Download PDF - Anchor Environmental
Download PDF - Anchor Environmental
Download PDF - Anchor Environmental
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
C.A.P.E. Estuaries Management Programme<br />
UILKRAALS ESTUARY<br />
SITUATION ASSESSMENT<br />
DRAFT<br />
JULY 2010<br />
ENVIRONMENTAL<br />
ANCH R<br />
University of Cape Town,<br />
PO Box 34035, Rhodes Gift 7707<br />
barry.clark@uct.ac.za<br />
E N V I R O N M E N T A L<br />
• marine & estuarine ecology • aquatic resource management •<br />
• resource economics • conservation planning •<br />
i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY<br />
Introduction<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is a relatively large estuary, with a total area of 105 ha, and is located on the<br />
Southern Cape Coast of South Africa. The Uilkraals is an important estuary from a conservation<br />
perspective, particularly in respect of macrophyte diversity and bird fauna. The large expanse of sand<br />
and mud flats as well as the high plant diversity within the estuary makes the Uilkraals, together with the<br />
Klein and Heuningnes Estuaries, unique along the Southern Cape Coastline. The estuary faces pressure<br />
from reduced freshwater inflow due to the upstream Kraaibosch Dam, planned rural developments and<br />
increasing tourism at the estuary mouth. Recognising the importance of the Uilkraals Estuary and<br />
estuaries in South Africa more generally, the C.A.P.E. Regional Estuaries Management Programme<br />
commissioned <strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong> Consultants cc to prepare a management plan for the Uilkraals<br />
Estuary. This report is the Situation Assessment that forms the background material for the development<br />
of the management plan, and should be read in conjunction with the Management Plan itself.<br />
Geographic and socio-economic context<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is situated approximately 60 km northwest of Cape Agulhas and 11 km east of<br />
Danger Point on the south-west coast of South Africa. It is the first estuary east of Danger Point and lies<br />
within the warm-temperate biogeographic region of South Africa. The catchment lies entirely within the<br />
Western Cape Province which receives most precipitation during the winter rainfall season. The estuary is<br />
classified as a temporarily open-closed mixed blackwater system, which is relatively common along the<br />
south west and east coast. The Mean Annual Runoff (MAR) is approximately 18 Mm 3 , which is 20% lower<br />
than under natural conditions. The Kraaibosch Dam was built 10 km upstream of the estuary in 1999,<br />
covers a surface area of 102 ha and has a storage capacity of 5.5 Mm 3 . Numerous smaller farm dams are<br />
found throughout parts of the catchment too.<br />
The total population living within the Overstrand Local Municipality, in which the Uilkraals River<br />
Catchment is located, was estimated at 74 546 in the 2007 StatsSA Community Survey. The population<br />
density was estimated at 35 people per square kilometre and the total household count was 24 485. The<br />
overall population of the Uilkraals River catchment (G40M) is a small proportion of the total for the<br />
Overstrand local municipality, as it contains a small urban area. Larger settlements such as Gansbaai with<br />
approximately 20 000 residents and Stanford with 8 000 residents are located outside of the boundaries<br />
of the Uilkraals catchment. Agriculture, residential development and nature conservation are the main<br />
land use activities in the catchment. The Uilkraals Estuary and surrounding areas are aesthetically<br />
beautiful and this remains a strong draw card to the estuary.<br />
Ecological characteristics and functioning of the estuary<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is important in terms of its conservation value. Based on an index which takes size,<br />
estuary type, rarity and biodiversity (plants, invertebrates, fish, birds) into account, the estuary was<br />
ranked 34 th overall in terms of conservation importance in South Africa (Turpie et al. 2002).<br />
Structures associated with the estuary include a bridge approximately 220 m long which crosses the river<br />
approximately 800 m from the mouth. The bridge was constructed in 1973 and replaced an old wooden<br />
footbridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). It is supported on the eastern side by a high embankment of<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
i<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
ubble spanning almost two-thirds of the original high tide river width (Gaigher 1984). The remaining<br />
100 m is supported by concrete pylons, effectively halving the width of the estuary there and<br />
concentrating the river flow against the western bank (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The lower reaches of<br />
the estuary used to consist of several braided channels that expanded to a single 400 m wide channel at<br />
high tide (Harrison et al. 1995b). Water in the area below the bridge is now restricted to two smaller<br />
shallow channels, the larger of which ends at the beach in front of the huts at the caravan park.<br />
Some very short mouth closure events have occurred in the past with the estuary remaining closed for<br />
only brief periods of time (Gaigher 1984). The first time (in recorded history) the mouth of the estuary<br />
closed for an extended period of time was in January 2009. It only opened again in the winter of the<br />
same year (P. Le Roux, pers. comm.). The opening may have been caused by residents manually digging a<br />
channel to connect it to the sea, as the mouth closed shortly after and has been closed ever since. Before<br />
mouth closure occurred, tidal influence reached beyond the bridge, with the majority of the sandflats<br />
becoming inundated at high tide (Harrison et al. 1995b). Tidal interchange was recorded up to 3 km<br />
upstream in a 1981 survey (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). Currently, a very shallow braided channel runs<br />
across the sandflats upstream from the bridge, probably similar to former low tide conditions. The<br />
majority of the sandflats are now permanently exposed. The middle reaches of the estuary consist of a<br />
wide meandering channel across a large floodplain, surrounded by saltmarsh vegetation.<br />
Vegetation of the estuary can broadly be grouped into four types: (1) Macroalgae (Enteromorpha sp.)<br />
which forms extensive mats that cover sand and mud flats in the lower reaches of the estuary, and is a<br />
source of concern owing to the impacts on invertebrate populations and their predators (birds). (2)<br />
Submerged macrophytes consist of eelgrass Zostera capensis, which forms beds in the lower reaches and<br />
provide important habitat for juvenile fishes. (3) Salt marsh, which is also concentrated in the lower<br />
reaches and on the floodplain area, contributes to system productivity and biotic diversity, providing<br />
important feeding areas, habitat and shelter for numerous invertebrates, birds and fish. (4) Reeds and<br />
sedges, which are not able to tolerate high salinity, occur in the middle and upper reaches of the estuary.<br />
Fish are particularly reliant on estuaries for sheltered habitat in southern Africa, and different species<br />
depend on them to different extents. Previous studies, for example Harrison et al. (1995b), recorded four<br />
species of fish in the estuary; Cape silverside Atherina breviceps, Knysna sand goby Psammogobius<br />
knysnaensis, harder Liza richardsonii, and flathead mullet Mugil cephalus. An icthyological survey carried<br />
out in 2006 found 11 different species through seine net hauls. The Knysna sand goby is the most<br />
abundant species in the estuary, followed by harders. In all, nine species (82% of the fish species<br />
recorded from the Uilkraals Estuary) are regarded as either partially or completely dependent on<br />
estuaries for their survival. Another five of the species recorded are at least partially dependent on<br />
estuaries as a nursery area including cape sole Heteromycteris capensis, groovy mullet Liza dumerilii,<br />
blackhand sole Soleo bleekeri, harder Liza richardsonii and white stumpnose Rhabdosargus globiceps.<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is an important area for waterbirds (Barnes 1996). On a national scale it ranked 14 th<br />
in terms of waterbird abundance in a conservation priority analysis study (Turpie 1995). Regionally, it<br />
was ranked 11 th out of 65 coastal wetland systems in the south-western Cape in terms of bird numbers<br />
supported (Ryan et al. 1988). A total of 48 water-associated bird species have been recorded at the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary. Of these, 23 species are piscivorous, 21 are invertebrate-feeding and four species are<br />
herbivorous. The estuary has supported large numbers of terns and migratory waders in the past<br />
(Summers et al. 1976, Heydorn & Bickerton 1982, Ryan et al. 1988) and has been recognised as one of the<br />
largest mainland tern roosts in the south-western Cape (Ryan et al. 1988). However, recent bird counts<br />
suggest that certain bird species visiting the estuary have decreased dramatically. Previous years have<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
ii<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
seen hundreds and even thousands of waders and terns around the estuary. In February 2010 a total of<br />
only 60 waders were counted. This is most likely due to a loss in the intertidal feeding habitat which<br />
covered the entire sandlfat region below and above the causeway. The estuary also seems to have<br />
become less suitable as a tern roosting site.<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is now categorised as a D-class estuary in terms of its present state of health. This<br />
means it is considered to be a ”largely modified” system. Although the estuary currently receives 80% of<br />
its Mean Annual Runoff (MAR), the loss of an important part of the natural hydrology of the estuary has<br />
been removed (winter and summer base flows), which has modified the natural condition and caused the<br />
estuary to become permanently closed off from the sea. This has resulted in changes to the habitats<br />
within and around the estuary (i.e. microalgae abundance and saltmarsh areas) and has caused a<br />
decrease in the number of bird species, especially waders utilising the estuary. It is likely that the<br />
estuary’s condition will continue to deteriorate. Turpie & Clark (2007) listed the Uilkraals Estuary as a<br />
high priority estuary for rehabilitation. Alien plant clearance and the removal of the causeway were<br />
listed as the types of requirements needed to rehabilitate the estuary. Increasing the freshwater inflows<br />
and ensuring more natural flows into the system are also needed.<br />
Ecosystem services<br />
Estuaries provide a range of services that have economic or welfare value. In the case of the Uilkraals<br />
Estuary, the most important of these are the recreational and tourism values of the estuary as well as the<br />
provision of a nursery area for fish. There may be additional services, such as carbon sequestration, but<br />
these are not likely to be of major value.<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is a popular tourist destination for local and regional South African tourists. The<br />
area surrounding the mouth of the estuary has been developed on the west bank in the form of the<br />
Uilenkraalsmond Holiday Resort, which includes the municipal caravan and camping park as well as<br />
associated recreational amenities located on the site. This establishment is generally full during the<br />
major holiday periods. Birding and recreational opportunities represent an important draw card for<br />
visitors to the estuary.<br />
Legislation and management issues<br />
Little legislation has been designed for estuaries in particular. However, the fact that estuaries contain<br />
freshwater, terrestrial and marine components, and are heavily influenced by activities in a much broader<br />
catchment and adjacent marine area, means that they are affected by a large number of policies and<br />
laws. There is also no specific provision for Estuarine Protected Areas. The Department of Water and<br />
<strong>Environmental</strong> Affairs Estuary is the primary agency responsible for estuary management in South Africa<br />
with a small amount of responsibility (fisheries) attributable to the Deapartment of Agriculture and<br />
Fishies. <strong>Environmental</strong> management in most instances is devolved to provincial level, aside from water<br />
resources and fisheries which remain a national competancy. At a municipal level, by-laws are passed<br />
which cannot conflict with provincial and national laws. The Uilkraals Estuary lies wholly within the<br />
Overstrand Local Municipality, which falls within the Overberg District Municipality of the Western Cape<br />
Province.<br />
Water quality and quantity are mainly controlled under the National Water Act 36 of 1998. This makes<br />
provision for an <strong>Environmental</strong> Reserve which stipulates the quantity and quality of water flow required<br />
to protect the natural functioning of each water resource, including estuaries. The extent to which an<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
iii<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
estuary’s functioning is catered for is determined by the designated future management “class” (where<br />
classes A – F describe state of health), called the Ecological Reserve Category (ERC). In future this will be<br />
determined in a recently-developed, holistic classification process.<br />
Exploitation of living resources in the estuary is governed by the Marine Fisheries Policy for South Africa<br />
(1997) and the Marine Living Resources Act (1998). The policy supports sustainable use of resources and<br />
use of these resources for economic growth and development as well as ecosystem and biodiversity<br />
protection.<br />
The Integrated Coastal Management Act, 2008 (ICMA) requires that a management plan be developed for<br />
each estuary in the country. ICMA also requires the designation of a coastal protection zones extending<br />
100 m from the high tide mark (including in estuaries) in areas zoned for residential, industrial or<br />
commercial land use, and much larger development setback of 1km for public land and land zoned for<br />
agricultural use. A development setback zone must also be designated for all coastal property, by<br />
agreement between local and provincial authorities. Within these designated setback zones, no new land<br />
transformation or development may take place without a permit issued by the MEC. There is also<br />
provision to create a larger setback line under the ICMA where necessary. In the case of the Uilkraals<br />
Estuary, most of the land surrounding the estuary is zoned rural, and thus in terms of ICMA a coastal<br />
protection zone of 1km will be required around much of the estuary. There is a strong argument to<br />
establish corresponding development setback zones for all estuaries in the country.<br />
The Municipal Systems Act (2000) requires the identification of development priorities for each province,<br />
district and local municipality, and the expression of development plans in a spatial layout. The latter in<br />
turn, has to be formalised in a detailed land use and management plan. Thus the key land-use decisionmaking<br />
is taking place by the local municipalities, in this case the Overstrand Local Municipality. Their<br />
plans have to fit in with broader scale plans of the district and province. The Western Cape Province<br />
Spatial Development Framework (SDF) highlights the conservation importance of the Uilkraals Estuary at<br />
a national level but offers little of specific relevance to the management of the Uilkraals Estuary. The<br />
Overberg District and Overstrand Local Municipality IDP and SDF documents offer more relevance at a<br />
local management level. Both SDF documents highlighted the importance of conservation areas and the<br />
need for protection of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Two strategies mentioned in both SDF<br />
documents key to restoration or rehabilitation of the Uilkraals Estuary, is the importance of and need for<br />
alien invasive plant clearance along the course of the river and estuary, as well the importance of<br />
regulating any modification of rivers and their natural flow patterns. Effective management of the<br />
catchment needs to be ensured. The local Overstrand SDF document focuses on a spatial planning<br />
concept that underpins the municipality’s approach to the integrated spatial management of land use<br />
and economic development within its area. The main principles involve identifying an overarching spatial<br />
development pattern within a clear hierarchy of nodes and settlements, the hierarchy of the<br />
development patterns being clearly defined based on empirical determined growth potentials, the<br />
principles of comparative advantage and the prerequisite of sustainable development. The growth of<br />
urban nodes and rural settlements should be strictly contained within well-defined boundaries and<br />
growth should be managed so as to ensure that development pressures are, wherever possible, directed<br />
and absorbed within the defined urban areas. Appropriate densification specific to each area must be<br />
encouraged to limit unwanted sprawl into the rural vicinity. The diversity, health and productivity of<br />
natural eco-systems, throughout the rural, urban and agricultural areas should be maintained through an<br />
interlinked web of natural spaces and the protection of important sensitive habitats.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
iv<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Need for protection of the Uilkraals Estuary<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is important in terms of its conservation value. It has unique macrophyte diversity<br />
and is a very important birding site. The Uilkraals Estuary was included within a set of estuaries in the<br />
country identified as requiring protection in order to achieve national biodiversity protection targets. The<br />
establishment of a protected area on the Uilkraals Estuary is highly recommended and is considered<br />
highly feasible. Specific recommendations, to be further developed in consultation with stakeholders, are<br />
as follows:<br />
1. Establish a nature reserve encompassing as much of the land around the estuary as possible<br />
including supratidal estuarine habitats;<br />
2. Establish a Marine Protected Area on the estuary incorporating the most significant bird<br />
habitats and fish nursery areas as well as a representative section of all habitat types present<br />
in the estuary (mudflat, salt marsh, submerged and emergent vegetation)<br />
3. Develop a zonation plan in which 50% of the MPA (not necessarily contiguous) is declared a<br />
no-take zone.<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary has also been identified as one in which there is a need for rehabilitation. Key<br />
management interventions identified in this respect include:<br />
1. Restoration of the quantity of freshwater inflows;<br />
2. Restoration of water quality;<br />
3. Removing significant obstructions to flow; and<br />
4. Removal of alien vegetation<br />
The degree to which these factors should be managed to restore the health of the system depends<br />
largely on the vision that is developed for the estuary, and on its future protection status.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
v<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS<br />
WMA<br />
BAS<br />
C.A.P.E.<br />
Chla<br />
CPUE<br />
DEA&DP<br />
DEAT<br />
DIN<br />
DRP<br />
DRS<br />
DWAF<br />
ERC<br />
EHI<br />
EWR<br />
HIV/AIDS<br />
IDP<br />
IEP<br />
NEMA<br />
NWA<br />
MAR<br />
MCM<br />
MEC<br />
Mm 3<br />
MSL<br />
PES<br />
RDM<br />
REI<br />
RSA<br />
RQO<br />
SDF<br />
TPC<br />
WCNCB<br />
Water Management Area<br />
Best Attainable State<br />
Cape Action Plan for People and the Environment<br />
Chlorophyll a<br />
Catch per unit effort<br />
Department of <strong>Environmental</strong> Affairs and Development Planning (provincial)<br />
Department of <strong>Environmental</strong> Affairs and Tourism (national)<br />
Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen<br />
Dissolved Reactive Phosphate<br />
Dissolved Reactive Silicate<br />
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry<br />
Ecological Reserve Category<br />
Estuary Health Index<br />
Ecological Water Requirement<br />
Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Disease Syndrome<br />
Integrated Development Planning<br />
Integrated <strong>Environmental</strong> Programme<br />
National <strong>Environmental</strong> Management Act<br />
National Water Act<br />
Mean Annual Runoff<br />
Marine & Coastal Management<br />
Member of provincial Executive Council<br />
Million cubic metres<br />
Mean Sea Level<br />
Present Ecological Status<br />
Resource Directed Measures<br />
River-Estuary-Interface<br />
Republic of South Africa<br />
Resource Quality Objectives<br />
Spatial Development Framework<br />
Threshold of Potential Concern<br />
Western Cape Nature Conservation Board<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
vi<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />
1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 9<br />
2. GEOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT ....................................................................... 11<br />
2.1 LOCATION AND EXTENT OF THE ESTUARY AND ITS CATCHMENT ....................................................................... 11<br />
2.2 CATCHMENT CLIMATE, VEGETATION AND DRAINAGE .................................................................................... 13<br />
2.3 CATCHMENT POPULATION, LAND-USE AND ECONOMY.................................................................................. 15<br />
Population and socio-economic status ............................................................................................ 15<br />
Land-use .......................................................................................................................................... 16<br />
Economy .......................................................................................................................................... 17<br />
3. ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONING OF THE ESTUARY ...................................... 18<br />
3.1 MOUTH DYNAMICS, HYDROLOGY AND CHANNEL SHAPE ................................................................................ 18<br />
3.2 WATER CHEMISTRY ............................................................................................................................... 22<br />
3.3 MICROALGAE ...................................................................................................................................... 22<br />
3.4 VEGETATION ....................................................................................................................................... 23<br />
Macroalgae ..................................................................................................................................... 23<br />
Submerged macrophytes................................................................................................................. 23<br />
Salt marsh ....................................................................................................................................... 23<br />
Reeds and sedges ............................................................................................................................ 24<br />
Terrestrial vegetation ...................................................................................................................... 24<br />
3.5 INVERTEBRATES ................................................................................................................................... 25<br />
Benthic invertebrates ...................................................................................................................... 25<br />
Hyperbenthic invertebrates ............................................................................................................. 25<br />
3.6 FISH .................................................................................................................................................. 26<br />
3.7 BIRDS ................................................................................................................................................ 28<br />
3.8 CURRENT HEALTH OF THE ESTUARY .......................................................................................................... 31<br />
Implications for the estuary ............................................................................................................ 33<br />
4. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ............................................................................................................... 34<br />
4.1 WHAT ARE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ........................................................................................................... 34<br />
4.2 GOODS AND SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE UILKRAALS ESTUARY ....................................................................... 34<br />
4.3 RAW MATERIALS .................................................................................................................................. 35<br />
4.4 CARBON SEQUESTRATION ...................................................................................................................... 35<br />
4.5 WASTE TREATMENT .............................................................................................................................. 36<br />
4.6 EXPORT OF MATERIALS AND NUTRIENTS .................................................................................................... 36<br />
4.7 REFUGIA AREAS AND NURSERY VALUE ....................................................................................................... 36<br />
