APPLICANT: INDIGO FRUIT FARMING – NARANJA DIVISION ... ESR...applicant: indigo fruit farming –...

P O Box 1935 TZANEEN 0850 Tel 015 – 307 3606 Fax 015 – 307 3080 [email protected]

www.polygonenvironmental.co.za

APPLICANT: INDIGO FRUIT FARMING – NARANJA DIVISION

CONSULTATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING REPORT:

PROPOSED EXPANSION OF CITRUS ORCHARDS ON PORTION 3 OF THE FARM BOERBOOMKRAAL

353-KT NEAR BURGERSFORT, FETAKGOMO GREATER TUBATSE MUNICIPALITY, LIMPOPO

PROVINCE

31 OCTOBER 2017

Telephone: 015 307 3606 / 083 339 2731

Fax: 015 307 3080 / 086 527 0012

E-mail: [email protected]

Postal address: PO Box 1935, Tzaneen, 0850

Website: www.polygonenvironmental.co.za

CONSULTATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF CITRUS ORCHARDS ON PORTION 3 OF THE FARM BOERBOOMKRAAL 353-KT NEAR BURGERSFORT, LIMPOPO PROVINCE

Polygon Environmental Planning

Tel 015 307 3606 – Fax 015 307 3080 – [email protected] – PO Box 1935 TZANEEN 0850 – www.polygonenvironmental.co.za

2

Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................... 6

2. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................ 6

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................ 8

4. PROJECT MOTIVATION, NEED AND DESIRABILITY ............................................................................... 8

4.1. Motivation, need and desirability of the overall project .......................................................................8

4.2. Motivation for selected preferred alternatives ......................................................................................9

5. INVESTIGATION OF ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................ 9

5.1. Project Alternatives ...............................................................................................................................9

5.2. Site and Layout Alternatives .................................................................................................................9

5.3. Technology Alternatives .......................................................................................................................9

5.4. No-go Alternative ...............................................................................................................................10

6. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION .................................................................................................................... 11

6.1. Environmental Legislation ..................................................................................................................11

6.1.1. National Environmental Management Act, EIA Regulations (2014) ......................................... 11

6.1.2. National Water Act (1998) .......................................................................................................... 12

6.2. National Forests Act (1998) and Limpopo Environmental Management Act (2003) .........................12

6.3. Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (1983) ...........................................................................12

6.4. Other Legislation .................................................................................................................................12

6.5. Municipal and provincial planning tools .............................................................................................13

6.5.1. Fetakgomo – Greater Tubatse Municipality – Integrated Development Plan ............................. 13

6.5.2. Limpopo Conservation Plan version 2 (2013) ............................................................................ 14

6.5.3. Protected areas ............................................................................................................................ 14

6.5.4. National Freshwater Ecosystems Priority Areas ......................................................................... 15

7. IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 15

8. ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING INVESTIGATION – BIO-PHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS ....................... 17

8.1. Climate ................................................................................................................................................17

8.1.1. Status quo .................................................................................................................................... 17

8.1.2. Potential impacts ......................................................................................................................... 17

8.2. Topography, Soils, Agriculture and Geology .....................................................................................17

8.4. Ecology ...............................................................................................................................................21

8.4.1. Status quo .................................................................................................................................... 21


9. ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING INVESTIGATION – ................................................................................... 24

SOCIO-ECONOMIC INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................................................................ 24

9.1. Heritage Assessment ...........................................................................................................................24

9.2. Social Aspects .....................................................................................................................................25

9.2.1. Status quo .................................................................................................................................... 25

Information adapted from consolidated Fetakgomo- Greater Tubatse Local Municipality (FGTLM)

Integrated Development Plan (IDP) 2016/17 -2018/2021. ......................................................................... 25


9.3. Visual Aspects.....................................................................................................................................27




3

9.3.1. Status quo .................................................................................................................................... 27


9.4. Noise ...................................................................................................................................................28

9.4.1. Status quo .................................................................................................................................... 28


9.5. Indirect and cumulative impacts .........................................................................................................29

10. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS ....................................................................................................... 30

10.1. Advertisement of Commencement of EIA Process / I&AP registration period ..............................30

10.2. Public Meeting ................................................................................................................................30

10.3. Issues Raised ...................................................................................................................................30

10.4. Availability of Consultative ESR for Review and Comment..........................................................30

11. PLAN OF STUDY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ..................................................... 31

11.1. Approach to Undertaking the Impact Assessment Phase of the Project .........................................31

11.2. Assessments to be conducted as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment phase ..................31

11.3. Assessment of impacts ....................................................................................................................32

11.4. Public Participation Process ............................................................................................................33

11.4.1. Public Meeting ............................................................................................................................ 33

11.4.2. Issues Trail .................................................................................................................................. 34

11.4.3. Availability of reports for public review ..................................................................................... 34

11.5. Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Management Programme ................................34

11.5.1. Public Review of the consultative EIR and EMPR ..................................................................... 34

11.5.2. Authority Review of the EIR and EMPR .................................................................................... 35

11.6. Authorisation ...................................................................................................................................35

11.7. Agreement with I&APs as to Plan of Study ....................................................................................35

12. CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 35

13. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 39




4

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Site plans and maps

Appendix B: Site photographs

Appendix C: LDEDET pre-application meeting

Appendix D: I&AP Comments and Correspondence

Appendix E: Advertisement of commencement of EIA process and first public comment

period

Appendix F: Advertisement of availability of consultation Environmental Scoping Report for public review

and comment

Appendix G: Environmental Management Programme

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS:

DWS Department of Water and Sanitation

EAP Environmental Assessment Practitioner

ECO Environmental Control Officer

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EMPR Environmental Management Programme

ESR Environmental Scoping Report

FGTLM Fetakgomo- Greater Tubatse Municipality

IBA Important Bird Area

Ha Hectare

HIA Heritage Impact Assessment

I&AP Interested and/or Affected Party

LDEDET Limpopo Department of Economic Development and Environmental Tourism

LEMA Limpopo Environmental Management Act (2003)

MAE Mean Annual Evaporation

MAMSL Metres Above Mean Sea Level

MAP Mean Average Precipitation

NEMA National Environmental Management Act (1998)

NWA National Water Act (1998)

WUL Water Use Licence

WULA Water Use Licence Application




5

CONTACT DETAILS

Environmental Impact Assessment Practitioner

Polygon Environmental Planning CC

Contact: Ms. Louise Agenbag

Tel.: 015 307 3606 / 083 339 2731

Fax: 015 307 3080


Postal address: PO Box 1935, Tzaneen, 0850

Web: www.polygonenvironmental.co.za

EAP’s Qualifications (Louise Agenbag):

- BSc (Hons) Geography (cum laude), University of Pretoria

- BSc Environmental Sciences (cum laude), University of Pretoria

- Certificate in Environmental Management Systems (ISO14001:2004), North-West University,

