niassa green resources plantation project ngr biodiversity ... green resources plantation...

NIASSA GREEN RESOURCES PLANTATION PROJECT

NGR BIODIVERSITY AND FLORAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Prepared for:

Green Resource Niassa 36, Trabalho Ave

Lichinga Mozambique

Prepared by:

Coastal& Environmental Services EAST LONDON

2 Marine Terrace, Hampton Court East London, 5201

043 742 3302 Also in Grahamstown and Durban

www.cesnet.co.za

May 2013

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

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION This document contains intellectual property and propriety information that is protected

by copyright in favour of Coastal & Environmental Services and the specialist consultants. The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to

any third party without the prior written consent of Coastal & Environmental Services. This document is prepared exclusively for submission to Niassa Green Resources,

and is subject to all confidentiality, copyright and trade secrets, rules intellectual property law and practices of Mozambique.

NGR Floral Survey and Impact Assessment – September 2012

Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Plantation Project i

This Report should be sited as follows: Coastal & Environmental Services, May 2013: NGR Floral Survey and Impact Assessment, CES, East London.

CES Report Revision and Tracking Schedule Document Title

Niassa Green Resources Plantation Project – Floral Survey and Impact Assessment

Client Name & Address

Niassa Green Resources

Document Reference

CES/2012/148/Bot01

Status

Issue Date

Lead Author

Greer Hawley

Reviewer

Nic Davenport

Study Leader or Registered Environmental Assessment Practitioner Approval

Report Distribution Circulated to No. of hard copies

No. electronic copies

This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of Coastal & Environmental Services (CES) appointment and contains intellectual property and proprietary information that is protected by copyright in favour of CES. The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to any third party without the prior written consent of Coastal & Environmental Services. This document is prepared exclusively for use by CES’s client. CES accepts no liability for any use of this document other than by its client and only for the purposes for which it was prepared. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part) use or rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written permission of CES. The document is subject to all confidentiality, copyright and trade secrets rules, intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.

Coastal& Environmental Services

2 Marine Terrace Quigney

East London 5201

+27 43 7423302 [email protected]

www.cesnet.co.za Also in Grahamstown

mailto:[email protected]

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


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Plantation Project i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Niassa Green Resources (NGR) are proposing to utilise approximately 8000ha of land to be converted from rotational crop agriculture to plantation forest, utilising predominantly Eucalyptus and Pinus tree species. Four planting areas have been identified, namely Malulu 01, Malulu 02 in the north and Malica and Ntiuile in the south. NGR intends to apply for FSC certification. The FSC principles and criteria apply to the products that originate from FSC registered and certified forests and in the context of Niassa Green Resources, would therefore only apply to the plantation forests (Pines, Eucalyptus and other hardwood plantations) that have been and will be planted, managed and harvested. The two project areas of Malulu (01 &02) were previously surveyed in terms of plant species richness and biodiversity by Sitoe (2008) and findings of the survey are incorporated into this report for continuation. A site survey was conducted from the 11th – 17th April 2012. An initial drive through of all four plantation sites (Malulu 01 (North), Malulu 02 (South), Ntiuile and Malica) was undertaken in order to establish habitat diversity and overall state. Habitat sites were selected (non-randomly) based on habitat integrity, for biodiversity sampling. The most pristine and established habitat representations were selected as these would reflect the highest possible species diversity within the project area. The Simpson’s index (Simpson, 1949) was used for the calculation of alpha biodiversity within each habitat. Five vegetation/land cover categories were identified and mapped: 1. Miombo Woodland, which includes:

Riparian vegetation

Cemetery Miombo Woodland

Rocky Outcrop and Slopes 2. Savanna Shrub 3. Wetlands 4. Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic 5. Riparian Zones (water courses) The most important floral habitats include the remaining Miombo Woodland and Wetlands, which are described briefly below. The area, once covered in Miombo Woodland, currently contains a few hectares (Table below), confined to narrow riparian strips, steep slopes, high hills and cemeteries. Riparian Woodland is entirely restricted to a few metres, adjacent to rivers and streams, throughout the NGR project area. In most cases, riparian woodland is absent or highly degraded.

Planting area Total area of Miomo Woodland (ha)

% of area covered by Miombo Woodland

Malulu 01 377 ha 12.6%

Malulu 02 194 ha 7%

Malica 20 ha 0.6%

Ntiuile 5 ha 0.5%

The wetlands that were sampled at the Malulu sites did not, at the time of the site visit, appear transformed by cultivation and did not show signs of direct or indirect human impacts. The presence of Drosera species at one site indicates a period of low disturbance. Recent aerial imagery on Google Earth of the Malica and Ntiuile sites, however, demonstrates significant utilisation of riparian zones for cultivation.


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Planation Project ii

The site visit and plant survey was undertaken in April 2012, which is considered autumn. As such, annual forbs and seasonal geophytes would not have been evident and therefore not recorded during this survey. Plant species identified by Sitoe (2008) have been included into the total species list for the Malulu, Malica and Ntiuile planting areas (Appendix B) and used as a calculation for total species richness. Alpha Biodiversity calculated for the Savanna shrub and Miombo Woodland is provided in the table below:

Habitat Total plant species richness Sitoe (2008) and current survey combined data

Alpha Biodiversity (Simpsons Index 1/D; value range 0.0 < 1/D < 10+)

Miombo Terrestrial (Secondary/degraded)

Slope and Rocky outcrops (Malulu Mountain)

35 4.617

Cemetery 65

Miombo Riparian 16 4.01

Savanna Shrub 122 1.90

Wetlands 14 100% Grass species, 0-1% herb and geophyte species.

Total 230

The following species which are considered species of special concern include:

IUCN Category Total plant species

Near Threatened 1 (Synaptolepis kirkii)

Declining 2 (Balanites maughamii, Boophone disticha)

Lower Risk# 2 (Afzelia quanzensis, Khaya anthotheca)

In order to assess the NGR planting areas for land suitable for plantation forestry, all four sites were mapped in terms of landcover/vegetation types. Areas deemed as High Conservation Value, High Conservation Value Forest and critical ecosystem or ecological corridors were identified as SENSITIVE AREAS. Habitats and vegetation types that were identified have been buffered by a 50 metre “No-go” zone for NGR plantation activities.

Sensitive area Habitat and Rationale

High Conservation Value or High Conservation Value Forest

All Miombo Woodland is identified as HCV or HCVF as the Miombo found in the project area is considered by specialists as Upper Shire/Eastern Rift Miombo Woodland and has been identified as an important conservation area as a result of high recorded biodiversity (+1500 species) (Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011)

Critical Ecosystems and Critical ecological corridors

Critical ecosystems have been identified in this report as:

Riparian Woodland

Riparian Zones

Wetlands

Cemetery Miombo Woodlands (as isolated refugia)

Rocky Outcrop Miombo Woodland


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Planation Project iii

The following floral ecology impacts associated with the NGR plantation project were identified:

Issues Associated Impacts Post-mitigation Significance

1. Reduction of Soil health and changes to soil characteristics

1. Permanent modification of soil characteristics and properties: pH, soil organisms, other chemical properties, fertilisers

MODERATE

2. Poor soil management, combined with vegetation clearing and soil exposure may result in the erosion of topsoil and result in downstream sedimentation in water courses

LOW

2. Biodiversity losses 1. Control of Pine and Eucalyptus plant invasion through downstream dispersion

MODERATE

2. Habitat fragmentation: due linear infrastructure routed through habitats

POTENTIAL HIGH BENEFICIAL

3. Edge-effect pressure on sensitive ecosystems (Miombo Woodland/ Wetlands) as a result of plantation activities (during site establishment, harvesting and construction of associated infrastructure)

LOW

4. Loss of remaining degraded Miombo Woodland, as an Indirect impact, resulting from displacement of agriculture which may cause local extinctions and potential total destruction of Miombo Woodland and associated plant and animal diversity from the small remaining pockets

LOW

5. Degradation of wetlands due to plantation establishment and loss of natural network corridors

MODERATE

3. Monoculture and disease Risk

1. Re-vegetation with monoculture plantation may increase the risk of plant diseases, disease vector (insects) and thereby reduce natural biodiversity

LOW

4. Changes to ground and surface water hydrology

1. Alien plantation species may impact on water flow regimes and ground water levels that support wetland and downstream users.

MODERATE

5. Increased Fire risk 1. Fuel loads in plantation sites that are not kept clear of felled biomass and understory growth could increase fire intensities and cause soil damage, increase erosion and decreased germination from indigenous seed pools. Increased fire frequency reduces natural Miombo Woodland (Dry forest) species diversity.

LOW

6. Conservation Opportunities and

1. Potential for improved conservation of Miombo Woodland through:

HIGH BENEFICIAL


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Planation Project iv

Issues Associated Impacts Post-mitigation Significance

Biodiversity Offsets/Set aside area

a. Access to alternative timber b. Access to alternative incomes

and livelihoods c. Implementation of Conservation

Programmes (Sustainability)

In conclusion:

The most “natural” vegetation types appear to be in a state of constant primary or secondary succession due to constant disturbance such as fire, harvesting, cultivation, etc.

Miombo Woodland contained a high species richness and alpha biodiversity and should not be developed or cultivated, but managed as natural areas so they continue to provide ecosystem goods and services. The effectiveness of the management should be audited on an annual basis.

Water courses (streams, rivers and wetlands) have been identified as ecological network areas, providing linear pathways for fauna and flora.

The following key recommendations are made: 1. A 50 metre “No-go” buffer on either side of water bodies (including streams, wetlands and

rivers), in addition to the rehabilitation and re-vegetation of drainage lines will ensure that these corridors are maintained and further enhance their ecological function. In addition a 50 metre No-go” buffer zone must be implemented around all Miombo Woodland. No plantation activities may occur within these buffer zones.

2. Biodiversity of plants and animals has been briefly considered at various levels ranging from the conservation of individual species to landscapes and ecosystems. NGR will be required to address the impacts by implementing various programmes delivering outcomes which: a) Create awareness of the value of natural resources and the importance of conservation b) Monitor and avoid sensitive areas c) Incorporates active and informed management in response to the findings of monitoring

programmes. In addition to the FSC requirements, the following recommendations must be implemented:

Implement all mitigation measures presented in this report (provided below) by incorporating and detailing these in an Operation Management Plan under Ecological Monitoring.

Encourage and facilitate, where feasible, ongoing research on fauna and flora in the area.

Rehabilitate, where possible, drainage lines (streams and rivers) and monitor fishing and cultivation of wetlands.

Fire management is to include fire breaks around and between plantations. Controlling fire regimes will require cooperation from community members who inhabit surrounding.

No rare and endangered species were observed in the project areas (2008 and 2012 survey), but should such as species become apparent in future they should be actively conservation and managed through an appropriate mechanisms such as: translocation, monitoring or protection

Carry out exhaustive monitoring, which should be audited every year for the first 8 years and thereafter, every two years for the following 12 years.


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Plantation Project v

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................. 1

1.1 Project description ........................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Terms of Reference ......................................................................................................... 1

2 LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDELINES .......................................................................... 3 2.1 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN): Statutes and Regulations ........... 3 2.2 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) ........................................................................ 3 2.3 Equator principles relevant to the Ecological Study ......................................................... 3 2.4 International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards relevant to the Floral Biodiversity Assessment ............................................................................................................. 4 2.5 Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) requirements ............................................................. 5

3 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 13 3.1 Literature for review ....................................................................................................... 13 3.1.1 Current information and existing data ........................................................................ 13 3.1.2 Findings of impacts of Alien plant species on surrounding environment ..................... 13

3.2 Site survey ..................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Floral survey and Biodiversity calculations ..................................................................... 13 3.3.1 Floral Survey approach .............................................................................................. 13 3.3.2 Biodiversity calculation .............................................................................................. 14

3.4 IUCN and CITES assessment ....................................................................................... 15 4 LITERATURE REVIEW AND REGIONAL CONTEXT .......................................................... 16

4.1 Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 16 4.1.1 Climate and Topography............................................................................................ 16 4.1.2 Vegetation type and Regional Context ....................................................................... 16 4.1.3 Survey undertaken by Sitoe (2008): ........................................................................... 18

4.2 Protected Areas ............................................................................................................. 18 4.3 Alien Invasive plant species ........................................................................................... 18

5 VEGETATION TYPES AND SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................ 20 5.1 General description of the planting areas ...................................................................... 25 5.1.1 Planting area of Malulu 01 ......................................................................................... 25 5.1.2 Planting area of Malulu 02 ......................................................................................... 25 5.1.3 Planting area of Malica .............................................................................................. 25 5.1.4 Planting area of Ntiuile ............................................................................................... 25

5.2 General description of vegetation types ......................................................................... 20 5.2.1 Miombo Woodland ..................................................................................................... 20 5.2.2 Savanna shrub .......................................................................................................... 22 5.2.3 Wetlands ................................................................................................................... 23

5.3 Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic ................................................................................ 24 6 FLORAL BIODIVERSITY, CONSERVATION STATUS AND SPATIAL ASSESSMENT OF ECOLOGICAL CORRIDORS ....................................................................................................... 30

6.1 Floral Biodiversity .......................................................................................................... 30 6.2 Conservation Status of plant species: Rare, Endangered or Threatened species .......... 32 6.3 Geographical assessment of the project area ................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

7 IDENTIFIED ISSUES AND IMPACTS ................................................................................... 36 7.1 The current impacts: the “NO-GO” or “Without project scenario” ................................... 36 7.2 Issues and impacts associated with the proposed plantation ......................................... 36

8 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................................... 38 8.1 Issue 1: Reduction of Soil health and changes to soil characteristics ............................. 38 8.2 Issue 2: Biodiversity losses ............................................................................................ 39 8.3 Issue 3: Increased Disease Risk due to monoculture plantations .................................. 42 8.4 Issue 4: Changes to ground and surface water hydrology (water quantity and quality) .. 44 8.5 Issue 5: Increased Fire Risk .......................................................................................... 44 8.6 Issue 6: Potential Conservation Opportunities ............................................................... 45

9 CONCLUSIONS OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............... 46 9.1 Summary of impact assessment .................................................................................... 46 9.2 Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 46 9.2.1 IFC Performance Standard 6 ..................................................................................... 46


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Planation Project vi

9.2.2 FSC Criteria and Compliance Requirements ............................................................. 47 9.2.3 Concluding remarks: Reporting on Terms of Reference............................................. 49 9.2.4 Concluding remarks ................................................................................................... 51

9.3 Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 51 9.4 Mitigation measures associated with relevant issues to be implemented ....................... 52 9.5 Summary of recommended additional monitoring and evaluation requirements ............ 54

10 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................... 55

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Map of NGR Planting areas. ............................................................................................................ 1 Figure 4.1 Vegetation types of the Miombo Eco-region, showing that the NGR project areas are located in

Dry Miombo Woodland (from WWR SARPO, 2003, Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011). ...................... 17 Figure 4.2 Areas of Importance for Biodiversity Conservation (WWF-SARPO, 2003 in Timberlake and

Chidumayo (2011). The project area is located at No.16: Upper Shire/Eastern Rift area of importance. ................................................................................................................................................................. 17

Figure 5.1 Vegetation cover of Malulu 01 (Insert: planting schedule for Malulu 01) ....................................... 26 Figure 5.2 Vegetation cover of Malulu 02 (Insert: planting schedule for Malulu 02). The woodland encircled in

red is a cemetery Miombo Woodland of cultural significance. ................................................................ 27 Figure 5.3 Vegetation cover of Malica (Insert: planting scheduled for Malica). The woodland encircled in red

is a cemetery Miombo Woodland of cultural significance. ....................................................................... 28 Figure 5.4 Vegetation cover of Ntiuile (Insert: planting schedule for Ntiuile). ................................................. 29 Figure 6.1 Malulu 01 and Malulu 02: Potential sensitive areas in orange includes wetlands and potential

woodland.................................................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 6.2 Malica and Ntiuile: Potential sensitive areas in red, orange and light yellow include wetlands,

savanna shrub and woodlands ................................................................................................................ 35

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 FSC Principles and Criteria relevant to the Floral Survey and Impact Assessment and comments 6 Table 3.1 Methodology used for floral survey sampling .................................................................................. 13 Table 5.1 Remaining Miombo Woodland per planting area ............................................................................ 20 Table 6.1 Floral Survey and Biodiversity calculations (2012) .......................................................................... 31 Table 6.2 Species conservation status according to IUCN and Moz Red Data List ....................................... 32 Table 6.3 Sensitive environments ................................................................................................................... 33 Table 9.1 Summary of the impact ratings before and after mitigation ............................................................. 46 Table 9.2 IFC PS6 requirements and comments ............................................................................................ 46 Table 9.3 FSC criteria and Biodiversity Actions required ................................................................................ 47 Table 9.4 Terms of Reference and reporting response ................................................................................... 49


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Plantation Project 1

1 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.1 Project description The Floral Survey and Impact Assessment report is based on the understanding that approximately 8000ha of land will be converted from rotational crop agriculture to plantation forest, utilising predominantly Eucalyptus and Pinus tree species. Four planting areas have been identified, namely Malulu 01, Malulu 02 in the north and Malica and Ntiuile in the south (Figure 1.1). Both Malulu sites have been subjected to a previous Environmental assessment and have already been planted. The findings of the previous floral survey conducted (Sitoe, 2008) have been incorporated into this report and the information has been updated to ensure consistency across all four planting areas.