4.8 GENETIC RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................. 38<br />
4.9 TOURISM AND RECREATIONAL VALUE ....................................................................................................... 38<br />
5. LEGISLATION AND MANAGEMENT ISSUES ................................................................................. 40<br />
5.1 THE MAIN THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO BE CONSIDERED ........................................................................ 40<br />
5.2 GENERAL POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND ....................................................................................... 40<br />
5.3 WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 47<br />
Legislative context ........................................................................................................................... 47<br />
The classification process ................................................................................................................ 47<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
vii<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
The reserve determination process ................................................................................................. 47<br />
5.4 EXPLOITATION OF LIVING MARINE RESOURCES ............................................................................................ 48<br />
Legislative context ........................................................................................................................... 48<br />
Issues surrounding recreational fishing ........................................................................................... 48<br />
5.5 LAND USE AND MANAGEMENT OF ESTUARY MARGINS .................................................................................. 48<br />
Legislative context ........................................................................................................................... 48<br />
Development planning pertaining to the Uilkraals Estuary ............................................................ 53<br />
Issues of surrounding land use and development ........................................................................... 66<br />
5.6 NON-CONSUMPTIVE RECREATIONAL USE ................................................................................................... 66<br />
Legislation ....................................................................................................................................... 66<br />
Management issues ........................................................................................................................ 66<br />
5.7 POTENTIAL FOR PROTECTED AREA STATUS ................................................................................................. 67<br />
Legislative context ........................................................................................................................... 67<br />
Potential for protection of the Uilkraals Estuary ............................................................................. 68<br />
Recommendations and procedure for establishing a protected area ............................................. 68<br />
5.8 POTENTIAL AND NEED FOR RESTORATION ON THE UILKRAALS ESTUARY ........................................................... 69<br />
6. REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 70<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
viii<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
1. INTRODUCTION<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is one of South Africa’s approximately 279 functional estuaries (Turpie<br />
2004). It is one of 21 estuaries within the warm temperate biogeographical region to be<br />
classified as a temporarily open/closed, mixed blackwater system (van Niekerk & Taljaard<br />
2007). A medium to large sized estuary, it is estimated to cover an area of 105 ha (Turpie &<br />
Clark 2007) (Figure 1), and before the construction of the upstream Kraaibosch Dam had<br />
naturally hyposaline conditions and a strong tidal exchange when open to the sea. This tidal<br />
exchange helped to maintain an open mouth state (Harrison et al. 1995b), but since the<br />
construction of the dam in 1999, there has been a disruption in the natural freshwater inflows.<br />
Owing to its large size, high diversity and abundance of certain biota, the estuary is rated as<br />
34 th overall in terms of conservation importance in South Africa (Turpie et al. 2002, Turpie &<br />
Clark 2007). It has been identified as a particularly important estuary for macrophyte diversity<br />
(macroalgae, submerged macrophytes and saltmarsh) and birds (both residential and migrants)<br />
(Barnes 1996).<br />
Figure 1: The Uilkraals Estuary before it became closed to the sea (Source: Google Earth).<br />
Despite the widely acknowledged conservation importance of the Uilkraals Estuary, the system<br />
is currently under no formal protection. The estuary has been subjected to relatively high<br />
levels of development and anthropogenic disturbance. This includes the construction of the<br />
road bridge over the estuary which affected the natural east to west migration of the mouth.<br />
Increasing recreational use of the estuary, including natural resource use (such as fishing) and<br />
non-consumptive activities (birdwatching and hiking) is putting pressure on the system, which<br />
will most likely see a change in the character of the area. However, the most significant impact<br />
has been the reduction in freshwater flow into the estuary due to water storage. The<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
9<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
construction of the Kraaibosch dam some 10 km upstream from the estuary in 1999 has<br />
resulted in a reduction in freshwater input, which has had profound effects on the physical and<br />
ecological functioning of the estuary. Due to the prolonged variation in freshwater inputs, the<br />
estuary closed to the sea for an extended period for the first time in January 2009, and<br />
remained closed until July 2009. In December of the same year, the estuary enetered another<br />
prolonged closed phase. This alteration in the natural flow regime will most likely to result in a<br />
reduction in the frequency and extent of floodplain inundation, and a reduction in scouring of<br />
sediment in the estuary. Further threats to the estuary include increased siltation due to<br />
erosion, the loss and destruction of natural habitat by development and alien plant invasion,<br />
and deterioration in water quality caused by agricultural and residential pollution.<br />
This study forms part of the Cape Action Plan for the Environment (C.A.P.E.) Regional Estuarine<br />
Management Programme. The main aim of the programme is to develop a strategic<br />
conservation plan for the estuaries of the Cape Floristic Region (CFR), and to prepare detailed<br />
management plans for each estuary. The estuary programme is divided into three phases. The<br />
first phase involved the establishment of a regional conservation plan (Turpie & Clark 2007),<br />
the development of guidelines for estuary management plans (van Niekerk & Taljaard 2007),<br />
and the preparation of detailed management plans for a few selected systems. Of these,<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong> Consultants cc was tasked with preparing the management plan for the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary. These studies will then pave the way for preparation of management plans<br />
for the remaining systems in the region in subsequent phases of the programme.<br />
This document is the Situation Assessment report for the Uilkraals Estuary. It provides<br />
background information on the estuary including the geographic and socio-economic context,<br />
a description of the ecosystem functioning and biodiversity, the legal and planning context,<br />
threats to the system, and its conservation importance. This document will form the basis of<br />
the development of a vision and strategy for the management of the estuary in a participatory<br />
process involving stakeholders. Terms of Reference for the study are in Appendix 1.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
10<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
2. GEOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT<br />
2.1 Location and extent of the estuary and its catchment<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is situated approximately 60 km northwest of Cape Agulhas and 11 km<br />
east of Danger Point on the south-west coast within the cool temperate biogeographic region<br />
of South Africa (Whitfield 1998) (Figure 2). It is the first estuary to be found east of Danger<br />
Point (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The Uilkraals River runs southward and drains into the<br />
Indian Ocean 6 km southeast of Gansbaai. The total catchment area of the Uilkraals Estuary<br />
covers approximately 105 ha (Turpie & Clark 2007).<br />
Figure 2. Map of the south western tip of South Africa. The arrow indicates the relative position of the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary (adapted from Harrison 2004).<br />
Figure 3. Map showing Overberg region in which the Uilkraals Estuary is located.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
11<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
The Uilkraals catchment lies within the Overberg District Municipality in the Western Cape<br />
Province and the estuary is located within the Overstrand Local Municipality (Figure 3 and<br />
Figure 4). The estuary enters the sea at 34˚36’23”S 19˚24’33”E when the estuary mouth is<br />
open (Whitfield 2000). The river is approximately 46 km in length from the mouth to the<br />
source of the Sondagskloof, one of its major tributaries. The junction of the Sondagskloof and<br />
the Perdeberg rivers forms the Uilkraals at an approximate elevation of 200 m roughly 30 km<br />
from the mouth. In the lower catchment the Boesmans River joins the Uilkraals approximately<br />
6 km from the mouth. The size of the estuary from the mouth to the the confluence of the<br />
Uilkraals and Boesmans is approximately 260 ha (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). A bridge<br />
approximately 220 m long spans the estuary approximately 800 m from the mouth. A<br />
causeway approximately 120 m in length supports the eastern road access to the bridge whilst<br />
the remaining 100 m is spanned and supported by large concrete pylons (Heydorn & Bickerton<br />
1982).<br />
Figure 4. Overstrand Local Municipality map showing the main settlements. The Uilkraals Estuary<br />
(shown by the arrow) is located between Gansbaai and Pearly Beach (Source: Overstrand SDF 2009).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
12<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
2.2 Catchment climate, vegetation and drainage<br />
The Uilkraals River Catchment is relatively small at 313 km 2 , is dominated by Table Mountain<br />
Sandstone (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982) and lies wholly within the Western Cape Province,<br />
which receives most precipitation during the winter rainfall season. MAR for the whole<br />
catchment is approximately 22 Mm 3 (van Niekerk, unpubl. data) and the average annual<br />
rainfall in the catchment ranges between 500 and 700 mm (Heydorn & Tinley 1980, Heydorn &<br />
Bickerton 1982) with peaks in June and July. The river flow is therefore high in winter with runoff<br />
declining in summer. At Franskraal, located at the estuary mouth, the annual average daily<br />
maximum temperature is 22°, with the monthly average maximum temperature ranging from<br />
27°C in February to 18°C in June, July and August. The annual average daily minimum<br />
temperature is 11°C. The settlement of Franskraal receives on average 500-600 mm annually<br />
with most of the rain falling in the winter months (South African Rain Atlas 2010).<br />
The spatial patterns in the natural vegetation within the Uilkraals River Catchment are<br />
determined primarily by the underlying geology and regional rainfall. The upper catchment is<br />
characterised by the acidic and nutrient poor Table Mountain Group (TMG) sandstones and<br />
quartzites, which are dominated by mountain fynbos. Lower down in the river valley, rocks of<br />
the Malmesbury Formation outcrop and support limestone fynbos. The mountain fynbos<br />
vegetation in the higher lying areas of the Uilkraals River catchment remain predominantly<br />
intact. The lower areas of the catchment have been altered by increased anthropogenic<br />
activities, mainly agriculture and alien plant invasion. Natural riparian vegetation along most<br />
of the Uilkraals River’s course (with the exeption of the saltmarsh alongside the estuary) has<br />
been replaced by invasive exotics, in particular gums, poplars, Port Jackson and rooikrans (Gale<br />
1998).<br />
Figure 5. Overstrand Local Municipality physical morphology and landscape map (Source: Overstrand<br />
SDF 2009).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
13<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
The Kraaibosch dam (Figure 6) was constructed on the Uilkraals River in 1999 to supply the<br />
town of Gansbaai with water for domestic and industrial use and the surrounding areas with<br />
water for irrigation. The dam wall lies appproximately 10 km upriver from the estuary mouth<br />
(du Preez & Sasman 1999), covers 102 ha and can hold 5.5 x 10 6 m 3 . According to the dams<br />
permit conditions only winter flow is allowed to be retained and all summer flow is let through.<br />
Detailed flow records of river inflow, spillage, rainfall and outflow are kept on a daily basis.<br />
Data collected over the past 48 years shows that the average annual rainfall (Figure 7) has<br />
remained between 600 and 750 mm per annum. The amount of rain received over the last 10<br />
years is in fact comfortably above this annual average, which strongly suggests that recent<br />
anomalous mouth closure events are most likely attributable to the construction and operation<br />
of the Kraaibosch the dam, as opposed to changes in rainfall. Retaining water in the dam<br />
decreases riverine base flows and floods which changes the physical functioning of the estuary.<br />
Estuaries are not only reliant on base flow but also require flood peaks to scour them and<br />
maintain their dynamics, something that cannot easily be supported where in-channel storage<br />
dams are developed (DWAF 2004a).<br />
The Boesmansrivier which joins the Uilkraals approximately 6 km from the mouth also has a<br />
large dam upstream called the Nieuwedam. There is an unknown number of small dams and<br />
water abstraction points by local farmers on the river below the Nieuwedam. The total volume<br />
of water abstracted from these dams is not known though. The Breede Water Managament<br />
Area (WMA) Internal Strategic Perspective (ISP) anticipated that the Uilkraals River Catchment<br />
(G40M) would have a 40% increase in summer allocations out of the Kraaibosch Dam (DWAF<br />
2004a) indicating increasing demand, through the progressive implementation of agricultural<br />
development in the catchment.<br />
Figure 6. Kraaibosch Dam (Source: Google Earth)<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
14<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Figure 7: Annual rainfall for the Uilkraals River Catchment from 1962 – 2009.<br />
2.3 Catchment population, land-use and economy<br />
Population and socio-economic status<br />
The total population living within the Overstrand Local Municipality, in which the Uilkraals<br />
River Catchment is located, was estimated at 74 546 in the 2007 StatsSA Community Survey.<br />
Population density was estimated at 35 people per square kilometre and total household count<br />
was 24 485. The majority of the population in the Overstrand Local Municipality are classified<br />
as Coloured (37%) and White (34%), followed by Black Africans (29%) (Local Economic<br />
Development 2008). The overall population of the Uilkraals River catchment (G40M) is a small<br />
proportion of the total for the Overstrand Local Municipality as it contains a relatively small<br />
urban area. Larger settlements such as Gansbaai with approximately 20 000 residents and<br />
Stanford with 8 000 residents are located outside of the boundaries of the Uilkraals catchment.<br />
The Overberg District Municipality population growth has been declining since 1995, and the<br />
average annual growth rate is only 3%. If the current trend of population growth continues,<br />
the Overberg will soon have a negative growth rate, as is already seen in the Cape Agulhas<br />
Local Municipality (Local Economic Development 2008). Approximately 56% of the population<br />
in the Overberg area is employed, with 20% of the population being unemployed (Local<br />
Economic Development 2008). Agriculture and trade are the economic sectors with the<br />
highest employment at 20.1% and 16.5%, respectively. The geographic trend in economic<br />
activity along the catchment is predominately agriculturally based in the middle and upper<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
15<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
eaches and tourism and fishing industry based near the mouth. One of the larger tourism<br />
developments within the catchment is the Uilenkraalsmond Holiday Resort, located at the<br />
estuary mouth, which includes permanent holiday cottages, caravan sites and recreational<br />
amenities.<br />
Land-use<br />
The catchment consists mainly of agricultural areas and an ecological corridor/area, with some<br />
private conservation areas and other statutory conservation areas. Development within the<br />
catchment includes small urbanised areas along the coast and larger areas developed for<br />
agricultural purposes, with agriculture, fruit farming, stock-farming, viticulture and nature<br />
conservation being the main land use activities. Agriculturally based industries dominate in the<br />
Overstrand and include wineries, fruit and fynbos cultivation (Overberg Spatial Development<br />
Framework 2004). The Overstrand Local Municipality lists the Uilkraals River Catchment as an<br />
intensive agricultural resource area (Figure 8).<br />
Urban development accounts for a very small proportion of the catchment land cover. The<br />
major towns in the area, Gansbaai and Stanford, lie adjacent to the Uilkraals catchment. The<br />
largest town within the catchment is Franskraal, which is located at the mouth of the estuary<br />
on the coast.<br />
Figure 8. Intensive agricultural resource areas showing the Uilkraals River Catchment as being one of<br />
the larger agricultural areas in the Overstrand (Source: Overstrand SDF 2009).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
16<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Economy<br />
Agriculture dominates much of the upper Uilkraals River Catchment, with wineries, fruit<br />
cultivation and fynbos cultivation being the most important contributors to this sector.<br />
Tourism is a major economic contributor across the catchment, through nature based<br />
recreation and holiday destinations. The estuary is considered a bird watching destination and<br />
recreational fishing remains a draw card. In addition, Pearly Beach and the Uilenkraalsmond<br />
Resort are big attractions to the Uilkraals catchment, where the popularity as a holiday<br />
destination results in a fourfold increase in the population over the holiday seasons. The<br />
Overstrand has had the highest positive annual Gross Domestic Product growth in the<br />
Overberg District since 1995 (Local Economic Development 2008). In 2008, the Gross Domestic<br />
Product for the Overberg District was estimated to be in the region of R4 billion, equivalent to<br />
approximately only 0.3% of the national GDP (Local Economic Development 2008).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
17<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
3. ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONING OF<br />
THE ESTUARY<br />
3.1 Mouth dynamics, hydrology and channel shape<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary has been classified as a temporarily open-closed estuary (Whitfield 2000),<br />
and is a mixed (in terms of salinity), blackwater system (van Niekerk unpubl. data). When<br />
functioning naturally, the estuary has tidal exchange and a high frequency of connection to the<br />
sea, similar to the Palmiet and Kleinmond estuaries, but is in a more advanced stage of<br />
progressive infilling and reduction of the tidal prism (Harrison et al. 1995a). The road bridge,<br />
which was constructed in 1973, is approximately 220 m long and crosses the river<br />
approximately 800 m from the mouth (Figure 9 and Figure 10). It is supported on the eastern<br />
side by a high embankment of rubble spanning almost two-thirds of the original high tide river<br />
width (Gaigher 1984). The remaining 100 m are supported by concrete pylons, effectively<br />
halving the width of the estuary there and concentrating the river flow against the western<br />
bank (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). In 1978 a 150 m long rubble and rock embankment was<br />
built on the beach in front of the beach facing bungalows, forcing the estuary mouth<br />
eastwards, away from the caravan park (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). However, the<br />
embankment was quickly eroded by wave and tidal action and a shallow, stagnant pool of<br />
water and a series of sand dunes formed on the beach in front of the bungalows (Figure 9).<br />
In the past the estuary mouth opened over a beach with a relatively flat profile and the open<br />
mouth status was probably maintained by strong tidal currents (Harrison 2004). Tidal currents<br />
play a major role in maintaining a connection with the sea in cool and warm-temperate<br />
estuaries (unlike subtropical estuaries, where river flow is the major factor; Cooper et al. 1999,<br />
Cooper 2001). Seasonal closure and migration of the estuary occurs due to strong seasonal<br />
variations of river flow and wave climate where limited river flow allows the formation of a<br />
sand bar across the estuary mouth.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
18<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Figure 9. An aerial view of the Uilkraals Estuary mouth in October 1979 (altitude of 500m).<br />
When functioning naturally, the river enters the sea via a meandering channel across the<br />
floodplain, which opens onto sand flats (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The road bridge crosses<br />
at the lower reaches of these sand flats. There are several river channels which flow across the<br />
sand flats upstream of the bridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The mouth was originally<br />
mobile and in the past could enter the sea at any point between the eastern dune and western<br />
part of the beach opposite the caravan park (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The mouth later<br />
became fixed by a combination of factors, including the causeway of the road bridge and the<br />
stabilization of both the eastern and western dunes (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).<br />
Figure 10. Picture of the bridge and causeway of the Uilkraals Estuary facing downstream.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
19<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
The first time in recorded history that the Uilkraals Estuary became closed for a long period of<br />
time was in January 2009. It re-opened six months later for a short period but closed again for<br />
an extended period in December 2009. Water storage in the Kraaibosch Dam, approximately<br />
10 km upstream from the estuary, has significantly altered the natural freshwater in-flows to<br />
the estuary while agricultural activities in the upper catchment have introduced an increased<br />
sediment load into the estuary, ultimately resulting in reduced flow over time and an increased<br />
likelihood of mouth closure of the estuary in low flow periods.<br />
The lower reaches of the estuary used to consist of several braided channels that expanded to<br />
a single 400 m wide channel at high tide (Harrison et al. 1995b). Water in the area below the<br />
bridge is now restricted to two smaller shallow channels, the larger of which ends at the beach<br />
in front of the huts at the caravan park (Figure 11). Before mouth closure occurred, tidal<br />
influence reached beyond the bridge, with the majority of the sandflats becoming inundated at<br />
high tide (Harrison et al. 1995b). Tidal interchange was recorded up to 3 km upstream in a<br />
1981 survey (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). Currently, a very shallow braided channel runs<br />
across the sandflats upstream from the bridge, probably similar to former low tide conditions.<br />
The majority of the sandflats are now permanently exposed (Figure 12).<br />
Figure 11. The closed estuary mouth facing upstream (left) and the area below the bridge facing<br />
downstream (right, picture taken from the bridge), February 2010.<br />
The middle reaches of the estuary consist of a wide meandering channel across a large<br />
floodplain, surrounded by saltmarsh vegetation. Before the road bridge was built, the estuary<br />
was a marine-dominated tidal lagoon. The large volumes of tidal exchange would have rapidly<br />
reduced any effects of floods, when they did occur (Gaigher 1984). Factors affecting<br />
circulation also affect salinity by altering the volumes of salty water entering the estuary as<br />
well as the ratio of dilution of fresh and salt water (Clark 1977). The obstruction caused by the<br />
road bridge would therefore have changed the circulation and hence salinity regime of the<br />
estuary immensely. This would have been most critical during periods of freshwater flooding,<br />
by prolonging the extension time of freshwater over tidal sandbanks. This effect would have<br />
been most intensive in the extensive flood area on the landside of the bridge (Gaigher 1984).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
20<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Figure 12. Pictures of the exposed sandflats above the bridge, February 2010.<br />