Potchefstroom campus

- Completed short courses in Water Use Authorisation and Project Management

- More than 11 years’ experience in environmental impact assessment and management (2005 to

current), 9 of which at management level (2007 to current)

- Member of IWMSA (Institute of Waste Management of Southern Africa) and IAIAsa (International

Association for Impact Assessment, South African chapter)

Applicant

Indigo Fruit Farming (Pty) Ltd – Naranja division

Contact: Mr Leon Lotter

Tel.: 013 231 7940 / 078 060 5922


Environmental Authority

Department of Economic Development, Environment & Tourism (LDEDET)

Contact: Mr. Rhulani Mthombeni

Tel.: 015 290 7057

Fax: 015 295 5015





6

1. INTRODUCTION

Polygon Environmental Planning has been appointed by Indigo Fruit Farming (Pty) Ltd to conduct an

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed expansion of citrus orchards on Portion 3 of the farm

Boerboomkraal 353-KT near Burgersfort, in the Fetakgomo-Greater Tubatse Municipality, Limpopo Province.

This Environmental Scoping Report (ESR) was compiled following the scoping-phase investigations and public

participation, and is currently available for public review and comment, from 31 October to 30 November 2017.

Following the comment period, all comments will be incorporated into the final ESR, which will then be submitted

to the Limpopo Department of Economic Development and Environmental Tourism (LDEDET).

2. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

2.1. Location

The project is proposed on Portion 3 of the farm Boerboomkraal 353-KT, near Burgersfort (Figure 2.1). The site

is under the jurisdiction of the Fetakgomo- Greater Tubatse Municipality. The property is 481.8ha in extent.

Figure 2.1: 1:50 000 topocadastral map of the location




7

2.2. Site description

The property is currently occupied by existing pivots and agricultural fields, pack house and storage area, a

shooting range and the largest section by virgin land with indigenous vegetation. Some of the virgin areas

(uncultivated for more than 10 years) proposed for the citrus orchard expansion appear to have been disturbed

more than 14 years ago and no longer represent natural undisturbed locations observed elsewhere on the farm.

Figure 2.1 Aerial photograph showing the location of the Farm.

Figure 2.2: Aerial photograph of the Farm, the proposed cultivation sites are outlined in yellow.




8

The following table provides general information pertaining to the site.

Table 1.1: General site information

District Sekhukhune District

Local Municipality Fetakgomo-Greater Tubatse Municipality

Property description Remaining Extent of Portion 3 of the farm Boerboomkraal 353-KT

Surveyor-General code T0KT00000000035300003

Nearest town Burgersfort

Coordinates 24° 50' 03.24" S and 30° 21' 41.69" E

Current land use Agriculture

Natural areas

Surrounding land use Agriculture

Natural areas

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The applicant proposes the establishment of 33ha of citrus on virgin land on the Remaining extent of portion 3

of the Farm Boerboomskraal 353-KT, as well as. The area where they wish to establish the orchards is virgin

land which has not been uncultivated for more than 10 years and since then the proposed areas have developed

into mosaics of relatively natural appearing areas as well as more disturbed areas where compacted and eroded

soil is limiting the establishment of natural elements and promoting the spread of alien and invasive vegetation

species.

Drip irrigation is proposed to be installed, as this is the most efficient method of irrigation in terms of minimising

the volume of water used.

Fruit to be produced on this farm will be packed in the applicant’s nearby existing packhouse, from where it will

be distributed locally and exported.

4. PROJECT MOTIVATION, NEED AND DESIRABILITY

4.1. Motivation, need and desirability of the overall project

The proposed project keeps in line with the surrounding land-use in the area. The potential for citrus cultivation

is apparent as many large-scale commercial citrus developments already occupy the general location. The soil

and climate are suited to citrus cultivation, and the proposed orchards are anticipated to yield high volumes of

quality fruit for export and domestic distribution. This is likely to make a significant contribution to job creation,

directly on the farm, and indirectly will likely contribute to job security of labourers who are employed at the

packhouse operated by the applicant. By increasing the disposable income of community members working on

the farms growth is expected to occur and is likely to contribute to local economic development, as the workers

are likely to spend most of their disposable income at local businesses.




9

The specialist investigations found the proposed project to be potentially compatible with the proposed site (with

layout adjusted to respect buffer zones around sensitive features), provided that recommended impact mitigation

measures are implemented. No fatal flaws have been identified and it is anticipated that impacts can be

addressed satisfactorily.

4.2. Motivation for selected preferred alternatives

The farm was purchased as it was one of the only ones for sale in the area at that stage, and the applicant

wished to expand their cultivation. No alternative farms were considered. The areas on the site that were

selected for proposed cultivation were selected because they had previously been disturbed, are easily

accessible and fairly level. Furthermore, Naranja Packers, which is another division of indigo Fruit Farming, is

located approximately 10km away from the property and the citrus from this farm will be sent there for packing.

The proximity of Indigo’s Fruit Farming’s existing farm operations indicate that all the necessary agricultural

support services are available in the area and would ensure that fresh picked citrus would be rapidly processed

with limited logistical effort.

Lastly, the climatic conditions and the soil in the area are suited for citrus production and an existing water

allocation with sufficient volume to irrigate the proposed orchards is available for the property.

5. INVESTIGATION OF ALTERNATIVES

5.1. Project Alternatives

No project alternatives were investigated within the ambit of this EIA, as the applicant’s purpose with the project

is to expand the citrus cultivation which they are already doing on several other nearby properties. The project

proposal is furthermore in line with surrounding land use, which mostly consists of agriculture and associated

infrastructure. The applicant also already has the necessary processes, infrastructure and expertise in the area,

which the proposed new orchards can make use of.

5.2. Site and Layout Alternatives

wished to expand their cultivation. No alternative farms were considered. The areas on the site that were

selected for proposed cultivation were selected because they had previously been disturbed, are easily

accessible and fairly level. Furthermore, Naranja Packers, which is another division of indigo Fruit Farming, is

located approximately 10km away from the property and the citrus from this farm will be sent there for packing.

The proximity of Indigo’s Fruit Farming’s existing farm operations indicate that all the necessary agricultural

support services are available in the area and would ensure that fresh picked citrus would be rapidly processed

with limited logistical effort.

Lastly, the climatic conditions and the soil in the area are suited for citrus production and an existing water

allocation with sufficient volume to irrigate the proposed orchards is available for the property.

5.3. Technology Alternatives

No technological alternatives have been investigated for the project. The applicant’s core business has for many

years been citrus cultivation, and they have standardised operations to the methods and practices they have




10

found to be most efficient. For instance, drip irrigation has been found to be most efficient in terms of minimising

water wastage.

5.4. No-go Alternative

The ‘no-go’ alternative refers to the scenario in which the proposed activity does not take place and the site

remains as it is.

