appendix 4 - soils, land use an - nra€¦ · specialist report on the potential impact of the...

APPENDIX 4

SOILS, LAND USE AND AGRICULTURE

Specialist

Frank Merryweather Merryweather Environmental

Peer Reviewer

Dr Eben Verster Pedoplan International Consultants

SPECIALIST REPORT ON THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED N2 WILD COAST HIGHWAY ON SOILS, LAND USE

AND AGRICULTURE

Prepared by

F.R. Merryweather Merryweather Environmental

Box 68 Cintsa East

5275

Submitted to

CCA Environmental (Pty) Ltd

On behalf of

The South African National Roads Agency Limited

March 2008

Merryweather EnvironmentalBox 68 Cintsa East 5275; [email protected]; Tel (043) 7385 150; Fax 0865049302

Specialist study on the potential impact of the proposed N2 Wild Coast Toll Road Highway on Soils, Land use and Agriculture

FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental: PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; Tel: 043-7385150; Fax: 043-7385045 i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides a description and assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed N2 Wild Coast Proposed toll Highway on soils, land use and agriculture along the route for the proposed N2 Wild Coast Proposed toll Highway from Gonubie to Isipingo. Land tenure is an overriding factor controlling land use and agriculture so that, other than projects initiated by the State or quasi State organisations in Transkei (from Kei River to Mthamvuna River), there are no commercial agricultural projects of significant scale along that stretch of the proposed toll road route whereas along the other stretches of road almost all of the land is used for commercial agriculture.

Geomorphology controls the nature of the soil along the proposed toll road route more than most other soil-forming processes so that the Beaufort sediments south of Lusikisiki have given rise largely to poor arable soils and good soils are limited to remnants of older land surfaces (minor plateaux) and dolerite. On the Msikaba sandstones of the Pondoland coastal area the situation is similar with good soils on the slope crests and shallow soils on the dissected land. The KwaZulu-KZN section has a mixture of coastal sands which although sandy are deep, medium deep granite sandy soils and Msikaba sandstone soils.

The potential changes which Global Warming may bring to the climate could drastically alter the crop mix which can be grown. Staple crops such as maize could become unsuitable while other marginal crops such as sugarcane could become well adapted together with foreign staple crops such as cassava and yams. Such changes would require drastic changes to the way of life of the communities along the proposed toll road route, especially the subsistence farmers along the green fields section, if they are to survive.

Agriculture was once the only source of income to the Transkei communities and was practised on a far larger scale than it now is. Cattle were sold at monthly auctions at sale pens throughout the area. Maize was grown in contoured fields. Production credit and state supplied mechanisation services were available. Sheep were sheared and there was a wide network of marketing spread throughout the Transkei. Now it is common to see sheep with last year’s wool hanging on them and maize cultivation has shrunk to the homestead patch. Farmers say there is no market for produce.

Magwa Tea is being revived (but not paying for itself) and the sugarcane plantings near Bizana are subsidised by Illovo Sugar. Agriculture has a very tarnished image as far as the youth are concerned and is not seen as a commercial enterprise. They do not participate in agriculture. The government has started a few small communal schemes but these, like the extension services provided are a far cry from the situation two decades ago. The government is to re-introduce the organised schedule dipping of livestock and plans to educate farmers on production systems in a bid to revitalise the livestock industry.


FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental: PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; Tel: 043-7385150; Fax: 043-7385045 ii

The potential negative impacts which the proposed toll road would have on agriculture are small because the impacts are largely limited to the area of land which would be alienated and the areas involved are small. In the area south of the Kei River and north of the Mthamvuna River, the resources which would be lost are small and the impacts (other than the costs of proposed toll fees – which are not part of this assessment) are small. On the other hand the losses in Transkei are not insignificant. Losses include illegal grazing of the unfenced road verge along the existing road and the loss of (communal) use of the green fields section. The potential negative impacts to agriculture are however far outweighed by the potential positive impacts which improved access could have on agriculture.

The northern green fields section of the proposed toll road would open up markets for agricultural produce and allow the community to restart the production which they previously were engaged on. It would also allow expansion of existing activities such as timber growing (for commercial purposes in contrast to the current woodlots for own use). It would allow the development of sugar growing in the remote parts where sugar was not feasible before because of the lack of transport infrastructure. It might allow the development of new industries based on new agricultural development such as biofuel from sugarcane, sawmilling and board making from timber etc.

For such development potential to materialise would require more than just the proposed toll road. It would require some outside intervention to facilitate:

an improvement in the Agricultural Extension Services,changes in the land tenure system,systems of production credit sound regional and farm level land use planning

It is suggested that the SANRAL sociological team could facilitate this intervention.

The total area which the proposed toll road would alienate for construction of new features is 1364ha. Of this about 900 ha is for the two green fields road sections and the rest for widening of existing roads, proposed toll plazas and interchanges. The total road reserve would be about 4100ha. The green fields sections are largely on non-arable land suitable for grazing only. The total area of arable land with moderate or better potential which would be alienated is less than 150ha in extent.

A common thread which would be found throughout the report is that agriculture in the Transkei has been allowed to retrogress, that agriculture is regarded as a non-commercial activity. Transkei has gone from being self-sufficient in many commodities (maize, cabbage, milk, meat) to being a nett importer of those commodities. There is little to indicate that this process would not continue. On the other hand, this report indicates that there is a good chance that the construction of the proposed toll road would create opportunities which would stimulate agriculture, particularly in the green fields section that could help to reverse that process. In summation, the “No Go” option


FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental: PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; Tel: 043-7385150; Fax: 043-7385045 iii

would lead to a further decline in agriculture which could be stopped by developing the proposed toll road.

A draft report was made available to Professor Verster whose report is provided in Appendix 3. Comments in his peer review necessitated some additions to the specialist report. Soil Pattern/Land Type Maps from the Departments of Agriculture of KwaZulu-Natal and E. Cape Provinces are now attached to this report. The review report’s main exception to the specialist study report relates to the perceived variance between level of detail as described in the ToR and that presented and used in the specialist report which assumes that detailed soil maps will form a part of the design stage of the project (commissioned by the contractor who wins the tender to construct the road if it proceeds). This matter is now explained in the report.


FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental: PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; Tel: 043-7385150; Fax: 043-7385045 iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 BACKGROUND AND BRIEF............................................................................................................................. 11.2 STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................................................ 31.3 METHOD....................................................................................................................................................... 4

2 STUDY APPROACH......................................................................................................................................... 6

3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT......................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 CLIMATE AND CROP ADAPTABILITY ............................................................................................................. 73.1.1 Climate .................................................................................................................................................... 73.1.2 Crop adaptability and the climate........................................................................................................... 9

3.2 GEOLOGY AND LANDFORM......................................................................................................................... 103.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................................................................. 11

3.3.1 Soils on Beaufort sediments .................................................................................................................. 123.3.2 Soils on Ecca sediments ........................................................................................................................ 123.3.3 Soils on Dwyka tillite ............................................................................................................................ 133.3.4 Soils on Msikaba/Table mountain sandstone ........................................................................................ 133.3.5 Soils on Dolerite.................................................................................................................................... 133.3.6 Soils on Granite..................................................................................................................................... 133.3.7 Soils on Coastal sands .......................................................................................................................... 133.3.8 Soil patterns of the northern green fields section.................................................................................. 143.3.9 Soil chemistry ........................................................................................................................................ 153.3.10 Soil erodibility .................................................................................................................................. 163.3.11 Soil compaction................................................................................................................................. 163.3.12 Susceptibility to wind erosion/dust generation ................................................................................. 16

3.4 SOILS, LAND USE POTENTIAL AND CURRENT LAND USE.............................................................................. 163.4.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................... 163.4.2 Section 1 Gonubie Interchange to Ngobozi........................................................................................... 173.4.3 Section 2 Ngobozi to Mthatha (Ngqeleni) ............................................................................................. 183.4.4 Section 3 Mthatha (Ngqeleni) to Ndwalane .......................................................................................... 183.4.5 Section 4 Ndwalane to Ntafufu River .................................................................................................... 193.4.6 Section 5 Ntafufu River to Lusikisiki (Magwa intersection).................................................................. 203.4.7 Section 6 Lusikisiki (Magwa intersection) to Mthamvuna River........................................................... 213.4.8 Section 7 Mthamvuna river to Isipingo Interchange ............................................................................. 23

3.5 AGRICULTURE............................................................................................................................................ 243.5.1 Agricultural services and projects ........................................................................................................ 243.5.2 Commercial Crops ................................................................................................................................ 253.5.3 Livestock................................................................................................................................................ 293.5.4 Subsistence crops .................................................................................................................................. 30

3.6 TIMBER ...................................................................................................................................................... 313.6.1 Current timber....................................................................................................................................... 31


FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental: PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; Tel: 043-7385150; Fax: 043-7385045 v

3.6.2 Future timber ........................................................................................................................................ 313.7 MARKETS FOR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE ................................................................................................... 323.8 THE IMPACT THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS LIKELY TO HAVE ON AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION ..................... 333.9 THE IMPACT WHICH LAND TENURE HAS ON AGRICULTURE ......................................................................... 34

4 IDENTIFICATION OF RISK SOURCES..................................................................................................... 35

4.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 354.2 RISK SOURCES ............................................................................................................................................ 364.3 RELEVANT LEGISLATIVE AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................... 37

5 IMPACT DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................... 37

5.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 375.1.1 Impact 1 – loss of productive/potentially productive land .................................................................... 385.1.2 Impact 2 - loss of access........................................................................................................................ 395.1.3 Impact 3 - change in drainage patterns ................................................................................................ 405.1.4 Impact 4 - improved regional access .................................................................................................... 415.1.5 Impact 5 - noise impacts........................................................................................................................ 425.1.6 Impact 6 - loss of soil resources............................................................................................................ 425.1.7 Impact 7- loss of use of land within the existing road reserve .............................................................. 445.1.8 Impact 8 - improved extension services ................................................................................................ 455.1.9 Impact 10 - access to production credit ................................................................................................ 455.1.10 Impact 11- increased cost of transport resulting from proposed toll fee charges ............................ 46

5.2 IMPACTS ALONG THE PROPOSED TOLL ROAD ROUTE CORRIDOR.................................................................. 465.2.1 Section 1: Gonubie Interchange to Ngobozi ......................................................................................... 475.2.2 Section 2: Ngobozi to Mthatha (Ngqeleni)............................................................................................ 515.2.3 Section 3: Mthatha (Ngqeleni) to Ndwalane ......................................................................................... 625.2.4 Section 4: Ndwalane to Ntafufu River................................................................................................... 715.2.5 Section 5 Ntafufu River to Lusikisiki (Magwa Intersection).................................................................. 745.2.6 Section 6 Lusikisiki (Magwa intersection) to Mthamvuma River .......................................................... 765.2.7 Section 7 Mthamvuna River to Isipingo Interchange ............................................................................ 88

5.3 THE “DO NOTHING” ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................................................ 935.4 COLTO SPECIFICATIONS AND GENERIC MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................... 93

5.4.1 Camps, constructional plant and testing facilities ................................................................................ 935.4.2 Soil stockpiles........................................................................................................................................ 935.4.3 Disposal of material .............................................................................................................................. 945.4.4 Siting of spoil sites ................................................................................................................................ 94

6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................ 94

6.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................... 946.2 PLANNING .................................................................................................................................................. 956.3 MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................................................................. 966.4 MONITORING AND REVIEW OF MITIGATION MEASURES............................................................................... 96

7 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................. 97


FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental: PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; Tel: 043-7385150; Fax: 043-7385045 vi

8 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................................. 99


FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental: PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; Tel: 043-7385150; Fax: 043-7385045 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background and brief During the Scoping phase of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed N2 Wild Coast Proposed toll Highway a number of issues and concerns requiring further investigation were identified. These included the assessment of potential impacts of the proposed project and identified feasible alternatives on agriculture, soils and land use. FR Merryweather, trading as Merryweather Environmental (hereafter Merryweather Environmental) was commissioned to undertake a detailed investigation and assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed N2 Wild Coast Proposed toll Highway on soils, land use and agriculture. This information is to be used in the further planning and design of the proposed project and would be included in the Environmental Impact Report to be compiled as part of the EIA process.

The terms of reference for the study included both general and specific aspects. The general terms of reference include an assessment of the following impacts:

Loss of productive/potentially productive land;

Impacts in terms of changes in drainage patterns;

Loss of soil;

Impacts on existing and future commercial agricultural developments;

Impacts on subsistence farming activities;

Impacts in terms of loss (or changes) of access to land; and

Impacts in terms of likely improved regional access.

In order to do this a baseline statement is needed on the soils, climate and crop adaptability, land use and land tenure. Merryweather Environmental had prepared the statement on these matters for the first EIA undertaken by Bolwheki Environmental for The South African National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL). Some criticisms were made of the report during the EIA process, those listed in the Final Scoping Report are:

“Report is very general and too qualitative; description of agriculture fails to provide regional context of the proposed project (e.g. type, location, size, etc. of any commercial farming ventures in the region and how they might benefit from the proposed toll road); no assessment of the value of subsistence, or other agriculture, in the economy of the local area; no regional context of land use has been provided (e.g. industry, current and future mining and quarrying activities, etc.); land ownership and tenure issues should be considered; rural livelihoods and the use of natural veld products should be considered; mitigation measures broad and not practical.”



These are addressed in this specialist report where possible within the constraints of time and practicality. This is an impact assessment and not an Environmental Management Programme wherein would be guidelines for implementation.

In summary, the Scoping report provided the following terms of reference for the study: “The assessment of impacts should broadly be undertaken in accordance with the guidelines provided in the Guidelines Document: EIA Regulations (DEAT, 1998), the NEMA principles and Section 24(4) of NEMA (as amended), as appropriate to the specific field of study. In addition, the following General Terms of Reference would apply to each of the specialist studies:

Describe the baseline conditions that exist in the study area and identify any sensitive areas that would need special consideration;Ensure that all issues and concerns expressed in Chapter 7 and potential environmental impacts in Chapter 8 of the Scoping Report relevant to the specific specialist study are addressed and recommend the inclusion of any additional issues required in the Terms of Reference, based on professional expertise and experience. Also consider comments on the previous specialist study as per the review of the previous EIA process, appeals and RoD commissioned by the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (final report dated 29 October 2004), as appropriate; Provide a brief outline of the approach used in the study. Assumptions, sources of information and the difficulties with predictive models must also be clearly stated;Indicate the reliability of information used in the assessment, as well as any constraints/limitations applicable to the report (e.g. any areas of insufficient information or uncertainty); Identify the potential sources of risk to the affected environment during the construction and operational phases of the proposed project; Identify and list relevant legislative and permit requirements applicable to the potential impacts of the proposed project; Include an assessment of the “do nothing” alternative and identified feasible alternatives;Assess and evaluate potential direct and indirect impacts during both the construction and operational phase of the proposed project; Identify and assess any cumulative effects arising from the proposed project; Undertake field surveys, as appropriate to the requirements of the particular specialist study; Identify areas where impacts could combine or interact with impacts likely to be covered by other specialists, resulting in aggravated or enhanced impacts and assess potential effects; Apply the precautionary principle in the assessment of impacts, in particular where there is major uncertainty, low levels of confidence in predictions and poor data or information;



Determine the significance of assessed impacts according to a Convention for Assigning Significance Ratings to Impacts (see Section 9.4 and Table 9.1); Recommend practicable mitigation measures to minimise or eliminate potential negative impacts, enhance potential project benefits or to protect public and individual rights to compensation and indicate how these can be implemented in the final design, construction and operation of the proposed project; Provide a revised significance rating of assessed impacts after the implementation of mitigation measures; Identify ways to ensure that recommended mitigation measures would be implemented, as appropriate; and Recommend an appropriate monitoring and review programme in order to track the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures.

Describe the commercial agricultural activity in the study area. Include data - such as type, location, size, export routes, value, etc - on commercial farming (e.g. forestry products, sugar production, etc.). Assess the potential impact of the proposed project and identified feasible alternatives on regional commercial agriculture (in association with economic study); Describe the current situation regarding land ownership and tenure in the green fields sections of the proposed route (in association with planning/development study). Assess the potential impacts of the proposed project and identified feasible alternatives in terms of land ownership and tenure; Quantify the potential loss of grazing and productive land and assess the significance of the potential impact;

a) Identify and assess the potential impacts on land use and agriculture in terms of likely improved regional access; and b) Identify and assess the potential impacts of the proposed project and identified feasible alternatives on existing and future commercial agricultural developments.”

1.2 Study area

The study area covers both the provinces of the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-KZN (KZN) inasmuch as changes to the transport infrastructure can impact on agriculture. In terms of markets it could be defined as global since the international markets and prices for such products as tea, sugar, paper and fuel are international. In terms of the impact on soils and on local agriculture the study area could be limited to a few hundred metres or less on either side along the proposed route.

If the study area were to be limited to the area of impact it would be flexible since the potential for the production of agricultural commodities depends not only on natural phenomena such as soils, landscape and climate but also on factors which govern economics which include the presence or absence of good roads. The extent and magnitude of global warming, since it would improve the production potential of some



crops while it would limit the potential of others, would alter the area on which the proposed toll road can potentially impact. Again this could have global impacts as it would allow import substitution in some cases and open up new local markets for foreign produce of which local production is currently limited.

1.3 MethodThe study was done as a desk top study augmented by two reconnaissance trips/site visits. One trip was done with the whole multi-disciplinary team when SANRAL, who are well acquainted with the existing roads/tracks and how to get to the proposed road sites while the other was done accompanied by a retired extension officer, who worked all of his career in Transkei, to the main centres in the green fields portion of the route. During the reconnaissance trip GPS readings and photographs were taken at site stops. These were then put into Google Earth to accurately plot the positions. Contact prints of Infrared colour aerial photographs of the green fields section were studied with a mirror stereoscope. Together with these, photo-mosaics of the greenfield sections were also made use of to analyse current land use patterns and landform. 1:50 000 maps of the whole route provided information on landform.

The report of the earlier EIA (Bohlweki Environmental, 2003) was heavily made use of and expanded as deemed appropriate.

A copy of the draft report was made available to Professor E Verster of Pedoplan International Consultants for review. His comments are supplied in Appendix 3.

The question of scale of study in the case of soils studies is very often a thorny issue in studies of soils. Those with a background of soils will inevitably require that more detail be provided whereas those with no soils background will perceive that there is no need to go beyond a fairly rudimentary level. The question of budget allocation has to be considered and particularly looked at in the light of the importance of soil impacts in relation to impacts on other fields/parameters. In this project (and it is pointed out in later sections) much of the proposed toll road would be superimposed on an existing road with some new sections being done within the existing road reserve. From East London to the turn off from the R61 at Ndwalane near Port St Johns, the road would follow the existing N2 and R61. After the “greenfields” section between Ndwalane and the Ntafufu river, it would again follow the R61 to Lusikisiki. Between Magwa Tea and Port Edward is another greenfields stretch of road after which the proposed toll road would follow the existing N2 to Durban. These two sections of road comprise the only significant parts of the proposed road where road works would be superimposed on land which is not already occupied by roadway. A reconnaissance survey is sufficient to indicate that the proposed road section from Ndwalane to the Ntafufu River is largely occupied by stony soils on steep topography while that along the section between Magwa Tea and Port Edward by a mosaic of shallow and moderately deep soils on weathering rock. The Land Type maps supplied by Department of Agriculture confirm



this. These maps were not provided before the peer review took place but now accompany this report.

The question of level of detail provided could stem from differing interpretations of the ToR. To bring perspective to this, the quote (See Appendix 4) prepared the specialist reporting on soils, land use and agriculture is now provided in this report. The quote in Appendix 4 states that the level of detail required at this stage of the project is less than that required for design purposes or for compensation and the quote presumes that a more detailed study of soils would form a part of the design stage of the project. The Terms of Reference in 1.1 were prepared by the lead consultant while that in Appendix 4 were prepared by the specialist consultant.

Soil surveys are spatial as well as descriptive in character. Descriptions of soils may be in two forms viz map legends which describe map units in terms of the kinds and nature of the soils occurring within the mapped units and intrinsic (describing soil profiles) or taxonomic which describe pedons or taxonomic units such as soil series. The detail at which soils are mapped in soil surveys varies with the purpose of the soil survey. A soil survey undertaken for a purpose where soil use is to be intensive will be done in great detail. Here the spatial soil distribution may be investigated with observations 100m apart or closer. The mapped units will be mapped at such detail that maps at a scale of 1: 5000 or more detailed can depict soil units of 1hectare in extent or even less. A soil survey undertaken for a purpose where the detail of spatial distribution is less important may have soil observations done at quite wide intervals. The mapped units will be mapped at such detail that maps at a scale of 1:100 000 or less detailed can not depict soil units of less than 100 hectares (or even greater) in extent1.

For the purpose of an EIA on a road route, the alignment of which is already defined, detailed spatial knowledge of the soils is not important. Spatial knowledge of the soils is however important in comparing alternative routes where such comparisons are needed. The nature of the soils is more important in EIAs than spatial distribution because there may be soil characteristics that can impact on road building. Such soil qualities have been referred to in the peer review report (Appendix 3) and are the focus of this report. Spatial knowledge will be important during the design stage and during implementation/compensation stages. For this reason it has been proposed that detailed soil studies form a part of the brief to the contractor who wins the bid should the toll road construction take place (See both Appendices 3 and 4)2.

1 The parameters are provided for comparative purposes and are not text book parameters. 2 It should be borne in mind that should the Minister give permission for the toll road to be constructed, construction would be put through an (international) tender process. The contractor who wins the bid would prepare his own design and further environmental analysis would inevitably be required, particularly on peripheral works.



Detailed studies (maps) are a prerequisite to compensation. People in the proposed road route would have to move and soil studies are necessary to satisfy all concerned that the move does not prejudice the people moving. Such work can only be done during the design/implementation stage.

This is not the forum to debate the adequacy of regional soil maps/Land type maps for the purpose of detailed interpretation. The peer review correctly states that differences between soils should be pointed out so that either mitigating measures may be put in place or that alternative routes/methods sought. The spatial distribution of the soils, as shown on the Land Type maps, are however remarkably uniform along the route with Fa units occupying the major part of the “greenfields” route. It is highly unlikely that detailed soil maps would provide any convincing information suggesting that alternative routes be considered as a practical possibility.

2 STUDY APPROACH The approach to this study has been to seek answers to the questions:

What is currently the situation of agriculture and land use in the area?

What are the limitations and what is the potential for agriculture?

How can that potential be achieved?

What would the impact of a new proposed toll road be on soils, agriculture and

land- use?

How can the new road help the agricultural potential to be achieved?

How can such benefits be maximised?

How should adverse impacts be mitigated?

What would happen if the project does not go ahead?

Since, outside of the previous EIA, no information at the level of detail required, relating to the subject of current land use or agricultural production is available, it was necessary to undertake field work to obtain such information and to study aerial photographs. A four day trip was undertaken with the other specialists through the area by road and track including a short helicopter trip of the area between the Mthamvuna River and the Mthentu River. A further four-day trip, in the company of a retired extension officer who worked in the area under the SA government before Transkei independence and during Transkei’s independence was made. Visits were made to District Agricultural offices, Extension officers, projects and private farmers. Previous TRACOR employees were telephoned and E Mails were exchanged. Information was analysed and stitched together in logical format in order to provide a picture of what was and is and could be the situation of agriculture. This is presented as apolitically as



is possible but since it is necessary to spread the picture over two or three different political regimes, it may appear that some regimes are being criticised. This is not the intention.

The ToR distinguishes between commercial and subsistence farming. This is a distinction which has become clearer of recent years in Transkei as the fields away from the homestead are abandoned. In earlier years there was no such distinction because all land–based families produce (d) for own use and to sell surpluses. This is still so. The extension services say all rural people are farmers and, were there (a) markets for surpluses (b) facilities/services for producing outside the homestead garden and (c) credit facilities to fund larger production surpluses would be produced. It is therefore difficult to distinguish between commercial and subsistence farmers. Commercial farmers outside Transkei have security of tenure. Very few farmers in Transkei have security of tenure. The only farmers in Transkei who grow produce solely for sale are those with tea or sugarcane plantings but they are not the only farmers who sell produce. There is a local market in Transkei for livestock and for grain and vegetables. This is currently being fed also by imports from outside Transkei.

3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

3.1 Climate and crop adaptability

3.1.1 Climate Data have been drawn from published Weather Bureau records. Relevant climatic data variables are available for a number of stations along the route. The climate for the surrounding area can be described as sub-tropical, with warm summers and cooler winters. There is a gradual small increase in prevailing temperatures northwards/ eastwards and a decrease in rainfall westwards. For the purpose of this study, Port St Johns/Cape Hermes is taken as being representative of the whole length of road.

The mean annual temperature at Cape Hermes (Port St Johns) is 19.9 C (Table 1). The route which the proposed road would take is marginally cooler than Cape Hermes, due to it being largely more elevated and situated away from the coast. The temperature lapse rate is 0.35ºC per 100m change in elevation in summer and 0.60ºC per 100m elevation change in winter.

Table 1 Temperature ( C) statistics recorded at Cape Hermes (Port St Johns) 1961-1990

MeanAnnual

ExtremeMax

ExtremeMin

Mean Jan Max

Mean Jan Min

Mean Jul Max

Mean Jul Min

19.9 35.0 7.1 27.6 17.1 20.5 7.4



The yearly average rainfall is about 1000mm at the coast decreasing inland. The amount of winter rain also decreases inland. Annual rainfall increases in a north-easterly direction along the coast from just over 900mm at East London to 1032mm at Port St Johns and 1140mm at Port Shepstone and 1029mm at Durban. Only June can be said to be normally dry. Very heavy showers of rain have been recorded. Over 130mm of rain has been recorded in 24 hours on a number of occasions. Such heavy falls of rain can substantially increase the rate of erosion (the soils are however not as erodible as those on Beaufort sediments).

Table 2 Mean monthly and average annual rainfall (mm) recorded at Cape Hermes (1961-90).

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Yr

108 112 132 87 63 35 46 50 77 106 123 93 1032

Cape Hermes has a mean relative humidity at 14h00 of over 77% in the eight “wet” months and over 69 % in the four “dry” months. Inland and to the north, at places such as Holy Cross, humidity would be similar or lower than that recorded on the coast. In the coastal strip the heavy dews at night keep the vegetation significantly moist and allow forest in the margins of the coast and along gorges.

At East London the evaporation rate from a “Class A” evaporation pan is of the order of 1700mm annually with a minimum in May/June and a maximum in December/January. Daily evaporation rates can be drastically affected by hot berg winds coming from the north and north-west. Durban is comparable with an evaporation rate of 1626mm annually.

Wind direction and strength recorded at Cape Hermes show that strong winds predominate from the north-east and south-west (Table 3) oriented with the direction of coastline. Wind patterns should be similar all along the coast. Strong northerly or north-westerly winds may be experienced inland during the winter months. March and April are the calmest months along the coast when over 20% of the wind speeds recorded is 3.6km/hr or less.

Wind is not likely to influence rehabilitation significantly except in locations where the soils are very sandy.



Table 3 Average wind velocities and direction recorded at Cape Hermes (Port St Johns)3 over a 30 year period.

