, M.J., ROEL, B.A., BADENHORST, A. and J.G. FIELD, 1993. Analysis of demersal community of

fish and cephalopods on the Agulhas Bank, South Africa. Journal of Fisheries Biology 43:169-191.

SMITH, G.G and G.P. MOCKE, 2002. Interaction between breaking/broken waves and infragravity-scale

phenomena to control sediment suspension and transport in the surf zone. Marine Geology, 187: 320-345.

SNOW, G. (2013). Chapter 3: Estuarine Microalgae Report in: Volume 2: Orange Estuary Supporting




SOARES, A.G., 2003. Sandy beach morphodynamics and macrobenthic communities in temperate,

subtropical and tropical regions - a macroecological approach. PhD, University of Port Elizabeth

SOARES, A.G., McLACHLAN, A. and T.A. SCHLACHER, 1996. Disturbance effects of stranded kelp on

populations of the sandy beach bivalve Donax serra (Röding). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and

Ecology 205: 165-186.

SOARES, A.G., SCHLACHER, T.A. and A. McLACHLAN, 1997. Carbon and nitrogen exchange between

sandy beach clams. Marine Biology 127: 657-664.

SPRFMA, 2007. Information describing seamount habitat relevant to the South Pacific Regional Fisheries

Management Organisation.

STEFFANI, C.N. and A. PULFRICH, 2004. Environmental Baseline Survey of the Macrofaunal Benthic

Communities in the De Beers ML3/2003 Mining Licence Area. Prepared for De Beers Marine South Africa,

April 2004., 34pp.

STEFFEN, S., MUCINA, L. AND KADEREIT, G. (2010). Revision of Sarcocornia (Chenopodiaceae) in South

Africa, Namibia and Mozambique. Systematic Botany, 35(2): 390-408.

STEGENGA, H., BOLTON, J.J. and R.J. ANDERSON, 1997. Seaweeds of the South African West Coast.

Contributions from the Bolus Herbarium, No. 18. Creda Press, Cape Town. 655 pp.

SWEIJD, N., 1998. The potential of abalone (Haliotis midae) seeding in South Africa. Chapter from PhD

Thesis, University of Cape Town, South Africa.

TAUNTON-CLARK, J., 1985. The formation, growth and decay of upwelling tongues in response to the

mesoscale wind field during summer. In: South African Ocean Colour and Upwelling Experiment.

SLR & PRM Page 6-13

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

TURPIE, J.K., ADAMS J.B., JOUBERT, A., HARRISON, T.D., COLLOTY, B.M., MAREE, R.C., WHITFIELD,

A.K., WOOLDRIDGE, T.H., LAMBERT, S.J., TALJAARD, S. AND VAN NIEKERK, L. (2002). Assessment of

the conservation status of South African estuaries for use in management and water allocation. Water SA 28:

191-203.

TURPIE, J.K. & CLARK, B.M. (2007). THE HEALTH STATUS, CONSERVATION IMPORTANCE, AND

ECONOMIC VALUE OF TEMPERATE SOUTH AFRICAN ESTUARIES AND DEVELOPMENT OF A

REGIONAL CONSERVATION PLAN. REPORT TO CAPENATURE.

UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMME (UNEP), 1995. Global biodiversity assessment.

UNEP Nairobi: Cambridge University Press.

VAN DALFSEN, J.A., ESSINK, K., TOXVIG MADSEN, H., BIRKLUND, J., ROMERO, J. and M.

MANZANERA, 2000. Differential response of macrozoobenthos to marine sand extraction in the North Sea

and the Western Mediterranean. ICES J. Mar. Sci., 57: 1439–1445.

VAN NIEKERK, L., TALJAARD, S., THERON, A., HUIZINGA, P., BERGMAN, S. AND VAN

BALLEGOOYEN, R. (2013). Chapter 2: Abiotic Specialist Report in: Volume 2: Orange Estuary Supporting




VELDKORNET, D.A. AND ADAMS, J. (2013). Chapter 4: Estuarine Macrophyte Report in: Volume 2:

Orange Estuary Supporting Information. Orange-Senqu River Commission Research Project on

Environmental Flow Requirements of the Fish River and the Orange-Senqu River Mouth. Technical Report

33. Ver. 1, 1 May 2013. UNDP-GEF Orange-Senqu Strategic Action Programme (Atlas Project ID 71598).

VISSER, G.A., 1969. Analysis of Atlantic waters off the coast of southern Africa. Investigational Report

Division of Sea Fisheries, South Africa, 75: 26 pp.

WALKER, D.R. and W.T. PETERSON, 1991. Relationships between hydrography, phytoplankton production,

biomass, cell size and species composition, and copepod production in the southern Benguela upwelling

system in April 1988. S. Afr. J. mar. Sci., 11: 289-306

WEIR, C.R., 2011. Distribution and seasonality of cetaceans in tropical waters between Angola and the Gulf

of Guinea. African Journal of Marine Science 33(1): 1-15.

WEIR, C.R., COLLINS, T., CARVALHO, I. and H.C. ROSENBAUM, 2010. Killer whales (Orcinus orca) in

Angolan and Gulf of Guinea waters, tropical West Africa. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the

U.K. 90: 1601– 1611.

WHEELER, A.J., KOZACHENKO, M., BEYER, A., FOUBERT, A., HUVENNE, V.A.I., KLAGES, M.,

MASSON, D.G., OLU-LE ROY, K. and J. THIEDE, 2005. Sedimentary processes and carbonate mounds in

the Belgica Mound province, Porcupine Seabight, NE Atlantic. In: Cold-water Corals and Ecosystems,

FREIWALD, A and J.M. ROBERTS, (eds). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg pp. 571-603.

WHITFIELD, A.K. (2000). Available scientific information on individual South African estuarine Systems.

WRC Report no. 577/3/00.

WICKENS, P., 1994. Interactions between South African Fur Seals and the Purse-Seine Fishery. Marine

Mammal Science, 10: 442–457.

WOOLDRIDGE, T. (2013). Chapter 5: Estuarine Invertebrate Report in: Volume 2: Orange Estuary

Supporting Information. Orange-Senqu River Commission Research Project on Environmental Flow

Requirements of the Fish River and the Orange-Senqu River Mouth. Technical Report 33. Ver. 1, 1 May

2013. UNDP-GEF Orange-Senqu Strategic Action Programme (Atlas Project ID 71598).

SLR & PRM Page 6-14

SLR Ref. 720.01087.00001

Report No.1




November 2017

ZAJAC, R.N., LEWIS, R.S., POPPE, L.J., TWICHELL, D.C., VOZARIK, J., and M.L. DIGIACOMO-COHEN,

2000. Relationships among sea-floor structure and benthic communities in Long Island Sound at regional

and benthoscape scales. J. Coast. Res., 16: 627– 640.

ZOUTENDYK, P., 1992. Turbid water in the Elizabeth Bay region: A review of the relevant literature. CSIR

Report EMAS-I 92004.

ZOUTENDYK, P., 1995. Turbid water literature review: a supplement to the 1992 Elizabeth Bay Study.

CSIR Report EMAS-I 95008.

amendment of environmental management … · reviewer andrew bradbury ... status draft report for...

Documents