If the no-go alternative is taken, the impacts that can be anticipated to be associated with the proposed cultivation

would not come to pass and the conditions and trends on the property can be expected to remain as per the

status quo. Impacts that can be expected to be experienced in case of the no-go alternative being selected

include the following:

Table 5.1: Potential impacts that may be associated with the no-go option

POTENTIAL IMPACT STATUS EXTENT MAGNITUDE LIKELIHOOD SIGNIFICANCE

Bio-physical aspects

Soil erosion and siltation

remain the same

Neutral Local Medium Possible Low

Topography remains

unchanged

Neutral Local Low Highly

probable

Insignificant

Unused agricultural potential Neutral Local Medium Definite Medium

No ingress of foreign matter

into streams and wetlands, or

concomitant impacts on fauna

and flora

Neutral Local Unknown Possible Low

No increase in water

abstraction rates, though still

within existing allocation


probable

Medium

Water contamination and/or

eutrophication due to run-off of

pesticides, fertilizers, etc

Neutral Local Low Possible Low

Sediment movement /

transportation within the

system remains unchanged

Neutral Local Medium Possible Low

Water quality remains

unchanged


probable

Low

Habitat remains intact Neutral Local Low Definite Medium

No veld fire risk associated with

construction

Neutral Local Very low Possible Very Low

No contribution to further

spreading of alien plant species

or encroachment by indigenous

trees due to disturbance of

natural vegetation

Neutral Local Medium Definite Low




11

6. APPLICABLE LEGISLATION

6.1. Environmental Legislation

6.1.1. National Environmental Management Act, EIA Regulations (2014)

The EIA Regulations (2014, as amended), published in terms of section 24(5) read with section 44 of the National

Environmental Management Act (NEMA, Act No. 107 of 1998), stipulate that an EIA process is required to be

undertaken for the proposed project (Table 6.1).

Table 6.1: Applicable Environmental Legislation

Table 6.1: Applicable Environmental Legislation

ACTIVITY

NR.

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

Listing Notice 2

15 The clearance of an area of 20ha or more of indigenous vegetation, excluding where such

clearance of indigenous vegetation is required for (i) the undertaking of a linear activity,

No disruption of the activities of

fauna on and around the site

Neutral Local Very low Possible Very low

Socio-economic aspects

No supporting local businesses

through local procurement of

materials, equipment &

services (construction phase)

Neutral Local Low-medium Highly

probable

Low-medium

No job creation (construction

phase), whether direct or

indirect


probable

Low-medium

No contribution to operational-

phase job creation and job

security


probable

Low-medium

No contribution to local

economy (operational phase)


probable

Medium

No visual impact of

construction activities and site

clearing

Neutral Local Low Definite Low

No noise associated with

construction activities and

heavy vehicles during

construction

Neutral Local Very low Highly

probable

Very low

No risk to possible undetected /

subterranean heritage

resources

Neutral Local Very low Improbable Very low




12

or (ii) maintenance purposes undertaken in accordance with a maintenance management

plan.

For the clearance of approximately 33ha of indigenous vegetation for establishment of

citrus orchards.

6.1.2. National Water Act (1998)

Naranja have an existing water use allocation from the Lower Spekboomriver Irrigation Board which allows them

to irrigate a total of 85 ha of land.

A Water Use Licence Application (WULA) will be submitted to DWS in terms of the National Water Act (NWA,

Act No. 36 of 1998) for the Section 21(c) and (i) water uses which will be triggered by the development of

orchards within 100m of a watercourse and within 500m of a wetland, as highlighted below:

Table 6.2: Applicable water uses in terms of the National Water Act (1998)

Section Description of Water Use Relevant Activity

21(c) Impeding or diverting the flow of water

in a watercourse.

Development of orchards within 100m of a

watercourse and within 500m of a wetland.

21(i) Altering the beds, banks, course or

characteristics of a watercourse.

Development of orchards within 100m of a

watercourse and within 500m of a wetland.

6.2. National Forests Act (1998) and Limpopo Environmental Management Act (2003)

Should specimens be destroyed of any plant species that are protected in terms of the National Forests Act

and/or the Limpopo Environmental Management Act (LEMA), permits will be required from the Department of

Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) and/or LDEDET.

Protected species should be preserved as far as possible. Large specimens of trees, particularly of protected

species, will be incorporated into the orchard development as far as possible.

6.3. Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (1983)

A cultivation permit application will be submitted to DAFF’s Agriculture directorate for the proposed cultivation

of virgin land, viz. land that has not been cultivated in the past 10 years.

6.4. Other Legislation

Table 6.3: Other applicable legislation

LEGISLATION RELEVANT

SECTIONS PERTAINS TO

The Constitution Act (No 108 of

1996)

Chapter 2,

Section 24

Bill of Rights: Environmental rights

Fencing Act (No 31 of 1963) Section 17 Clearing of bush for fencing

Fertilizers, Farm Feeds,

Agricultural Remedies and Stock

Remedies Act (No 36 of 1947)

Sections 3 – 10 Control of the use of pesticides, herbicides and

fertilizers, and precautions to protect workers in this

regard




13

Limpopo Environmental

Management Act

Schedule 2, 3,

11 and 12

Lists of protected animals and plants

National Environmental

Management: Air Quality Act

(No 39 of 2004)

Section 32 Control of dust

Section 34 Control of noise

Section 35 Control of offensive odours


Management: Biodiversity Act

(No 10 of 2004)

Section 57 Restricted activities involving listed threatened or

protected species

Sections 65–69 Regulation of activities involving alien species

Sections 71, 73

and 75

Regulation of activities involving invasive species


Management: Waste

Amendment Act (No 26 of 2014)

Chapter 4, Part

4 Waste management activities

Chapter 5 Licensing of waste management activities

Chapter 5 Institutional and planning matters

Chapter 7 Compliance and enforcement

National Heritage Resources Act

(No 25 of 1999)

Section 34 Protection of structures older than 60 years

Section 35 Protection of archaeological and palaeontological

sites and material as well as meteorites

Section 36 Conservation of burial grounds and graves

National Forests Act (No 84 of

1998), as amended by the

Forestry Laws Amendment Act

(No 35 of 2005) and Regulations

(GN466 of 2009)

Section 7 Prohibition on destruction of trees in natural forests

Sections 12–16 Declaration of trees, groups of trees, woodlands or

tree species as protected

Section 17 Declaration of controlled forest areas

National Water Act (No 36 of

1998)

Section 19 Prevention and remedying effects of pollution,

particularly where pollution of a water resource

occurs or might occur as a result of activities on land

Section 20 Control of pollution of water resources following an

emergency incident

Chapter 4

(Sections 21-55)

Governs water use

Occupational Health and Safety

Act (No 85 of 1993)

Section 8 General duties of employers to their employees

Section 9 General duties of employers and self-employed

persons to persons other than their employees

6.5. Municipal and provincial planning tools

6.5.1. Fetakgomo – Greater Tubatse Municipality – Integrated Development Plan

Two areas in the municipal area have been identified as highly sensitive in terms of environment. The first lies

on the northern boundary of the region along the Olifants River stretching from the villages of Maretlwaneng and

Makoloto up to Morathong along the R527 to Hoedspruit. The area is endowed with forestry, deep gorges and

waterfalls and has been identified as the very sensitive environment area due to these features. The second is

the area bordered by the R36 to Hoedspruit on the west, by R532 to Bouke’s Luck on the south and the study




14

area boundary on the north east has been identified as one of the most sensitive area. These will not be

affected by the proposed project.