3.1.2 Crop adaptability and the climate

While the climate is currently subtropical, it is cool subtropical and the temperature regime is more suited to such crops as tea and coffee (Arabica) than to bananas and sugarcane simply because it is not warm enough. This is reflected in commercial farming where the KZN coastline is marginal for the production of both of these crops (Robinson, 1981) compared with the Lowveld of Mpumalanga or even the north coast of KZN. Rainfall is somewhat low for the production of perennial subtropical crops and they would benefit from irrigation. The temperature regime is well suited to maize production and the only limitation, on the soils of higher potential, is the need for lime and fertilizer. Avocado do well under the climate as do a wide variety of vegetables and herbs. There is also a wide range of fodder and tree/timber crops well suited to the temperature regime.

A table has been prepared showing the current crop adaptability and the possible future crop adaptability after global warming has taken full effect. This is debatable since there is no consensus on how much the earth would warm up, where it would be affected most and to what extent the rainfall patterns would be affected. If rainfall does not increase with warming then crop production would be seriously compromised. The table in the Appendix is based on temperature regime and assumes water is not a limiting factor.

This shows some dramatic changes in cropping that would be possible. Maize would no longer be adapted but rice would (rice is very demanding of water supply)... Cassava and pigeon pea would be well adapted under the warmer regime but few vegetables would be suited. Taro and yams would be well adapted but the garden pea

3 Data obtained directly form the Weather Bureau Pretoria.

Direction Wind speedm/s km/h

N 4.8 17.3NE 9.2 33.1E 3.9 14.0SE 4.8 17.3S 5.4 19.4SW 6.4 23.0W 3.4 12.2NW 4.8 17.3

02468

10N

NE

E

SE

S

SW

W

NW



and most herbs except pepper not. The production of sugarcane would be enhanced but it would become too hot for tea or Arabica coffee.

3.2 Geology and landform

The first four sections of the road are on Beaufort sediments. There are small areas of Beaufort sediments in the south of the southern “green fields” section near Port St Johns with larger areas of Dwyka tillite and sediments and Ecca sediments also in the south, otherwise the larger part of the proposed route between Port St Johns and Port Edward traverses land which is occupied by sandstones of what was previously known as the Cape supergoup (Table Mountain Group) now named Msikaba sandstone.

Commercial exploitation of mineral resources is currently limited to small scale mining of building sand, quarrying for material to produce crushed stone and borrowing for road metal/foundation material. An application to mine Recent dune sands for ilmenite and rutile in the Xolobeni area is currently under consideration by DME while another deposit at Wavecrest has been the subject of various studies in the past. A small scale mine was operated in Kei Mouth some decades ago.

The geology and landform of the route is as follows:

Sections 1 to 4 Gonubie to Ndwalane The geology is exclusively Beaufort sediments with dolerite intrusions and the landform rolling to undulating with deeply incised major rivers.

Section 4 Ndwalane to Ntafufu River Coming off the R61 to Port St Johns, the road cuts through a hilly area of Ecca and Dwyka sediments before crossing the Mzimvubu alluvial plain. Over the northern bank of the Mzimvubu the route goes over Dwyka with some Ecca until the Ntafufu River. Here the landscape is rolling with deeply incised valleys and long side slopes.

Section 5 Ntafufu to Lusikisiki (Magwa Intersection) .This section is over Beaufort sediments with dolerite intrusions

Section 6 Lusikisiki (Magwa intersection) to Mthamvuna River

The first section of the route from the turn off from the road to Msikaba mouth is over Dwyka at higher elevations and the landscape is undulating deeply incised by the Msikaba and other rivers. At the lower elevations is Msikaba sandstone.

From the Magwa intersection to the Msikaba River the route is largely on Msikaba sandstone and the landscape is undulating with deeply incised rivers. From Mthentu River to Mthamvuna River the proposed toll road route is on Msikaba sandstone and



the landscape is undulating with deeply incised rivers. A narrow strip of granite occurs on the north bank of the Mthamvuna River.

Section 7 Mthamvuna to Isipingo Interchange

The geology here is a mosaic of Msikaba sandstone, migmatite, gneiss and ultra metamorphosed rocks of Precambrian age and Dwyka tillite and sediments with, close to the coast towards Isipingo, some Recent dune sands. The rivers adjacent to the coast are deeply incised.

3.3 Geology and Soils

The soil patterns of the coastal belt of South Africa are directly related to geomorphological features and to climate. Since much of the area within the eastern coastal zone is situated on the monocline4, the landscape is a juvenile one and although colluviation is a general feature, transportation has seldom taken place over long distances or accumulated to significant depths nor is pre-weathering of widespread importance5. Alluvial deposition is not extensive even along the larger rivers which are generally deeply incised. The overall result is that soil character is closely related to underlying geological formations. The climatic effect tends to be masked because the higher rainfall areas to the east are occupied by geological formations which do not occur in the drier western parts. The most acid rocks also occur in the higher rainfall areas. Beaufort sediments which tend to be more base saturated than the Ecca sediments (or the Msikaba sandstones) occupy the drier western part of the study area but are lacking in the eastern section.

Soils on the various geological formations are discussed below. The terminology is in terms of the South African National Taxonomic System (Soil Classification Working Group, 1991). The only reliable information covering soil distribution on a National scale is in the Land Type maps prepared by the Institute for Soil Climate and Water (ISCW), a part of the Agricultural Research Council, formerly a State organisation under Department of Agriculture. Whereas this information was earlier available as printed maps and bulletins, the information gathered in later stages was not published and is only kept in electronic form. This is the case for the larger part of the proposed route. ISCW has privatised and now sells the information. It is at a scale of 1:250 000

4 The monocline is the feature/process whereby the inland section of KZN was forced upwards while the coastal section was simultaneously depressed. This process started in the middle of the Cretaceous when the Drakensburg was forced upwards by about 1200m. Towards the end of the Miocene the fourth cycle saw another upliftment of about 600metres while some 2million years ago, further upliftment increased the seaward tilt and produced the landscape which is currently eroding producing the spectacular river valleys and waterfalls. 5 The deep soils such as those on which Magwa Tea estates are sited are on a pre-weathered landscape not yet eroded by the cutting back of the rivers following emergence of the coastline.



which is not suitable for use at farm scale. For a detailed evaluation of the agricultural potential for compensation/relocation purposes6, it would be necessary to map the soils along the proposed route at a more detailed scale. Current land use and agricultural infrastructure (dips, shearing sheds, irrigation pipes etc) should be mapped concurrently with soils and veld condition/carrying capacity to be most cost-effective.

It would be necessary to also satisfy Department Mineral and Energy Affairs (DME) that the requirements of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, No 28 of 2002 with regard to borrow pit construction, operation and rehabilitation would be adhered to. In this respect an Environmental Management Programme report (EMP) would have to be submitted to DME. This would be required for both existing7 and new borrow pits. There are numerous borrow pits and some quarries along the existing N2 and R61. The position of many of these are shown on the 1:50 000 map series produced by the Surveyor General (particularly on the older editions).

3.3.1 Soils on Beaufort sediments

Beaufort sediments are largely argillaceous (clay rich) and generally produce soils with pedocutanic B horizons. In the E Cape they characteristically also produce bleached A horizons. In higher rainfall areas and on older landscapes red coloured neocutanic B horizons similar to those on Ecca sediments can form. The latter have a high agricultural potential but generally the soils on Beaufort sediments, particularly those on rolling and steeply sloping land are shallow and poor. Good agricultural soils within the area covered by Beaufort sediments are generally associated with dolerite outcrops, relict landscapes or with alluvium.

The soils on Beaufort sediments are characteristically erodible. The dense subsoil and often clear to abrupt transition between topsoil and subsoil lends towards excessive water accumulation in the surface following rains while the subsoil, especially in low lying positions in the landscape, can be sodic causing it to be highly erodible.

3.3.2 Soils on Ecca sediments

The Ecca sediments tend to be more mixed than the Beaufort sediments and less argillaceous. Lighter textured soils and deeper weathering is common on Ecca sediments. While pedocutanic B horizons are not uncommon, yellow-brown B horizons and lithocutanic B horizons are common. In the higher rainfall areas such as in Kwa Zulu – KZN (and the Flagstaff – Lusikisiki - Holy Cross – Bizana areas) good agricultural soils can be found on the less steep slopes on Ecca sediments.

6 SANRAL has already prepared an inventory of the infrastructure including agricultural along the route 7 Few existing pits have had EMPs prepared. DME can provide information on a pit on request.



3.3.3 Soils on Dwyka tillite

Dwyka tillite occurs in the higher rainfall, more elevated western area. On older landscapes (such as at Magwa Tea Estate) some remnants of deep weathering occur resulting in red apedal B horizons and in yellow-brown B horizons in soils with good agricultural potential. Soils with red neocutanic B horizons on Dwyka also have good agricultural potential. These soils occur on more gently sloping top slope positions on relic land surfaces. On steeper slopes however shallow soils with lithocutanic B horizons are common.

3.3.4 Soils on Msikaba/Table mountain sandstone

Generally this formation comprises arenaceous (coarse textured) rocks and the soils tend to be light textured. This leads invariably towards the formation of soils with E horizons which are typical of low fertility. Accompanied with this feature are hydromorphic conditions and the soils are often wet. Nevertheless on relict land surfaces8 where pre-weathering is prominent some deep, red apedal B horizons and yellow-brown B horizons do occur providing for good agricultural potential. Flat topography on Msikaba sandstone does not necessarily equate with deep soils however and some plateaux are occupied by shallow Mispah and Glenrosa form soils.

3.3.5 Soils on Dolerite

In higher rainfall areas and where the dolerite is pre-weathered, heavy textured red apedal B horizons occur providing a very good agricultural potential. On steeper ground the soils can be stony and shallow with red-structured B horizons or melanic A horizons. Doleritic soils generally have a high potential for both rainfed and irrigated crops and for forestry.

3.3.6 Soils on Granite

Granite generally produces coarse sandy soils however on biotite-rich granite on the pre-weathered African surface (mainly further inland) medium-textured soils have developed. Lithocutanic B horizons are common on the juvenile landscape of the coastal belt.

3.3.7 Soils on Coastal sands

The coastal sands occupy a very narrow band along the coast. For the main part these are on the first dunes and for conservation reasons should not be cultivated. (In terms

8 Such as the relatively flat area on which Magwa tea estate is sited



of the identification of detrimental activities under the National Environmental Management Act, 1998, they would probably never be cultivated again in South Africa). In places they do extend beyond the first dunes and here the medium-textured red soils have a high agricultural potential.

3.3.8 Soil patterns of the northern green fields section9

. The soils of South Africa have been mapped by Soils and Irrigation Institute/Institute for Soil Climate and Water (ISCW) as part of the government funded Land Type surveys. This information is no longer published but housed electronically at some government institutions. The information for E. Cape can be accessed in the form of Broad Soil Patterns from the Department of Agriculture and Land Affairs (Cradock office) and for Kwa Zulu Natal from the Natural Resources Section Dept Agriculture and Environment Affairs.

Two maps are provided showing the Broad Soil patterns of the E Cape section and of the Kwa Zulu Natal section of the proposed toll road.

Table 4 lists the broad soil patterns which ISCW have mapped in the northern green fields section of Pondoland. The type of soils encountered, where the units can be found, suitability for arable production and, conversely, the sensitivity to the building of a toll highway are given. The larger part of the northern green fields proposed toll road route is occupied by Map Unit Fa.

Table 4 Broad soil patterns of the northern Pondoland green fields area

MapSymbol

Description LocationSuitabilityfor arable

SensitivityToProposedtoll Rd.

Aa Red and yellow apedal soils with a humic horizon

On old land surfaces east of Lusikisiki

High High

Ab Red and yellow, apedal or weakly structured soils with low to medium base status

On inland old land surfaces

High High

Ac Red, apedal or weak structured soils with medium to high base status

On old land surfaces near Flagstaff

High High

Ad Yellow or red, excessively Inland of study area Low Low

9 Because this section of the proposed greenfields route has potential for agricultural development (the Ndwalane to Ntafufu section being mainly rocky) the soils there are given more attention than those elsewhere along the proposed route.



drained sandy soils with high base status - dunes are present

Db Prismacutanic horizons - not red (less than half red colour).

In the upper Msikaba River catchment around Manteku

Low Low

Fa Soils with a sandy texture, leached and with subsurface accumulation of organic matter, iron and aluminium oxides, either deep or on hard or weathering rock.

Widespread on Msikaba sandstones. The commonest soil pattern.

Low Low

Hb Regic sands Coastal dunes Mod Low Low Ia Alluvia Along major rivers High High Ib Rock areas with

miscellaneous soils(60 - 80 % Rock)

Steep river valleys Low Low

3.3.9 Soil chemistry

In terms of nutrients, the soils on Beaufort sediments and dolerite are the most fertile10

(although they may have a low potential because of their poor ability to supply water over a long period to plants). Soils on Ecca and Dwyka shales have intermediate fertility with those on Msikaba sandstones and those on pre-weathered rocks have a low fertility status. Soil fertility and potential are not necessarily covariant.

Four soil profiles, representative of the different kinds of soil along the green fields section of the proposed toll road route were sampled and analysed. Descriptions and analyses are provided in Appendix2. Soils are described according to the terms defined by Soil Classification Working Group (1991), Soil Survey Staff (1951 and 1975). The analyses confirm that the soils are very acid and dystrophic (low in bases). Aluminium would certainly be present in the soils at levels which would be toxic to plants sensitive to such conditions. Maize would respond to moderate levels of liming as well as nitrogenous, phosphatic and potassic fertilizers. There could also be a range of trace elements which are in short supply. Rehabilitation strategy should include liming of soils at a rate of 2 tons agricultural lime (there is an inverse Ca:Mg ratio and dolomitic lime is not suitable). Fertilisation at a rate of 500kg 2:3:2/ha should be applied. Care must be taken to strip topsoil and store it separately from the subsoil for use in rehabilitation. The subsoil of these soils generally has much higher aluminium content

10 “Soil fertility” does not necessarily relate to production potential. Fertility relates to chemistry whereas potential refers to the potential to support plants/crops at high production levels. Some of the soils in the area with the highest production potential are very infertile (due to low nutrient levels and consequent acidity). They owe their high potential to their good physical properties.



than the topsoil and would require heavier doses of lime to ameliorate the condition. The soils also have a low buffer capacity and too much lime can upset the balance of cations thereby causing trace element deficiencies.

3.3.10 Soil erodibility The soils on Beaufort sediments are characteristically erodible. The southern section of the existing road East London to Ntlaza (between Mthatha and Port St Johns) is occupied by such soils. Keeping them well covered with growing grass greatly reduces their erosion potential. Along the rest of the route the soils are not particularly erodible except where they are shallow onto hard rock.

3.3.11 Soil compaction The soils on Beaufort sediments are characteristically prone to surface compaction. The southern section of the existing road East London to Ntlaza (between Mthatha and Port St Johns) is occupied by such soils. Keeping them well covered with growing grass greatly reduces their erosion potential. Along the rest of the route the soils are not particularly prone to surface compaction.

3.3.12 Susceptibility to wind erosion/dust generation

The soils on Beaufort sediments have a high silt/fine sand content which makes them susceptible to dust generation if laid bare . The southern section of the existing road East London to Ntlaza (between Mthatha and Port St Johns) is occupied by such soils. Keeping them well covered with growing grass greatly reduces their dust generating potential. The Fa soil unit derived from Msikaba sandstone as well as those derived from Recent sands have a high sand content on the surface and are prone to wind erosion particularly when their organic matter content has been oxidised..

3.4 Soils, land use potential and Current land use

3.4.1 Introduction

Land use potential is governed by a combination of factors dominated by soil character, landform and climate. The climate along the proposed toll road route is subtropical with a moderate rainfall (about 1000mm along the coastal stretches and about 800mm inland). For the most part, geomorphology is the single most important soil-forming character which dominates the genesis of soils so that landform tends to be the most important factor which is indicative of land use potential. Thus while the soils are most important in defining land use potential, soil character tends to be covariant with landform and an analysis of slopes provides the best indication of potential in the absence of soil maps.



Most of the land along the northern “green fields” sections of the proposed toll road route11 is tribally/communally owned falling within the former Transkei. The only commercial activity of any significance which takes place is local and the larger part of the land comprises a mosaic of grazing land and loosely formed villages in which a small area of cultivation is associated with each homestead. Little of the cultivation is fenced or formally laid out but the hedgerows bear evidence that tribal “ownership” does hold.

Maize is the dominant crop if not the only crop grown. A few plantains, papaws, citrus and sugarcane are grown for home use by some people. There appears to be a greater participation in cultivation of crops in the green fields area than in the rest of communal Transkei where agriculture has lost its appeal as a way of life.

The 1:50 000 maps show large areas of the green fields section between Lusikisiki and the Mthamvuna river to have an average slope of 3-6% making it physically suitable for arable agriculture however this area is also largely occupied by Fa unit soils on the ISCW maps which are poorly suited to arable agriculture. Good opportunities for agriculture are limited to the Ia, Aa and Ad soils which also have gentle slopes.

For the larger part the potential for agriculture is limited by steep slopes and shallow soils to small patches. There are however small areas along the Mzimvubu River and larger upland areas north-east of the Msikaba River where there are larger areas of soils suitable for rain fed agriculture on a commercial scale.

Crop potential is of course also dependent on the type of crop envisaged. Some crops are less demanding than others and the two plantation crops which could have a significant role to play in the development of Pondoland, sugarcane and timber (Eucalyptus) are very tolerant of a wide range of soil conditions.

The land-use observed along the different sections of the proposed toll road route are given below:

3.4.2 Section 1 Gonubie Interchange to Ngobozi The proposed toll road (on the existing N2) would pass through undulating to rolling country with deeply incised river valleys few of which have a well developed alluvium. The geology is Beaufort sediments with some dolerite intrusions. Deep soils are limited to dolerite and to old land surfaces where remnants of deep weathering remain. In the vicinity of Franklin and Annexation the old land surface is well preserved and the climate is moist providing conditions for the accumulation of deeply weathered soils on which arable agriculture is practised. Otherwise, even on upper slopes the soils are shallow for the most part and agriculture is limited to dairy or beef cattle with limited

11 Which occupy the largest areas of land which would be alienated form agriculture.



arable agriculture. Although it is small scale, agriculture is commercial. The area is mostly frost free and cool subtropical. Pineapple farming used to be practised at the turn off to Kei Mouth/Haga-Haga. That land is now fallow following the collapse of the South African pineapple industry. On the steeper slopes the soils are very shallow with agricultural potential limited to grazing. In the major river valleys the soils are very shallow and rock outcrops are common. Much of this country, such as along the Kei River, is suited only to ranching or game farming. The vegetation is dominated by Acacia karroo short woodland and woodland with areas of grassland on the slope crests. The land south of the Kei River is mostly freehold farmland. In the Kei river valley is a large game farm but elsewhere the farms are mainly small (<200ha). The road is fenced and livestock are seldom encountered on the road.

3.4.3 Section 2 Ngobozi to Mthatha (Ngqeleni)

The proposed toll road (on the existing N2) would pass through undulating to rolling country with deeply incised river valleys few of which have a well developed alluvium. The geology is Beaufort sediments with rare dolerite intrusions. Deep soils are limited to dolerite and to old land surfaces where remnants of deep weathering remain. Woody plants such as Acacia karroo and thicket species are limited to the major river valleys such as the Kei and Mbashe and on steeper hillsides. Elsewhere the vegetation is comprised of sour grassland with occasional gum woodlots. The land is mostly state/tribal land in what was formerly Transkei and is largely used for communal grazing. There are small areas of better soils on the more gently undulating upper slopes such as around Qunu and there is some cultivation mainly of maize for subsistence. Much of the old abandoned cultivated fields are eroded. The tendency, of recent times, has been for the fields away from the homestead to be abandoned and for the people to concentrate their crop growing efforts on that piece of land around the homestead. The only commercial agriculture of note is one farmer producing cabbage between Butterworth and Dutywa.

This area is colder than the section from East London to Kei River and frost can be experienced in winter. In a number of places (like at Viedgiesville) the building restriction line was ignored during the latter part of the Transkei era and people have built homes and erected businesses close to the existing road. This would create some problems if the road is to be widened. The road is largely unfenced and livestock are a significant danger to traffic especially at night.

3.4.4 Section 3 Mthatha (Ngqeleni) to Ndwalane

The first half of the proposed toll road route is on Beaufort sediments with the second half on Ecca sediments with patches of Dwyka tillite and sediments. The landform becomes more steeply rolling as the coast is approached. Rainfall also increases towards the coast and temperatures increase. Where slopes permit, deep soils can be



found on Ecca and Dwyka sediments but along the road to Ndwalane, the degradational nature of the landscape has not allowed deep accumulation. Woody plants increase in significance from about Misty Mount towards Ndwalane. These are mainly in the valleys and on steeper slopes but in the coastal region thicket and forest patches are common even on hill crests. Grasses remain sour but not as sour as on the Mthatha-Butterworth plateau nor the ‘‘Ngongoni veld (the lowest successional stage of the Pondoland Coastal Sourveld). The land is almost exclusively State owned and communally grazed with limited areas of subsistence cultivation, mainly of maize for subsistence. Along the Mngazi River valley is a broad floor with colluvial and alluvial soils which are cultivated (and irrigated in places). Soils are cultivated elsewhere on fairly steep slopes in places. Soils are generally less erodible than on Beaufort sediments and there are consequently less erosion scars to be seen. Along the Mngazi River there is potential for irrigation development of subtropical fruits and of vegetable production. The road is largely unfenced and livestock are a significant danger to traffic especially at night.

3.4.5 Section 4 Ndwalane to Ntafufu River

3.4.5.1 From Ndwalane to Mzimvubu river

This proposed toll road route is mainly a green fields route although there are sections where it would be along (replace) existing gravel roads. The Kings Road area near Port St Johns has traditional subsistence cropping on very steep slopes. Most of the land that is not under thicket has been divided into little fields of a few hectares with hedgerows separating each field. Cromalaena odorata (Triffid weed/paraffin weed) is very common. Crops planted are mainly maize for subsistence purposes. People plough even in winter with ox-drawn ploughs. Some plantains and papayas are grown. There are lots of escaped guava shrubs in the bush.

There is not much erosion although the slopes that the people plant on are very steep. Soils are Mispah, Clovelly and Glenrosa with small patches of Hutton. The soils on the alluvial plain are very heavy non-calcareous Oakleaf form soils with a dark yellowish-brown sub-soil with about 35% clay. Alien plants include senna, castor oil, bugweed, inkberry, Ageratum, guava and Mauritius thorn.

On the Mzimvubu alluvial plain, farmers used to grow cabbage with some other vegetables, avocados, citrus, sugar cane and pecans in small commercial farms. There appears to be currently a problem with land ownership and the land is not cultivated. Further north the slopes become more steep and soils are again the shallow Glenrosa/Mispah/Clovelly type. Avocados are scattered in a mosaic with old cultivation and maize.



3.4.5.2 From the Mzimvubu River to the Ntafufu River

This is a green fields section of proposed road. The northern side of the Mzimvubu River has traditional agriculture with small fields and some mangoes on the river banks. There is only a very narrow strip of Dundee form soil; the soils away from the river are derived from the underlying geology. Traditional agriculture is practiced with small fields and some mangoes on the river banks.

In the central section there is much cultivation along the proposed road route on the steeper slopes away from the homestead areas (which are on the ridge crests). The hill slopes have been cut up for subsistence cultivation as shown by hedgerows of grass and small shrubs but a large part of it has not been cultivated for some time. The mid and lower slopes have almost 70% cultivated under maize. There is surprisingly little erosion considering the slopes which are under cultivation.

Along the Ntafufu River the proposed toll road would go through grassland until it crosses the river. Soils are Mispah, Glenrosa and Clovelly. Patches of dolerite have very thin Mayo form soils. Near the villages, subsistence cultivation of papaya, mealies and plantains is limited to areas around the homesteads. Vegetation includes Senna, Mauritius thorn, ‘Ngongoni veld, Erythrina caffra (Coral tree), Bugweed and other Solanum sp.

3.4.6 Section 5 Ntafufu River to Lusikisiki (Magwa intersection)

The Junior Secondary school north of the Ntafufu river would be directly affected by the proposed toll road as would two small fields. The High School has three fields which would be directly affected, these include about 5ha under irrigation where vegetables are produced.

After leaving the Ntafufu River the proposed toll road would follow the route of the existing R61 with large parts of it being straightened and widened. This section traverses Ecca and Dwyka sediments and the topography tends to be rolling to steeply rolling along the river valleys. Climate is cool subtropical and frost free with a moderately high rainfall. Where they have not been cleared, forest and thicket approach high up the hill slopes. Although the soils away from the alluvium in river valleys are shallow, where slope permits it, some cultivation of maize for subsistence purposes takes place. The land is almost exclusively State/tribally owned and communally grazed with scattered subsistence cultivation on less steep slopes. The area is covered with scattered peasant dwellings.



3.4.7 Section 6 Lusikisiki (Magwa intersection) to Mthamvuna River This proposed toll road section involves the longest greenfields section of the project and also includes a number of different alternative alignments. In the case of the alternative alignments of river crossings (three over the Msikaba River, two over the Mthentu River and three over the Mnyameni River, there is little difference between the soils (which are largely shallow and rocky), land use (which is rough grazing and wilderness) and agriculture for which the area show low potential. However there is some difference between the alternative proposed toll road routes between the Mthenthu and Mthamvuna Rivers with the Coastal Mzamba (inland) route having a slightly higher agricultural potential and having more land under cultivation than the SANRAL preferred route.

3.4.7.1 Magwa intersection to the Msikaba River

The first section of the proposed toll road route would follow the gravel road to Mateku. The northern green fields section commences at the Mateku turnoff. From Lusikisiki to the Y junction (split in the road to Magwa and that to Mawotsheni), the land is mostly residential. Here the proposed toll road would follow the existing road. From the Y junction to the last of the of the Magwa Tea plantings it is largely cultivated. Up to Mateku the proposed toll road route follows the existing road. From the outlier of Magwa Tea to the Msikaba River there is almost no cultivation along the proposed toll route.

On the deep soils on the plateau along which the road to Msikaba runs (south of the road) maize, citrus, plantains and guava are grown for subsistence while tea and maize are grown commercially. Escapes/volunteers12 include Mauritius thorn, Euphorbia sptogether with Aloe arborescens, Ficus sp, Crassula sp occur on the Msikaba sandstone outcrops. The grass is almost pure stands of the very sour Aristida junciformis (‘Ngongoni) with some Monocymbium sp. The area is cultivated near the turnoff from the Lusikisiki-Msikaba road on the Hutton form soils near the road on the top slopes on Dwyka while down the valley on to Msikaba sandstone the soils are poorer and these are not cultivated. Subsistence cultivation in this area is limited to the top old land surface remnants where the good Hutton form soils are.

On the slopes down to the Msikabe gorge, there are contours in places on the poor sandstone soils which show that this was cultivated a long time ago although it is now covered by dense Aristida junciformis / Sporobolus sp grassland. Currently the area which is proposed to be traversed by the road is used only for grazing. There is some subsistence cultivation along the Msikaba River but for the rest of it the Msikaba sandstone soils are not cultivated.

12 Self established alien plants



3.4.7.2 Msikaba River to the Mthentu River

For the most part the proposed toll road route is on non-cultivated land. On the north-eastern side of the Msikaba River the soils are Mispah form with sandstone outcrops. The vegetation is an almost pure stand of Aristida junciformis – ‘Ngongoni veld. There are a number of villages in this area. Each homestead has some subsistence cultivation around it. On the Mthentu section to the north on Msikaba sandstone the soils are shallow Oakleaf - dark brown sandy loams on mottled sandstone signs of seasonal soil wetness. There is scattered subsistence cultivation mainly associated with homesteads. There are no soil conservation works. Between the homestead areas is Aristida junciformis grassland (with lots of mole rats), scattered gum tree woodlots and gum trees associated with the homesteads.

In parts there is a fairly high proportion of informal scattered subsistence cultivation with hedgerows of Mauritius thorn. Soils here are a mixture of Cartref, Oakleaf and Glenrosa on sandstone. The grassland is mainly Aristida sp. In places there are scattered rock outcrops with Clovelly form soils. Clovelly form is probably the dominant soil which is cultivated around here. There is also a fair bit of Port Jackson willow. In some places Agave sp. is used as a hedge. Maize is the dominant crop (almost exclusive). Some use is made here of cow dung as a fertilizer.

North of the road to Mkambati on the grassland above the old Tracor maize scheme which is no longer cultivated there are deep Oakleaf which has a dark brown sandy loam B-horizon13 overlying thin yellowish-brown sandy loam onto a mottled yellowish-brown, yellowish-red sandy clay loam which merges into weathering sandstone at 1200mm. It is very close to an Avalon form. The agricultural potential for rain fed cropping here is amongst the best seen along the whole route. Topography is very gently undulating.

3.4.7.3 Mthentu River to Mthamvuna River

Shortly after crossing the Mthenthu river the proposed toll road route offers two alternatives. The Mzamba Coastal route follows a more westerly route while the SANRAL preferred route follows an easterly route. Mispah and shallow Oakleaf form soils on sandstone are dominant with some Clovelly and with Katspruit in the vleis. To the west there are areas of a very heavy weakly structured Hutton form soils with about 50% clay with a very dark A-horizon. Other soils include a wet Oakleaf /Tukulu form soil with quite good upper soil which is going to react very much like an Avalon. The production potential is quite good. Some areas have extensive rock outcrops while others do not have any rock outcrops. Veld is Aristida junciformis (‘Ngongoni veld).

13 For a description of the soil terminology used, the reader is referred to Soil Classification Working Group (1991) or Soil Survey Staff (1975).



There is scattered subsistence cultivation mainly associated with homesteads. There are no fences around cultivation and no hedgerows for the larger part. Maize is the dominant crop. This area includes patches which are more eroded than any of the other areas along the proposed toll road route. In some parts are scattered Eucalyptussaligna woodlots.

Coastal Mzamba route

There is scattered subsistence cultivation along most of the proposed route to the Mzamba River along Coastal Mzamba route. Cultivation is dominantly on the upper slopes because the soils in the lower slopes are wet in the upper catchments and shallow in the lower catchment. Along the Coastal Mzamba route vleis are fairly extensive in the upper catchments particularly of the Bizana and Kulumbe Rivers (tributary to the Mnyameni River.

SANRAL preferred route

Along the first section, before joining the road to Xolobeni and along the road to Xolobeni, the road follows a section of high potential ground and it is quite intensively cultivated. Turning off that road down to the Mnyameni river and after the crossing there is no cultivation most of the way to the Mzamba river.

3.4.8 Section 7 Mthamvuna river to Isipingo Interchange

The proposed toll road would follow the existing highway to Isipingo/Durban. The geology here is strongly faulted and consequently the route covers a mosaic of Precambrian granite, Table mountain sandstone, Ecca sediments, Dwyka sediments and Coastal sand. The landscape is undulating to rolling and the soils mainly shallow. The climate is subtropical and frost-free. Land along the road route is mainly privately owned and comprises a mosaic of small farms, peri-urban and urban areas. In general, the road divides residential and peri-urban land on the seaward side from agriculture on the land ward side. The commercial agricultural land is of varying widths. It generally occupies the less steeply rolling land with communal/tribally owned land further inland. Commercial farms produce a variety of commodities such as bananas, sugarcane and vegetables. Timber is also produced in places. Macadamia nuts are produced in places. The soils are however mainly not of the best and the climate is both dry and cooler than the optimum for bananas and sugarcane. Higher yields are attained under irrigation in the Mpumalanga Lowveld.



3.5 Agriculture

3.5.1 Agricultural services and projects Since independence the area of cultivated land in Transkei as well as the level of production of most agricultural commodities has decreased to the extent that Transkei now imports most of its food requirements. This can be attributed in part to the changed approach to the provision of goods and services to farmers and partly due to agriculture being labelled as an uneconomic or non-economic activity by the youth.

Using a “top down approach”, the previous regime, developed many successful large projects in Transkei. Many of these were subsidised in one way or another by government and when management (and the provision of subsidised inputs in many cases) were removed under our current government the schemes collapsed. Old projects such as the Bizana sugar and Magwa Tea, initiated by the parastatal TRACOR are being revived and are in production. Both projects still have land tenure problems and both are to an extent propped up by external funding but they are on their way out of being State funded/owned projects.

Road users would recall the maize silos at the junction of the Holy Cross road and R61 in earlier years – testimony to the amounts of grain that used to be produced in the area under earlier government assisted projects. The fields are now abandoned. The new approach of extension services is to provide services on demand from the farmers and not to intervene or force projects onto people. The Department of Agriculture assists farmers and groups of farmers to develop projects if they request them. Inevitably land tenure is the biggest obstacle to the development of commercial agriculture so that the number of individual farmers who are being assisted by Department of Agriculture remains small. Likewise both the number and size of the “group farms” – vegetable, poultry and maize - are small. For example under the Uvimba/Department of Agriculture’s “Massive food production” programme there are 5 maize projects in Lusikisiki district (80ha, 100ha, 250ha, 120ha and 150ha) and three in Flagstaff district (180ha, 120ha and 180ha). These Uvimba projects are subsidised (in the first year of production members are given free mechanisation, seed, weedicides and pesticides, in the 2nd year 25% of the production loan must be repaid, in the 3rd year 50% must be repaid, in the 4th year 75% must be repaid while in the 5th

year Uvimba repays the member all of the money they have contributed and they are left on their own to continue production). Government appoints mentors in each region (a consultant who gives advice to the project). Extension officers facilitate the process. Unfortunately the crops have failed because Uvimba has been slow in processing finance (government pays Uvimba money in advance and they distribute it to farmers/contractors) so that maize has been planted too late. Project members have therefore dropped out of the scheme and it is difficult to recruit new participants.

If its task were to reach all farmers and empower them with agricultural technology, the Extension services are hopelessly inadequately staffed. Although every inhabitant is a



potential farmer it is impossible for the officers to provide services to all people. In Bizana district for example there are 200 000 people with only 12 extension officers with each officer seeing to the requirements of two Wards. In Lusikisiki each officer looks after one ward but there are two Wards vacant. Officers are centrally located in each district. This does not make for efficient work since there is not sufficient transport and many of the officers do not have a driver’s licence. (Under the “old regime” officers lived within the communities which they served and horseback could replace a motorised vehicle). Under current state of thinking, there is not much demand for extension services (agriculture has a poor image – it is not a commercial activity) since there are few projects and the provided services are therefore adequate.

Along the proposed toll road in KZN, agriculture is largely commercial and services are commodity-linked or commercial. Sugar mills thus provide services to sugar farmers. Banana growers make use of consultants.

3.5.2 Commercial Crops

3.5.2.1 Sugarcane

Current sugarcane

During the previous period of Transkei Independence, about 4000ha of tribal land east of Bizana was alienated from the people for TRACOR to develop and transfer to individual farmers. About 3000ha were planted to cane and 1000ha to timber (Eucalyptus). On average 10ha of sugarcane were allocated to each farmer. The estate has now been transferred to North Pondoland Sugar Company. The land is now the subject of land claims (it seems the tribal authority disputes the claims of the people alienated by the former Transkei government whose claims are according to the Tribal authority supported by the Minister of Land Affairs). That portion of the estate along the R61 is subject to runaway fires/arson to the extent that some of it has been abandoned. The cane further away from the R61 is doing reasonably so that yields of about 60t/ha are obtained14. Extension is provided by an extension officer provided by the Illovo Mill with an office on site. Illovo also maintain the roads. Cane is sold to the Illovo mill which is 75km away. Transport to the mill cost R76/ton in 2006 with harvesting costs R43/ton. Weeding costs R200/ha, herbicides R150/ha and fertiliser R150/ha. Growers receive about R150 /ton cane delivered. This equates @ 60t/ha to R1300/ha nett or R13 000 per farm.15 The cane is old and should be replaced but there are no funds available to do so (it is >20yrs old whereas it should be replanted every 10 years if production level is to be maintained).

14 This may be the potential yield and not the average attained yield. Cane growth does not look like 60t/ha. 15 Not profitable enough to get the youth enthusiastic about farming.



Commercial sugarcane has been grown in the coastal zone in KZN for more than a century. The Sugar Research Station at Mount Edgecombe provides extension services to farmers in the province and on a wider scale to the industry throughout Africa and the Indian ocean islands. Sugarcane production has expanded both inland into cooler areas with the development of cold resistant varieties and northwards into Mpumalanga. Cane yields are dependant both on rainfall and temperature so that the hotter Mpumalanga production areas produce much higher yield than the KZN plantings. Yields in the North Coast of KZN are likewise higher than those on the South Coast.

Future sugarcane

Illovo Sugar Mill could take more cane but land tenure problems are stopping expansion of the estate. There is a current move to start a biofuel project in the area which would increase the demand for cane immensely. Depending on the price paid by a biofuel project, sugarcane could hold promise for small farmers along the proposed toll road route and its vicinity.

Figure1 shows the area which was identified by TRACOR as suitable for sugarcane. This indicates that the potential for production is there. The economics of production would probably not however provide sufficient incentive needed to attract the youth into agriculture.

3.5.2.2 Tea

Current tea

Magwa Tea on the road to Mbotyi has 1800ha under tea of which 100ha is under the control of 100 outgrowers. Magwa provides credit on requisites and makes no profit handling and processing outgrower’s tea,

Currently Magwa produces 2500 tons with the potential to produce 4000tons of quality tea (80 to 85% prime quality). This is processed at the estate which also ferments and markets the outgrowers’ tea. Dried tea is transported to Durban by road. The break-even yield is calculated at 3500tons annually. Current selling price is R12/kg. Labour is the single largest production cost (75% of cost) with 3500 people employed during the peak growing period. A shortage of labour results in tea going unharvested on the bush. Under the free trade market situation now operating in South Africa, Magwa and other South African Tea growers find it impossible to compete with imported tea (from Malawi for example).



Figure 1 TRACOR Map showing area suited to sugarcane in Pondoland (Source unknown)

1



Future tea

It takes 3 to 3.5 years for tea to come into production. Magwa Tea has about 500 ha which could go to tea. They would prefer to give this to outgrowers. However discussion with outgrowers indicates that they are leaving tea (and the company has to take it over) rather than wanting opportunities to expand. They believe that they should be paid R2.00 for their leaf whereas Magwa has paid R1-69 for many years. Magwa Tea says that the initial calculation of 1 ha per family was based on 1 person being able to work a hectare however in practice they have to employ labour which means that they have little left from their gross income of about R8000 annually. The youth have no interest in tea because it pays so poorly. Unless our government can provide support for growers, it does not seem likely that new growers would be attracted into production.

3.5.2.3 Maize

Current Maize

The area under maize production has dropped dramatically since 1994. This can be directly attributed largely to the changed attitude of government towards agriculture and, to a lesser extent to the loss of expertise in the Department of Agriculture. Vast areas of maize were cultivated by Department of Agriculture and TRACOR for “farmers” prior to 1994. Now there are very few such projects. In 3.5.1 reference is made to 7 small Uvimba projects in Lusikisiki and Flagstaff totalling 1180ha in extent. These are the only subsidised project in those two districts. No data can be found referring to other maize production. Many households in the rural areas have a patch of maize attached to the homestead in which maize is produced. Some maize production still takes place in the former maize fields but most districts have probably gone from being nett exporters to nett importers of maize. Abandoned fields bear testimony to the vast extent to which farmers have left the land.

The attitude of the youth towards agriculture is reflected in the reduced production of maize. They can hardly be blamed for holding such potential negative attitudes because too often the yield obtained without timeous planting and proper cultural practices does not justify the effort.

Surprisingly there are no large millers of grain in the area. Milling is done by a few small mills as well as by home based milling.

Future maize

The government has started funding parastatals in an effort to boost crop, and maize in particular, production. Thus far these efforts have not been successful. Perhaps only changing the land tenure system, facilitating the emergence of commercial farmers technically assisted by well educated extension officers and well stocked stores of the necessary requisites would solve the problem.



Without proper maize cultural techniques it is not possible to farm maize successfully. Most people do not have the expertise to prepare a cropping programme. Few people have the capital resources to fund crop production. For small farmers, production can only be done on a “project” basis where most of the activities are done on contract and on loan (funded to be collected on harvesting). Farming risks are high and it is only on sites where potential yields are high that it is worth taking the risk (cf. diminishing maize production in the “maize belt” of the Highveld).

A gap in the market for milling enterprises is seen. This could perhaps become the “missing link” in the production line providing the marketing needs of the producer of maize.

All this must however be viewed in the context of global warming. Elsewhere the future of maize has been called into doubt unless Genetically Modified (GM) strains that can withstand the high temperatures and virus streak which global warming is anticipated to bring.

3.5.3 Livestock

3.5.3.1 Current livestock There are currently about 300 000 head of cattle and 200 000 small and other stock in Lusikisiki, Flagstaff, Bizana, Port St Johns and Ngqeleni districts. Cattle which come onto the market are generally old with a low meat: bone ratio and almost no fat. Veterinary Services plans to educate livestock owners and get them into a system of selling cattle timeously in order to market a better quality animal and get better prices. Currently cattle are sold locally, used by the owners for lobola and slaughtered on special occasions. The sale pens which were operated by Stock Owners in earlier years have fallen into disrepair and would have to be reconstructed if public auctions are to be re-introduced. Buyers from East London and Port Shepstone pay low prices because of the high transport costs. Currently the younger generation do not regard agriculture (even livestock farming) as a commercial activity.

Cattle owners do dip their cattle and treat them for the various diseases. Although there is not a shortage of dips (for example there are about 100 dips in Quakeni) the existing dips might not be efficiently used because cattle owners do not like to dip their cattle in neighbouring wards or neighbouring headman’s areas etc.

3.5.3.2 Future livestock

After a period in which the provision of veterinary services by Department of Agriculture were purposely allowed to go into recess so that cattle owners could learn the importance thereof, they are due to start up the system of dip inspectors, this time with the cattle owners being participative in the scheme and learning from them how to care



for their stock16 (under the old system cattle owners regarded the dipping system as something forced onto them by the government and something to be escaped if possible).

The cattle from Pondoland are generally small framed and the animals which have traditionally been sold are old and rather thin. Such animals respond well to an improved pasturage with an increased bone: meat ratio but retain their low fat content and are tough by modern (Western) standards. Such animals are however sought after by the meat processing industry because their meat absorbs a lot of water during cooking and therefore increases profitability of processing. The meat processors however do not want animals with so little meat on them. It is therefore envisaged that the proposed toll road would generate increased export of livestock from Pondoland to East Griqualand (via R61) where cattle would be conditioned on pastures before being sold to the meat processing industry. A reversed flow of younger beef animals from East Griqualand into Pondoland would allow the transport costs to be reduced.

Veterinary Services would in the meantime educate farmers to sell livestock at a younger age taking advantage of the higher price that younger animals enjoy and getting a more rapid throughput thus putting livestock farming back into a commercial situation. They would also educate them on how to get more meat onto their cattle and how to increase the quality of their pasturage (moving it up a level from ‘Ngongoni veld to a Themeda – Tristachya – Diheteropogon sour grassland). Bad veld management and constant burning keeps it in the former successional stage at present.17

3.5.4 Subsistence crops

3.5.4.1 Current subsistence cropping In the Transkei context, it is not easy to draw the line between subsistence cropping and commercial cropping. Crop yields that are surplus to household requirements could be regarded as commercial (were there a market for them). The extent of commercial cropping has decreased considerably. This is partially the result of lost markets.

Maize is the staple food and therefore the dominant crop grown. Other crops include Madumbi (Colocasia esculentis), Sweet potato, beans, pumpkin, cabbage, plantain. In some cases kraal manure is used to fertilise the crop. Normally no other requisites are used. Seed may be bought or kept from the previous year’s crop. In the case of vegetative propagation it would be from own stock (a continuing source of plant virus infection).

16 Personal communication Dr Kasule, Veterinary Officer Dept Agriculture Lusikisiki 17 A “Catch 22” situation because in order to keep ‘‘Ngongoni palatable the grazer must keep burning it.



While galvanised iron and plastic tanks are increasingly being used for grain storage, many homesteads were seen (from the air) to be still using pits to store the harvest (increasing the risk of loss through rot and rodents).

3.5.4.2 Future subsistence cropping The movement towards forming co-operatives seems to be slowly but surely taking hold. Small communal gardens are developing which produce surpluses for marketing. Where produce is available for such purposes, entrepreneur hawkers are buying such and marketing it elsewhere. It is difficult to establish the extent of such trading but it is only natural that a trader would set up business between producer and consumer where the two exist.

As global warming exerts its influence, it would become increasingly impossible to grow maize (unless genetically modified heat and streak tolerant strains are developed) and farmers would be forced to rely on sorghum, madumbi, sweet potato, cassava and yams as staples. A new road (whether a toll road or other road) would help with the development of markets for surpluses of these which, other than sorghum, are marketed fresh. The availability of supply of agricultural goods and services which the proposed toll road would bring about to the currently disadvantaged people of northern Pondoland should improve their ability to cultivate better crops.

3.6 Timber

3.6.1 Current timber There are a large number of small gum woodlots along the proposed toll road route and in its vicinity, North Pondoland Sugar has about 1000ha allocated for timber production, Magwa Tea has 250ha under pine, wattle and gum. The state has gum, wattle and pine in the Mbotyi area. Eucalyptus poles from the Mbotyi area are sold as far away as the Western Cape for trellising of vines. The SAPPI pulp factory at Mkomazi is the nearest large market for gums. Even were the proposed toll road in place the distance to Mkomazi is likely to make transport too expensive to stimulate production. The pines at Mbotyi are used by sawmills (currently three) nearby which market sawn timber to local markets as far as Port Shepstone.

Artisanal production of creosote gum poles is taking place along the road to Mbotyi and in the Flagstaff area.

3.6.2 Future timber The potential for timber production along the proposed toll road route and in its vicinity (particularly in North Pondoland) is good and has been the subject of at least two studies (Loxton, Venn and Associates, 1990 and CES, August 2005 and September 2005). Land tenure and the cost of transport/lack of nearby markets were identified in both as the main drawbacks.



Despite the obvious development potential however and the huge stimulus which the proposed toll road should provide, it is hard to see the development of the Pondoland timber potential eventuating for a number of reasons:

The recent swell of sentiment against the proposed toll road, riding on the common base of the conservation of the “Pondoland Centre of Endemism” would no doubt also draw strength from that and the success that those against it had in stopping the development of a commercial timber project in southern Mocambique riding on the common cause of the “Maputoland Centre of Endemism”.Without strong political backing and with the full support of the local communities, it is not likely that a timber project of the size envisaged by CES and the various State and Municipal development initiatives would ensue. Timber development generally requires a large scale operational viewpoint which is at odds with the small scale view point of community-driven projects based on sugar, livestock or maize production. In practical terms it is not as easy to integrate small timber holdings with other land uses as it is with say maize, livestock or sugar.Livestock production is especially difficult to integrate with timber in ‘Ngongoni veld because of the “need to burn” to stimulate veld palatability and there would always be friction between the camps of timber men and (traditional) livestock owners. Fire is always the timber man’s greatest fear. In Pondoland, the source of fear would not only be from natural fires but accidental and purposeful fires in all months of the year. Only consolidated large blocks of timber could successfully provide the necessary management allowing sustainable timber development. With their history of fighting “betterment planning” as well as various Tracor schemes it would not be easy to get such schemes going.

Construction of the proposed toll road could provide a boost to existing local timber growers/woodlots in north Pondoland bringing a market to the doorstep for treated poles for ARMCO barriers and fencing poles. In the longer term the answer for them is probably to switch from gums to pine and sawmilling.

3.7 Markets for agricultural produce

The lack of markets for produce was frequently mentioned during the site visits to Pondoland. This is surprising since there are markets in South Africa for all of the produce grown in the area. In the context used, “markets” are not the roadside vegetable markets which Municipalities construct to facilitate local distribution of produce but wholesale markets which, in aggregate absorb produce at a scale of tons and hundreds or thousands of tons. It seems that producers of various agricultural commodities can not find local markets for their produce and therefore are discouraged from production.

In the days of pre-Transkei independence, the traders served as the point of sale or first point gathering ground of various agricultural commodities, wool, beans, maize,



skins et al. Their demise left a large gap which was partly filled by TRACOR but which is now vacant. With no market for surplus crops, the people plant a smaller surplus for sale locally only and subsistence agriculture has shrunk to the plot around the homestead or attached to the homestead.18

3.8 The impact that global warming is likely to have on agricultural production

Of all groups of people that which is most likely to be heavily impacted on by global warming are the farmers and probably more so the peasant or subsistence farmers. b They are least forewarned and they, unlike the commercial farmer must rely on their own production for their lives and they can not afford to eat imported goods. With these people their governments face a huge responsibility in not only predicting the results of global warming but also in being pre-emptive in guiding the peasant/subsistence farmers and their families in changing their very way of life. A rise in temperature without the inevitable change in evapo-transpiration would render many staple crops un-adapted implying a dire need for a change in cropping patterns if the peasants are to survive. With the inevitable concomitant increase in evapo-transpirative needs, the whole spectra of subsistence crops may change.

Maize, the staple crop of southern Africa would no longer be adapted to the climate of the hot coastal areas. Not only would it be too hot but the incidence of virus streak would be so great that unless genetic modification can come to its rescue, maize would probably cease to be grown outside of the Highveld. Because it would be imported from Europe and Asia it would still be available (at a price).

Staple foods from more tropical parts of Africa such as cassava, madumbi, sweet potato, pigeon pea, yams and banana would become well adapted, depending on the distribution of rain. In areas made more drought stricken, sorghum, finger manna, grains of paradise and millet provide for peoples of hot, dry Africa. It is going to require massive and rapid extension in both agriculture and home-economics to get the peasants to adopt new ways of life if the vicissitudes of global warming are to be met.

Eastern Cape has long been the “poor cousin” of agriculture. While soil resources are generally poor there are areas with good soils and even some potentially good irrigation areas but inevitably there is no crop on which a successful scheme can be launched. Where niche crops can be found (such as chicory or pineapple) they are not highly successful economically. It has been just too cool for such subtropical crops as banana, sugar cane. Even KZN (which used to be called the “Banana Province” can not produce the yield and quality bananas or sugar which are produced under irrigation

18 The pattern of agriculture has been a shift from large fields in designated arable areas to the small homestead plot. There are many reasons for this switch but it could be the diminished market which was the most important reason for this.



in the Mpumalanga Lowveld because it is currently too cool. With Global warming this is set to change and, provided water is not a problem, KZN and the E Cape coastal zone could become prime production areas for subtropical fruit and nut. Unfortunately, global warming would probably result in the collapse of the markets for tropical fruits and nuts with a rise in demand and price for temperate fruit and nuts. Wind damage in coastal areas would always be a problem, making it difficult to compete with the calmer equatorial climate of Kenya.

The table in Appendix 1 provides a comparison of current crop adaptabilities with expected future adaptability (excluding evapo-transpiration requirements). This could be used to identify possible “winner” crops for future economic production bearing in mind that large parts of the world would now also become suitable for the production of the same ‘winners”.

Some of the most successful “plantation” or “factory” crops – sugar cane, cashew nut, cotton and perhaps oil palm would become adapted. These lend themselves well to a production system based on a central co-operative with peasant “outgrowers” receiving extension services and production loans and requisites from the co-operative.

3.9 The impact which land tenure has on agriculture

Most land in Transkei is State/Tribally owned and communally used. Land south of the Kei River and north of the Mthamvuna River is privately owned. One only has to drive across either of those two rivers to see what impact land tenure has had on agriculture19. There is almost no agricultural development in Transkei. The agricultural projects which were developed prior to and during Transkei Independence collapsed after the emergence of the new Democratic South Africa for various reasons. It is only logical that a wise person does not invest in agricultural development without security of tenure20. Unless the youth see the wise (rich) people investing in agriculture they can only regard it as a fringe activity (‘non-economic”). Large parts of low elevation Pondoland are occupied by almost pure stands of Aristidajunciformis – ‘Ngongoni Veld. Ecologically this is not the same as the climax ‘Ngongoni Veld which replaces the forest at higher elevations -750 to 900m above sea level.

19 This statement frequently results in heated debate from those who would blame apartheid and quote examples of successful communal agriculture. They have no answer to the question, “Why then have the rich black people not developed viable farms in Transkei?” Because there are very rich black people in Transkei and there are places in Transkei with good natural resources suitable for agriculture. 20 Despite this it is heartening to see, here and there, the emergence of agricultural and timber entrepreneurship small scale sawmilling, pole treatment, small vegetable farms and so on in Transkei. If the land tenure nettle could be firmly grasped and solved by government and Tribal authority agriculture would take off.



Acocks (1975) says that this ‘Ngongoni Veld is the lowest successional stage in its Veld Type going to high forest and is potentially a highly productive veld with good management21. Under a communal grazing system it is near impossible to establish sound veld management systems. Overgrazing leads to the proliferation of Ajunciformis to the detriment of the rich grassland of the higher succession while constant burning, to keep it palatable, maintains it in that state. To bring it to the more productive higher succession, such veld requires fencing and non-selective, rapid rotational grazing with a strictly controlled stocking rate. This would be very difficult (impossible in practice) to obtain under a communal grazing regime. And who is to pay for and maintain the fencing and watering points under a communal grazing system?

4 IDENTIFICATION OF RISK SOURCES

4.1 Introduction

SANRAL has prepared a manual of guidelines for land acquisition describing the “various issues and pitfalls that need to be taken into account in the designing of roads and the sourcing of land for road reserves, material or other construction needs”. These as well as the preliminary design of the proposed roads show that in the process of designing a road as is proposed for the Proposed N2 toll road highway, due cognisance is given, as a matter of course, to the social and natural environment. SANRAL has also developed a social team who are involved in projects alleviating the hardship of poor communities. Because SANRAL’s business involves roads, the projects the social team are involved with tend to be “road oriented”. This could be because they need directing towards other avenues and perhaps this report would help identify agricultural projects with which they may become involved, not so much in mitigation of impacts but as a part of their (already adopted) social responsibility programme.

The proposed toll road highway can bring both benefits and adverse impacts to the agricultural and forestry industry. Some of the impacts like use/sterilisation of resources, restriction of access and the impact of noise are common to other fields while other impacts such as increased theft of produce are more limited to agriculture. In general a new road/increasing the width of a road would have a greater impact on intensive agriculture than on extensive agriculture. Land values are also higher on intensively used agricultural land. Although the intensity of agriculture generally depends on land-use potential, some intensive agricultural activities such as battery poultry and greenhouse/tunnel horticulture are less dependant on land-use potential since they artificially control the environment. Access can be an important factor in determining the site of such enterprises. proposed toll road highway may thus open up new opportunities for intensive agriculture.

21 Acocks (1975) says the Short sour grassveld is potentially one of the most productive in South Africa.



4.2 Risk sources

A number of impacts to agriculture, soils and land use could occur from the activities arising from road construction and operation. These impacts apply to a greater extent to the green fields sections of the proposed toll road route but are not insignificant to that section of the proposed toll road route which follows the existing roads (N2 and R61). This is because the risk sources are more widespread in the greenfields sections of road. Some of the risks would operate away from the site/area where the road reserve is to be enlarged, others would only operate to the footprint of the activity.

The most important risk sources are: The alienation of landConstruction vehicles travelling on the alienated and other land Construction of a fenced off road The travelling of vehicles on the constructed road (post construction)

The potential impacts which can arise from these sources during construction are identified as:

the loss of productive or potentially productive land the loss of access by people, machinery and livestock to land on the other side of the road the change in surface as well as subsurface drainage patterns noise impacts on livestock direct loss or change of character of soil resources loss of the use of land within the road reserve (where this is already owned by SANRAL but (illegally) used by the community loss of use of land along temporary access roads

The physical impacts of construction would not be limited to the footprint of the road and associated features but would have wider impacts as in the three impacts above. Damage to land, loss of the use of fields, loss of crops and grazing would also occur along access routes from feeder roads to the actual work site.

The operation of a toll road along the proposed toll road route(s) would also pose the following risks/benefits in addition to those listed above:

improved access to local, regional and international markets improved extension services improved access to production credit increased cost of transport resulting from proposed toll fee charges increased theft increased fire risk



4.3 Relevant legislative and permit requirements In terms of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, No 28 of 2002, operation of any mining activity (including existing borrow pits and quarries) requires that an Environmental Management Programme (EMP)for it be approved by Department of Minerals and Energy (DME). The EMP describes how the pit is to be managed and is legally binding on the contractor using the pit.

In terms of the List of Activities identified by Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism under the National Environmental Management Act, No 107 of 1998 (NEMA) conversion of agricultural land, destruction of indigenous vegetation require authorisation.

The crossing of streams and rivers requires authorisation from Department of Water Affairs and Forestry under the National Water Act (Act 36 of 1998).

The Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act (Act No. 43 of 1983) (CARA) covers the control of alien plants and the conservation of natural agricultural resources. Although some of the regulations could be used against any person/activity22, the Act is primarily aimed at governing farming practices. Department of Agriculture is usually asked to comment under NEMA as an interested authority rather than as a permitting authority under CARA.

5 IMPACT DESCRIPTION AND ASSESSMENT

5.1 Introduction

Modern road-building assumes a BATNEEC23 approach and in this Impact assessment, it has been assumed that the road would be built (and maintained) to SANRAL standards which are to BATNEEC standards. It is assumed for example therefore that water would be drained away from the road and not be allowed to dam up against it, that embankments and areas of bare soil would be grassed/vegetated to control erosion and so on. Mitigation measures proposed are measures which have been identified which could mitigate impacts which still remain or which are outside the “normal” impacts which BATNEEC/SANRAL standards caters for. The specifications used by SANRAL are the standard COLTO (Committee of Land Transport Officials) specifications24 in “COLTO Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Works for State Authorities”.

22 Such as destruction of soil or causing soil erosion 23 Best Available Technology Not Entailing Excessive Cost = BATNEEC is a term probably first used in rehabilitation technology in the mining industry meaning just what it says. 24 Available from South African Institution for Civil Engineers (the Green book) for R200.00 – see http://www.saice.org.za



In order to provide a perspective from the soils, land use and agriculture point of view, a discussion is provided below firstly (Section 5.1) of the identified potential impacts that the proposed toll road poses to agriculture. This is followed (Section 5.2) by an analysis of actual impacts of actual proposed works.

Generic impacts such as dust generation, soil compaction by heavy machinery, increased erosion potential, as noted by the peer review are not dealt with here. This is because the COLTO specifications already mitigate such impacts and therefore the specialist study was specifically told by the lead consultant not to include them. Such impacts will be dealt with in the stand alone EMP which will include both generic and specific actions.

5.1.1 Impact 1 – loss of productive/potentially productive land

In the terrain through which the road passes, most of the good25, potentially productive soil occurs is on the top slope positions in the landscape (on the divide/watershed between two drainage systems) and on relict land-surfaces. This is also the most suitable/cost effective position to place a road and to build houses.

The economic significance of the loss of a few hectares of productive land is greater on small, intensively farmed properties than on larger extensively properties and could make the remainder (after excision of a portion for the road) non-economic. The economic significance of the loss of land on the Mthamvuna-Isipingo stretch could be considered greater than elsewhere because of the intensive nature of smaller farms there. Because they work small tracts of land26, the loss of land in the former Transkei could mean the loss of a family’s livelihood so the socio-economic loss there could be the greatest27.

Land which is not suitable for arable agriculture is often nevertheless suitable for grazing. The carrying capacity of the range along most of the proposed toll road route is lower than it could be because of overstocking and poor/lack of veld management28.Loss of a portion of the range of a farm/portion of communal land would mean more

25 Moderate and better potential 26 A family can use an area of 1ha and smaller for subsistence purposes 27 It could be argued that since land title is not with the occupier and since they can be allocated land elsewhere in the communally owned land, the loss to the individual is theoretical (not a real one). The loss, according to this argument is a communal one, diminished by the large community ownership. 28 As discussed elsewhere the communal tenure of land does not lend itself to the following of a veld management system



pressure is put on the remainder unless stock numbers are reduced proportionally. Reduction in stock numbers may drastically affect farm/stockowner’s economics29.

Incorporated into SANRAL land acquisition policy is a process whereby where the road passes through small farms, the option of purchasing the whole farm and not just a portion are available to the land-owner. After subdivision, the remaining farm portions not used by the road could be sold to the relevant neighbouring farmers to be consolidated with their land30. If the road goes ahead, SANRAL would negotiate compensation with the affected people according to standards laid down by Department of Agriculture and SANRAL’s own policy31. Where people must be moved this would be in consultation with the authorities and lost infrastructure would be replaced32.

5.1.2 Impact 2 - loss of access Loss of access would be a serious problem to some farmers both with respect of current operations and future planned operations. Some farmers (commercial and subsistence) and their livestock would have their access to portions of the land or to water which they utilise cut off from their other operations. The proposed toll road would effectively sterilise portions of the land to which they previously had access. In the case of privately owned farms, particularly small farms, the loss of access to a portion of the farm could render the remainder uneconomic33. A road can cross various infrastructural features such as waterways, drains, irrigation pipes (particularly gravity fed systems can be adversely affected), domestic and livestock water pipes etc requiring diversion or incorporation into the road design. With communal land the provision of access culverts/subways at suitable intervals would be possible but in farmland the number of culverts necessary to accommodate all situations would be too many, particularly where farms are small. Compromise may be necessary. The proposed toll road design incorporates different kinds of overpasses and underpasses (subways) as well as local roads parallel with the proposed toll road and feeder roads

29 Agricultural economics is not the same as ordinary economics because of the many linkages involved. It would be essential to employ an agricultural economist, especially one versed in compensation economics, on the team to determine compensation. 30 This procedure is a part of SANRAL policy towards land acquisition 31 As described in “Land Acquisition Guidelines for Consulting Engineers” prepared by SANRAL for the Workshop of 19-20 July 2007. 32 Again, by negotiation, people would not be paid money for lost infrastructure but either a contractor employed to rebuild it on the new site. Perhaps the farmer can be contracted to rebuild his own infrastructure. 33 In agricultural economics size is often of tantamount importance. For example a specific sized tractor can be used more economically on a specific sized farm. Larger tractors provide better/more economical performance etc.



to access routes. These have been planned in the light of current land use and access across the path. The position of such passes has been and would be further discussed with the affected farmers during current and future workshops held by SANRAL.

It is possible to mitigate most access problems but in the interest of cost some compromise would be necessary and consultation with the community is essential to establish what the best compromise would be in each instance.

5.1.3 Impact 3 - change in drainage patterns Some soils drain laterally through the soil body. This is prevalent on gentle slopes and light textured soils such as occur on Msikaba/Table Mountain sandstone. The proposed toll road would cut off this lateral drainage in places making the soils on the up-slope side of the road wetter than they were and those on the down-slope side drier than they were. Depending on the nature of the soils prior to road construction there may be some improvement on either side or there may be loss of productivity on both sides. The loss can be serious but generally unpredictable.

Soil conservation works (contour banks) are designed with a low gradient to remove runoff water at a controlled rate so as to prevent soil erosion. A road may interfere with this surface drainage system cutting off drainage or putting more water into the system at various points than it was designed for. Soil conservation works may have to be redesigned and constructed following bisection by the road.

The proposed toll road would concentrate runoff water towards particular culverts. This could lead to an increased erosion hazard below the culvert where runoff water flows under the road. The soils on the down-slope side of drainage culverts would be made wetter by the discharge waters. This could make them waterlogged and unproductive.

The proposed toll road could decrease the catchment area of a farm dam (or a proposed farm dam) by changing the configuration of the surface water runoff. It could increase the catchment (and perhaps endanger the dam) or decrease it (and decrease its yield).

Some positive impacts could be gained by the construction, at suitable points, of stock watering dams, fed by the concentrated runoff water in commonage and in stock farming land thereby benefiting farmers and communities along the proposed toll road route.

It would not be possible to mitigate soil moisture changes in the case of the drying out of moist soils by cutting off lateral drainage but where wet soils result from the road damming lateral drainage or culverts spilling water over land, artificial drainage can be installed (perforated pipes to drain wet spots). It is not possible to predict where wet



spots would appear. The implementing agent should allow for drainage of wet spots after construction.

Where it is necessary to redesign conservation works, this should be done by the implementing agent in consultation with the farmer/community.

5.1.4 Impact 4 - improved regional access

While a proposed toll road would result in cutting off local access and many local roads and footpaths34 may become blocked by it35, access on a broader scale would be improved and this would aid agriculture and forestry (particularly in the northern Greenfields section) tremendously by increasing access to requisites and by rendering accessible regional and national markets which were not readily accessible before. Because the distance travelled would decrease and the road quality improve, the cost of road transport from most of Pondoland to the port cities of Durban and East London would be reduced.

The lack of good all weather roads has been one of the biggest limitations to the development of the agricultural potential of northern Pondoland. This has been a particular drawback in considerations of high bulk products such as timber and sugarcane. The development of the proposed toll road highway would effectively open up Pondoland to timber and sugar production. It would however also open it up to production of a wide variety of other commodities which could previously not be seriously considered not only because of the difficulty of transporting produce out of the area but also because it was near impossible to get bulk supplies of such requisites as fertilizer, fuel seed and pesticides into the remoter parts.

The potential impact is a positive one and SANRAL could maximise the positive impact of the proposed toll road (and also benefit themselves by thereby increasing the use of the road) through facilitating the development of markets and producers co-operatives for such commodities as sugarcane, timber, maize and livestock. It is suggested that SANRAL could make it the task of their socio-economic team to facilitate discussion between leaders in commerce, agricultural officers and leaders of the community towards reopening discussion and planning towards developing sugar and timber industries in Pondoland. (These have stalled earlier largely on the issue of transport).

This potential positive impact would mainly affect the green fields section of the road between Lusikisiki (Magwa Interchange) and the Mthamvuna River.

34 Footpaths can be linked for many tens of kilometers. With time as communities expand, footpaths graduate to tracks and to gravel access roads. 35 The design of the local access/feeder roads, underpasses and overpasses incorporates those footpaths and tracks as could be identified on the aerial photographs.



Improved access could have a downside. Theft of agricultural produce, livestock and equipment would probably increase, particularly in the vicinity of larger towns. On the other hand the combating of crime would be aided so such an impact could be a temporary one. During dry hot summers, the proposed toll road could also allow arsonists to start fires on a wide front. Again the proposed toll road would be of great assistance to fire-fighters.

5.1.5 Impact 5 - noise impacts

Sudden loud, sharp noises can adversely affect livestock, particularly poultry in confined quarters such as batteries. Hens may be frightened off the lay while broilers may panic and crowd into corners resulting in wholesale deaths from suffocation. Roadconstruction would require blasting in places. A band along the proposed toll road would be affected. Land further away would be unaffected. The width of such a band would depend on vegetative cover and landscape features. The landscape is relatively flat so large truck exhaust brakes would probably not be a problem in the northern green fields section36.

If farmers are warned before blasting is to occur they would be able to save poultry in communal broiler houses from suffocation by corralling them into smaller groups. Loss of production is however inevitable and compensation the only option. Mitigation should aim at minimising losses. Future poultry houses should not be built within 500m of the proposed toll road especially where there are steep down-hills where the possibility of vehicle backfiring increases.

5.1.6 Impact 6 - loss of soil resources

In addition to the impact which road construction has on the soil landscape in terms of loss of land use/productivity (Issue 1: Loss of productive land), the activity could result in the loss of or damage to the soil body per se. Soil which is in the path of the road/footprint of new developments would be stripped and may be used in rehabilitation of other sections of the road such as on exposed banks, drains etc or it may be used to cover spoil heaps etc. After stripping, if it cannot be used immediately it would be stored in stockpiles for future use. Depending on the configuration of the soil heaps and where it is placed, the character of the soil is likely to change.

Where the road is to be widened within the road reserve, soil which was not in productive use but which was still in a form which was potentially productive would be

36 But one day the improbable may happen and they may suffer losses from a loud noise emanating from the road. Unless they know what sound can do to poultry, they may never know what killed their fowl. That is what empowerment during the social study must do - inform the community of potential problems and how to mitigate/avoid them.



stripped from the site to make way for roadworks. Although the existing road reserve has been fenced off in parts, the soil has not been impacted on everywhere. There remains soil on the verges and between the current road and the fence. In places this would now be stripped in the proposed project to make way for road expansion. This soil resource would be lost/altered to the extent that it is no longer classifiable as a natural soil37 but rather as a man-made soil deposit38 (Witbank soil Form). The loss would be diminished by putting the excavated soil to good use in covering exposures, spoil areas etc or in stockpiling it and grassing it for future use in rehabilitation work.

Soil would be stripped from areas which are to be used for road works, spoil areas, borrow pits etc for later use in rehabilitation. Topsoil39 should be stockpiled separately from subsoil. Stockpiles should not be higher than 2m to avoid compaction. Stockpiled soil should be seeded to maintain biological activity and to keep alien invader species from establishing on it and seeding it. Care must be taken not to allow heavy traffic over the soil. The soil should be fertilized at a rate of 400kg 2:3:2(22) per ha before seeding with a mixture of commercially obtainable grass seed as shown in Table 5 below40. No irrigation would be needed. There is sufficient winter rain in average years to keep late-planted seedlings alive.

None of these grasses (most of which are indigenous) poses any threat of proliferation in the area and they would probably gradually be replaced by Cynodon dactylon(Couch/kweek grass).

Table 5 Grass species and amount of seed (kg/ha) to apply to rehabilitated structures

Grass species Seeding rate (kg/ha) (or gm/m2 x 10)

Digitaria eriantha 3

Chloris gayana 3

Eragrostis tef 1.0

37 In terms of the National Soil classification system (Soil Classification Working Group, 1991) 38 In the same way as an oak tree is transformed from an oak tree to oak wood by the felling and sawing process, a bag or heap of soil is still soil but cannot be classified as the soil form to which it originally belonged because it no longer has the same multi-dimensional nature which characterises that soil form. 39 Topsoil is normally about 40cm thick. It is the dark coloured biologically active soil which overlies the subsoil often of contrasting colour. 40 If the topsoil is to be used within a short period (1 year) Eragrostis tef may be used alone but because it is poorly self-seeding it can not be used beyond a single season.



Bromus catharticus 2.5

Festuca arundinacea 2.5

Panicum maximum 2

Paspalum dilitatum 2

Total seed per hectare 16

5.1.7 Impact 7- loss of use of land within the existing road reserve

In parts of the road reserve between the Kei River and Ndwalana (near Port St Johns) the reserve is no longer fenced (it is being fenced). Where it is unfenced, the community makes use of the land for grazing and occasionally for cultivation. In many places people occupy land within the 95m building restriction area (in terms of Section 11 of Act 21 of 1940; Roads and Ribbon Development Act). Agriculture is practised in association with their homesteads. In some peri-urban places in KZN people even cultivate parts of the fenced road reserve.

Although the use of such land is not legal, the perception of the people who use it is that they are within the law. In many cases they have been given permission to occupy the land by tribal authorities or the previous Transkei government. This issue could become a political “hot potato” if SANRAL contests the right of the occupier to use of the land41.

The grazing on the road verges is generally better than that away from the road because the runoff of rain water from the road surface results in better grass growth in the narrow band along the road. This results in a (dangerous to traffic) concentration of livestock along the road (within the road reserve).

Fencing of the reserve would mean the loss of use of this resource to livestock and a consequent increased pressure of grazing on the remaining grazing land in the vicinity of the road.

The road must however be fenced to safeguard both traffic and livestock42. Grass within the road reserve should be mown/cut each year where possible to help prevent the spread of fires.

41 In much the same way as occupants of informal settlements may not be summarily evicted from land which they illegally occupy, it would be necessary to negotiate with such people. 42 It could be argued that stock losses due to lost grazing would be offset by the diminished kills on the road.



5.1.8 Impact 8 - improved extension services

Good extension work is essential to the development of a higher level of technical expertise in farmers. Commercial farmers can afford access to the Internet and consultants. Subsistence farmers have to rely on (government) extension workers. Good extension work requires that the extension officer must have regular and easy access to the farmer as well as to his regional office library (computer/Internet). Not having proper access demotivates both the extension officer and the farmer.

With improved access which would be provided by the proposed toll road (particularly to the Pondoland green fields section) and a higher level of agricultural practice, the farming community would use more and more requisites of different kinds and purposes. As this increases so the distributors of such requisites would afford to send their own extension workers into the area (made possible by the improved access) and so the level and the depth of penetration of agricultural extension would also gradually increase.

The potential impact is a positive one and the extension services should be helped to make the most of this potential impact. It may be feasible for SANRAL to sponsor driving lessons for those extension officers (and other government and Municipal officials who can not drive and facilitate their purchase of bakkies under the government subsidy scheme and so on).

This potential positive impact would mainly affect the northern green fields section of the road between Lusikisiki (Magwa Interchange) and the Mthamvuna River. During the implementation of the road, the SANRAL social enlistment team should liaison with government extension services to determine how to assist with aiding the extension workers perform their work efficiently.

5.1.9 Impact 10 - access to production credit

Access to a cheap source of production credit is essential to the development of agriculture. Such credit normally comes from one of three sources viz. (i) commercial institutions/co-operatives (ii) quasi government institutions (iii) market linked organizations/processing facilities. Each of these has its place in different situations and failures can be found in each category.

Commercial organizations provide credit where the borrower has some form of collateral. Normally in the case of agriculture this means the title deeds to the property. Lack of title to the land has been a stumbling block to development in many peasant societies. It is something which the RSA government is addressing with respect to tribal/communal land. Production credit from commercial institutions is probably more appropriate to commercial ventures than to peasant production where cooperatives,



quasi government organizations or market linked organizations are most likely to find place.

Peasant farmers can seldom afford to finance crop production. This is why their level of production is generally so low. There is no money to do anything correctly.

Access to production credit is a potentially positive impact43. The proposed toll road would change the economics/risk of crop production and therefore the risks to any potential lender organisation would diminish. In the context of the proposed toll road and more specifically to the green fields section of the road where the potential for the proposed toll road to improve agricultural production is greatest, the most likely source of funding would be from the processor organisations who form the potential market base for the production (maize, timber and sugar mills, meat processors, biofuel producer etc).

Availability of credit/production loans should be linked to the process of facilitating markets and availability of requisites. The risk to the farmer should be limited to and linked to the crop so as to avoid the possibility of losing title (if they have it) to unscrupulous lenders.

5.1.10 Impact 11- increased cost of transport resulting from proposed toll fee charges

The imposition of proposed toll fees would affect farmers in the same way as it would impact on other road users whether on commercial trips or on other trips. This impact would be an increase in costs only where proposed toll fees are charged on existing sections of road where farmers previously travelled without paying such fees. Because this is being treated in more detail in the specialist economics study, it would not be analysed here.

5.2 Impacts along the proposed toll road route corridor In this section the anticipated impacts on soils, land use and agriculture which the proposed toll road would have, provided COLTO and SANRAL specifications and standards are adhered to are given. These are discussed in terms of each road section. The impacts are discussed according to the principles above. Only those issues/impacts which are relevant are included in the tables of impacts; where an impact/issue does not appear in a table it means that the issue/impact would not be relevant along that road section.

43 It is linked to the undeveloped potential for crop production



5.2.1 Section 1: Gonubie Interchange to Ngobozi

5.2.1.1 Road Section Gonubie Interchange to Mooiplaas

Proposed construction activities

The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Rehabilitation, where required ResurfacingUpgrading of intersections, where required Replacement of guard rails, signage and fencing, where required

Description of effect

None of the activities along this Road Section would impact on agriculture. The anticipated upgrading of the intersections would not impact on agriculture because it would take place within the existing road reserve. Actual 44land use could change from unused road reserve to road where an intersection is widened. Soil would be stripped from the footprint of the proposed works and stockpiled as described above (section 5.1.6) for use in rehabilitation.

5.2.1.2 Road Section Mooiplaas to Komga


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: RehabilitationWidening to make provision for climbing lanes, where required Repairing of structures, as required Safety features such as over and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails


None of the activities along this Road Section would impact on agriculture. The anticipated widening of the road would not impact on agriculture because it would take place within the existing road reserve. Land use would change from unused road reserve to road where an intersection is widened. Soil would be stripped from the footprint of the proposed works and stockpiled as described above (section 5.1.6) for use in rehabilitation.

44 For the purpose of this Chapter, all fenced land within the road reserve is regarded as being used by the road. Where the road is unfenced and being grazed by livestock, the grassed verge is regarded as being used (illegally) for grazing.



5.2.1.3 Road Section Komga to Great Kei River


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Resurfacing.Upgrading of intersections, where required. Construction of Komga Interchange. Repairing of structures, as required. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing,

road signs and guard rails.


Of these activities, the only one which would affect agriculture is the construction of the Komga Interchange. Alienation of land here would affect soils, land use and agriculture on 2.5ha. Soils would be stripped from the footprint of the construction and stockpiled for use in rehabilitation/landscaping (as described in 5.1.6), land use will change from agriculture to road and the land will be lost from agriculture. Other activities which would take place within the road reserve would not affect soils, land use and agriculture..

Assessment

Approximately 2.5ha of agricultural land would be alienated for construction the interchange. That land which would be alienated from soils, agriculture is not currently cultivated. It may be subject to seasonal wetness since it is in the KwaMsenge river (a tributary of the Tyityitaba river) floodplain.

The assessment of the anticipated impacts is provided in Table 6 below. It can be stated with a high degree of confidence that the potential negative impact to agriculture associated with the building the Komga interchange would be of a very low significance and only the loss of a very small piece of land and the soil that it occupies would have a site specific impact.



Table 6 Assessment of potential impacts of the road section Komga to Kei river on soils, land use and agriculture

Mitigation objectives and measures

No specific mitigation measures relating to this site are proposed because they are too small.

5.2.1.4 Road Section Great Kei to Ngobozi


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Construction of mainline proposed toll plaza at Ngobozi. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails.

Community access roads.


Construction of the proposed toll plaza would remove land from all potential communal use including agriculture. The community would lose easy access across the road and access to (illegal) grazing along the road reserve.

Assessment

Almost 60% of this section is in the Kei cuttings where only limited grazing is available due to the steepness of the terrain. The conversion of the road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. Approximately 25 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by livestock of the community living adjacent to the

45 It is the same 2.5ha of land involved during construction and operation. A piece of land could be impacted on during construction but not during operation

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE

WITHOUT MITIGATION Construction Site

specificPermanent Negligible Definite Very

lowPotentialnegative

HighLoss of productiveland45 Operation Site



High

Construction Site specific

Permanent Negligible Definite Very low

Potentialnegative

HighDirect loss of soil resource

Operation Site specific


Potentialnegative

High



road. This can support about 5 LSU46. Because of the runoff from the road, the veld along the verge is generally more productive than that away from the road.

The requirement for community access roads would extend to a larger area. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses. Overpasses and underpasses would be joined to villages, as appropriate, by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an ad hoc basis.

The proposed Ngobozi mainline toll plaza would result in a potential permanent negative impact on soils, land use and agriculture which would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance. Table 7 below summarises the potential impacts of the section of proposed toll road from Great Kei river to Ngobozi .

46 A Large Stock Unit (LSU) is defined as the equivalent of a steer with a mass of 450kg and a mass gain of 500g per day on a grass pasture with a mean digestible energy concentration of 55%



Table 7 Assessment of potential impacts on soils, land use and agriculture associated with the proposed toll road section Great Kei to Ngobozi.


No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because there would be only minor, small impacts left after construction according to COLTO specifications.

5.2.2 Section 2: Ngobozi to Mthatha (Ngqeleni)

5.2.2.1 Road section Ngobozi to Butterworth The following activities are proposed for this section of road:

Safety features such as over and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails.Upgrading of the Ndabakazi Intersection. Upgrade of section between Ndabakazi and Butterworth to a 4-lane undivided road.Provision of pedestrian walkways and guard rails, where required.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE


specificPermanent Low Definite Very


HighLoss of productiveland Operation Site



High

Construction Local Permanent Low Definite Low Potential negative

HighLoss of access

Operation Local Permanent Low Definite Low Potential negative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High


Permanent Low Definite Very low

Potentialnegative

HighLoss of (illegal) land use in reserve



Potentialnegative

High




The conversion of the section of road from Ndabakazi to Butterworth from the existing N2 to the proposed toll road would be achieved within the existing (largely unfenced) road reserve. Current access and illegal grazing would be lost.

Assessment

The conversion of the road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses. Underpasses and overpasses would be joined to villages, as appropriate by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an ad hocbasis.

Almost all of this section, except where it passes through villages, is currently available for (illegal) grazing. Approximately 90 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by the livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 18 LSU47. The land surrounding the Ndabakazi Intersection is heavily impacted by the presence of people and traffic. Land which used to be cultivated is no longer so used and, although available for grazing is probably generally avoided so any loss would not be significant.

The potential permanent negative impacts of the proposed activities along the section of road from Ngobozi to Butterworth would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to agriculture. Table 8 below summarises the potential impacts of the section of proposed toll road from Ngobozi to Butterworth.

47 A Large Stock Unit (LSU) is defined as the equivalent of a steer with a mass of 450kg and a mass gain of 500g per day on a grass pasture with a mean digestible energy concentration of 55%)



Table 8 Assessment of potential impacts of the section of proposed toll road from Ngobozi to Butterworth on soils, land use and agriculture


No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts of this road section on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because there are only minor small impacts left after construction according to COLTO specifications.

5.2.2.2 Road section Main Street Butterworth

Proposed Construction Activities

The following activities are proposed through Butterworth: Upgrade of through-road to support traffic flow and safety (such as median and pedestrian barriers, restricted turning movements, restricted parking in through-road, improved access to taxi pick-up points, provision of lighting, traffic signals, etc.)


None of the activities along this Road Section would impact on soils, land use and agriculture.

5.2.2.3 Road section Butterworth to Ibika


The following activities are proposed along the section of road from Butterworth to Ibika:

Upgrading of intersections, including widening of road where required. Upgrade of section between Butterworth and Msobomvu Intersection to a 4-lane undivided road. Replacement of guard rails, signage and fencing, where required. Repairing of structures, where required.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE


specificPermanent Low Definite Low Potential

negativeHighLoss of

accessOperation Site


negativeHigh



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails.


The conversion of the section from Butterworth to Ibika from the current N2 to the proposed toll road would be achieved within the existing (largely unfenced) road reserve. Current access and illegal grazing would be lost.

Assessment

The conversion of the road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at over and underpasses. These would be joined to villages, as appropriate by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an ad hoc basis.

Almost all of this section, except where it passes through villages, is available for grazing. Approximately 43 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by the livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 9 LSU48. The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Butterworth to Ibika would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to agriculture. Table 9 below summarises the potential impacts of the section of proposed toll road from Butterworth to Ibika.

Table 9 Assessment of potential impacts on soils, land use and agriculture of the proposed toll road section from Butterworth to Ibika

48 A Large Stock Unit (LSU) is defined as the equivalent of a steer with a mass of 450kg and a mass gain of 500g per day on a grass pasture with a mean digestible energy concentration of 55%

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE



negativeHighLoss of

accessOperation Site


negativeHigh



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High




No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts are proposed because there are only minor small impacts left after construction of this road section according to COLTO specifications..

5.2.2.4 Road section Ibeka to Dutywa The following activities are proposed along the section of road

Resurfacing.Repairing of structures, as required. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails. Community access roads.


The conversion of the section of the N2 from Ibeka to Dutywa to a proposed toll road would be achieved within the existing (largely unfenced) road reserve and would not affect legal soils, land use and agriculture . The reserve is however currently illegally used for grazing and this would be lost.

Assessment

Almost all of this section is available for grazing. The conversion of the existing N2 to the proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at over and underpasses. These would be joined to villages, as appropriate by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an ad hoc basis.

Approximately 120 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by the livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 24 LSU49. The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Ibeka to Dutywa would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to agriculture. Table 10 below summarises the potential impacts of the proposed toll road section Ibeka to Dutywa.




Table 10 Assessment of potential impacts associated with construction of the proposed toll road section Ibeka to Dutywa on soils, land use and agriculture


No mitigation measures to alleviate the identified impacts are proposed for this proposed toll road section because they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve.

5.2.2.5 Road section Main street through Dutywa


The following activities are proposed through Butterworth: Construction of second carriageway through Dutywa and implementing a one-way system through the town.

Traffic flow and safety upgrades (such as median and pedestrian barriers, restricted turning movements, restricted parking in through-road, improved access to taxi pick-up points, provision of lighting, traffic signals, etc.)


None of the activities along this Road Section would impact on soils, land use and agriculture.

5.2.2.6 Road section Dutywa to Candu River


The following activities are proposed: Construction of mainline proposed toll plaza near the Candu River.

Resurfacing.

Widening, where required.

Replacement of guard rails, signage and fencing, where required.

Repairing of structures, as required.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE


specificPermanent Negligible Defini

teVerylow

Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access


Permanent Negligible Definite

Verylow

Potentialnegative

High



Provision of pedestrian walkways and guard rails, where required.

Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails.

Community access roads


Land would be alienated from the community for the construction of the proposed toll plaza and widening of the road. The community would also lose access across the currently unfenced road and illegal grazing in the unfenced reserve.

Assessment

The conversion of the existing road to the proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. Almost all of this section is currently available for grazing. Approximately 130 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by the livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 27 LSU50.

Construction of the proposed toll plaza and widening of the road would mean that a 50 ha area of land would be removed from all potential communal use including agriculture. This land is currently used for grazing. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses. These would be joined to villages, as appropriate, by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an adhoc basis.

The potential permanent negative impact of the Dutywa to Candu River section of the proposed toll road would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to agriculture. Table 11 below summarises the potential impacts of the construction of the proposed toll road section Dutywa to Candu River on soils, land use and agriculture.


No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because either they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve or they are too small to require mitigation




Table 11 Assessment of potential impacts on soils, land use and agriculture associated with the proposed toll road section Dutywa to Candu river

.

5.2.2.7 Road section Candu River to Viedgesville


The following activities are proposed: Resurfacing/rehabilitation.Widening to 12.5 m and to make provision for climbing lanes, where required. Upgrading of intersections, where required. Repairing of structures, as required. Provision of pedestrian walkways and guard rails, where required. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails. Community access roads. Construction of Elliotdale Interchange.


Land would be alienated from the community for widening of the road and for the Elliotdale Interchange. Other activities would take place within the road reserve and would not impact on agriculture. Land use would change from road reserve to road and soil would be removed from the footprint of the widened sections of road for use in rehabilitation.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE







High



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative

N/ALoss of (illegal) land use in reserve



Potentialnegative

N/A



Assessment

Almost all of this section of existing road is currently available for rough grazing. The conversion of the existing road to the proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community.

Construction of the interchange and widening of the road would mean that about 50 ha area of (illegal) rough grazing51 land would be removed from all potential communal use including agriculture. This grazing can support about 10 LSU.

The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses. These would be joined to villages, as appropriate, by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an ad hoc basis.

Approximately 192 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by the livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 39 LSU52. Soil would be stripped from the footprint of the proposed works and stockpiled as described above (section 5.1.6) for use in rehabilitation. The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Candu River to Viedgesville would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. Table 12 below summarises the potential impacts of the proposed toll road section Candu River to Viedgesville.


No mitigation measures to are proposed alleviate the impacts of the proposed toll road section Candu River to Viedgesville on soils, land use and agriculture because either they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve or they are too small to require mitigation.

51 Collins dictionary:” denoting taking place on uncultivated ground: rough grazing”, in South African agriculture used in a broader context to mean coarse/poor grazing.




Table 12 Assessment of potential impacts on soils, land use and agriculture associated with the section of road Candu River to Viedgesville.

5.2.2.8 Road section Viedgesville to Mthatha


The following activities are proposed: Rehabilitation.Construction of Viedgesville InterchangeWidening to make provision for climbing lanes, and 4-lane undivided road where required. Upgrading of intersections, where required. Repairing of structures, as required. Provision of pedestrian walkways and guard rails, where required. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails. Community access roads.


Widening of the road would alienate a narrow strip of land from the community. Here land will be removed from agriculture, soils will be removed from the footprint of the activity and land use would change from grazing (and illegal grazing) to proposed toll road. Other activities would take place within the road reserve and would not impact on soils, land use and agriculture.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE







High



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

N/A



Assessment

Almost all of this section is currently available for grazing. The conversion of the road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. Construction of the interchange and widening of the road would mean that a 35 ha area of land would be removed from all potential communal use including agriculture.

The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses. Overpasses and underpasses would be joined to villages, as appropriate, by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an ad hoc basis. Approximately 65 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by the livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 13 LSU53. The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Viedgesville to Mthatha would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to agriculture. Table 13 below summarises the potential impacts of the proposed toll road section Viedgesville to Mthatha.

Table 13 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed toll road in the section Viedgesville to Mthatha on soils, land use and agriculture


ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CEWITHOUT MITIGATION



Potentialnegative




High



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

N/A




No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts of this proposed toll road section on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because either they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve or they are too small to require mitigation.

5.2.2.9 Road Section Mthatha (Ultra City) to Ngqeleni


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Widening to 4-lane dual carriageway, rehabilitation and resurfacing as required. Upgrading of intersections, where required. Implementation of one-way system at Madeira and Sprigg Streets. Improved signage, lighting, etc. New carriageway bridges at Corana and Mthatha rivers


None of the activities through Mthatha and the proposed toll road route to the Ngqeleni turnoff would impact on soils, land use and agriculture because the route is largely built up or in the process of being built on. The anticipated upgrading of the intersections would not impact on soils, land use and agriculture because it would take place within the existing road reserve.

5.2.3 Section 3: Mthatha (Ngqeleni) to Ndwalane

5.2.3.1 Road Section Mthatha (Ngqeleni) to Libode


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Widening and resurfacing.Upgrading of intersections, where required. Improvement of access control. Widening and construction of climbing lanes, where required. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails.


Widening of the existing road reserve to build the proposed toll road would alienate communal grazing land from the community. The other activities would take place inside the road reserve and would not affect agriculture but would affect soils (stripping stockpiling and use in rehabilitation) and land use (change from vegetated road reserve to road).



Assessment

Almost the entire road verge along this section is currently available for rough grazing. The conversion of the existing road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community.

Widening of the road would mean that about 58 ha area of rough grazing land would be removed from all potential communal use including agriculture. This grazing can support about 12 LSU.

The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and they would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses. These would be joined to villages, as appropriate, by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an ad hoc basis. Approximately 115 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by the livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 20 LSU54. The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Ngqeleni to Libode would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. Table 14 below summarises the potential impacts of the road section Ngqeleni to Libode on soils, land use and agriculture.


No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because either they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve or they are too small to require mitigation.




Table 14 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed toll road section Ngqeleni to Libode on soils, land use and agriculture

5.2.3.2 Road Section Libode to Ntlaza


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Widening and rehabilitation. Upgrading of intersections, where required. Climbing lanes, where required. Provision of pedestrian and taxi facilities, where required.Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing,

road signs and guard rails. Construction of dual carriageway at St Barnabas Hospital (2 km).


Widening of the existing road to build the proposed toll road would alienate soils, land use and agriculture from the community. The anticipated upgrading of the intersections would not impact on agriculture because it would take place within the existing road reserve. Land use within the road reserve would change from unused road reserve to road where the road is widened. Soil in the footprint of the widened road sections would be stripped, stockpiled and later used in rehabilitation.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE







High



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

N/A



Assessment

The conversion of the existing road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. Almost all of this section is currently available for grazing. Approximately 20 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by the livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 4 LSU55.

Widening of the road would mean that a 40 ha area of land would be removed from all potential communal use including agriculture. This is currently used for grazing. It can support about 8 LSU.

The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at over and underpasses. These would be joined to villages, as appropriate by community access roads. Community access roads would alienate grazing land from communal use. These roads would be the subject of separate applications to DEAET on an ad hoc basis. The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Libode to Ntlaza would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. Table 15 below summarises the potential impacts of the road section Libode to Ntlaza on soils, land use and agriculture.

Table 15 Assessment of the potential impacts of the propose toll road section Libode to Ntlaza on soils, land use and agriculture.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CEWITHOUT MITIGATION



Potentialnegative




High



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

N/A




No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because either they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve or they are too small to require mitigation.

5.2.3.3 Road Section Ntlaza to Mgwenyana


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Widening and resurfacing.Construction of climbing lanes, where required. Upgrading of intersections, where required. Implementation of slope stability measures, where required. Possible construction of alternative mainline proposed toll plaza (Ntlaza). Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails.


Land would be alienated form agriculture by the widening of the road. Other activities would take place within the road reserve.

Assessment

Most of the road verge in this section is available to the livestock of the surrounding community for (illegal) grazing. Approximately 79 ha of veld inside the road reserve is currently (illegally) used by livestock of the community living adjacent to the road. This can support about 16 LSU56. The conversion of the existing road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community.

Construction of the proposed toll plaza and widening of the road would mean that a 40 ha area of land would be removed from all potential communal use including agriculture. This can carry about 8 LSU. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at over and underpasses which would be connected to access roads.





The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Ntlaza to Mgwenyana would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. Table 16 below summarises the potential impacts of the section of road from Ntlaza to Mgwenyana.

Table 16 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed road section Ntlaza to Mgwenyana on soils, land use and agriculture


No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed for this proposed toll road section because there are only minor small impacts left after construction according to COLTO specifications.

5.2.3.4 Road Section Mgwenyana to Thombo


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Widening and surface rehabilitation. Addition of climbing lanes, where required. Upgrading of intersections, where required. Implementation of slope stability measures, where required. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails. Construction of dual carriageway at Thombo (2 km).

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE







High


Permanent Low Definite Low Potential negative

HighLoss of access


Permanent Low Definite Low Potential negative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High




Even the widening of the road would have little impact on soils, land use and agriculture by alienating land because the land is so steep.

Assessment

The anticipated upgrading of the intersections would not impact on agriculture because it would take place within the existing road reserve. Land use within the road reserve would change from unused road reserve to road where the road is widened. The conversion of the existing road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at over and underpasses.

The terrain through which this section passes offers little grazing because it is steeply rolling. Even where the road verge is available, it supplies little sustenance except to browsing livestock such as goats. About 40 ha of land would be alienated from the community for the widening of the road but this would have little impact on soils, land use and agriculture because the soil is so thin and the land has little agricultural value.

The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Mgwenyana to Thombo would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. Table 17 below summarises the potential impacts of the road section Mgwenyana to Thombo.

.


No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts of this section of the proposed toll road on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because either they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve or they are too small to require mitigation.



Table 17 Assessment of potential impacts of the construction of the proposed road section Mgwenyana to Thombo on soils, land use and agriculture

5.2.3.5 Road Section Thombo to Ndwalane


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Widening and resurfacing.Bridge widening at Mngazi River. Provision of pedestrian and taxi facilities, where required. Upgrading of intersections, where required. Implementation of slope stability measures, where required.Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails


Land would be alienated from the community for road widening.

Assessment

The terrain along much of this section is steeply rolling and grazing is limited by the natural steepness and difficult access. There is intensive agriculture along the Mngazi River. Other than road widening the proposed activities along this road section would

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE







High



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

N/A



not impact on the community’s use of resources because the activities would all take place within the existing road reserve.

The anticipated upgrading of the intersections would not impact on agriculture because it would take place within the existing road reserve. Land use (within the road reserve) would change from unused road reserve to road where the road is widened and/or intersections upgraded. The conversion of the existing road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the N2. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at over and underpasses.

Approximately 25 ha of land with a low agricultural potential would be alienated from the community for road widening. The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Thombo to Ndwalane would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. Table 18 below summarises the potential impacts of the road section Thombo to Ndwalane.

Table 18 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed toll road section Thombo to Ndwalane on soils, land use and agriculture.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE







High



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

N/A




No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts of this proposed toll road section on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because either they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve or they are too small to require mitigation.

5.2.4 Section 4: Ndwalane to Ntafufu River


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Construction of new road to national proposed toll road standards. Construction of new bridge across the Mzimvubu River. Construction of new interchanges at Ndwalane and Ntafufu. Over- and underpasses, interchanges, fencing, road signs and guard rails. Construction of new mainline proposed toll plaza and ramp plazas at the proposed Ndwalane Interchange


This is a green fields section of the road entailing the construction of a new proposed toll road in a sparsely settled, partly forested area of mountains and hill slopes.

Assessment

The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the proposed toll road route and would be able to cross only at over and underpasses but they would gain access across the Mzimvubu River and to Ndwalane. There are not many people that this would affect. There is some cultivation along the hill slopes. On the banks of the Mzimvubu is previously irrigated land through which the road would pass to the bridge. Approximately 153 ha of land would be occupied by the road reserve.

For the larger part the terrain through which this section passes offers little agricultural potential because it is steeply hilly with rocky soils of scree slopes. The area of irrigation land which would be taken is less than 5ha while cultivated rain fed crop land which would be lost is less than 20ha.

The road has the potential to provide a positive impact to agriculture by providing access to services which are currently very difficult for farmers to access. It would probably allow the “opening up” of the steep terrain through which it passes to the cultivation of tree crops such as avocado57.

57 This may be seen as a positive impact to agriculture but it would be a potential negative impact to the natural environment with forest being cleared for agriculture. Unfortunately the cultivation of annual food crops is more likely and this would give rise to accelerated erosion.



The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. A highly significant potential permanent positive impact of medium intensity is predicted if proposed mitigation measures are adopted. Table 18 below summarises the potential impacts of the road section Ndwalane to Ntafufu.

Table 18 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed toll road section Ndwalane to Ntafufu on soils, land use and agriculture.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE



negativeHighLoss of

productiveland Operation Site


negativeHigh



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High


Short term Low Improbable

Low Potential negative

Medium

Change in drainage


Long term Low Improbable


Medium



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High

Loss of land use along temporaryroad


Short term Low Definite Medium Potential negative

Medium

Improvedaccess

Operation Regional Permanent Medium Definite High Positive Medium

Improvedextensionservices

Operation Local Permanent Medium Definite Medium Positive Medium

Improvedaccess to productioncredit




Table 18 (Continued)

Mitigation objectives

If mitigation measures are introduced, the confidence with which the positive impacts can be achieved would be raised from medium to high and the significance of improved access raised from medium to high through adding benefit to extension and credit services.

Mitigation measures

If the improved access is to attain the high significance rating in terms of agriculture, it is axiomatic that agriculture needs a stimulus over and above the improved access which would result from the construction of the proposed toll road because a number of

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE

WITH MITIGATION Construction Site


negativeHighLoss of



negativeHigh


Permanent Negligible

Definite Very low

Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access


Permanent Negligible

Definite Very low

Potentialnegative

High




Medium

Change in drainage




Medium



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Short term Low Definite

Medium Potential negative

Medium

Improvedaccess

Operation Regional Permanent Medium Definite High Positive High


Operation Local Permanent Medium Definite High Positive High





factors have been identified which currently limit agricultural development, access is only one of them. These factors are:

Poor extension services Land tenure Lack of facilities for production credit Access to markets

While the new proposed toll road can provide the means to facilitate the means to solve all of these, it would require outside intervention to “kick start” the process of implementation. It is proposed that SANRAL’s social team be tasked with facilitating an improvement in the extension services (5.1.8 above), change in the land tenure system (3.9 above), provision of credit facilities (5.1.9 above) and access to markets(5.1.4 and 3.7 above) with the aim of magnifying the positive impacts of the proposed toll road.

Alternative proposed toll road alignments

The alternative proposed toll road route alignment from Isinuka along the Mzimvubu river bank would impact significantly on agriculture occupying almost 5 Ha of prime riparian irrigation land but effectively sterilising more than that. The loss of this land would be of high significance and from the agricultural perspective alternative 1b is to be avoided as it poses greater impacts on soil, land use and agriculture.

5.2.5 Section 5 Ntafufu River to Lusikisiki (Magwa Intersection)


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: Upgrade pass to a minimum design speed of 60 km/h, widen and realign as required.Construction of climbing lanes, where required. Widening of road cross-section, where required. Widening of the Mzintlava River Bridge. Construction of 4-lane undivided road through Lusikisiki.Construction of Lusikisiki Interchange. Upgrading of Magwa Intersection. Safety features such as over and underpasses, improved intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails.


Along this proposed toll road section only widening of the road would impact on soils, land use and agriculture because the activities would all take place within the existing road reserve.

Assessment

The area through which this road section travels is quite densely populated and the terrain quite steeply rolling so that there is not much land available for agriculture. The existing road occupies the slope crests/ridgeline so that the narrow strip of less steep land has already been alienated from agriculture. The road is to be widened and almost



40 ha of land would be alienated from the community. The agricultural potential of the land varies from poor and steep to moderate potential. Due to the narrowness and difficult access, very little could be considered arable, except for hand-tilled home gardens.

Land use within the road reserve would change from unused road reserve (veld) to road where the existing road would be widened. The conversion of the existing road to a proposed toll road would entail fencing and a level of maintenance which is not currently applied to the R61. This would mean that the road verge would no longer effectively form a part of the grazing land of the surrounding community. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road and would be able to cross only at over- and underpasses. The Lusikisiki interchange would not impact on agriculture. It is in the township.

The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Ntafufu to Lusikisiki would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. Table 19 below summarises the potential impacts of the road section Ntafufu to Lusikisiki..

Table 19 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed toll road section Ntafufu to Lusikisiki on soils, land use and agriculture.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE



negativeHighLoss of



negativeHigh



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

N/A




No mitigation measures to alleviate the impacts on soils, land use and agriculture are proposed because either they result from the removal of illegal grazing within the road reserve or they are too small (after the COLTO specifications have been implemented) to require mitigation.

Alternative road alignments

The preferred road alignment at the Ntafufu River would pass directly through cultivated fields belonging to the Ntafafu High School (on loan to a local woman). About 5ha is under irrigation for the production of vegetables. Alternative 2a would avoid the fields. From the agricultural perspective 2a is preferable but that proposed toll road alignment comes very close to a village and one house might have to move. The loss of the fields is of low significance only because they are of small extent (large by local standards).

5.2.6 Section 6 Lusikisiki (Magwa intersection) to Mthamvuma River

5.2.6.1 Road Section Lusikisiki (Magwa Intersection) to Msikaba River

Route description

This green fields section of the proposed road follows the gravel road from the Mbotyi turnoff to Mateku after which it turns off the plateau/old land surface better soils onto the section with shallower poor soils to the Msikaba River crossing.


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: New road construction on alignment of existing district road up to Msikaba Village, new frontage and feeder roads. New greenfields construction from Msikaba Village to Msikaba Gorge on a preferred alignment. High-level bridge crossing over Msikaba River. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, improved and new intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails


The current road is not fenced and is used by the community for grazing although it is within the existing road reserve. This would be alienated from the community. The community would lose access along the existing road.

Assessment

The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the proposed toll road and would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses but they would gain access across the Msikaba River and gain improved access to Lusikisiki (as well



as to East London and Durban via the rest of the proposed toll road). They would also lose the (illegal) use of the road reserve as grazing.

There is some cultivation along the Mateku gravel road section including outlier out grower tea plantations and what was the Tracor Lambasi maize project. Approximately 136 ha of land would be occupied by the newly registered road reserve. Of this approximately 45ha would be newly alienated land since the rest is already occupied by an existing gravel road. This newly alienated section of land is not arable. The soils are shallow and rock outcrops are common.

For the larger part the terrain through which this section passes offers little agricultural potential because it is within an existing road reserve or is non-arable.

Access provided by the road to markets and to services would benefit agriculture away from the footprint of the road. This positive impact can be magnified by facilitating this (see mitigation below).

The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road from Lusikisiki to Msikaba would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to soils, land use and agriculture. A highly significant potential permanent positive impact of medium intensity is predicted to be brought about by improved access if proposed mitigation measures are adopted. Table 20 below summarises the potential impacts of the road section Lusikisiki to Msikaba River.



Table 20 Assessment of potential impacts associated with the loss of land to the proposed toll road and construction impacts in the section Lusikisiki to the Msikaba River.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE



negativeHighLoss of



negativeHigh



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High




MediumChange in drainage




Medium



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Medium










Mitigation measures

If the improved access is to attain the high significance rating in terms of agriculture, it is axiomatic that agriculture needs a stimulus over and above the improved access because a number of factors have been identified which currently limit agricultural development , access is only one of them. These factors are:

Poor extension services Land tenure

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE



negativeHighLoss of



negativeHigh



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High








Medium



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Medium







Lack of facilities for production credit Access to markets


The alternative bridge sites and proposed toll road route across the Msikaba River

Alternative 5g is on shallow soils with about 10% rock exposure and no cultivation (but it is only on the south side of the river where the others also have no cultivation). 5e is also on the south side of the river on shallow soils but with less rock exposure and no cultivation. The SANRAL preferred route passes over fields on the north side of the Msikaba. It has little advantage over 5g and 5e. From the soils, land use and agriculture perspective there is little choice between the alternatives.

5.2.6.2 Road Section Msikaba River to Mthenthu River

Route description

This is a greenfields proposed toll road route which, for the larger part follows the boundary between the inland more settled land and the coastal area of more sparsely settled land (including Mkambati Reserve and the Tracor maize project – which has some large tracts of good soil.) .


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: New road construction on a preferred alignment. High-level bridge crossing over the Mthentu River. Safety features such as over- and underpasses, new intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails.


The community would suffer loss of alienated land and loss of access across the road. There would be a gain of local and regional access.

Assessment

For the larger part the terrain through which this proposed toll road section passes offers good agricultural potential. Land between the Msikaba and Kwa Dlamba Rivers is not as extensively cultivated as in the past.

Between the Msikaba and Kwa Dlamba Rivers there are people on both sides of the road but between the Kwa Dlamba and the Mthentu, the people are on the inland side only for the most part so access is less of a problem. The community (and their



livestock) would lose free access across the road route and would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses but they would gain easy access across the both the Msikaba and Mthenthu Rivers and improved access to East London and Durban via the rest of the proposed toll road. This improved access has the potential of opening up markets to agricultural and timber products on a very large scale.

Approximately 153 ha of land would be occupied by the road reserve. More than 50% of this newly alienated land is arable and about 75ha is potentially highly productive (under a wide range of crops) although it is currently derelict.

The proposed toll road could help provide the stimulus to the community to bring land back into cultivation (by providing access to requisites, markets and services (see mitigation below).

A highly significant potential permanent positive impact of medium intensity is predicted to be brought about by improved access if proposed mitigation measures are adopted. Table 21 below provides an assessment of the anticipated impact of the road section Msikaba River to Mthenthu River before mitigation and after mitigation measures have been instituted.



Table 21 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed toll road section Msikaba River to Mthenthu River on soils, land use and agriculture.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE



negativeHighLoss of


specificPermanent Medium Definite Medium Potential

negativeMedium



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High






Long term Medium Probable


Medium


Permanent Medium Definite Medium Potential negative




High




Medium

Improvedaccess











Mitigation measures

If the improved access is to attain the possible high significance rating in terms of agriculture, it is axiomatic that agriculture needs a stimulus over and above the improved access because a number of factors have been identified which currently limit agricultural development, access is only one of them. These factors are:


While the new proposed toll road can provide the means to facilitate the means to solve all of these, it would require outside intervention to “kick start” the process of

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE



negativeHighLoss of



negativeHigh



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High








Medium



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Medium







implementation. It is proposed that SANRAL’s social team be tasked with facilitating an improvement in the extension services (5.1.8 above), change in the land tenure system (3.9 above), provision of credit facilities (5.1.9 above) and access to markets(5.1.4 and 3.7 above) with the aim of magnifying the positive impacts of the proposed toll road.

Alternative crossings over the Mthentu River

Alternative 9d_5 passes over (and bisects) more cultivated fields than does the SANRAL preferred route. The differences are not of more than low significance. The SANRAL preferred route is the better from the perspective of soils, land use and agriculture.

5.2.6.3 Road Section Mthenthu River to Mthamvuna River

Route description

Two proposed toll road routes are under consideration here. They bifurcate after the Mthenthu bridge crossing and join again at the Mzamba river crossing. The inland proposed toll road route (Mzamba coastal proposed toll road route) has more cultivation along it than does the more coastal route (SANRAL preferred route) which only has people settled to any extent west of the Mnyameni River. Both proposed toll road routes are greenfields developments.

The Coastal Mzamba proposed toll road route is sparsely cultivated between the Mzamba River and the Kulumbe River and has scattered cultivation between that and the Mthentu River. The SANRAL preferred route is sparsely cultivated between the Mzamba River and the crossing of the Xolobeni road after which there is scattered cultivation. Along the Xolobeni road there is scattered settlement and cultivation upslope of the existing gravel road but since the proposed road is downslope of it, the proposed toll road route is on shallower soils which are not cultivated as much. In the vicinity of the Xolobeni road. The community along this section appears to be better off/more established than elsewhere along either proposed toll road route58.

Both proposed toll road routes are 33km long.


The following activities are contemplated on this stretch of proposed toll road: New road construction on a preferred alignment.New R61 Interchange. Construction of high-level bridge structures across the Mnyameni, and Mzamba Rivers (and over Kulumbe, Mpahlane Rivers in the case of the SANRAL preferred route).

58 This is not substantiated but appears to bear the thought that better access helps to improve the general economy of a community.



New interchanges at the crossing of the Xolobeni road and intersections at existing access roads Maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing Mthamvuna River Bridge. Safety features such as over and underpasses, new intersections, fencing, road signs and guard rails..


Land would be alienated from the community and they would lose easy access across the road route. They would gain local and regional access on the proposed toll road route however. The Mzamba coastal route would alienate more cultivated land and more arable land than would the SANRAL preferred route

Assessment

For the larger part the terrain through which this section (both proposed routes) passes does not offer good agricultural potential. The community (and their livestock) would lose free access across the road route and would be able to cross only at overpasses and underpasses but they would gain access across the both major rivers and improved access to East London and Durban via the rest of the proposed toll road.

Approximately 230 ha of land would be occupied by the road reserve. This would all be newly alienated land. This land is largely poor arable land but where soils are not excessively shallow the land is suitable for timber and sugarcane. With good veld and herd management the alienated land could support about 100LSU. Currently since it is largely under ‘Ngongoni veld it probably can support only about 40 LSU, depending on the veld burning regime.

The proposed toll road may help provide the stimulus to the community to bring the land into cultivation (by providing access to requisites, markets and services). Proximity to existing KZN markets would make it the obvious starting point for sugarcane or timber development.

From the perspective of soils, land use and agriculture, the difference between the SANRAL preferred route and the inland Mzamba coastal proposed toll road route is small. More currently used land would be alienated by the Mzamba proposed toll road route than by the SANRAL preferred route. The land which would be alienated along the two proposed toll road routes is comparably poor. From the perspective of soils, land use and agriculture, the SANRAL preferred route marginally exhibits the least impact.

A highly significant potential permanent positive impact of medium intensity is predicted to be brought about by improved access if proposed mitigation measures are adopted. Table 22 below provides an assessment of the anticipated impacts of the proposed toll road section before mitigation and after mitigation measures have been instituted.



Table 22 Assessment of potential impacts of the propose toll road Mthentu River to Mthamvuna River on soils, land use and agriculture.

59 A Broiler farm was seen along the proposed Mzamba Coastal route

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE



negativeHighLoss of



negativeMedium

Construction Local Permanent Low Definite Low Potential negative

HighLoss of access

Operation Local Permanent Low Definite Low Potential negative

High






Long term Medium Probable


Medium




N/ANoiseimpacts on livestock Operation Site

specificLong term Medium Probab

le59lMedium Potential

negativeN/A






High



Medium

Operation Regional Permanent Medium Definite Medium Positive Medium









Mitigation measures

If the improved access is to attain the possible high significance rating in terms of agriculture, it is axiomatic that agriculture needs a stimulus over and above the improved access because a number of factors have been identified which currently limit agricultural development, access is only one of them. These factors are:


ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE


specificPermanent Medium Definite Low Potential

negativeHighLoss of



negativeHigh



Potentialnegative

HighLoss of access



Potentialnegative

High








Medium



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



Medium








The alternative Mnyameni bridge sites

None of the sites would travel over cultivated land. Alternative 10a traverses a larger area of rock outcrops and shallow soils than the other proposed toll road routes. 10e traverses less rock and shallow soils. The preferred route has less again while 10c has the least. Proposed toll road route 10 e would impact least on agriculture because the carrying capacity of the whole proposed toll road route is lowest – because it is not only short but has poorer grass coverage than the preferred route. The difference is however not more than of a low significance.

From the perspective of soils, land use and agriculture, alternative 10e is preferred.

5.2.7 Section 7 Mthamvuna River to Isipingo Interchange

5.2.7.1 Road Section Mthamvuna River to Southbroom


Some improvements to the existing R61 are necessary to upgrade it to the proposed toll road:

Upgrading of at-grade intersections. Construction of Port Edward and Southbroom interchanges. Improvement of intersection layout, where required.

Consolidation of access points – illegal and dangerous accesses would be closed and feeder roads constructed to provide access at new, safe and appropriate access points.


Of the proposed activities, the ones which would involve land alienation are the construction of the Port Edward and Southbroom interchanges and the feeder roads. The interchanges would not affect agriculture. They are within the townships. Land use and soils would be affected. Land use would change from unused road reserve to road infrastructure. Soils in the footprint of intersections, interchanges and other infrastructure would be stripped, stockpiled and used in rehabilitation/landscaping. Approximately 67 ha of a previous provincial road without a subdivided road reserve are to be acquired by SANRAL for the proposed toll road in this section. The feeder roads would be the subject of separate applications in terms of NEMA.



5.2.7.2 Road Sections Southbroom to Marburg, Marburg Interchange to St Faiths Interchange and St Faiths Interchange to Umhlungwa Interchange (Hibberdene)


This section of road is already constructed and only minor improvements are necessary:

Safety improvements. Minor rehabilitation and resurfacing, as required.


None of these activities would affect soils, land use and agriculture. They would all take place within the existing road reserve.

5.2.7.3 Road Section Umhlungwa Interchange (Hibberdene) to Park Rynie Interchange


Some improvements and additions are necessary to convert the current N2 to the proposed toll road:

Safety improvements. Minor rehabilitation and resurfacing, as required. Construction of ramp plazas on the southern ramps of the Pennington

InterchangeConstruction of ramp plazas on the southern ramps of the Park Rynie

Interchange


Of these activities, the construction of ramp plazas on the southern ramps of the Pennington and Park Rynie interchanges would affect soils and current land use in the footprint of the ramps and ramp plazas but agriculture would not be affected because the construction would take place within the existing road reserve. The impacts on soils, land use and agriculture

5.2.7.4 Road Section Park Rynie Interchange to Winklespruit Interchange


Some improvements to the existing N2 and additions are necessary to upgrade it to the proposed toll road:

Safety improvements. Minor rehabilitation and resurfacing, as required. Construction of proposed Park Rynie mainline proposed toll plaza. Construction of ramp plazas on the northern ramps of the Scottburgh Interchange. Construction of ramp plazas on the northern ramps of the Umkomaas Interchange.




Of these activities, the only ones which would affect soils, land use and agriculture is the construction of the Park Rynie mainline plaza (about 1 ha of sugarcane and gum trees). The ramp plazas on the northern ramps of the Scottburgh and Umkomaas interchanges would be constructed within the existing road reserve.

Assessment

The sugarcane on land which would be alienated from agriculture is mediocre. The soils have a potentially moderately high production potential for both soils and timber but rainfall is limiting (like in most of KZN South Coast).

It can be stated with a high degree of confidence that the potential negative impact to agriculture associated with the building the Park Rynie mainline plaza would be of a very low significance and only the loss of a very small area of land and the soil that it occupies would have a site specific impact. The potential permanent negative impact of the section of road between the Park Rynie and Winklespruit interchanges would be of negligible intensity and of a very low significance to agriculture. The assessment of the anticipated impacts is provided in Table 23 below.

Table 23 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed toll road Section Park Rynie Interchange to Winklespruit


No specific mitigation measures are proposed because the impacts are small and of low significance..

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE







High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High



5.2.7.5 Road Section Winklespruit Interchange to Adams Road Interchange (Amamzimtoti)


This section of road is already constructed but some improvements and additions are necessary:

Resurfacing and rehabilitation, as required. Widening of Amanzimtoti River Bridge. Addition of third lane and paved shoulder from Amanzimtoti River northwards. Reconstruction of Adams Road Interchange to improve the operational safety of the interchange.Construction of ramp plazas on the southern ramps of the Adams Road Interchange.


Of these activities, none would affect agriculture as the construction would be within the existing road reserve. Soils and land use would be affected under the footprint of the interchange, ramp plazas and ramps and addition of the third lanes. Land use would change from unused road reserve to road and soils would be stripped and stockpiled for use in rehabilitation and landscaping. Being within the road reserve, the land is zoned for such activity.

.

5.2.7.6 Road Section Adams Road Interchange to Dickens Road Interchange (Athlone Park)


Some improvements and additions to the existing N2 are necessary to upgrade it to the proposed toll road:

Resurfacing and rehabilitation of existing road pavement. Addition of a third lane in each direction. Construction of ramp plazas on the southern ramps of the Moss Kolnick Drive Interchange.


Of these activities, none would affect agriculture as the construction would be within the existing road reserve. Soils and land use would be affected under the footprint of the interchange, ramp plazas and ramps and addition of the third lanes. Land use would change from unused road reserve to road and soils would be stripped and stockpiled for use in rehabilitation and landscaping. Being within the road reserve, the land is zoned for such activity.



5.2.7.7 Road Section Dickens Road Interchange to Isipingo Interchange


This section of road is already constructed but some improvements and additions are necessary:

Resurfacing and rehabilitation of existing road pavement. Addition of a third lane and paved shoulders in each direction. Addition of a fourth lane between Dickens Road and Joyner Road in each direction. Construction of ramp plazas on the southern ramps of the Joyner Road Interchange.Construction of proposed Isipingo mainline proposed toll plaza south of the Prospecton Road (Isipingo) Interchange.


The Isipingo mainline proposed toll plaza would alienate approximately 1 ha of land which is too wet for agriculture. Of the other activities, none would affect agriculture as the construction would be within the existing road reserve. Soils and land use would be affected in the footprint of the addition of the additional lanes and the plazas..

Assessment

The assessment of the anticipated impacts is provided in Table 24 below. It can be stated with a high degree of confidence that the potential negative impact to agriculture associated with the building of the mainline plaza would be of a very low significance and only the loss of a small area of land and the soil that it occupies would have a site specific impact.

Table 24 Assessment of potential impacts of the proposed toll road section between Dickens Road and the Isipingo Interchanges on soils, land use and agriculture.

ISSU

E /

IMPA

CT

PHAS

E

EXTE

NT

DURA

TION

INTE

NSIT

Y

PROB

ABIL

ITY

SIGN

IFIC

ANCE

STAT

US

CONF

IDEN

CE







High



Potentialnegative




Potentialnegative

High




No mitigation measures to be proposed alleviate the impacts on soils, land use and agriculture because they are too small to require mitigation.

5.3 The “Do nothing” alternative The plight of agriculture is probably more desperate in that part of Transkei through which the northern greenfields section of the road would pass than anywhere else. Agriculture in the Transkei has retrogressed since the 1980s from a nett exporter of a number of commodities to a nett importer of even staple foods such as maize, cabbage, milk and meat. The number and extent of projects which the Eastern Cape Department of Agriculture has abandoned since 1994 outweighs that which have been initiated by a considerable margin. If nothing is done (if the proposed toll road does not go ahead), there is no reason to believe that the retrogression in agriculture would not continue.

5.4 COLTO Specifications and generic mitigation measures

5.4.1 Camps, constructional plant and testing facilities Camps, construction plant and testing facilities can impact on soils, land use and agriculture both during construction and, if rehabilitation is not adequate, after construction. It is becoming accepted practice that, in order to minimise the impacts of activities associated with camps, construction plant and testing facilities that these be preferably placed in villages (hiring existing premises where possible). Wherever possible such facilities would thus be established on non-pristine or non-agricultural land. Camp sites should be chosen in collaboration with the community. An Environmental Management Programme (EMP) should be drawn up for such premises.

Labour should be sourced locally in order to maximise the positive impacts of construction.

5.4.2 Soil stockpiles

5.4.2.1 Point 1506 Earthworks for temporary deviations in the COLTO specifications refers.

It is not acceptable to source soil (“topsoil”) for any works other than from the footprint of that activity which is to take place60. It is also not acceptable to use soil (“topsoil”) for road-making because heavy traffic over soil would damage its structure. Soil should be removed from the footprint of temporary deviations (and other works) and stockpiled for use in rehabilitation of the deviation (or any other works for which topsoil has been removed and stockpiled) prior to closure.

60 Soil and especially topsoil is a valuable resource which can not be squandered. Such activity is in contravention of NEMA and the Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act of 1983.



5.4.2.2 Generic rules regarding soil stockpiling Most soils are comprised of a topsoil layer and one or more subsoil layers. Soils are classified according to the superimposition of the various topsoil and subsoil layers. The South African Soil Classification System ( Soil Classification Working Group, 1991) defines five different topsoil horizons and twenty five subsoil horizons. The way soils react (their worth to agriculture or their erodibility for example) depends on the kind of horizons they have. If the soil is to be replaced in the nature in which it occurred before it was excavated the different horizons must be replaced in the order in which they occur naturally. This implies therefore that in their removal and stockpiling, the different layers must be treated separately.

As a minimum the topsoil (the dark surface 40cm or so) should be removed and stockpiled separately from the subsoil. If there is more than one kind of subsoil, they should also be treated separately. Soil should be stockpiled in heaps no higher than 2m and grassed (see 5.1.6) to prevent colonisation by invader species and degradation of the soil microbial population. Soil stockpiles should be in designated areas and should be labled appropriately to avoid unauthorised removal and use for other purposes. If there is no weathered rock under the subsoil suitable for making the temporary road, it should be sourced and imported from a borrow pit. Prior to rehabilitation it should be removed and discarded in an appropriate designate site if it has no use within the proposed toll road reserve (e.g. for landscaping). An environmental study (at least a Basic Assessment Report) should be done for each temporary deviation/access road to ensure the impact (including that on agriculture, soil and land use) is minimised.

5.4.3 Disposal of material Permission must be obtained from DWAF (National Water Act 36 of 1998) and from DME Minerals and Petroleum Resources Development Act 28 of 2002) to dispose of material in borrow pits since this is the equivalent of opening up a landfill site. Vegetation buried under soil can remain combustible and pose a hazard to the community.

5.4.4 Siting of spoil sites An environmental study should be undertaken on proposed spoil sites and their siting planned to minimise inter alia the impact on soils, land use and agriculture.

6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

6.1 IntroductionThe proposed toll road would bring a new modern highway to northern Pondoland which is currently one of the most isolated, difficult to access parts of South Africa. The rest of the proposed toll road would benefit, in terms of access, only in relative terms, it already has tarred roads. Not only does much of northern Pondoland not have tarred



roads, it does not have all-weather roads. Some parts do not have any roads. Potentially the impact of a toll road on soils, land use and agriculture will be greatest in northern Pondoland because that is the most underdeveloped part of the potentially impacted area which the proposed toll road will impact on. It is for that reason that the emphasis of this report is placed on northern Pondoland.

It is difficult to quantify what the potential impacts on agriculture of the proposed toll road would be. It is perhaps easier to quantify the potential negative impacts than the potential positive impacts because the latter are so much more dependant on “other” factors than the pure physical factors of the realisation of intrinsic land use potential. This is because the community who live in the impacted area and who would stand to benefit from the realisation of the production potential of the land are not truly in charge of their own destiny. Outside forces, wanting to see the landscape remain in its “raw” state could rally a number of reasons to keep agricultural and timber development away even if the proposed toll road does get built because the development of the agricultural and timber potential of the area would do more to damage the “Centre of endemism” and the potential for Nature Reserve declaration than the proposed toll road per se which would occupy a paltry few hundred hectares.

6.2 PlanningA new Spatial Development Framework plan needs to be developed for the Eastern part of the E Cape taking into consideration the proposed toll road, the tourism potential, the natural fauna and flora as well as the development potential of the natural resources so that they can all benefit. Inevitably sacrifices would have to be made61.That is the nature of development. It happens at a cost. But the future of the local Pondoland community should not be made to bear the cost of denying the timber and agricultural potential of the area.

By the time soil surveys were being done in South Africa, most of the Free State, Gauteng and Mpumalanga Highveld had been put under the plough. Only after soil surveys were done did farmers begin to rationalise their arable fields and leave the poor soils to return to veld. Too late vast areas of such veld are occupied by lower succession grassland and the habitat which sound planning could have preserved has been lost. The same can be said for many other agricultural developments – timber in the escarpment areas on shallow uneconomic soils, sugarcane similarly on sandy soils in KZN and more. Early farmers did not realise what they could do with “uitvalgrond”. Today they know that eco-tourism based on the fauna and flora of the non-arable parts of the land can provide the base for a sound tourist industry.

61 The Wild Coast Spatial Development Framework compiled under the Wild Coast Conservation and Development Project (Sept 2005) focuses on the coast and coastal tourism potential stretching, at most, only 30km inland. The impacts of the potential toll road would stretch inland more than double that.



6.3 Mitigation measures

The COLTO specifications aim at limiting the potential impacts of road-building and after the choice of what route a road should take has been subjected to NEMA, provided the contracting agent sticks to the rules laid down in COLTO and the EMP for construction, the potential impacts should be minimised.

In terms of soils, land use and agriculture the most important of the mitigation measures identified above, revolve around “kick-starting” or facilitating processes to get the Department of Agriculture, the Municipalities, Eastern Cape Development Corporation, the private sector and Department Economic Affairs and Tourism (and its E Cape and KZN branches) to develop:

Extension services which operate effectively and educate the farmers on sound scientific agricultural practices

CropsTimberMarketing networks New land tenure systems Agricultural co-operatives Agricultural service and requisite supply networks Production loans

These to be developed in harmony with other forms of potential land use.

In order to safeguard soil physical and chemical properties and to maximise the usefulness of soil, the potentially productive soil (topsoil and subsoil) should be stripped from the footprint of infrastructural developments and stockpiled (separately) in dedicated areas for later use in rehabilitation. Stockpiles should be fertilised and seeded with grass to protect against the invasion of alien plants. Stockpile sites should be identified on site plans and also by erected signage indicating that they are to be conserved for use in rehabilitation. Signage would differentiate topsoil and subsoil.

6.4 Monitoring and review of mitigation measures

The only way to monitor the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures (the identified mitigation measures are intended to maximise the positive impacts) is to determine whether the intended objectives are achieved.

If a programme to assist the extension officers to reach more people is to be tested, a survey should be carried out to learn if that is so. If a programme to develop new sugarcane plantings is to be initiated, a survey should be carried out to determine what has been done and what is happening If a programme to assist with access to markets is to be initiated, a survey should be carried out to determine what has been done and what is happening



If a programme is to be initiated to facilitate the availability of production credit, a survey should be carried out to determine what has been done and what is happening.

Obviously, it would be necessary to establish a baseline to measure changes against. If the impacts of the proposed toll road would be anywhere near as great as is anticipated, a baseline of near zero for all of these issues can be used as a baseline for northern Pondoland (the section of the proposed toll road where these mitigation measures were recommended).

If topsoil is stripped and stockpiled, it will not be necessary to source soil for rehabilitation elsewhere. Engineer site plans would show stockpile sites while signage on the ground would indicate/identify the stockpile in terms of nature and intended use.

Most of the impacts are anticipated to take place over many years. It is not expected that the toll road should monitor and report on such impacts beyond say a 5 year target. After that each industry should provide its own monitoring programme using the benchmarks provided by the toll road studies to measure progress against.

7 REFERENCES

Acocks, J.P.H. 1975. Veld Types of South Africa, Bot. Res. Inst. & Dept. Agric. Tech. Serv, South Africa. ISBN 0 621 02256 X BOHLWEKI ENVIRONMENTAL (Pty) Ltd . 2003. N2 Wild Coast Proposed toll Road between

East London (Eastern Cape) and Durban (KwaZulu-KZN): Environmental Impact Assessment Report, Volume 1: Environmental Impact Assessment Report (Books 1 and 2).

BOHLWEKI ENVIRONMENTAL (Pty) Ltd. 2003. N2 Wild Coast Proposed toll Road between East London (Eastern Cape) and Durban (KwaZulu-KZN): Environmental Impact Assessment Report, Volume 2: Specialist Reports (Books 1 and 2).

BOHLWEKI ENVIRONMENTAL (Pty) Ltd. 2003. N2 Wild Coast Proposed toll Road between East London (Eastern Cape) and Durban (KwaZulu-KZN): Environmental Impact Assessment Report, Volume 3: Comments and Response Report (Books 1, 2a and 2b).

Bromilow,C.1995. Problem Plants of South Africa; Briza Publications; Pretoria ISBN 0 620 8563 5

Coastal and Environmental Services. August 2005. The development of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for the Zone of Afforestation Potential in Eastern Cape; Final Scoping Report; Prepared for DWAF

Coastal and Environmental Services. August 2005. The development of a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for the Zone of Afforestation Potential in Eastern Cape; Draft Strategic Environmental Assessment Report for the Focus Area; Prepared for DWAF

Coates Palgrave K. 1988. Trees of Southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town,



ISBN 0 86977 081 0 Ehlers J. H. Undated posthumous publication. Ekologiese Beplanning van Gewasse. Dept of

Agricultural Services Transvaal Region Posthumous publication Gibbs Russell et al. 1990.Grasses of Southern Africa; Nat Bot Gdns/ Bot Res Inst; Mem Bot

Surv SA No 58. ISBN 0 620 14846 2 Klingebiel A. A. and Montgomery P. H. 1961. Land Capability Classification; USDA Handbook

210, Washington ISBN 0-621-038318 Low B. & Rebelo A.G. 1996. Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland; Dept Environ

Affairs & Tourism, Pretoria. ISBN 0 621 17316 9 Loxton, Venn and Associates.1990.East Pondoland Forestry Development Project, A

prefeasibility Study for Mondi Paper Company Lubke R. & de Moor I. 1998. Field Guide to the Eastern and Southern Cape Coasts; 2nd Ed;

UCT Press Cape Town; ISBN 1 919713 03 4 Macvicar, C.N., Loxton, R.F., Lambrechts, J.J.N., le Roux, J., von M Harmse, H.J.; de Villiers,

J.M., Verster, E., Merryweather, F.R.: van Rooyen,T.H. 1977. Soil classification, a binomial system for South Africa; Dept Agric Tech Services; Pretoria

Pooley E. 1994. The Complete Field Guide to Trees of KZN, Zululand and Transkei, KZN Flora Publications Trust; ISBN 0 620 17697 0

Robinson, J.C. & Welgemoed, C. 1981 Bananas: Climatic Requirements. Farming in South Africa Bananas B.1/1981

Robinson, J.C. July 1981. Studies on the Phenology & Production Potential of Wouldiams Banana in Sub-tropical Climate. Sub-tropical Vol.2 No 7.

Scotney, D.M., Ellis,,F., Wood,,P,C, Taylor,,K., vanNiekerk,,B.J., Verster,,E. 1986. A System of Land capability classification for rain fed agriculture in the SATBVC states; compiled by the task team appointed by the multilateral Technical Committee for Agriculture and Environmental Affairs (MTC/AGEN), Pretoria

Soil Classification Working Group 1991 Soil Classification A Taxonomic System for South Africa Memoirs on the Agricultural Natural Resources of South Africa No 15 Dept Agricultural Development Pretoria. ISBN 0-621-10784-0

Soil Survey Staff 1951. Soil Survey Manual Agricultural Handbook No 18 USA Dept of Agriculture.

Soil Survey Staff 1975. Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys. US Dept of Agriculture Handbook No 436 Washington DC US Government Printing Office

Tainton N.M. 1981 Veld and Pasture Management in South Africa. Shuter and Shooter Pietermaritzburg; ISBN 0 86985 557 3

The Director:Hydrology 1985. Evaporation and Precipitation Records, Monthly Data up to September 1980; Hydrological Information No 13; Dept Water Affairs, Pretoria

Weather Bureau. 1986 Climate of South Africa; Climate Statistics up to 1984; WB40; Government Printer

Weather Bureau. 1992. Climate of South Africa; Climate Statistics up to 1990; WB40; Government Printer



8 APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 CROP ADAPTABILITY TABLE APPENDIX 2 SOIL PROFILES APPENDIX 3 PEER REVIEW REPORT AND REFERENCES TO SPECIALIST’S REPLIESAPPENDIX 4 SPECIALIST REPORT QUOTATION APPENDIX 5 INDEPENDENCE OF CONSULTANT APPENDIX 6 CURRICULUM VITAE


FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental: PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; Tel: 043-7385150; Fax: 043-7385045

APPENDIX 1 CROP ADAPTABILITY TABLE

Toll road crop adaptability comparing current adaptability with that under global warming (Ehlers99/78)

Land use, Soils and Agriculture: Merryweather Environmental; PO Box 68 Cintsa East, 5275. [email protected]

1

CROP ADAPTABILITY (99/78)

ADAPTABILITYSCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME WARM CURRENT

ANNUAL FIELD CROPS Afromomum spp Grains of paradise O MArachis hypogaea Groundnut, peanut, monkeynut N UAvena sativa Oats N OBeta vulgaris Sugarbeet N OBrassica alba Yellow mustard N MBrassica alboglabra Kale N MB. campestris var. rapu Oilseed rape N MB. campestris var. sarson Indian colze oil N MB. campestris var. toria Indian rape, rapeseed oil N MCajanas cajan Pigeon pea O MCamelina sativa False flax N UCarthamus tinctorius Safflower, Bastard saffron N OCrotalaria juncea Sunn hemp O NCyamopsis tetragonolobus Guar, cluster beam O NEchinochloa colonum Japanese millet N UE. crus-gali var. frumentacea

Japanese barnyard millet N O

Eleusine corocana Rapoko, African finger manna O NEragrostis tef Teff, Manna N OFagopyrum spp Buckwheat N UGlycine max Soya bean N SGossypium spp Cotton O NGuizotia abyssinica Niger oilseed N NHelianthus annuus Sunflower M OHibiscus cannabinus Kenaf S NHordeum spp Barley N OKerstingiella geocarpa Hausa groundnut N NLablab niger Dolichos bean M OL. pupureus Lablab bean M ULens esculenta Lentil N OLinum usitatissimum Flax U NLupinus spp Lupin, tarwi N OManihot esculenta Cassava, Manioc O NNicotiana tabacum Turkish tobacco, Virginia tobacco N UOryza sativa Rice O NPanicum maliaceum Millet, manna, broomcorn millet U UPaspalum scrobiculatum Kodo millet U NPennisetum typhoides Babala, millet U U

KEY: O = Optimal; S = Sub-optimal; M = Marginal; N = Not suitable; U = Undifferentiated



2

CROP ADAPTABILITY


P. glaucum Pearl millet U URicinus communis Castor oil O NSecale cereale Rye N NSesamum indicum Sesame U USebania spp Sesbanian hemp N NSetaria italica Millet grain U NS.sphacelata Golden millet U USolanum tuberosum Potato N SSorghum bicolor Grain sorghum O UTriticum aestivum Wheat N OTylosema esculentum Matama bean, Kalahari bean O NVicia faba Windsor bean N NVigna spp Cowpea, Mung bean U NVoandzeia subterranea Bambara nut U NZea mays Maize, sweetcorn N O

KEY:

O = Optimal S = Sub-optimal; M = Marginal; N = Not suitable; U = Undifferentiated



3

CROP ADAPTABILITY

ADAPTABILITYADAPTABILITYCURRENT

COMMON NAME CURRENT WARM CURRENT

VEGETABLESAllium spp Leek N OAllium sativum Garlic N OAllium schaenoprasum Chives N OAllium scorodoprasum Spanish garlic N OAmaranthus leucocarpus Grain amaranth N UAmorphophallus campanulatus

Elephant Yam U N

Apium sp Celery N NArmoracia rusticana Horse radish N NAscolicum cepa Shallot, onion, welsh onion N UAsparagus officinalis Asparagus N NAtriplex hortensis Mountain spinach N OBasella alba Malabar spinach N NBenincasa hispida Ash gourd U NBeta vulgaris Beetroot, Swiss chard, Fodder beet N MBrassica chinensis Turnip N NB. juncea Chinese mustard N NB. napobrassica Kohlrabi N NB. napus Swede, cole N NB. nigra Black mustard, Brown mustard N NB. oleracea var acephala Kale, Chou Moullier N NB. oleracea var botrytis Cauliflower, broccoli N NB. oleracea var capitata Cabbage, Savoy cabbage N NB. oleracea var caulorapa Kohlrabi N NB. oleracea var costata N NB. oleracea var gemmifera Brussel sprout N NB. oleracea var gongylodes Kohlrabi, Hungarian turnip N NB. oleracea var italica Italian broccoli N NB. oleracea var sabauda N NB. oleracea var sinensis Rapeseed oil N NB. oleracea var viridis Collard N NBrassica pekinensis Petsai, Chinese cabbage N NB. rapa Turnip N NCanavalia ensiformis Chicksaw Lima bean U NC. gladiata Sword bean U NC. maritima Dune sword bean U NC. plagiosperma U NCana edulis Queensland arrowroot (purple) U NCapsicum frutescens Green Pepper, Chillies N OChrysanthemum carinatum Chop suey green N UCicer arietinum Chick pea, Bengal gram U U


CROP ADAPTABILITY



4


Cichorium endivia Endive N NCitrullus lanatus Tsama watermelon M OClitoria laurifolia Butterfly pea U NColocasia esculenta Taro, madumbi, Eddo O UC. antiquorum Cocoyam O UCorchrus olitorius Jews mallow U NCucumus anguria Gherkin, Gooseberry gourd U OC.melo Cantelope, netted melon U OC.melo var sativus Cucumber U OCucumis pepo var melopapo Bush pumpkin U O var maxima Pumpkin, squash U O var maxat Hubbard squash U O var medullosa Vegetable marrow U OCurcurbita foetidissima Buffalo gourd U OCurcuma angustifolia East Indian Arrowroot U NC. langa Turmeric U NCynara cardunculus Spanish artichoke N NCyphomandra betacea Tree tomato U NDaucus carota var sativus Carrot N NDioscorea spp Yam U NEruca sativa Rocket salad N SHelianthus tuberosus Jerusalem artichoke N NHibiscus esculentus Okra O SIpomoea batatas Sweet Potato S SLactuca sativa Cabbage lettuce N NLagenaria sicerania Calabash gourd U NLathyrus cicera Falcon pea N UL. hirsutus Caley pea O NL. sativus Chickling pea N UL. sylvestris Flat pea N UL. tingitanus Tangier pea N ULycopersicon lycopersicum Tomato N OMaranta arundinacea West Indian arrowroot U NPachyrrhizus spp Yam bean, potato bean U NPastinaca sativa Turnip, Parsnip N MPetroselinum crispum Parsley N MPhaseolus aconitifolius Mat bean (Vigna aconitifolia syn) U UP. acutifolius Texas bean, Tepary bean U NP. angularis Adzuki bean U UP. aureus Mung bean U UP. calcaratus Rice bean U NP. coccineus Scarlet runner, Kidney bean N OP. lathyroides Phasemy bean U NP. lunatus Lima bean, Butter bean O O




5

CROP ADAPTABILITY


P. metcalfei Metcalf bean O NP. mungo Urd bean, Mung bean U UP. radiatus Green gram bean U NP. trinervis Jerusalem pea U NP. vulgarus French bean, haricot bean,

runner bean, sugar bean N S

Pisum sativum Garden pea N NPlectranthus esculentus Hausa potato M NPortulaca oleracea var sativa Purslane N SPsophorcarpus tetragonolobus Manilla bean U NRaphanus sativus Radish N NR. longipinnatus Japanese radish N URheum rhabarbarum English rhubarb N NSechium edule Chayotte, Choko N OSolanum melongena var esculentum Aubergine, Eggplant M

O

Spinacia oleracea Spinach N NTetragonia expansa New Zealand spinach U OTrichosanthes cucumerina Serpent groud U N




6

CROP ADAPTABILITY

ADAPTABILITYSCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME WARM CURRENTM

HERBS, DYES, DRUGS, AROMATICS

Aconitum napellus Monks hood, Aconite N UAcorus calamus Galango root N UAnethum graveolens Dill N OAngelica archangelica Angelica N UAnthemis nobilis Sweet camomile N OArnica montana Arnica N UArtemesia doncuculus Tarragon N UAnthriscus cerefolium Chervil N MBixa orellana Anatto O NCananga odorata Ylang-Ylang (oil Tree) U NCannabis sativa Marijuana (dagga) Hemp U NCarum carvi Caraway seed N UCatha edulis Bushman’s tea, Mitaa N OChaerophyllum bulbosum Turnip rooted chervil N UCinnamomum spp Cinnamon U NCola nitida Colanut U NColeus ambionicus Indian borage U NC. parviflorus U NCoriandrum sativum Coriander N SCuminum cyminum Cumin seed N OCurcuma longa Turmeric U NCymbopogon citratus Lemongrass O NC. nardus Citronella oil grass O NDioscorea spp Yam, Potato yam U NElettaria cardamonum Cardamom U NEugenia carophyllata Clove U NFoeniculum vulgare var dulce

Fennel, Sweet anise N U

Galega officinalis Goats rue U NGlycyrrhiza glabra Liquorice U UHibiscus sabdariffa Sorrel O NLaurus nobilis Bay, laurel, laurel bay N NLavandula officinalis Lavender N UMarjorana hortensis Marjoram, sweet marjoram N UM. anites French marjoram N UMentha arumensis Field mint, menthol N UM. piperata Peppermint N UM. spicata Spearmint N UMyrrhis odorata Myrrh N NOcimum basilicum Basil, sweet basil N SOriganum vulgare Oreganum N U


CROP ADAPTABILITY



7


Pelargonium graveolens Malva N UPimenta dioica Pimento, Allspice S UPimenta racemosa West Indian bay S UPimpinella anisum Anise N OPiper nigrum Black pepper, White pepper O NPortulaca oleracea var sativa

Purslane N S

Rosmarinus officinalis Rosemary N USalvia officinalis Sage N US. sclarea Common clary N USatureia hortensis Savory N UScorsonera hispanica Black salsify N UTamarindus indica Tamarind, Indian date S NTanacetum vulgare Tansy N UTaraxacum officinale Dandelion N UTephrosia toxicaria Rotenone O NThymus vulgaris Thyme N UVanilla sp Vanilla O NZingiber officinale Ginger O N




8

CROP ADAPTABILITY


SOFT BERRY FRUITS Actinidia chinensis Kiwi N NAverrhoa carambola Coramandel goosberry N NDovyalis hebecarpa Ceylon gooseberry N NEriobotrya uniflora Surinam cherry N OFragaria ananassa Strawberry N UMalphigia glabra Barbados cherry N NPhysalis ixocarpa Sugar cherry N NP. peruviana Cape gooseberry N NP. pruinosa Dwarf Cape gooseberry N UPrunus avium Cherry N NRubus idacus Red raspberry N NR. logonobacens Loganberry N NR. occidentalis Black raspberry N NR. strigosis Red raspberry N NR. logonobacens x flagilaris Youngberry, Booysenberry N NVaccinium sp Blueberry N NVitis vinifera Grape N N




9

CROP ADAPTABILITY


FRUITS AND NUTS Aegele marmelos Bael fruit O NAnonum aromaticum Begal cardamon N NAnacardium occidentale Cashew nut O NAnanas comosus/sativus Pineapple M OAnnona cherimola Cherimoya S OAnnona diversifolia Llama S OAnnona glabra Pond apple S NAnnona montana Mountain soursop M NAnnona muricata Guanabana M NAnnona purpurea Sancoya S NAnnona reticulata Corazon custard apple S NAnnona squamosa Sugar apple M NArtocarpus altillis Breadfruit tree M NA. heterophyllus Jackfruit M NA. odoratissimus Marang M NAverrhoa bilimbi Cucumber tree M NA. carambola Carambola, coromandel

gooseberry M N

Bactrys utilis Peach nut N NButyrospermum paradoxum Shea butter M NCalocarpum spp Sapote M NCanarium spp Javanese almond M NCarcica candanaricensis Hairy papaya N OC. papaya Pawpaw, papaya O MCaryoca nuciform Butter nut M NCarya illinoinensis Pecan nut N SCasimiroa edulis White sapote U UCeiba parvifolia Pachote, camote N UCeratonia siliqua Carob U NChrysophyllum cainito Star apple U NCitrus aurantiifolia Sweet lime O NC. aurantium Seville, bitter orange O NC. grandis Shaddock, pumelo O NC. limonia Lemon N UC. medica Citrus U UC. var paradisii Grapefruit S NCitrus var reticulata Mandarin (Naartjie), Tangerine O MC. var sinensis Valencia, Navel M SClausena lansium Wampi U U




10

CROP ADAPTABILITY


Cocos nuciferum Coconut O NCola spp Cola nut, Kola S NColocarpum sapota/viride Green sapote U NCordeauxia edulis Ye-eb, Somali Pistacio N NCorylus maxima Hazel nut N UCrataegus pubescens Mexican hawthorn N ODialium ovoideum Velvet tamarind U UDiospyros discolor Velvet apple U ND. ebenaster Black sapote U UD. kaki Japanese persimmon M OD. virginiana American persimmon N UDipteryx spp Tonka bean U NDovyalis caffra Kei apple U UEnsete ventricosum Wild banana O UEriobotrya japonica Loquat N OE. braziliensis Brazil chestnut N ME. jambas Jambos N UFeijoa sellowiana Pineapple guava N OFerronia elephantum Elephant apple N NFicus carica Fig N UFlacourtia indica Madagascar plum U NFortunella japonica Marumi kumquat N UGarcinia livingstonei African mangosteen O NGenipa americana Genip, Marmalade box U NJuglans regia Walnut N NLansium domesticum Langsat, Lanson U NLecythis minor Sapucoya nut U NLitchi chinensis Litchi S NLucuma spp Eggfruit, Mexican sapodilla S NMacadamia integrifolia Macadamia nut M MMalus sylvestris Apple N NMammea americana Mammee apple M NMangifera foetida Grey mango M NM. indica Mango O MManilkara achras Marmalade plum, Sapodilla M NMelaleuca leucadendron Cajeput tree, Punk tree M NMusa spp Banana, plantain O NMyrciaria cauliflora Jaboticaba U NNephelium lappaceum Rambutan N NOpuntia ficus indica Spineless cactus, Prickly pear M UOrbignya oleifer Babasso palm N NPassiflora edulis forma edulis

Purple granadilla N O

P. laurifolia Yellow granadilla U NP. ligularis Sweet granadilla U NP. quadrangularis Giant granadilla U N




11

CROP ADAPTABILITY


Persea americana Avocado M OPhoenix dacytlifera Date palm N NPhyllanthus emblica Malacca tree U NPistacia vera Pistacio nut N NPoncirus trifoliata Trifoliate orange N UPrunus amygdalus Almond N NP. armeniaca Apricot N NP. domestica Common plum N NP. institia var italica Greengage N NP. occidentalis Japanese plum N NP. persica Peach, nectarine N NP. salicina Japanese plum N NPsidium guajava Guava S MP. littorale var longipes Strawberry guava, Cattley guava S UPunica granatum Pomegranate U NPyrus communis Pear N NRicenodendron rautenenii Mangetti nut N NSpondias spp Golden apple, Hog plum U NTamarindus indica Tamarind O NTerminalia catappa Tropical almond U NTheobroma cacao Cocoa S NZiziphus mauritiana Zambezi plum, Mauritius plum O N




12

CROP ADAPTABILITY


DRINKS, OILS Aleurites fordii Tung nut N UA. montana Mu oil N UAspalanthus linearis Rooibos Tea N NCamellia sinensis Tea N SCampanula rapunculus Rampion N UCichorium intybus Chicory N MCoffea arabica Arabica coffee N MC. canephora (robusta) Robusta coffee S NCola nitida Cola nut S NElais guineensis Oil palm O NHumulus lupulus Hops N UOlea europaea Olive N NParthenium agrentatum Guayule U USaccharum officinarum Sugar cane O MSimmonodia chinensis Jojoba bean/wax N N




13

CROP ADAPTABILITY


FIBRE CROPS Abutilon theophrasti Chinese jute S SAechmea magdalenae Pita fibre, Silkgrass O NAgave fourcroydes Mexican fibre U NA. sisalana Sisal U NCannabis sativa Indian hemp N OCeiba pentandra Kapok O MCorchorus olitorius Tossa jute, Jews mallow U NCrotalaria junca Madras hemp, Sunn hemp O MFurcraea foetida Mauritius hemp U NHibiscus cannabinus Bimlipatum jute, Deccan hemp,

Stokroos S M

Luffa spp Loofah U MPhormium tenax New Zealand hemp N OSesbania exaltata Sesbania hemp U NUrena lobata Congo jute U N




14

CROP ADAPTABILITY

ADAPTABILITYSCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME

WARM CURRENTPASTURES, FORAGES Acroceras macrum Nile Grass O UAeschynomene americana Jointed vetch U UAgropyron spp Wheat grass N OAgrostis spp Bent grass N NAlopecurus spp Foxtail N OAlysicarpus vaginalis Alyce clover O NAmmophila app American beachgrass N OAndropogon annulatus Big bluestem O NA. gayanus Gambia grass O NA. var squamulatus Rhodesian bluestem O NA. gerrardii Big bluestem S OA. hallii Sand bluestem S OA. intermedius var. caucasius

Caucasian bluestem S O

A. ischaemum Yellow bluestem U NA. ischaemum var. King Ranch bluestem U NA. littoralis Sea coast bluestem O NA. scoparius Liule bluestem S OAnthyllis vulneraria Kidney vetch N OArrhenatherum elatius False oatgrass N OAstragalus chinensis Milk vetch U NAtriplex nummularia Old man salt bush N OAxonopus affinis Carpet grass O NA. compressus Tropical carpetgrass O NA. furcatus Big carpetgrass O NBoehmeria nivea China grass, Rhea S NBouteloua curtipendula Side Oats Grama U UB. Eriopoda Black grama S NB. filiformis Slender grama S NB. gracilis Blue grama S OB. hirsuta Hairy grama S OBouteloua rothrockii Rothrock grama S NBrachiaria brizantha Common signal grass U OB. mutica Mauritius signal grass O OBromus arvensis Field Brome grass N OB. carinatus California Brome grass N UB. inermis Smooth Brome grass N OB. marginatus Mountain Brome grass N OB. willdenowii Australian oats U NBuchloe dactyloides Buffalo grass U UCenchrus ciliaris Blue buffalo grass, Poko grass O S




15

CROP ADAPTABILITY


Centrosema pumieri Centroseme U NCeratonia siliqua Carob U NChloris gayana Rhodes grass O OCoix lacryma-jobi Job’s tears U UCoronila varia Crown vetch N UCurcurbita foetidissima Buffalo gourd U UCymbopogon plurinodis Turpentine grass U UCynodon spp Quickgrass, Stargrass O UDactylis glomerata Cocksfoot grass N ODactyloctenium australe Durban quickgrass O ODesmodium spp Clover, tick trefoil U NDichanthium caricosum Bluegrass of Nadi U NDigitaria decumbens Nelspruit fingergrass U NEchinochloa pyramidalis Limpopograss (Antelopegrass) U NE. stagnina Burgugrass U NElymus spp Helm, wild rye N UEragrostis chloromelas Blue vlei grass U OE. curvula Weeping lovegrass U OE. lehmanniana Eastern Province vleigrass S OE. tef Teff N OE. trichodes Sand lovegrass U OEremochloa ophiuroides U UEriochloa polystachya Caribgrass U NFestuca spp Fescue N OGleditsia triancanthus Honey locust N NGlycine javanica Forage bean M OHedysarum coronarium Sweet vetch U NHilaria mutica Mesquite grass O NHolcus lanatus Velvet grass N UHyparrhenia hirta Thatch grass M OH. rufa Yellow spike thatch grass M NLathyrus niger Black bitter vetch N ULespedeza bicolor Shrub lespedeza U NL. cuneata Chinese lespedeza U NL. cyrtobotrya Bush lespedeza U NL. hedysaroides Rush lespedeza U NL. stipulacea Korean lespedeza, U NL. striata Common lespedeza U NLeucaena leucocephala Poor mans alfalfa, White popinac U NLolium multiflorum Italian ryegrass M UL. perenne Perrennial ryegrass N OLotononis bainessi Birdsfoot trefoil U MLotus corniculates Broadleaf birdsfoot trefoil N OL. tenius Narrowleaf birdsfoot trefoil N OL. uliginosus/pedunculatus Big trefoil N UMedicago arabica Spotted lucerne M N




16

CROP ADAPTABILITY


M. hispida Rough medic, California bur clover

S N

M. lupulina Black lucerne, Yellow trefoil N OM. rigidula Tifton bur clover S NM. sativa Lucerne M OM. tuberculata Cogwheel bur clover U OMelilotus alba White sweet clover N U var annua Israel sweet clover N U var indica Annual sweet yellow clover N U var officinalis Common melilot U U var suaveolens Dagheston sweet clover U UMelinis minutiflora Brazilian stinkgrass U NM. repens Natal redtop O OOnobrychus viciifolia Sainfoin N OOpuntia ficus-indica Spineless cactus U UOrnithopus sativus Serradella N OOryzopsis spp Indian ricegrass N UPanicum aquinerve Giant panicgrass U UP. antidotale Guana grass U NPanicum coloratum var makarikarienses

Makarikari grass U U

P. laevifolium Lands grass U UP. maximum Guinea grass O OP. muticum Para grass U UP. obtusum Vine mesquite grass U NP. purpurescens Para grass U NP. virgatum Switchgrass U UParochetus communis Blue oxalis, Shamrock pea U NPaspalum spp Paspalum U SPennisetum clandestinum Kikuyu U UP. merkeri Merkers pennisetum U UP. purpureum Napier fodder, Elephant grass U UP. typhoides Babala, pearl millet U UPhalaris arundinacea Canary grass N UP. tuberosa Perennial canary grass N OPhleum nodosum Timothy N NPoa spp Blue grass N OProsopis spp Mesquite U NPueraria thunbergiana Thunberg kudzu U URaphanus var longipinnatus Japanese radish N USetaria italica Millet green fodder U USorghum almum Columbus grass O US. arundinaceum var sudanense Perennial Sudan grass O

U

S. halepense Aleppograss, Johnson grass O NStenotaphrum secundatum Buffalo grass, Coarse quick O S




17

CROP ADAPTABILITY


Tephrosia spp Tephrosia U NTragopogon porrifolius Salsify, Oyster plant N NTrifolium alexandrinum Egyptian clover N UT. dubium Yellow suckling clover U UT. fragiferum Strawberry clover N UT. glomeratum Cluster clover U UT. hirtum Rose clover U UT. hybridum Alsike clover N OT. incarnatum Crimson clover S OT. lappaceum Lappa clover U UT. pratense Red clover N UT. pratense forma Kenland Kenland red clover U NT. procumbens Large hop clover U UT. repens White clover N UT. var. giganteum Giant white clover N UT. resupinatum Persian clover U UT.striatum Knotted clover U UT. subterraneum Subterranean hop clover N UVicia spp Vetch U UV. faba Horse bean, Windsor bean N NZoysia japonica Palm-beach grass U UZ. matrella Manilla lawn grass U U




APPENDIX 2 SOIL PROFILES

Profile No 1 Soil form Cartref Locality 31°18˝ 13.6 S; 29°47˝ 19.4 S Soil family Frosterley Site and landform Undulating lower slope Parent material/geology Umsikaba sandstone Vegetation Aristida junciformis (NGongoni) veld HORISON DEPTH (mm) DESCRIPTION A1 0-700 Black (10YR 2/1); coarse sand; apedal; friable; rapidly permeable;

gradual transition B1 700-900 Dark grey (10YR4/1); coarse sandy loam; apedal; friable; rapidly

permeable A2 900-1000 Grey (10YR 5/1); loamy coarse sand; apedal; friable; rapidly permeable;

abrupt transition R 1000+ Rock

ANALYTICAL DATA Sample No 1a 1b 1c Horison A1 B1 E Depth 0-700 700-900 900-1000 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION %Fine earth (<2.0 mm) 100 100 100 Coarse sand (2.0 –0.5mm) 36 31 30 Med sand (0.5 – 0.20mm) 34 34 41 Fine sand (0.20– 0.02mm) 12 12 15 Silt (0.02 – 0.002mm) 9 7 4 Clay (<0.002mm) 9 16 10 NET EXTRACTABLE CATIONS (me/100g soil in ammonium acetate) Na 0.08 0.01 0.01 K 0.03 0.01 0.01 Ca 0.30 0.10 0.15 Mg 1.05 0.40 0.40 Svalue 1.46 0.52 0.57 S value per 100 g clay 16 3 6 CEC per 100g clay 24 10 20 OTHER ANALYSES pH Water paste 3.5 3.6 3.7 Resistance (R16 C Ohms) 2100 9000 12000 Phosphorus (ppm) 17 Organic N % 0.19

Profile No 2 Soil form Oakleaf/Tukulu Locality 31°12˝ 17.5 S; 29°53˝ 2.2 E Soil family Buchuberg/Olivedale Site and landform Undulating; topslope Parent material/geology Umsikaba sandstone Vegetation Aristida junciformis (NGongoni) grassland HORISON DEPTH (mm) DESCRIPTION A1 0-500 Very dark brown ((10YR2/2);loamy sand; apedal; friable; rapidly

permeable; gradual transition; B2 500-700 Very dark grey brown (10YR3/2); sandy loam; apedal; friable; rapidly

permeable; clear transition C/R 700+ Mottled strong brown and white weathering sandstone

ANALYTICAL DATA Sample No 2a 2b Horison A1 B2 Depth 0-500 500-700 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION %Fine earth (<2.0 mm) 100 100 Coarse sand (2.0 –0.5mm) 18 18 Med sand (0.5 – 0.20mm) 51 48 Fine sand (0.20– 0.02mm) 12 11 Silt (0.02 – 0.002mm) 7 6 Clay (<0.002mm) 12 17 NET EXTRACTABLE CATIONS (me/100g soil in ammonium acetate) Na 0.01 0.02 K 0.03 0.03 Ca 0.10 0.10 Mg 0.50 0.40 Svalue 1.46 0.52 S value per 100 g clay 5 3 CEC per 100g clay 24 10 OTHER ANALYSES pH Water paste 3.4 3.5 Resistance (R16 C Ohms) 4100 5700 Phosphorus (ppm) 13 Organic N % 0.12

Profile No 3 Soil form Clovelly Locality 31°15˝ 27.6 S; 29°49˝ 5.9 E Soil family Brereton Site and landform Undulating Parent material/geology Msikaba sandstone Vegetation Aristida junciformis (NGongoni) grassland HORISON DEPTH (mm) DESCRIPTION A1 0-600 Very dark grey (10YR 3/1); coarse sandy loam; apedal; friable; rapidly

permeable; gradual transition B1 600-800 Very dark greyish brown (10YR 3/2); coarse sandy loam; apedal; friable;

rapidly permeable; gradual transition B21 800-900 Yellowish brown (10YR5/4); coarse sandy loam; apedal; friable; rapidly

permeable; clear transition C/R 900+ Mottled weathered sandstone

ANALYTICAL DATA Sample No 3a 3b Horison A1 B2 Depth 0-600 800-900 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION %Fine earth (<2.0 mm) 100 100 Coarse sand (2.0 –0.5mm) 31 28 Med sand (0.5 – 0.20mm) 32 35 Fine sand (0.20– 0.02mm) 16 10 Silt (0.02 – 0.002mm) 10 9 Clay (<0.002mm) 11 18 NET EXTRACTABLE CATIONS (me/100g soil in ammonium acetate) Na 0.01 0.01 K 0.03 0.01 Ca 0.2 0.1 Mg 0.6 0.45 Svalue 0.84 0.57 S value per 100 g clay 8 3 CEC per 100g clay 15 8 OTHER ANALYSES pH Water paste 3.8 4.0 Resistance (R16 C Ohms) 4200 7500 Phosphorus (ppm) 5 Organic N % 0.10

Profile No 4 Soil form Tukulu Locality 31°7˝ 6.4 S; 30°4˝ 51.0 E Soil family Olivedale Site and landform Gently undulating Parent material/geology Msikaba sandstone Vegetation HORISON DEPTH (mm) DESCRIPTION A1 0-600 Very dark brown (10YR2/2); loamy coarse sand; apedal; friable; rapidly

permeable; gradual transition B21 600-800 Very dark greyish brown (10YR3/2); coarse sandy loam; apedal; friable;

rapidly permeable; abrupt transition; at the transition is a layer of iron concretions

B22 800-1000 Mottled light brownish grey (10YR5/2)and brownish yellow (10YR6/6) with abundant dark grey (10YR 4/1) cutans; sandy clay loam; apedal; friable; slowly permeable

ANALYTICAL DATA Sample No 4a 4b 4c Horison A1 B21 B22 Depth 0-600 600-800 800-1000 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION %Fine earth (<2.0 mm) 99 83 100 Coarse sand (2.0 –0.5mm) 28 27 20 Med sand (0.5 – 0.20mm) 40 39 28 Fine sand (0.20– 0.02mm) 12 11 10 Silt (0.02 – 0.002mm) 9 6 9 Clay (<0.002mm) 11 17 33 NET EXTRACTABLE CATIONS (me/100g soil in ammonium acetate) Na 0.01 0.01 0.05 K 0.02 0.01 0.05 Ca 0.1 0.1 0.3 Mg 0.4 0.5 0.85 Svalue 0.53 0.62 1.25 S value per 100 g clay 5 4 4 CEC per 100g clay 15 9 6 OTHER ANALYSES pH Water paste 3.7 3.8 3.7 Resistance (R16 C Ohms) 5100 8800 5000 Phosphorus (ppm) 14 Organic N % 0.13



APPENDIX 3 PEER REVIEW REPORT AND REFERENCES TO SPECIALIST’S REPLIES

PEDOPLAN INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS

SOIL AND LAND USE SURVEYS FOR AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING

247 Knysna Avenue 0182 SINOVILLE

Pretoria

Tel/Fax: 0125431018 Mobile: 0826838338

Email:[email protected]

26 November 2007

CCA Environmental (Pty) Ltd Cape Town

Attention: Fuad Fredericks

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPOSED N2 WILD COAST TOLL HIGHWAY – EXTERNAL PEER REVIEW OF DRAFT SOILS, LAND USE AND AGRICULTURAL STUDY

For the purpose of this review, it is assumed that the study will form part of a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on the proposed project from which a draft Environmental Management Plan (EMP) will be compiled. An acceptable level of detail for studies of this speciality (e.g. soil-landform) is therefore anticipated.

I scrutinised the report thoroughly and my review can be summarised as follows:

1. Background comments on and assessment of the study

1.1 One of my concerns is scale of study. In 1.1 the brief stated “… to undertake a detailed (my accentuation) investigation and assessment of the potential impacts….”. Considering the need for an acceptable level of detail to comply with the terms of reference for an EMP, it would be, in my view, a crucial approach, i.e. to conduct a detailed investigation (as stated in the brief). However, to be able to attain this objective one needs detailed information on specifically the soil-landform resources in order to assess, for example, arable potential (see also 1.4 of review). Methodology in the report does not confirm such a level of study (see 1.3 of report). Although the brief indicates a detailed approach, the data utilised does not support such an assumption. This lack of detail provided will be elaborated on throughout most of the review.

At this stage my premise of the study is: a) the level of detail on the soil-landform part of the study has not been satisfactorily dealt with; and b) this study should be followed by a detailed investigation on soil-landform resources of mainly sensitive areas. On the other hand, level of detail on land use and agriculture provided seems satisfactorily dealt with, although the latter should really have formed a separate study with a strong agriculture economic input.

2

1.2. To describe the affected environment as a whole (see 3 of report) one needs broad-scale information as for climate (3.1), geology and landform (3.2), and geology and soils (3.3). While climate and geology (no reference stated) are satisfactorily described, soil and landform (slope) are not. Soil-landform data in up-to-date terminology (even climatic statistics) are available in the form of land types. I would regard the use of this data as essential detail for the route in total. In actual fact, a map showing the land types with its soil and slope properties needs to be included. On the basis of this data, descriptions on the soil-landform resources (3.3) and sections of the route (3.4) could be made, as well as sensitive areas, viz. loss of high potential arable land, susceptibility to water erosion, soil compaction, disturbance of water throughflow, wetland/riparian areas, stability of land through landslides, etc. could be pointed out. It is the pedologists duty to highlight these potential sensitive areas for other disciplines to take note of.

Without the implied use of the available land type data for such an extensive and complex project, I consider this approach not acceptable.

1.3. Data on land use (current and potential – 3.4); agriculture (3.5); timber (3.6); and markets (3.7) in the context of the brief are adequately dealt with; though, the assessment of global warming and its impact on agricultural production is highly speculative (also stated in report). I fully agree with their assessment of impact which land tenure has on agriculture.

1.4. Normally the loss of “high” potential agricultural (prime) land is generally appraised to be an impact of high significance subject to the provisos stated in 5.1.1 (p36). My main concern is that neither criteria nor classification system have been used to evaluate arable suitability. Currently two systems for land evaluation are used in South Africa, viz.

Schoeman, J.L., van der Walt, M., Monnik, K.A., Thackrah, J., Malherbe, J. & le Roux, R.E., 2002. Development and application of a land capability classification system for South Africa. Unpublished report GW/A/2000/57. ARC-ISCW, Pretoria.

Scotney, D.M., Ellis, F., Nott, R.W., Taylor, K.P., Van Niekerk, B.J. Verster, E. & Wood, P.C., 1987. A system of soil and land capability classification for agriculture in the SATBVC States. Unpublished report, Dept. Agric. Water Supply, Pretoria.

For example: in 5.2.6.3 (p82) the following is stated: “Approximately 230 ha of land would be occupied by the road reserve. …. This land is largely poor arable land but where soils are not excessively shallow the land is suitable for timber and sugarcane.” Generic terms such as ‘poor’, ‘good’, etc are not very scientific. What does ‘not excessively shallow’ mean? Although land may be ‘suitable for timber and sugarcane’, is it best suited for these uses? (I remind the reader of statements made in 6.2 where farmers of the Mpumalanga Highveld, for example, began to rationalise their arable fields and leave the poor soil to return to veld upon soil surveys being conducted in this area.) Instead, the evaluation of suitability of land should be based on independent criteria and a system of classification; therefore no need would exist for possibly unreliable and subjective assessments. These assessments on arable potential should inter alia be reported on during the impact analysis phase. Therefore, if of low arable potential (defined according to the above systems) then the significance of impact would be obviously lower or even of no significance with reference to the loss of prime agricultural land.

3

Failing to utilise land type data and subsequently a land evaluation procedure should be regarded as shortcomings of the study.

1.5. Four most important risk sources as well as 11 impacts are mentioned (4.2 of the report). Those impacts (negative and positive) not directly associated with the properties and quality of agricultural resources such as loss of access, noise, loss of use of land within the road reserve, improved regional access, improved extension services, access to production credit and increased cost of transport, are satisfactorily explained and motivated in section 5.1. However, impact 1 (loss of productive/potentially productive land) need to be adapted to those data gleaned from the land type survey and subsequently evaluated in terms of land capability (see 1.4 above). While the impact of change in surface drainage (impact 3) may easily be predicted as stated in the report (5.1.3), impact on throughflow is unpredictable; the reason is that very little is known of this process. Regarding the loss of or damage to the soil body per se (impact 6), I am in full agreement with the removal of especially the topsoil from the footprint, stockpiling thereof according to the conditions stated in the report, and using it for rehabilitation.

Though, important negative impacts such as possible increased water erosion during construction and operational phases; compaction of soil by heavy, construction vehicles; source of dust during the construction phase; degradation of wetlands/riparian areas inter alia are not dealt with in the report. It is a known fact that certain areas are more prone to water erosion; some soil has a higher compaction potential as well as dust potential as maybe adjacent soils; etc. These differences should be highlighted through the process of evaluation for each section of the proposed road, based on data supplied by the land type survey. Similarly, mitigation measures need to be recommended, for example ripping of compacted areas, wetting of areas producing dust, etc.

These negative impacts should definitely be included in the report notwithstanding assumptions that road-building will be conducted according to BATNEEC and SANRAL approaches.

1.6. The lengthy section on impacts along the proposed toll route corridor (section 5.2) is understandably the focus of the report. Throughout, the analytical approach in the form of subsections describing proposed construction activities, description of effect, assessment, mitigation objectives and measures, are commendable. Impact terminology is in line with standard procedures. Except for differences in opinion regarding the assessment of prime agricultural land, the significance ratings given to potential impacts are reasonable and reliable.

Regarding the scale of study (see 1.1 of the review), the claim that it represents a detailed assessment of potential impacts seems to be debatable. Without the application of the available data on land types as well as the land evaluation process, a detailed assessment of potential impacts on the soil-landform resources is, in my view, not possible for the different sections of the proposed toll road. My recommendation would be that a detailed field investigation of the soil-landform resources still needs to be undertaken to be able to prepare the EMP. This will definitely be necessary for the sensitive areas along the proposed road. I must emphasise again that impacts related to land use and agriculture seem to be satisfactorily dealt with.

4

1.7 I can associate myself completely with the viewpoint on the “Do nothing” alternative (5.3).

1.8 Monitoring programmes recommended in 6.4 should preferably include a timeframe of say six months periods.

2. Specific comments on review’s Terms of Reference

2.1 The terms of reference for the study are outlined in Background and brief (see section 1.1 of report). In general, I am satisfied that the study has complied with the ToR.

2.2 Adequate consideration is given to legal/policy matters (see 4.3) and the planning context (see 6.2).

2.3 Limitations regarding the use of soil-landform data available from the land type survey as well as the lack of a credible land evaluation procedure/system in order to assess suitability have been dealt with in 1.2 and 1.4 of the review. Otherwise the study approach, except for a difference of opinion about the scale of study (1.1 and 1.6 of the review), and assessment methodology are in line with specifications.

2.4 The obvious gap in data used, according to my understanding, again refers to the absence of land type data for the complete road corridor. Information regarding land use and agriculture, however, is specific enough to be able to assess impacts. It is not possible for me to assess inaccuracies.

2.5 As already stated in 1.6 above, the significant ratings given to potential impacts are reasonable and reliable.

2.6 If this point refers to alternative route alignments and alternative mainline toll plaza locations then recommendations (see 5.2.4 and 5.2.5, for example) are based on soil (although detail is lacking as mentioned above), land use and agricultural parameters and are therefore defensible.

2.7 The introduction of impacts such as accelerated water erosion, soil compaction, dustiness, degradation of wetlands/riparian areas, indicating possible land surface instability, etc. and their assessment (see 1.2 and 1.4 above) as part of section 5 of the report, may be considered as an alternative viewpoint. Significance of impact varies according to the properties of the soil-landform resources, and obviously is the subject of this specialist study. Regarding the aquatic ecosystem, soil and landform play an important role and should be accommodated in any study of this nature.

2.8 It is my belief, in general, that key uncertainties or risks, and/or assumptions underpinning the assessment have been sufficiently highlighted in the study.

3. General

3.1 Editing may be required.

3.2 With improvements, this analysis could become a benchmark study on linear features.

5

Thank you for the opportunity to participate as peer reviewer.

Dr Eben Verster (Pr Sci Nat Soil Science)

Relevant paragraphs in which Peer Review report queries are answered or rectified

PEER REVIEW

PARAGRAPHSPECIALIST REPORT REPLIES

1.1 See Section 1.3

1.2 Attached Land Type map

Section 5.2 already provides information on

impacts relating to road sections

1.3 No comment required

1.4 It is a question of semantics

1.5 The details relating to site follow in section 5.2 and

are not meant to be in Section 5.1

See last two paragraphs in 5.1

1.6 See 1.3 and Appendix 4


1.8 See last para in 6.4



2.3 See 1.3 and Land Type Maps provided

2.4 See 1.3 and Land Type Maps provided

2.5 No comment

2.6 No comment

2.7 New Sections 3.3.10, 3.3.11 and 3.3.12 and last

para in 5.1

2.8 No comment

3.1 Spell check is working again! Done.

3.2 No comment



APPENDIX 4 SPECIALIST REPORT QUOTATION

FR Merryweather trading as Merryweather Environmental

PO Box 68 Cintsa East 5275; 65 Mar l in dr ive; Fax (043) 7385045; E Mai l merryweatherenvironmental@iafr ica.com

Tel (043) 7385150; Cel l 083 3253002.

Facsimile transmittal sheetTO: FUAD FREDERICKS FROM: FRANK R MERRYWEATHER COMPANY: CCA ENVIRONMENTAL DATE: TUESDAY, 21 OCTOBER 2008 FAX NUMBER: 0214611120 TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER:

Toll road Climate, Soils, Agriculture and Land Use

Dear Mr Fredericks,

Thank you for asking me to quote you on updating the Specialist report which I provided for the first EIA (The Bohlweki EIA – In actuality, I subcontracted to CES and not to Bohlweki) done for the earlier bid on the proposed Toll road. I believe that the success or failure of the process to safeguard the environment rests not so much in the EIA reporting process but in the implementation of proposed measures in mitigation of identified impacts as well as the on-going on-site environmental care during construction and post construction.

I read in the scoping report that the section on climate, soils, agriculture and land use was criticised for being too general. That would have been my own criticism. There were many reasons for this. Mainly the terms of reference/budget did not allow for the kind of detail which many people might have liked to see. In most cases, such matters perforce were left for some later stage because the precise road site had not yet been pegged. Many of the impacts which were identified in generic terms could not be precisely located/defined so that individual parcels of land and people who would be impacted could not be identified. The scale of study did not allow this. Neither will the current scale of study allow this.

My earlier study indicated that the whole greenfields section of the road would occupy some 700ha. This is a small piece of land. Because it occurs in a high rainfall area it is potentially more valuable to agriculture than the same size parcel of land in the Karoo or the Kalahari would be but because it occurs in such dissected country it has not the potential of an equal piece of land on the Highveld Plateau or in the Crocodile river valley of the Lowveld. My statement that the land was intrinsically poor was criticised because there are, within the area covered by the 700ha some patches of potentially productive soil, but unlike the vast areas of uniformly deep, productive soil on the Mpumalanga Highveld, such large expanses of good soil are generally absent in all of the Eastern Cape due to its geomorphological history.

The earlier study did not make use of the new South African tenet which requires that new major developments contribute to the upliftment of the local people (often beyond reason - it could be argued that the new road will be providing enough for local upliftment). This study can help provide ways (in fact the ToR would appear to mandate this) in which the local people can improve their lot. By identifying poor agricultural practices and ways of improving production through the adoption of better practices, crops, enterprises etc. such a project can do much to alleviate the plight of the communities through which the road will pass if both they and the Dept

M E R R Y W E A T H E R E N V I R O N M E N T A L


2

of Agriculture can be galvanised to adopt new practices. This will require a greater in-depth analysis of what is currently being done than was done in the previous study. Liaison with the social team can help provide lines of possible improvement by providing them with the questions to ask. Field work and (independent) discussion with the people will also be undertaken (with the help of agricultural officers and Ward Councillors).

Our earlier study was based on existing soil maps at a regional scale. These maps generalise what is mapped in terms of percentages. Map units comprise geographic units of often very different soils which are repeated over large areas. The maps do not show where the “good” soil is, just that there is a percentage of such soil within the unit. If it were now wanted to provide the kind of detail which will identify where the good patches of soil are, it will take more work than may be justified by the end requirement at this stage. In order to achieve this, it would be necessary to cover, probably on foot, the whole route of the greenfields section (100km?). This kind of detail will be necessary for the EMP (and if compensation is to be paid) but that level of detail is not needed now. It is proposed therefore to use the same methodology as previously with respect to soils and land use potential but to do more field work on the issue of current land use, current cropping and marketing.

Global warming was not taken into account in the previous studies. This phenomenon may well open up new opportunities for the people of the Coastal Eastern Cape which enjoys a fairly equable climate but one which is cooler than is required for the commercial production of many tropical and equatorial crops (it is too cool for banana, sugar cane, coconut, many tropical spices etc but the anticipated rise in temperature of 5°C would make the area very suitable). Crop adaptability needs a fresh look as do the new opportunities which the road will bring by linking small farmers to markets. Improved access (together with an improvement in other facilities which could also arise as a spin off effect of the road) could well spark new co-operative farming ventures in new crops.

Some identified issues such as land tenure, which have long been identified as limitations to agriculture and forestry development, were not included in the previous study as they do not (only) pertain to the toll road. These problems will be dealt with in this new presentation. Land tenure is one of the key issues which have stopped progress in the implementation of grazing systems which would provide a measure of security and better productivity everywhere that communal grazing/tenure holds.

Liaison with other specialists will be necessary to address the issues of tenure, economics and marketing. While the previous study erred by not allowing each specialist to follow his/her own line of study on the ground in sufficient detail, it is proposed that in–field liaison in the new study be accomplished where possible but not as a mandatory requirement.

Liaison with Dept Agriculture and other role players in agriculture in the area will be undertaken in order not only to incorporate their input but also to make the study more meaningful to the current roleplayers in agriculture.

The report will be prepared in the required format and supplied in digital format for easy incorporation into the EIA. Maps will be prepared as overlays to aerial photographs and supplied as hand drawn line maps for further processing by CCA Environmental. The report


3

will, inter alia, a) Describe the commercial agricultural activity in the study area. It will include relevant data - such as type, location, size, export routes, value, etc - on commercial farming (e.g. forestry products, sugar production, etc.). It will assess the potential impact of the proposed project and identified feasible alternatives on regional commercial agriculture (in association with the economic study); b) Describe the current situation regarding land ownership and tenure in the greenfields sections of the proposed route (in association with planning/development and sociao-economic study). Assess the potential impacts of the proposed project and identified feasible alternatives in terms of land ownership and tenure; c)Quantify the potential loss of grazing and productive land and assess the significance of the potential impact; d) Identify and assess the potential impacts on land use and agriculture in terms of likely improved regional access; and e) Identify and assess the potential impacts of the proposed project and identified feasible alternatives on existing and future commercial agricultural developments.

It would be most useful if the prepared line maps supplied to CES for further preparation, together with the photography used could be supplied. Aerial photography of similar age covering the Coastal Mzamba route will be required from CCA Environmental for field and office use. Maps at 1:50 000 scale showing the alternative routes will be needed. Ward maps with the names and telephone numbers of the Ward Councillor for each ward will be required.

The attached spreadsheet provides a breakdown of the anticipated costs. I estimate these to be R113 870.00 (VAT Excl.). I will invoice you on the basis of actual time spent and costs incurred. I will invoice you on a monthly basis in arrears. I will anticipate payment within 30 days of invoicing (by which time I will expect your client to have paid you).

This quote has been prepared in a great hurry to meet with your time limits and if you would like me to add anything I have omitted please let me know. I have E Mailed you my curriculum vitae, a list of projects completed within the last ten years and a profile of my business.

I look forward to working with you on this project should you consider my quote in line with your requirements and budget. I am happy to sign a declaration of independence.

Yours faithfully

Frank R Merryweather



APPENDIX 5 INDEPENDENCE OF CONSULTANT



APPENDIX 6 CURRICULUM VITAE

ABRIDGED CURRICULUM VITAEFRANK RAYMOND MERRYWEATHER

DATE OF BIRTH 1939-02-07

DISCIPLINE Soil Science, natural resources mapping and assessment, agricultural planning and management, Crop ecology, generalist in environmental matters, farm and project land-use potential assessment. Environmental impact assessment.

QUALIFICATIONS BSc. (Agric) in Chemistry & Agricultural Chemistry (Natal 1961) BSc. (Agric.) Hons in Soil Science (Stellenbosch 1963) MSc. (Agric) Cum Laude in Pedology (Stellenbosch - 1965)

PROFESSIONAL STATUS Registered as a Natural Scientist with the South African Council for Natural Scientists. (No 1642/83) Member of International Society of Soil Science. Member of Soil Science Society of southern Africa.

EMPLOYMENT RECORD 1962 - 1965 Soils Research Institute: Assistant Professional Officer Soil Surveys. 1966 – 1974 Loxton Hunting and Associates: Chief Pedologist in charge of natural resource

surveys, and interpretative planning. 1975 – 1979 Farming citrus and vegetables in own right in Richmond (Natal) district. 1980-1981 Agricultural Manager Vegetable dehydration factory 1981 - July 1986 Loxton Venn and Associates: Manager, Pietersburg office. 1986 - July 1995 Loxton Venn and Associates: Consultant in charge of Environmental division. 1995 – date Self employed, trading as Merryweather Environmental consulting in soil

science, crop ecology, environmental impact assessment and land-use planning

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE1962 - 1965 SOILS RESEARCH INSTITUTE – PRETORIA

1962 Soil surveys for irrigation planning participated in as an Assistant Professional officer Langkloof Valley St. Marks Flats

1964 Soil Survey of the 1:50 000 sheets Wellington 3318DB which formed the basis of M.Sc thesis "The Soils of the Wellington-Malmesbury Area" Awarded M.Sc Agric cum laude Stellenbosch Dec 1965

1965 Participated in soil survey for irrigation planning of Makatini Flats below Jozini dam

1966 - 1974 R.F. LOXTON HUNTING AND ASSOCIATES (AND AOC TECHNICAL SERVICES)1966 – 1970 Chief Pedologist; Soil surveys done for the Fertiliser Society with the purpose of developing a National Soil

Classification System: Western Province Eastern Transvaal Highveld Eastern Orange Free State Western Transvaal Highveld

Developed the soil classification system which formed the basis of the South African national system. Major contribution to development of National Binomial Soil Classification System, foundation member of the National Soil Classification Committee.

1966 – 1971 Field and technical management of large multi-disciplinary teams of natural scientists. In-field training of technical staff. Coordinated and compiled the map series on Natural Resources Surveys for the "homelands". Some series included reports but most comprised maps with expanded legends.

Most map series, at 100 000 scale. Produced the following maps for each of the areas: Soils VegetationPhysiographic Regions Dryland Arable Potential Pasture Potential Irrigation Potential Recommended Land Use

The following is a partial list, showing the major (10 000ha and larger), jobs undertaken during this period:

Herschel district (also did all the field work) Glen Grey district MaputolandVendalandShangaanlandLebowa N & S Gutu Tribal Area (Zimbabwe) Tegwani Tribal Area (Zimbabwe) Ovamboland (Namibia) Okavongoland (Namibia)Kaokoveld (Namibia)Rio Save (Mocambique) irrigation potential Northern S.W.A. irrigation potential north of 220SNatal S Coast (KwaZulu) Mecanhelas district (Mocambique)

1972 – 1974 Project Manager of Natural Resources Surveys in Zambezi Valley covering 5 million ha. Resident in Mocambique at Mutarara providing technical and managerial co-ordination to a large multi-disciplinary team of scientists. Extensive liaison with the authorities at all levels was essential as this was a war zone. Survey stretched from south east of Tete to the Zambezi mouth. Reports prepared for each of six blocks with maps at 1:50 000 and 1:100 000 scale:

Soils Ecology Physiographic Regions Dryland Arable Production Potential Pasture Potential Irrigation Potential and Surface Water Resources Recommended Land Use

Assisted with co-ordination of other projects in Mocambique:

Natural resources of Nauela/Alto Molocue districts Natural resources of Lurio ValleyForestry potential of San Martinho area Forestry potential of Ponto do Ouro area

1975 – 1980 FARMING CITRUS AND VEGETABLES IN OWN RIGHT IN RICHMOND (NATAL) DISTRICT

Irrigated vegetable and citrus (mainly mandarin) farming on own farm on the Illovo river. Designed and installed irrigation system, built roads and bridges. Marketed vegetables on local and international markets.

1980-1981 AGRICULTURAL MANAGER AT LOWVELD COOPERATIVE DEHYDRATION FACTORYManager of company farming enterprises, sourcing vegetables for processing in the company dehydration factory and providing extension to out-growers producing vegetables for factory. Duties included researching new crop varieties for processing, and ensuring the flow of produce to the factory.

1982 - July ‘86 LOXTON VENN AND ASSOCIATES – Rejoined as Manager, Pietersburg Office. Undertook detailed natural resources surveys and planning (scale 1:10 000) and co-ordinated economic planning for:

Vuwani Rural Development Area (16 000 ha Venda) Tshivase Rural Development Area (15 000 ha Venda)

Assisted the Venda Department of Agriculture with infrastructural development planning and management of Vuwani RDA. Project included irrigated food plots, avocado farms, Tshakhuma dam and irrigation, new extensions for Tshakhuma village.Undertook Natural Resource Survey and planning co-ordination of Concept Development Plan Mphephu-Beaconsfield (36 000 ha Venda) as well as numerous small soil surveys including:

Lower Levubu Soil Survey Soil survey of a portion of Everdon, District Howick Natal Reconnaissance Soil Survey of Naphuno Area

1986 - July 1995: Consultant heading Environmental Section – Loxton, Venn and AssociatesRejoined head office to co-ordinate activities in environmental impact studies, crop ecology as well as inputs into rural development planning. Wrote the handbook on village micro-agriculture for Owambo Rural Development Centre in Namibia. Major inputs into Development Plans for Owambo and Kavango. Pre-feasibility planning of forestry projects in Mocambique, Pondoland and Namibia.Inputs in multi-disciplinary teams working on agricultural matters were provided in the field of soil potential, soil utilisation and soil amelioration as well as in agro-climatology and in crop ecology. Provided expert witness in various litigation cases involving pollution and/or crop losses. Various reports produced on the agricultural

requirements/crop tolerances to levels of water quality as an aid in determining user requirements in establishing water quality standards/assimilative capacity of river systems. Inputs in multi-disciplinary teams working on rehabilitation and rehabilitation problems particularly inputs related to soil properties and suitable grasses. Managed a wide range of environmental studies for mines, industries and development projects. Managed multi-disciplinary biological studies in Lesotho Highlands (Phase 1a) and mapping the biomass and vegetation communities of Maputo Province (Mocambique). Resource assessment and land-use planning in the feasibility study of the Mosa Florestal timber project in southern Mocambique.

1995 July to date MERRYWEATHER ENVIRONMENTAL – self employed Subcontracting consultant and consortium member in the agricultural, soil, land capability and environmental field to Loxton, Venn and Associates; Wates, Meiring and Barnard; L&W Environmental; Digby Wells and Associates; Wanklin and Associates; Coastal and Environmental Services; Appropriate Planning Solutions and Pollution Control Technologies. Manager EIA process ESKOM project to determine alternative routes and systems to transport coal to Majubapower station. Technical agricultural and land-use planning inputs to the Gauteng land re-distribution projects at Rust der Winter, Onverwacht, Rethabiseng (Gauteng) and in NW Province in Lichtenburg district. Soil and agricultural inputs into sludge disposal project Nigel Municipality. Inputs into a number of EMPR s for small coal mines in Gauteng and Mpumalanga. EIA s of three subtropical fruit irrigation projects in N Province for ARDC. Provided environmental and agricultural inputs for Land Development Objectives and Integrated Development Plans for Elliot municipality, Kei Mouth-Morgan’s Bay, Kei District Council and Amatola Regional Council as well as agricultural inputs for Nahoon Valley Framework Plan. Soil, land capability, current land use and infrastructure surveys of 12 farms to be undermined by New Denmark Colliery. Agricultural aspects of Cost Benefit Analysis of Iscor Vereeniging Steelworks pollution of smallholdings and farms in the vicinity. Soil and land use inputs into EIA of BHP (Australia) titanium mining project in Nampula province Mocambique, Billiton mining titanium project in Zambezia province Mocambique,Southern Mining titanium project in Gaza Province Mocambique, Randgold gold mining project in Mali, West Africa and Tiomin (Canada) titanium project in Kenya. Environmental scoping reports for fuel stations at Crossways, Beacon Bay and Greenfields in East London and at Peddie, Mqanduli, Kentani, Cradock, Boksburg and Tsomo as well as various exemption applications for upgrading of fuel storage facilities. Scoping reports for the rezoning of a proposed restaurant site at Cintsa East; broiler farm at Sunrise on Sea; upgrading of Hamburg caravan park; eco village at Haven Hills (East London Municipality) and road rehabilitation on a large number of roads and including EMPs for borrow pits. A detailed list of projects undertaken since 1997 is provided on attached schedule.

MEMBERSHIP1962 - date Soil Science Society of South Africa and International Society of Soil Science. 1970 to date Co-founder and member of National Soil Classification Committee. 1983 to date South African Council for Natural Scientists. 1994 to 2005 Member of committee appointed by Soil Science Society of South Africa to prepare a handbook on soils and

soil mapping in southern Africa. AWARDS

1987 Awarded gold medal for contribution towards the publication "Soil Classification, A Binomial System for South Africa" by the Soil Science Society of South Africa.

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS "The use of Aerial Photographs in Agricultural Soil Surveys in South Africa" in Photo Interpretation Editions Technic Paris. Co-author "Soil Classification, A Bionomial System for South Africa."Co-author “Soil Classification, a Taxonomic System for South Africa.” Soil Science Society 3rd Congress 1967 "The anomalous occurrence of Ferralitic and Fersiallitic soils of the Western Cape"Soils Science Society 4th Congress 1981 "The Clay/S ratio as a differentiating characteristic".Soil Science Society 11th Congress 1983 "The Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Rural Planning".

A vast number of reports and maps written for various clients in the agricultural, natural resources and environmental field as consultant working for :

AOC Technical Services Empresa Tecnica Levantamentos Aereos LdaR F Loxton, Hunting and Associates Loxton, Venn and Associates East Africa Technical Services L & W Environmental Loxton, Hunting and Associates Merryweather Environmental

These reports were published internally and are the property of the client who paid for the work. The reports were in the name of the consulting company and do not list contributing consultants. The description of professional experience above gives an indication of the number and range of reports compiled.

LANGUAGES ENGLISH PORTUGUESE AFRIKAANS ZULU XHOSASPEAK Excellent Poor Good Poor Poor WRITE Excellent Not Good Not Not

READ Excellent Poor Good Not Not

appendix 4 - soils, land use an - nra€¦ · specialist report on the potential impact of the...

Documents