Flows recorded at Kraaibosch Dam (some 10 km upstream of the estuary) are well correlated<br />
with rainfall in the area. While flows are largely natural in the upper reaches, there are<br />
substantial decreases in downstream flow during the winter months compared with natural<br />
condition, and increases in summer flow along parts of the river. Annual flood peaks into the<br />
estuary are important, but the impact of a flood also depends to some extent on the base flow,<br />
with greater flooding impact when the base flows are higher. The estuary currently receives an<br />
estimated 80% of its natural MAR (van Niekerk, unpubl. data), however, an important<br />
component of the natural flow (i.e. winter and summer base flows) has been modified to a<br />
large extent, including reductions in floods that would normally scour the system and maintain<br />
the opening of the estuary to the sea.<br />
There is little data on the sediments or on historical sedimentation processes of the Uilkraals<br />
Estuary. Estuaries contain a mixture of river and marine sediments, the balance of which is<br />
determined by the amount of water moving in and out of the estuary during a tidal cycle,<br />
riverine base flows and floods. The size of particles that can be transported from the<br />
catchment increases with amplified velocity, and larger particles are deposited before small<br />
particles as flow decreases. Base flows carry relatively little sediment, mostly fine silts, and this<br />
is deposited when freshwater flows are slowed by the pushing effect of incoming sea water.<br />
This process generally leads to an accumulation of fine sediments in the lower to middle<br />
reaches of the estuary, which results in the channel and inter-tidal areas becoming muddier<br />
and shallower with time. Floods carry a lot of silt from the catchment, and this is deposited<br />
wherever floodwaters slow down significantly, such as on the floodplain. They also scour away<br />
accumulated sediments from the estuary the channel and in the lower inter-tidal areas. Very<br />
large floods may scour the floodplain as well. The area of scouring versus deposition depends<br />
on the size of the flood.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
21<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
3.2 Water chemistry<br />
The distribution of saline water in an estuary (the longitudinal salinity distribution) is of<br />
fundamental importance as it affects the distribution of all biota in the system due to their<br />
differing salinity tolerances. River inflow and sea level together determine the penetration of<br />
seawater into the system, thereby determining the salinity profile of the estuary.<br />
In 1979 and 1981 surveys showed that salinities below the bridge ranged from 35.5‰ at the<br />
mouth to 26‰ at the bridge. The main channel had a salinity of 20‰ 2 km from the mouth<br />
and 0‰ only 500 m further upstream (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). Harrison (2004) measured<br />
salinities at six stations along the estuary and reported a mean value of 15.43‰ (SE ± 2.11).<br />
Surface water temperature was recorded as 24.5˚C to 25.5˚C at 400 m and 500 m from the<br />
mouth respectively in the 1979 survey (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). At the same sampling sites<br />
dissolved oxygen concentrations of 9.8 mg/l and 10.8 mg/l were measured, with a higher<br />
measurement of 13.0 mg/l near algae at the latter (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). Harrison<br />
(2004) measured a mean temperature of 17.33˚C (SE ± 0.27), a mean dissolved oxygen<br />
concentration of 8.49 (SE ± 0.11) mg/l and a mean turbidity of 5.33 (SE ± 0.88) NTU. Extended<br />
mouth closure events will affect the water chemistry of the estuary. The estuary is no longer<br />
flushed by the sea or freshwater as frequently as it was in the past and this could result either<br />
in hypersaline conditions or fresh conditions developing within the estuary, depending on the<br />
amount of freshwater inflows and the amount of evaporation.<br />
3.3 Microalgae<br />
Microalgae in estuaries comprise unicellular algae that live either suspended in the water<br />
column (termed phytoplankton) or benthically on rocks or sediments in the estuary (termed<br />
microphytobenthos or benthic microalgae). These microalgae (i.e. phytoplankton and<br />
microphytobenthos) are very important in estuarine systems as they are generally the main<br />
source of primary production in the estuary.<br />
Phytoplankton communities in estuaries are influenced by salinity, generally dominated by<br />
flagellates where river flow dominates and by diatoms in marine dominated areas. Diatoms<br />
are most common in the area of the estuary where the salinity is in the region of 10-15‰,<br />
often referred to as the River Estuary Interface (REI) zone. Phytoplankton biomass in an<br />
estuary is also generally at its maximum in this region. Biomass of phytoplankton in estuaries<br />
varies widely and may range from 0-210 µgChla/l (Adams et al. 1999). If nutrient<br />
concentrations in an estuary are high (particularly in the case of nitrogen) then phytoplankton<br />
biomass in the estuary is generally high too. Under extreme conditions, when nutrient levels<br />
are very high, certain toxic dinoflagellate species may form dense blooms known as red tides.<br />
Less is known about benthic microalgae (microphytobenthos) in estuaries than phytoplankton.<br />
Values for benthic microalgae biomass are often reported in different units which makes<br />
comparisons between estuaries difficult. Currently there is no available information on<br />
microalgae in the Uilkraals Estuary.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
22<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
3.4 Vegetation<br />
There are four main vegetation communities associated with the Uilkraals Estuary: macroalgae,<br />
submerged macrophytes, reeds and sedges, and salt marsh.<br />
Heydorn & Bickerton (1982) recorded 13 species of semi-aquatic plants in and around the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary. These included Crassula glomerata, Plantago carnosa, triglochin bulbosum,<br />
Scirpus littoralis, Sebaea minutiflora, Sebaea albens, Spergularia marginata, Cotula eckloniana,<br />
Chenolea diffusa, Samolus deis and Limonium scabrum.<br />
Macroalgae<br />
Macroalgae can be indicative of water quality and nutrient enrichment. Macroalgae may be<br />
intertidal (intermittently exposed) or subtidal (continually submerged) and can be attached to<br />
hard or soft substrata or they may float (Adams et al. 1999). Opportunistic macroalgae are<br />
found in temporary closed estuaries like the Uilkraals as they can tolerate fluctuating salinities.<br />
During a survey in 1981 the filamentous algae Enteromorpha and Cladophora were recorded in<br />
the estuary and Ulva beds were present under the road bridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).<br />
Enteromorpha and Cladorphora belong to the family Chlorophyta, and are often found to<br />
extend further into estuaries due to their salinity tolerance (Adams et al. 1999).<br />
Submerged macrophytes<br />
The high macrophyte diversity in the Uilkraals Estuary is of conservation importance. There<br />
are approximately 2 ha of submerged macrophytes in the estuary, which provide an important<br />
habitat for invertebrates and juvenile fish. Submerged macrophytes are plants rooted in both<br />
soft subtidal and low intertidal substrata, which are completely submersed for most states of<br />
the tide (Adams et al. 1999). Submerged macrophyte beds support diverse and abundant<br />
invertebrate and juvenile fish communities (Whitfield 1984, 1989). Primary productivity of<br />
submerged macrophytes is high and on par with the most productive plant habitats in marine<br />
and terrestrial ecosystems (Day 1981, Fredette et al. 1990). Adams et al. (1999) found in saline<br />
waters in the region, Zostera capensis is prevalent. Submerged macrophytes are important in<br />
their provision of food for epifaunal and benthic invertebrate species as well as nursery areas<br />
for juvenile fish through the provision of food, shelter and protection (Adams et al. 1999).<br />
Salt marsh<br />
Salt marshes in estuaries are a source of primary production and provide habitat and food for a<br />
variety of faunal species (Adams et al. 2006). The degree of tidal flushing is important in<br />
determining how much nutrients they release into the water column (Childers & Day 1990).<br />
An open mouth is important as this maintains the intertidal salt marsh community. Salt marsh<br />
plants are distributed away from the water’s edge along an inundation gradient (Figure 13).<br />
Intertidal salt marsh occurs between the limits of the high and low tide ranges, while supratidal<br />
marsh occurs above the intertidal zone and is only normally flooded during spring tide and<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
23<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
other associated high water levels. Floodplain marshes are normally elevated above the rest of<br />
the estuary, and are normally only covered with water during large flood events.<br />
Mucina et al. (2003) described and classified 11 salt marsh plant communities at the Uilkraals<br />
Estuary. Dominant species included Salicornia meyeriana, Sarcocornia perennis agg., S.<br />
capensis, S. decumbens, Bassia diffusa, Limonium sp. nova, Juncus kraussii subsp. kraussii,<br />
Sporobolus virginicus and Triglochin bulbosa. In a 1981, study the saltmarsh covered an area of<br />
approximately 1.3 ha or 0.6% of the studied estuarine region (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982) and<br />
had the highest cover (95%) of all recorded vegetation types. A more recent vegetation study<br />
recorded approximately 38 ha of saltmarsh, which is still the highest cover of all recorded<br />
vegetation types and is of high conservation importance.<br />
Figure 13. Picture of the upper channel and saltmarsh area facing upstream, February 2010.<br />
Reeds and sedges<br />
Reeds and sedges act as natural biological filters, they are important for bank stabilisation as<br />
they are rooted in soft intertidal or shallow subtidal strata (Adams et al. 1999). Reeds and<br />
sedges contribute to the diversity of aquatic life, particularly the avifauna (Coetzee et al. 1997).<br />
Terrestrial vegetation<br />
Parsons (1982) identified 10 main terrestrial plant communities around the Uilkraals Estuary,<br />
including the saltmarsh (Error! Reference source not found.). These can be consolidated into<br />
five plant formations visually: low shrubland (0.25-1.0 m), mid-high shrubland (1-2 m),<br />
woodland, herbland and grassland. In the study area (205 ha) the low shrubland was the most<br />
extensive (39 ha), followed by the herbland (37 ha) and woodland (32 ha). Mid-high shrubland<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
24<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
covered 19 ha and grassland 1.3 ha. Open sand, including the beach, made up 46 ha. Fynbos<br />
communities made up fairly large patches in the study area with a total cover of 56 ha or<br />
27.3% of the study area. Dense stands of exotic vegetation surround the estuary with the main<br />
invader being the rooikrans Acacia cyclops (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).<br />
3.5 Invertebrates<br />
Invertebrates inhabiting estuaries can be divided into a number of sub-groups based on where<br />
they reside in the estuary. Zooplankton live mostly in the water column, benthic organisms<br />
live in the sediments on the bottom and sides of the estuary channel, and hyperbenthic<br />
organisms live just above the sediment surface. Benthic organisms are frequently further<br />
subdivided into intertidal (those living between the high and low water marks on the banks of<br />
the estuary) and subtidal groups (those living below the low water mark). Only limited<br />
information on some benthic and hyperbenthic species is available for the Uilkraals Estuary,<br />
summarised below.<br />
Benthic invertebrates<br />
During a 1955 survey, before the construction of the road bridge, a good population of<br />
bloodworms Arenicola loveni, sandprawns Callianassa kraussi and mudprawns Upogebia<br />
africana were found both up- and downstream of the foot bridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982,<br />
Gaigher 1984). In 1973 a strong, viable population of bloodworms was reported in the tidally<br />
exposed sandbanks of the estuary reaching at least 2 km upstream (Gaigher 1984). Three<br />
years later, after the erection of the road bridge and the long rubble embankment on which it<br />
was built, no bloodworms were found above the bridge, which is situated approximately 800 m<br />
from the mouth. Another survey in 1979 confirmed the extinction of the bloodworm in the<br />
estuary. A very small juvenile bloodworm population was found in a permanent seawater pool<br />
on the beach adjacent to the estuary mouth (Gaigher 1984). The associated change in the<br />
salinity regime of the estuary caused by the construction of the road bridge is the most likely<br />
cause of the loss of this species from the estuary.<br />
In December 1979 sandprawns and mudprawns were found up and downstream of the new<br />
road bridge, with sandprawns being more abundant and more widely distributed. Mudprawn<br />
distribution ended abruptly 100 m upstream of the bridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). In<br />
March 1981, sandprawns were found in abundance from the mouth across the floodplain to<br />
where freshwater conditions prevailed. Only a few mudprawn burrows were noted (Heydorn<br />
& Bickerton 1982).<br />
Hyperbenthic invertebrates<br />
The crown crab Hymenosa orbiculare and the hermit crab Diogenes brevirostris were abundant<br />
near the road bridge in 1979, while smaller numbers of the crab Cyclograpsus punctatus were<br />
found in the same area. In 1981 large numbers of C. punctatus were found just above the<br />
bridge, as well as large numbers of the shrimp Palaemon pacificus (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
25<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
3.6 Fish<br />
Estuaries provide an extremely important habitat for fish in southern Africa. The vast majority<br />
of coastal habitat in southern Africa is directly exposed to the open ocean, and as such is<br />
subject to intensive wave action throughout the year (Field & Griffiths 1991). Estuaries in<br />
southern Africa are thus disproportionately important relative to other parts of the world, in<br />
that they constitute the bulk of the sheltered, shallow water inshore habitat in the region.<br />
Juveniles of many marine fish species in southern Africa have adapted to take advantage of<br />
this situation, and have developed the necessary adaptations to enable them to persist in<br />
estuaries for at least part of their life cycles. There are at least 100 species that show a clear<br />
association with estuaries in South Africa (Whitfield 1998). Most of these are juveniles of<br />
marine species that enter estuaries as juveniles, remain there for a year or more before<br />
returning to the marine environment as adults or sub-adults where they spawn, completing<br />
the cycles. Several other species also use estuaries in southern Africa, including some that are<br />
able to complete their entire life cycles in these systems, and a range of salt tolerant<br />
freshwater species and euryhaline marine species. Whitfield (1994) has developed a detailed<br />
classification system of estuary associated fishes in southern Africa. He recognized five major<br />
categories of estuary associated fish species and several subcategories (Table 1).<br />
Table 1. Classification of South African fish fauna according to their dependence on estuaries (Whitfield<br />
1994)<br />
Category<br />
I<br />
Ia<br />
Ib<br />
II<br />
IIa<br />
IIb<br />
IIc<br />
III<br />
IV<br />
V<br />
Description<br />
Truly estuarine species, which breed in southern African estuaries; subdivided as follows:<br />
Resident species which have not been recorded breeding in the freshwater or marine<br />
environment<br />
Resident species which have marine or freshwater breeding populations<br />
Euryhaline marine species which usually breed at sea with the juveniles showing varying<br />
degrees of dependence on southern African estuaries; subdivided as follows:<br />
Juveniles dependant of estuaries as nursery areas<br />
Juveniles occur mainly in estuaries, but are also found at sea<br />
Juveniles occur in estuaries but are more abundant at sea<br />
Marine species which occur in estuaries in small numbers but are not dependant on<br />
these systems<br />
Euryhaline freshwater species that can penetrate estuaries depending on salinity<br />
tolerance. Includes some species which may breed in both freshwater and estuarine<br />
systems<br />
Obligate catadromous species which use estuaries as transit routes between the marine<br />
and freshwater environments<br />
Fish species in categories I, II, and V as defined by Whitfield (1994) are all wholly or largely<br />
dependent on estuaries for their survival and are hence the most important from an estuary<br />
conservation perspective. These species need to receive most attention from a management<br />
perspective.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
26<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Because the Uilkraals Estuary is categorised as a cool-temperate open-closed system its<br />
icthyofaunal composition is likely to be consistent with estuaries in the same category as fish in<br />
estuaries respond to their environment in a consistent manner and estuaries with similar<br />
habitats and environmental regimes support similar species assemblages (Whitfield 1998).<br />
Harrison (2005) described species caught during extended field research carried out in the<br />
1990s, with open cool-temperate estuaries having an average of 6.8 species captured per<br />
estuary. The numerically dominant species caught included harder Liza richardsonii, cape<br />
silverside Atherina breviceps and estuarine round-herring Gilchristella aestuaria. Kob<br />
Argyrosomus sp., shad Pomatomus saltatrix , flathead mullet Mugil cephalus , and cape white<br />
catfish Galeicthys feliceps also contributed to the overall biomass (Harrison 2005). In open<br />
cool-temperate estuaries like the Uilkraals, Harrison (2005) found that they did not appear to<br />
contain any unique taxa, instead comprising of a mix of widespread and endemic species which<br />
prefer cooler waters (e.g. Cape silverside and harder).<br />
G F van Wyk recorded white steenbras Lithognathus lithognathus, mullet (Family: Mugilidae)<br />
and nude goby Caffrogobius nudiceps in the estuary in 1955. During a 1981 site visit the<br />
presence of mullet in abundance was noted as well as the presence of white steenbras and the<br />
Knysna sandgoby Psammagobius knysnaensis in smaller numbers (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).<br />
White steenbras is a category IIa species and is dependent on estuaries as a nursery area for at<br />
least the first year of life (Whitfield 1994). Harrison et al. (1995b) recorded four species of fish<br />
in the estuary; Cape silverside, Knysna sand goby, harder, and flathead mullet.<br />
An ichthyological survey at the Uilkraals Estuary was conducted in 2006. Ten hauls were done<br />
at 10 sampling sites, covering a total sampling area of 3000 m 2 . 11 species of fishes were<br />
recorded (Table 2). Three of these were likely to be breeding in the Uilkraals Estuary; Cape<br />
silverside, nude goby, and the Knysna sand goby. One species, flathead mullet, was likely to be<br />
dependent on the estuary as a nursery area for at least its first year of life. Another five<br />
species were at least partially dependent on the estuary as a nursery area; Cape sole<br />
Heteromycteris capensis, groovy mullet Liza dumerilii, blackhand sole Soleo bleekeri, harder,<br />
and white stumpnose Rhabdosargus globiceps.<br />
In total, nine species (82% of the fish species recorded from the Uilkraals Estuary) can be<br />
regarded as either partially or completely dependent on the estuary for their survival. The<br />
most abundant species in terms of numbers was the Knysna sand goby, followed by harder<br />
(Table 2). Both species are at least partially dependant on the estuary. In terms of biomass<br />
sandshark contributed most to the total biomass in the system, followed by harders. However,<br />
sandsharks do not rely on estuaries as part of their life cycle.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
27<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Table 2. Species composition, abundance and biomass of fish in 10 seine net hauls at Uilkraals Estuary, March<br />
2006.<br />
Species Common name Number per ha kg/ha<br />
Atherina breviceps Silverside 176.7 48.7<br />
Caffrogobius nudiceps Nude goby 6.7 11<br />
Psammogobius knysnaensis Knysna sand goby 13284.2 700.7<br />
Mugil cephalus Flathead mullet 36.7 303.3<br />
Heteromycteris capensis Cape sole 213.3 233.3<br />
Liza dumerilii Groovy mullet 3.3 496.7<br />
Solea bleekeri Blackhand sole 6.7 33.3<br />
Liza richardsonii Harder 3036.7 42492<br />
Rhabdosargus globiceps White stumpnose 110 52.7<br />
Amblyrhynchotes hokenii Evil eye blassop 33.3 70.3<br />
Rhinobatos annulatus Sandshark, guitarfish 20 58020<br />
3.7 Birds<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary has been identified as an important area for waterbirds (Barnes 1996).<br />
On a national scale it is ranked 14 th in terms of waterbird abundance in a conservation priority<br />
analysis study (Turpie 1995). Regionally, it was ranked 11 th out of 65 coastal wetland systems<br />
in the south-western Cape in terms of total bird numbers supported (Ryan et al. 1988). A total<br />
of 48 water-associated bird species have been recorded at the Uilkraals Estuary (Table 3). Of<br />
these, 23 species are piscivorous, 21 are invertebrate-feeding and only four species are<br />
herbivorous.<br />
The estuary has supported large numbers of terns and migratory waders in the past (Summers<br />
et al. 1976, Heydorn & Bickerton 1982, Ryan et al. 1988) and has been recognised as one of the<br />
largest mainland tern roosts in the south-western Cape (Ryan et al. 1988).<br />
Only a few bird counts have been conducted on the estuary, all of which were done in the<br />
summer months (Table 4). Previous counts conducted between 1976 and 1981 showed bird<br />
abundances ranging from 4 864 to 6 755 individuals. The count conducted in 1996 showed a<br />
decrease of over 4 500 individuals compared to the 1981 count. This was due to much lower<br />
numbers of terns being recorded, also on subsequent visits to the estuary in the following few<br />
days. This decrease was probably caused by changes in habitat availability. Increased erosion<br />
and changes in sedimentation and river flow have occurred as a long-term result of the<br />
causeway supporting the bridge built in 1973, and the erection of a rubble embankment<br />
(Barnes 1996), and more recently the decreased flows due to the upstream dam. The number<br />
of invertebrate-feeding waders present at the estuary remained relatively stable (Table 4).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
28<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Piscivores<br />
Table 3. Water-associated birds recorded at Uilkraals Estuary (Summers et al. 1976; Heydorn &<br />
Bickerton 1982; A. Terörde, unpubl. data).<br />
Invertebrate feeders<br />
African Darter Anhinga rufa African Oystercatcher Haematopus moquini<br />
African Fish-eagle Haliaeetus vocifer African Sacred Ibis Threskiornis aethiopicus<br />
African Spoonbill Platalea alba Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica<br />
Black Stork Ciconia nigra Blacksmith Lapwing Vanellus armatus<br />
Cape Gannet Morus capensis Blackwinged Stilt Himantopus himantopus<br />
Cape Cormorant Phalacrocorax capensis Cape Wagtail Motacilla capensis<br />
Caspian Tern Sterna caspia Common Greenshank Tringa nebularia<br />
Common Tern Sterna hirundo Common Ringed Plover Charadrius hiaticula<br />
Crowned Cormorant Phalacrocorax coronatus Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucos<br />
Giant Kingfisher Megaceryle maxima Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquata<br />
Great Egret Casmerodius albus Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferruginea<br />
Greyheaded Gull Larus cirrocephalus Grey Plover Pluvialis squatarola<br />
Grey Heron Ardea cinerea Kittlitz's Plover Charadrius pecuarius<br />
Hartlaub's Gull Larus hartlaubii Little Stint Calidris minuta<br />
Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilis<br />
Little Egret Egretta garzetta Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpres<br />
Malachite Kingfisher Alcedo cristata Sanderling Calidris alba<br />
Osprey Pandion haliaetus Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereus<br />
Pied Kingfisher Ceryle rudis Three-banded Plover Charadrius tricollaris<br />
Reed Cormorant Phalacrocorax africanis Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus<br />
Sandwich Tern Sterna sandvicensis White-fronted Plover Charadrius marginatus<br />
Swift Tern Sterna bergii Herbivores<br />
White-breasted Cormorant Phalacrocorax lucidus Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus<br />
Egyptian Goose<br />
Red-knobbed Coot<br />
Yellow-billed Duck<br />
Alopochen aegyptiaca<br />
Fulica cristata<br />
Anas undulata<br />
Table 4. Summary of bird count results conducted at the Uilkraals Estuary.<br />
January 1976<br />
(Summers et al. 1976)<br />
January 1976<br />
(Summers unpublished<br />
data)<br />
December 1979<br />
(Heydorn & Bickerton<br />
1982)<br />
January 1981<br />
(Ryan et al. 1988)<br />
February 1996<br />
(Barnes 1996)<br />
February 2010<br />
(A. Terörde, unpub.<br />
data)<br />
Number of<br />
species<br />
Total<br />
abundance<br />
Wader<br />
abundance<br />
Most abundant species<br />
32 Not counted 774 Waders: Curlew Sandpiper (480)<br />
17 4864 720 Sandwich Tern (2000)<br />
Waders: Curlew Sandpipers<br />
(440)<br />
26 5879 584 Sandwich Tern (5000)<br />
Waders: Curlew Sandpiper (480)<br />
24 6755 880 Common Tern (4720)<br />
Waders: Curlew Sandpiper (534)<br />
30 2180 1041 Common Tern (513)<br />
Waders: Curlew Sandpiper (421)<br />
22 435 60 Kelp Gull (310)<br />