6.5.2. Limpopo Conservation Plan version 2 (2013)

According to the Limpopo Conservation Plan version 2 (2013), the proposed development site is situated within

a Critical Biodiversity Area (CBA2). Other parts of the property, which are not proposed to be developed, are

classified as CBA1.

Figure 6.2: Extract from Limpopo Conservation Plan

6.5.3. Protected areas

The property was declared as a protected area called Kasma Private Nature Reserve in 1969. Meetings have

been undertaken with LDEDET’s Biodiversity, Protected Areas and EIM divisions regarding possible

deproclamation of the reserve and proclamation of a new reserve containing the undeveloped portions of this

property as well as undeveloped portions of some of the applicant’s other properties in the area. This process

is taking place while the EIA is proceeding simultaneously.




15

6.5.4. National Freshwater Ecosystems Priority Areas

The site falls within an upstream management area in terms of the National Freshwater Ecosystems Priority

Areas (NFEPA) map. The Watervals River forms the northern boundary of the property, and confluences with

the Spekboom River at the property’s north-eastern corner.

Figure 6.3: Extract from the NFEPA map (BGIS, 2017).

7. IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

Potential impacts were scored on the following basis:

• Status:

- Positive – the proposed project is to have a positive impact in terms of the particular parameter;

- Negative – the proposed project is to have a negative impact in terms of the particular parameter;

- Neutral – the proposed project is to have neither a positive nor a negative impact in terms of the

particular parameter.

• Extent:

- Local – the impact is to be felt on the site and in its immediate surroundings, up to a radius of 50km from

the site;

- Sub-regional – the impact is to be felt at a distance of up to 100km from the site;

- Regional – the impact is to be felt in the Limpopo Province;

- National – the impact is to be felt across provincial boundaries.




16

• Duration:

Refers to the period of time over which impacts can be expected to be experienced.

- Short term – 0 to 5 years;

- Medium term – more than 5 years, up to 15 years;

- Long term – more than 15 years;

- Permanent – the impact is irreversible.

• Magnitude:

Refers to the intensity of the potential impact, if it is experienced.

- Negligible – the impact will barely be felt, if at all. No mitigation required;

- Low – the parameter will only be affected to a small extent by the proposed project. No mitigation

required, but monitoring is recommended;

- Medium – the parameter will be affected by the proposed project, but functions in terms of the parameter

can still continue. Mitigation and monitoring required;

- High – functioning in terms of the parameter will be significantly affected by the impact. Extensive

mitigation and long-term monitoring required.

• Likelihood:

- Improbable – it is unlikely that the impact will be experienced;

- Possible – the impact may be experienced. Monitoring required; mitigation may also be required based

on the type of impact and its significance;

- Highly probable – the impact will most likely be experienced. Monitoring and mitigation required based

on the type of impact and its significance in order to reduce the probability of the impact occurring and/or

to reduce the magnitude of the impact;

- Definite – the impact will be experienced. Monitoring and mitigation required based on the type of impact

and its significance in order to reduce the probability of the impact occurring and/or to reduce the

magnitude of the impact.

• Significance:

Significance is based on a consolidation of the anticipated extent, duration, magnitude and likelihood of the

potential impact.

- Negligible – The impact will barely be felt, if at all. No mitigation required;

- Low – The parameter will only be affected to a small extent by the proposed project. No mitigation

required, but monitoring is recommended;

- Medium – The parameter will be affected by the proposed project, but functions in terms of the

parameter can still continue. Mitigation and monitoring required;

- High – Functioning in terms of the parameter will be significantly affected by the impact. Extensive

mitigation and long-term monitoring required.




17

8. ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING INVESTIGATION – BIO-PHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS

8.1. Climate

8.1.1. Status quo

Climate is hot, with day temperatures ranging between 25ºC and 35 ºC in the summer months. Winters are mild

to warm with day temperatures averaging around 15ºC – 25ºC. Average annual precipitation is 598mm, with the

bulk of rainfall occurring between November and March. Mean annual S-Pan evaporation is 1552mm. Frost

does occur within this area but only, on average, 4 days during the winter months (Mucina & Rutherford 2006).

8.1.2. Potential impacts

The proposed project is not anticipated to have any impact on the local climate.

The climate may impact on the project in that rain during the development phase can cause soil erosion,

particularly on cleared areas which have not been stabilised, if vegetation clearance takes place during the rainy

season.

Table 8.1: Potential impacts in terms of climate

DEVELOPMENT PHASE

Potential impact Status Extent Duration Magnitude Likelihood Significance

without

mitigation

Significance

with

mitigation

Rain during the

development phase may

cause soil erosion, which

in turn may also lead to

siltation of the stream

Negative Local Short

term

Medium Possible Medium Low

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Erosion from bare areas

located within the

orchards may result in

sedimentation of the

watercourses

Negative Local Long

term

Low Probable Medium Low

8.2. Topography, Soils, Agriculture and Geology

8.2.1. Status quo

Topography

The area is located between two perennial rivers; the Watervals and Spekboom Rivers. The northern section of

the farm is fairly flat and slopes gently downwards towards the confluence of the Rivers, which sits at an elevation

of 829 mamsl. This flat to gently sloping area, which occupies the northern third of the property is the region in




18

which the orchards have been proposed to be established. The southern part of the site and steep and

mountainous, and therefore not conducive to cultivation.

Soils

According to the National Soils source layer the locations proposed for orchard establishment are located in

areas where soils are red with a high base status. These soils may have restricted depth, excessive drainage

and low natural fertility and are at risk from erosive forces (BGIS, 2017). The land types are mainly Ib, Ae and

Fa (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006).

status.

Agriculture

The agriculture sector in Fetakgomo-Greater Tubatse Municipality is still emerging and heavily under-invested.