Figure 1.1 Map of NGR Planting areas.

1.2 Terms of Reference For sound planning and environmental management of the area NGR wants to carry out an ecological survey and assessment of biodiversity of the lands where it will work with the aim of identifying the various vegetation formations in the area. The following terms of reference apply to this assessment (based on the Terms of Reference supplied by NGR for this proposal with some minor alterations): Identify: In all four planting areas

Rare, endangered and threatened species/ecosystems.

A selection of plantable areas for plantation forestry. These have been identified as modified agriculture areas already utilised for rotational cultivation


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Planation Project 2

Areas in need for protection because of rare, endangered and threatened species (fauna).

Areas in need for protection such as wetlands, grasslands and riverine forests as these habitats form important sites for bird species in particular

Invasive species - both within NGR plantation areas as well as in the project zone – detect whether such species are spreading into or outside the project site, and advise on remedial action and a monitoring system for such species.

Identify and Assess NTFP species and propose management, harvesting and monitoring guidelines for those products

Pristine natural areas/landscapes

In Malica and Ntiuile planting areas

Areas of High Conservation Value (HCVs) and High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF) and provide a description of the qualifying attributes and:

Areas that provide critical ecosystem services (e.g., hydrological services, erosion control, fire control);

Ecological resources that are utilised for cultural and spiritual purposes.

Key habitats and/or key species in the various vegetation types, for biodiversity monitoring.

Other features of interest e.g. water sources, wetlands, conservation areas, controlled areas including valley bottoms and propose methods of monitoring them.

Assessment of:

Assess impacts of plantation forestry using exotic species on the grasslands and natural vegetation and to propose ways to minimize negative impacts

New planting area: Identify and describe in detail any measures and management prescriptions that need to be put in place to ensure HCV’s are in no way negatively impacted by the project

New planting area: Assess the impact of the project on the biodiversity surrounding the project area.

New planting area: Assess the impact of fire as an environmental factor in biodiversity conservation.

New planting area: Assess Globally, regionally or nationally significant biodiversity in terms of: o protected areas o threatened species o endemic species

Review existing ecological survey ‘ecological identification and characterization of the ecosystems of the Sanga area currently held by NGRs.’, and supplement as necessary as to bring up to the standard to comply with the other prescriptions above.

Management recommendations in the new planting area:

Describe how the ‘without project’ reference scenario (business-as-usual) would affect biodiversity in the project zone (e.g., habitat availability, landscape connectivity and threatened species).

Recommend Management Systems for vegetation types and patterns of NGR land,

Propose management system for conservation of rare, threatened and endangered species including HCV’s and finally

Develop management prescriptions for identified water sources, wetlands, conservation areas, controlled areas that include valley bottoms.

Management recommendations In all four planting areas:

Develop a monitoring plan that describes the future monitoring requirements to obtain a scientifically defensible baseline. Initial data will be provided as part of the specialist study.

In conjunction with other specialists, determine areas that are critical for the traditional cultural identity of communities (e.g., areas of cultural, ecological, economic or religious significance identified in collaboration with the communities).


Coastal & Environmental Services Niassa Green Resources Plantation Project 3

2 LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDELINES

2.1 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN): Statutes and Regulations

The objective of the IUCN is to “influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable.” (http://www.iucn.org/about/) In order to achieve this objective the IUCN implements programmes, administered by the World Conservation Congress, in the form of number of activities such as:

Research species and ecosystem function and ensure sustainable, equitable and ecological utilisation of natural resources.

Determine biological diversity, identify threats and priority conservation areas

Develop sound practices for the conservation and sustainable use of species and ecosystems

Develop tools for effective rehabilitation, mitigation or offsets

2.2 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) The objectives of the CBD address issues of conservation, sustainable use and fair/equitable sharing of the benefits of natural resources. The CBD encourage the use of the “Ecosystem approach” which is based on the application of scientific methodologies focused on levels of biological organisation including process, functions and interactions between organisms and the environment (http://www.cbd.int/convention/articles/?a=cbd-01). The levels are extended to refer to any functional ecological unit at any scale. The CBD emphasizes that adaptive management is necessary for complex and dynamic ecosystems. Impact responses of ecosystems are non-linear and often delayed, resulting in unpredictable reactive events. Management must be adaptive in order to respond to these events by incorporating a “lessons-learnt” approach and frequent considerations of “cause-and-effect”. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), to which Mozambique is a signatory, recognises the CBD and its objectives.

2.3 Equator principles relevant to the Ecological Study The Equator principles were derived as a set of requirements which must be fulfilled in order for lenders to finance capital ventures (http://www.equator-principles.com/). These principles ensure that social and environmental issues are addressed, all considerations are taken into account, policies and standards are upheld and that all these elements are thoroughly addressed. This includes the identification and mitigation of all negative impacts. The principles relevant to the Biodiversity and Ecological Study include:

Principal 1: Review and categorisation: determine potential impacts and risks to the environment using screening criteria of the International Finance Corporation (IFC).

Principal 2: Social and Environmental Assessment: This study and EIR are in fulfilment of this principal.

Principal 3: Environmental standards: Compare with IFC standards and World Bank Environment, Health and Safety standards and determine compliance or justify deviation.

Principal 4: Action Plan and Management System:



EIR and specialist studies should inform the Environmental and Social Management Plan, which will include all mitigation measures suggested by the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment.

2.4 International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards relevant to the Floral Biodiversity Assessment

The following Performance Standards (PS) apply to the impact assessment of Floral Biodiversity: 1. PS 1: Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts

Identify and assess environment impacts, risks and opportunities in the project’s area of influence

To avoid, or where avoidance is not possible, minimize, mitigate or compensate/offset for adverse impacts on the natural environment

To promote improved environmental performance of companies through the effective use of management systems

2. PS 6: Biodiversity Conservation & Sustainable Management of Living Natural

Resources

Objectives and requirements to avoid, minimise or compensate/offset risks and impacts

Protect and conserve biodiversity

Maintain the benefits of ecosystem services

Promote the sustainable management and use of living natural resources through the adoption of practices that integrate conservation needs and development priorities

PS 6 applies to modified, natural and critical habitats. Specifically, PS 6 applies to: 1. Modified habitats that contain significant biodiversity value as determined in the this report 2. Natural habitats will not be significantly converted or degraded by project activities. Mitigation

measures will include:

Avoiding impacts on biodiversity through protection of set-asides,

Implementing biological corridors

Restoring habitats during operations

Implementing biodiversity offsets 3. Critical Habitats are areas considered as high biodiversity areas which should remain in a

natural state, failing which, should comply with conditions and implement a Biodiversity Action Plan aimed at achieving net gains of biodiversity values for the habitat

Although NGR will only be utilising modified habitats three factors need to be taken into account when considering the above: 1. The planting areas are located in an area of Miombo Woodland identified as an “Area of

Importance for Biodiversity Conservation” (Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011). 2. Natural habitats such as wetlands, Miombo Woodland and Riparian vegetation, may be

indirectly (i.e. beyond the project boundary) affected by NGR forestry activities through agricultural displacement. As such, set-aside areas, within project areas and habitat restoration may be considered as biodiversity offsets.

3. No critical habitats associated with high biodiversity were identified, although the Miombo Woodland habitat in the project area has been identified as an “Area of Importance for Biodiversity Conservation” in the WWF-SARPO Miombo Eco-region Vision Report (Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011).



2.5 Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) requirements FSC’s mission is to “promote environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial and economically viable management of the world's forests”. NGR intends to apply for FSC certification. The FSC principles and criteria apply to the products that originate from FSC registered and certified forests and in the context of Niassa Green Resources, would therefore only apply to the plantation forests (Pines, Eucalyptus and other hardwood plantations) that have been and will be planted, managed and harvested. As such, the FSC principles and criteria require plantation activities to acknowledge, maintain and monitoring the natural surrounding Miombo Woodland (indigenous dry forest). As the majority of the proposed project area will be planted to alien, and possibly invasive, tree species, the FSC requirements would need to be addressed in a general Operations Management Programme or Plan. The relevant environmental FSC criteria that may be relevant to the floral biodiversity impact assessment are discussed in the table below:



Table 2.1 FSC Principles and Criteria relevant to the Floral Survey and Impact Assessment and comments

FSC Principles and Criteria Comment on principle

5 Benefits from the forest

Forest management operations shall encourage the efficient use of the forest’s multiple products and services to ensure economic viability and a wide range of environmental and social benefits.

1. Forest management should strive toward economic viability, while taking into account the full environmental, social, and operational costs of production, and ensuring the investments necessary to maintain the ecological productivity of the forest.

The environmental (floral) cost of production would need to consider:

Current state of the natural environment

Potential biodiversity and conservation status of the land to be used for plantation forests

Habitat fragmentation

Agricultural displacement and effect on remaining ecological areas that may be converted to crop agriculture

Effective management and rehabilitation of ecologically important areas by NGR within the project area

2. Forest management and marketing operations should encourage the optimal use and local processing of the forest’s diversity of products.

Additional plantation forest products that should be considered includes:

Edible mushrooms

Honey

Fuel wood (to replace Miombo wood utilisation)

Vermiculture and composting (organic fertiliser production)

3. Forest management should minimize waste associated with harvesting and on-site processing operations and avoid damage to other forest resources.

Waste minimisation can be directly addressed by implementing waste utilisation mechanisms at each processing stage, such as bio-pellets made from saw-dust and wood chips, gasification of remaining wood for electricity generation, etc.

4. The rate of harvest of forest products shall not exceed levels which can be permanently sustained.

This is not a Floral biodiversity issue as the plantation tree species are alien and their rates of harvest have no impact on the biodiversity of the surrounding indigenous vegetation.

6 Environmental Impact

Forest management shall conserve biological diversity and its associated values, water resources, soils, and unique and fragile ecosystems and landscapes, and, by so doing, maintain the ecological functions and the integrity of the forest.

1. Assessment of environmental impacts shall be completed—appropriate to the scale, intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected resources—and adequately integrated into management systems. Assessments shall include landscape level considerations as well as the impacts of on-site processing facilities. Environmental impacts shall be assessed prior to

Project impacts on Floral biodiversity are addressed in this report. On-site processing cannot yet be assessed as these activities are only scheduled for implementation in the next 15-20 years. Not processing site has been indicated.




commencement of site-disturbing operations.

2. Safeguards shall exist which protect rare, threatened and endangered species and their habitats (e.g., nesting and feeding areas). Conservation zones and protection areas shall be established, appropriate to the scale and intensity of forest management and the uniqueness of the affected resources. Inappropriate hunting, fishing, trapping and collecting shall be controlled.

The potential presence of rare, threatened and endangered plant species was established in a previous environmental impact assessment for the Malulu plantation areas (Sitoe, 2008). The information in the study has been incorporated, updated and expanded to include the Malica and Ntiuile sites. Currently, no rare, threatened or endangered plant species have been observed.

3. Ecological functions and values shall be maintained intact, enhanced, or restored, including:

Forest regeneration and succession.

Genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity.

Natural cycles that affect the productivity of the forest ecosystem.

There is significant scope to maintain, enhance AND restore surrounding natural habitats such as Miombo Woodland (also known Dry forest) and wetlands.

4. Representative samples of existing ecosystems within the landscape shall be protected in their natural state and recorded on maps, appropriate to the scale and intensity of operations and the uniqueness of the affected resources.

The natural vegetation cover within the project areas has been delineated. The effective protection of representative habitats and plant specimens is limited by land tenure and resource utilisation laws in Mozambique. Community engagement and agreement on this topic is required in order to implement any such activity. Should NGR commit to protecting habitats, they would need to manage them accordingly.

5. Written guidelines shall be prepared and implemented to: control erosion; minimize forest damage during harvesting, road construction, and all other mechanical disturbances; and protect water resources.

Erosion control and water resource protection are noteworthy environmental issues, which have been addressed in this report. Road construction cannot be assessed as they have not been delineated. Plantation forest damage during harvesting is not a Floral Biodiversity issue, but damage to surrounding natural vegetation is noted as a potential issue to be addressed in this report.

6. Management systems shall promote the development and adoption of environmentally friendly non-chemical methods of pest management and strive to avoid the use of chemical pesticides. World Health Organization Type 1A and 1B and chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides; pesticides that are persistent, toxic or whose derivatives remain biologically active and accumulate in the

Pesticides and Herbicides (for undergrowth control) could impact on neighbouring land cover and affect downstream land-users (crops) or water resource-user (fishing). Chemical pest management must be controlled and monitored in terms of:

Type of chemical utilised

Frequency of application




food chain beyond their intended use; as well as any pesticides banned by international agreement, shall be prohibited. If chemicals are used, proper equipment and training shall be provided to minimize health and environmental risks.

Quantity of application

7. Use of biological control agents shall be documented, minimized, monitored and strictly controlled in accordance with national laws and internationally accepted scientific protocols. Use of genetically modified organisms shall be prohibited. (This criterion is in contradiction to criterion 9(7) below)

The use of biological control agents with respect to the alien plant species utilised in the plantation development may be appropriate and should not be ruled out. Obviously, the release of such agents must comply with regulations and based on detailed scientific assessment.

8. The use of exotic species shall be carefully controlled and actively monitored to avoid adverse ecological impacts.

Exotic tree species will be utilised for plantation forestry. It is highly likely, as experienced elsewhere in Southern Africa that seeds of both Eucalyptus and Pine trees will disperse and established well beyond the project boundary, through wind and water action. Mitigating against invasion of exotic species, especially in downstream water courses, will be extremely challenging and difficult to control. In some cases indigenous hardwood tree species will be used (including Khaya species), but the extent of this is currently unknown.

9. Forest conversion to plantations or non-forest land uses shall not occur, except in circumstances where conversion:

entails a very limited portion of the forest management unit; and

does not occur on high conservation value forest areas; and

will enable clear, substantial, additional, secure long term conservation benefits across the forest management unit.

This is not relevant in the case of the NGR plantation project as land impacted by crop agriculture is being converted to Plantation forestry.

9 Maintenance of high conservation value forests

Management activities in high conservation value forests shall maintain or enhance the attributes which define such forests. Decisions regarding high conservation value forests shall always be considered in the context of a precautionary approach.