Waders: Whimbrel (17)<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
29<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
For this study, a count of water-associated birds was conducted in late February 2010, when<br />
summer migrant numbers are usually maximal. Birds were recorded from the mouth to the<br />
section of the estuary where the wider channel becomes a series of smaller braided channels,<br />
approximately 3 km from the mouth.<br />
Counts during this study showed a drastic decrease in bird numbers compared to previous<br />
years, while diversity was not affected as much (Table 4). Only 435 individuals were recorded,<br />
the majority of these being Kelp Gulls (310 individuals). Most birds (89%) were found in the<br />
sandflats above the bridge (Error! Reference source not found.). Ten species were piscivores<br />
nd 12 species were invertebrate-feeding waders. No herbivores were recorded. Compared to<br />
the study by Barnes (1996) the proportion of invertebrate-feeders, piscivores and herbivores<br />
was similar. Barnes (1996) recorded 15 species of piscivores, 18 species of invertebratefeeders<br />
and one species of herbivore (Egyptian Goose).<br />
The low numbers can be explained by the significant decrease in the numbers of Curlew<br />
Sandpipers, as well as only a small number of terns being present (32 individuals) as compared<br />
to previous counts (Error! Reference source not found.). Curlew Sandpiper has been recorded<br />
t the estuary in high numbers during every previous survey conducted (Error! Reference source<br />
not found.). It is an Arctic-breeding migratory species, and is found in southern Africa from<br />
August/November to March/April. It forages for nereid worms, snails and crustaceans mainly<br />
in the intertidal area of coastal lagoons and estuaries and on sheltered open shores with much<br />
stranded algae (Hockey et al. 2005). The estuary was closed to the sea during the study and<br />
had been closed for approximately two months. Therefore, the large inter-tidal feeding habitat<br />
which covered the entire sandflat region below and above the road bridge was lost. Most<br />
inter-tidal invertebrates had probably desiccated and died or migrated elsewhere. While many<br />
sandprawn burrows were still present, these animals are able to burrow deeper to a level of<br />
sufficient moisture in dry times and are often found in closed systems. They are also very<br />
tolerant of varying salinities (Forbes 1974). Due to their large size and the depth of their<br />
burrows it is unlikely that sandprawns can be utilised as prey by small invertebrate-feeding<br />
waders.<br />
Kelp Gulls were recorded roosting for the first time in high numbers at Uilkraals with 310<br />
individuals recorded (Table 5). Barnes (1996) recorded 67 and Ryan et al. (1988) recorded 77<br />
individuals. On the day of the count a strong south-easterly wind was blowing and it is possible<br />
that this species seeks shelter in the estuary sporadically. Similar numbers of Kelp Gulls were,<br />
however, still present the following two days, even after the wind had died down. The low<br />
numbers of terns recorded are of particular concern as this site was once a major roost for<br />
several tern species including the Caspian Tern, Sandwich Tern and Swift Tern, of which it<br />
hosted 6.8%, 2.8% and 6.6% respectively of the south-western Cape’s population (Barnes<br />
1996). Whimbrel has previously been recorded in high numbers at the estuary (76 and 65<br />
individuals) making it the second largest population in the south-western Cape after Langebaan<br />
Lagoon (Barnes 1996). Only 17 individuals were recorded in this study. Whimbrel are relatively<br />
sensitive to disturbance and higher levels of recreational use of the estuary by people may be a<br />
contributing factor, in addition to the loss of intertidal feeding habitat.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
30<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
In addition to the changes associated with the building of the bridge and the closure of the<br />
mouth, disturbance would have increased with the size of the surrounding settlements and<br />
amount of people utilizing the adjoining caravan park and estuary for recreational purposes.<br />
Table 5. Results of the waterbird count (February 2010). Area 1: mouth to bridge; Area 2: bridge to<br />
saltmarsh (sandflats); Area 3: channel through to saltmarsh.<br />
Piscivores Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 TOTAL<br />
Cape Cormorant 1 1<br />
Caspian Tern 4 2 6<br />
Common Tern 12 12<br />
Grey Heron 1 1<br />
Hartlaub's Gull 8 8<br />
Kelp Gull 310 310<br />
Little Egret 1 11 12<br />
Reed Cormorant 1 1<br />
Sandwich Tern 1 1<br />
Swift Tern 13 13<br />
Invertebrate-feeders<br />
Blacksmith Lapwing 2 3 5<br />
Cape Wagtail 2 2 4<br />
Common Sandpiper 1 1<br />
Curlew Sandpiper 12 12<br />
Common Greenshank 1 1<br />
African Oystercatcher 4 4<br />
Ruff 4 4<br />
Sacred Ibis 2 2<br />
Terek Sandpiper 3 3<br />
Whimbrel 17 17<br />
White-fronted Plover 9 7 16<br />
Wood Sandpiper 1 1<br />
Total number of individuals 24 387 24 435<br />
Total number of species 6 15 6 22<br />
3.8 Current health of the estuary<br />
Whitfield (2000) conducted an assessment on the condition of estuaries of the entire South<br />
African coast. The estuaries were broadly classified as follows:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Excellent: estuary in near pristine condition (negligible human impact)<br />
Good: no major negative anthropogenic influences on either the estuary or catchment<br />
(low impact)<br />
Fair: noticeable degree of ecological degradation in the catchment and/or estuary<br />
(moderate impact)<br />
Poor: major ecological degradation arising from a combination of anthropogenic<br />
influences (high impact)<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary was classified by Whitfield (2000) as being in a fair condition. A more<br />
recent health assessment found that the Uilkraals Estuary has an Estuarine Health Index (EHI)<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
31<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
score of 55 (van Niekerk, unpubl. data). The EHI assesses the degree to which the current state<br />
resembles the reference (i.e. natural) condition. Once the natural hydrological conditions have<br />
been described, specialists assess the condition of the estuary in terms of a range of<br />
biophysical variables. The current state is then scored for each of these variables on a scale of<br />
0 (no resemblance to original state) to 100 (same as natural state). The health scores and<br />
overall score are summarised in Table 6. Although the estuary currently receives some 80% of<br />
its natural MAR, an important part of the hydrology and natural functioning of the estuary has<br />
been removed (winter and summer base flows) which affects the mouth condition<br />
significantly. The similarity score given for the hydrology of system is 50% of the natural<br />
condition, which is lower than the percentage in natural MAR (80% of natural). This is because<br />
an important component of the natural flow regime has been modified to a large extent, the<br />
hydrodynamics and mouth condition (0% of natural condition) are severely altered. The<br />
reduction in flow has also had an impact on the water quality of the system, both due to the<br />
reduced ability to dilute pollution and due to the increase in polluted return flows as a result of<br />
water use for irrigation. The reduced flows may have also altered the physical habitat of the<br />
estuary in that the depth and profile have changed. There has been a recorded 81%<br />
transformation in the 1 km buffer zone of the estuary (van Niekerk, unpub. data), most likely a<br />
consequence of increased alien vegetation and reduced flows.<br />
The reduction in flows has also resulted in considerable changes to the biota of the estuary.<br />
Primary productivity by microalgae is thought to have increased due to the nutrient input and<br />
reduction in flushing of the estuary. Being a blackwater system, the Uilkraals is naturally<br />
oligotrophic and because the water is being retained in the estuary for an extended period of<br />
time, the primary productivity has increased substantially. Plants have also been significantly<br />
affected. Mouth closure for such extended periods can lead to a significant reduction in<br />
saltmarsh vegetation. Saltmarsh cannot survive inundation which is caused by the permanent<br />
rise of the water level in the estuary due to a closed mouth. A reduced cueing effect to<br />
estuarine dependent invertebrate and fish species could result in a reduction in nursery<br />
function, abundance and diversity of species. Birds have also been significantly affected by the<br />
closure of the estuary. The large intertidal feeding habitat which covered the entire sandflat<br />
region below and the above the causeway has been lost, resulting in a severe decrease in<br />
wader numbers. The estuary has also become less suitable as a tern roost. The score of 80%<br />
allocated to birds is most likely an over estimate and has become even lower as the estuary<br />
continues to remain closed off from the sea.<br />
Table 6. The Estuarine Health Index scores allocated to the Uilkraals Estuary (Present State)<br />
VARIABLE<br />
SCORE (% resemblance to natural condition)<br />
Hydrology 50<br />
Hydrodynamics and mouth condition 0<br />
Water quality 70<br />
Salinity 50<br />
Total Water Quality Score 62<br />
Physical habitat 70<br />
Habitat health score 45.5<br />
Microalgae 35<br />
Plants (macrophytes) 70<br />
Invertebrates 70<br />
Fish 75<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
32<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Birds 80<br />
Biological health score 64<br />
OVERALL EHI SCORE 55<br />
The overall health score of 55 translates into a Present Ecological Status of a D, which is classed<br />
as a largely modified system (Table 7).<br />
Although the Present State of the Uilkraals Estuary currently falls within an Ecological Category<br />
D, it is likely that the estuary is on a negative trajectory of change, because of the extremely<br />
low base flows under the Present State. Turpie & Clark (2007) listed the Uilkraals Estuary as a<br />
high priority estuary in need of rehabilitation. Alien plant clearance and the removal of the<br />
causeway were listed as the types of requirements needed to rehabilitate the estuary.<br />
Increasing freshwater inflow and ensuring more natural flows into the system are also needed.<br />
Table 7. Relationship between Estuarine Health Score, Present Ecological Status (PES) classification,<br />
and how it is understood.<br />
EHI Score PES General description<br />
91 – 100 A Unmodified, natural<br />
76 – 90 B Largely natural with few modifications<br />
61 – 75 C Moderately modified<br />
41 – 60 D Largely modified<br />
21 – 40 E Highly degraded<br />
0 – 20 F Extremely degraded<br />
Implications for the estuary<br />
The estuary is degrading under the current flows. The main consequences of maintaining the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary in an Ecological Category D through these flows are considered to be as<br />
follows:<br />
1. Excessive (or nuisance) macrophyte growth during the late summer months in the<br />
upper reaches, particularly if nutrient inputs are not reduced, negatively impacting on<br />
water intake systems, recreational usage and aesthetics (i.e. ‘loss of value’).<br />
2. Reduced cueing effect to estuarine dependent invertebrate and fish species and<br />
resulting reduction in nursery function.<br />
3. A loss of saltmarsh through inundation or dessication if the estuary remains closed to<br />
the sea.<br />
4. A further decrease in bird numbers as the estuary becomes less suitable for waders<br />
and terns. Birds that require an inter-tidal feeding area are severely affected.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
33<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
4. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES<br />
4.1 What are ecosystem services<br />
Ecosystems can be viewed as natural capital which contributes to economic production. They<br />
provide goods, services and attributes, collectively known as ecosystem services that<br />
contribute to human welfare (Barbier 1994):<br />
Goods are harvested resources, such as fish.<br />
Services are processes that contribute to economic production or save costs, such as water<br />
purification.<br />
Attributes relate to the structure and organisation of biodiversity, such as beauty, rarity or<br />
diversity, and generate less tangible values such as spiritual, educational, cultural and<br />
recreational value.<br />
The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) recently re-categorized the services obtained<br />
from ecosystems as follows:<br />
Provisioning services such as food and water;<br />
Regulating services such as flood and disease control;<br />
Cultural services such as spiritual, recreational, and cultural benefits; and<br />
Supporting services, such as nutrient cycling, that maintain the conditions for life on Earth.<br />
The first three align well with the definitions of goods, services and attributes described above,<br />
while the fourth underlies these and need only be considered inasmuch as changes in these<br />
affect the values of the first three (Turpie 2007).<br />
4.2 Goods and services provided by the Uilkraals Estuary<br />
The main types of ecosystem services that are associated with temperate South African<br />
estuaries are listed in Error! Reference source not found.Table 8.<br />
The goods and services provided by Uilkraals Estuary are described in more detail below.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
34<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Attributes<br />
Services<br />
Goods<br />
Table 8. Ecosystem goods, services and attributes based on definitions by Costanza et al. (1997) that<br />
are likely to be provided by temperate South African estuaries (Turpie 2007)<br />
Ecosystem Goods,<br />
Services & Attributes<br />
Description<br />
Importance in<br />
estuaries<br />
Food, medicines Production of fish and food plants; medicinal plants High<br />
Raw materials<br />
Production of craftwork materials, construction materials and<br />
fodder<br />
Medium<br />
Gas regulation Carbon sequestration, oxygen and ozone production, Low<br />
Climate regulation Urban heat amelioration, wind generation Low<br />
Erosion control and<br />
sediment retention<br />
Waste treatment<br />
Refugia<br />
Nursery areas<br />
Export of materials<br />
and nutrients<br />
Genetic resources<br />
Structure and<br />
composition<br />
Prevention of soil loss by vegetation cover, and capture of soil in<br />
wetlands, added agricultural (crop and grazing) output in<br />
wetlands/floodplains<br />
Breaking down of waste, detoxifying pollution; dilution and<br />
transport of pollutants<br />
Critical habitat for migratory fish and birds, important habitats for<br />
species<br />
Critical breeding habitat,<br />
Nurseries for marine fish<br />
Export of nutrients and sediments to marine ecosystems<br />
Medicine, products for materials science, genes for resistance to<br />
plant pathogens and crop pests, ornamental species<br />
Species diversity and habitats providing opportunities for<br />
recreational and cultural activities<br />
Low<br />
Medium<br />
High<br />
High<br />
High<br />
Low<br />
High<br />
4.3 Raw materials<br />
There is no recorded use of building materials (e.g. reeds, sand) gathered from the Uilkraals<br />
Estuary for subsistence of commercial purposes. The lack of subsistence use is unsurprising<br />
because of the population make-up and the lack of traditional dwellings in this catchment.<br />
4.4 Carbon sequestration<br />
Carbon sequestration is measured in terms of the net storage or loss of carbon that takes place<br />
as a result of a long-term increase or decrease in biomass. The contribution made by estuaries<br />
to carbon sequestration is largely unknown, and was thought unlikely to be significant apart<br />
from in mangrove systems. However recent studies have found estuarine wetlands are able to<br />
sequester carbon at ten times the rate of any other wetland ecosystem due to the high soil<br />
carbon content and burial due to sea level rise (Brigham et al. 2006). Therefore higher rates of<br />
carbon sequestration and lower methane emissions in marsh areas, such as those identified in<br />
the Uilkraals by Mucina et al. (2003) have the potential to be valuable carbon sinks.<br />
Nevertheless, the area is not extensive and the overall value is not likely to be significant in<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
35<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
isolation, but only inasmuch as it contributes cumulatively to this service provided by<br />
ecosystems in general.<br />
4.5 Waste treatment<br />
Waste treatment is likely to be an important ecological service provided by the aquatic<br />
ecosystems of the Uilkraals catchment, particularly in that agricultural return flows are diluted<br />
and assimilated by the system. The value of this function is usually estimated in terms of the<br />
cost savings of treating the water before it is released. However, the quantity of pollutants<br />
released into the system is unknown. It is important to note that the value of the system is<br />
only measured in terms of the amount assimilated by the system. This capacity could be<br />
reduced under certain circumstances, resulting in decreased water quality downstream and<br />
exacerbating the negative impacts on downstream users that would already be caused by<br />
increased pollution loads due to agricultural expansion.<br />
In order to effectively quantify the value of the waste treatment services water quality<br />
assessments would have to identify any periods of elevated loads, which would signify when<br />
the Uilkraals system was not able to assimilate and dilute agricultural return flows, which have<br />
the capacity to deliver of organic pollutants into the estuary.<br />
The capacity to assimilate pollutants could also be reduced under certain circumstances,<br />
resulting in decreased water quality downstream and exacerbating the negative impacts on<br />
downstream users that would already be caused by increased pollution loads due to<br />
agricultural expansion.<br />
4.6 Export of materials and nutrients<br />
The export of sediments and nutrients to the marine zone is an important function of some<br />
river systems. For example, the prawn fisheries of KwaZulu-Natal depend on such exports<br />
(DWAF 2004b). However, this function is far more important on the east coast, which is<br />
relatively nutrient-poor, than on the west coast, where the outputs of estuaries do not<br />
compete with the nutrients supplied by the Atlantic upwelling systems (Turpie & Clark 2007).<br />
It is unlikely that the export of materials and nutrients is important in this system because its<br />
low mean annual runoff (MAR).<br />
4.7 Refugia areas and nursery value<br />
Refugia areas are areas that help to maintain populations in a broader area. For example,<br />
wetlands within relatively arid areas may play an important seasonal role in the maintenance<br />
of wild herbivores that are utilised in tourism operations well beyond the wetland. This is<br />
probably not important in the study area apart from for fish. In the rivers, some of the smaller<br />
tributaries have become important as refuge areas for endemic fish, although their ability to<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
36<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
epopulate the rest of the river system is low at present. In the estuary, some inshore marine<br />
fish populations may utilise the estuary as a warmer refuge during upwelling events (Lamberth<br />
2003). The extent of this function in its contribution to marine populations is unknown.<br />
Estuaries are typically shallow and sheltered habitats that provide a refuge from the action of<br />
waves that are characteristic of the South African coastline, making them ideal nursery<br />
habitats for juvenile fish species, many of which are of commercial importance (Wallace et al.<br />
1984). While estuaries are widely accepted as being among the most biologically productive<br />
ecosystems on earth (Kennish 2002), estuaries in the region where the Uilkraals is located are<br />
fed by oligotrophic (nutrient‐poor) rivers, and are thus not particularly productive.<br />
There are about 431 000 recreational fishers and well over 21 000 commercial fishers active in<br />
the inshore marine environment in South Africa. Commercial net fisheries (beach seine and gill<br />
net) on the south coast are likely to be the fisheries that benefit most from the Uilkraals<br />
Estuary. The commercial line fishery, recreational shore angling and recreational boat angling<br />
fisheries could also benefit to a small extent.<br />
Nursery areas are breeding habitat for populations that reside elsewhere. Estuaries provide<br />
nursery areas and habitat for numerous species of fishes which are exploited by recreational<br />
and commercial harvesting in the inshore marine environment. Different species are<br />
dependent on estuaries to different degrees for stages of their development and growth.<br />
Freshwater flow and the frequency and duration of estuary mouth openings are major factors<br />
affecting estuarine biota (Turpie & Clark 2007), and particularly the juveniles of marine<br />
organisms that use them as nursery grounds (Whitfield 1994, Strydom et al. 2003) either<br />
directly through habitat availability, or indirectly through their impact on estuarine<br />
productivity (Gillanders & Kingsford 2002). Factors that make estuaries suitable nursery areas<br />
are increased food, higher temperature, turbid waters and lower salinities, all of which can be<br />
changed by the variation in freshwater input (GiIlanders & Kingsford 2002, Turpie & Clark<br />
2007). The nursery function of the Uilkraals Estuary is considered to be relatively important, in<br />
that some marine species caught in the surrounding marine fisheries are dependent on<br />
estuaries as nursery areas. With high macrophyte diversity and a large area of submerged<br />
macrophytes within the estuary, nursery areas and refugia are important. However, the<br />
nursery areas may have been reduced or possibly eliminated as a result of the changes in<br />
functioning and mouth dynamics brought about by the upstream dams.<br />
As per the ichthyological survey carried out in 2006, three of the species found within the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary breed in the estuary, one species is completely dependent on the estuary for<br />
the first year of its life and five species are partially dependent on the estuary. The nursery<br />
value is derived from the amount of fish caught which fall under I, III and IV in terms of their<br />
dependence on estuaries (Table 1). Of particular importance in calculating the value is<br />
Category II species for which management of estuaries plays a crucial role in inshore fisheries.<br />
Turpie & Clark (2007) estimated the total nursery value of all the estuaries within South Africa<br />
from the Orange River to Kosi Bay to be in the order of R773 million per annum, ranging from<br />
R900 to R167 million per estuary. The majority of estuaries were estimated to have a nursery<br />
value in the range of R100 000 to R10 million per annum. The Uilkraals Estuary theoretically<br />
falls within this category (Turpie & Clark 2007), but it is unlikely that this value is realised now<br />
due to the closure of the estuary to the sea for such an extended period of time, and the<br />
reduction in freshwater flow.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
37<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
4.8 Genetic resources<br />
Genetic resources are valuable in many systems, but probably least valuable in freshwater and<br />
estuarine systems, where most species are extremely widespread. There are also few species<br />
that have widespread commercial potential (e.g. for agriculture or horticulture). Nevertheless,<br />
there are endemic species, and there is a possibility that these may become useful. The<br />
Uilkraals, because of its high macrophyte abundance, is one of the more interesting systems<br />
within the area in terms of diversity. However, it is not possible to determine this value.<br />
4.9 Tourism and recreational value<br />
The Overstrand coastline, between Rooiels and Pearly Beach which includes the Uilkraals<br />
catchment has become an increasingly popular tourist destination for South Africans and<br />
overseas tourists. Much of the appeal lies in the natural features of the area, particularly the<br />
coastline which provides opportunities for peaceful getaways or adventure holidays involving a<br />
variety of aquatic and non-aquatic outdoor activities. The area is surrounded by hills in the<br />
form of the western Franskraalberge, the central Koudeberge and range of limestone hills<br />
which merge into the coastal plains. In the scale of the Western Cape mountain ranges these<br />
are a minor attraction (van der Merwe 2008), but do contribute positively to the aesthetic<br />
attraction of the region. In addition the shifting sand dunes and limestone hills have high<br />
species endemism. There are a number of protected areas in the vicinity of the Uilkraals<br />
catchment including the Uilkraalsmond Nature Reserve, Pearly Beach, Groot Hagelkraal Nature<br />
Reserve and Quoin Point Nature Reserve.<br />
Tourism is a major economic driver in the Overstrand and its popularity as a holiday and<br />
recreational destination is on the increase. During the peak holiday seasons, the population<br />
can increase four fold. As with many estuaries in South Africa, there is an urban settlement<br />
around the mouth of the Uilkraals Estuary. The Uilenkraalsmond Holiday Resort is located<br />
directly at the mouth of the estuary and is a very popular holiday resort, generally being full<br />
during all major holiday periods (Figure 14). The holiday resort covers a large area having both<br />
cottages and a caravan park with camping facilities. At R550 per night in self catering<br />
accommodation during the peak season and R400 a night out of season, it is expected that the<br />