Lack of mechanisation makes smallholder farming one of the least contributor to the municipality’s economic

growth. Although the overall contribution of the sector to the total GVA of the municipality is promising, records

availed by StatsSA, 2013, paint a picture of a sector that is gradually experiencing a steady year-on-year growth

in output. For instance, in a 12-year period review, the agricultural output rose from 13957 in 2001 to 22817 in

2013. The year-on-year growth in output speaks of a sector that shows remarkable growth potential in the future.

Considering that the municipality is blessed with vast tracts of fertile arable land and livestock farming potential,

the optimal job absorption capacity of the sector is still below expectations. The sector suffers from low capacity

utilisation owing to poor investment in mechanisation schemes. Relatively better pay options in the mining

sector, makes many locals to turn their back on the agricultural sector

Geology

The Farm Boerboomskraal is primarily underlain by quartzite and shale (Timbeball Hill and Silverton formations

of the Pretoria Group), with some chemical elements of the Chuniespoort Group, which weather to form shallow

rocky soils of either Glenrosa or Mispah soil forms (Mucina and Rutherford, 2006).


Topography

No impacts on the local topography are anticipated.

Soils

Potential acceleration of soil erosion is likely to occur in a short-term, it is expected to be limited largely to the

construction phase, when soil preparation and clearing of vegetation takes place.

Agriculture

The establishment of the proposed orchards is anticipated to improve agricultural production by unlocking the

agricultural potential of the property.

Geology

No geological impacts are anticipated.




19

Potential impacts that may be associated with topography, soils, agriculture and geology are summarised in the

following table:

Table 8.3: Potential impacts in terms of topography, soils, agriculture and geology

DEVELOPMENT PHASE


without

mitigation

Significance

with mitigation

Soil erosion and

associated siltation of

watercourses

Negative Local Short term Medium Possible Medium Low

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Unlocking the

agricultural potential

of the property

Positive Local Long term Medium Definite Medium Medium

Soil erosion and

associated siltation of

watercourses

Negative Local Long term Low Possible Medium Low

8.3. Surface hydrology and wetlands

8.3.1. Status quo

Surface water spatial layers such as the National Freshwater Ecosystems Priority Areas (NFEPA) Wetland

Types for South Africa (SANBI, 2013) Indicated the property being between two major perennial rivers, the

Watervals River and Spekboom. The Watervals River forms the northern boundary of the site, and confluences

with the Spekboom River at the north-eastern corner of the property. Furthermore, numerous non-perennial

streams are located within drainage lines on the property (Figure below). The entire farm portion is located

within an Upstream Water Management Area according to NFEPA.

An onsite investigation found wetland conditions to be present in the north-eastern corner of the property formed

by the confluence.




20

Figure 8.1: Hydrology of the proposed expansion sites (Limosella Consulting, 2017).

.


Soil erosion may lead to sedimentation of the wetland and rivers, which in turn may increase turbidity.

Agricultural run-off of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides used in agriculture may also potentially contribute to

the nutrients and toxic organic compounds within the water resource, which may lead to eutrophication or

contamination.

Table 8.4: Potential impacts in terms of surface hydrology and wetlands

DEVELOPMENT PHASE


without

mitigation

Significance

with

mitigation

Sedimentation of

watercourses and

increased turbidity in

rivers

Negative Local Short term Low-

Medium

Possible Medium Low

Water contamination

and/or

eutrophication due

to runoff of

pesticides,

fertilizers, etc

Negative Local to

sub-

regional

Long term Low Possible Medium Low

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Increased water

abstraction, though

Negative Local Long term Low Highly

Probable

Medium Medium




21

still within existing

allocation from DWS

Introduction and

spread of alien

vegetation in

wetland

Negative Local Long term Medium Possible Medium Low

Water contamination

and/or

eutrophication due

to runoff of

pesticides,

fertilizers, etc

Negative Local to

sub-

regional

Long term Low Possible Medium Low

8.4. Ecology

8.4.1. Status quo

Vegetation type

The proposed location is located in South Africa’s Savanna Biome, more specifically the Central Bushveld

(SVcb26) (Mucina & Rutherford 2006). A bioregion is a composite terrestrial unit that is defined on the basis of

similar biotic and physical features and processes at a regional level. All the proposed agricultural developments

will take place in the Central Bushveld bioregion. The property is occupied only by Ohrigstad Mountain Bushveld

(SVcb 26).

It is characterised by an open to dense woody layer, with associated woody and herbaceous shrubs with a

closed to open grass layer. Ohrigstad Mountain Bushveld is listed as Least threatened. A small portion of the

unit (8%) is statutorily conserved within the Bewaarskloof and Blyde River Canyon Nature Reserves. A further

4% is located in other reserves, mainly the Wolkberg Wilderness Area. Only 9% of this vegetation type has

been transformed, mostly by cultivation. Erosion is variable, from very low to very high in parts of the

Sekhukhune region.

Figure 8.2: Reference map of site location Map indicating the different vegetation units according to Mucina

and Rutherford (2012).




22

Important taxonomy within the vegetation includes (Mucina & Rutherford, 2006):

Tall Trees:

Sclerocarya birrea subsp. Caffra,

Small Trees:

Acacia exuvialis, A. karroo, A. tortilis subsp.heteracantha, Combretum apiculatum, C. mole, Kirkia wilmsii,

Acacia caffra, Berchemia zeyheri, Boscia foetida subsp. rehmanniana, Commiphora mollis, croton gratissimus,

Englerophytum magalismonttanum, Hippobromus ppauciflorus, Pappea capensis, Terminalia prunioides, Vitex

obovate subsp. Wilmsii, Ziziphus mucronate.

Succulent trees

Euphorbia tirucalli, E. cooperi

Tall Shrubs:

Dichrostachys cinereal, Combretum petrophilum, Crotalaria monteiroi, Grewia bicolor, G.monticola, Hexalobus

monopetalus, karomia speciose, Olea europaea subsp. Africana, Tarchonanthus camphoratus

Low Shrubs:

Grewia Vernicosa, psiadia punctulate, Euclea crispa.

Sacculent Shrubs

Aloe castanea, A.cryptopoda, A.globuligemma

Woody Climbers:

Pterobium stellatum. Graminoids: Loudetia simplex, Andropogon chinensis, Aristida congesta, brachiaria

nigropedata, Eragrotis rigidior, Melinis repens, Panicum maximum

Sacculent Herb:

Aloe fosteri

Fauna

The proposed area is comprised of natural habitat that has been subject to minimal anthropogenic disturbance.

The remainder of the site has been transformed through agriculture and the development of associated

infrastructure. There is suitable habitat for the presence of 40 species of conservation concern.

Ecological sensitivity

The proposed sites for cultivation has a high species richness and remain in a natural condition, though some

portions of the site had been previously disturbed and colonized by a number of alien and invasive plant species

which has degraded the site while some parts, overgrazing has led to severe trampling and signs of erosion

were common. The site still possesses large land which is still suitable for local fauna to persist in. The remaining

land, composed of natural vegetation will be left undeveloped. Furthermore, it is likely that small antelope, such

as Duiker and Bushbuck, will continue to use the site for foraging as natural nearby drainage lines within the

development footprint which will provide them with shelter and forage. These natural areas will also provide a




23

retreat where birds, insects and reptiles may shelter. The proposed cultivated lands are still likely to be suitable

foraging areas for the local fauna, though it is likely that the species composition will change.