1. Assessment to determine the presence of the attributes consistent with High Conservation Value Forests will be completed, appropriate to scale and intensity of forest management.

High Conservation Value Forests are defined as:

Forests with high biodiversity

Large intact natural forest areas

Rare or threatened ecosystems

Forest with critical ecosystem importance

Forest areas of particular importance to local communities and indigenous peoples




Although none of the above criteria are met, it is important to consider areas that are considered by Miombo Woodland specialists as “Areas of Importance for Biodiversity Conservation” (Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011). The project site falls into such an area therefore any Miombo Woodland within the project area should be considered as High Conservation Value “Forests”. All the Miombo Woodland within the planting areas has been delineated (Figure 5.1-5.4).

10 Plantations

Plantations shall be planned and managed in accordance with Principles and Criteria 1 - 9, and Principle 10 and its Criteria. While plantations can provide an array of social and economic benefits, and can contribute to satisfying the world's needs for forest products, they should complement the management of, reduce pressures on, and promote the restoration and conservation of

natural forests.

1. The management objectives of the plantation, including natural forest conservation and restoration objectives, shall be explicitly stated in the management plan, and clearly demonstrated in the implementation of the plan.

No forest conservation or restoration objectives have been set in terms of the indigenous Miombo Woodland (Dry forest). It is not certain that NGR would be in a legal position to carry out this object.

2. The design and layout of plantations should promote the protection, restoration and conservation of natural forests, and not increase pressures on natural forests. Wildlife corridors, streamside zones and a mosaic of stands of different ages and rotation periods shall be used in the layout of the plantation, consistent with the scale of the operation. The scale and layout of plantation blocks shall be consistent with the patterns of forest stands found within the natural landscape.

At present, small patches of Miombo Woodland associated with cemeteries, and on some high hills with steep slopes, are scattered around the planting areas. The Malulu 01 project area contains the largest area of Miombo, which will not be utilised for plantations. Much of the Miombo Woodland exists precariously and is subject to harvesting for production of charcoal. Plantation forestry may alleviate human impact on the Miombo Woodland by providing communities with alternative employment and livelihood strategies and providing communities with alternative sources of timber. It is also important to acknowledge that NGR may indirectly further impact on the natural resources in the project area by replacing land used for commercial or subsistence food production. The result of this displacement may cause a knock-on effect of increased slash-and-burn by surrounding communities




for cultivation, on the remnants of Miombo Woodland in the project area. Ecological (network) corridors in the project area have been identified in this report, primarily associated with streams and rivers in the planting areas, which will be conserved by NGR.

3. Diversity in the composition of plantations is preferred, so as to enhance economic, ecological and social stability. Such diversity may include the size and spatial distribution of management units within the landscape, number and genetic composition of species, age classes and structures.

Two main genera are currently being proposed, namely:

Pinus spp

Eucalyptus spp As the plantation forests will consist of exotic species, the diversity in composition may not be as relevant in terms of ecological issues in the surrounding natural environment.

4. The selection of species for planting shall be based on their overall suitability for the site and their appropriateness to the management objectives. In order to enhance the conservation of biological diversity, native species are preferred over exotic species in the establishment of plantations and the restoration of degraded ecosystems. Exotic species, which shall be used only when their performance is greater than that of native species, shall be carefully monitored to detect unusual mortality, disease, or insect outbreaks and adverse ecological impacts.

The plantation forests will consist of exotic species, and may include some indigenous tree species. Disease and insect outbreaks must be monitored, with respect to their impact on the surrounding natural vegetation.

5. A proportion of the overall forest management area, appropriate to the scale of the plantation and to be determined in regional standards, shall be managed so as to restore the site to a natural forest cover.

The effective restoration of Miombo Woodland (Dry forest) may be severely limited by land tenure and natural resource utilisation laws in Mozambique. It seems unlikely that NGR, even with a DUAT, would be in a position to exclude natural resource utilisation from restored Miombo Woodland. Whilst non-timber products would be harmless, charcoal harvesting would render attempts at restoring woodland futile. Land for Miombo Woodland restoration could be secured by NGR, but thorough community engagement and agreement that no live tree timber harvesting is to occur will be required in order to implement any such activity.

6. Measures shall be taken to maintain or improve soil structure, fertility, and biological activity. The techniques and rate of

Water drainage deviation is not envisaged for the NGR project, however Eucalyptus and Pinus trees are well-known for their high




harvesting, road and trail construction and maintenance, and the choice of species shall not result in long term soil degradation or adverse impacts on water quality, quantity or substantial deviation from stream course drainage patterns.

water demand and high transpiration rates, which may affect downstream water flows and the water table in the immediate area of plantations (Le Maitre et al., 2002, ). Although long-term soil degradation is not envisaged, long-term (or permanent) changes to soil characteristics are likely in association with Eucalyptus and Pine plantations. Soil pH, moisture and microbial composition may be altered. Soil Health Monitoring will need to undertake in order to establish baseline conditions and monitor changes as a result of the NGR plantations.

7. Measures shall be taken to prevent and minimize outbreaks of pests, diseases, fire and invasive plant introductions. Integrated pest management shall form an essential part of the management plan, with primary reliance on prevention and biological control methods rather than chemical pesticides and fertilizers. Plantation management should make every effort to move away from chemical pesticides and fertilizers, including their use in nurseries. The use of chemicals is also covered in Criteria 6.6 and 6.7.

NGR will need to employ all possible measures to reduce the potential of Eucalypt and Pine invasion into the natural vegetation (where applicable). This is especially important in the riparian zones within the project area. In Criteria 6.8 (Blue text above), biological control methods are required to be minimised, contradicting this as a method of primary reliance.

8. Appropriate to the scale and diversity of the operation, monitoring of plantations shall include regular assessment of potential on-site and off-site ecological and social impacts, (e.g. natural regeneration, effects on water resources and soil fertility, and impacts on local welfare and social well-being), in addition to those elements addressed in principles 8, 6 and 4. No species should be planted on a large scale until local trials and/or experience have shown that they are ecologically well-adapted to the site, are not invasive, and do not have significant negative ecological impacts on other ecosystems. Special attention will be paid to social issues of land acquisition for plantations, especially the protection of local rights of ownership, use or access.

The potential negative ecological impacts should be monitored and include the following:

Wetland hydrology and water course stream flows

Alien plant establishment within riparian zones (within 50 metres)

Incidence and frequency of fires

Soil erosion

9. Plantations established in areas converted from natural forests after November 1994 normally shall not qualify for certification. Certification may be allowed in circumstances where sufficient evidence is submitted to the certification body that the manager/owner is not responsible directly or indirectly of such conversion.

Due to the extensive, uncontrolled, constant and apparent rotational harvesting of the small scattered pockets of remaining secondary Miombo Woodland, enabled by the protection of local rights to resource utilisation, it is not possible to establish land cover transformations as far back as 1994 as land cover patterns are dynamic and change from year-to-year.




However, it will be important for NGR to independently ground-truth and verify the condition of the site, prior to planting, in order to demonstrate compliance with this criterion.



3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Literature for review A review of the existing literature pertaining to the natural vegetation and plant biodiversity, the presence and status of alien/invasive plant species and the effects of Eucalyptus and Pinus plantations may have on the surrounding vegetation ecology, was undertaken. 3.1.1 Current information and existing data The two project areas of Malulu (01 &02) were previously surveyed in terms of plant species richness and biodiversity by Sitoe (2008) and findings of the survey are incorporated into this report for continuation. In addition, a number of reference sources on the ecology and biodiversity of Dry Forest and Dry Miombo Woodland were used for background information. 3.1.2 Findings of impacts of Alien plant species on surrounding environment As there appears to be no repository for information on the alien and invasive plant species of Mozambique, information sourced from South Africa and Malawi has been used for inference of potential scenarios and impacts associated with the NGR plantation project.

3.2 Site survey A site survey was conducted from the 11th – 17th April 2012. An initial drive through of all four plantation sites (Malulu 01 (North), Malulu 02 (South), Ntiuile and Malica) was undertaken in order to establish habitat diversity and overall state.

3.3 Floral survey and Biodiversity calculations 3.3.1 Floral Survey approach During the site survey, selected sites which represented natural habitats were sampled for species richness and abundance, which was carried out by identifying the species and counting the number of individuals within a predetermined area. The methodology applied varied between habitats and is summarised in Table 3.1 below. Habitat sites were selected (non-randomly) based on habitat integrity, for biodiversity sampling. The most pristine and established habitat representations were selected as these would reflect the highest possible species diversity within the project area. In addition, total species richness was noted for the entire project area during the drive-through of sections of the four sites. Table 3.1 Methodology used for floral survey sampling

Habitats sampled Biodiversity-Abundance Methodology Total area per sample

No. of samples

per habitat

Riparian Miombo Woodland

Stratified random sampling: Site pre-selected, start point of transect randomly selected. 50 metre transect along the length of the water course bank. All Miombo plant species were noted (width variable but up to

500m2 2



Habitats sampled Biodiversity-Abundance Methodology Total area per sample

No. of samples

per habitat

10 metres) and abundance recorded.

Degraded Terrestrial Miombo

Stratified random sampling: Site pre-selected, start point of transect randomly selected. 10x10 metre plots alternating along the length of a 50 metre transects. All plant species within plots were noted and abundance recorded.

500m2 2

Protea rocky outcrop Stratified random sampling: Site pre-selected, start point of transect randomly selected. 10x10 metre plots alternating along the length of a 50 metre transects. All plant species within plots were noted and abundance recorded.

500m2 1

Wetland Stratified random sampling: Site pre-selected, plots randomly selected. 1x1 metre plots were assessed using % plant cover. Method was used as single species (grasses) dominated whole plots and counting of individual plants was not possible (grass tufts cover soil surface)

1 m2 5

Grassland Stratified random sampling: Site pre-selected, plots randomly selected. 5x5 metre plot was randomly selected. All plant species within the plot were noted and abundance recorded.

25m2 1

3.3.2 Biodiversity calculation

The Simpson’s index (Simpson, 1949) was used for the calculation of alpha biodiversity within each habitat. The Simpson’s index measures the probability that two individuals, randomly selected from a sample, will belong to the same species. The calculation considers a dominance index because it weights towards the abundance of the most common species. It is also relatively simple, whilst providing a meaningful interpretation of the habitat biodiversity. The equation for the Simpson’s index is given below:

D = Σ(n1(n1 -1)/N(N-1))

Where: D = Simpson Index n1 = number of individuals of sp 1 N = Total number of spp in community As biodiversity increases, the Simpson’s index value will get smaller. By inversing this value (1/D), a positive correlation is achieved making interpretation of the value easier to apply. This study has used the inverse format of the Simpsons Index.



3.4 IUCN and CITES assessment The compiled plant species checklists were reviewed for the presence of Species of Special Concern (SSC), as they appear in the International Red Data List (IUCN) and the Mozambique Red Data List (MICOA, 2003). As the MICOA Red List species appears to be based on limited research within the country, additional reference to an updated Mozambique Flora Red Data List as well as the South African Red List 2009, has been made. For the purposes of this report:

Threatened species are defined as: a) species listed in the Critically endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable categories;

Sensitive species are defined as those species listed in the Data Deficient or Near Threatened categories

In addition, the plant species list was reviewed in terms of Appendix 1 and 2 of the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES);



4 LITERATURE REVIEW AND REGIONAL CONTEXT

4.1 Literature Review 4.1.1 Climate and Topography The project area is located at relatively high altitude ranging between 1000-1300 metres above-sea-level. As a result, the project area experiences a relatively moderate sub-tropical climate, with summer maximum and minimum temperatures of 25°C and 16°C, and winter maximum and minimum temperatures of 23°C and 12°C, respectively (www.worldclimateguide.co.uk). The rainfall season begins in November and ends in April (www.worldclimateguide.co.uk), with a total of approximately 1100mm annually. Annual rainfall is used as delineating factor that distinguishes between Wet (+1000mm/a) and Dry (-1000mm/a) Miombo Woodlands. Although this would classify the Miombo Woodland in the project area as “Wet”, the species composition and vegetation structure indicates rather that is it “Dry” Miombo Woodland (See discussion in Section 4.1.2 below). The topography of the project area can be described as gently undulating, occasionally punctuated by ridges and rocky outcrops, typically associated with steep slopes. Water courses are narrow and mostly shallow occasionally widening into wetlands. 4.1.2 Vegetation type and Regional Context The NGR plantation areas fall within the Miombo Woodland biome. Current discussions and research revolving around Miombo Woodlands in Africa are mostly premised on the original work and mapping conducted by White (1983), who classified the vegetation in the NGR project area as Miombo Woodland. The sub-humid dry forest of southern Africa has been significantly reduced or transformed to grassland or wooded grassland by fires and human destruction (Timberlake et al., 2010). The remaining remnants of woodland are typically characterised by species such as Brachystegia spiciformis, Parinari curatellifolia, Marquesia macroura and Daniellia alsteeniana. In areas that experience high fire frequencies, tree species such as Pterocarpus angolensis, Burkea africana, Dialium englerianum and understorey species of Protea,Combretum and Strychnos become the dominant species, due to fire-resistance. According to more recent mapping (Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011, Timberlake et al., 2010) the Miombo Woodland that occurs within the project area of the NGR plantations is considered as Dry Miombo (in spite of receiving +1000mm/annum), which is dominated by tree species such as: Brachystegia spiciformis, B. boehmii and Julbernardia floribunda (Figure 4.1). The geographical extent of Dry Miombo stretches across south-eastern Angola, southern Zambia and Zimbabwe, to south, central and northern Mozambique, southern Malawi and central and southern Tanzania (Timberlake et al., 2010). The WWF (WWF website, 2010) published map describing global eco-regions and their associated conservation status. This map places the NGR plantation site into “Eastern Miombo Woodlands”, which are currently classified as “Vulnerable” in terms of conservation status. Subsequently, and through WWF funding and mechanism, Timberlake and Chidumayo (2011) published a map generated by regional specialists and a series of WWT-SARPO maps that indicates areas of biodiversity importance (Figure 4.2). The map takes into consideration a range of taxa in terms of high biodiversity, endemism, threatened species and corridors or movement or migration. The Project area is located in an area of interest known as the Upper Shire/Eastern Rift (Figure 4.2). Upper Shire/Eastern Rift area has been identified as an important conservation area as a result of high recorded biodiversity (+1500 species) (Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011).



According to the National Report on Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Mozambique (2007), there are seven main vegetation types in Mozambique. Miombo Woodland is the most extensive and dominates in the north and central parts of the country and is characterised by the presence of tree species such as Brachystegia, Julbernardia and Pteleopsis, in many cases, mixed with Pterocarpus, Vitex payos, V. doniana, and Cussonia.

Figure 4.1 Vegetation types of the Miombo Eco-region, showing that the NGR project areas are located in Dry Miombo Woodland (from WWR SARPO, 2003, Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011).

Figure 4.2 Areas of Importance for Biodiversity Conservation (WWF-SARPO, 2003 in Timberlake and Chidumayo (2011). The project area is located at No.16: Upper Shire/Eastern Rift area of importance.



4.1.3 Survey undertaken by Sitoe (2008): The study undertaken by Sitoe in 2008 was critically reviewed. A summary is discussed in more detail below. Although small-scale subsistence agriculture was identified as the dominant land-use pattern, Sitoe (2008) recognised or identified three major ecosystems at the Malulu plantation areas (01 and 02), which included:

Grassland (tall and short),

Shrub Savanna and

Woodland (Miombo and Riparian) The ecosystems described by Sitoe (2008) were consistent with the descriptions provided by Wild and Fernandes (1967) which described Miombo (dominated by Brachystegia and Julbernardia), shrub Savanna (dominated by Protea and Cussonia) and Grasslands (dominated by Hyparrhenia and Cymbopogon). Furthermore, Sitoe (2008) suggests that these ecosystems are in a steady state as a comparison of the historical with the current vegetation reveals a similarity in terms of dominant species. Sitoe (2008) also discusses the major commercial timber species utilised by the local communities and reports that they are represented by small size trees in low abundance, with the exception of Brachystegia and Julbernardia, which were high in abundance and volume, but were represented by specimens with small dbh (diameter-at-breast-height) measurements (<42cm), indicating that these species are represented by consistently young specimens. Mature Brachystegia specimens on gentle slopes typically have dbh values ranging from 84-95cm (Saidi and Tshipala-Ramatshimbila, 2006). This report questions the use of the term “steady-state” to describe the Miombo Woodland in the project area. The fact that no mature tree specimens were observed surely indicates that ecosystems are, even if dominant plant species remain constant, being maintained in a sub-climax level, i.e. the woodland is never allowed to reach ecological climax state. In addition, Sitoe (2008) mentions that woody material is used by local communities in a selective manner, not causing change in its cover. This was not the modus operandi observed during the site visit. The apparent method utilised for charcoal production is non-selective harvesting of entire sections of Miombo Woodland, completely eliminating tree cover. The species richness was established by identifying 175 plant species of herb, shrub, trees, liana, epiphyte, palm and bamboo (Sitoe, 2008). Khaya anthotheca was the only species listed in the Mozambique Red data list as lower risk.

4.2 Protected Areas No National Parks occur in close proximity to the Niassa Green Resources project areas of Malulu, Ntiuile and Malica. The closest Game Reserve is the Niassa Reserve, which is one of the largest protected Miombo forest ecosystems in the world, with a surface of 42,200 km². The Niassa Reserve is the largest conservation area of Mozambique and it contains by far the greatest concentration of wildlife in the Country (USAid 2008).

4.3 Alien Invasive plant species Since the tree species utilised by NGR for the plantations are alien plant species, and are considered by some surrounding southern African countries as invasive, it is appropriate to discuss the potential risk that Pinus and Eucalyptus tree species may have on the surrounding environment.



Two reference documents have been used to assess the risk the invasive potential of Pinus and Eucalyptus species; Southern African National reports and directory of invasive alien species (Macdonald et al., 2003) and the South African National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act (No. 10 of 2004), which lists and categorises alien plant species according to their risk of invasion and proposed management control. The National report of alien invasive species for Mozambique did not provide a comprehensive list of alien invasive plant species and comment, particularly on Pinus and Eucalyptus is absent. For this reason, countries closest to the NGR project were used for reference, such as Malawi and Zimbabwe. The IUCN Invasive Species Database (http://www.issg.org/) relies heavily on information contributions, and is not a comprehensive reference. In Malawi, Pinus patula and Eucalyptus camaldulensis have been identified as an alien invasive plant species with the associated impact “Displaces indigenous plants or is a serious invader of native ecosystems” (Mwanyongo et al., 2003). No other Pinus or Eucalyptus species appear on the list. In Zambia (Sithole et al., 2003) a number of Pinus and Eucalyptus species have been identified as invasive and are listed below:

Pinus patula, P., taeda, P.,elliotii, P. kesiya, P. radiate, P. roxburghii

Eucalyptus mearnsii, E., microcorys, E. camaldulensis, E. tereticornis, E. robusta, E. macarthurii, E. paniculata, E. globulus, E. citriodora.

Legislation implemented in South African has sought to categorise all species according to the risk of the species in question on the integrity of the surrounding natural habitat. Control and management of these species is also prescribed. The categories are described below:

a) Category 1a: Invasive species requiring compulsory control. Remove and destroy. Any specimens of Category 1a listed species need, by law, to be eradicated from the environment. No permits will be issued.

b) Category 1b: Invasive species requiring compulsory control as part of an invasive species

control programme. Remove and destroy. These plants are deemed to have such a high invasive potential that infestations can qualify to be placed under a government sponsored invasive species management programme. No permits will be issued.

c) Category 2: Invasive species regulated by area. A demarcation permit is required to import,

possess, grow, breed, move, sell, buy or accept as a gift any plants listed as Category 2 plants. No permits will be issued for Cat 2 plants to exist in riparian zones.

d) Category 3: Invasive species regulated by activity. An individual plant permit is required to

undertake any of the following restricted activities (import, possess, grow, breed, move, sell, buy or accept as a gift) involving a Category 3 species. No permits will be issued for Cat 3 plants to exist in riparian zones.

All Eucalyptus species are listed as Category 2 species where they occur in dense stands or plantations. In riparian areas and wetlands, all Eucalyptus species are listed as Category 1b species, which indicates that Eucalyptus species are high risk in these areas. The implications to the NGR project are to design the plantation to ensure that Eucalyptus stands are not placed adjacent to water-course or wetlands. The Pinus species were either designated as a Category 2 or 3. The implications that need to be considered by NGR are to ensure that Pinus trees are not to be placed within riparian zones. Maintaining a buffer zone between Pinus stand and riparian zones are also recommended.



5 VEGETATION TYPES AND SITE DESCRIPTION

5.1 General description of vegetation types During the site visit conducted in April 2012, the following ecological categories in terms of land cover were noted (Figure 5.1-5.4): 1. Miombo Woodland, which includes:

Riparian: a narrow strip of vegetation along streams and rivers. Harvesting continues to threaten riparian vegetation

Cemetery: small patches preserved for cultural/religious reasons. Larger tracts of Miombo Woodland are present in the north and north-eastern portions of Malulu 01 (North) planting area

Rocky Outcrop and Slopes: steep and rocky slopes that cannot be cultivated and not ideal for charcoal production. Trees are harvested, but at a more sustainable level as access is a significant obstacle

2. Savanna Shrub: only a single representative of this vegetation type was noted in the Malica Plantation area.

3. Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic: Approximately 85% of the land cover has been modified and has been classified as Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic in this report, whether actively farmed or fallow.

4. Wetlands: a number of wetlands associated with water courses were identified. Man-made dams are also included into the definition of a wetland.

5. Riparian Zones: are defined in this report as areas associated with all water courses and is delineated by a 50 metre buffer from the bank and are not described further.

5.1.1 Miombo Woodland The area, once covered in Miombo Woodland, currently contains a few hectares (Table 5.1), confined to narrow riparian strips, steep slopes, high hills and cemeteries. Table 5.1 Remaining Miombo Woodland per planting area

Planting area Total area of Miombo Woodland (ha)

% of area covered by Miombo Woodland

Malulu 01 377 ha 12.6%

Malulu 02 194 ha 7%

Malica 20 ha 0.6%

Ntiuile 5 ha 0.5%

All the vegetation cover that formed a canopy or potential was categorised as Woodland. Miombo Woodland was associated with cemeteries and rocky outcrops and Riparian Woodland, which consisted of a different species set (tree species that were hydrophilic), was associated with water-courses. They are described and assessed separately in this study. Smaller riparian vegetation patches along water courses and terrestrial woodland are under constant threat of harvesting for cultivation, timber, fuel and charcoal activities. The existence of the remaining Miombo Woodland in the project area is precarious under current conditions. Cemetery and Rocky outcrop Miombo Woodlands Small pockets of Miombo Woodland are scattered over the planting areas. The woodlands appear to be secondary and are harvested for timber and non-timber purposes. Malulu 01 has the largest area of Miombo Woodland (±377ha).



Cemetery patches can be described as established terrestrial woodlands as they are not harvested for timber due to spiritual reasons (Plate 5.1). Non-timber harvesting (bark stripping for medicinal purposes) was observed. In spite of the small area, species diversity is relatively high in these pockets. All the cemetery woodlands that were surveyed were similar in structure and species composition. Typical species included Brachystegia, Uapaca, Cussonia, Securidaca and Julbernadia (see Appendix A for all species found in this habitat). Not all cemetery woodlands were noted and detailed social surveying and high definition imagery is necessary to accurately map them. A different sub-set of species was observed on higher-lying rocky outcrops and steep slopes (Plate 5.2) (see Appendix A for all species found in this habitat). The woodlands were harvested for fuel or timber, but since harvesting from these areas requires significant effort, harvesting is more selective and occurs at a sustainable level.

Plate 5.1 Cemetery Miombo Woodland

Plate 5.2 Rocky outcrop Miombo Woodland. Larger tree specimens are noted on the higher, steeper slopes



Riparian Woodland Vegetation Riparian Woodland consisted of a number of hydrophilic species such as Syzygium. Riparian Woodland is entirely restricted to a few metres, adjacent to rivers and streams, throughout the NGR project area. In most cases, riparian woodland is absent or highly degraded. The narrow strips of riparian trees were undetectable on the Google Earth aerial image, limiting accurate mapping of this vegetation type. The dominant species is Syzygium guineense (see Appendix A for all species found in this habitat).

Plate 5.3 Narrow strips of riparian woodland vegetation, or entirely devoid of tree vegetation 5.1.2 Savanna shrub Only a single representative sample of this vegetation type was observed in the Malulu 02 planting area on a south-facing slope of a rocky ridge. The dominant species included Protea, Brachystegia and Uapaca (Figure 5.4).



Plate 5.4 Savanna Shrub 5.1.3 Wetlands All the wetlands on site were identified as flow-through wetland systems that are widened, flattened sections of water courses, where the soils are seasonally or permanently inundated with water. The plant species in these wetland areas are typically aquatic and are characterised by grasses, which dominate, as well as bulbous and herbaceous species. The wetlands in the planting areas do not appear transformed by cultivation and do not show any signs of direct or indirect human impacts (Figure 5.5 and 5.6).

Plate 5.5 Wetland dominated by Grass species



Plate 5.6 Wetland close to the large village of Malulu. Difference in species composition may be attributed to hydrology and harvesting of plant resources by community members.

5.2 Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic The dominant land cover (±85%) of the proposed planting areas is crop cultivation in various stages of utilisation (Plate 5.7). Crops that are currently produced include maize and cassava, which are planted on a rotational basis. Slash-and-burn of secondary woodland for cultivation is still evident (Plate 5.7). The landscape of the cultivation mosaic is composed of grassland (where land has been left fallow), active cultivation (planted to crops), and scattered mango trees (Plate 5.8). The pattern is consisted in all the planting areas.

Plate 5.7 Maize and cassava cultivation. Cut and burned tree stumps remain in the foreground.



Plate 5.7 Landscape of the Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic punctuated with Mango trees

5.3 General description of the planting areas All four planting areas were surveyed and are described in terms of vegetation cover in this study in order to ensure consistency. Each site is discussed below in terms of general vegetation cover and important floral/habitat features. 5.3.1 Planting area of Malulu 01 Malulu 01 was subject to a previous environmental assessment. Planting has already begun and is limited to the west and south of the planting area according the planting schedule provided by NGR (Figure 5.1). The areas currently planted to Pinus and Eucalyptus were not evident from the Google Earth images used for mapping and were therefore not delineated in the Malulu 01 vegetation map, however the areas marked for planting all fall within “Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic” (Figure 5.1). Significant portions in the east are covered by Miombo Woodland, but delineation using the Google Earth image was challenging due to the quality of the image. For this reason, a precautionary approach was used and all areas that appeared to be densely vegetated was mapped as woodland. 5.3.2 Planting area of Malulu 02 Malulu 02 has similarly been subjected to a previous environmental assessment and planting has already taken place on a relatively large scale. The Google Earth aerial image identified what appeared to be small patches of Miombo Woodland in the central and western portion, but the image used is dated 2006, and may reflect outdated vegetation cover (Figure 5.2). A single cemetery Miombo Woodland patch was noted during the site visit (S12°58'31.02", E35°25'20.10"), but smaller patches may have gone undetected (Figure 5.2). 5.3.3 Planting area of Malica The Malica planting area is generally covered by what is described as “Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic” (Figure 5.3). Planting has already commenced in the north-west of the site. Wetlands have been delineated. A cemetery woodland (S13° 8'3.41", E35°13'33.90") was observed in the north, and Savanna scrub in the north-west (Figure 5.3). 5.3.4 Planting area of Ntiuile The majority of this planting area is impacted by cultivation and is described as “Rotational Crop Cultivation Mosaic” (Figure 5.4). A few patches of what appeared to be small patches Miombo Woodland from the Google Earth aerial image were delineated, but no woodland was observed during the site survey. Wetlands associated with water courses have been mapped.



Figure 5.1 Vegetation cover of Malulu 01 (Insert: planting schedule for Malulu 01)



Figure 5.2 Vegetation cover of Malulu 02 (Insert: planting schedule for Malulu 02). The woodland encircled in red is a cemetery Miombo Woodland of cultural significance.



Figure 5.3 Vegetation cover of Malica (Insert: planting scheduled for Malica).



Figure 5.4 Vegetation cover of Ntiuile (Insert: planting schedule for Ntiuile).



6 FLORAL BIODIVERSITY, CONSERVATION STATUS AND SPATIAL ASSESSMENT OF ECOLOGICAL CORRIDORS

6.1 Floral Biodiversity The site visit and plant survey was undertaken in April 2012, which is considered autumn. As such, annual forbs and seasonal geophytes would not have been evident and therefore not recorded during this survey. Plant species identified by Sitoe (2008) have been included into the total species list for the Malulu, Malica and Ntiuile planting areas (Appendix B) and used as a calculation for total species richness. Species abundance (number of plants per unit area) data in Miombo Woodlands (Riparian and Cemetery) and Savanna shrub have been used to calculate biodiversity. In the wetlands, percentage vegetation cover was used for estimating species abundance. For future monitoring, alpha biodiversity calculations within each habitat will be useful management tools. Alpha Biodiversity considers species richness and relative abundance with the habitat. This report has utilised the Simpsons Index to calculate the alpha biodiversity for three reasons: 1. It is a relatively simple calculation which can be utilised for monitoring 2. It is fairly robust and does NOT rely on large datasets 3. It is abundance-weighted, which allows for a better reflection of biodiversity in habitats that are

dominated by a few species



Table 6.1 Floral Survey and Biodiversity calculations (2012)

Habitat Total plant species richness Sitoe (2008) and current survey combined data

Alpha Biodiversity (Simpsons Index 1/D; value range 0.0 < 1/D < 10+)

Ecologically important (key stone) taxa or indicator species

Pioneer species (indicative of disturbance) or Edge species

Miombo Terrestrial (Secondary/degraded)

Slope and Rocky outcrops (Malulu Mountain)

35 4.617

Erythrina sp Cussonia sp

All Brachystegia, Uapaca species Protea sp

Cemetery 65

Miombo Riparian 16 4.01 Khaya anthotheca Syzygium cf cordatum

Savanna Shrub 122 1.90

Wetlands 14 100% Grass species, 0-1% herb and geophyte species.

Drosera sp (Indicator species)

Total 230

The highest biodiversity was observed in the terrestrial Miombo Woodland vegetation type. The Savanna shrub was dominated by relatively few species, which is the reason for observing a relatively low alpha biodiversity. Riparian Woodland, where sampled, was heavily degraded and was largely dominated by a single species, Syzygium. If maintained through a conservation programme, it is expected to have higher biodiversity. It is also interesting to note that although the highest number of species was observed in the Savanna Shrub, it achieved the lower biodiversity score. This could be due to the sampling season in which this study took place (conducted at the end beginning of autumn).



6.2 Conservation Status of plant species: Rare, Endangered or Threatened species

The total species list was assessed again the IUCN publication and the Mozambique Red Data list. Table 6.2 Species conservation status according to Mozambique and South African Red Data List

IUCN Category Total plant species

Least Concern 113

Likely Least Concern* 21

Unknown (no information available) 83

Data Deficient 8

Near Threatened 1 (Synaptolepis kirkii)

Declining 2 (Balanites maughamii, Boophone disticha)

Lower Risk# 2 (Afzelia quanzensis, Khaya anthotheca)

Total 230

* Not present in IUCN list, but no other species in genus identified as endangered, vulnerable or near threatened # Mozambique Red Data List species Two species of special concern appear on the SA Red Data list and are categorised as “Declining” and “Near threatened” This does reflect the status of the species in Mozambique, but does indicate (is using the precautionary approach) that some consideration for the species should be inferred. Species in decline include:

Balanites maughamii is a large tree which was largely found in higher lying rocky outcrops.

Boophone disticha is a geophyte (bulbous plant) with a distinctive growth form and flowering feature.

The plant species noted as Near Threaten in the SA Red Data list, Synaptolepis kirkii, is a medicinal plant used traditionally for, skin diseases, parasites, tumours, snakebite, etc. The compounds in the root have also been found to be neurotrophic, potentially toxic and tumour-promoting (Weidong HE, 2001). According to the Mozambique Red Data List, two species are considered at “lower risk” as a result of over-exploitation and include Afzelia quanzensis and Khaya anthotheca. Two CITES species both occurring the Aloe genus appear in Appendix II, which are not necessarily threatened, but are controlled in terms of international trade.



6.3 Ecological Corridors suitable plantation areas In order to assess the NGR planting areas for land suitable for plantation forestry, all four sites were mapped in terms of landcover/vegetation types. Areas deemed as High Conservation Value, High Conservation Value Forest and critical ecosystems were identified (According to Table 6.3) as CORE or SENSITIVE AREAS. Habitats and vegetation types that were identified have been buffered by a 50 metre “No-go” zone for NGR plantation activities. It must be kept in mind that the mapping accuracy is limited due to the poor resolution and potentially outdated nature of the Google Earth aerial image. Table 6.3 Core or Sensitive environments

Sensitive area Habitat and Rationale

High Conservation Value or High Conservation Value Forest

All Miombo Woodland is identified as HCV or HCVF as the Miombo found in the project area is considered by specialists as Upper Shire/Eastern Rift Miombo Woodland and has been identified as an important conservation area as a result of high recorded biodiversity (+1500 species) (Timberlake and Chidumayo, 2011)

Critical Ecosystems and Critical ecological corridors

Critical ecosystems have been identified in this report as:

Riparian Woodland

Riparian Zones

Wetlands

Cemetery Miombo Woodlands (as isolated refugia)

Rocky Outcrop Miombo Woodland

Ecological network areas provide important ecological corridors and stepping stones that ensure movement and gene flow that would sustain biodiversity. Network areas consist of:

1. Core or sensitive vegetation or landscapes, 2. Corridors that link sensitive areas and 3. Buffer zones.

Two sensitivity maps (Figure 6.1 & 6.2) have been generated which indicate all sensitive areas, with a 50 metre buffer zone. Aquatic features are by nature linear corridors that facilitate movement up- and downstream and are ALL therefore, by default, identified as ecological network areas. An additional network area connecting the Lucheringo River, to rocky outcrop Miombo woodland along extended ridges, linking to low flat land woodland in Malulu 01 planting area and joining again at the Lucheringo River further north, has been mapped (See Figure 6.1).



Figure 6.1 Malulu 01 and Malulu 02: Sensitive sites and proposed ecological corridors



Figure 6.2 Malica and Ntiuile: Sensitive sites and proposed ecological corridors



7 IDENTIFIED ISSUES AND IMPACTS

7.1 The current impacts: the “NO-GO” or “Without project scenario” In order to contextualise the potential impacts of the plantations proposed by NGR, the existing impacts (or status quo), associated with current ecological conditions, need to be described in terms of vegetation patterns, structure and composition. This baseline or status quo should be used as the comparison against which project impacts are assessed. The main issues identified with the status quo are discussed below: 1. The current vegetation conditions in project planting areas can be described as: Largely

modified and transformed through slash-and-burn practices for agricultural cultivation. Wetlands appear pristine and selected Miombo Woodlands have been maintained.

2. Uncontrolled fires continually stunt the succession of Grassland to Miombo Woodland and

fashion an artificial landscape of scattered remnants of fire-tolerant plant species. 3. Uncontrolled harvesting of entire sections (NOT selective) of Miombo Woodland both riparian

and terrestrial, have likely resulted in localised extinctions of sensitive plant and animal species.

7.2 Issues and impacts associated with the proposed plantation A number of potential issues and impacts are typically associated with plantation projects and are discussed in the context of the NGR planting areas and surrounding environmental conditions.

Issues Associated Impacts

1. Reduction of Soil health and changes to soil characteristics

1. Permanent modification of soil characteristics and properties: pH, soil organisms, other chemical properties, fertilisers

2. Poor soil management, combined with vegetation clearing and soil exposure may result in the erosion of topsoil and result in downstream sedimentation in water courses

2. Biodiversity losses 1. Lack of control of Pine and Eucalyptus plant invasion through downstream dispersion

2. Habitat fragmentation: linear infrastructure

3. Edge-effect pressure on sensitive ecosystems (Miombo Woodland/ Wetlands) as a result of plantation activities (during site establishment, harvesting and construction of associated infrastructure)

4. Loss of remaining degraded Miombo Woodland, as an Indirect impact, resulting from displacement of agriculture which may cause local extinctions and potential total destruction of Miombo Woodland and associated plant and animal diversity from the small remaining pockets

5. Degradation of wetlands due to plantation establishment and loss of natural network corridors

3. Monoculture and disease Risk

1. Re-vegetation with monoculture plantation may increase the risk of plant diseases, disease vector (insects) and thereby reduce natural biodiversity

4. Changes to ground and surface water hydrology

1. Alien plantation species may impact on water flow regimes and ground water levels that support wetland and downstream users.

5. Increased Fire risk 1. Fuel loads in plantation sites that are not kept clear of



Issues Associated Impacts

felled biomass and understory growth could increase fire intensities and cause soil damage, increase erosion and decreased germination from indigenous seed pools. Increased fire frequency reduces natural Miombo Woodland (Dry forest) species diversity.

6. Conservation Opportunities and Biodiversity Offsets

1. Potential for improved conservation of Miombo Woodland through: a. Access to alternative timber b. Access to alternative incomes and livelihoods c. Implementation of Conservation Programmes

(Sustainability)



8 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

8.1 Issue 1: Reduction of Soil health and changes to soil characteristics Impact 1.1: Permanent/irreversible modification of soil constituents, characteristics and properties Cause and Comment: Soil properties such as pH and nutrient solubility/availability are likely to be altered due to plantation activities such as application of inorganic fertilisers, liming and increased organic matter on the plantation floor. In addition, natural soil fauna and flora will probably undergo a change in composition due to increased organic matter, mutual symbioses and associated decreased pH levels. A key indicator of healthy soil is an active faunal/floral component, which could be adversely affected by the application of pesticides (e.g. fungicides). Changes to soil properties are likely to be localised, but would take considerable effort and time to remediate. Mitigation Measures 1. Since changes to soil structure and chemical characteristics are expected, soils must be tested

and monitored to ensure that soil health is maintained. This can be undertaken through the development and implementation of a Soil Health Monitoring Plan (see the Monitoring and Impact Management Programme for detail).

2. On-going monitoring of soil properties and adaptive management of soils is required. 3. Application of chemicals and pesticides must be well recorded and managed. 4. Storm water management must ensure that polluted water does not run off into wetlands and

other sensitive ecosystems. 5. Surface and ground water must be regularly monitored for traces of pollutants (residual organic

pesticides). This can be undertaken through the development and implementation of a Water Quality Monitoring Plan (see the Monitoring and Impact Management Programme for detail).

6. A Plantation Operation Environmental Management Plan needs to be developed to deal with these issues and risks.

Significance Statement: This impact will take place at the scale of the study area in the long term. Without mitigation it could result in severe impacts on the soil. Proper management of soil nutrient and chemical composition, in relation to the above mentioned mitigation measures, will reduce the severity of the impact to moderately severe, resulting in a reduction of the significance from HIGH to MODERATE.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale Spatial Scale

Severity of the Impact

Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation

Long-term Project Area Severe Definite HIGH

With mitigation

Long-term Project Area Moderately Severe Definite MODERATE

Impact 1.2: Poor soil management, combined with vegetation clearing and soil exposure may result in the erosion of topsoil and result in downstream sedimentation in water courses. Cause and Comment: During the initial plantation establishment and general project infrastructure development, soil is likely to be exposed, rendering it vulnerable to wind and storm water erosion. Top soil losses due to sheet erosion will impact on soil fertility and will result in downstream sedimentation of water courses. Mitigation Measures: 1. Ensure that clearing/harvesting, land preparation and replanting is rapid and does not coincide

with the rainy season.



2. Ensure that a Land Clearance Environmental Management Plan is developed to address this issue.

Significance Statement: Common sense and an awareness of this impact would go a long way towards mitigating the effects of extended periods of soil exposure. The impact may occur, and could definitely have a moderately severe impact in the short term. This could be reduced to a slight impact of LOW environmental significance.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation

Short-term Project Area Moderately Severe Possible MODERATE

With mitigation

Short-term Project Area Slight Unlikely LOW

8.2 Issue 2: Biodiversity losses Impact 2.1: Potential invasion of alien plant species being utilised by NGR for plantation establishment into surrounding environments, especially along the banks of water courses Cause and Comment: Alien plant species which are being utilised by NGR and which escape beyond the managed plantation areas, will establish and proliferate in the surrounding natural vegetation and displace indigenous species, thereby reducing overall biodiversity. In addition, some alien species (such as Pinus and Eucalyptus which are both being planted by NGR) are allelopathic, preventing the germination of indigenous plant species. Mitigation Measures: 1. An Alien Plant Invasion Monitoring programme has been developed and must be implemented.

This programme must involve annual reporting and updates. The programme should monitor the presence of alien species outside of plantation lots and beyond NGR project area (plantation sites). It will be critical to monitor water courses as far as 10 kilometres downstream.

2. The Alien Plant Invasion Monitoring Programme and the findings thereof must feed into an Alien Invasive Plant Eradication Programme. Immediate action to remove invasive alien plant species must be implemented.

Significance Statement: The plant species utilised by NGR are alien and known to be invasive in neighbouring countries, to varying degrees. The associated impacts of alien plant invasion on biodiversity (and ground water) are Severe and the risk is long-term as it will continue throughout the life of the project, resulting in a HIGH rated impact. The implementation of the mitigation measures described above may reduce the likelihood of alien plant invasion into the surrounding natural vegetation, mitigating the impact to MODERATE.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation

Long-term Project area and downstream

Severe Probable HIGH

With mitigation

Long-term Project area and downstream

Slight Possible MODERATE

Impact 2.2: Habitat fragmentation due to linear infrastructure and plantation establishment and operation Cause and Comment: Habitats which become isolated may stop functioning as an ecosystem unit, and hence fragmentation of habitats can lead to the loss of viable populations, especially in



animals requiring large home ranges. The disruption to gene flow between `island’ populations, reduces biological fitness in the long-term. It also compromises the abilities of populations to adapt to future environmental perturbations. Species prone to habitat fragmentation are sessile, habitat-specialists with low fecundity. Most of the species with these characteristics may already be locally extinct. The study area is already largely transformed, and a large amount of habitat fragmentation has already taken place. Maintenance of ecological corridors and network areas is critical. Mitigation Measures: 1. Plantation plots and linear activities must not bisect sensitive ecosystems (Riparian or Miombo

Woodland and wetlands) or fragment ecosystems. 2. Recommendation: Set-aside areas, identified as sensitive and/or ecological networks within the

NGR DUATs should be managed by NGR to ensure there preservation and conservation. Wetlands, riparian zones and Miombo Woodlands adjacent to plantation areas or within plantations area should be preferentially selected for management purposes. The objective of the set-aside areas is to reconnect habitats along ecological corridors (riparian networks). This should be facilitated and managed through the development and implementation of a Conservation Management Plan.

3. Recommendation: Buffer zones around Wetlands, riparian zones and Miombo Woodlands may also be considered for woodland rehabilitation which would involve seed harvesting from indigenous trees, outgrowing in the existing nursery and planting adjacent to future or current plantations.

Significance Statement: The fragmentation of habitats will probably result in a decrease in floral biodiversity that will have an impact of moderate severity in the long term within the NGR project area. The environmental significance of this unmitigated impact would be MODERATE NEGATIVE. Biodiversity set-asides areas and the opportunity for Woodland rehabilitation would turn this into a HIGHLY BENEFICIAL impact.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation

Long-term Project area Moderately Severe

Probable MODERATE

With mitigation

Long-term Project area High Beneficial Possible HIGH BENEFICIAL

Impact 2.3 Edge-effect pressure on sensitive ecosystems (Miombo Woodland/ Wetlands) as a result of plantation activities (during site establishment, harvesting and construction of associated infrastructure) Cause and Comment: Inappropriate management of plantation activities could result in indirect impacts on ecosystem boundaries (e.g. fire disturbance, plantation pests impacting on natural systems etc.), causing substantial disturbance and extensive edge effects. Mitigation Measures: 1. A buffer of 50 metres from well-established Miombo Woodland (Riparian and Terrestrial) or

riparian zones must be implemented where appropriate and adhered to during project layout and design.

2. No agricultural activities, within the plantation plots/estates, are to take place in these buffer areas.

3. Monitoring must be carried out on an annual basis, using satellite imagery. Should the satellite analysis identify affected areas a site survey must be conducted to confirm the findings.



Significance Statement: The edge effect resulting from current (pre- NGR) land use is a severe, long term impact in the study area. The project can reduce the current impact of edge effects by implementing and managing a buffer zone around sensitive ecosystems, fragmented habitats and network corridors along tributaries and drainage lines. This mitigation would reduce the significance rating from HIGH to LOW.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation

Long-term Project area Severe Probable HIGH

With mitigation

Long-term Project area Slight Possible LOW

Impact 2.4: Loss of remaining degraded Miombo Woodland (as an indirect impact) as a result of displacement of agriculture which may cause local extinctions and potential total destruction of Miombo Woodland and associated plant and animal diversity from the small remaining pockets Cause and Comment: Although NGR is only utilising cultivated land, and therefore not clearing natural vegetation, the community that are currently growing crops may source new land to continue crop production. It is possible that the last remnants of Miombo Woodland will be cleared (slash-and-burned) in order to compensate for the cultivated land lost to NGR. Rather than the plantation replacing crop production, it may displace crop production, thereby impacting on the remaining Woodland vegetation. Mitigation Measures: 1. As suggested by Sitoe (2008) NGR should set aside plantation lots specifically for the

propagation of Woodland species that are important resources for communities (e.g. Uapaca for the fruit)

2. Assist communities to develop a more intensive, less rotational-based crop farming method, by providing training and machinery etc.

3. Develop a number of spin-off economic industries to enhance job opportunities for community members who will no longer be able to produce crops such as:

Chipping felled trees and branches and production of organic fertiliser by composting (vermiculture)

Honey production: although apiary would increase the risk of fires significantly, the location of bee hives could be established

Significance Statement: It is possible that community members who have been displaced by NGR plantation may seek alternative land for crop production. The resulting loss of Miombo Woodland, while considered as moderately severe on a regional scale, could be considered as severe on a localised scale. Implementation of the above mitigation would reduce the significance of the impact from MODERATE to LOW.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation


Possible MODERATE

With mitigation

Long-term Localised Slight Possible LOW

Impact 2.5 Degradation of wetlands due to plantation establishment and loss of natural network corridors



Cause and Comment: Wetlands provide important habitat for amphibians and birds and perform important ecological functions. The encroachment of plantations on wetlands will impact on the wetland hydrology and obligate aquatic flora. Mitigation Measures: 1. A buffer 50 metre from riparian zones must be implemented where appropriate and adhered to

during project layout and design. 2. No plantation or agricultural activities are to take place in these buffer areas. 3. Wetlands are to be monitoring annually for specie richness and indicator species. Significance Statement: The possible impact of NGR project activities on wetland would be considered Severe and have long-term implications and is therefore a HIGHLY significant impact. Implementation of buffer zones and consistent monitoring may reduce the likelihood and severity and mitigate the impact to MODERATE significance.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation


With mitigation

Long-term Project area Moderately severe

Possible MODERATE

8.3 Issue 3: Increased Disease Risk due to monoculture plantations Impact 3.1: Re-vegetation with monoculture plantation may increase the risk of plant diseases, disease vector (insects) and thereby reduce natural biodiversity Cause and Comment: The risk of spread of plant diseases is generally associated with mono-culture crops. Insect populations, often the vectors of disease, explode due to a constant source of “food”. Diseases that can be harboured in plantation species may be fatal for indigenous plant species. Mono-culture crops have been implicated as the main cause of significant shifts in plant, animal and fungal communities. Large stands of the same plant species will preferentially benefit selected (often generalist) species (including diseases) and negatively select against specialist, sensitive species. A community shift has an unpredictable “knock-on” effect, which ultimately results in localised extinctions and reduction of biodiversity. Mitigation measures: 1. Constant monitoring and preventative measures will need to be carried out. A Plantation

Operation Management Plan must detail and develop suitable strategies to reduce this risk. 2. Adaptive management must be employed to handle specific events according to best practice

principles, and focus on ways to prevent and control diseases from spreading. 3. Constant and attentive monitoring of plantations and nursery plants will be crucial to the

success of early plant disease detection. 4. It is important to allow for a “patch-work” of plantations, separated by indigenous flora, to allow

for a mosaic, heterogeneous landscape. 5. Shifts in plant, animal, insect, bird and microbial communities will need to be monitored and

adaptive management applied. Some consideration can be given to indigenous tree plantations.

6. Maintain natural corridors and sensitive ecosystems Significance Statement: The risk associated with monoculture plantations are well-researched and understood. It is assumed the monitoring of disease will be an integral part of the operational activities of NGR. With a rigorous monitoring programme in place, the impact is rated as MODERATE. By implementing the mitigation measures above, the impact significance can be reduced to LOW.



RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation


Possible MODERATE

With mitigation

Long-term Project area Slight Possible LOW



8.4 Issue 4: Changes to ground and surface water hydrology (water quantity and quality)

Impact 4.1: Alien plant species may impact on water flow regimes and ground water levels that support wetlands and downstream users. Cause and Comment: Significant research conducted in South Africa has demonstrated that alien plant species can have a dramatic impact on ground and surface water, reducing soil moisture and reducing water levels. One of the contributing factors is significantly higher transpiration rates and therefore a higher water demand associated with species of Eucalyptus and Pine. Due to the resultant low soil moisture, few understory plants are able to establish, resulting in higher surface water run-off and reduced ground water recharge. Plantations may therefore impact on wetlands present in the four project areas Mitigation Measures: 1. Ensure that Riparian zone buffers downstream from plantation lots are completely vegetated.

No crop production activities may be undertaken in riparian buffers. NGR are to ensure that land is acquired for management in this regard

2. Wetland monitoring in terms of amphibian indicators (refer to Faunal Impact Assessment) should be undertaken to determine the impact and significance thereof on wetland systems

3. Water quantity baseline data must be established as soon as possible as selected sites (e.g. dams). Water Quality and Quantity can be effectively monitored through the development and implementation of a Surface and Ground Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Plan (refer to Monitoring and Impact Management Programme)

Significance Statement: Impacts on local hydrology and soil moisture will probably occur and may result in moderately severe, long-term impacts. Implementation and management of buffer zones will reduce the HIGH significance of the impact by ensuring the maximum retention of surface water run-off, allowing for groundwater recharge and maintain wetland functions, at MODERATE significance.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation


With mitigation

Long-term Project area Moderately severe

Possible MODERATE

8.5 Issue 5: Increased Fire Risk Impact 5.1: Fire risk may increase due to the increase in biomass fuel loads Cause and Comment: Fuel loads in plantation sites that are not kept clear of felled biomass and understory growth could increase fire intensities and cause soil damage, increase erosion and decreased germination from indigenous seed pools. The current frequency of uncontrolled fires is already impacting the natural Miombo Woodland vegetation. NGR will be making concerted effort to reduce this frequency in order to safeguard the plantations. Mitigation Measures: 1. All felled trees and branches during the growth of a plantation must be removed from site. The

tree material can be mulched and converted into fertiliser for application to avoid nutrient loss from the system

2. Fire breaks of no less that 50 metres must be established around the estate, alien and indigenous. Internal fire-breaks should conform to forestry best practice.



Significance Statement: Increase fire intensity due to fuel-loading, which may be a moderately severe impact of MODERATE significance, can be effectively reduced and managed. Reduced fire frequency will require local community co-operation. The impact significance is therefore rated as LOW, although the likelihood of the risk of fire remains probable.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation

Short-term Project area Moderately severe

Probable MODERATE

With mitigation

Short-term Project area Moderately severe

Probable LOW

8.6 Issue 6: Potential Conservation Opportunities Impact 6.1: An opportunity for improved conservation and preservation of remaining terrestrial and riparian Miombo Woodland is possible through the identification and management of conservation areas Cause and Comment: Although NGR is propagating and establishing plantations of alien plant species, woodlots of indigenous species has been included. In addition, to indigenous woodlots, which will be commercially harvested, an opportunity for NGR to implement a rehabilitation and conservation programme exists. This may entail securing land, as per plantation negotiation, and actively re-vegetating the land to its natural state for the purposes of conservation. Although no timber product harvesting by surrounding communities would be permitted within these areas, non-timber resource use could be encouraged. No timber or charcoal harvesting would be permitted. As a priority, ecological network areas and corridors, which are primarily associated with water-courses and wetlands, should be selected. A representative area of high biodiversity Miombo should likewise be managed for the same purpose, by NGR. The establishment of Rehabilitation and Conservation areas will be a considerable off-set against the above-mentioned negative impacts. Mitigation Measures:

Develop and implement a Rehabilitation and Conservation Monitoring and Management Plan, which must aim to select suitable land for these activities and monitor the success in terms of biodiversity indicators.

Significance Statement: The high beneficial, long-term impact would result in a HIGHLY BENEFICIAL significance rating.

RA

TIN

G

Time Scale

Spatial Scale


Likelihood Impact

Significance

Without mitigation

Long-term Region Beneficial Probable HIGH BENEFICIAL

With mitigation

Long-term Region Beneficial Probable HIGH BENEFICIAL



9 CONCLUSIONS OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

9.1 Summary of impact assessment Impacts associated with the propose NGR plantation project were identified and the significance of each issue/impact was assessed in terms of HIGH, MODERATE and LOW significance. In each case, mitigation measures were provided to reduce the negative impacts and re-assessed in order to determine if the impact could be mitigated to an acceptable level. Table 9.1 Summary of the impact ratings before and after mitigation

Impact significance Pre mitigation Post mitigation

Negative impacts Low 0 6

Moderate 5 (+ 1 became beneficial) 4

High 5 0

Beneficial impacts HIGH BENEFICIAL 2 2

The impacts identified in the above table indicate that HIGH rated impacts can be satisfactorily mitigated to an acceptable level. Similarly, the MODERATE rated impacts can be mitigated, to LOW significance. In total 10 negative impacts were assessed, with HIGH-MODERATE significance range, which indicates that particular attention needs to be paid to the mitigation measures, and that impacts on Biodiversity are considered as a high priority.

9.2 Conclusions 9.2.1 IFC Performance Standard 6 The Biodiversity and Ecological Impact Assessment needs to satisfy the requirements of the IFC standards with specific reference to Performance Standard 6. For easy reference, these requirements are tabulated and annotated with comments. Table 9.2 IFC PS6 requirements and comments

PS 6: requirement Comments

Modified habitat (Natural or modified): further degradation should be minimised.

No Woodland will be transformed to plantation. Only existing cultivated land (already transformed) will be utilised. Where possible, further degradation to the surrounding natural vegetation will be minimised through implementation of mitigation measures. Miombo and Riparian Woodlands are also considered as modified habitats as they are subjected to frequent and severe disturbance. These systems, however, are capable of regenerating over long periods of succession.

Natural/Critical habitat: including habitats required for endangered species or maintenance of high biodiversity.

NGR will not be destroying natural habitats, but could be contributing towards conservation by establishing protected areas and creating an opportunities for plantation resource utilisation which could replace Miombo Woodland harvesting.

Legally protected areas No legally protected areas occur within the study area.

Invasive Alien Species: introduction of new alien species.

As discussed in Section 4.3 Eucalyptus and Pinus species will be utilised as the primary



plantation species. Significant effort into controlling the potential for invasion of these species, especially in near proximity to riparian zones, must be implemented. It is recommended that an Alien Invasive Plant monitoring and eradication programme is developed.

Natural and Plantation Forests Concerning plantation and harvesting, critical or natural habitat may not be converted or degraded.

9.2.2 FSC Criteria and Compliance Requirements The following minimum requirements will need to be implemented in order to comply with the FSC criteria: Table 9.3 FSC criteria and Biodiversity Actions required

FRC criteria Compliance Actions

Forest management operations shall encourage the efficient use of the forest’s multiple products and services to ensure economic viability and a wide range of environmental and social benefits.

The environmental (floral) cost of production would need to consider:

Current state of the natural environment

Potential biodiversity and conservation status of the land to be used for plantation forests

Habitat fragmentation

Agricultural displacement and effect on remaining ecological areas that may be converted to crop agriculture

Effective management and rehabilitation of ecologically important areas by NGR within the project area

Additional plantation forest products that should be considered includes:

Edible mushrooms

Honey

Fuel wood (to replace Miombo wood utilisation)

Vermiculture and composting (organic fertiliser production)

Forest management shall conserve biological diversity and its associated values, water resources, soils, and unique and fragile ecosystems and landscapes, and, by so doing, maintain the ecological functions and the integrity of the forest.

There is significant scope to maintain, enhance AND restore surrounding natural habitats such as Miombo Woodland (also known Dry forest) and wetlands.

The effective protection of plant specimens within representative samples is severely limited by land tenure and resource utilisation laws in Mozambique. Community engagement and agreement on this topic is required in order to implement any such activity.

Erosion control and water resource protection are noteworthy environmental issues

Damage to surrounding natural vegetation has been addressed in this report.

Pesticides and Herbicides (for undergrowth control) could impact on neighbouring land cover and affect downstream land-users (crops)




or water resource-user (fishing). A Chemical Pest Management Plan must be controlled and monitored in terms of:

Type of chemical utilised

Frequency of application

Quantity of application

The use of biological control agents with respect to the alien plant species utilised in the plantation development may be appropriate and should not be ruled out. Obviously, the release of such agents must comply with regulations and based on detailed scientific assessment.

Management activities in high conservation value forests shall maintain or enhance the attributes which define such forests. Decisions regarding high conservation value forests shall always be considered in the context of a precautionary approach.

High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF areas) are defined as:

Forests with high biodiversity

Large intact natural forest areas

Rare or threatened ecosystems

Forest with critical ecosystem importance

Forest areas if particular importance to local communities and indigenous peoples

Cemetery Miombo Woodlands are an example of a Dry forest area with importance to local communities and should be protected. All Miombo Woodland as per the description in Section 5.1 must be considered as HCVF areas.

While plantations can provide an array of social and economic benefits, and can contribute to satisfying the world's needs for forest products, they should complement the management of, reduce pressures on, and promote the restoration and conservation of natural forests.

No forest conservation or restoration objectives have been set in terms of the indigenous Miombo Woodland (Dry forest). It is not certain that NGR would be in a legal position to carry out this objective, but the consideration of biodiversity offsets will require NGR to consider potential conservation mechanisms. A Rehabilitation and Conservation Monitoring and Management Plan must be developed in order to facilitate this process.

Ecological (network) corridors in the project area have been identified in this report, primarily associated with streams and rivers in the planting areas.

The plantation forests will consist of exotic species, and may include some indigenous tree species. Disease and insect outbreaks must be monitored, with respect to their impact on the surrounding natural vegetation.

Land for Miombo Woodland restoration could be secured by NGR, but thorough community engagement and agreement will be required in order to implement any such activity.

Although long-term soil degradation is not envisaged, long-term (or permanent) changes to soil characteristics are likely in association with Eucalyptus and Pine plantations. Soil pH,




moisture and microbial composition may be altered. Soil Health Monitoring will need to undertake in order to establish baseline conditions and monitor changes as a result of the NGR plantations.

NGR will need to employ all possible measures to reduce the potential of Eucalypt and Pine invasion into the natural vegetation (where applicable). This is especially important in the riparian zones within the project area.

The potential negative ecological impacts should be monitored and include the following:

Wetland hydrology and water course stream flows: Water Quantity Monitoring Plan must establish baseline flows and report on changes as a result of NGR plantations

Alien plant establishment within riparian zones (within 50 metres): assessed in the Alien Invasive Plant Monitoring and Eradication Programme

Incidence and frequency of fires

Soil erosion: assessed in the Soil Health Monitoring Plan

It will be important for NGR to independently ground-truth and verify the condition of the site, prior to planting, in order to demonstrate compliance with this criterion.

9.2.3 Concluding remarks: Reporting on Terms of Reference The Terms of Reference provided are tabulated below (Table 9.4). A description of where each item is reported on, is provided Table 9.4 Terms of Reference and reporting response

Requirement Report assessment/response

Rare, endangered and threatened species/ecosystems

See Section 6.2

A selection of plantable areas for plantation forestry. These have been identified as modified agriculture areas already utilised for rotational cultivation

See Section 6.3 and associated maps

Areas in need for protection because of rare, endangered and threatened species (fauna).


Areas in need for protection such as wetlands, grasslands and riverine forests as these habitats form important sites for bird species in particular


Invasive species - both within NGR plantation areas as well as in the project zone – detect whether such species are spreading into or outside the project site, and advise on remedial action and a monitoring system for such species

No species have been identified as invasive. For future monitoring of NGR tree species a Alien Invasive Plant Monitoring and Eradication Plan has been developed (refer to Monitoring and Impact Management Programme).




Identify and Assess NTFP species and propose management, harvesting and monitoring guidelines for those products

Deficit in data did not allow for full reporting on this item.

Pristine natural areas/landscapes See Section 6.3 and associated maps

In Malica and Ntiuile planting areas

Areas of High Conservation Value (HCVs) and High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF) and provide a description of the qualifying attributes


Areas that provide critical ecosystem services (e.g., hydrological services, erosion control, fire control)


Ecological resources that are utilised for cultural and spiritual purposes

The only ecological resources that are currently being utilised for cultural and spiritual purposes are small pockets of Miombo Woodland (Figure 5.3 &5.3) which are used as cemeteries. Only limited tree harvesting was observed in these pockets.

Key habitats and/or key species in the various vegetation types, for biodiversity monitoring


Other features of interest e.g. water sources, wetlands, conservation areas, controlled areas including valley bottoms and propose methods of monitoring them


Assessment of:

Assess impacts of plantation forestry using exotic species on the grasslands and natural vegetation and to propose ways to minimize negative impacts

Refer to Section 8 of this report.

New planting area: Identify and describe in detail any measures and management prescriptions that need to be put in place to ensure HCV’s are in no way negatively impacted by the project.

See Section 6.3. No NGR plantation activities should occur within identified sensitive area or within the 50 metre buffer zone.

New planting area: Assess the impact of fire as an environmental factor in biodiversity conservation

Refer to Section 8 of this report

New planting area: Assess the impact of the project on the biodiversity surrounding the project area

Refer to Section 8 of this report

New planting area: Assess Globally, regionally or nationally significant biodiversity areas in terms of:

protected areas

threatened species

endemic species

Although none of the criteria listed apply to the NGR planting areas, the Miombo Woodland has been allocated as significant biodiversity resource and assessed accordingly. The new planting areas (Malica and Ntiuile) have very little Woodland.

Review existing ecological survey ‘ecological identification and characterization of the ecosystems of the Sanga area currently held by NGRs.’, and supplement as necessary as to bring up to the standard to comply with the other prescriptions above.

See Section 4 of this report. For ease of reference and to ensure consistency, all planting areas have been included in terms of survey, description and assessment.

Management recommendations In the new planting area:

Describe how the ‘without project’ reference scenario (business-as-usual) would affect

Refer to Section 7.1 of this report.




biodiversity in the project zone (e.g., habitat availability, landscape connectivity and threatened species)

Recommend Management Systems for vegetation types and patterns of NGR land

Section 9.5 provides a list of recommended plans and programmes that could be implemented.

Propose management system for conservation of rare, threatened and endangered species including HCV’s

Refer to Monitoring and Impact Management Programme.

Develop management prescriptions for identified water sources, wetlands, conservation areas, controlled areas that include valley bottoms


Management recommendations In all four planting areas:

Develop a monitoring plan that describes the future monitoring requirements to obtain a scientifically defensible baseline. Initial data will be provided as part of the specialist study.


In conjunction with other specialists, determine areas that are critical for the traditional cultural identity of communities (e.g., areas of cultural, ecological, economic or religious significance identified in collaboration with the communities).

According to observation on site, the only important areas appear to be the cemetery woodland.

9.2.4 Concluding remarks

The most “natural” vegetation types appear to be in a state of constant primary or secondary succession due to constant disturbance such as fire, harvesting, cultivation, etc.

Miombo Woodland contained a high species richness and alpha biodiversity and should not be developed or cultivated, but managed as natural areas so they continue to provide ecosystem goods and services. The effectiveness of the management should be audited on an annual basis.

Water courses (streams, rivers and wetlands) have been identified as ecological network areas, providing linear pathways for fauna and flora.

9.3 Recommendations A 50 metre “No-go” buffer on either side of water bodies, in addition to the rehabilitation and re-vegetation of drainage lines will ensure that these corridors are maintained and further enhance their ecological function. In addition a 50 metre No-go” buffer zone must be implemented around all Miombo Woodland. No plantation activities may occur within these buffer zones (See Section 6.3, Figure 6.1-6.2). Soil health is vital for the continuation of the plantation estates. Therefore it is in the interest of NGR to maintain the integrity for future utilisation. The management of soils may require a “Lessons-learnt” approach, which incorporates experience gained on a continual basis. The no-go alternative or status quo does not appear to be a more ecologically viable option, since the proposed land is already transformed, being used for subsistence and commercial agriculture. The existing state of the environment is, in some areas, already heavily impacted. If the proposed plantation project is managed and monitored, the benefits of the development on the social and economic environment are likely to out-weigh the negative impacts on the natural environment.



Biodiversity of plants and animals has been briefly considered at various levels ranging from the conservation of individual species to landscapes and ecosystems. NGR will be required to address the impacts by implementing various programmes delivering outcomes which:

1. Create awareness of the value of natural resources and the importance of conservation 2. Monitor and avoid sensitive areas 3. Incorporates active and informed management in response to the findings of monitoring

programmes. In addition to the FSC requirements, the following recommendations must be implemented:

Implement all mitigation measures presented in this report (provided below) by incorporating and detailing these in an Operation Management Plan under Ecological Monitoring.

Encourage and facilitate, where feasible, ongoing research on fauna and flora in the area.

Rehabilitate, where possible, drainage lines (streams and rivers) and monitor fishing and cultivation of wetlands.

Fire management is to include fire breaks around and between plantations. Controlling fire regimes will require cooperation from community members who inhabit surrounding.

No rare and endangered species were observed in the project areas (2008 and 2012 survey), but should such as species become apparent in future they should be actively conservation and managed through an appropriate mechanisms such as: translocation, monitoring or protection

Carry out exhaustive monitoring, which should be audited every year for the first 8 years and thereafter, every two years for the following 12 years.

9.4 Mitigation measures associated with relevant issues to be implemented Issue1: Reduction of Soil health and changes to soil characteristics

Since changes to soil structure and chemical characteristics are expected, soils must be tested and monitored to ensure that soil health is maintained. This can be undertaken through the development and implementation of a Soil Health Monitoring Plan

On-going monitoring of soil properties and adaptive management of soils is required.

Application of chemicals and pesticides must be well recorded and managed.

Stormwater management must ensure that polluted water does not run off into wetlands and other sensitive ecosystems.

Surface and ground water must be regularly monitored for traces of pollutants (residual organic pesticides). This can be undertaken through the development and implementation of a Water Quality Monitoring Plan.

A Plantation Operation Environmental Management Plan needs to be developed to deal with these issues and risks.

Ensure that clearing/harvesting, land preparation and replanting is rapid and does not coincide with the rainy season.

Ensure that a Land Clearance Environmental Management Plan is developed to address this issue.

Issue 2: Biodiversity Losses

An Alien Plant Invasion Monitoring programme MUST be developed and implemented. This programme must involve annual reporting and updates. The programme should monitor the presence of alien species outside of plantation lots and beyond NGR project area (plantation sites). It will be critical to monitor water courses as far as 10 kilometres downstream.

The Alien Plant Invasion Monitoring Programme and the findings thereof must feed into an Alien Invasive Plant Eradication Programme. Immediate action to remove invasive alien plant species must be implemented.

Plantation plots and linear activities must not bisect sensitive ecosystems (Riparian or Miombo Woodland and wetlands) or fragment ecosystems.



Biodiversity offsets in terms of acquiring/long-term leasing of land, for the duration of the NGR project, for active conservation management of Miombo Woodland (where resource harvesting is strictly controlled and limited to non-timber resource utilisation) must be implemented. Areas for this activity should be aimed at reconnecting habitats along ecological corridors (riparian networks). This should be facilitated and managed through the development and implementation of a Rehabilitation and Conservation Monitoring and Management Plan.

A buffer of 50 metres from well-established Miombo Woodland (Riparian and Terrestrial) or riparian zones must be implemented where appropriate and adhered to during project layout and design.

No plantation or agricultural activities are to take place in these buffer areas.

Wetlands are to be monitoring annually for specie richness and indicator species.

No agricultural activities, within the plantation plots/estates, are to take place in these buffer areas.

Biodiversity monitoring must be carried out on an annual basis, using satellite imagery and incorporated into the Rehabilitation and Conservation Monitoring and Management Plan audit.

As suggested by Sitoe (2008) NGR should set aside plantation lots specifically for the propagation of Woodland species that are important resources for communities (e.g. Uapaca for the fruit)

Assist communities to develop a more intensive, less rotational-based crop farming method, by providing training and machinery etc.

Develop a number of spin-off economic industries to enhance job opportunities for community members who will no longer be able to produce crops such as:

a. Chipping felled trees and branches and production of organic fertiliser by composting (vermiculture)

b. Honey production: although apiary would increase the risk of fires significantly, the location of bee hives could be established

Issue 3: Increased Disease Risk due to monoculture plantations

Constant monitoring and preventative measures will need to be carried out. A Plantation Operation Management Plan must detail and develop suitable strategies to reduce this risk.

Adaptive management must be employed to handle specific events according to best practice principles, and focus on ways to prevent and control diseases from spreading.

Constant and attentive monitoring of plantations and nursery plants will be crucial to the success of early plant disease detection.

It is important to allow for a “patch-work” of plantations, separated by indigenous flora, to allow for a mosaic, heterogenous landscape.

Shifts in plant, animal, insect, bird and microbial communities will need to be monitored and adaptive management applied. Some consideration can be given to indigenous tree plantations.

Maintain natural corridors and sensitive ecosystems Issue 4: Changes to ground and surface water hydrology (water quantity and quality)

Ensure that Riparian zone buffers downstream from plantation lots are completely vegetated. No crop production activities may be undertaken in riparian buffers. NGR are to ensure that land is acquired for management in this regard

Wetland monitoring in terms of amphibian indicators should be undertaken to determine the impact and significant thereof on wetland systems

Water quantity baseline data must be established as soon as possible as selected sites (e.g. dams). Water Quality and Quantity can be effectively monitored through the development and implementation of a Surface and Ground Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Plan

Issue 5: Increase Fire Risk

All felled trees and branches during the growth of a plantation must be removed from site

Fire breaks of no less that 50 metres must be established around all plantations, alien and indigenous



Issue 6: Potential Conservation Opportunities

Develop and implement a Rehabilitation and Conservation Monitoring and Management Plan, which must aim to select suitable land for these activities and monitor the success in terms of biodiversity indicators.

9.5 Summary of recommended additional monitoring and evaluation requirements

1. Chemical Pest Management Plan (not included in Scope of Work) 2. Disease and insect outbreak Monitoring Plan (not included in Scope of Work)

As part of the Monitoring and Impact Management Programme 3. Alien Invasive Plant monitoring and eradication Plan 4. Rehabilitation and Conservation Monitoring and Management Plan 5. Soil Health Monitoring Plan 6. Surface and Ground Water Quality and Quantity Monitoring Plan



10 REFERENCES http://www.cbd.int/convention/articles/?a=cbd-01 http://www.equator-principles.com/ http://www.iucn.org/about/ Le Maitre, DC, Van Wilgen, BW, Gelderblom, CM, Bailey, C, Chapman, RA, Nel, JA. (2002). Invasive alien trees and water resources in South Africa: case studies of the costs and benefits of management. Forest Ecology and Management, vol 160, 03 January, pp 143-159 Macdonald, I.A.W., J.K. Reaser, C. Bright, L.E. Neville, G.W. Howard, S.J. Murphy & G., Preston (eds.). 2003. Invasive alien species in southern Africa: national reports & directory of resources. Global Invasive Species Programme, Cape Town, South Africa. National Report on Implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Mozambique (2007), Saidi TA and Tshipala-Ramatshimbila TV. ( 2006). Ecology and Management of a Remnant Brachystegia spiciformis (Miombo) Woodland in North Eastern Soutpansbergy, Limpopo Province. South African Geographical Journal 88(2) 205-212. Simpson, E. H. (1949) Measurement of diversity. Nature,163, 688. Sitoe, A. (2008) Ecological identification and characterisation of ecosystems of the Sanga area held by Malonda Tree Farms. Departamento de Engenharia Florestal, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane. Timberlake et al., (2010) Chidumayo EN and Gumbo (eds). The Dry Forests and Woodlands of Africa: Managing for Products and Services, Earthscan, London, Uk USAid 2008: Mozambique Biodiversity and Tropical Forests 118/119 Assessment Weidong HE. (2001). Study of biological active principles from Kenyan medicinal plants. Phd Thesis in Applied Biological Sciences: Chemistry, Ghent University. White, F. (1983). The vegetation of Africa: a descriptive memoir to accompany the Unesco/AETFAT/UNSO vegetation map of Africa. (Natural Resources Research: 20). Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 356p. WWF-SARPO (2011) Miombo Ecoregion Vision Report (Timberlake J. and Chidumayo E, 2011). Occasional Publications in Biodiversity No. 20. Biodiversity Foundation for Africa, Zimbabwe www.worldclimateguide.co.uk

http://www.cbd.int/convention/articles/?a=cbd-01

http://www.equator-principles.com/



APPENDIX A All species per habitat

Genus/species Family Sitoe

(2008)

Current Survey

2012 Mountain Miombo Woodland Riparian Savanna Shrub Wetland

IUCN/Moz Red Data List CITES

Abelmoschus esculentus Malvaceae 1

1

Unknown

Acacia karroo Fabaceae: Mimosoideae 1

1

1

LC

Acacia nilotica Leguminasaea 1 1

1

LC Acalypha villicaulis Euphorbiaceae 1

1

LC

Aeschynomene fina Leguminasaea 1

1

Unknown

Afzelia quanzensis Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae

1 1

Lower Risk

Ageratum conyzoides Asteraceae 1

1

Unknown

Albizia antunesiana Fabaceae: Mimosoideae 1 1

1

LC

Aleanotis sp. Poaceae 1

1

Unknown Alectra sp Orobanchaceae

1 1

Prob LC

Aloe parvibracteata Aloaceae 1

1

LC 2

Aloe zebrina Aloaceae 1 1

1 1 LC 2

Andropogon gayanus Poaceae 1

1

LC Annona senegalensis Annonaceae 1 1

1

1

LC

Antidesma venosum Euphorbiaceae 1

1

Unknown Aspalathus sp Fabaceae

1 1

1

Unknown

Asparagus sp. Asparagaceae 1

1

Prob LC Asteraceae Forb Asteraceae

1

1

Unknown

Balanites maughamii Balanitaceae 1 1 1 1

1

Declining

Bauhinia galpinii Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae

1 1 1

1

LC

Bauhinia petersiana Fabaceae:

1

1

1

LC




(2008)

Current Survey



(White) Caesalpinioideae

Bidens pilosa Asteraceae 1

1

Unknown Boophone disticha Amaryllidaceae 1

1

Declining

Boraginaceae Boraginaceae

1

1

Unknown

Brachystegia allenii Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae 1

1

Unknown

Brachystegia boehmii Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae 1 1

1

1

Unknown

Brachystegia spiciformis

Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae 1 1 1 1

1

LC

Brachystegia utilis Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae 1

1

1

Unknown

Brackenridgea zanguebarica Ochnaceae 1

1

Unknown

Breonadia salicina Rubiaceae 1 1

1

LC Bridelia cathartica Euphorbiaceae 1

1

LC

Bulbostylis burchellii Cyperaceae 1

1 1 LC Burkea africana: not

confident ID Fabaceae: Mimosoideae

1

LC

Carissa bispinosa subsp zambesiensis Apocynaceae 1 1 1 1

LC

Carissa edulis Apocynaceae

1 1 1

LC Cassytha filiformis Lauraceae 1

1

1

Unknown

Catunaregam spinosa Rubiaceae 1

1

Unknown Celosia sp. Amaranthaceae 1

1

Prob LC

Ceratia sp. poaceae 1

1

Unknown Chamaecrista

mimosoides Fabaceae: Mimosoideae 1

1

LC

Chloris gayana Poaceae 1

1

LC Clematis viridiflora Rununculaceae 1 1

1

Unknown




(2008)

Current Survey



Coix lacrima Poaceae 1

1

Unknown Combretum

apiculatum Combretaceae 1

1

1

LC Combretum collinum Combretaceae 1

1

LC

Combretum molle Combretaceae

1 1 1

LC Combretum sp Combretaceae

1 1

LC

Commelina benghalensis Commelinaceae 1 1 1

LC

Commiphora (Chiumbo) Burseraceae

1

1

Prob LC

Conostomium sp Rubiaceae

x

1

Prob LC Corchorus sp. Malvaceae 1

1

Prob LC

Craibia brevicaudata Fabaceae (Pap)

1 1

Unknown Craibia zimmermannii Fabaceae (Pap) 1

1

LC

Crinum sp. Amaryllidaceae 1

1

1

Unknown Crotalaria assungens Fabaceae 1

1

Unknown

Crotalaria brevidens Fabaceae 1

1

Unknown Crotalaria monteiroi Fabaceae 1

1

LC

Crotalaria sp Fabaceae

1

1

Unknown Crotalaria sp B Fabaceae

1

1

Cussonia arborea Araliaceae 1 1

1 1

Unknown Cussonia paniculata Araliaceae 1 1 1

1

LC

Cyanotis sp Commelinaceae

1

1

Prob LC Cymbopogon

dieterlenii Poaceae 1

1

1

LC Cymbopogon

excavatus Poaceae 1

1

1

Unknown Cymbopogon nardus Poaceae 1

1

1

LC

Cyperus sp. Cyperaceae 1 1

1 Prob LC




(2008)

Current Survey



Cyphostemma sp Vitaceae 1

Unknown

Dichrostachys cinerea Fabaceae: Mimosoideae 1 1 1 1

1

LC

Dicoma sessiliflora Harv. Asteraceae 1

1

Unknown

Digitaria eriantha Poaceae 1

1

LC Diospyros kirkii Ebenaceae 1

1

Unknown

Diospyros mespiliformis Ebenaceae

1

1

LC

Diospyros usambarensis Ebenaceae 1 1 1

Unknown

Diplorhynchus condylocarpon Apocynaceae 1

1

1

LC

Dissotis canescens Melastomataceae

1

1 LC Dolichos

kilimandscharicus Fabaceae (Pap) 1

1

Unknown Droogmansia

pteropus Fabaceae (Pap) 1

1

Unknown Drosera sp Droseraceae

1

1 DD

Eclipta prostrata Asteraceae 1

1 Unknown Eleusine indica Poaceae 1

1

Unknown

Enneapogon sp. Poaceae 1

1

Prob LC Eragrostis aspera Poaceae 1

1

LC

Eragrostis ciliaris Poaceae 1

1

LC Eragrostis superba Poaceae 1

1

LC

Eriosema ellipticum Fabaceae 1

1

1

LC Eriosema shirense Fabaceae 1

1

1

Unknown

Erythrina abyssinica Fabaceae: Papilinoideae

1 1 1

Unknown

Euphorbia hirta Euphorbiaceae 1

1

Unknown




(2008)

Current Survey



Fabaceae (pink) Fabaceae

1 1

Unknown

Faidherbia albida Fabaceae: Mimosoideae 1

1

LC

Ficus sycomorus Moraceae 1 1 1

1 1 1 LC Flacourtia indica Saliaceae 1 x

1

LC

Flaveria sp. Asteraceae 1

1

Unknown Unknown: double leaf

1 1 1 1 1

Unknown

Unknown Furo (Local name)

1

1

Unknown

Garcinia livingstonei Clusiaceae 1

1

LC Gardenia volkensii Rubiaceae 1

1

LC

Gerbera sp. Asteraceae 1

1

Unknown Gladiolus sp Liliaceae

1 1

DD

Gnidia sp Thymelaeaceae

1

1 DD Grewia sp Malvaceae 1 1

1

Prob LC

Gymnosporia sp. Celastraceae 1 1

1

1 1 Unknown Harrisonia abyssinica Simaroubaceae

1

1

Unknown

Helichrysum longifolium Asteraceae 1

1

LC

Helichrysum sp 1 Asteraceae

1

1

Unknown Helichrysum sp 2 Asteraceae

1

1

Unknown

Heteromorpha ara(?) Apiaceae 1

Unknown Heteromorpha

arborescens Apiaceae 1

1

LC Heteropogon

contortus Poaceae 1

1

LC Hyacinthaceae sp Hyacinthaceae

1 1

1 Unknown

Hymenocardia acida Phyllanthaceae 1

1

1

Unknown Hyparrhenia anamesa Poaceae 1

1

LC




(2008)

Current Survey



Hyparrhenia dichroa Poaceae 1 1

1

LC Hyparrhenia

filipendula Poaceae 1

1

LC Hyperthelia dissoluta Poaceae 1

1

LC

Impatiens sp Apiaceae

1

1 DD Imperata cylindrica Poaceae 1

1

LC

Impolopolo (Local name)

1

1

Unknown

Indigofera arrecta Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1

1

LC

Indigofera sp A Fabaceae: Papilinoideae

1

1

Unknown

Jacquemontia sp. Convolvaceae 1

1

Prob LC

Julbernadia globiflora Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae 1 1

1

1

Unknown

Julbernadia paniculata Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae

1

?

Unknown

Khaya anthotheca Meliaceae 1 1

1

Lower Risk Kigelia africana Bigonianceae 1

1

LC

Kohautia subverticillata Rubiaceae 1

1

LC

Laggera crispata Asteraceae 1

1

LC Lamiaceae Herb Lamiaceae 1

1

Unknown

Lannea discolor Anacardiaceae 1

1

1

LC Leonotis intermedia Lamiaceae 1

1

LC

Leonotis nepetifolia Lamiaceae 1

1

LC Leonotis ocymifolia Lamiaceae 1

1

LC

Lippia javanica Verbenaceae 1

1

LC Lobelia sp Campanulaceae

1 Unknown

Loudetia simplex Poaceae 1

1

LC




(2008)

Current Survey



Melinis repens Poaceae 1

1

LC Mimusops zeyheri Sapotaceae 1

1 1 1

LC

Monocymbium ceresiiforme Poaceae 1

1

LC

Monodora junodii Annonaceae 1

1

LC Monotes engleri Dipterocarpaceae 1 1 1 1

1

Unknown

Mucuna coriacea Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1

1

LC

Mucuna pruriens Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1 1 1 1

LC

Ochna arborea Ochnaceae 1

1

1

LC Ochna cf

schweinfurthiana Ochnaceae

1 1

Unknown Ocimum sp. Lamiaceae 1

1

Prob LC

Orchidaceae (Mountain) Orchidaceae

1 1

DD

Orchidaceae (Wetland) Orchidaceae

1

1 DD

Ormocarpum kirkii Fabaceae (Pap) 1

LC Oxyanthus sp. Rubiaceae 1

1

Prob LC

Oxytenanthera abyssinica

Poaceae (Bambusoideae) 1 1

1

Unknown

Ozoroa reticulata (Mbewe) Anacardiaceae 1 1

1

Unknown

Ozoroa cf obovata Anacardiaceae

1 1 1

LC Panicum

heterostachyum Poaceae 1

1

LC Panicum maximum Poaceae 1

1

LC

Parinari curatellifolia Chrysobalanaceae 1 1

1

1

LC Paspalum Poaceae 1

1

LC




(2008)

Current Survey



scrobiculatum

Pavetta crassipes Rubiaceae 1

1

Unknown Pennisetum setaceum Poaceae 1

1

Unknown

Pericopsis angolensis Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1

1

1

Unknown

Peucedanum sp. Apiaceae

1

DD

Philenoptera violacea Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1

LC

Phoenix reclinata Arecaceae 1 1

LC Phragmitis australis Poaceae 1

1 LC

Piliostigma thonningii Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae 1

1

LC

Pogonarthria squarrosa Poaceae 1

Unknown

Polygala sphenoptera Polygalaceae 1

LC Protea angolensis Proteaceae

1

Unknown

Protea gaguedi Proteaceae

1

LC Protea caffra (red) Proteaceae

1

LC

Protea (white, smooth lvs) Proteaceae 1 1

Unknown

Pseudolachnostylis maprouneifolia Euphorbiaceae 1 1

1

1

LC

Pterocarpus angolensis

Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1 1 1 1

LC

Pychnostachys sp (Blue)

Fabaceae: Papilinoideae

1

Prob LC

Pychnostachys sp Fabaceae: Papilinoideae

1

Prob LC

Rhynchosia minima Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1

LC




(2008)

Current Survey



Rottboellia cochinchinensis Poaceae 1

LC

Rourea orientalis Connaraceae 1

1

1

Unknown Rubiaceae Herb Rubiaceae

1

Unknown

Sansevieria hyacinthoides Dracaenaceae 1

LC

Schizachyrium sp. Poaceae 1

1

LC Sebaea sp Gentianaceae

1

Unknown

Securidaca longepedunculata Polygalaceae 1 1

1

1

LC

Senecio madagascariensis Asteraceae 1 ?

LC

Senecio sp 1 (Purple) Asteraceae

1

Prob LC Senecio sp 2 (Purple) Asteraceae

1

Prob LC

Senecia sp 3 (Yellow) Asteraceae

Prob LC

Senna petersiana Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae 1 1

LC

Sesamum calycinum Pedaliaceae 1

Unknown

Sesbania sesban Fabaceae: Papilinoideae

1

1

LC

Setaria sphacelata Poaceae 1

LC Sida cordifolia Malvaceae 1

LC

Smilax anceps Smilacaceae 1

LC Smilax kraussiana Smilacaceae 1

Unknown

Sorghum bicolor Poaceae 1

LC Steganotaenia

araliacea Apiaceae 1

LC Stereospermum

kunthianum Bigonianceae 1

1

Unknown Sterculia africana Malvaceae

1 1

DD




(2008)

Current Survey



Striga gesnerioides Scrophulariaceae 1

LC Strophanthus sp. Apocynaceae 1

Prob LC

Strychnos spinosa Strychnaceae 1 1

LC Swartzia

madagascariensis Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1 1

1

Unknown

Synaptolepis kirkii Thymelaeaceae 1

NT Syzygium cf cordatum Myrtaceae

1

1

LC

Syzygium guineense Myrtaceae 1 1

1

1

LC Terminalia gazensis Combretaceae 1

1

1

Unknown

Terminalia prunioides Combretaceae

1 1

LC Terminalia sericia

(Nhanhua) Combretaceae 1 1 1

LC Terminalia sp (denate

leaf) Combretaceae

1

Unknown Themeda triandra Poaceae 1 1

1

LC

Tricalysia delagoensis Rubiaceae 1

Unknown Trichodesma

zeylanicum Boraginaceae 1

1

LC Tridax procumbens Asteraceae 1

1

Unknown

Tristachya leucotrix Poaceae 1

1

LC Triumfetta pentandra Tiliaceae 1

1

LC

Triumfetta pilosa Tiliaceae 1

LC Turraea floribunda Meliaceae 1

LC

Uapaca kirkiana (sml) Euphorbiaceae 1 1 1 1 1 1

Prob LC Uapaca nitida (lrg) Euphorbiaceae 1 1 1 1 1 1

Prob LC

Uapaca sansibarica Euphorbiaceae 1

1

Unknown Vangueria infausta Rubiaceae 1

1

LC

Vernonia adoensis Asteraceae 1 1

Unknown Vernonia cf chrysanth Asteraceae

1

Unknown




(2008)

Current Survey



Vernonia colorata Asteraceae 1

1

LC Vernonia poskeana Asteraceae 1

LC

Vernonia sp (orange) Asteraceae

1 1

Unknown

Vigna vexillata Fabaceae: Papilinoideae 1

1

LC

Vitex doniana Verbenaceae 1

1

Unknown Vitex mombassae Verbenaceae

1 1

1

Unknown

Ximenia caffra Olacacaea 1

1

LC Zanha golungensis Sapindaceae 1

1

1

Unknown

172 96 35 65 16 122 14



APPENDIX B: SIMPSONS INDEX BIODIVERSIY CALCULATIONS The Simpson’s Index Biodiversity calculations were calculated as follows:

D = Σ(n1(n1 -1)/N(N-1))

Where: D = Simpson Index n1 = number of individuals of sp 1 N = Total number of spp in community Riparian Woodland

40 metre transect 13° 9'45.32"S 35°18'22.37"E

100 metre transect 13° 9'34.34"S 35°13'2.89"E Total (n)

Brachestegia spiciformis 1 1 2 0.000173

Syzigium sp 8 44 52 0.229491

Combretum 1

1 0

Bamboo 1

1 0

Uapaca large leaf 3 1 4 0.001038

Euclea sp 1

1 0

Unknown species 2

2 0.000173

Impolopolo 5 6 11 0.009519

Terminalia sp (Nhanhua) 2

2 0.000173

Protorhus cf Faurea 2

2 0.000173

Erythrina sp 1

1 0

Hippobromus cf 1

1 0

Unknown species 2 1

1 0

Annona senegalensis 1 1 2 0.000173

Bauhinia gal large leaf 2 2 4 0.001038

Commiphora sp 1

1 0

Sesbania sp.

1 1 0

Unknown: lanceolate leaf

0 0

Ficus sp

1 1 0

Grewia sp

1 1 0

Unknown deciduous

1 1 0

Brachestegia boehmii

9 9 0.006231

Cussonia sp

1 1 0

Ll1

4 4 0.001038

FW1

1 1 0

N = 107 D = 0.249221

1/D = 4.0125



Savanna shrub

Single 40 metre transect 13° 9'2.49"S 35°11'44.03"E Total (n)

Uapaca nitida 184 184 0.512

Protea sp (Red flwr) 10 10 0.001

Protea sp (Furry) 2 2 0.000

Parinari curtellifolia 10 10 0.001

Brachestegia boehmii 27 27 0.011

Mbewe_Ozoroa 1 1 0.000

Syzygium sp 3 3 0.000

Carissa sp 8 8 0.001

Protea White 3 3 0.000

Cussonia sp 1 1 0.000

Brachestegia spiciformis 5 5 0.000

Protea sp (large leaf) 1 1 0.000

Unknown lanceolate leaf 1 1 0.000

Unknown deciduous 1 1 0.000

N= 257 D = 0.527

1/D = 1.899

Miombo Woodland

Degraded Miombo (Ntiuile) 13°10'6.18"S 35°17'56.01"E

Sand quarry (Malulu 01) 12°57'29.68"S 35°27'58.90"E

Cemetery (Malulu 02) 12°58'31.02"S 35°25'20.10"E Total

(n)

50m transect plots

50 metre transect

70 metre transect

Securidaca longepedunculata 16 2 7 25 0.00312

Cussonia sp 2 1 19 22 0.002403

Uapaca kirkiana 5 1 19 25 0.00312

Uapaca nitida 2 5 11 18 0.001591

Brachestegia spiciformis 49 18 122 189 0.184791

Syzigium sp 1

1 0

Parinari curatellifolia 29 9 2 40 0.008113

Protea sp (big leaf) 3 2 2 7 0.000218

Chiumbo (Commiphora sp) 1

1 0

Terminalia cerisia (Nhanhua) 6 1

7 0.000218

Brachestegia boemii 2 10 12 24 0.002871

Carissa edulis 2 1

3 3.12E-05

Terminalia sp (dentate leaf) 9 1

10 0.000468

Pseudolachnostyis 1

4 5 0.000104



Degraded Miombo (Ntiuile) 13°10'6.18"S 35°17'56.01"E

Sand quarry (Malulu 01) 12°57'29.68"S 35°27'58.90"E

Cemetery (Malulu 02) 12°58'31.02"S 35°25'20.10"E Total

(n) maprinuifolia (Msolo)

Bi-denate lf 1

4 5 0.000104

Unknown: local name Furo 1

1 0

Julbernadia globiflora

25 4 29 0.004223

Swartzia sp

3

3 3.12E-05

Bauhinia petersiana

2

2 1.04E-05

Spotty leaf

1

1 0

Unidentified: TF1

1

1 0

Dovyalis/Gymnosporia

15 1 16 0.001248

Unidentified: ST1

1

1 0

Albizia sp

1

1 0

Aloe sp

1 1 2 1.04E-05

Unidentified: Bb

1 1 0

Vitex mombassae

3 3 3.12E-05

cf Burkea africana

3 3 3.12E-05

Deciduous tree sp

5 5 0.000104

Afzelia guan

1 1 0

Unidentified: Sp Al

1 1 0

Annona senegalensis

14 14 0.000947

Unidentified: dentate leaf margin

22 22 0.002403

Acacia sp

8 8 0.000291

Bauhinia cf galpinii (orange flwr)

5 5 0.000104

Ficus sp

1 1 0

Total

N = 439 D = 0.216588

1/D = 4.617058

niassa green resources plantation project ngr biodiversity ... green resources plantation...

Documents