resort generates a relatively substantial amount, which can be ultimately attributed to the<br />
estuary. There are a couple of upmarket bed and breakfast facilities located in the Franskraal<br />
village. The main attractions of the estuary are for fishing, birdwatching, and relaxation. The<br />
Uilkraalsmond area is considered to be under increasing development pressure, with the<br />
proposed rural development in the area (van de Merwe 2008). Tourism is also an important<br />
industry in the areas in the vicinity of the Uilkraals Estuary, with a range of adventure, ecotourism<br />
and consumptive (fishing) activities available to visitors.<br />
The Uilkraals River is considered an asset amongst the five rivers listed within the Strandveld<br />
area, with the coastal features at the mouth of the Uilkraals Estuary listed as important<br />
because of the tourism value that they hold. T he area adjacent to the mouth is varied with the<br />
western section forming the rocky outstretches linking to Gansbaai and the eastern section<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
38<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
comprised of smooth fine grained sandy beaches which continue on to Pearly Beach. The<br />
Uilkraals catchment is also important as a Fynbos biodiversity hotspot, containing important<br />
strands of remnant undisturbed fynbos. A number of places have reported the occurrence of<br />
red data species, in addition a number of flower harvesting and processing centres are located<br />
in the catchment, for example Concordia and Niewedam (van der Merwe 2008).<br />
Figure 14. Uilkraals Estuary (which is now closed to the sea) with the Uilenkraalsmond Holiday Resort<br />
situated at the mouth (inside red box). Source: Google Earth.<br />
Recreational use of estuaries is significant in South Africa, with an estimated total of 67 000<br />
recreational anglers and 5700 cast netters (Turpie & Clark 2007). Although this activity is<br />
relatively small in the Uilkraals Estuary area and on the coast, recreational angling (mainly<br />
shore angling) is carried out by many of the locals and visitors to the area. The bulk of the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary linefish catch is made within 500 m of the mouth. The total fishing effort for<br />
the Uilkraals Estuary is 2.1 tonnes, which is considerably less when compared to the Klein (80<br />
tonnes), the Bot (70 tonnes) and the Heuningnes (10 tonnes; Lamberth & Turpie 2003).<br />
The economic value of the recreational fishery can be considered in terms of the expenditure<br />
on fishing by recreational fishers (i.e. the income to subsidiary industries such as<br />
accommodation and fuel). While the commercial and traditional fisheries are forms of<br />
generating cash or subsistence income, and are largely valued in terms of the market value of<br />
their catches, the value of recreational angling does not lie mainly in the market value of the<br />
fish caught. Recreational anglers value the sport and experience, and expend considerable<br />
sums on this activity, largely irrespective of their catch returns (McGrath et al. 1997). The<br />
value attributed to this fishery is mostly in terms of gains to subsidiary industries that benefit<br />
from angler expenditure (McGrath et al. 1997).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
39<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
5. LEGISLATION AND MANAGEMENT ISSUES<br />
5.1 The main threats and opportunities to be considered<br />
There are a number of factors that threaten the future health of the Uilkraals Estuary and<br />
hence its biodiversity and capacity to deliver ecosystem services. The main threats to the<br />
system or areas of potential conflict are as follows:<br />
1. Water quantity and quality<br />
a. reduction in freshwater inflows due to water storage in the catchment<br />
(Kraaibosch Dam), and a continuing increase in the demand for water<br />
b. increasing nutrient enrichment due to agriculture in the catchment<br />
c. Loss of important habitat area such as saltmarsh through inundation caused<br />
by increasing water levels in the estuary as the mouth remains closed.<br />
2. Exploitation of living resources<br />
a. potential for future overexploitation by recreational fishers<br />
3. Land-use and associated disturbance<br />
a. potential for residential/resort development around the estuary leading to<br />
change in sense of place and existence value, increased human disturbance<br />
of biota, and damage or loss of estuarine habitat<br />
In addition to meeting the existing legislation governing the above activities, opportunities to<br />
protect the health and value of the system over the medium to long term include:<br />
1. The establishment of terrestrial and estuarine protected areas, and<br />
2. Implementation of rehabilitation measures.<br />
All of the above issues are discussed below in the context of the prevailing policies and<br />
legislation.<br />
5.2 General policy and legislative background<br />
This section provides an overview of legislation and policy applicable to management of<br />
estuaries in South Africa and specifically to the Uilkraals Estuary. More details on the<br />
legislative framework for estuary management including international and regional treaties<br />
and obligations, national policies and laws, and provincial and local policies and legislation is<br />
provided in Taljaard (2007).<br />
The South African Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and provides the legal<br />
framework for legislation regulating environmental management in general. Section 24 of the<br />
Constitution states that:<br />
"Everyone has the right:<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
40<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
• to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being; and<br />
• to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations<br />
through reasonable legislative and other measures that –<br />
• prevent pollution and ecological degradation;<br />
• promote conservation; and<br />
• secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while<br />
promoting justifiable economic and social development.<br />
This lays the basis for environmental law in South Africa (Breen & McKenzie 2001) and is a very<br />
important justification for the wise use of estuarine biodiversity.<br />
Because they are not freshwater, terrestrial or marine, estuaries have tended to be neglected<br />
in past legislation. However, the fact that estuaries contain freshwater, terrestrial and marine<br />
components, and are heavily influenced by activities in a much broader catchment and<br />
adjacent marine area, means that they are affected by a large number of policies and laws.<br />
The situation has improved with newer policies and legislation, but there is still no specific<br />
provision for Estuarine Protected Areas.<br />
South African policy and law as pertaining to estuaries has been summarised in detail<br />
elsewhere (Smith & Cullinan 2000, van Niekerk & Taljaard 2002). A brief summary of the most<br />
relevant policies is given here (Table 9 and Table 10). Policy and legislation which affects<br />
estuaries directly can be roughly divided into that affecting (a) water quality and quantity, (b)<br />
land use and infrastructure development, and (c) living resources within estuaries (Van Niekerk<br />
& Taljaard 2002, Taljaard 2007).<br />
Estuary management falls mainly under two national government departments: the<br />
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, responsible for water resources, and the<br />
Department of <strong>Environmental</strong> Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), responsible for everything else, e.g.<br />
land use, living resources. <strong>Environmental</strong> management in most instances is devolved to<br />
provincial level through whichever provincial department is responsible for environmental<br />
matters. Management and conservation of marine living resources is an exception in this<br />
respect, in that this is retained as a national competency, responsibility residing with the<br />
Branch Marine & Coastal Management (MCM) of DEAT. In instances where provincial or local<br />
legislation are in conflict with national legislation, national legislation prevails. At a local<br />
(municipality) level, municipal councils pass municipal by-laws, which in turn, cannot conflict<br />
with provincial and national laws (Breen & McKenzie 2001).<br />
The Western Cape Government has also released a Coastal Management Programme which<br />
includes a suite of goals, objectives and strategies designed to achieve sustainable coastal<br />
development in the Western Cape. These are closely aligned with the National Coastal<br />
Management Programme and are organised within five themes:<br />
Theme A: Governance and Capacity Building<br />
Theme B: Our National Asset<br />
Theme C: Coastal Planning and Development<br />
Theme D: Natural Resource Management<br />
Theme E: Pollution Control and Waste Management<br />
A number of goals within each of these themes are of relevance to the management of the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary (Table 11).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
41<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Land use &<br />
management<br />
Water quality<br />
& quantity<br />
Table 9.<br />
Summary of national policies which affect water quality and quantity in estuaries in general, landing use, development and resource use in the estuarine environment.<br />
White Paper (= Policy) Bill or Act (= Law) Lead<br />
Agent<br />
White Paper on National<br />
Water Policy for SA (1997)<br />
White Paper on Integrated<br />
Pollution and Waste<br />
Management for South Africa<br />
(2000)<br />
Implications<br />
National Water Act 36 of 1998 DWEA Defines the environmental reserve in terms of quantity and quality of water; provides for<br />
national, catchment and local management of water<br />
Marine Pollution (Control and<br />
Civil Liability) Act (1981)<br />
National <strong>Environmental</strong><br />
Management: Integrated<br />
Coastal Management Act no 24<br />
of 2008<br />
Seashore Act<br />
(1935) as amended<br />
DOT/<br />
DWEA<br />
DWEA<br />
DEADP<br />
Provides for the protection of the marine environment from pollution by oil and other harmful<br />
substances, the prevention and combating of such pollution, and the determination of liability in<br />
certain respects for loss or damage caused by the discharge of oil from ships, tankers and<br />
offshore installations.<br />
Provides for the control of dumping at sea and pollution in the coastal zone (including estuaries).<br />
The leasing of the sea shore for the purposes of construction on the sea-shore or in the sea.<br />
<strong>Environmental</strong> Conservation Act<br />
(1989)<br />
Most of the provisions of this Act have been repealed by NEMA, apart from the regulation on<br />
Sensitive Coastal Areas.<br />
National Heritage Resources Act<br />
(1999)<br />
DWEA<br />
Provides for managements of national heritage resources (including landscapes and natural<br />
features of cultural significance, and for participation of communities in the identification,<br />
conservation and management of cultural resources<br />
White Paper for Sustainable<br />
Coastal Development in<br />
South Africa (2000)<br />
National <strong>Environmental</strong><br />
Management: Integrated<br />
Coastal Management Act no 24<br />
of 2008<br />
DWEA<br />
Provides for integrated coastal and estuarine management in South Africa, and sustainable<br />
development of the coastal zone, defines rights and duties in relation to coastal areas; includes a<br />
National Estuarine Management Protocol for South Africa, and requires that estuarine<br />
management plans be developed and implemented for all estuaries<br />
White Paper on Spatial<br />
Planning and Land-use<br />
Management (2001)<br />
Local Government: Municipal<br />
Systems Act (2000)<br />
DPLG<br />
Requires each local authority to adopt a single, inclusive plan for the development of the<br />
municipality intended to encompass and harmonise planning over a range of sectors such as<br />
water, transport, land use and environmental management.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
42<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Use of living resources<br />
& MPAs<br />
Protected<br />
areas<br />
White Paper (= Policy) Bill or Act (= Law) Lead<br />
Agent<br />
White Paper: Mineral and<br />
Mining Policy for South Africa<br />
(1998)<br />
White Paper on the<br />
Conservation and Sustainable<br />
Use of South Africa’s<br />
Biological Diversity (1998)<br />
Marine Fisheries Policy for<br />
South Africa (1997)<br />
Mineral and Petroleum<br />
Resources Development Act<br />
(2002)<br />
National <strong>Environmental</strong><br />
Management: Protected Areas<br />
Act (2003)<br />
World Heritage Convention Act<br />
(1999)<br />
National <strong>Environmental</strong><br />
Management: Biodiversity Act<br />
(2004)<br />
Marine Living Resources Act<br />
(1998)<br />
DME<br />
DWEA<br />
DWEA<br />
DWEA<br />
DWEA<br />
Implications<br />
Deals with environmental protection and management of mining impacts, including sand and<br />
coastal mining.<br />
Provides for the protection and conservation of ecologically viable areas representative of South<br />
Africa’s biological diversity and its natural landscapes and seascapes; and for establishment of a<br />
national register of national, provincial and local protected areas, describes the different types of<br />
protected areas that can be declared which may also apply to estuaries.<br />
Provides for the incorporation of the World Heritage Convention into South African Law, and for<br />
the recognition and establishment of World Heritage Sites in South Africa<br />
Provide for the conservation of biological diversity, and regulates sustainable use of biological<br />
resources<br />
Regulates living resource use within marine and estuarine areas, mainly through licensing;<br />
provides for establishment of Marine Protected Areas<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
43<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Table 10.<br />
Provincial and local government legislation applicable to the Uilkraals Estuary<br />
Act/Ordinance Lead Agent Implications<br />
Municipal Ordinance (Cape) (1974) DEADP Grants local authorities in the province of the Western Cape the power ‘to drain storm water into any natural water<br />
course’.<br />
Western Cape Nature Conservation Laws<br />
Act No. 15 of 1998<br />
Land Use Planning Ordinance (1985) as<br />
amended<br />
WCNCB<br />
DEADP<br />
Provides for the establishment of the Western Cape Nature Conservation Board.<br />
Most planning applications received by the provincial department are in terms of this Act including applications for<br />
departure, rezoning or subdivision and appeals against planning decisions taken by a municipality<br />
Western Cape Planning and Development Act DEADP Provides guidelines for the future spatial development in province of Western Cape<br />
(1999)<br />
Nature Conservation Ordinance (1974) WCNCB Provides for the establishment of provincial, local and private nature reserves and the protection of indigenous species of<br />
flora and fauna. Protected and endangered species of flora and fauna are listed in schedules to the ordinance. It is<br />
administered by the Western Cape Nature Conservation Board (WCNCB) and grants certain powers to the WCNCB.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
44<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Table 11.<br />
Goals and strategies in the Western Cape Integrated Coastal Management Programme with particular relevance to management of the Uilkraals Estuary.<br />
Goal # Goal Strategies<br />
Goal B3:<br />
Goal C1:<br />
Goal C3:<br />
Goal C4:<br />
Goal C5:<br />
Goal D1<br />
Goal D2:<br />
To preserve, promote or protect archaeological, historical and<br />
cultural resources and activities of the coast<br />
To promote the diversity, vitality and long term viability of coastal<br />
economies and activities, giving preference to those that are<br />
distinctly coastal or dependent on a coastal location<br />
To maintain an appropriate balance between built, rural and<br />
wilderness coastal areas in the Western Cape<br />
To design and manage coastal settlements to be in harmony with the<br />
aesthetic, environmental and cultural attributes of the Western Cape<br />
Coast<br />
To plan and manage coastal development so as to avoid increasing<br />
the incidence and severity of natural hazards and to avoid exposure<br />
of people, property and economic activities to significant risk from<br />
dynamic coastal processes<br />
To maintain the diversity, health and productivity of coastal and<br />
marine processes and ecosystems<br />
To establish and effectively manage a system of coastal protected<br />
areas<br />
B3.1.1: Implementation of section 38 of the National Heritage Resources Act<br />
B3.1.2: Encouragement of heritage conservation planning<br />
B3.1.6: Termination of inappropriate uses of places, illegal activities<br />
C1.7.1: Diversify tourism opportunities<br />
C1.7.3: Build capacity of communities to initiate and effectively participate in sustainable<br />
tourism ventures<br />
C1.7.4: Identify and address the limits imposed by natural and manmade environments<br />
when planning tourism (and other) initiatives<br />
C3.4.2: Ensure the protection and conservation of natural/wilderness areas<br />
C4.1.1: Determine adequate setback and buffer zones along the coast<br />
C4.1.2: Control the sitting of infrastructure in the coastal zone<br />
C4.1.3: Restrict non-coastal related land uses from being located in the coastal zone<br />
C4.1.4: Encourage appropriate forms of coastal settlement and building<br />
C4.1.5: Formulate design guidelines for all buildings and structures in the coastal zone<br />
C4.2.1: Develop regulations to restrict the alteration of landforms and vegetation cover in<br />
dynamic coastal zones<br />
C4.2.3: Manage pedestrian and vehicular access in coastal environments<br />
C5.1.1 Protect and maintain dynamic coastal features that act as a buffer against natural<br />
coastal processes and hazards<br />
C5.2.1: Incorporate appropriate preventative and adaptive measures into all planning and<br />
management policies, plans and decision-making processes to account for projected<br />
changes in climate, particularly increases in sea level<br />
D1.2.1 Identify and protect unique sensitive environments and habitats in the coastal and<br />
marine zones<br />
D2.1.3: Ensure proper management of protected areas that caters for ecological and<br />
human use requirements<br />
Goal D3: To ensure that the use of renewable resources and associated user D3.1.2: Adopt holistic rather than single species management approaches<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
45<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Goal # Goal Strategies<br />
practices do not compromise the regenerative capacity of coastal<br />
ecosystems<br />
D3.1.3: Set harvest levels that correspond to the regenerative capacity of coastal<br />
resources<br />
D3.1.5: Develop adequate strategies for monitoring and compliance<br />
D3.1.6: Promote participation of all stakeholders in management<br />
Goal D5:<br />
Goal E1:<br />
Goal E2:<br />
To rehabilitate damaged or degraded coastal ecosystems and<br />
habitats<br />
To implement pollution control and waste-management measures in<br />
order to prevent, minimize and strictly control harmful discharges<br />
into coastal ecosystems<br />
To manage polluting activities to ensure that they have minimal<br />
adverse impact on the health of coastal communities, and on coastal<br />
ecosystems and their ability to support beneficial human uses<br />
D5.1.1: Identification of significantly degraded coastal areas and ecosystems and<br />
development of rehabilitation management plans<br />
D5.2.1: Put in place procedures to enforce rehabilitation of degraded coastal areas by<br />
those responsible<br />
E1.2.3: Inclusion of pollution and waste management into land-use planning<br />
E2.1.7: Reduce pollution entering rivers and estuaries by promoting catchment<br />
management<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
46<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
5.3 Water quantity and quality requirements<br />
Legislative context<br />
Water quality and quantity are mainly controlled from the terrestrial side under the National<br />
Water Act 36 of 1998, under DWEA (Table 9). Legislation being developed under the White<br />
Paper on Integrated Pollution and Waste Management for SA (2000) will also have a bearing on<br />
river systems. The risk of marine pollution is addressed by the Combating Pollution of the Sea<br />
by Oil Act 6 of 1981, under DEAT. This discussion focuses on National Water Act and the<br />
Integrated Coastal Management Act as being the most pertinent to the development of the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Management Plan.<br />
The White Paper on National Water Policy for SA (1997) promotes efficiency, equity and<br />
sustainability in the use of water resources through its slogan “some, for all, forever”. The<br />
policy explicitly recognises the environment as a legitimate user of water and makes provision<br />
to protect the environment from overexploitation of water resources. The National Water Act<br />
36 of 1998 (NWA) provides the legal framework for this policy. The NWA makes provision for a<br />
water “Reserve” which provides the quantity and quality of water flow required in aquatic<br />
ecosystems required to meet basic human needs and to protect the natural functioning of a<br />
water resource. The latter portion of the reserve is known as the environmental Reserve.<br />
The classification process<br />
The extent to which an estuary’s functioning is catered for is determined by the designated<br />
“class” (= future state of health) of that estuary, with some estuaries being assigned a low class<br />
to allow maximal water provision and others being assigned a high class in order to meet<br />
conservation needs. The decision as to the designated class of the estuary is thus a critical one.<br />
In future, this will take place using a classification process that has recently been devised by<br />
DWAF and is being gazetted. This process will entail consideration of the trade-offs in value<br />
generated by allocating water (or pollution rights) to off-stream users (e.g. irrigation<br />
agriculture), flow-reducing activities (e.g. plantation forestry) and polluters (e.g. municipalities,<br />
farmers) versus allocating water to the environment for the provision of ecosystem services<br />
(e.g. fishing, tourism). The Catchment Management Agencies will in future probably play the<br />
key role in this decision –making process, but until these agencies are operational, decisions<br />
are being made with the aid of water situation assessments known as Internal Strategic<br />
Perspectives (ISPs) that were developed as an interim aid.<br />
The reserve determination process<br />
In the absence of a gazetted classification process, the environmental Reserve is currently<br />
determined on the basis of recommendations emanating from a reserve determination study<br />
using the Resource Directed Measures methodology in conjunction with considerations of the<br />
demand for water in the catchment (the classification process described above will effectively<br />
standardise the way this is done). In the case of the Uilkraals River System, a Reserve<br />
Determination Study has not been undertaken and there is no preliminary assessment of the<br />
freshwater requirements for individual components of the estuary.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
47<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
5.4 Exploitation of living marine resources<br />
Legislative context<br />
The exploitation of marine living resources in South Africa (which includes those in estuaries) is<br />
governed by the Marine Fisheries Policy for South Africa (1997) and the Marine Living<br />
Resources Act (1998). Objectives of the policy are as follows:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
to achieve optimum utilisation and ecologically sustainable development of marine living<br />
resources;<br />
to conserve marine living resources for present and future generations, to use marine<br />
living resources;<br />
to achieve economic growth, human resource development, capacity building within<br />
fisheries and mariculture branches, employment creation and a sound ecological balance<br />
consistent with the development objectives of national governments;<br />
to protect the ecosystem as a whole, including species which area not targeted for<br />
exploitation; and<br />
to preserve marine biodiversity.<br />
The Marine Living Resources Act (1998) defines the species that can be exploited, and<br />
protection measures for those species, such as closed areas, closed seasons and size and bag<br />
limits. Various types of resource-use permit systems are also defined under this act.<br />
Issues surrounding recreational fishing<br />
Compared to other estuaries along the southwest and east coasts, the Uilkraals Estuary is<br />
currently utilised by a relatively low number of recreational fishers. This situation could<br />
change in the future depending on how development in the area proceeds.<br />
Due to the large number of participants, and associated expenditure (tackle, bait,<br />
accommodation, food, travel costs), recreational fisheries have been shown to contribute<br />
significantly to regional economies (Mann et al. 2002, Lamberth & Turpie 2003, Pradervand et<br />
al. 2003). It has been shown that the demand for recreational angling is largely driven by a<br />
desire for relaxation and that the quantity of fish caught does not negatively affect the<br />
expenditure by recreational anglers (McGrath et al. 1997). Increased tourism and real estate<br />
development along the banks of the Uilkraals Estuary could lead to increases in recreational<br />
fishing effort.<br />
5.5 Land use and management of estuary margins<br />
Legislative context<br />
Land use management and control of development in the coastal zone is mostly the<br />