The proposed cultivation sites are located within a CBA2, while the mountainous part of the property is classified

as a CBA1. The property is a private nature reserve.

During the public comment period, a community member highlighted the fact that certain sensitive plant species

(Ceropegia sp. and Eulophia sp. (orchids)) have been found on an adjacent property, and that there is a high

likelihood of their occurrence on this site as well. This will be investigated as part of the ecological study.


The proposed project will result in habitat destruction and fragmentation within a CBA2, which may include

TOPS species.

The impact on fauna is anticipated to be low if the management and mitigation measures contained within the

EMPr are adhered to, as the site on which the development is planned has been disturbed, albeit more than 10

years ago. Furthermore, indigenous vegetation which is the preferred habitat of fauna occupying the farm will

not be developed on. The development is proposed to occur on transformed virgin land which was cleared in

2003.

Table 8.5: Potential impacts in terms of vegetation

CONSTRUCTION PHASE


without

mitigation

Significance

with

mitigation

Veld fire risk associated with

“hot” construction activities

and workers smoking etc


term

Very low Possible Very low Very low

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Habitat loss in the areas to

be cleared for cultivation

Negative Local Long

term

Medium Definite Medium Medium

Possible further spreading

of alien plant species or

bush encroachment by

indigenous trees due to

disturbance of natural

vegetation

Negative Local Long

term

Low Possible Medium Low

Table 8.6: Potential impacts in terms of fauna

DEVELOPMENT PHASE

Potential impact Status Extent Duration Magnitude Likelihood

Significance

without

mitigation

Significance

with

mitigation

Disruption of the activities of

fauna on and around the

site due to construction


term

Very low Possible Low Very low




24

activities, and possible

trapping / hunting / killing

fauna by labourers

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Habitat destruction and

change in faunal species

composition onsite

Negative Local Long

term

Medium Definite Medium Medium

9. ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING INVESTIGATION –

SOCIO-ECONOMIC INVESTIGATIONS

9.1. Heritage Assessment

9.1.1. Status quo

There are no known graves, buildings older than 60 years, or areas with cultural or religious significance on the

site. According to the most recent archaeological cultural distribution sequences by huffman (2007), this area

falls within the distribution area of various cultural groupings originating out of both the urewe tradition (Eastern

stream of migration) and the kalundu tradition (western stream of migration) with facies from the Kwale and

Moloko branches possibly occurring, and the Kalundu Tradition with facies from the Happy Rest sub-branch

possibly occurring.

The Sekhukhune District has a rich and varied history. Stone Age materials are generally recorded in dry rivers,

erosion gullies and near rocky overhangs. Remains from the Early, Middle and Late Stone are known in the

wider area, especially in the Steelpoort valley, now primarily dominated by platinum and chrome mines. The Iron

Age is also well documented in the wider area, with sites dating from the Eiland and Icon period, through to

more ‘modern’ Marateng facies sites.


Due to the high level of disturbance and transformation of the site, it is considered unlikely that intact sites of

heritage-related significance will be found onsite. However, this will be investigated by an archaeologist as part

of the impact assessment phase.

Should any previously undetected subterranean heritage remains however be found on site during the remainder

of the construction phase, this must be reported to the Limpopo Heritage Resources Agency (LIHRA) or South

African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) and work onsite halted until given the go-ahead by LIHRA and/or

SAHRA.

Table 9.1: Potential heritage impacts

CONSTRUCTION PHASE


None expected - - - - - -

OPERATIONAL PHASE

None expected - - - - - -




25

9.2. Social Aspects

9.2.1. Status quo

Information adapted from consolidated Fetakgomo- Greater Tubatse Local Municipality (FGTLM) Integrated

Development Plan (IDP) 2016/17 -2018/2021.

Location

The Fetakgomo-Greater Tubatse Local Municipality forms part of the Sekhukhune District in the Limpopo

province and is located north of N4 highway, Middleburg, Belfast and Mbombela; and east of the N1 highway;

Groblersdal and Polokwane. The municipal area of jurisdiction covers approximately 45 500ha in size. The area

is known as the middelveld as it is located between the Highveld and lowveld regions.

Population

According to the South African Statistics Census 2011 information, the total population of the former Fetakgomo

and Greater Tubatse municipality combined is approximately 429 471 with 106 050 households; this makes it

the municipality with the highest population in the district. When comparing the 2016 Community Survey to the

2011 Stats SA results it shows that in the FGTM there has been a population increase to 490 381, with

households increasing to 125 454. In the municipality the number of women outnumbers the males as they

comprise 51% of the population.

Income, employment and education

The mining, Agriculture, manufacturing, Tourism and business services are the main employer within the

FGTLM, the mining sector is the lead contributor in terms of employment and contributes about 54% of the total

labour force in the formal sector, while the remaining 46% is made from the other sectors, including General

government services supply. 31% of the municipal workforce consists of women while men contribute 69% of

the workforce.

According to the Stats SA (2011), in the Former Fetakgomo and Greater Tubatse Municipalities, the greatest

proportion of households earn between R 400 - R 12 800 monthly.

There are 225 primary and 133 secondary schools and 8 private schools with 128 740 learners and 4 711

Educators in FGTM. The Department of Education Limpopo has developed two state of the art schools namely

Nthame Primary School at Riba – Cross and Batubatse Primary School in Praktiseer.

Economic activities and opportunities

The FGTM is economically the most marginal region of the Limpopo Province. Although the Fetakgomo

economy remains predominantly rural, the current key economic drivers present a great potential for the

improvement in the economic conditions of the general community of the FGTM.

The newly amalgamated Municipality is in the process of rationalising both strategies to form the Fetakgomo-

Greater Tubatse Local Economic Development Plan which will then direct the economic agenda of the

Municipality. The Plan is set to focus on key economic areas of development anchored on coordinating public

and private investment in flagship projects focusing on economic drivers related to infrastructural development,

small to medium enterprises; agricultural and agro processing; mining and beneficiation; tourism and destination

marketing; manufacturing and value addition; and the Green economy in the municipality.




26

The municipality together with other government sector are busy with projects in expanding the roads, ensuring

the there is water to run the mines, souring electrical energy to supply the mine and community etc. To this

effect, FT/GTM hosts a town, Burgersfort, a provincial growth point and Steelpoort, a district growth point. The

growth of these towns should stimulate investments that can accrue due to mine developments

Infrastructure and services

Water: The Municipality is neither a Water Services Authority nor a Water Service Provider. The FGTM is a

water stressed municipality. These functions were assigned to the Sekhukhune District Municipality (SDM). The

SDM is responsible for provision of Free Basic Water (FBW) to the 39 wards of the municipality. According to

community survey 2016 records that 58 255 households have access to piped water and 67 208 households

have no access to piped water.

Sanitation: The sanitation function is within the Sekhukhune District Municipality. According to the Sekhukhune

District’s Water Sector Development Plan (2004), FGTM has a huge backlog in sanitation provision. Generally,

sanitation facilities in some villages are in poor state hence the Sekhukhune District Municipality is currently

constructing VIP toilets in most villages of the municipality. Most industrial consumers are in the existing urban

centers (e.g. Burgersfort) and discharge their effluent into the municipal sewers for treatment at the Waste Water

Treatment Works.

Electricity: FGTM is not the electricity authority nor provider and this is the sole competency of ESKOM. The

municipality is only responsible for the coordination of the service by making sure that communities are consulted

and by compiling a priority list. The only provider of electricity in the region is ESKOM; which has installed basic

infrastructure to provide electricity to the communities.

Housing: Housing delivery is a competence of the Department of Co-operative Governance, Human Settlement

and Traditional Affairs (COGHSTA). The municipality’s primary role is limited to compiling housing waiting lists.

However, the municipality can make a careful assessment of delivery in the area thus far, and how this impacts

on socio-economic development generally.

According to South African Statistics in 2011 Fetakgomo and Greater Tubatse Municipalities as combined had

106 050 households, and in the 2016 community survey it is 125 454 within Fetakgomo Greater Tubatse. No

land within the municipal area belongs to the municipality, while some of the land portions belonging to the other

spheres of government are subject to land claim.

Health care: There are 26 medical facilities in the Fetakgomo Greater Tubatse Local Municipality, which mainly

constitute regional clinics that provide health services to the communities. The Dilokong Hospital is the biggest

hospital followed by Mecklenburg, HC Boshoff, Penge health centre and Nchabeleng Health cnetre. Nchabeleng

Health Centre has a potential to be converted into a hospital

Waste management: The Municipality is in a process of ensuring that the whole area of the municipality

receives waste services. Waste management services are currently rendered in a few areas of the municipality

by the municipality and by independent contractors in private properties. Waste is collected and deposited in

landfill sites. Bins and containers are provided in public areas for collection of waste. Waste collection is done

on Monday to Friday. In Burgersfort business and household waste is collected daily except on Sundays. The

municipality has 3 licensed landfiils: Bugersfort landfill, Malogeng landfill and Mataganeng.




27


The following short-term socio-economic impacts may be expected during the development phase of the

proposed project:

• Job creation: 70 jobs during the development phase of 5 months.

• Support of local job opportunities through support of local businesses in the procurement of materials,

equipment and services to be used in the development phase.

Long-term socio-economic impacts during the operational phase may relate to the following:

• Job creation: 15 permanent jobs and 50 seasonal jobs for 5 months of each year.

• Contribution to local economic development – the orchards will increase citrus production on the property,

which in turn is anticipated to contribute to the secondary agriculture-based industries in the area, such

as transport and the applicant’s packhouse situated nearby. Staff employed at the farm are also

anticipated to spend most of their disposable income locally, which in turn will also stimulate the local

economy.

Table 9.2: Potential social impacts

DEVELOPMENT PHASE


Significance

without

mitigation

Significance

with

mitigation

Supporting local businesses

through local procurement

of materials, equipment &

services

Positive Local Short

term

Low-

Medium

Highly

probable

Low Low-Medium

Direct and indirect job

creation

Positive Local Short

term

Medium Highly

probable

Low Low-Medium

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Direct and indirect job

creation

Positive Local Long

term

Low Highly

probable

Very low Low

Contribution to local

economy

Positive Local Long

term

Medium Highly

probable

Medium Medium

9.3. Visual Aspects

9.3.1. Status quo

The property has a visual appearance similar to surrounding areas where agricultural lands, areas with natural

vegetation, riparian vegetation along the river, and gravel farm roads.

The cultivation sites themselves appear degraded, not pristine, with sections being affected by bush

encroachment and others by erosion and grazing. These proposed locations are surrounded by existing




28

agricultural fields and natural areas with undisturbed vegetation. Two of the sites are situated right at the farm

boundary which is approximately 350m away from the R37 road, with high visibility.


Development-phase visual impacts can be expected in the form of vegetation clearance and soil preparation. In

light of the short duration of the construction period and the fact that the type of activities that are proposed are

similar to what occurs in the surrounding area, even though some of the development will be highly visible, the

visual impacts of the development phase are anticipated to have low significance.

Operational-phase visual impacts are similarly anticipated to be of low significance, due to the fact that the

proposed cultivation is in line with surrounding land use and the surrounding visual landscape.

Table 9.3: Potential visual impacts

DEVELOPMENT PHASE


Significance

without

mitigation

Significance

with

mitigation

Vegetation clearance

and soil preparation


term

Medium Definite Low Low

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Visual impact of

replacement of natural

vegetation with

agriculture

Negative Local Long

term

Medium Definite Low Low

9.4. Noise

9.4.1. Status quo

The site is situated in an area where ambient noise levels are low, with sounds mostly associated with the voices

of farm workers on surrounding farms, farm machinery and the sound of vehicles travelling on the nearby R37

road. There are no sensitive noise receptors (e.g. schools or places of worship) in close proximity to the site;

the site is surrounded by agricultural areas.


Development-phase impacts are anticipated to be mainly associated with machinery, e.g. bulldozers and

tractors involved in vegetation clearance and soil preparation. These impacts will be short-term in duration,

occurring only during the development phase, and will be very low in magnitude. The significance of the impacts

will be further reduced by the absence of sensitive local noise receptors and the fact that the type of noise will

be in line with the surrounding area, which is mostly used for agriculture.

Given the short-term nature of development-phase noise impacts and the distance of the site from noise-

sensitive receptors, noise impacts potentially associated with the development phase are anticipated to be of

very low significance.




29

Agricultural activities during the operational phase are also anticipated to have very low significance noise

impacts, with noise mostly associated with vehicles for instance transporting workers into orchards or spraying

pesticides, etc. Again, this will be congruent with the sounds of nearby agricultural activities in the area.

Table 9.4: Potential impacts in terms of noise

DEVELOPMENT PHASE


Noise associated with

vegetation clearance and

soil preparation


term

Very low Highly

probable

Very low

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Noise associated with

vehicles used in agricultural

activities, e.g tractors

Negative Local Long term Very low Highly

probable

Very low

9.5. Indirect and cumulative impacts

As is the case for any activity, impacts are not limited to those directly or even indirectly associated with the

proposed activity – potential cumulative impacts need to be considered as well, so that activities can be seen

not as stand-alone entities but as part of the larger picture.

The following tables highlight potential indirect and cumulative impacts of the proposed project:

Table 9.5: Potential indirect and cumulative impacts – BIOPHYSICAL ASPECTS

DEVELOPMENT PHASE


Habitat loss and

fragmentation, including

wetlands

Negative Local Long term Medium Definite Medium

Increased soil erosion and

possible associated

sedimentation of the wetland

Negative Local Long term Medium Highly

probable

Low-Medium

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Increased water abstraction,

with reduced water

availability downstream

Negative Local Long term Low Highly

probable

Low-medium

Risk of contamination of

water resources by

agricultural chemicals

Negative Local Long term Unknown Possible Medium

Table 9.6: Potential indirect and cumulative impacts – SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS

DEVELOPMENT PHASE

Potential impact Status Extent Duration Magnitude Likelihoo

d Significance

Job creation Positive Local Short

term

Medium Definite Low




30

Visual impacts Negative Local Long term Medium Definite Low

Noise Negative Local Short

term

Very low Highly

probable

Very low

OPERATIONAL PHASE

Job creation Positive Local- sub

regional

Long term Medium Definite Low-medium

Contribution to local

economy

Positive Local Long term Medium Definite Low-medium

10. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS

10.1. Advertisement of Commencement of EIA Process / I&AP registration period

The commencement of the EIA process / I&AP registration period was advertised for a period of 30 days (12

May to 11 June 2017) in the following ways (please refer to Appendix E for copies of newspaper advertisements,

photographs of site notices and the list of stakeholders who were directly notified):

• Publication of a notice (English and SePedi) in the local newspaper, the Steelburger, on 12 May 2017;

• Display of site notices (each containing both the English and the SePedi adverts) at and near the site;

• Direct notification of identified Interested and/or Affected Parties (I&APs) via fax, e-mail and/or post.

10.2. Public Meeting

A Public Meeting has been scheduled for 08 November 2017, to be held at the Motsepula packhouse near the

site. The purpose of the Public Meeting will be to afford stakeholders and members of the public the opportunity

to interface with the project team to obtain information about the proposed project and to have their comments,

queries and/or concerns addressed.

10.3. Issues Raised

The only comments raised thus far have been received from one local community member, who highlighted the

high likelihood of certain sensitive plant species occurring onsite, as their presence on a neighbouring property

has been confirmed. These comments will be addressed as part of the ecological study during the impact

assessment phase.

10.4. Availability of Consultative ESR for Review and Comment

This consultative ESR is currently available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days, from 31

October to 30 November 2017. Copies of the report are available at the Naranja Packers packhouse near the

site and Polygon’s offices in Tzaneen during this period. Electronic copies on CD are also available from Polygon

upon request and copies (whether in hard copy or on CD) have submitted directly to certain stakeholders for

their comment (notably DWS, SAHRA and FGTLM).




31

11. PLAN OF STUDY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

11.1. Approach to Undertaking the Impact Assessment Phase of the Project

The impact assessment phase of this project will comprise a more in-depth assessment of potential impacts, as

well as development of detailed impact mitigation measures. It will also include an extension of the public

participation process in order to make the findings of the entire EIA available to I&APs and to obtain their

comments.

11.2. Assessments to be conducted as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment phase

During the ESS phase of this project, the following aspects were assessed at a desktop level, complemented

by a site inspection by Polygon, to determine the status quo and to identify potential impacts of the proposed

development:


• Climate

• Topography, Soils, Agriculture and Geology

• Surface hydrology and wetlands

• Ecology


• Heritage

• Social aspects

• Visual aspects

• Noise

The following aspects have been identified as requiring further, more detailed specialist investigation; these will

be looked at in more detail during the impact assessment phase of this project:


• Ecological: An ecological study will be undertaken by an ecologist to investigate the current conditions

onsite in terms of vegetation and fauna, as well as potential impacts that may be wrought by the proposed

project. The following aspects will be assessed through a combination of desktop investigations and a field

investigation:

- Vegetation types and units, including an assessment of whether vegetation is pristine or degraded

- Gauging which faunal species are likely to occur onsite, based on the habitat found onsite

- Ecological sensitivity of the site, including compilation of a sensitivity map and recommendations in

terms of the suitability of parts of the site that are proposed for development;

- Possible presence of threatened or protected species (fauna or flora);

- Identification of potential ecological impacts that may be associated with the proposed project

- Recommendation of measures for prevention, mitigation or management of potential ecological

impacts

- Recommendation as to whether the project can be supported from an ecological perspective




32

• Wetland and riparian areas: A wetland and riparian delineation will be undertaken to determine the extent

of wetland and riparian conditions on the site and to assess the Present Ecological State (PES) and

Ecological Importance and Sensitivity (EIS). Potential impacts of the proposed projects on the wetland and

riparian areas will be identified and an assessment done of the potential significance of such impacts. The

investigation will combine a desktop study with fieldwork in which the focus will be on wetland indicators

such as terrain unit indicators (hydrogeomorphic classification), vegetation and soils. Riparian indicators

(specifically vegetation) will also be used to identify riparian areas along drainage lines.

The delineation method will follow the DWAF document “Updated manual for identification and delineation

of wetlands and riparian areas” (DWAF, 2008), and the Minimum Requirements for Biodiversity

Assessments (GDACE, 2009) as well as the Classification System for Wetlands and other Aquatic

Ecosystems in South Africa. User Manual: Inland Systems (Ollis et al, 2013). These guidelines describe

the use of indicators to determine the outer edge of the wetland and riparian areas such as soil and

vegetation forms as well as the terrain unit indicator.


• Heritage: A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) will be undertaken to investigate whether sites or objects

of heritage-related significance occur onsite or are likely to occur. Desktop investigations will be combined

with a site walkover to look for grave sites, archaeological or palaeontological material, or for signs of

disturbance where subterranean archaeological material is more likely to be found. Other aspects to be

considered, include whether the site holds any non-tangible cultural or religious value to local communities

or residents.

11.3. Assessment of impacts

Impacts that may be associated with the proposed project will be assessed according to the following

methodology:

• Status:

- Positive – the proposed project is to have a positive impact in terms of the particular parameter;

- Negative – the proposed project is to have a negative impact in terms of the particular parameter;

- Neutral – the proposed project is to have neither a positive nor a negative impact in terms of the

particular parameter.

• Extent:

- Local – the impact is to be felt on the site and in its immediate surroundings, up to a radius of 50km from

the site);

- Sub-regional – the impact is to be felt at a distance of up to 100km from the site;

- Regional – the impact is to be felt in the Limpopo Province;

- National – the impact is to be felt across provincial boundaries.

• Duration:

Refers to the period of time over which impacts can be expected to be experienced.

- Short term – 0 to 5 years;



Tel 015 307 3606 – Fax 015 307 3080 – loui

APPLICANT: INDIGO FRUIT FARMING – NARANJA DIVISION ... ESR...applicant: indigo fruit farming –...

Documents

Transcript of APPLICANT: INDIGO FRUIT FARMING – NARANJA DIVISION ... ESR...applicant: indigo fruit farming –...