responsibility of the provincial government and local authorities (municipalities), and is<br />
administered through the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act (2000), the National<br />
<strong>Environmental</strong> Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act (2009), the Seashore Act<br />
(1935), the National <strong>Environmental</strong> Management Act (2003) (NEMA) and associated EIA<br />
regulations.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
48<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Development planning has been rather ad hoc in the past, but has now been formalised under<br />
the Municipal Systems Act, which requires that all municipalities (i.e. Metros, District<br />
Municipalities and Local Municipalities) have to produce Integrated Development Plans (IDPs).<br />
As the IDP is a legislative requirement it has a legal status and supercedes all other plans that<br />
guide development at local government level. The IDP process is one of the key tools for local<br />
governments to cope with their developmental roles and responsibilities. It is the principal<br />
strategic planning instrument which guides and informs all planning, budgeting, management<br />
and decision-making in a municipality for a five-year period. IDPs are also supposed to guide<br />
the activities of other spheres of government, corporate service providers, NGOs and the<br />
private sector within the municipal area. Because of the participatory process it takes<br />
approximately 6 – 9 months to complete an IDP. The IDP is updated every five years.<br />
Every municipality is required to produce an indicative plan, called a Spatial Development<br />
Framework (SDF), showing desired patterns of land use, directions of growth, urban edges,<br />
special development areas and conservation-worthy areas. It must also produce a scheme,<br />
called a Land use Management System (LUMS)’ recording the land use and development rights<br />
and restrictions applicable to each erf in the municipality. The plan should be flexible enough<br />
to accommodate changing priorities, and the scheme has to conform to the plan. The plan<br />
(SDF) is a guide to development, and the scheme (LUMS) is binding.<br />
The National <strong>Environmental</strong> Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act No. 24 of<br />
2008 (ICMA), which came into force in December 2009, seeks to:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
promote the conservation of the coastal environment, and maintain the natural<br />
attributes of coastal landscapes and seascapes, and to ensure that development<br />
and the use of natural resources within the coastal zone is socially and<br />
economically justifiable and ecologically sustainable;<br />
define rights and duties in relation to coastal areas;<br />
determine the responsibilities of organs of state in relation to coastal areas;<br />
prohibit incineration at sea;<br />
control dumping at sea, pollution in the coastal zone, inappropriate development<br />
of the coastal environment and other adverse effects on the coastal<br />
environment; and<br />
give effect to South Africa’s international obligations in relation to coastal<br />
matters<br />
The ICMA defines the coastal zone as:<br />
“The area comprising coastal public property, the coastal protection zone, coastal access<br />
land and coastal protected areas, the seashore, coastal waters and the exclusive economic<br />
zone and includes any aspect of the environment on, in under and above such area”.<br />
All land below the high water mark, coastal waters and natural resources up to the boundary<br />
of the exclusive economic zone are considered coastal public property (s.7) that is held in trust<br />
by the state on behalf of the citizens of the country (s.11) 1 . The state is required by ICMA to<br />
take “whatever reasonable legislative and other measures it considers necessary to conserve<br />
and protect coastal public property for the benefit of present and future generations” (s.12).<br />
1 Section 11, which deals with the ownership of coastal public property, is scheduled to come into force at<br />
a later date.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
49<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
In terms of ICMA, all land within one kilometre of the high water mark zoned for agricultural or<br />
undetermined use and not part of a lawfully established township at the time at which the Act<br />
came into force, and all other land within 100 metres of the high-water mark will be<br />
incorporated within a “coastal protection zone” (s.16). The purpose of coastal protection zone<br />
is to protect ecological integrity, natural character and the economic, social and aesthetic value<br />
of the land and sea below the high water mark and to maintain the natural functioning of the<br />
littoral active zone (s.17). Authorisation for construction of any structures within this zone<br />
may only be issued in terms of the NEMA EIA regulations provided the structure in question is<br />
inconsistent with the purpose for which the coastal protection zone was established, is likely to<br />
cause irreversible or long-lasting adverse effects to any aspect of the coastal environment that<br />
cannot satisfactorily be mitigated nor is likely to be significantly damaged or prejudiced by<br />
dynamic coastal processes. Provincial MEC’s are required to establish or coastal set-back lines<br />
so to protect the coastal public property, private property and public safety; protect the<br />
coastal protection zone; preserve the aesthetic values of the coastal zone; or for any other<br />
purpose consistent with the objectives of ICMA. The building, erection, alteration or extension<br />
of structures will be prohibited seaward of the coastal set back line.<br />
All municipalities in the country are required to facilitate public access to the seashore through<br />
the designation of coastal access land.<br />
Certain sections of the coast may be designated as “special management areas” in terms of<br />
the Act for the purpose of conserving, protecting or enhancing coastal ecosystems and<br />
biodiversity in the area and for facilitating the management of coastal resources by a local<br />
community.<br />
The Act requires that all estuaries in the country be managed in a co-ordinated and efficient<br />
manner and in accordance with a national estuarine management protocol.<br />
Minister and provincial MECs are also empowered to remove any structure on or within the<br />
coastal zone deemed to be having an adverse effect on the coastal environment by virtue of its<br />
existence or because it has been erected, constructed or upgraded in contravention of this Act<br />
or any other law.<br />
The national government (DEAT), all coastal provinces and coastal municipalities are also all<br />
required to prepare coastal management programmes for managing the coastal zone within<br />
their areas of jurisdiction. These coastal management programmes are required to set out a<br />
vision, objectives, priorities and strategies for achieving objectives, norms and standard for<br />
management of the coastal zone, and a framework for co-operative governance that identifies<br />
the responsibilities of different organs of state in respect of the management of the coast.<br />
Coastal management programmes are required to be consistent with other planning<br />
documents (e.g. IDP and SDF documents) and vice versa. Coastal municipalities are also<br />
empowered to pass bylaws in terms of the Act for the purpose of administrating and enforcing<br />
their coastal management programmes.<br />
Agricultural activities in and around the Uilkraals Estuary, include livestock grazing, fruit<br />
farming, viticulture and wild flower farming and are all subject to the Conservation of<br />
Agricultural Resources Act (1983) which gives the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and<br />
Fisheries the power to prescribe control measures to achieve the objectives of the Act (viz. the<br />
maintenance of the production potential of land, by the combating and prevention of erosion<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
50<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
and weakening or destruction of the water sources (including estuaries), and by the protection<br />
of the vegetation and the combating of weeds and invader plants).<br />
Development within the coastal zone is also to some extent controlled through National<br />
<strong>Environmental</strong> Management Act No.107 0f 1998 (NEMA) and associated EIA regulations. A<br />
range of listed activities are included in the annexures to the regulations for which either a<br />
Basic or full EIA are required. In the event that a developer wishes to undertake a project<br />
involving any of the listed activities, the developer is required to appoint an independent EIA<br />
practitioner to conduct a Basic <strong>Environmental</strong> Assessment (in the case of the former) or initiate<br />
a scoping exercise in the case of the latter). Following completion of such an assessment, an<br />
application must then be made to the relevant authority (Western Cape Department of<br />
<strong>Environmental</strong> Affairs & Development Planning or DEAT in the case of the Kogelberg area) for<br />
approval of the project. The application will be considered by the MEC/Minister and his/her<br />
staff and a Record of Decision issued indicating that the development may either proceed<br />
under certain conditions, must be subject to a more detailed assessment (i.e. full EIA), or may<br />
not proceed at all. The Record of Decision (ROD) issued by the authority (DEADP) may be<br />
appealed by the applicant (or anyone opposed to the development) which could result in the<br />
ROD being upheld, additional conditions being imposed on the development, or the ROD being<br />
overturned. Such an appeal must be lodged within 30 days of the ROD being published, using<br />
the appropriate forms. Further details on the EIA process, application and appeal forms are<br />
available on the Cape>Gateway website<br />
(www.capegateway.gov.za/eng/directories/services/11537/10199).<br />
NEMA requires that activities identified by the Minister may not commence without an<br />
environmental authorisation in terms of section 24. When applying for an environmental<br />
authorisation an environmental impact assessment must be undertaken to assess potential<br />
impacts on the environment, socio-economic condition and cultural heritage, the results of<br />
which must be reported to the authority charged with authorizing, permitting or otherwise<br />
allowing the implementation of an activity (in this case DEA&DP).<br />
Regulations were promulgated in 2006 which regulate procedures and criteria for EIA and list<br />
activities which are subject to basic assessment reports and scoping assessment and<br />
environmental assessment reports. Applications for the following activities, listed in GN No. R.<br />
386, are subject to a basic assessment as provided in regulations 22 – 26 of the <strong>Environmental</strong><br />
Impact Assessment Regulations (GN No. R. 385):<br />
1. The construction of facilities or infrastructure, including associated structures and<br />
infrastructure, for -<br />
(a) any purpose in the one in ten year flood line of a river or stream, or within 32<br />
metres from the bank of a river or stream where the flood line is unknown, excluding<br />
purposes associated with existing residential use, but including –<br />
(i) canals; (ii) channels; (iii) bridges; (iv) dams; and (v) weirs;<br />
(b) marinas and the launching of watercraft on inland freshwater systems;<br />
2. Construction or earth moving activities in the sea or within 100 metres inland of the highwater<br />
mark of the sea, in respect of –<br />
(a) facilities for the storage of material and the maintenance of vessels;<br />
(b) fixed or floating jetties and slipways;<br />
(c) tidal pools;<br />
(d) embankments;<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
51<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
(e) stabilising walls;<br />
(f) buildings; or<br />
(g) infrastructure.<br />
3. The prevention of the free movement of sand, including erosion and accretion, by means of<br />
planting vegetation, placing synthetic material on dunes and exposed sand surfaces within a<br />
distance of 100 metres inland of the high water mark of the sea.<br />
4. The dredging, excavation, infilling; removal or moving of soil, sand or rock exceeding 5<br />
cubic metres from a river, tidal lagoon, tidal river, lake, in-stream dam, floodplain or wetland.<br />
5. The removal or damaging of indigenous vegetation of more than 10 square metres within a<br />
distance of 100 metres inland of the high water mark of the sea.<br />
6. The excavation, moving, removal, depositing or compacting of soil, sand, rock or rubble<br />
covering an area exceeding 10 square metres in the sea or within a distance of 100 metres<br />
inland of the high-water mark of the sea.<br />
Applications for the following activities, listed in GN No. R. 387, are subject to scoping and<br />
environmental impact assessment as provided in regulations 27 – 36 of the <strong>Environmental</strong><br />
Impact Assessment Regulations (GN No. R. 385):<br />
9. The construction or earth moving activities in the sea or within 100 metres inland of the<br />
high-water mark of the sea, excluding an activity listed in item 2 of Government Notive No.R.<br />
386 of 2006 but including construction or earth moving activities in respect of-<br />
(a) facilities associated with the arrival and departure of vessels and the handling of<br />
cargo;<br />
(b) piers;<br />
(c) inter- and sub-tidal structures for entrapment of sand;<br />
(d) breakwater structures;<br />
(e) rock revetments and other stabilising structures;<br />
(f) coastal marines;<br />
(g) coastal harbours;<br />
(h) structures for draining parts of the sea;<br />
(i) tunnels; or<br />
(j) underwater channels<br />
Section 3.1 of the Sea-shore Act No.21 of 1935 requires that a lease be obtained from the<br />
relevant administering authority before commencing construction activities on the sea-shore<br />
(the land between the low water and high water marks) or in the sea. This administrative<br />
function was delegated to the coastal provinces (Proclamation R27 in GG 16346 of 7 April<br />
1995). Since this delegation of powers the Sea-shore Act has been repealed in its entirety by<br />
ICMA, except for those sections that were assigned to provinces. Thus the administrative<br />
power of the various provincial authorities to let the sea-shore still prevails despite the Seashore<br />
Act being repealed.<br />
In the Western Cape this administrative function was transferred by section 2 of the Western<br />
Cape Nature Conservation Laws Act No. 15 of 1998 to the Western Cape Nature Conservation<br />
Board (Cape Nature). Cape Nature, a public entity responsible for nature conservation in the<br />
Western Cape, is the competent authority to which applications for leases of the sea-shore are<br />
addressed.<br />
During the evaluation of applications Cape Nature is required to:<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
52<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
take into consideration whether the letting is in the interests of the general public and will<br />
not seriously affect the general public’s enjoyment of the sea and sea-shore;<br />
consult with a local authority if the land adjoining the portion of the sea-shore is under the<br />
jurisdiction of that local authority;<br />
publish a notice in the Provincial Gazette, before granting a lease, to inform the public of the<br />
proposal and the inspection date and provide opportunity for objections. According to<br />
Section 3(6), any objection submitted in response to such advertisements must be<br />
considered by Cape Nature prior to entering into a lease agreement or issuing of a permit.<br />
Development planning pertaining to the Uilkraals Estuary<br />
The Spatial Development Framework for the Western Cape Province is pitched at a very broad<br />
level, encapsulated in the vision “a home for all in the Western Cape”. It offers very little<br />
material guidance of specific relevance to the management of the Uilkraals Estuary, except to<br />
say that estuaries are unique ecosystems under serious threat both directly from human<br />
activities such as overexploitation, waste discharges, and through activities in the catchment.<br />
The IDP and SDF for the Overberg District Municipality and the SDF for the Overstrand Local<br />
Municipality contain much more of direct relevance to the management of the Uilkraals Estuary. The<br />
Overberg District Municipality IDP has recently been updated for 2010-2011, the local SDF document<br />
is recent from 2009 and the District level SDF, although written in 2004, is still relevant. Excerpts from<br />
the existing documents have been collated in Table 12 (Overberg District Municipality IDP), Table 13<br />
(Overberg District Municipality SDF) and<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
53<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Table 14 (Overstrand Local Municipality Bioregional Plan SDF).<br />
Table 12.<br />
The vision, mission and objectives of the Overberg District Municipality as outlined in the<br />
2010-2011 IDP document.<br />
Vision Mission Objectives<br />
To bridge the<br />
racial socioeconomic<br />
divide<br />
and to create<br />
sustainable<br />
livelihoods and<br />
thriving<br />
communities<br />
within the<br />
Overberg<br />
District<br />
To preserve and<br />
further develop the<br />
district through the<br />
preservation of the<br />
region’s rural<br />
character, the<br />
promotion and<br />
sustainable utilisation<br />
of the region’s<br />
diversity, and to<br />
ensure sustainability<br />
and development of<br />
human and natural<br />
resources to the<br />
benefit and wealth of<br />
all inhabitants and for<br />
the promotion of<br />
economic growth<br />
and development<br />
• To support the development of a diversified, resilient<br />
and sustainable district economy in order to promote<br />
economic growth, build skills, create jobs and eradicate<br />
poverty<br />
• To ensure that all people are located within integral<br />
human settlements and have access to social services<br />
and security<br />
• To facilitate the improvement and expansion of the<br />
provision bulk and basic services to all the people<br />
• To ensure the health and safety of communities through<br />
the prevention and management of risks<br />
• To facilitate sustainable and efficient land use and<br />
planning frameworks<br />
• To facilitate the necessary institutional transformation<br />
and financial sustainability of the ODM in order to make<br />
it a truly developmental municipality<br />
Both the local and district SDF documents highlight the importance of conservation areas and<br />
the need for protection of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Both documents recognise<br />
the potential for natural resources (agriculture, forestry, fishing etc.) to support economic<br />
development as well as the notion that natural attributes of the area (including the estuary)<br />
have a regional value for opportunities e.g. ecotourism. Restoration and rehabilitation of<br />
natural areas are listed as key strategies and both SDF documents emphasise the strategy of<br />
invasive alien plant clearance. The Uilkraals River Catchment has extensive areas of alien<br />
vegetation that run along the course of the river and estuary within the riparian zone. The<br />
Overstrand Local Municipality SDF document states restrictions on future development i.e.<br />
restrictions on development below the 1:100 flood line and in sensitive areas, such as<br />
wetlands, floodplains and riparian systems. Development around the estuary is relatively low,<br />
but with increasing tourism to the area development will surely increase and consequently put<br />
pressure to cross the existing urban edge. Both SDF documents state that the natural<br />
functioning and natural processes of ecosystems must be protected and the effective<br />
management of catchments must be ensured. The district level SDF also focuses on estuaries<br />
directly and states that the long term protection of estuaries must be ensured and that areas<br />
around the estuary mouth must be protected from any development impacts. The Uilkraals<br />
Estuary is at present not functioning naturally and the natural processes associated with the<br />
estuary have been disrupted. The management of the catchment is therefore not effective as<br />
the rivers natural flow patterns have not been regulated successfully.<br />
The Overstrand Local Municipality SDF compiled a spatial planning and management concept<br />
(Figure 15) which further underpins the municipality’s approach to the integrated spatial<br />
management of land use and economic development within its jurisdictional area. The main<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
54<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
principles involve identifying an overarching spatial development pattern within a clear<br />
hierarchy of nodes and settlements. The hierarchy of the development patterns being clearly<br />
defined based on empirical determined growth potentials, the principles of comparative<br />
advantage and the prerequisite of sustainable development. The growth of urban nodes and<br />
rural settlements should be strictly contained within well-defined boundaries and growth<br />
should be managed so as to ensure that development pressures are, wherever possible,<br />
directed and absorbed within the defined urban areas. Appropriate densification specific to<br />
each area must be encouraged to limit unwanted sprawl into the rural vicinity. The diversity,<br />
health and productivity of natural eco-systems, throughout the rural, urban and agricultural<br />
areas should be maintained through an interlinked web of natural spaces and the protection of<br />
important sensitive habitats. Prime and unique agricultural areas must be protected from nonsoil<br />
based land use activities. The diversification of rural and industrial based development<br />
opportunities, based on location and comparative resource advantages must be promoted in<br />
selected areas to stimulate economic growth and employment of the rural population.<br />
Figure 15. The Spatial Management Concept for the Overstrand Local Municipality, showing core urban<br />
areas, rural settlements and settlement hierarchy (Source: Overstrand SDF 2009).<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
55<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Table 13.<br />
Overberg District Spatial Development Framework (SDF)<br />
Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implications<br />
Protected<br />
Areas<br />
Nature<br />
Estuaries, Lakes and<br />
Natural Water Bodies<br />
Natural resources<br />
• Rocks<br />
• Soils<br />
• Minerals<br />
1. Expand statutory conservation<br />
status to at least 12% of the ODM;<br />
2. Establish protected nature areas in<br />
conservation worthy habitats;<br />
3. Consolidate statutory and de facto<br />
nature areas to form extensive<br />
continuous tracts of conservation<br />
land;<br />
4. Link important statutory<br />
conservation areas;<br />
5. Establish conservancies on suitable<br />
privately-owned land.<br />
1. Ensure long-term protection of<br />
estuaries, lakes, and natural water<br />
bodies.<br />
2. Ensure effective management and<br />
conservation of catchments.<br />
1. Regulate the exploitation and<br />
utilisation of all geological and<br />
mineral resources to limit<br />
ecological and aesthetic damage;<br />
2. Regulate miming in accordance<br />
with the SPCs;<br />
3. Limit loss of agricultural soil to a<br />
‘tolerable’ level (10<br />
tonnes/ha/annum)<br />
1. Conserve the ecological and social integrity of natural areas and provide a broad spectrum of compatible outdoor<br />
recreational opportunities;<br />
2. Improve efficiency of conservation authorities and state departments;<br />
3. Rationalise departmental functions;<br />
4. Centralise the management of all statutory conservation areas;<br />
5. Determine and regulate carrying capacity in accordance with ecological requirements;<br />
6. Restore degraded sites or conservation areas;<br />
7. Institute plans and programmes for managing statutory conservation areas;<br />
8. Ensure constructive public involvement in environmental conservation;<br />
9. Foster public acceptance of ownership and responsibility for specific conservation areas;<br />
10. Collect public funds for management of specific conservation areas;<br />
11. Ensure educated public interest and involvement in nature conservation and in the management of conservation<br />
areas.<br />
1. Protect all estuaries and river mouths from developmental impact;<br />
2. Improvement of the current knowledge base.<br />
1. Impose and monitor soil conservation programmes in all sectors;<br />
2. Conserve biodiversity and the life-supporting natural processes and functions of ecosystems;<br />
3. Rehabilitate soil erosion sites;<br />
4. Institute programmes for managing indigenous and alien vegetation;<br />
5. Control all alien plant infestations;<br />
6. Apply appropriate land-use guidelines in accordance with SPCs;<br />
7. Determine and monitor erosion sites;<br />
8. Apply appropriate management practises;<br />
9. Control construction of new dams.<br />
10. Regulate all mining in accordance with the applicable legislation;<br />
11. Ensure effective rehabilitation of mining sites;<br />
12. Control all forms of mining.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
56<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implications<br />
Water<br />
1. Ensure appropriate management of<br />
all catchment areas within the<br />
municipal area.<br />
2. Manage mountain catchment areas<br />
in accordance with existing<br />
management systems.<br />
3. Ensure conservation of all the<br />
water resources of the region.<br />
1. Establish viable sustainable new irrigation schemes to facilitate sustainable agricultural development;<br />
2. Undertake thorough hydrogeological studies;<br />
3. Determine ecological effects of proposed and existing schemes;<br />
4. Institute effective public participation of all IAPs when considering major developments;<br />
5. Maintain ecological processes inherent to the catchment systems;<br />
6. Protect sensitive areas such as ‘sponge areas’;<br />
7. Include the private sector in catchment management;<br />
8. Consolidate legislation;<br />
9. Coordinate catchment management at all levels;<br />
10. Regulate unnatural disturbance regimes in accordance with ecological requirements;<br />
11. Control all alien plant infestations in river courses;<br />
12. Control all forms of pollution in catchment areas;<br />
13. Regulate modification of river beds and natural flow patterns;<br />
14. Regulate future development in accordance with the availability of water;<br />
15. Promote effective agricultural practises;<br />
16. Conserve water through ‘effective water management’;<br />
17. Institute measures to repair leaking storage dams or to utilise leaking from these dams;<br />
18. Ensure equitable payment of levies by all water users;<br />
19. Ensure equitable access of water to all rightful users;<br />
20. Allocate water in accordance with the available water resource;<br />
21. Implement strategies to overcome capacity problems experienced by Overberg Water;<br />
22. Ensure minimum stream flow requirements of the natural environment;<br />
23. Ensure sufficient and sustainable water provision to all rightful users;<br />
24. Ensure water quality of a high standard;<br />
25. Sustainable utilisation of alternative water resources such as ground water;<br />
26. Limit flood damage to infrastructure and developed land to ‘acceptable levels’:<br />
27. Regulate the construction of obstructions in rivers and streams;<br />
28. Conserve riparian and riverine vegetation;<br />
29. Prevent or mitigate the negative effects if essential bulk water releases from dams;<br />
30. Institute proactive measures to prevent/mitigate negative effects of natural floods.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
57<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implications<br />
Flora 1. Conserve the diversity of plants<br />
that are indigenous to the region<br />
at species, population and<br />
community level.<br />
2. Conserve sensitive plant habitats<br />
as indicated by CAPE, SKEP and<br />
STEP.<br />
3. Establish an additional biosphere<br />
reserve in the region.<br />
4. Establish a system of protected<br />
nature areas.<br />
5. Establish bioregional<br />
conservancies.<br />
6. Promote the establishment of<br />
Special Management Areas.<br />
Fauna<br />
1. Consolidate and extend the natural<br />
habitats of the indigenous animal<br />
communities of the region.<br />
2. Consolidate the natural habitats of<br />
endangered animal species.<br />
1. Conserve the diversity of plants that are indigenous to the municipal area at species, population and community level;<br />
2. Identify and conserve all known sensitive habitats;<br />
3. Maintain or simulate natural disturbance regimes;<br />
4. Control all infestations and alien plants;<br />
5. Institute effective environmental education;<br />
6. Regulate flower shows;<br />
7. Maintain minimum viable populations of rare endemic plant species;<br />
8. Prevent local extinction of rare endemic species;<br />
9. Mitigate the negative effects of disasters;<br />
10. Protect rare and endemic plant species;<br />
11. Promote the sustainable utilisation of indigenous flora for financial benefit;<br />
12. Promote the value of indigenous flora;<br />
13. Regulate harvesting of natural plant products;<br />
14. Regulate grazing in accordance with agricultural stocking rates;<br />
15. Promote the sustainable utilisation of forests for the benefits of local economy and communities;<br />
16. Regulate afforestation;<br />
17. Rehabilitate afforested areas in catchment areas;<br />
18. Determine feasibility of alternative farming options.<br />
1. Conserve the natural habitats of the indigenous animals of the region;<br />
2. Conserve all sensitive animal habitats;<br />
3. Control all alien animal species;<br />
4. Locate sensitive or threatened habitats;<br />
5. Conserve the diversity of animals that are indigenous to the ODM at all levels;<br />
6. Re-introduce species that historically occurred in the region;<br />
7. Activate and/or support natural population dynamics to recreate historical species diversity;<br />
8. Simulate or replicate natural disturbance regimes;<br />
9. Regulate artificial distribution of endemic species;<br />
10. Regulate the utilisation of renewable animal resources;<br />
11. Institute contingency measures to mitigate negative impact disasters;<br />
12. Maintain minimum viable populations of rare and endemic animal species;<br />
13. Maintain population dynamics of rare endemic species;<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
58<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implications<br />
Cultural Resources<br />
Rural development<br />
1. Provide all the infrastructure and<br />
services that are essential for<br />
improving the quality of life of<br />
people living in rural areas of the<br />
region.<br />
2. Institute effective roads upgrading<br />
and maintenance.<br />
Urban development 1. Provide the necessary<br />
infrastructure and services needed<br />
to improve the quality of life of<br />
communities in urban areas of the<br />
14. Conserve all indigenous animal species;<br />
15. Promote sustainable utilisation of indigenous and exotic fauna for financial benefit;<br />
16. Regulate utilisation of wild animal resources<br />
17. Involve communities in conservation and sustainable use of indigenous fauna;<br />
18. Utilise renewable resources;<br />
19. Promote and apply principles of sustainable resource utilisation;<br />
20. Promote sustainable game and abalone farming.<br />
1. Conserve representative samples of the historical buildings and structures in the study area;<br />
2. Conserve all archaeological resources on state and private land for present and future generations;<br />
3. Conserve all ‘intangible’ cultural resources, such as oral history, language, place names, social activities, and human<br />
habits;<br />
4. Conserve all underwater cultural resources throughout the coastal zone of the ODM.<br />
1. Ensure application of place-specific planning and design guidelines for rural development.<br />
2. Co-ordinate institutional functions to prevent duplication and facilitate effective use of available financial and other<br />
resources.<br />
3. Establish partnerships between government and private sector for funding upgrading of infrastructure and services.<br />
4. Develop and upgrade infrastructure and services to accommodate community needs.<br />
5. Safeguard the ecological, social and aesthetic qualities of the natural environment through appropriate environmental<br />
planning;<br />
6. Increase environmental awareness at all levels of society;<br />
7. Ensure appropriate environmental control in all rural development;<br />
8. Monitor all aspects and influences of development to identify and rectify negative impacts;<br />
9. Impose similar environmental and legislative requirements on all development;<br />
10. Limit negative impacts on the ecological, social and aesthetic environment to acceptable levels;<br />
11. Regulate the construction of power lines, roads and other infrastructure;<br />
12. Regulate golf estate developments in accordance with place-specific planning;<br />
13. Regulate waste disposal to prevent pollution of the natural environment and natural resources.<br />
1. Develop the necessary infrastructure and facilities to accommodate the aspirations, needs and pressures of present<br />
and future industries and dependent communities;<br />
2. Institute place-specific planning as fundamental requirement of all urban development to safeguard the cultural, social<br />
and aesthetic al qualities of the urban environment;<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
59<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implications<br />
Economic sectors<br />
• Tourism<br />
• Agriculture<br />
• Forestry<br />
• Fishing<br />
• Manufacturing<br />
Community<br />
development<br />
region.<br />
1. Advance the development of<br />
tourism infrastructure in keeping<br />
with location-specific architectural,<br />
environmental and aesthetic<br />
requirements;<br />
2. Ensure effective management of<br />
agriculture throughout the ODM;<br />
3. Provide sustainable opportunities<br />
for small and emerging farmers.<br />
4. Ensure maintenance if commercial<br />
forestry as a primary economic<br />
sector in the ODM;<br />
5. Ensure the proper planning and<br />
development of industrial areas<br />
and manufacturing facilities<br />
required for adequate<br />
manufacturing of products<br />
3. Ensure effective management of municipal functions and facets to ensure equitable and affordable services and<br />
amenities, and a safe and aesthetically pleasing urban environment for the resident tax-paying communities;<br />
4. Limit negative impacts of urban development to pre-determined acceptable levels;<br />
5. Develop necessary infrastructure and facilities required to improve transportation in, and aesthetic qualities in urban<br />
areas;<br />
6. Regulate waste disposal to prevent pollution of the natural environment and natural resources;<br />
7. Provide essential infrastructure required to improve electricity provision.<br />
1. Ensure the conservation and preservation of the area’s character and natural aesthetics by imparting information to<br />
tourists;<br />
2. Ensure cost-effective management of tourism at all levels;<br />
3. Promote community-based and driven industry with inherent direct and indirect benefits for the communities;<br />
4. Promote the development of sustainable agricultural enterprises in the ODM;<br />
5. Combine professional management skills with human, mechanical and financial resources in order to ensure<br />
sustainable agriculture;<br />
6. Undertake appropriate detailed planning as a standard practise on farms;<br />
7. Diversify agricultural enterprises;<br />
8. Make the status of natural resources and the environment determinants for sustainable agriculture;<br />
9. Regulate and utilise the potential rezoning of agricultural land to promote comparative economic advantages of the<br />
ODM;<br />
10. Ensure development and maintenance of harbours and facilities required for viable fishing;<br />
11. Promote sustainable utilisation of indigenous and exotic fish species for financial benefit;<br />
12. Ensure the protection of marine resources;<br />
13. Explore the feasibility of alternative fishing and aquaculture enterprises as community empowerment initiatives;<br />
14. Ensure the sustainable use and protection of natural resources;<br />
15. Ensure constructive public involvement in manufacturing activities;<br />
16. Explore alternative and emerging technologies.<br />
1. Ensure sustainable development of all the people of the ODM;<br />
2. Create a safe, healthy and aesthetically acceptable social environment for all communities;<br />
3. Create a sustainable growing economic environment for all the communities of the ODM;<br />
4. Create equal opportunities for professional education and training in order to ensure sustainable human resources and<br />
access to available job opportunities<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
60<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implications<br />
Effective District<br />
Management<br />
5. Regulate land reform in accordance with the Land Reform programme;<br />
6. Establish constructive involvement of communities in local government;<br />
7. Promote constructive involvement of communities in the rehabilitation of degraded areas and the involvement of<br />
landowners and the general public in sustainable land management and socio-economic development planning;<br />
8. Promote sustainable community empowerment through the efficient use of public resources.<br />
1. Ensure effective cooperation and coordination between the various levels of government;<br />
2. Manage the district in accordance with a place-specific and community-based management approach that is<br />
supportive and supplementary to the existing municipal governance process;<br />
3. Establish mechanisms and procedures to enable the ODM to fulfil its constitutional obligations pertaining to socioeconomic<br />
development throughout its area of jurisdiction.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
61<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Table 14. Overstrand Local Municipality Bioregional Plan, taken from the Spatial Development Framework (SDF) 2009.<br />
Component Description Policies<br />
Conservation I<br />
Represents areas of highest conservation<br />
status. This includes unique areas, areas<br />
which are irreplaceable in terms of<br />
achieving national conservation<br />
objectives, and/or areas which provide<br />
valuable ecosystem services in terms of,<br />
particularly, maintaining water production<br />
and/or quality, protecting soils, regulating<br />
floods, buffering coastal areas, etc. Land is<br />
in Public ownership.<br />
Conservation II Represents areas of the highest<br />
conservation status. Includes unique<br />
areas, relatively large areas, clustered<br />
and/or discrete areas which are<br />
irreplaceable in terms of achieving<br />
national biodiversity conservation<br />
objectives, and/or areas which provide<br />
valuable ecosystem services in terms of,<br />
particularly, maintaining water production<br />
and/or quality, protecting soils, regulating<br />
floods, buffering coastal areas, etc. Land is<br />
in Public ownership.<br />
1. Protect transformation of areas of Critically Endangered or Endangered natural vegetation.<br />
2. Protect the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning of the Conservation Area.<br />
3. Protect the distinctive landscape character of the area.<br />
4. Promote sound management of natural resources.<br />
5. Permit use of natural resources if and only if such use would be sustainable and would not jeopardise biodiversity<br />
conservation.<br />
6. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecological and evolutionary processes.<br />
7. Eradicate alien invasive species.<br />
8. Promote the restoration of degraded and disturbed areas.<br />
9. Promote awareness of the significance and uniqueness of natural vegetation and ecosystems of the area amongst<br />
the local landowners and communities, visitors and tourists.<br />
1. Prohibit transformation of areas of Critically Endangered or Endangered natural vegetation.<br />
2. Protect the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning through sound management and eradication of alien invasive<br />
plants.<br />
3. Protect the distinctive landscape character of the area.<br />
4. Promote sound management of natural resources.<br />
5. Permit use of natural resources if and only if such use would be sustainable and would not jeopardise biodiversity<br />
conservation.<br />
6. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecological and evolutionary processes.<br />
7. Eradicate alien invasive species.<br />
8. Prohibit subdivision of agricultural land.<br />
9. Promote rehabilitation of degraded or disturbed areas.<br />
10. Promote awareness of the significance and uniqueness of natural vegetation and ecosystems of the area amongst<br />
the local landowners and communities, visitors and tourists.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
62<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Component Description Policies<br />
Conservation-<br />
Agriculture Buffer<br />
Core Agriculture<br />
Rural, modified landscapes of relatively<br />
high value in terms of achieving national<br />
objectives for biodiversity conservation,<br />
particularly in terms of maintaining<br />
ecological and evolutionary processes<br />
outside of the conservation areas, and<br />
safeguarding valuable ecosystem services<br />
such as production of harvestable goods,<br />
water production and/or protection of<br />
water quality, protecting soils, regulating<br />
floods, buffering coastal areas etc. In<br />
addition it contributes to the protection of<br />
cultural assets (specifically landscapes of<br />
visual or heritage value).<br />
Rural landscapes of largely transformed<br />
areas which may contain remnants of<br />
Critically Endangered or Endangered<br />
natural vegetation, which may have value<br />
in terms of food production, maintaining<br />
ecosystem services, and protecting<br />
heritage assets. Land is in private<br />
ownership.<br />
1. Prohibit transformation of those areas of buffer which are situated in key ecological/evolutionary process areas, in<br />
sensitive and/or dynamic environments, and/or which provide connectivity between protected or threatened<br />
ecosystems within the municipal boundary to similar systems beyond the municipal boundary.<br />
2. Allow only limited transformation of the conservation agriculture buffer area for agricultural or other development<br />
purposes, ensuring that transformation would not jeopardise either the ecosystem status of habitat in this area or<br />
important ecological process areas.<br />
3. Allow low impact activities only.<br />
4. Protect the biodiversity, connectivity and ecosystem functioning in the conservation areas through sound and<br />
supportive management practises in the buffer area, as prescribed by CapeNature.<br />
5. Protect the distinctive landscape character of the area.<br />
6. Promote sustainable use and sound management of natural resources and of the agricultural land in the buffer area.<br />
7. Prospecting or mining to be granted in certain conditions.<br />
8. Promote efficient use of water resources and safeguard those ecosystems that regulate water yield and quality<br />
(wetlands, riparian systems, floodplains).<br />
9. Support the diversification of the agricultural sector in terms of agri-tourism and value adding in the sub-region.<br />
Promote research into the sustainable use and harvesting of indigenous natural resources.<br />
10. Prohibit the subdivision of land currently used for agriculture, unless such sub division is for the purposes of<br />
incorporating additional land into the conservation areas.<br />
11. Promote restoration (preferably), or rehabilitation of degraded or disturbed areas.<br />
12. Promote eradication of alien species.<br />
13. Promote awareness of the significance and uniqueness of natural vegetation and ecosystems of the area amongst<br />
the local landowners and communities, visitors and tourists.<br />
1. Prohibit transformation of areas of Critically Endangered or Endangered natural vegetation.<br />
2. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecological and evolutionary processes<br />
3. Protect the distinctive landscape character of the area.<br />
4. Promote sustainable use and sound management of agricultural land and natural resources, employing the<br />
principles of ‘Landcare’ as endorsed by the Department of Agriculture.<br />
5. Promote eradication of invasive alien vegetation.<br />
6. Protect sensitive areas such as wetlands, drainage lines, and riparian areas.<br />
7. Promote efficient use of water resources.<br />
8. Promote restoration or rehabilitation of degraded or disturbed areas.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
63<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Component Description Policies<br />
9. Support diversification of the agricultural sector in terms of tourism and value adding in the sub-region.<br />
10. Retain areas of high primary production potential for agricultural use.<br />
11. Discourage the subdivision of land currently used for agriculture, except where it is consistent with the<br />
requirements as stipulated by Act 70 of 1970, and the guidelines for the sustainable sizes of farms required for<br />
various types of produce, as determined by the Department of Agriculture.<br />
12. Permit mining and mineral extraction where it would not results in unacceptable negative impacts on local<br />
ecosystems or ecosystem services, and/or local communities.<br />
13. Promote awareness of the significance and uniqueness of natural vegetation and ecosystems of the area amongst<br />
the local landowners and communities, visitors and tourists.<br />
Agricultural<br />
Settlements<br />
Modified rural landscapes which contain<br />
small, low-density, nodal settlements.<br />
Intensive small scale agriculture<br />
dominates the land use. There areas are<br />
transitional between urban and partly<br />
transformed natural landscapes.<br />
1. Promote sustainable use and sound management of agricultural land.<br />
2. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecological and evolutionary processes<br />
3. Zoning permission for commercial uses outside the designated Agricultural Settlements should not be granted.<br />
4. Applications for future development should comply with the restrictions on the development below the 1:100 year<br />
flood line.<br />
5. Development within the Agricultural Settlements should avoid or minimise negative impacts on ecosystems and<br />
should promote efficient use of resources.<br />
6. Adverse impacts of the Agricultural Settlements on adjacent areas should be minimised.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
64<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Component Description Policies<br />
Core Urban<br />
Intensive settlement areas of relatively<br />
high density within the study area, able to<br />
obtain and support a range of services and<br />
opportunities. These areas have defined<br />
edge and contain range of land use<br />
activities.<br />
1. Zoning permission for commercial uses outside the designated commercial areas should not be granted.<br />
2. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecologically and evolutionary processes.<br />
3. Applications for future development should comply with the restrictions on the development below the 1:100 year<br />
flood line.<br />
4. Development within the Core Urban Area should avoid or minimise negative impacts on ecosystems and should<br />
promote efficient use of resources.<br />
5. Adverse impacts of the Core Urban Area on adjacent areas should be minimised.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
65<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Issues of surrounding land use and development<br />
There is currently relatively little development and use of the margins of the Uilkraals Estuary.<br />
Nevertheless, there is increasing demand for development along the Overstrand coast, and<br />
applications for development around the estuary margins are likely to increase in the future.<br />
Increased development will lead to the degradation and loss of estuary habitats, and will bring<br />
about the increased use of the estuary for recreational purposes. This, in turn, could create<br />
problems of disturbance and pollution if inadequately managed. Recreational use of the<br />
estuary is discussed further below.<br />
Not only does future development pose a threat to the estuary habitats and fauna, it also<br />
threatens the cultural heritage of the area in terms of changing the nature of the historicallyinteresting<br />
areas along the estuary and coastline.<br />
5.6 Non-consumptive recreational use<br />
Legislation<br />
There is no legislation at present that specifically controls non-consumptive recreational use of<br />
the estuary. There are indirect means by which this can and has been achieved.<br />
Regulations were promulgated in 2001 that provided for a general prohibition on the<br />
recreational use of vehicles in the coastal zone and regulates the licensing and control of<br />
recreational boat launching sites and provided procedures for approving the use of vehicles in<br />
the coastal zone [1] under specific circumstances (Regulations No. 13399, Government Gazette<br />
No. 22960, promulgated under Section 44 of the NEMA). These regulations effectively banned<br />
any person from using a vehicle in the coastal zone unless the use is a listed permissible use, is<br />
authorised in terms of a permit or is authorised in terms of an exemption.<br />
Zonation of recreational uses of estuaries has only been applied within protected areas<br />
(national parks or nature reserves).<br />
Management issues<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is used recreationally for fishing, birdwatching and photography, and is<br />
currently appreciated for its unspoilt, wilderness feel and the quaint settlements on its<br />
margins. Although these uses have not been quantified in any way, they pose little threat to<br />
the estuary at present.<br />
[1] The “coastal zone” is described by the ORV Regulations as: “the area adjacent to the sea<br />
characterised by coastal landforms, and includes beaches, dunes, estuaries, coastal lakes,<br />
coastal wetlands, land submerged by the waters of the sea, or of any estuary, coastal lake or<br />
coastal wetland, boat-launching sites, proclaimed harbours and recreational use areas”<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
66<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Other recreational activities are of more concern. There is reportedly also some use of the<br />
estuary margins by quad bikers that may be causing environmental damage. Aircraft such as<br />
gyrocopters and microlights have been observed flying low over the estuary, and causing<br />
disturbance of birds.<br />
With increasing development pressure in the area, disturbance of wildlife is likely to increase.<br />
Appropriate management measures such as protected areas and zonation could be developed<br />
to guard against impacts associated with increased use.<br />
5.7 Potential for protected area status<br />
Legislative context<br />
The White Paper on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa’s Biological Diversity<br />
(1998) recognises the importance of estuaries and commits the government to a number of<br />
strategies to protect wetlands in general, such as facilitating the development of appropriate<br />
legislation to secure their conservation, promoting the establishment of a National System of<br />
Protected Wetlands, preventing inappropriate activities and development around wetlands,<br />
finding ways to recognise wetlands in planning and decision-making, determining the impact of<br />
fishers and developing guidelines for managing them.<br />
Marine reserves were previously proclaimed under the Sea Fishery Act 12 of 1988 or under the<br />
National Parks Act 57 of 1976. Now all marine reserves have been re-proclaimed under the<br />
Marine Living Resources Act. However, this only affords protection up to the high tide mark.<br />
Estuaries can also be protected within regular protected areas (see below), though the latter<br />
do not have jurisdiction over the use of estuarine living resources. Estuaries may also be<br />
protected within World Heritage Sites under the World Heritage Convention Act 49 of 1999.<br />
The General Policy in terms of the Environment Conservation Act – Terrestrial and Marine<br />
protected areas (1994) categorises protected areas into 7 categories (based on IUCN and one<br />
additional category). It prescribes the management objectives and criteria for selecting and<br />
managing each category. The policy suggests that estuaries, fish, spawning areas and<br />
seascapes should generally be treated as Category IV – Habitat and wildlife management areas,<br />
regardless of who owns those resources. In reality, estuaries could fall into any category.<br />
Those such as Kosi could be classified as Category V – Protected land/seascapes, while others<br />
could be classified as Category VI - Sustainable Use Areas. Each estuary should be classified on<br />
the basis of the management objectives of the estuary (Smith & Cullinan 2000).<br />
The Biodiversity Act (2004) provides for the conservation of biological diversity. It requires<br />
identification of important landscapes, ecosystems, ecological process and species for<br />
biodiversity conservation, and promotes monitoring of these. It also provides for the<br />
proclamation of protected areas, recognising South Africa’s obligations to international<br />
conventions. The Protected Areas Act (2003) provides for the declaration and management of<br />
protected areas, and can also provide for co-operative governance, the sustainable utilisation<br />
of protected areas that preserves their ecological character, and the participation of local<br />
communities in the management of protected areas, where appropriate. A consultation and<br />
public participation process is outlined in the Act. It also contains the requirement that marine<br />
and terrestrial protected areas with common boundaries must be managed as an integrated<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
67<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
protected area by a single management authority. It is also important to note that under this<br />
Act, commercial prospecting or mining is prohibited in any nature reserve.<br />
Potential for protection of the Uilkraals Estuary<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary is rated as a very important estuary in South Africa from a conservation<br />
perspective, having a Biodiversity Importance Score of 75.3 for its size, habitats, and type rarity<br />
within its biogeographical zone, and biodiversity (Turpie et al. 2004). It ranks highly for birds<br />
and macrophyte diversity.<br />
Based on these criteria, there is justification for establishment of a protected area which<br />
encompasses at least part of the estuary. Although it would be highly desirable, based on the<br />
above arguments, to provide no-take protection to the estuary in its entirety, it would<br />
probably not be feasible to achieve complete protection of the system.<br />
Turpie & Clark (2007) conducted a conservation planning exercise in conjunction with the<br />
estuarine research and management community of the CAPE region under the C.A.P.E.<br />
Estuaries Management Programme. The study aimed to elicit the minimum set of estuaries<br />
that would be required to meet conservation targets (i.e. set percentages of habitats and<br />
populations of estuary-dependent species). Without worrying about costs, this can be done<br />
with the partial protection (50% of estuary as a sanctuary area) of some 50 of the 159<br />
temperate estuaries.<br />
The Uilkraals Estuary was not included in this primary set of 50. When costs and benefits of<br />
conservation measures were incorporated into the analysis, the configuration changes, and it<br />
makes sense to afford partial protection to about 80% of estuaries. This creates a good<br />
argument for a general zonation system to be applied to most South African estuaries in which<br />
50% of the estuary is declared a no-take zone. The Uilkraals Estuary was included in this latter<br />
selection - when estuary value and management costs were taken into consideration.<br />
Recommendations and procedure for establishing a protected area<br />
With the lack of development around the estuary, the establishment of a protected area is<br />
highly feasible and would be strongly recommended. The protection should include a<br />
substantial no-take zone or zones and the protected area should extend to supratidal<br />
saltmarsh areas and to some of the fringing terrestrial area.<br />
Under current regulations, this would require establishment of a nature reserve that contains a<br />
marine protected area, both of which would be managed by a single authority. A nature<br />
reserve is needed in order to protect areas above the high tide mark (important fringing<br />
habitats) that the marine protected areas act does not cover, and in order to protect the<br />
estuarine habitat areas a marine protected area needs to be established so that zoning of the<br />
estuary can be developed. Specific recommendations, to be further developed in consultation<br />
with stakeholders, are as follows:<br />
1. Establish a nature reserve encompassing as much of the land around the estuary as<br />
possible including supratidal estuarine habitats;<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
68<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
2. Establish a Marine Protected Area on the estuary incorporating the most significant<br />
bird habitats and fish nursery areas as well as a representative section of all habitat<br />
types present in the estuary (mudflat, salt marsh, submerged and emergent<br />
vegetation)<br />
3. Develop a zonation plan in which 50% of the MPA (not necessarily contiguous) is<br />
declared a no-take zone;<br />
4. The whole protected area to be managed by the provincial (CapeNature), district<br />
(Overberg District Municipality) or local (Overstrand Municipality) authority.<br />
The details of the above will have to be finalised in consultation with stakeholders. <strong>Anchor</strong><br />
<strong>Environmental</strong> Consultants will draw up a detailed management plan including plans for the<br />
proposed protected area based on outcomes of the consultative process.<br />
5.8 Potential and need for restoration on the Uilkraals Estuary<br />
There is no specific legislation pertaining to the restoration of ecosystems. The estuary has<br />
been highly modified and is classified as being largely modified, and has been identified as one<br />
in which there is a need for rehabilitation. In the case of the Uilkraals Estuary restoration of the<br />
estuary to a better state of health would be straightforward, and would mainly entail (in order<br />
of priority):<br />
1. Restoration of the quantity of freshwater inflows;<br />
2. Restoration of water quality;<br />
3. Removing significant obstructions to flow; and<br />
4. Removal of alien vegetation.<br />
In general, the degree to which these factors should be managed to restore the health of the<br />
system depends largely on the vision that is developed for the estuary, and on its future<br />
protection status. Protection status will provide a strong case for the provision of restoring<br />
flow quality and quantity.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
69<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
6. REFERENCES<br />
Adams, J.B., Bate, G., & O'Callaghan, M. 1999. Primary producers. In: B.R. Allanson & D. Baird<br />
(Eds.) Estuaries of South Africa, pp 91-117. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.<br />
Adams, J.B., Bornman, T. & C. Bezuidenhout. 2006. Olifants/Doring Ecological Water<br />
Requirements Study Appendix D: Macrophyte specialist study.<br />
Barbier, E.B. 1994. Valuing environmental functions: tropical wetlands. Land Economics 70:<br />
155-173.<br />
Barnes, K.N. 1996. Specialist bird report on the proposed resort development on Farm Sand<br />
Down (estate number 200, Bredasdorp), and the impacts on the Uilkraals River Estuary.<br />
Avian Demography Unit Research Report No. 15.<br />
Breen, C.M. & McKenzie, M. 2001. Managing estuaries in South Africa: an introduction.<br />
Institute of Natural Resources, Pietermaritzburg. 66pp.<br />
Begg, G.W., 1984. The estuaries of Natal. Part 2. Natal Town and Regional Planning Report 55:<br />
1-631.<br />
Brigham, S.D., Megonigal, J.P., Keller, J.K., Bliss, N.P. & Trettin, C. 2006. The carbon balance of<br />
North American wetlands. Wetlands 26:889 – 916.<br />
Childers, D.L. & J.W. Day (Jr.) 1990. Marsh-water column interactions in two Louisiana<br />
estuaries. II: Nutrient dynamics. Estuaries 13: 404-417.<br />
Clark, J.R. 1977. Coastal Ecosystem Management. John Wiley and Sons, N.Y.<br />
Coetzee, J.C., J.B. Adams & G.C. Bate. 1997. A botanical importance rating of selected Cape<br />
estuaries. Water SA 23: 81-93.<br />
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S.,<br />
O'Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P. and van den Belt, M. 1997. The value of<br />
the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253-259.<br />
Cooper, J.A.G., 2001. Geomorphological variability among microtidal estuaries from the wavedominated<br />
South African coast. Geomorphology 40: 99-122.<br />
Cooper, A., Wright, I., Mason, T., 1999. Geomorphology and sedimentology. In: Allanson, B.R.,<br />
Baird, D. (Eds.), Estuaries of South Africa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 5-<br />
25<br />
Day, JH. 1981. Estuarine Ecology with Particular Reference to Southern Africa. AA Balkema,<br />
Cape Town.<br />
Department Of Water Affairs & Forestry (DWAF). 2004b. Thukela Bank: impacts of flow on<br />
prawn and fish catch. Thukela water flow decision support phase. IWR.<br />
Du Preez, D. & Sasman, M. 1999. Kraaibosch Dam <strong>Environmental</strong> Operational Management<br />
Plan. Ecosense report. 50pp.<br />
Field, J. G. & Griffiths, C.L. 1991. Littoral and sublittoral ecosystems of South Africa. In: A. C.<br />
Mathieson & P. H. Nienhuis. Intertidal and Littoral Ecosystems 24: 323-346.<br />
Amsterdam, Elsevier.<br />
Forbes, A.T. 1974. Osmotic and ionic regulation in Callianassa kraussi Stebbing (CRUSTACEA :<br />
DECAPODA : THALASSINIDEA). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology 16: 301-311.<br />
Fredette, T.J., R.J. Diaz, J. Von Montfrans & R.J. Orth. 1990. Secondary production within a<br />
seagrass bed (Zostera marina and Ruppia maritima) in lower Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries<br />
13: 431-440.<br />
Gaigher, C.M. 1984. The effects of bridge building on the bloodworm population in the Uilkraal<br />
River estuary. The Naturalist 28: 16-18.<br />
Gale, B.A. 1998. Scoping report on the possible environmental effects of a proposed dam on<br />
the Uilkraals River. Aquatic and catchment management consultants<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
70<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Gillanders, B.M. & Kingsford, M.J. 2002. Impact of changes in flow of freshwater on estuarine<br />
and open coastal habitats and associated organisms. Oceanography and Marine<br />
Biology: An Annual Review 40:233–309.<br />
Harrison, T.D. 2002. Preliminary assessment of the biogeography of fishes in South African<br />
estuaries. Marine Freshwater Research 53: 479-490<br />
Harrison, T.D. 2004. Physico-chemical characteristics of South African estuaries in relation to<br />
the zoogeography of the region. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 61: 73-87<br />
Harrison, T.D. 2005. Ichthyofauna of South African estuaries in relation to the zoogeography of<br />
the region. Smithiana 6:2–27<br />
Harrison, T.D., Cooper, J.A.G., Ramm, A.E.L. & Singh, R.A. 1995a. Health of South African<br />
estuaries, Palmiet - Sout. Technical Report, Catchment and Coastal <strong>Environmental</strong><br />
Programme, CSIR, Durban.<br />
Harrison, T.D., Cooper, J.A.G., Ramm, A.E.L. & Singh, R.A. 1995b. Health of South African<br />
estuaries, Palmiet - Sout. Executive Report, Catchment and Coastal <strong>Environmental</strong><br />
Programme, CSIR, Durban.<br />
Heydorn, A.E.F. & Bickerton, I.B. 1982. Estuaries of the Cape Part II: Synopsis of available<br />
information on individual systems (A E F Heydorn and J R Grindley eds.). Report No. 9:<br />
Uilkraals. CSIR Research Report 425. Stellenbosch.<br />
Heydorn, A.E.F. & Tinley, K.L. 1980. Estuaries of the Cape part I: Synopsis of the Cape Coast.<br />
Natural features, Dynamics and Utilisation. CSIR Research Report 380. 97 pp.<br />
Hockey, P.A.R., Dean, W.R.J. & Ryan, P.G. (eds) 2005. Roberts – Birds of Southern Africa, VIIth<br />
ed. The Trustees of the John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape Town.<br />
Kennish, M.J. 2002. <strong>Environmental</strong> threats and environmental future of estuaries.<br />
<strong>Environmental</strong> Conservation 29: 78-107.<br />
Lamberth, S.J. 2003. Orange River Ecological Water Requirements Study. Specialist report on<br />
the fish of the Orange River Estuary.<br />
Lamberth, S.J. & Turpie, J.K. 2003. The role of estuaries in South African fisheries: economic<br />
importance and economic implications. African Journal of Marine Science 25: 131-157.<br />
Mann, B.Q., James, N.C. and L. E. Beckley 2002 – An assessment of the recreational linefishery<br />
in Lake St Lucia, KwaZulu-Natal. South African Journal of Marine Science. 24: 263-279.<br />
McGrath, M.D., Horner, C.C.M., Brouwer, S.L., Lamberth, S.J., Sauer, W.H.H. & Erasmus, C.<br />
1997. An economic valuation of the South African linefishery. South African Journal of<br />
Marine Science 18:203-211.<br />
Midgley, D.C. and Pitman, W.V. 1969. Surface water resources of South Africa. Johannesburg.<br />
University of Witwatersrand, report 2/69. 127 pp.<br />
Millenium Ecosystem Assessment 2003. Ecosystems and Human-wellbeing: A Framework for<br />
Assessment. Island Press, Washington, pp 245.<br />
Mucina, L., Phuthaditjhaba, John A. M. Janssen, Wageningen and Mike O’Callaghan. 2003.<br />
Syntaxonomy and zonation patterns in coastal salt marshes of the Uilkraals Estuary,<br />
Western Cape (South Africa). Phytocoenologia 33: 309-334<br />
Noble, R.G. and Hemens, J. 1978. Inland water ecosystems in South Africa – a review of<br />
research needs. South African National Science Programmes Report 34. 150 pp.<br />
Pradervand, P., Beckley, L. E., Mann, B. Q. and P. V. Radebe 2003 – Assessment of the<br />
linefishery in two estuarine systems in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. African Journal of<br />
Marine Science. 25: 111-130.<br />
Ryan, P.G., Underhill, L.G., Cooper, J. & Waltner, M. 1988. Waders (Charadrii) and other<br />
waterbirds on the coast, adjacent wetlands and offshore islands on the southwestern<br />
Cape Province, South Africa. Bontebok 6: 1-19.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
71<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
Smith, N & Cullinan, C. 2000. Review of South African <strong>Environmental</strong> Laws regulating Estuaries.<br />
In Report on the National Estuaries Workshop. 3 – 5 May 2000, Port Elizabeth, South<br />
Africa. Boyd, AJ, Barwell, L & Taljaard, S (eds.). Report No. 2, Marine and Coastal<br />
Management implantation Workshops. Cape Town: Marine and Coastal Management.<br />
Statistics South Africa. 2007. Community Survey Results.<br />
Summers, R.W., Pringle, J.S. & Cooper, J. 1976. The status of Coastal Waders in the southwestern<br />
Cape, South Africa. Report on the summer 1975/76 ornithological survey of<br />
coastal wetlands and shorelines of the south-western Cape by the Western Cape Wader<br />
Study Group. Percy FitzPatrick Institute, University of Cape Town. 162pp.<br />
Taljaard, S. 2007. C.A.P.E. Estuaries Guideline 1: Interpretation of Legislation pertaining to<br />
Management of <strong>Environmental</strong> Threats within Estuaries. Report prepared by the CSIR<br />
for C.A.P.E. estuaries programme, DEAT/Cape Nature.<br />
Turpie, J.K. 1995. Prioritising South African estuaries for conservation: a practical example using<br />
waterbirds. Biological Conservation 74: 175-185.<br />
Turpie, J.K. 2004. South African Spatial Biodiversity Assessment, Technical Report Vol 3: Estuary<br />
component. DEAT: SANBI.<br />
Turpie, J.K. 2007. C.A.P.E. Estuaries Guideline 9: Maximising the economic value of estuaries.<br />
C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme.<br />
Turpie, J.K. & Clark, B.M. 2007. The health status, conservation importance, and economic<br />
value of temperate South African estuaries and development of a regional conservation<br />
plan. Report to CapeNature.<br />
Turpie, J.K., Adams, J.B., Joubert, A., Harrison, T.D., Colloty, B.M., Maree, R.C., Whitfield, A.K.,<br />
Wooldridge, T.H., Lamberth, S.J., Taljaard, S. & van Niekerk, L. 2002. Assessment of the<br />
conservation priority status of South African estuaries for use in management and<br />
water allocation. Water SA 28, 191-206.<br />
Urban-Econ Development Economists. 2008. Overberg District Local Economic Development<br />
Strategy. Prepared for the Department of Trade and Industry.<br />
Van der Merwe, H. 2008. Development of a spatial planning database and analysis of<br />
agriculture and tourism potential in the Strandveld region of the Overstrand local<br />
municipality. Part 3 Agriculture and rural tourism potential.<br />
van Niekerk, L. & Taljaard, S. 2002. Recommendations on a framework for effective cooperative<br />
governance of South African estuaries. CSIR Environmentek Draft report 8 July 2002,<br />
Eastern Cape Estuaries management Programme, Co-operative governance sub-project.<br />
van Niekerk, L. & S. Taljaard 2007. Proposed Framework for Estuarine Management Plans.<br />
C.A.P.E. Estuaries Management Plan. CSIR, Stellenbosch. 44 pp.<br />
Wallace, J.H., Kok, H.M., Beckley, L.E., Bennett, B. & Blaber, S.J.M. 1984. South African Estuaries<br />
and their importance to fishes. South African Journal of Science 80: 203-207.<br />
Whitfield, A.K. 1984. The effects of prolonged aquatic macrophyte senescence on the biology<br />
of the dominant fish species in a southern African coastal lake. Estuarine Coastal and<br />
Shelf Science 18: 315-329.<br />
Whitfield, AK. 1989. The benthic invertebrate community of a southern Cape estuary:<br />
Structure and possible food sources. Transactions of the Royal Society of Southern<br />
Africa 47: 159-179.<br />
Whitfield, A.K. 1994. An estuary-association classification for the fishes of southern Africa.<br />
South African Journal of Science 90: 411-417.<br />
Whitfield, A.K. 1998. Biology and ecology of fishes in southern African estuaries. JLB Smith<br />
Institute of Ichthyology, Grahamstown.<br />
Whitfield, A.K. 2000. Available scientific information on individual estuarine systems. WRC<br />
Report no. 577/3/00.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
72<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
APPENDIX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE<br />
The development of the Uilkraals Estuary Management Plan will be carried out in two phases,<br />
as follows:<br />
Phase 1: Situation Assessment<br />
1. Review of legislation pertaining to the management of environmental threats within<br />
estuaries<br />
The focus of this task will be explaining the specific relevance of legislative instruments<br />
highlighted in the generic legislative review compiled for the GEMP, on how interaction of<br />
the respective Governmental Departments will affect management of the Olifants estuary,<br />
and also the relevance of any local by-laws to management of the estuary. A summary of all<br />
relevant information will be included in the Phase 1 Situation Assessment Report.<br />
2. Description and GIS map of the estuary<br />
A clear GIS map of the estuary will be prepared indicating important biophysical features<br />
(open channel area, macrophyte beds, invertebrate beds, etc.), protected/conservation<br />
areas, areas earmarked for rehabilitation, land-use and planning provisions of surrounding<br />
lands, infrastructure (e.g. roads, bridges), cultural & heritage sites, recreational activities<br />
(e.g. swimming, boating), living resource exploitation (e.g. bait collection, fishing areas, etc),<br />
mariculture activities, wastewater discharges (sewage, industrial), stormwater drains, and<br />
solid waste dump sites.<br />
3. Description of goods and services provided by the estuary<br />
Information on goods and services provided by the Uilkraals Estuary will be extracted from<br />
any relevant literature and studies completed on the system.<br />
4. Identification of issues relating to the exploitation of living resources<br />
A brief description of current levels and trends in exploitation of living resources in the<br />
Uilkraals Estuary will be provided, and on the likely impacts of this harvested on goods and<br />
services provided by the system.<br />
5. Synopsis of water quantity and quality requirements<br />
Details on water quantity and quality requirements of the system will be extracted from<br />
studies and any information that can be obtained from DWAF on the system.<br />
6. Determination of priority restoration actions.<br />
All issues affecting or impacting on the health of the estuary will be identified, prioritized and<br />
specific rehabilitation measures proposed.<br />
7. Determination of protected area potential<br />
Protected area potential of the Olifants estuary will be assessed using information provided<br />
in the recently completed C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme: Classification, prioritization,<br />
protection and rehabilitation document as well as other relevant documents. Specific<br />
recommendations will be provided as to the type of protection that should be applied and<br />
associated application procedure that must be completed in order to achieve this status.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
73<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
8. Plan for awareness-raising and public participation/stakeholder involvement<br />
A generic awareness programme for the Olifants estuary will be prepared that will include<br />
details on processes for involving relevant stakeholders and user groups in estuary<br />
management and decision-making processes. Much of the necessary material will be drawn<br />
from relevant reports produced by the East Cape Estuaries Management Programme.<br />
9. Work plan and budget for Phase 2<br />
A detailed workplan and budget for Phase 2 of the project will be prepared and submitted to<br />
the C.A.P.E. Estuaries Task Team for approval along with the Task 1 Situation Assessment<br />
Report before work on Objective 2 is initiated.<br />
Phase 2: Stakeholder consultation and compilation of Estuary Management Plan<br />
1. Vision & Strategic Objectives<br />
The primary activity for this task will be to convene a stakeholder workshop aimed at<br />
developing a local vision and associated objectives for the Olifants estuary. This vision will<br />
underpin the entire EMP and will need to be consistent with the vision and Strategic<br />
Objectives for the Estuaries of the CFR and with the findings of the C.A.P.E. Estuaries<br />
Conservation Planning report (Turpie & Clark 2007).<br />
2. Management Strategies<br />
Clear management strategies will be formulated that will ensure that the Vision and Strategic<br />
Objectives developed for the Olifants estuary are achieved that makes optimal use of<br />
available financial and human resources.<br />
3. Estuarine Zonation Plan & Operational Objectives<br />
Management strategies developed as part of task 2 above will be spatially explicit and linked<br />
with the GIS map prepared during Phase 1 of the project. This will become the Estuary<br />
Zonation plan (EZP). Appropriate annotations will be added to the map to ensure that<br />
management objectives and visions for all sections of the estuary are clearly laid out and<br />
easy to follow.<br />
4. Management Action Plans<br />
Detailed Management Action Plans (MAPs) will be developed to ensure that all defined<br />
operational objective can be achieved in an efficient and effective manner. MPAs to be<br />
developed for this purpose will include those dealing with conservation, social issues, landuse<br />
and infrastructure development, water quality and quantity, and exploitation of living<br />
resources. Each MAP will include a prioritized list of management actions, related legal,<br />
policy and/or best practice requirements, monitoring plans, work and resource plans.<br />
5. Implementation<br />
A detailed five year implementation plan for the EMP will be developed in which agencies<br />
and individuals responsible for implementation of all aspects of the EMP are identified.<br />
Qualifications required by key individuals responsible for implementation of the plan will be<br />
clearly articulated as will opportunities for capacity building and empowerment of<br />
Historically Disadvantaged Individuals (HDIs). The implementation plan will take cognisance<br />
of available human and financial resources.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
74<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>
6. Monitoring and evaluation<br />
An appropriate monitoring programme will be designed for the Uilkraals Estuary with the<br />
primary objective being the ongoing evaluation of the health of the system and success of<br />
the EMP. The following key components of the monitoring programme will be defined<br />
within the monitoring plan: monitoring objectives, parameters (indicators) to be monitored,<br />
staff and budgetary requirements, spatial and temporal resolution of monitoring activities,<br />
sampling and analytical techniques to be employed, and protocols for evaluation and<br />
reporting, and for incorporation of results into the MAPs.<br />
7. Research<br />
Focal areas for further research effort that will contribute to improved management of the<br />
estuary.<br />
Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment<br />
75<br />
<strong>Anchor</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong>