Uilkraals Situation Assessment - Anchor Environmental

C.A.P.E. Estuaries Management ProgrammeUILKRAALS ESTUARYSITUATION ASSESSMENT (DRAFT)DRAFTJULY 2010ENVIRONMENTALANCH RUniversity of Cape Town,PO Box 34035, Rhodes Gift 7707barry.clark@uct.ac.zaENVIRONMENTAL• marine & estuarine ecology • aquatic resource management •• resource economics • conservation planning •i

seen hundreds and even thousands of waders and terns around the estuary. In February 2010 a total ofonly 60 waders were counted. This is most likely due to a loss in the intertidal feeding habitat whichcovered the entire sandlfat region below and above the causeway. The estuary also seems to havebecome less suitable as a tern roosting site.The Uilkraals Estuary is now categorised as a D‐class estuary in terms of its present state of health. Thismeans it is considered to be a ”largely modified” system. Although the estuary currently receives 80% ofits Mean Annual Runoff (MAR), the loss of an important part of the natural hydrology of the estuary hasbeen removed (winter and summer base flows), which has modified the natural condition and caused theestuary to become permanently closed off from the sea. This has resulted in changes to the habitatswithin and around the estuary (i.e. microalgae abundance and saltmarsh areas) and has caused adecrease in the number of bird species, especially waders utilising the estuary. It is likely that theestuary’s condition will continue to deteriorate. Turpie & Clark (2007) listed the Uilkraals Estuary as ahigh priority estuary for rehabilitation. Alien plant clearance and the removal of the causeway werelisted as the types of requirements needed to rehabilitate the estuary. Increasing the freshwater inflowsand ensuring more natural flows into the system are also needed.Ecosystem servicesEstuaries provide a range of services that have economic or welfare value. In the case of the UilkraalsEstuary, the most important of these are the recreational and tourism values of the estuary as well as theprovision of a nursery area for fish. There may be additional services, such as carbon sequestration, butthese are not likely to be of major value.The Uilkraals Estuary is a popular tourist destination for local and regional South African tourists. Thearea surrounding the mouth of the estuary has been developed on the west bank in the form of theUilenkraalsmond Holiday Resort, which includes the municipal caravan and camping park as well asassociated recreational amenities located on the site. This establishment is generally full during themajor holiday periods. Birding and recreational opportunities represent an important draw card forvisitors to the estuary.Legislation and management issuesLittle legislation has been designed for estuaries in particular. However, the fact that estuaries containfreshwater, terrestrial and marine components, and are heavily influenced by activities in a much broadercatchment and adjacent marine area, means that they are affected by a large number of policies andlaws. There is also no specific provision for Estuarine Protected Areas. The Department of Water andEnvironmental Affairs Estuary is the primary agency responsible for estuary management in South Africawith a small amount of responsibility (fisheries) attributable to the Deapartment of Agriculture andFishies. Environmental management in most instances is devolved to provincial level, aside from waterresources and fisheries which remain a national competancy. At a municipal level, by‐laws are passedwhich cannot conflict with provincial and national laws. The Uilkraals Estuary lies wholly within theOverstrand Local Municipality, which falls within the Overberg District Municipality of the Western CapeProvince.Water quality and quantity are mainly controlled under the National Water Act 36 of 1998. This makesprovision for an Environmental Reserve which stipulates the quantity and quality of water flow requiredto protect the natural functioning of each water resource, including estuaries. The extent to which anUilkraals Estuary Situation AssessmentiiiAnchor Environmental

Need for protection of the Uilkraals EstuaryThe Uilkraals Estuary is important in terms of its conservation value. It has unique macrophyte diversityand is a very important birding site. The Uilkraals Estuary was included within a set of estuaries in thecountry identified as requiring protection in order to achieve national biodiversity protection targets. Theestablishment of a protected area on the Uilkraals Estuary is highly recommended and is consideredhighly feasible. Specific recommendations, to be further developed in consultation with stakeholders, areas follows:1. Establish a nature reserve encompassing as much of the land around the estuary as possibleincluding supratidal estuarine habitats;2. Establish a Marine Protected Area on the estuary incorporating the most significant birdhabitats and fish nursery areas as well as a representative section of all habitat types presentin the estuary (mudflat, salt marsh, submerged and emergent vegetation)3. Develop a zonation plan in which 50% of the MPA (not necessarily contiguous) is declared ano‐take zone.The Uilkraals Estuary has also been identified as one in which there is a need for rehabilitation. Keymanagement interventions identified in this respect include:1. Restoration of the quantity of freshwater inflows;2. Restoration of water quality;3. Removing significant obstructions to flow; and4. Removal of alien vegetationThe degree to which these factors should be managed to restore the health of the system dependslargely on the vision that is developed for the estuary, and on its future protection status.Uilkraals Estuary Situation AssessmentvAnchor Environmental

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMSWMABASC.A.P.E.ChlaCPUEDEA&DPDEATDINDRPDRSDWAFERCEHIEWRHIV/AIDSIDPIEPNEMANWAMARMCMMECMm 3MSLPESRDMREIRSARQOSDFTPCWCNCBWater Management AreaBest Attainable StateCape Action Plan for People and the EnvironmentChlorophyll aCatch per unit effortDepartment of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning (provincial)Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (national)Dissolved Inorganic NitrogenDissolved Reactive PhosphateDissolved Reactive SilicateDepartment of Water Affairs and ForestryEcological Reserve CategoryEstuary Health IndexEcological Water RequirementHuman Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Disease SyndromeIntegrated Development PlanningIntegrated Environmental ProgrammeNational Environmental Management ActNational Water ActMean Annual RunoffMarine & Coastal ManagementMember of provincial Executive CouncilMillion cubic metresMean Sea LevelPresent Ecological StatusResource Directed MeasuresRiver‐Estuary‐InterfaceRepublic of South AfricaResource Quality ObjectivesSpatial Development FrameworkThreshold of Potential ConcernWestern Cape Nature Conservation BoardUilkraals Estuary Situation AssessmentviAnchor Environmental

TABLE OF CONTENTS1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 92. GEOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO‐ECONOMIC CONTEXT ..................................................................... 112.1 LOCATION AND EXTENT OF THE ESTUARY AND ITS CATCHMENT ....................................................................... 112.2 CATCHMENT CLIMATE, VEGETATION AND DRAINAGE .................................................................................... 132.3 CATCHMENT POPULATION, LAND‐USE AND ECONOMY.................................................................................. 15Population and socio‐economic status ............................................................................................ 15Land‐use .......................................................................................................................................... 16Economy .......................................................................................................................................... 173. ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONING OF THE ESTUARY .................................... 183.1 MOUTH DYNAMICS, HYDROLOGY AND CHANNEL SHAPE ................................................................................ 183.2 WATER CHEMISTRY ............................................................................................................................... 223.3 MICROALGAE ...................................................................................................................................... 223.4 VEGETATION ....................................................................................................................................... 23Macroalgae ..................................................................................................................................... 23Submerged macrophytes ................................................................................................................. 23Salt marsh ....................................................................................................................................... 23Reeds and sedges ............................................................................................................................ 24Terrestrial vegetation ...................................................................................................................... 243.5 INVERTEBRATES ................................................................................................................................... 25Benthic invertebrates ...................................................................................................................... 25Hyperbenthic invertebrates ............................................................................................................. 253.6 FISH .................................................................................................................................................. 263.7 BIRDS ................................................................................................................................................ 283.8 CURRENT HEALTH OF THE ESTUARY .......................................................................................................... 31Implications for the estuary ............................................................................................................ 334. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ............................................................................................................ 344.1 WHAT ARE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES? ........................................................................................................... 344.2 GOODS AND SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE UILKRAALS ESTUARY ....................................................................... 344.3 RAW MATERIALS .................................................................................................................................. 354.4 CARBON SEQUESTRATION ...................................................................................................................... 354.5 WASTE TREATMENT .............................................................................................................................. 364.6 EXPORT OF MATERIALS AND NUTRIENTS .................................................................................................... 364.7 REFUGIA AREAS AND NURSERY VALUE ....................................................................................................... 364.8 GENETIC RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................. 384.9 TOURISM AND RECREATIONAL VALUE ....................................................................................................... 385. LEGISLATION AND MANAGEMENT ISSUES .............................................................................. 405.1 THE MAIN THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO BE CONSIDERED ........................................................................ 405.2 GENERAL POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND ....................................................................................... 405.3 WATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 47Legislative context ........................................................................................................................... 47The classification process ................................................................................................................ 47Uilkraals Estuary Situation AssessmentviiAnchor Environmental

The reserve determination process ................................................................................................. 475.4 EXPLOITATION OF LIVING MARINE RESOURCES ............................................................................................ 48Legislative context ........................................................................................................................... 48Issues surrounding recreational fishing ........................................................................................... 485.5 LAND USE AND MANAGEMENT OF ESTUARY MARGINS .................................................................................. 48Legislative context ........................................................................................................................... 48Development planning pertaining to the Uilkraals Estuary ............................................................ 53Issues of surrounding land use and development ........................................................................... 665.6 NON‐CONSUMPTIVE RECREATIONAL USE ................................................................................................... 66Legislation ....................................................................................................................................... 66Management issues ........................................................................................................................ 665.7 POTENTIAL FOR PROTECTED AREA STATUS ................................................................................................. 67Legislative context ........................................................................................................................... 67Potential for protection of the Uilkraals Estuary ............................................................................. 68Recommendations and procedure for establishing a protected area ............................................. 685.8 POTENTIAL AND NEED FOR RESTORATION ON THE UILKRAALS ESTUARY ........................................................... 696. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 70Uilkraals Estuary Situation AssessmentviiiAnchor Environmental

1. INTRODUCTIONThe Uilkraals Estuary is one of South Africa’s approximately 279 functional estuaries (Turpie2004). It is one of 21 estuaries within the warm temperate biogeographical region to beclassified as a temporarily open/closed, mixed blackwater system (van Niekerk & Taljaard2007). A medium to large sized estuary, it is estimated to cover an area of 105 ha (Turpie &Clark 2007) (Figure 1), and before the construction of the upstream Kraaibosch Dam hadnaturally hyposaline conditions and a strong tidal exchange when open to the sea. This tidalexchange helped to maintain an open mouth state (Harrison et al. 1995b), but since theconstruction of the dam in 1999, there has been a disruption in the natural freshwater inflows.Owing to its large size, high diversity and abundance of certain biota, the estuary is rated as34 th overall in terms of conservation importance in South Africa (Turpie et al. 2002, Turpie &Clark 2007). It has been identified as a particularly important estuary for macrophyte diversity(macroalgae, submerged macrophytes and saltmarsh) and birds (both residential and migrants)(Barnes 1996).Figure 1: The Uilkraals Estuary before it became closed to the sea (Source: Google Earth).Despite the widely acknowledged conservation importance of the Uilkraals Estuary, the systemis currently under no formal protection. The estuary has been subjected to relatively highlevels of development and anthropogenic disturbance. This includes the construction of theroad bridge over the estuary which affected the natural east to west migration of the mouth.Increasing recreational use of the estuary, including natural resource use (such as fishing) andnon‐consumptive activities (birdwatching and hiking) is putting pressure on the system, whichwill most likely see a change in the character of the area. However, the most significant impacthas been the reduction in freshwater flow into the estuary due to water storage. TheUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment9Anchor Environmental

construction of the Kraaibosch dam some 10 km upstream from the estuary in 1999 hasresulted in a reduction in freshwater input, which has had profound effects on the physical andecological functioning of the estuary. Due to the prolonged variation in freshwater inputs, theestuary closed to the sea for an extended period for the first time in January 2009, andremained closed until July 2009. In December of the same year, the estuary enetered anotherprolonged closed phase. This alteration in the natural flow regime will most likely to result in areduction in the frequency and extent of floodplain inundation, and a reduction in scouring ofsediment in the estuary. Further threats to the estuary include increased siltation due toerosion, the loss and destruction of natural habitat by development and alien plant invasion,and deterioration in water quality caused by agricultural and residential pollution.This study forms part of the Cape Action Plan for the Environment (C.A.P.E.) Regional EstuarineManagement Programme. The main aim of the programme is to develop a strategicconservation plan for the estuaries of the Cape Floristic Region (CFR), and to prepare detailedmanagement plans for each estuary. The estuary programme is divided into three phases. Thefirst phase involved the establishment of a regional conservation plan (Turpie & Clark 2007),the development of guidelines for estuary management plans (van Niekerk & Taljaard 2007),and the preparation of detailed management plans for a few selected systems. Of these,Anchor Environmental Consultants cc was tasked with preparing the management plan for theUilkraals Estuary. These studies will then pave the way for preparation of management plansfor the remaining systems in the region in subsequent phases of the programme.This document is the Situation Assessment report for the Uilkraals Estuary. It providesbackground information on the estuary including the geographic and socio‐economic context,a description of the ecosystem functioning and biodiversity, the legal and planning context,threats to the system, and its conservation importance. This document will form the basis ofthe development of a vision and strategy for the management of the estuary in a participatoryprocess involving stakeholders. Terms of Reference for the study are in Appendix 1.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment10Anchor Environmental

2. GEOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO‐ECONOMIC CONTEXT2.1 Location and extent of the estuary and its catchmentThe Uilkraals Estuary is situated approximately 60 km northwest of Cape Agulhas and 11 kmeast of Danger Point on the south‐west coast within the cool temperate biogeographic regionof South Africa (Whitfield 1998) (Figure 2). It is the first estuary to be found east of DangerPoint (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The Uilkraals River runs southward and drains into theIndian Ocean 6 km southeast of Gansbaai. The total catchment area of the Uilkraals Estuarycovers approximately 105 ha (Turpie & Clark 2007).Figure 2. Map of the south western tip of South Africa. The arrow indicates the relative position of theUilkraals Estuary (adapted from Harrison 2004).Figure 3. Map showing Overberg region in which the Uilkraals Estuary is located.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment11Anchor Environmental

The Uilkraals catchment lies within the Overberg District Municipality in the Western CapeProvince and the estuary is located within the Overstrand Local Municipality (Figure 3 andFigure 4). The estuary enters the sea at 34˚36’23”S 19˚24’33”E when the estuary mouth isopen (Whitfield 2000). The river is approximately 46 km in length from the mouth to thesource of the Sondagskloof, one of its major tributaries. The junction of the Sondagskloof andthe Perdeberg rivers forms the Uilkraals at an approximate elevation of 200 m roughly 30 kmfrom the mouth. In the lower catchment the Boesmans River joins the Uilkraals approximately6 km from the mouth. The size of the estuary from the mouth to the the confluence of theUilkraals and Boesmans is approximately 260 ha (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). A bridgeapproximately 220 m long spans the estuary approximately 800 m from the mouth. Acauseway approximately 120 m in length supports the eastern road access to the bridge whilstthe remaining 100 m is spanned and supported by large concrete pylons (Heydorn & Bickerton1982).Figure 4. Overstrand Local Municipality map showing the main settlements. The Uilkraals Estuary(shown by the arrow) is located between Gansbaai and Pearly Beach (Source: Overstrand SDF 2009).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment12Anchor Environmental

2.2 Catchment climate, vegetation and drainageThe Uilkraals River Catchment is relatively small at 313 km 2 , is dominated by Table MountainSandstone (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982) and lies wholly within the Western Cape Province,which receives most precipitation during the winter rainfall season. MAR for the wholecatchment is approximately 22 Mm 3 (van Niekerk, unpubl. data) and the average annualrainfall in the catchment ranges between 500 and 700 mm (Heydorn & Tinley 1980, Heydorn &Bickerton 1982) with peaks in June and July. The river flow is therefore high in winter with runoffdeclining in summer. At Franskraal, located at the estuary mouth, the annual average dailymaximum temperature is 22°, with the monthly average maximum temperature ranging from27°C in February to 18°C in June, July and August. The annual average daily minimumtemperature is 11°C. The settlement of Franskraal receives on average 500‐600 mm annuallywith most of the rain falling in the winter months (South African Rain Atlas 2010).The spatial patterns in the natural vegetation within the Uilkraals River Catchment aredetermined primarily by the underlying geology and regional rainfall. The upper catchment ischaracterised by the acidic and nutrient poor Table Mountain Group (TMG) sandstones andquartzites, which are dominated by mountain fynbos. Lower down in the river valley, rocks ofthe Malmesbury Formation outcrop and support limestone fynbos. The mountain fynbosvegetation in the higher lying areas of the Uilkraals River catchment remain predominantlyintact. The lower areas of the catchment have been altered by increased anthropogenicactivities, mainly agriculture and alien plant invasion. Natural riparian vegetation along mostof the Uilkraals River’s course (with the exeption of the saltmarsh alongside the estuary) hasbeen replaced by invasive exotics, in particular gums, poplars, Port Jackson and rooikrans (Gale1998).Figure 5. Overstrand Local Municipality physical morphology and landscape map (Source: OverstrandSDF 2009).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment13Anchor Environmental

The Kraaibosch dam (Figure 6) was constructed on the Uilkraals River in 1999 to supply thetown of Gansbaai with water for domestic and industrial use and the surrounding areas withwater for irrigation. The dam wall lies appproximately 10 km upriver from the estuary mouth(du Preez & Sasman 1999), covers 102 ha and can hold 5.5 x 10 6 m 3 . According to the damspermit conditions only winter flow is allowed to be retained and all summer flow is let through.Detailed flow records of river inflow, spillage, rainfall and outflow are kept on a daily basis.Data collected over the past 48 years shows that the average annual rainfall (Figure 7) hasremained between 600 and 750 mm per annum. The amount of rain received over the last 10years is in fact comfortably above this annual average, which strongly suggests that recentanomalous mouth closure events are most likely attributable to the construction and operationof the Kraaibosch the dam, as opposed to changes in rainfall. Retaining water in the damdecreases riverine base flows and floods which changes the physical functioning of the estuary.Estuaries are not only reliant on base flow but also require flood peaks to scour them andmaintain their dynamics, something that cannot easily be supported where in‐channel storagedams are developed (DWAF 2004a).The Boesmansrivier which joins the Uilkraals approximately 6 km from the mouth also has alarge dam upstream called the Nieuwedam. There is an unknown number of small dams andwater abstraction points by local farmers on the river below the Nieuwedam. The total volumeof water abstracted from these dams is not known though. The Breede Water ManagamentArea (WMA) Internal Strategic Perspective (ISP) anticipated that the Uilkraals River Catchment(G40M) would have a 40% increase in summer allocations out of the Kraaibosch Dam (DWAF2004a) indicating increasing demand, through the progressive implementation of agriculturaldevelopment in the catchment.Figure 6. Kraaibosch Dam (Source: Google Earth)Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment14Anchor Environmental

Figure 7: Annual rainfall for the Uilkraals River Catchment from 1962 – 2009.2.3 Catchment population, land‐use and economyPopulation and socio‐economic statusThe total population living within the Overstrand Local Municipality, in which the UilkraalsRiver Catchment is located, was estimated at 74 546 in the 2007 StatsSA Community Survey.Population density was estimated at 35 people per square kilometre and total household countwas 24 485. The majority of the population in the Overstrand Local Municipality are classifiedas Coloured (37%) and White (34%), followed by Black Africans (29%) (Local EconomicDevelopment 2008). The overall population of the Uilkraals River catchment (G40M) is a smallproportion of the total for the Overstrand Local Municipality as it contains a relatively smallurban area. Larger settlements such as Gansbaai with approximately 20 000 residents andStanford with 8 000 residents are located outside of the boundaries of the Uilkraals catchment.The Overberg District Municipality population growth has been declining since 1995, and theaverage annual growth rate is only 3%. If the current trend of population growth continues,the Overberg will soon have a negative growth rate, as is already seen in the Cape AgulhasLocal Municipality (Local Economic Development 2008). Approximately 56% of the populationin the Overberg area is employed, with 20% of the population being unemployed (LocalEconomic Development 2008). Agriculture and trade are the economic sectors with thehighest employment at 20.1% and 16.5%, respectively. The geographic trend in economicactivity along the catchment is predominately agriculturally based in the middle and upperUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment15Anchor Environmental

eaches and tourism and fishing industry based near the mouth. One of the larger tourismdevelopments within the catchment is the Uilenkraalsmond Holiday Resort, located at theestuary mouth, which includes permanent holiday cottages, caravan sites and recreationalamenities.Land‐useThe catchment consists mainly of agricultural areas and an ecological corridor/area, with someprivate conservation areas and other statutory conservation areas. Development within thecatchment includes small urbanised areas along the coast and larger areas developed foragricultural purposes, with agriculture, fruit farming, stock‐farming, viticulture and natureconservation being the main land use activities. Agriculturally based industries dominate in theOverstrand and include wineries, fruit and fynbos cultivation (Overberg Spatial DevelopmentFramework 2004). The Overstrand Local Municipality lists the Uilkraals River Catchment as anintensive agricultural resource area (Figure 8).Urban development accounts for a very small proportion of the catchment land cover. Themajor towns in the area, Gansbaai and Stanford, lie adjacent to the Uilkraals catchment. Thelargest town within the catchment is Franskraal, which is located at the mouth of the estuaryon the coast.Figure 8. Intensive agricultural resource areas showing the Uilkraals River Catchment as being one ofthe larger agricultural areas in the Overstrand (Source: Overstrand SDF 2009).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment16Anchor Environmental

EconomyAgriculture dominates much of the upper Uilkraals River Catchment, with wineries, fruitcultivation and fynbos cultivation being the most important contributors to this sector.Tourism is a major economic contributor across the catchment, through nature basedrecreation and holiday destinations. The estuary is considered a bird watching destination andrecreational fishing remains a draw card. In addition, Pearly Beach and the UilenkraalsmondResort are big attractions to the Uilkraals catchment, where the popularity as a holidaydestination results in a fourfold increase in the population over the holiday seasons. TheOverstrand has had the highest positive annual Gross Domestic Product growth in theOverberg District since 1995 (Local Economic Development 2008). In 2008, the Gross DomesticProduct for the Overberg District was estimated to be in the region of R4 billion, equivalent toapproximately only 0.3% of the national GDP (Local Economic Development 2008).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment17Anchor Environmental

3. ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONING OFTHE ESTUARY3.1 Mouth dynamics, hydrology and channel shapeThe Uilkraals Estuary has been classified as a temporarily open‐closed estuary (Whitfield 2000),and is a mixed (in terms of salinity), blackwater system (van Niekerk unpubl. data). Whenfunctioning naturally, the estuary has tidal exchange and a high frequency of connection to thesea, similar to the Palmiet and Kleinmond estuaries, but is in a more advanced stage ofprogressive infilling and reduction of the tidal prism (Harrison et al. 1995a). The road bridge,which was constructed in 1973, is approximately 220 m long and crosses the riverapproximately 800 m from the mouth (Figure 9 and Figure 10). It is supported on the easternside by a high embankment of rubble spanning almost two‐thirds of the original high tide riverwidth (Gaigher 1984). The remaining 100 m are supported by concrete pylons, effectivelyhalving the width of the estuary there and concentrating the river flow against the westernbank (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). In 1978 a 150 m long rubble and rock embankment wasbuilt on the beach in front of the beach facing bungalows, forcing the estuary moutheastwards, away from the caravan park (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). However, theembankment was quickly eroded by wave and tidal action and a shallow, stagnant pool ofwater and a series of sand dunes formed on the beach in front of the bungalows (Figure 9).In the past the estuary mouth opened over a beach with a relatively flat profile and the openmouth status was probably maintained by strong tidal currents (Harrison 2004). Tidal currentsplay a major role in maintaining a connection with the sea in cool and warm‐temperateestuaries (unlike subtropical estuaries, where river flow is the major factor; Cooper et al. 1999,Cooper 2001). Seasonal closure and migration of the estuary occurs due to strong seasonalvariations of river flow and wave climate where limited river flow allows the formation of asand bar across the estuary mouth.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment18Anchor Environmental

Figure 9. An aerial view of the Uilkraals Estuary mouth in October 1979 (altitude of 500m).When functioning naturally, the river enters the sea via a meandering channel across thefloodplain, which opens onto sand flats (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The road bridge crossesat the lower reaches of these sand flats. There are several river channels which flow across thesand flats upstream of the bridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The mouth was originallymobile and in the past could enter the sea at any point between the eastern dune and westernpart of the beach opposite the caravan park (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). The mouth laterbecame fixed by a combination of factors, including the causeway of the road bridge and thestabilization of both the eastern and western dunes (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).Figure 10. Picture of the bridge and causeway of the Uilkraals Estuary facing downstream.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment19Anchor Environmental

The first time in recorded history that the Uilkraals Estuary became closed for a long period oftime was in January 2009. It re‐opened six months later for a short period but closed again foran extended period in December 2009. Water storage in the Kraaibosch Dam, approximately10 km upstream from the estuary, has significantly altered the natural freshwater in‐flows tothe estuary while agricultural activities in the upper catchment have introduced an increasedsediment load into the estuary, ultimately resulting in reduced flow over time and an increasedlikelihood of mouth closure of the estuary in low flow periods.The lower reaches of the estuary used to consist of several braided channels that expanded toa single 400 m wide channel at high tide (Harrison et al. 1995b). Water in the area below thebridge is now restricted to two smaller shallow channels, the larger of which ends at the beachin front of the huts at the caravan park (Figure 11). Before mouth closure occurred, tidalinfluence reached beyond the bridge, with the majority of the sandflats becoming inundated athigh tide (Harrison et al. 1995b). Tidal interchange was recorded up to 3 km upstream in a1981 survey (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). Currently, a very shallow braided channel runsacross the sandflats upstream from the bridge, probably similar to former low tide conditions.The majority of the sandflats are now permanently exposed (Figure 12).Figure 11. The closed estuary mouth facing upstream (left) and the area below the bridge facingdownstream (right, picture taken from the bridge), February 2010.The middle reaches of the estuary consist of a wide meandering channel across a largefloodplain, surrounded by saltmarsh vegetation. Before the road bridge was built, the estuarywas a marine‐dominated tidal lagoon. The large volumes of tidal exchange would have rapidlyreduced any effects of floods, when they did occur (Gaigher 1984). Factors affectingcirculation also affect salinity by altering the volumes of salty water entering the estuary aswell as the ratio of dilution of fresh and salt water (Clark 1977). The obstruction caused by theroad bridge would therefore have changed the circulation and hence salinity regime of theestuary immensely. This would have been most critical during periods of freshwater flooding,by prolonging the extension time of freshwater over tidal sandbanks. This effect would havebeen most intensive in the extensive flood area on the landside of the bridge (Gaigher 1984).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment20Anchor Environmental

Figure 12. Pictures of the exposed sandflats above the bridge, February 2010.Flows recorded at Kraaibosch Dam (some 10 km upstream of the estuary) are well correlatedwith rainfall in the area. While flows are largely natural in the upper reaches, there aresubstantial decreases in downstream flow during the winter months compared with naturalcondition, and increases in summer flow along parts of the river. Annual flood peaks into theestuary are important, but the impact of a flood also depends to some extent on the base flow,with greater flooding impact when the base flows are higher. The estuary currently receives anestimated 80% of its natural MAR (van Niekerk, unpubl. data), however, an importantcomponent of the natural flow (i.e. winter and summer base flows) has been modified to alarge extent, including reductions in floods that would normally scour the system and maintainthe opening of the estuary to the sea.There is little data on the sediments or on historical sedimentation processes of the UilkraalsEstuary. Estuaries contain a mixture of river and marine sediments, the balance of which isdetermined by the amount of water moving in and out of the estuary during a tidal cycle,riverine base flows and floods. The size of particles that can be transported from thecatchment increases with amplified velocity, and larger particles are deposited before smallparticles as flow decreases. Base flows carry relatively little sediment, mostly fine silts, and thisis deposited when freshwater flows are slowed by the pushing effect of incoming sea water.This process generally leads to an accumulation of fine sediments in the lower to middlereaches of the estuary, which results in the channel and inter‐tidal areas becoming muddierand shallower with time. Floods carry a lot of silt from the catchment, and this is depositedwherever floodwaters slow down significantly, such as on the floodplain. They also scour awayaccumulated sediments from the estuary the channel and in the lower inter‐tidal areas. Verylarge floods may scour the floodplain as well. The area of scouring versus deposition dependson the size of the flood.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment21Anchor Environmental

3.2 Water chemistryThe distribution of saline water in an estuary (the longitudinal salinity distribution) is offundamental importance as it affects the distribution of all biota in the system due to theirdiffering salinity tolerances. River inflow and sea level together determine the penetration ofseawater into the system, thereby determining the salinity profile of the estuary.In 1979 and 1981 surveys showed that salinities below the bridge ranged from 35.5‰ at themouth to 26‰ at the bridge. The main channel had a salinity of 20‰ 2 km from the mouthand 0‰ only 500 m further upstream (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). Harrison (2004) measuredsalinities at six stations along the estuary and reported a mean value of 15.43‰ (SE ± 2.11).Surface water temperature was recorded as 24.5˚C to 25.5˚C at 400 m and 500 m from themouth respectively in the 1979 survey (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). At the same sampling sitesdissolved oxygen concentrations of 9.8 mg/l and 10.8 mg/l were measured, with a highermeasurement of 13.0 mg/l near algae at the latter (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). Harrison(2004) measured a mean temperature of 17.33˚C (SE ± 0.27), a mean dissolved oxygenconcentration of 8.49 (SE ± 0.11) mg/l and a mean turbidity of 5.33 (SE ± 0.88) NTU. Extendedmouth closure events will affect the water chemistry of the estuary. The estuary is no longerflushed by the sea or freshwater as frequently as it was in the past and this could result eitherin hypersaline conditions or fresh conditions developing within the estuary, depending on theamount of freshwater inflows and the amount of evaporation.3.3 MicroalgaeMicroalgae in estuaries comprise unicellular algae that live either suspended in the watercolumn (termed phytoplankton) or benthically on rocks or sediments in the estuary (termedmicrophytobenthos or benthic microalgae). These microalgae (i.e. phytoplankton andmicrophytobenthos) are very important in estuarine systems as they are generally the mainsource of primary production in the estuary.Phytoplankton communities in estuaries are influenced by salinity, generally dominated byflagellates where river flow dominates and by diatoms in marine dominated areas. Diatomsare most common in the area of the estuary where the salinity is in the region of 10‐15‰,often referred to as the River Estuary Interface (REI) zone. Phytoplankton biomass in anestuary is also generally at its maximum in this region. Biomass of phytoplankton in estuariesvaries widely and may range from 0‐210 µgChla/l (Adams et al. 1999). If nutrientconcentrations in an estuary are high (particularly in the case of nitrogen) then phytoplanktonbiomass in the estuary is generally high too. Under extreme conditions, when nutrient levelsare very high, certain toxic dinoflagellate species may form dense blooms known as red tides.Less is known about benthic microalgae (microphytobenthos) in estuaries than phytoplankton.Values for benthic microalgae biomass are often reported in different units which makescomparisons between estuaries difficult. Currently there is no available information onmicroalgae in the Uilkraals Estuary.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment22Anchor Environmental

3.4 VegetationThere are four main vegetation communities associated with the Uilkraals Estuary: macroalgae,submerged macrophytes, reeds and sedges, and salt marsh.Heydorn & Bickerton (1982) recorded 13 species of semi‐aquatic plants in and around theUilkraals Estuary. These included Crassula glomerata, Plantago carnosa, triglochin bulbosum,Scirpus littoralis, Sebaea minutiflora, Sebaea albens, Spergularia marginata, Cotula eckloniana,Chenolea diffusa, Samolus deis and Limonium scabrum.MacroalgaeMacroalgae can be indicative of water quality and nutrient enrichment. Macroalgae may beintertidal (intermittently exposed) or subtidal (continually submerged) and can be attached tohard or soft substrata or they may float (Adams et al. 1999). Opportunistic macroalgae arefound in temporary closed estuaries like the Uilkraals as they can tolerate fluctuating salinities.During a survey in 1981 the filamentous algae Enteromorpha and Cladophora were recorded inthe estuary and Ulva beds were present under the road bridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).Enteromorpha and Cladorphora belong to the family Chlorophyta, and are often found toextend further into estuaries due to their salinity tolerance (Adams et al. 1999).Submerged macrophytesThe high macrophyte diversity in the Uilkraals Estuary is of conservation importance. Thereare approximately 2 ha of submerged macrophytes in the estuary, which provide an importanthabitat for invertebrates and juvenile fish. Submerged macrophytes are plants rooted in bothsoft subtidal and low intertidal substrata, which are completely submersed for most states ofthe tide (Adams et al. 1999). Submerged macrophyte beds support diverse and abundantinvertebrate and juvenile fish communities (Whitfield 1984, 1989). Primary productivity ofsubmerged macrophytes is high and on par with the most productive plant habitats in marineand terrestrial ecosystems (Day 1981, Fredette et al. 1990). Adams et al. (1999) found in salinewaters in the region, Zostera capensis is prevalent. Submerged macrophytes are important intheir provision of food for epifaunal and benthic invertebrate species as well as nursery areasfor juvenile fish through the provision of food, shelter and protection (Adams et al. 1999).Salt marshSalt marshes in estuaries are a source of primary production and provide habitat and food for avariety of faunal species (Adams et al. 2006). The degree of tidal flushing is important indetermining how much nutrients they release into the water column (Childers & Day 1990).An open mouth is important as this maintains the intertidal salt marsh community. Salt marshplants are distributed away from the water’s edge along an inundation gradient (Figure 13).Intertidal salt marsh occurs between the limits of the high and low tide ranges, while supratidalmarsh occurs above the intertidal zone and is only normally flooded during spring tide andUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment23Anchor Environmental

other associated high water levels. Floodplain marshes are normally elevated above the rest ofthe estuary, and are normally only covered with water during large flood events.Mucina et al. (2003) described and classified 11 salt marsh plant communities at the UilkraalsEstuary. Dominant species included Salicornia meyeriana, Sarcocornia perennis agg., S.capensis, S. decumbens, Bassia diffusa, Limonium sp. nova, Juncus kraussii subsp. kraussii,Sporobolus virginicus and Triglochin bulbosa. In a 1981, study the saltmarsh covered an area ofapproximately 1.3 ha or 0.6% of the studied estuarine region (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982) andhad the highest cover (95%) of all recorded vegetation types. A more recent vegetation studyrecorded approximately 38 ha of saltmarsh, which is still the highest cover of all recordedvegetation types and is of high conservation importance.Figure 13. Picture of the upper channel and saltmarsh area facing upstream, February 2010.Reeds and sedgesReeds and sedges act as natural biological filters, they are important for bank stabilisation asthey are rooted in soft intertidal or shallow subtidal strata (Adams et al. 1999). Reeds andsedges contribute to the diversity of aquatic life, particularly the avifauna (Coetzee et al. 1997).Terrestrial vegetationParsons (1982) identified 10 main terrestrial plant communities around the Uilkraals Estuary,including the saltmarsh (Error! Reference source not found.). These can be consolidated intofive plant formations visually: low shrubland (0.25‐1.0 m), mid‐high shrubland (1‐2 m),woodland, herbland and grassland. In the study area (205 ha) the low shrubland was the mostextensive (39 ha), followed by the herbland (37 ha) and woodland (32 ha). Mid‐high shrublandUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment24Anchor Environmental

covered 19 ha and grassland 1.3 ha. Open sand, including the beach, made up 46 ha. Fynboscommunities made up fairly large patches in the study area with a total cover of 56 ha or27.3% of the study area. Dense stands of exotic vegetation surround the estuary with the maininvader being the rooikrans Acacia cyclops (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).3.5 InvertebratesInvertebrates inhabiting estuaries can be divided into a number of sub‐groups based on wherethey reside in the estuary. Zooplankton live mostly in the water column, benthic organismslive in the sediments on the bottom and sides of the estuary channel, and hyperbenthicorganisms live just above the sediment surface. Benthic organisms are frequently furthersubdivided into intertidal (those living between the high and low water marks on the banks ofthe estuary) and subtidal groups (those living below the low water mark). Only limitedinformation on some benthic and hyperbenthic species is available for the Uilkraals Estuary,summarised below.Benthic invertebratesDuring a 1955 survey, before the construction of the road bridge, a good population ofbloodworms Arenicola loveni, sandprawns Callianassa kraussi and mudprawns Upogebiaafricana were found both up‐ and downstream of the foot bridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982,Gaigher 1984). In 1973 a strong, viable population of bloodworms was reported in the tidallyexposed sandbanks of the estuary reaching at least 2 km upstream (Gaigher 1984). Threeyears later, after the erection of the road bridge and the long rubble embankment on which itwas built, no bloodworms were found above the bridge, which is situated approximately 800 mfrom the mouth. Another survey in 1979 confirmed the extinction of the bloodworm in theestuary. A very small juvenile bloodworm population was found in a permanent seawater poolon the beach adjacent to the estuary mouth (Gaigher 1984). The associated change in thesalinity regime of the estuary caused by the construction of the road bridge is the most likelycause of the loss of this species from the estuary.In December 1979 sandprawns and mudprawns were found up and downstream of the newroad bridge, with sandprawns being more abundant and more widely distributed. Mudprawndistribution ended abruptly 100 m upstream of the bridge (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982). InMarch 1981, sandprawns were found in abundance from the mouth across the floodplain towhere freshwater conditions prevailed. Only a few mudprawn burrows were noted (Heydorn& Bickerton 1982).Hyperbenthic invertebratesThe crown crab Hymenosa orbiculare and the hermit crab Diogenes brevirostris were abundantnear the road bridge in 1979, while smaller numbers of the crab Cyclograpsus punctatus werefound in the same area. In 1981 large numbers of C. punctatus were found just above thebridge, as well as large numbers of the shrimp Palaemon pacificus (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment25Anchor Environmental

3.6 FishEstuaries provide an extremely important habitat for fish in southern Africa. The vast majorityof coastal habitat in southern Africa is directly exposed to the open ocean, and as such issubject to intensive wave action throughout the year (Field & Griffiths 1991). Estuaries insouthern Africa are thus disproportionately important relative to other parts of the world, inthat they constitute the bulk of the sheltered, shallow water inshore habitat in the region.Juveniles of many marine fish species in southern Africa have adapted to take advantage ofthis situation, and have developed the necessary adaptations to enable them to persist inestuaries for at least part of their life cycles. There are at least 100 species that show a clearassociation with estuaries in South Africa (Whitfield 1998). Most of these are juveniles ofmarine species that enter estuaries as juveniles, remain there for a year or more beforereturning to the marine environment as adults or sub‐adults where they spawn, completingthe cycles. Several other species also use estuaries in southern Africa, including some that areable to complete their entire life cycles in these systems, and a range of salt tolerantfreshwater species and euryhaline marine species. Whitfield (1994) has developed a detailedclassification system of estuary associated fishes in southern Africa. He recognized five majorcategories of estuary associated fish species and several subcategories (Table 1).Table 1. Classification of South African fish fauna according to their dependence on estuaries (Whitfield1994)CategoryIIaIbIIIIaIIbIIcIIIIVVDescriptionTruly estuarine species, which breed in southern African estuaries; subdivided as follows:Resident species which have not been recorded breeding in the freshwater or marineenvironmentResident species which have marine or freshwater breeding populationsEuryhaline marine species which usually breed at sea with the juveniles showing varyingdegrees of dependence on southern African estuaries; subdivided as follows:Juveniles dependant of estuaries as nursery areasJuveniles occur mainly in estuaries, but are also found at seaJuveniles occur in estuaries but are more abundant at seaMarine species which occur in estuaries in small numbers but are not dependant onthese systemsEuryhaline freshwater species that can penetrate estuaries depending on salinitytolerance. Includes some species which may breed in both freshwater and estuarinesystemsObligate catadromous species which use estuaries as transit routes between the marineand freshwater environmentsFish species in categories I, II, and V as defined by Whitfield (1994) are all wholly or largelydependent on estuaries for their survival and are hence the most important from an estuaryconservation perspective. These species need to receive most attention from a managementperspective.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment26Anchor Environmental

Because the Uilkraals Estuary is categorised as a cool‐temperate open‐closed system itsicthyofaunal composition is likely to be consistent with estuaries in the same category as fish inestuaries respond to their environment in a consistent manner and estuaries with similarhabitats and environmental regimes support similar species assemblages (Whitfield 1998).Harrison (2005) described species caught during extended field research carried out in the1990s, with open cool‐temperate estuaries having an average of 6.8 species captured perestuary. The numerically dominant species caught included harder Liza richardsonii, capesilverside Atherina breviceps and estuarine round‐herring Gilchristella aestuaria. KobArgyrosomus sp., shad Pomatomus saltatrix , flathead mullet Mugil cephalus , and cape whitecatfish Galeicthys feliceps also contributed to the overall biomass (Harrison 2005). In opencool‐temperate estuaries like the Uilkraals, Harrison (2005) found that they did not appear tocontain any unique taxa, instead comprising of a mix of widespread and endemic species whichprefer cooler waters (e.g. Cape silverside and harder).G F van Wyk recorded white steenbras Lithognathus lithognathus, mullet (Family: Mugilidae)and nude goby Caffrogobius nudiceps in the estuary in 1955. During a 1981 site visit thepresence of mullet in abundance was noted as well as the presence of white steenbras and theKnysna sandgoby Psammagobius knysnaensis in smaller numbers (Heydorn & Bickerton 1982).White steenbras is a category IIa species and is dependent on estuaries as a nursery area for atleast the first year of life (Whitfield 1994). Harrison et al. (1995b) recorded four species of fishin the estuary; Cape silverside, Knysna sand goby, harder, and flathead mullet.An ichthyological survey at the Uilkraals Estuary was conducted in 2006. Ten hauls were doneat 10 sampling sites, covering a total sampling area of 3000 m 2 . 11 species of fishes wererecorded (Table 2). Three of these were likely to be breeding in the Uilkraals Estuary; Capesilverside, nude goby, and the Knysna sand goby. One species, flathead mullet, was likely to bedependent on the estuary as a nursery area for at least its first year of life. Another fivespecies were at least partially dependent on the estuary as a nursery area; Cape soleHeteromycteris capensis, groovy mullet Liza dumerilii, blackhand sole Soleo bleekeri, harder,and white stumpnose Rhabdosargus globiceps.In total, nine species (82% of the fish species recorded from the Uilkraals Estuary) can beregarded as either partially or completely dependent on the estuary for their survival. Themost abundant species in terms of numbers was the Knysna sand goby, followed by harder(Table 2). Both species are at least partially dependant on the estuary. In terms of biomasssandshark contributed most to the total biomass in the system, followed by harders. However,sandsharks do not rely on estuaries as part of their life cycle.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment27Anchor Environmental

PiscivoresTable 3. Water‐associated birds recorded at Uilkraals Estuary (Summers et al. 1976; Heydorn &Bickerton 1982; A. Terörde, unpubl. data).Invertebrate feedersAfrican Darter Anhinga rufa African Oystercatcher Haematopus moquiniAfrican Fish‐eagle Haliaeetus vocifer African Sacred Ibis Threskiornis aethiopicusAfrican Spoonbill Platalea alba Bar‐tailed Godwit Limosa lapponicaBlack Stork Ciconia nigra Blacksmith Lapwing Vanellus armatusCape Gannet Morus capensis Blackwinged Stilt Himantopus himantopusCape Cormorant Phalacrocorax capensis Cape Wagtail Motacilla capensisCaspian Tern Sterna caspia Common Greenshank Tringa nebulariaCommon Tern Sterna hirundo Common Ringed Plover Charadrius hiaticulaCrowned Cormorant Phalacrocorax coronatus Common Sandpiper Actitis hypoleucosGiant Kingfisher Megaceryle maxima Eurasian Curlew Numenius arquataGreat Egret Casmerodius albus Curlew Sandpiper Calidris ferrugineaGreyheaded Gull Larus cirrocephalus Grey Plover Pluvialis squatarolaGrey Heron Ardea cinerea Kittlitz's Plover Charadrius pecuariusHartlaub's Gull Larus hartlaubii Little Stint Calidris minutaKelp Gull Larus dominicanus Marsh Sandpiper Tringa stagnatilisLittle Egret Egretta garzetta Ruddy Turnstone Arenaria interpresMalachite Kingfisher Alcedo cristata Sanderling Calidris albaOsprey Pandion haliaetus Terek Sandpiper Xenus cinereusPied Kingfisher Ceryle rudis Three‐banded Plover Charadrius tricollarisReed Cormorant Phalacrocorax africanis Whimbrel Numenius phaeopusSandwich Tern Sterna sandvicensis White‐fronted Plover Charadrius marginatusSwift Tern Sterna bergii HerbivoresWhite‐breasted Cormorant Phalacrocorax lucidus Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropusEgyptian GooseRed‐knobbed CootYellow‐billed DuckAlopochen aegyptiacaFulica cristataAnas undulataTable 4. Summary of bird count results conducted at the Uilkraals Estuary.January 1976(Summers et al. 1976)January 1976(Summers unpublisheddata)December 1979(Heydorn & Bickerton1982)January 1981(Ryan et al. 1988)February 1996(Barnes 1996)February 2010(A. Terörde, unpub.data)Number ofspeciesTotalabundanceWaderabundanceMost abundant species32 Not counted 774 Waders: Curlew Sandpiper (480)17 4864 720 Sandwich Tern (2000)Waders: Curlew Sandpipers(440)26 5879 584 Sandwich Tern (5000)Waders: Curlew Sandpiper (480)24 6755 880 Common Tern (4720)Waders: Curlew Sandpiper (534)30 2180 1041 Common Tern (513)Waders: Curlew Sandpiper (421)22 435 60 Kelp Gull (310)Waders: Whimbrel (17)Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment29Anchor Environmental

For this study, a count of water‐associated birds was conducted in late February 2010, whensummer migrant numbers are usually maximal. Birds were recorded from the mouth to thesection of the estuary where the wider channel becomes a series of smaller braided channels,approximately 3 km from the mouth.Counts during this study showed a drastic decrease in bird numbers compared to previousyears, while diversity was not affected as much (Table 4). Only 435 individuals were recorded,the majority of these being Kelp Gulls (310 individuals). Most birds (89%) were found in thesandflats above the bridge (Error! Reference source not found.). Ten species were piscivoresand 12 species were invertebrate‐feeding waders. No herbivores were recorded. Compared tothe study by Barnes (1996) the proportion of invertebrate‐feeders, piscivores and herbivoreswas similar. Barnes (1996) recorded 15 species of piscivores, 18 species of invertebratefeedersand one species of herbivore (Egyptian Goose).The low numbers can be explained by the significant decrease in the numbers of CurlewSandpipers, as well as only a small number of terns being present (32 individuals) as comparedto previous counts (Error! Reference source not found.). Curlew Sandpiper has been recordedat the estuary in high numbers during every previous survey conducted (Error! Referencesource not found.). It is an Arctic‐breeding migratory species, and is found in southern Africafrom August/November to March/April. It forages for nereid worms, snails and crustaceansmainly in the intertidal area of coastal lagoons and estuaries and on sheltered open shores withmuch stranded algae (Hockey et al. 2005). The estuary was closed to the sea during the studyand had been closed for approximately two months. Therefore, the large inter‐tidal feedinghabitat which covered the entire sandflat region below and above the road bridge was lost.Most inter‐tidal invertebrates had probably desiccated and died or migrated elsewhere. Whilemany sandprawn burrows were still present, these animals are able to burrow deeper to a levelof sufficient moisture in dry times and are often found in closed systems. They are also verytolerant of varying salinities (Forbes 1974). Due to their large size and the depth of theirburrows it is unlikely that sandprawns can be utilised as prey by small invertebrate‐feedingwaders.Kelp Gulls were recorded roosting for the first time in high numbers at Uilkraals with 310individuals recorded (Table 5). Barnes (1996) recorded 67 and Ryan et al. (1988) recorded 77individuals. On the day of the count a strong south‐easterly wind was blowing and it is possiblethat this species seeks shelter in the estuary sporadically. Similar numbers of Kelp Gulls were,however, still present the following two days, even after the wind had died down. The lownumbers of terns recorded are of particular concern as this site was once a major roost forseveral tern species including the Caspian Tern, Sandwich Tern and Swift Tern, of which ithosted 6.8%, 2.8% and 6.6% respectively of the south‐western Cape’s population (Barnes1996). Whimbrel has previously been recorded in high numbers at the estuary (76 and 65individuals) making it the second largest population in the south‐western Cape after LangebaanLagoon (Barnes 1996). Only 17 individuals were recorded in this study. Whimbrel are relativelysensitive to disturbance and higher levels of recreational use of the estuary by people may be acontributing factor, in addition to the loss of intertidal feeding habitat.In addition to the changes associated with the building of the bridge and the closure of themouth, disturbance would have increased with the size of the surrounding settlements andamount of people utilizing the adjoining caravan park and estuary for recreational purposes.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment30Anchor Environmental

Table 5. Results of the waterbird count (February 2010). Area 1: mouth to bridge; Area 2: bridge tosaltmarsh (sandflats); Area 3: channel through to saltmarsh.Piscivores Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 TOTALCape Cormorant 1 1Caspian Tern 4 2 6Common Tern 12 12Grey Heron 1 1Hartlaub's Gull 8 8Kelp Gull 310 310Little Egret 1 11 12Reed Cormorant 1 1Sandwich Tern 1 1Swift Tern 13 13Invertebrate‐feedersBlacksmith Lapwing 2 3 5Cape Wagtail 2 2 4Common Sandpiper 1 1Curlew Sandpiper 12 12Common Greenshank 1 1African Oystercatcher 4 4Ruff 4 4Sacred Ibis 2 2Terek Sandpiper 3 3Whimbrel 17 17White‐fronted Plover 9 7 16Wood Sandpiper 1 1Total number of individuals 24 387 24 435Total number of species 6 15 6 223.8 Current health of the estuaryWhitfield (2000) conducted an assessment on the condition of estuaries of the entire SouthAfrican coast. The estuaries were broadly classified as follows:• Excellent: estuary in near pristine condition (negligible human impact)• Good: no major negative anthropogenic influences on either the estuary or catchment(low impact)• Fair: noticeable degree of ecological degradation in the catchment and/or estuary(moderate impact)• Poor: major ecological degradation arising from a combination of anthropogenicinfluences (high impact)The Uilkraals Estuary was classified by Whitfield (2000) as being in a fair condition. A morerecent health assessment found that the Uilkraals Estuary has an Estuarine Health Index (EHI)score of 55 (van Niekerk, unpubl. data). The EHI assesses the degree to which the current stateresembles the reference (i.e. natural) condition. Once the natural hydrological conditions havebeen described, specialists assess the condition of the estuary in terms of a range ofUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment31Anchor Environmental

iophysical variables. The current state is then scored for each of these variables on a scale of0 (no resemblance to original state) to 100 (same as natural state). The health scores andoverall score are summarised in Table 6. Although the estuary currently receives some 80% ofits natural MAR, an important part of the hydrology and natural functioning of the estuary hasbeen removed (winter and summer base flows) which affects the mouth conditionsignificantly. The similarity score given for the hydrology of system is 50% of the naturalcondition, which is lower than the percentage in natural MAR (80% of natural). This is becausean important component of the natural flow regime has been modified to a large extent, thehydrodynamics and mouth condition (0% of natural condition) are severely altered. Thereduction in flow has also had an impact on the water quality of the system, both due to thereduced ability to dilute pollution and due to the increase in polluted return flows as a result ofwater use for irrigation. The reduced flows may have also altered the physical habitat of theestuary in that the depth and profile have changed. There has been a recorded 81%transformation in the 1 km buffer zone of the estuary (van Niekerk, unpub. data), most likely aconsequence of increased alien vegetation and reduced flows.The reduction in flows has also resulted in considerable changes to the biota of the estuary.Primary productivity by microalgae is thought to have increased due to the nutrient input andreduction in flushing of the estuary. Being a blackwater system, the Uilkraals is naturallyoligotrophic and because the water is being retained in the estuary for an extended period oftime, the primary productivity has increased substantially. Plants have also been significantlyaffected. Mouth closure for such extended periods can lead to a significant reduction insaltmarsh vegetation. Saltmarsh cannot survive inundation which is caused by the permanentrise of the water level in the estuary due to a closed mouth. A reduced cueing effect toestuarine dependent invertebrate and fish species could result in a reduction in nurseryfunction, abundance and diversity of species. Birds have also been significantly affected by theclosure of the estuary. The large intertidal feeding habitat which covered the entire sandflatregion below and the above the causeway has been lost, resulting in a severe decrease inwader numbers. The estuary has also become less suitable as a tern roost. The score of 80%allocated to birds is most likely an over estimate and has become even lower as the estuarycontinues to remain closed off from the sea.Table 6. The Estuarine Health Index scores allocated to the Uilkraals Estuary (Present State)VARIABLESCORE (% resemblance to natural condition)Hydrology 50Hydrodynamics and mouth condition 0Water quality 70Salinity 50Total Water Quality Score 62Physical habitat 70Habitat health score 45.5Microalgae 35Plants (macrophytes) 70Invertebrates 70Fish 75Birds 80Biological health score 64OVERALL EHI SCORE 55Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment32Anchor Environmental

The overall health score of 55 translates into a Present Ecological Status of a D, which is classedas a largely modified system (Table 7).Although the Present State of the Uilkraals Estuary currently falls within an Ecological CategoryD, it is likely that the estuary is on a negative trajectory of change, because of the extremelylow base flows under the Present State. Turpie & Clark (2007) listed the Uilkraals Estuary as ahigh priority estuary in need of rehabilitation. Alien plant clearance and the removal of thecauseway were listed as the types of requirements needed to rehabilitate the estuary.Increasing freshwater inflow and ensuring more natural flows into the system are also needed.Table 7. Relationship between Estuarine Health Score, Present Ecological Status (PES) classification,and how it is understood.EHI Score PES General description91 – 100 A Unmodified, natural76 – 90 B Largely natural with few modifications61 – 75 C Moderately modified41 – 60 D Largely modified21 – 40 E Highly degraded0 – 20 F Extremely degradedImplications for the estuaryThe estuary is degrading under the current flows. The main consequences of maintaining theUilkraals Estuary in an Ecological Category D through these flows are considered to be asfollows:1. Excessive (or nuisance) macrophyte growth during the late summer months in theupper reaches, particularly if nutrient inputs are not reduced, negatively impacting onwater intake systems, recreational usage and aesthetics (i.e. ‘loss of value’).2. Reduced cueing effect to estuarine dependent invertebrate and fish species andresulting reduction in nursery function.3. A loss of saltmarsh through inundation or dessication if the estuary remains closed tothe sea.4. A further decrease in bird numbers as the estuary becomes less suitable for wadersand terns. Birds that require an inter‐tidal feeding area are severely affected.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment33Anchor Environmental

Table 8. Ecosystem goods, services and attributes based on definitions by Costanza et al. (1997) thatare likely to be provided by temperate South African estuaries (Turpie 2007)GoodsEcosystem Goods,Services & AttributesDescriptionImportance inestuariesFood, medicines Production of fish and food plants; medicinal plants HighRaw materialsProduction of craftwork materials, construction materials andfodderMediumServicesAttributesGas regulation Carbon sequestration, oxygen and ozone production, LowClimate regulation Urban heat amelioration, wind generation LowErosion control andsediment retentionWaste treatmentRefugiaNursery areasExport of materialsand nutrientsGenetic resourcesStructure andcompositionPrevention of soil loss by vegetation cover, and capture of soil inwetlands, added agricultural (crop and grazing) output inwetlands/floodplainsBreaking down of waste, detoxifying pollution; dilution andtransport of pollutantsCritical habitat for migratory fish and birds, important habitats forspeciesCritical breeding habitat,Nurseries for marine fishExport of nutrients and sediments to marine ecosystemsMedicine, products for materials science, genes for resistance toplant pathogens and crop pests, ornamental speciesSpecies diversity and habitats providing opportunities forrecreational and cultural activitiesLowMediumHighHighHighLowHigh4.3 Raw materialsThere is no recorded use of building materials (e.g. reeds, sand) gathered from the UilkraalsEstuary for subsistence of commercial purposes. The lack of subsistence use is unsurprisingbecause of the population make‐up and the lack of traditional dwellings in this catchment.4.4 Carbon sequestrationCarbon sequestration is measured in terms of the net storage or loss of carbon that takes placeas a result of a long‐term increase or decrease in biomass. The contribution made by estuariesto carbon sequestration is largely unknown, and was thought unlikely to be significant apartfrom in mangrove systems. However recent studies have found estuarine wetlands are able tosequester carbon at ten times the rate of any other wetland ecosystem due to the high soilcarbon content and burial due to sea level rise (Brigham et al. 2006). Therefore higher rates ofcarbon sequestration and lower methane emissions in marsh areas, such as those identified inthe Uilkraals by Mucina et al. (2003) have the potential to be valuable carbon sinks.Nevertheless, the area is not extensive and the overall value is not likely to be significant inisolation, but only inasmuch as it contributes cumulatively to this service provided byecosystems in general.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment35Anchor Environmental

4.5 Waste treatmentWaste treatment is likely to be an important ecological service provided by the aquaticecosystems of the Uilkraals catchment, particularly in that agricultural return flows are dilutedand assimilated by the system. The value of this function is usually estimated in terms of thecost savings of treating the water before it is released. However, the quantity of pollutantsreleased into the system is unknown. It is important to note that the value of the system isonly measured in terms of the amount assimilated by the system. This capacity could bereduced under certain circumstances, resulting in decreased water quality downstream andexacerbating the negative impacts on downstream users that would already be caused byincreased pollution loads due to agricultural expansion.In order to effectively quantify the value of the waste treatment services water qualityassessments would have to identify any periods of elevated loads, which would signify whenthe Uilkraals system was not able to assimilate and dilute agricultural return flows, which havethe capacity to deliver of organic pollutants into the estuary.The capacity to assimilate pollutants could also be reduced under certain circumstances,resulting in decreased water quality downstream and exacerbating the negative impacts ondownstream users that would already be caused by increased pollution loads due toagricultural expansion.4.6 Export of materials and nutrientsThe export of sediments and nutrients to the marine zone is an important function of someriver systems. For example, the prawn fisheries of KwaZulu‐Natal depend on such exports(DWAF 2004b). However, this function is far more important on the east coast, which isrelatively nutrient‐poor, than on the west coast, where the outputs of estuaries do notcompete with the nutrients supplied by the Atlantic upwelling systems (Turpie & Clark 2007).It is unlikely that the export of materials and nutrients is important in this system because itslow mean annual runoff (MAR).4.7 Refugia areas and nursery valueRefugia areas are areas that help to maintain populations in a broader area. For example,wetlands within relatively arid areas may play an important seasonal role in the maintenanceof wild herbivores that are utilised in tourism operations well beyond the wetland. This isprobably not important in the study area apart from for fish. In the rivers, some of the smallertributaries have become important as refuge areas for endemic fish, although their ability torepopulate the rest of the river system is low at present. In the estuary, some inshore marinefish populations may utilise the estuary as a warmer refuge during upwelling events (Lamberth2003). The extent of this function in its contribution to marine populations is unknown.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment36Anchor Environmental

Estuaries are typically shallow and sheltered habitats that provide a refuge from the action ofwaves that are characteristic of the South African coastline, making them ideal nurseryhabitats for juvenile fish species, many of which are of commercial importance (Wallace et al.1984). While estuaries are widely accepted as being among the most biologically productiveecosystems on earth (Kennish 2002), estuaries in the region where the Uilkraals is located arefed by oligotrophic (nutrient‐poor) rivers, and are thus not particularly productive.There are about 431 000 recreational fishers and well over 21 000 commercial fishers active inthe inshore marine environment in South Africa. Commercial net fisheries (beach seine and gillnet) on the south coast are likely to be the fisheries that benefit most from the UilkraalsEstuary. The commercial line fishery, recreational shore angling and recreational boat anglingfisheries could also benefit to a small extent.Nursery areas are breeding habitat for populations that reside elsewhere. Estuaries providenursery areas and habitat for numerous species of fishes which are exploited by recreationaland commercial harvesting in the inshore marine environment. Different species aredependent on estuaries to different degrees for stages of their development and growth.Freshwater flow and the frequency and duration of estuary mouth openings are major factorsaffecting estuarine biota (Turpie & Clark 2007), and particularly the juveniles of marineorganisms that use them as nursery grounds (Whitfield 1994, Strydom et al. 2003) eitherdirectly through habitat availability, or indirectly through their impact on estuarineproductivity (Gillanders & Kingsford 2002). Factors that make estuaries suitable nursery areasare increased food, higher temperature, turbid waters and lower salinities, all of which can bechanged by the variation in freshwater input (GiIlanders & Kingsford 2002, Turpie & Clark2007). The nursery function of the Uilkraals Estuary is considered to be relatively important, inthat some marine species caught in the surrounding marine fisheries are dependent onestuaries as nursery areas. With high macrophyte diversity and a large area of submergedmacrophytes within the estuary, nursery areas and refugia are important. However, thenursery areas may have been reduced or possibly eliminated as a result of the changes infunctioning and mouth dynamics brought about by the upstream dams.As per the ichthyological survey carried out in 2006, three of the species found within theUilkraals Estuary breed in the estuary, one species is completely dependent on the estuary forthe first year of its life and five species are partially dependent on the estuary. The nurseryvalue is derived from the amount of fish caught which fall under I, III and IV in terms of theirdependence on estuaries (Table 1). Of particular importance in calculating the value isCategory II species for which management of estuaries plays a crucial role in inshore fisheries.Turpie & Clark (2007) estimated the total nursery value of all the estuaries within South Africafrom the Orange River to Kosi Bay to be in the order of R773 million per annum, ranging fromR900 to R167 million per estuary. The majority of estuaries were estimated to have a nurseryvalue in the range of R100 000 to R10 million per annum. The Uilkraals Estuary theoreticallyfalls within this category (Turpie & Clark 2007), but it is unlikely that this value is realised nowdue to the closure of the estuary to the sea for such an extended period of time, and thereduction in freshwater flow.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment37Anchor Environmental

4.8 Genetic resourcesGenetic resources are valuable in many systems, but probably least valuable in freshwater andestuarine systems, where most species are extremely widespread. There are also few speciesthat have widespread commercial potential (e.g. for agriculture or horticulture). Nevertheless,there are endemic species, and there is a possibility that these may become useful. TheUilkraals, because of its high macrophyte abundance, is one of the more interesting systemswithin the area in terms of diversity. However, it is not possible to determine this value.4.9 Tourism and recreational valueThe Overstrand coastline, between Rooiels and Pearly Beach which includes the Uilkraalscatchment has become an increasingly popular tourist destination for South Africans andoverseas tourists. Much of the appeal lies in the natural features of the area, particularly thecoastline which provides opportunities for peaceful getaways or adventure holidays involving avariety of aquatic and non‐aquatic outdoor activities. The area is surrounded by hills in theform of the western Franskraalberge, the central Koudeberge and range of limestone hillswhich merge into the coastal plains. In the scale of the Western Cape mountain ranges theseare a minor attraction (van der Merwe 2008), but do contribute positively to the aestheticattraction of the region. In addition the shifting sand dunes and limestone hills have highspecies endemism. There are a number of protected areas in the vicinity of the Uilkraalscatchment including the Uilkraalsmond Nature Reserve, Pearly Beach, Groot Hagelkraal NatureReserve and Quoin Point Nature Reserve.Tourism is a major economic driver in the Overstrand and its popularity as a holiday andrecreational destination is on the increase. During the peak holiday seasons, the populationcan increase four fold. As with many estuaries in South Africa, there is an urban settlementaround the mouth of the Uilkraals Estuary. The Uilenkraalsmond Holiday Resort is locateddirectly at the mouth of the estuary and is a very popular holiday resort, generally being fullduring all major holiday periods (Figure 14). The holiday resort covers a large area having bothcottages and a caravan park with camping facilities. At R550 per night in self cateringaccommodation during the peak season and R400 a night out of season, it is expected that theresort generates a relatively substantial amount, which can be ultimately attributed to theestuary. There are a couple of upmarket bed and breakfast facilities located in the Franskraalvillage. The main attractions of the estuary are for fishing, birdwatching, and relaxation. TheUilkraalsmond area is considered to be under increasing development pressure, with theproposed rural development in the area (van de Merwe 2008). Tourism is also an importantindustry in the areas in the vicinity of the Uilkraals Estuary, with a range of adventure, ecotourismand consumptive (fishing) activities available to visitors.The Uilkraals River is considered an asset amongst the five rivers listed within the Strandveldarea, with the coastal features at the mouth of the Uilkraals Estuary listed as importantbecause of the tourism value that they hold. T he area adjacent to the mouth is varied with thewestern section forming the rocky outstretches linking to Gansbaai and the eastern sectioncomprised of smooth fine grained sandy beaches which continue on to Pearly Beach. TheUilkraals catchment is also important as a Fynbos biodiversity hotspot, containing importantUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment38Anchor Environmental

strands of remnant undisturbed fynbos. A number of places have reported the occurrence ofred data species, in addition a number of flower harvesting and processing centres are locatedin the catchment, for example Concordia and Niewedam (van der Merwe 2008).Figure 14. Uilkraals Estuary (which is now closed to the sea) with the Uilenkraalsmond Holiday Resortsituated at the mouth (inside red box). Source: Google Earth.Recreational use of estuaries is significant in South Africa, with an estimated total of 67 000recreational anglers and 5700 cast netters (Turpie & Clark 2007). Although this activity isrelatively small in the Uilkraals Estuary area and on the coast, recreational angling (mainlyshore angling) is carried out by many of the locals and visitors to the area. The bulk of theUilkraals Estuary linefish catch is made within 500 m of the mouth. The total fishing effort forthe Uilkraals Estuary is 2.1 tonnes, which is considerably less when compared to the Klein (80tonnes), the Bot (70 tonnes) and the Heuningnes (10 tonnes; Lamberth & Turpie 2003).The economic value of the recreational fishery can be considered in terms of the expenditureon fishing by recreational fishers (i.e. the income to subsidiary industries such asaccommodation and fuel). While the commercial and traditional fisheries are forms ofgenerating cash or subsistence income, and are largely valued in terms of the market value oftheir catches, the value of recreational angling does not lie mainly in the market value of thefish caught. Recreational anglers value the sport and experience, and expend considerablesums on this activity, largely irrespective of their catch returns (McGrath et al. 1997). Thevalue attributed to this fishery is mostly in terms of gains to subsidiary industries that benefitfrom angler expenditure (McGrath et al. 1997).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment39Anchor Environmental

5. LEGISLATION AND MANAGEMENT ISSUES5.1 The main threats and opportunities to be consideredThere are a number of factors that threaten the future health of the Uilkraals Estuary andhence its biodiversity and capacity to deliver ecosystem services. The main threats to thesystem or areas of potential conflict are as follows:1. Water quantity and qualitya. reduction in freshwater inflows due to water storage in the catchment(Kraaibosch Dam), and a continuing increase in the demand for waterb. increasing nutrient enrichment due to agriculture in the catchmentc. Loss of important habitat area such as saltmarsh through inundation causedby increasing water levels in the estuary as the mouth remains closed.2. Exploitation of living resourcesa. potential for future overexploitation by recreational fishers3. Land‐use and associated disturbancea. potential for residential/resort development around the estuary leading tochange in sense of place and existence value, increased human disturbanceof biota, and damage or loss of estuarine habitatIn addition to meeting the existing legislation governing the above activities, opportunities toprotect the health and value of the system over the medium to long term include:1. The establishment of terrestrial and estuarine protected areas, and2. Implementation of rehabilitation measures.All of the above issues are discussed below in the context of the prevailing policies andlegislation.5.2 General policy and legislative backgroundThis section provides an overview of legislation and policy applicable to management ofestuaries in South Africa and specifically to the Uilkraals Estuary. More details on thelegislative framework for estuary management including international and regional treatiesand obligations, national policies and laws, and provincial and local policies and legislation isprovided in Taljaard (2007).The South African Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and provides the legalframework for legislation regulating environmental management in general. Section 24 of theConstitution states that:"Everyone has the right:• to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well‐being; andUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment40Anchor Environmental

• to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generationsthrough reasonable legislative and other measures that –• prevent pollution and ecological degradation;• promote conservation; and• secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources whilepromoting justifiable economic and social development.This lays the basis for environmental law in South Africa (Breen & McKenzie 2001) and is a veryimportant justification for the wise use of estuarine biodiversity.Because they are not freshwater, terrestrial or marine, estuaries have tended to be neglectedin past legislation. However, the fact that estuaries contain freshwater, terrestrial and marinecomponents, and are heavily influenced by activities in a much broader catchment andadjacent marine area, means that they are affected by a large number of policies and laws.The situation has improved with newer policies and legislation, but there is still no specificprovision for Estuarine Protected Areas.South African policy and law as pertaining to estuaries has been summarised in detailelsewhere (Smith & Cullinan 2000, van Niekerk & Taljaard 2002). A brief summary of the mostrelevant policies is given here (Table 9 and Table 10). Policy and legislation which affectsestuaries directly can be roughly divided into that affecting (a) water quality and quantity, (b)land use and infrastructure development, and (c) living resources within estuaries (Van Niekerk& Taljaard 2002, Taljaard 2007).Estuary management falls mainly under two national government departments: theDepartment of Water Affairs and Forestry, responsible for water resources, and theDepartment of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), responsible for everything else, e.g.land use, living resources. Environmental management in most instances is devolved toprovincial level through whichever provincial department is responsible for environmentalmatters. Management and conservation of marine living resources is an exception in thisrespect, in that this is retained as a national competency, responsibility residing with theBranch Marine & Coastal Management (MCM) of DEAT. In instances where provincial or locallegislation are in conflict with national legislation, national legislation prevails. At a local(municipality) level, municipal councils pass municipal by‐laws, which in turn, cannot conflictwith provincial and national laws (Breen & McKenzie 2001).The Western Cape Government has also released a Coastal Management Programme whichincludes a suite of goals, objectives and strategies designed to achieve sustainable coastaldevelopment in the Western Cape. These are closely aligned with the National CoastalManagement Programme and are organised within five themes:Theme A: Governance and Capacity BuildingTheme B: Our National AssetTheme C: Coastal Planning and DevelopmentTheme D: Natural Resource ManagementTheme E: Pollution Control and Waste ManagementA number of goals within each of these themes are of relevance to the management of theUilkraals Estuary (Table 11).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment41Anchor Environmental

Table 9.Summary of national policies which affect water quality and quantity in estuaries in general, landing use, development and resource use in the estuarine environment.Water quality& quantityWhite Paper (= Policy) Bill or Act (= Law) LeadAgentWhite Paper on NationalWater Policy for SA (1997)White Paper on IntegratedPollution and WasteManagement for South Africa(2000)ImplicationsNational Water Act 36 of 1998 DWEA Defines the environmental reserve in terms of quantity and quality of water; provides fornational, catchment and local management of waterMarine Pollution (Control andCivil Liability) Act (1981)National EnvironmentalManagement: IntegratedCoastal Management Act no 24of 2008Seashore Act(1935) as amendedDOT/DWEADWEADEADPProvides for the protection of the marine environment from pollution by oil and other harmfulsubstances, the prevention and combating of such pollution, and the determination of liability incertain respects for loss or damage caused by the discharge of oil from ships, tankers andoffshore installations.Provides for the control of dumping at sea and pollution in the coastal zone (including estuaries).The leasing of the sea shore for the purposes of construction on the sea‐shore or in the sea.Environmental Conservation Act(1989)Most of the provisions of this Act have been repealed by NEMA, apart from the regulation onSensitive Coastal Areas.Land use &managementWhite Paper for SustainableCoastal Development inSouth Africa (2000)National Heritage Resources Act(1999)National EnvironmentalManagement: IntegratedCoastal Management Act no 24of 2008DWEADWEAProvides for managements of national heritage resources (including landscapes and naturalfeatures of cultural significance, and for participation of communities in the identification,conservation and management of cultural resourcesProvides for integrated coastal and estuarine management in South Africa, and sustainabledevelopment of the coastal zone, defines rights and duties in relation to coastal areas; includes aNational Estuarine Management Protocol for South Africa, and requires that estuarinemanagement plans be developed and implemented for all estuariesWhite Paper on SpatialPlanning and Land‐useManagement (2001)Local Government: MunicipalSystems Act (2000)DPLGRequires each local authority to adopt a single, inclusive plan for the development of themunicipality intended to encompass and harmonise planning over a range of sectors such aswater, transport, land use and environmental management.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 42Anchor Environmental

ProtectedareasUse of living resources& MPAsWhite Paper (= Policy) Bill or Act (= Law) LeadAgentWhite Paper: Mineral andMining Policy for South Africa(1998)White Paper on theConservation and SustainableUse of South Africa’sBiological Diversity (1998)Marine Fisheries Policy forSouth Africa (1997)Mineral and PetroleumResources Development Act(2002)National EnvironmentalManagement: Protected AreasAct (2003)World Heritage Convention Act(1999)National EnvironmentalManagement: Biodiversity Act(2004)Marine Living Resources Act(1998)DMEDWEADWEADWEADWEAImplicationsDeals with environmental protection and management of mining impacts, including sand andcoastal mining.Provides for the protection and conservation of ecologically viable areas representative of SouthAfrica’s biological diversity and its natural landscapes and seascapes; and for establishment of anational register of national, provincial and local protected areas, describes the different types ofprotected areas that can be declared which may also apply to estuaries.Provides for the incorporation of the World Heritage Convention into South African Law, and forthe recognition and establishment of World Heritage Sites in South AfricaProvide for the conservation of biological diversity, and regulates sustainable use of biologicalresourcesRegulates living resource use within marine and estuarine areas, mainly through licensing;provides for establishment of Marine Protected AreasUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 43Anchor Environmental

Table 10.Provincial and local government legislation applicable to the Uilkraals EstuaryAct/Ordinance Lead Agent ImplicationsMunicipal Ordinance (Cape) (1974) DEADP Grants local authorities in the province of the Western Cape the power ‘to drain storm water into any natural watercourse’.Western Cape Nature Conservation LawsAct No. 15 of 1998WCNCB Provides for the establishment of the Western Cape Nature Conservation Board.Land Use Planning Ordinance (1985) asamendedDEADPMost planning applications received by the provincial department are in terms of this Act including applications fordeparture, rezoning or subdivision and appeals against planning decisions taken by a municipalityWestern Cape Planning and Development Act DEADP Provides guidelines for the future spatial development in province of Western Cape(1999)Nature Conservation Ordinance (1974) WCNCB Provides for the establishment of provincial, local and private nature reserves and the protection of indigenous species offlora and fauna. Protected and endangered species of flora and fauna are listed in schedules to the ordinance. It isadministered by the Western Cape Nature Conservation Board (WCNCB) and grants certain powers to the WCNCB.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 44Anchor Environmental

Table 11.Goals and strategies in the Western Cape Integrated Coastal Management Programme with particular relevance to management of the Uilkraals Estuary.Goal # Goal StrategiesGoal B3:Goal C1:Goal C3:Goal C4:Goal C5:Goal D1Goal D2:To preserve, promote or protect archaeological, historical andcultural resources and activities of the coastTo promote the diversity, vitality and long term viability of coastaleconomies and activities, giving preference to those that aredistinctly coastal or dependent on a coastal locationTo maintain an appropriate balance between built, rural andwilderness coastal areas in the Western CapeTo design and manage coastal settlements to be in harmony with theaesthetic, environmental and cultural attributes of the Western CapeCoastTo plan and manage coastal development so as to avoid increasingthe incidence and severity of natural hazards and to avoid exposureof people, property and economic activities to significant risk fromdynamic coastal processesTo maintain the diversity, health and productivity of coastal andmarine processes and ecosystemsTo establish and effectively manage a system of coastal protectedareasB3.1.1: Implementation of section 38 of the National Heritage Resources ActB3.1.2: Encouragement of heritage conservation planningB3.1.6: Termination of inappropriate uses of places, illegal activitiesC1.7.1: Diversify tourism opportunitiesC1.7.3: Build capacity of communities to initiate and effectively participate in sustainabletourism venturesC1.7.4: Identify and address the limits imposed by natural and manmade environmentswhen planning tourism (and other) initiativesC3.4.2: Ensure the protection and conservation of natural/wilderness areasC4.1.1: Determine adequate setback and buffer zones along the coastC4.1.2: Control the sitting of infrastructure in the coastal zoneC4.1.3: Restrict non‐coastal related land uses from being located in the coastal zoneC4.1.4: Encourage appropriate forms of coastal settlement and buildingC4.1.5: Formulate design guidelines for all buildings and structures in the coastal zoneC4.2.1: Develop regulations to restrict the alteration of landforms and vegetation cover indynamic coastal zonesC4.2.3: Manage pedestrian and vehicular access in coastal environmentsC5.1.1 Protect and maintain dynamic coastal features that act as a buffer against naturalcoastal processes and hazardsC5.2.1: Incorporate appropriate preventative and adaptive measures into all planning andmanagement policies, plans and decision‐making processes to account for projectedchanges in climate, particularly increases in sea levelD1.2.1 Identify and protect unique sensitive environments and habitats in the coastal andmarine zonesD2.1.3: Ensure proper management of protected areas that caters for ecological andhuman use requirementsGoal D3: To ensure that the use of renewable resources and associated user D3.1.2: Adopt holistic rather than single species management approachesUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 45Anchor Environmental

Goal # Goal Strategiespractices do not compromise the regenerative capacity of coastalecosystemsD3.1.3: Set harvest levels that correspond to the regenerative capacity of coastalresourcesD3.1.5: Develop adequate strategies for monitoring and complianceD3.1.6: Promote participation of all stakeholders in managementGoal D5:Goal E1:Goal E2:To rehabilitate damaged or degraded coastal ecosystems andhabitatsTo implement pollution control and waste‐management measures inorder to prevent, minimize and strictly control harmful dischargesinto coastal ecosystemsTo manage polluting activities to ensure that they have minimaladverse impact on the health of coastal communities, and on coastalecosystems and their ability to support beneficial human usesD5.1.1: Identification of significantly degraded coastal areas and ecosystems anddevelopment of rehabilitation management plansD5.2.1: Put in place procedures to enforce rehabilitation of degraded coastal areas bythose responsibleE1.2.3: Inclusion of pollution and waste management into land‐use planningE2.1.7: Reduce pollution entering rivers and estuaries by promoting catchmentmanagementUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 46Anchor Environmental

5.3 Water quantity and quality requirementsLegislative contextWater quality and quantity are mainly controlled from the terrestrial side under the NationalWater Act 36 of 1998, under DWEA (Table 9). Legislation being developed under the WhitePaper on Integrated Pollution and Waste Management for SA (2000) will also have a bearing onriver systems. The risk of marine pollution is addressed by the Combating Pollution of the Seaby Oil Act 6 of 1981, under DEAT. This discussion focuses on National Water Act and theIntegrated Coastal Management Act as being the most pertinent to the development of theUilkraals Estuary Management Plan.The White Paper on National Water Policy for SA (1997) promotes efficiency, equity andsustainability in the use of water resources through its slogan “some, for all, forever”. Thepolicy explicitly recognises the environment as a legitimate user of water and makes provisionto protect the environment from overexploitation of water resources. The National Water Act36 of 1998 (NWA) provides the legal framework for this policy. The NWA makes provision for awater “Reserve” which provides the quantity and quality of water flow required in aquaticecosystems required to meet basic human needs and to protect the natural functioning of awater resource. The latter portion of the reserve is known as the environmental Reserve.The classification processThe extent to which an estuary’s functioning is catered for is determined by the designated“class” (= future state of health) of that estuary, with some estuaries being assigned a low classto allow maximal water provision and others being assigned a high class in order to meetconservation needs. The decision as to the designated class of the estuary is thus a critical one.In future, this will take place using a classification process that has recently been devised byDWAF and is being gazetted. This process will entail consideration of the trade‐offs in valuegenerated by allocating water (or pollution rights) to off‐stream users (e.g. irrigationagriculture), flow‐reducing activities (e.g. plantation forestry) and polluters (e.g. municipalities,farmers) versus allocating water to the environment for the provision of ecosystem services(e.g. fishing, tourism). The Catchment Management Agencies will in future probably play thekey role in this decision –making process, but until these agencies are operational, decisionsare being made with the aid of water situation assessments known as Internal StrategicPerspectives (ISPs) that were developed as an interim aid.The reserve determination processIn the absence of a gazetted classification process, the environmental Reserve is currentlydetermined on the basis of recommendations emanating from a reserve determination studyusing the Resource Directed Measures methodology in conjunction with considerations of thedemand for water in the catchment (the classification process described above will effectivelystandardise the way this is done). In the case of the Uilkraals River System, a ReserveDetermination Study has not been undertaken and there is no preliminary assessment of thefreshwater requirements for individual components of the estuary.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment47Anchor Environmental

5.4 Exploitation of living marine resourcesLegislative contextThe exploitation of marine living resources in South Africa (which includes those in estuaries) isgoverned by the Marine Fisheries Policy for South Africa (1997) and the Marine LivingResources Act (1998). Objectives of the policy are as follows:• to achieve optimum utilisation and ecologically sustainable development of marine livingresources;• to conserve marine living resources for present and future generations, to use marineliving resources;• to achieve economic growth, human resource development, capacity building withinfisheries and mariculture branches, employment creation and a sound ecological balanceconsistent with the development objectives of national governments;• to protect the ecosystem as a whole, including species which area not targeted forexploitation; and• to preserve marine biodiversity.The Marine Living Resources Act (1998) defines the species that can be exploited, andprotection measures for those species, such as closed areas, closed seasons and size and baglimits. Various types of resource‐use permit systems are also defined under this act.Issues surrounding recreational fishingCompared to other estuaries along the southwest and east coasts, the Uilkraals Estuary iscurrently utilised by a relatively low number of recreational fishers. This situation couldchange in the future depending on how development in the area proceeds.Due to the large number of participants, and associated expenditure (tackle, bait,accommodation, food, travel costs), recreational fisheries have been shown to contributesignificantly to regional economies (Mann et al. 2002, Lamberth & Turpie 2003, Pradervand etal. 2003). It has been shown that the demand for recreational angling is largely driven by adesire for relaxation and that the quantity of fish caught does not negatively affect theexpenditure by recreational anglers (McGrath et al. 1997). Increased tourism and real estatedevelopment along the banks of the Uilkraals Estuary could lead to increases in recreationalfishing effort.5.5 Land use and management of estuary marginsLegislative contextLand use management and control of development in the coastal zone is mostly theresponsibility of the provincial government and local authorities (municipalities), and isadministered through the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act (2000), the NationalEnvironmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act (2009), the Seashore Act(1935), the National Environmental Management Act (2003) (NEMA) and associated EIAregulations.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment48Anchor Environmental

Development planning has been rather ad hoc in the past, but has now been formalised underthe Municipal Systems Act, which requires that all municipalities (i.e. Metros, DistrictMunicipalities and Local Municipalities) have to produce Integrated Development Plans (IDPs).As the IDP is a legislative requirement it has a legal status and supercedes all other plans thatguide development at local government level. The IDP process is one of the key tools for localgovernments to cope with their developmental roles and responsibilities. It is the principalstrategic planning instrument which guides and informs all planning, budgeting, managementand decision‐making in a municipality for a five‐year period. IDPs are also supposed to guidethe activities of other spheres of government, corporate service providers, NGOs and theprivate sector within the municipal area. Because of the participatory process it takesapproximately 6 – 9 months to complete an IDP. The IDP is updated every five years.Every municipality is required to produce an indicative plan, called a Spatial DevelopmentFramework (SDF), showing desired patterns of land use, directions of growth, urban edges,special development areas and conservation‐worthy areas. It must also produce a scheme,called a Land use Management System (LUMS)’ recording the land use and development rightsand restrictions applicable to each erf in the municipality. The plan should be flexible enoughto accommodate changing priorities, and the scheme has to conform to the plan. The plan(SDF) is a guide to development, and the scheme (LUMS) is binding.The National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Act No. 24 of2008 (ICMA), which came into force in December 2009, seeks to:• promote the conservation of the coastal environment, and maintain the naturalattributes of coastal landscapes and seascapes, and to ensure that developmentand the use of natural resources within the coastal zone is socially andeconomically justifiable and ecologically sustainable;• define rights and duties in relation to coastal areas;• determine the responsibilities of organs of state in relation to coastal areas;• prohibit incineration at sea;• control dumping at sea, pollution in the coastal zone, inappropriate developmentof the coastal environment and other adverse effects on the coastalenvironment; and• give effect to South Africa’s international obligations in relation to coastalmattersThe ICMA defines the coastal zone as:“The area comprising coastal public property, the coastal protection zone, coastal accessland and coastal protected areas, the seashore, coastal waters and the exclusive economiczone and includes any aspect of the environment on, in under and above such area”.All land below the high water mark, coastal waters and natural resources up to the boundaryof the exclusive economic zone are considered coastal public property (s.7) that is held in trustby the state on behalf of the citizens of the country (s.11) 1 . The state is required by ICMA totake “whatever reasonable legislative and other measures it considers necessary to conserveand protect coastal public property for the benefit of present and future generations” (s.12).1 Section 11, which deals with the ownership of coastal public property, is scheduled to come into force ata later date.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment49Anchor Environmental

In terms of ICMA, all land within one kilometre of the high water mark zoned for agricultural orundetermined use and not part of a lawfully established township at the time at which the Actcame into force, and all other land within 100 metres of the high‐water mark will beincorporated within a “coastal protection zone” (s.16). The purpose of coastal protection zoneis to protect ecological integrity, natural character and the economic, social and aesthetic valueof the land and sea below the high water mark and to maintain the natural functioning of thelittoral active zone (s.17). Authorisation for construction of any structures within this zonemay only be issued in terms of the NEMA EIA regulations provided the structure in question isinconsistent with the purpose for which the coastal protection zone was established, is likely tocause irreversible or long‐lasting adverse effects to any aspect of the coastal environment thatcannot satisfactorily be mitigated nor is likely to be significantly damaged or prejudiced bydynamic coastal processes. Provincial MEC’s are required to establish or coastal set‐back linesso to protect the coastal public property, private property and public safety; protect thecoastal protection zone; preserve the aesthetic values of the coastal zone; or for any otherpurpose consistent with the objectives of ICMA. The building, erection, alteration or extensionof structures will be prohibited seaward of the coastal set back line.All municipalities in the country are required to facilitate public access to the seashore throughthe designation of coastal access land.Certain sections of the coast may be designated as “special management areas” in terms ofthe Act for the purpose of conserving, protecting or enhancing coastal ecosystems andbiodiversity in the area and for facilitating the management of coastal resources by a localcommunity.The Act requires that all estuaries in the country be managed in a co‐ordinated and efficientmanner and in accordance with a national estuarine management protocol.Minister and provincial MECs are also empowered to remove any structure on or within thecoastal zone deemed to be having an adverse effect on the coastal environment by virtue of itsexistence or because it has been erected, constructed or upgraded in contravention of this Actor any other law.The national government (DEAT), all coastal provinces and coastal municipalities are also allrequired to prepare coastal management programmes for managing the coastal zone withintheir areas of jurisdiction. These coastal management programmes are required to set out avision, objectives, priorities and strategies for achieving objectives, norms and standard formanagement of the coastal zone, and a framework for co‐operative governance that identifiesthe responsibilities of different organs of state in respect of the management of the coast.Coastal management programmes are required to be consistent with other planningdocuments (e.g. IDP and SDF documents) and vice versa. Coastal municipalities are alsoempowered to pass bylaws in terms of the Act for the purpose of administrating and enforcingtheir coastal management programmes.Agricultural activities in and around the Uilkraals Estuary, include livestock grazing, fruitfarming, viticulture and wild flower farming and are all subject to the Conservation ofAgricultural Resources Act (1983) which gives the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry andFisheries the power to prescribe control measures to achieve the objectives of the Act (viz. themaintenance of the production potential of land, by the combating and prevention of erosionUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment50Anchor Environmental

and weakening or destruction of the water sources (including estuaries), and by the protectionof the vegetation and the combating of weeds and invader plants).Development within the coastal zone is also to some extent controlled through NationalEnvironmental Management Act No.107 0f 1998 (NEMA) and associated EIA regulations. Arange of listed activities are included in the annexures to the regulations for which either aBasic or full EIA are required. In the event that a developer wishes to undertake a projectinvolving any of the listed activities, the developer is required to appoint an independent EIApractitioner to conduct a Basic Environmental Assessment (in the case of the former) or initiatea scoping exercise in the case of the latter). Following completion of such an assessment, anapplication must then be made to the relevant authority (Western Cape Department ofEnvironmental Affairs & Development Planning or DEAT in the case of the Kogelberg area) forapproval of the project. The application will be considered by the MEC/Minister and his/herstaff and a Record of Decision issued indicating that the development may either proceedunder certain conditions, must be subject to a more detailed assessment (i.e. full EIA), or maynot proceed at all. The Record of Decision (ROD) issued by the authority (DEADP) may beappealed by the applicant (or anyone opposed to the development) which could result in theROD being upheld, additional conditions being imposed on the development, or the ROD beingoverturned. Such an appeal must be lodged within 30 days of the ROD being published, usingthe appropriate forms. Further details on the EIA process, application and appeal forms areavailable on the Cape>Gateway website(www.capegateway.gov.za/eng/directories/services/11537/10199).NEMA requires that activities identified by the Minister may not commence without anenvironmental authorisation in terms of section 24. When applying for an environmentalauthorisation an environmental impact assessment must be undertaken to assess potentialimpacts on the environment, socio‐economic condition and cultural heritage, the results ofwhich must be reported to the authority charged with authorizing, permitting or otherwiseallowing the implementation of an activity (in this case DEA&DP).Regulations were promulgated in 2006 which regulate procedures and criteria for EIA and listactivities which are subject to basic assessment reports and scoping assessment andenvironmental assessment reports. Applications for the following activities, listed in GN No. R.386, are subject to a basic assessment as provided in regulations 22 – 26 of the EnvironmentalImpact Assessment Regulations (GN No. R. 385):1. The construction of facilities or infrastructure, including associated structures andinfrastructure, for ‐(a) any purpose in the one in ten year flood line of a river or stream, or within 32metres from the bank of a river or stream where the flood line is unknown, excludingpurposes associated with existing residential use, but including –(i) canals; (ii) channels; (iii) bridges; (iv) dams; and (v) weirs;(b) marinas and the launching of watercraft on inland freshwater systems;2. Construction or earth moving activities in the sea or within 100 metres inland of the highwatermark of the sea, in respect of –(a) facilities for the storage of material and the maintenance of vessels;(b) fixed or floating jetties and slipways;(c) tidal pools;(d) embankments;Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment51Anchor Environmental

(e) stabilising walls;(f) buildings; or(g) infrastructure.3. The prevention of the free movement of sand, including erosion and accretion, by means ofplanting vegetation, placing synthetic material on dunes and exposed sand surfaces within adistance of 100 metres inland of the high water mark of the sea.4. The dredging, excavation, infilling; removal or moving of soil, sand or rock exceeding 5cubic metres from a river, tidal lagoon, tidal river, lake, in‐stream dam, floodplain or wetland.5. The removal or damaging of indigenous vegetation of more than 10 square metres within adistance of 100 metres inland of the high water mark of the sea.6. The excavation, moving, removal, depositing or compacting of soil, sand, rock or rubblecovering an area exceeding 10 square metres in the sea or within a distance of 100 metresinland of the high‐water mark of the sea.Applications for the following activities, listed in GN No. R. 387, are subject to scoping andenvironmental impact assessment as provided in regulations 27 – 36 of the EnvironmentalImpact Assessment Regulations (GN No. R. 385):9. The construction or earth moving activities in the sea or within 100 metres inland of thehigh‐water mark of the sea, excluding an activity listed in item 2 of Government Notive No.R.386 of 2006 but including construction or earth moving activities in respect of‐(a) facilities associated with the arrival and departure of vessels and the handling ofcargo;(b) piers;(c) inter‐ and sub‐tidal structures for entrapment of sand;(d) breakwater structures;(e) rock revetments and other stabilising structures;(f) coastal marines;(g) coastal harbours;(h) structures for draining parts of the sea;(i) tunnels; or(j) underwater channelsSection 3.1 of the Sea‐shore Act No.21 of 1935 requires that a lease be obtained from therelevant administering authority before commencing construction activities on the sea‐shore(the land between the low water and high water marks) or in the sea. This administrativefunction was delegated to the coastal provinces (Proclamation R27 in GG 16346 of 7 April1995). Since this delegation of powers the Sea‐shore Act has been repealed in its entirety byICMA, except for those sections that were assigned to provinces. Thus the administrativepower of the various provincial authorities to let the sea‐shore still prevails despite the SeashoreAct being repealed.In the Western Cape this administrative function was transferred by section 2 of the WesternCape Nature Conservation Laws Act No. 15 of 1998 to the Western Cape Nature ConservationBoard (Cape Nature). Cape Nature, a public entity responsible for nature conservation in theWestern Cape, is the competent authority to which applications for leases of the sea‐shore areaddressed.During the evaluation of applications Cape Nature is required to:Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment52Anchor Environmental

• take into consideration whether the letting is in the interests of the general public and willnot seriously affect the general public’s enjoyment of the sea and sea‐shore;• consult with a local authority if the land adjoining the portion of the sea‐shore is under thejurisdiction of that local authority;• publish a notice in the Provincial Gazette, before granting a lease, to inform the public of theproposal and the inspection date and provide opportunity for objections. According toSection 3(6), any objection submitted in response to such advertisements must beconsidered by Cape Nature prior to entering into a lease agreement or issuing of a permit.Development planning pertaining to the Uilkraals EstuaryThe Spatial Development Framework for the Western Cape Province is pitched at a very broadlevel, encapsulated in the vision “a home for all in the Western Cape”. It offers very littlematerial guidance of specific relevance to the management of the Uilkraals Estuary, except tosay that estuaries are unique ecosystems under serious threat both directly from humanactivities such as overexploitation, waste discharges, and through activities in the catchment.The IDP and SDF for the Overberg District Municipality and the SDF for the Overstrand LocalMunicipality contain much more of direct relevance to the management of the Uilkraals Estuary. TheOverberg District Municipality IDP has recently been updated for 2010‐2011, the local SDF documentis recent from 2009 and the District level SDF, although written in 2004, is still relevant. Excerpts fromthe existing documents have been collated in Table 12 (Overberg District Municipality IDP), Table 13(Overberg District Municipality SDF) andUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment53Anchor Environmental

Table 14 (Overstrand Local Municipality Bioregional Plan SDF).Table 12.The vision, mission and objectives of the Overberg District Municipality as outlined in the2010‐2011 IDP document.Vision Mission ObjectivesTo bridge theracial socioeconomicdivideand to createsustainablelivelihoods andthrivingcommunitieswithin theOverbergDistrictTo preserve andfurther develop thedistrict through thepreservation of theregion’s ruralcharacter, thepromotion andsustainable utilisationof the region’sdiversity, and toensure sustainabilityand development ofhuman and naturalresources to thebenefit and wealth ofall inhabitants and forthe promotion ofeconomic growthand development• To support the development of a diversified, resilientand sustainable district economy in order to promoteeconomic growth, build skills, create jobs and eradicatepoverty• To ensure that all people are located within integralhuman settlements and have access to social servicesand security• To facilitate the improvement and expansion of theprovision bulk and basic services to all the people• To ensure the health and safety of communities throughthe prevention and management of risks• To facilitate sustainable and efficient land use andplanning frameworks• To facilitate the necessary institutional transformationand financial sustainability of the ODM in order to makeit a truly developmental municipalityBoth the local and district SDF documents highlight the importance of conservation areas andthe need for protection of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Both documents recognisethe potential for natural resources (agriculture, forestry, fishing etc.) to support economicdevelopment as well as the notion that natural attributes of the area (including the estuary)have a regional value for opportunities e.g. ecotourism. Restoration and rehabilitation ofnatural areas are listed as key strategies and both SDF documents emphasise the strategy ofinvasive alien plant clearance. The Uilkraals River Catchment has extensive areas of alienvegetation that run along the course of the river and estuary within the riparian zone. TheOverstrand Local Municipality SDF document states restrictions on future development i.e.restrictions on development below the 1:100 flood line and in sensitive areas, such aswetlands, floodplains and riparian systems. Development around the estuary is relatively low,but with increasing tourism to the area development will surely increase and consequently putpressure to cross the existing urban edge. Both SDF documents state that the naturalfunctioning and natural processes of ecosystems must be protected and the effectivemanagement of catchments must be ensured. The district level SDF also focuses on estuariesdirectly and states that the long term protection of estuaries must be ensured and that areasaround the estuary mouth must be protected from any development impacts. The UilkraalsEstuary is at present not functioning naturally and the natural processes associated with theestuary have been disrupted. The management of the catchment is therefore not effective asthe rivers natural flow patterns have not been regulated successfully.The Overstrand Local Municipality SDF compiled a spatial planning and management concept(Figure 15) which further underpins the municipality’s approach to the integrated spatialmanagement of land use and economic development within its jurisdictional area. The mainUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment54Anchor Environmental

principles involve identifying an overarching spatial development pattern within a clearhierarchy of nodes and settlements. The hierarchy of the development patterns being clearlydefined based on empirical determined growth potentials, the principles of comparativeadvantage and the prerequisite of sustainable development. The growth of urban nodes andrural settlements should be strictly contained within well‐defined boundaries and growthshould be managed so as to ensure that development pressures are, wherever possible,directed and absorbed within the defined urban areas. Appropriate densification specific toeach area must be encouraged to limit unwanted sprawl into the rural vicinity. The diversity,health and productivity of natural eco‐systems, throughout the rural, urban and agriculturalareas should be maintained through an interlinked web of natural spaces and the protection ofimportant sensitive habitats. Prime and unique agricultural areas must be protected from nonsoilbased land use activities. The diversification of rural and industrial based developmentopportunities, based on location and comparative resource advantages must be promoted inselected areas to stimulate economic growth and employment of the rural population.Figure 15. The Spatial Management Concept for the Overstrand Local Municipality, showing core urbanareas, rural settlements and settlement hierarchy (Source: Overstrand SDF 2009).Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment55Anchor Environmental

Table 13.Overberg District Spatial Development Framework (SDF)Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implicationsProtectedAreasNatureEstuaries, Lakes andNatural Water BodiesNatural resources• Rocks• Soils• Minerals1. Expand statutory conservationstatus to at least 12% of the ODM;2. Establish protected nature areas inconservation worthy habitats;3. Consolidate statutory and de factonature areas to form extensivecontinuous tracts of conservationland;4. Link important statutoryconservation areas;5. Establish conservancies on suitableprivately‐owned land.1. Ensure long‐term protection ofestuaries, lakes, and natural waterbodies.2. Ensure effective management andconservation of catchments.1. Regulate the exploitation andutilisation of all geological andmineral resources to limitecological and aesthetic damage;2. Regulate miming in accordancewith the SPCs;3. Limit loss of agricultural soil to a‘tolerable’ level (10tonnes/ha/annum)1. Conserve the ecological and social integrity of natural areas and provide a broad spectrum of compatible outdoorrecreational opportunities;2. Improve efficiency of conservation authorities and state departments;3. Rationalise departmental functions;4. Centralise the management of all statutory conservation areas;5. Determine and regulate carrying capacity in accordance with ecological requirements;6. Restore degraded sites or conservation areas;7. Institute plans and programmes for managing statutory conservation areas;8. Ensure constructive public involvement in environmental conservation;9. Foster public acceptance of ownership and responsibility for specific conservation areas;10. Collect public funds for management of specific conservation areas;11. Ensure educated public interest and involvement in nature conservation and in the management of conservationareas.1. Protect all estuaries and river mouths from developmental impact;2. Improvement of the current knowledge base.1. Impose and monitor soil conservation programmes in all sectors;2. Conserve biodiversity and the life‐supporting natural processes and functions of ecosystems;3. Rehabilitate soil erosion sites;4. Institute programmes for managing indigenous and alien vegetation;5. Control all alien plant infestations;6. Apply appropriate land‐use guidelines in accordance with SPCs;7. Determine and monitor erosion sites;8. Apply appropriate management practises;9. Control construction of new dams.10. Regulate all mining in accordance with the applicable legislation;11. Ensure effective rehabilitation of mining sites;12. Control all forms of mining.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 56Anchor Environmental

Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implicationsWater1. Ensure appropriate management ofall catchment areas within themunicipal area.2. Manage mountain catchment areasin accordance with existingmanagement systems.3. Ensure conservation of all thewater resources of the region.1. Establish viable sustainable new irrigation schemes to facilitate sustainable agricultural development;2. Undertake thorough hydrogeological studies;3. Determine ecological effects of proposed and existing schemes;4. Institute effective public participation of all IAPs when considering major developments;5. Maintain ecological processes inherent to the catchment systems;6. Protect sensitive areas such as ‘sponge areas’;7. Include the private sector in catchment management;8. Consolidate legislation;9. Coordinate catchment management at all levels;10. Regulate unnatural disturbance regimes in accordance with ecological requirements;11. Control all alien plant infestations in river courses;12. Control all forms of pollution in catchment areas;13. Regulate modification of river beds and natural flow patterns;14. Regulate future development in accordance with the availability of water;15. Promote effective agricultural practises;16. Conserve water through ‘effective water management’;17. Institute measures to repair leaking storage dams or to utilise leaking from these dams;18. Ensure equitable payment of levies by all water users;19. Ensure equitable access of water to all rightful users;20. Allocate water in accordance with the available water resource;21. Implement strategies to overcome capacity problems experienced by Overberg Water;22. Ensure minimum stream flow requirements of the natural environment;23. Ensure sufficient and sustainable water provision to all rightful users;24. Ensure water quality of a high standard;25. Sustainable utilisation of alternative water resources such as ground water;26. Limit flood damage to infrastructure and developed land to ‘acceptable levels’:27. Regulate the construction of obstructions in rivers and streams;28. Conserve riparian and riverine vegetation;29. Prevent or mitigate the negative effects if essential bulk water releases from dams;30. Institute proactive measures to prevent/mitigate negative effects of natural floods.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 57Anchor Environmental

Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implicationsFlora 1. Conserve the diversity of plantsthat are indigenous to the regionat species, population andcommunity level.2. Conserve sensitive plant habitatsas indicated by CAPE, SKEP andSTEP.3. Establish an additional biospherereserve in the region.4. Establish a system of protectednature areas.5. Establish bioregionalconservancies.6. Promote the establishment ofSpecial Management Areas.Fauna1. Consolidate and extend the naturalhabitats of the indigenous animalcommunities of the region.2. Consolidate the natural habitats ofendangered animal species.1. Conserve the diversity of plants that are indigenous to the municipal area at species, population and community level;2. Identify and conserve all known sensitive habitats;3. Maintain or simulate natural disturbance regimes;4. Control all infestations and alien plants;5. Institute effective environmental education;6. Regulate flower shows;7. Maintain minimum viable populations of rare endemic plant species;8. Prevent local extinction of rare endemic species;9. Mitigate the negative effects of disasters;10. Protect rare and endemic plant species;11. Promote the sustainable utilisation of indigenous flora for financial benefit;12. Promote the value of indigenous flora;13. Regulate harvesting of natural plant products;14. Regulate grazing in accordance with agricultural stocking rates;15. Promote the sustainable utilisation of forests for the benefits of local economy and communities;16. Regulate afforestation;17. Rehabilitate afforested areas in catchment areas;18. Determine feasibility of alternative farming options.1. Conserve the natural habitats of the indigenous animals of the region;2. Conserve all sensitive animal habitats;3. Control all alien animal species;4. Locate sensitive or threatened habitats;5. Conserve the diversity of animals that are indigenous to the ODM at all levels;6. Re‐introduce species that historically occurred in the region;7. Activate and/or support natural population dynamics to recreate historical species diversity;8. Simulate or replicate natural disturbance regimes;9. Regulate artificial distribution of endemic species;10. Regulate the utilisation of renewable animal resources;11. Institute contingency measures to mitigate negative impact disasters;12. Maintain minimum viable populations of rare and endemic animal species;13. Maintain population dynamics of rare endemic species;Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 58Anchor Environmental

Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implications14. Conserve all indigenous animal species;15. Promote sustainable utilisation of indigenous and exotic fauna for financial benefit;16. Regulate utilisation of wild animal resources17. Involve communities in conservation and sustainable use of indigenous fauna;18. Utilise renewable resources;19. Promote and apply principles of sustainable resource utilisation;20. Promote sustainable game and abalone farming.Cultural Resources 1. Conserve representative samples of the historical buildings and structures in the study area;2. Conserve all archaeological resources on state and private land for present and future generations;3. Conserve all ‘intangible’ cultural resources, such as oral history, language, place names, social activities, and humanhabits;4. Conserve all underwater cultural resources throughout the coastal zone of the ODM.Rural development1. Provide all the infrastructure andservices that are essential forimproving the quality of life ofpeople living in rural areas of theregion.2. Institute effective roads upgradingand maintenance.Urban development 1. Provide the necessaryinfrastructure and services neededto improve the quality of life ofcommunities in urban areas of the1. Ensure application of place‐specific planning and design guidelines for rural development.2. Co‐ordinate institutional functions to prevent duplication and facilitate effective use of available financial and otherresources.3. Establish partnerships between government and private sector for funding upgrading of infrastructure and services.4. Develop and upgrade infrastructure and services to accommodate community needs.5. Safeguard the ecological, social and aesthetic qualities of the natural environment through appropriate environmentalplanning;6. Increase environmental awareness at all levels of society;7. Ensure appropriate environmental control in all rural development;8. Monitor all aspects and influences of development to identify and rectify negative impacts;9. Impose similar environmental and legislative requirements on all development;10. Limit negative impacts on the ecological, social and aesthetic environment to acceptable levels;11. Regulate the construction of power lines, roads and other infrastructure;12. Regulate golf estate developments in accordance with place‐specific planning;13. Regulate waste disposal to prevent pollution of the natural environment and natural resources.1. Develop the necessary infrastructure and facilities to accommodate the aspirations, needs and pressures of presentand future industries and dependent communities;2. Institute place‐specific planning as fundamental requirement of all urban development to safeguard the cultural, socialand aesthetic al qualities of the urban environment;Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 59Anchor Environmental

Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implicationsEconomic sectors• Tourism• Agriculture• Forestry• Fishing• ManufacturingCommunitydevelopmentregion.1. Advance the development oftourism infrastructure in keepingwith location‐specific architectural,environmental and aestheticrequirements;2. Ensure effective management ofagriculture throughout the ODM;3. Provide sustainable opportunitiesfor small and emerging farmers.4. Ensure maintenance if commercialforestry as a primary economicsector in the ODM;5. Ensure the proper planning anddevelopment of industrial areasand manufacturing facilitiesrequired for adequatemanufacturing of products3. Ensure effective management of municipal functions and facets to ensure equitable and affordable services andamenities, and a safe and aesthetically pleasing urban environment for the resident tax‐paying communities;4. Limit negative impacts of urban development to pre‐determined acceptable levels;5. Develop necessary infrastructure and facilities required to improve transportation in, and aesthetic qualities in urbanareas;6. Regulate waste disposal to prevent pollution of the natural environment and natural resources;7. Provide essential infrastructure required to improve electricity provision.1. Ensure the conservation and preservation of the area’s character and natural aesthetics by imparting information totourists;2. Ensure cost‐effective management of tourism at all levels;3. Promote community‐based and driven industry with inherent direct and indirect benefits for the communities;4. Promote the development of sustainable agricultural enterprises in the ODM;5. Combine professional management skills with human, mechanical and financial resources in order to ensuresustainable agriculture;6. Undertake appropriate detailed planning as a standard practise on farms;7. Diversify agricultural enterprises;8. Make the status of natural resources and the environment determinants for sustainable agriculture;9. Regulate and utilise the potential rezoning of agricultural land to promote comparative economic advantages of theODM;10. Ensure development and maintenance of harbours and facilities required for viable fishing;11. Promote sustainable utilisation of indigenous and exotic fish species for financial benefit;12. Ensure the protection of marine resources;13. Explore the feasibility of alternative fishing and aquaculture enterprises as community empowerment initiatives;14. Ensure the sustainable use and protection of natural resources;15. Ensure constructive public involvement in manufacturing activities;16. Explore alternative and emerging technologies.1. Ensure sustainable development of all the people of the ODM;2. Create a safe, healthy and aesthetically acceptable social environment for all communities;3. Create a sustainable growing economic environment for all the communities of the ODM;4. Create equal opportunities for professional education and training in order to ensure sustainable human resources andaccess to available job opportunitiesUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 60Anchor Environmental

Component Strategy with spatial implications Strategy without spatial implicationsEffective DistrictManagement5. Regulate land reform in accordance with the Land Reform programme;6. Establish constructive involvement of communities in local government;7. Promote constructive involvement of communities in the rehabilitation of degraded areas and the involvement oflandowners and the general public in sustainable land management and socio‐economic development planning;8. Promote sustainable community empowerment through the efficient use of public resources.1. Ensure effective cooperation and coordination between the various levels of government;2. Manage the district in accordance with a place‐specific and community‐based management approach that issupportive and supplementary to the existing municipal governance process;3. Establish mechanisms and procedures to enable the ODM to fulfil its constitutional obligations pertaining to socioeconomicdevelopment throughout its area of jurisdiction.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 61Anchor Environmental

Table 14. Overstrand Local Municipality Bioregional Plan, taken from the Spatial Development Framework (SDF) 2009.Component Description PoliciesConservation IRepresents areas of highest conservationstatus. This includes unique areas, areaswhich are irreplaceable in terms ofachieving national conservationobjectives, and/or areas which providevaluable ecosystem services in terms of,particularly, maintaining water productionand/or quality, protecting soils, regulatingfloods, buffering coastal areas, etc. Land isin Public ownership.Conservation II Represents areas of the highestconservation status. Includes uniqueareas, relatively large areas, clusteredand/or discrete areas which areirreplaceable in terms of achievingnational biodiversity conservationobjectives, and/or areas which providevaluable ecosystem services in terms of,particularly, maintaining water productionand/or quality, protecting soils, regulatingfloods, buffering coastal areas, etc. Land isin Public ownership.1. Protect transformation of areas of Critically Endangered or Endangered natural vegetation.2. Protect the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning of the Conservation Area.3. Protect the distinctive landscape character of the area.4. Promote sound management of natural resources.5. Permit use of natural resources if and only if such use would be sustainable and would not jeopardise biodiversityconservation.6. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecological and evolutionary processes.7. Eradicate alien invasive species.8. Promote the restoration of degraded and disturbed areas.9. Promote awareness of the significance and uniqueness of natural vegetation and ecosystems of the area amongstthe local landowners and communities, visitors and tourists.1. Prohibit transformation of areas of Critically Endangered or Endangered natural vegetation.2. Protect the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning through sound management and eradication of alien invasiveplants.3. Protect the distinctive landscape character of the area.4. Promote sound management of natural resources.5. Permit use of natural resources if and only if such use would be sustainable and would not jeopardise biodiversityconservation.6. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecological and evolutionary processes.7. Eradicate alien invasive species.8. Prohibit subdivision of agricultural land.9. Promote rehabilitation of degraded or disturbed areas.10. Promote awareness of the significance and uniqueness of natural vegetation and ecosystems of the area amongstthe local landowners and communities, visitors and tourists.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 62Anchor Environmental

Component Description PoliciesConservation‐Agriculture BufferCore AgricultureRural, modified landscapes of relativelyhigh value in terms of achieving nationalobjectives for biodiversity conservation,particularly in terms of maintainingecological and evolutionary processesoutside of the conservation areas, andsafeguarding valuable ecosystem servicessuch as production of harvestable goods,water production and/or protection ofwater quality, protecting soils, regulatingfloods, buffering coastal areas etc. Inaddition it contributes to the protection ofcultural assets (specifically landscapes ofvisual or heritage value).Rural landscapes of largely transformedareas which may contain remnants ofCritically Endangered or Endangerednatural vegetation, which may have valuein terms of food production, maintainingecosystem services, and protectingheritage assets. Land is in privateownership.1. Prohibit transformation of those areas of buffer which are situated in key ecological/evolutionary process areas, insensitive and/or dynamic environments, and/or which provide connectivity between protected or threatenedecosystems within the municipal boundary to similar systems beyond the municipal boundary.2. Allow only limited transformation of the conservation agriculture buffer area for agricultural or other developmentpurposes, ensuring that transformation would not jeopardise either the ecosystem status of habitat in this area orimportant ecological process areas.3. Allow low impact activities only.4. Protect the biodiversity, connectivity and ecosystem functioning in the conservation areas through sound andsupportive management practises in the buffer area, as prescribed by CapeNature.5. Protect the distinctive landscape character of the area.6. Promote sustainable use and sound management of natural resources and of the agricultural land in the buffer area.7. Prospecting or mining to be granted in certain conditions.8. Promote efficient use of water resources and safeguard those ecosystems that regulate water yield and quality(wetlands, riparian systems, floodplains).9. Support the diversification of the agricultural sector in terms of agri‐tourism and value adding in the sub‐region.Promote research into the sustainable use and harvesting of indigenous natural resources.10. Prohibit the subdivision of land currently used for agriculture, unless such sub division is for the purposes ofincorporating additional land into the conservation areas.11. Promote restoration (preferably), or rehabilitation of degraded or disturbed areas.12. Promote eradication of alien species.13. Promote awareness of the significance and uniqueness of natural vegetation and ecosystems of the area amongstthe local landowners and communities, visitors and tourists.1. Prohibit transformation of areas of Critically Endangered or Endangered natural vegetation.2. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecological and evolutionary processes3. Protect the distinctive landscape character of the area.4. Promote sustainable use and sound management of agricultural land and natural resources, employing theprinciples of ‘Landcare’ as endorsed by the Department of Agriculture.5. Promote eradication of invasive alien vegetation.6. Protect sensitive areas such as wetlands, drainage lines, and riparian areas.7. Promote efficient use of water resources.8. Promote restoration or rehabilitation of degraded or disturbed areas.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 63Anchor Environmental

Component Description Policies9. Support diversification of the agricultural sector in terms of tourism and value adding in the sub‐region.10. Retain areas of high primary production potential for agricultural use.11. Discourage the subdivision of land currently used for agriculture, except where it is consistent with therequirements as stipulated by Act 70 of 1970, and the guidelines for the sustainable sizes of farms required forvarious types of produce, as determined by the Department of Agriculture.12. Permit mining and mineral extraction where it would not results in unacceptable negative impacts on localecosystems or ecosystem services, and/or local communities.13. Promote awareness of the significance and uniqueness of natural vegetation and ecosystems of the area amongstthe local landowners and communities, visitors and tourists.AgriculturalSettlementsModified rural landscapes which containsmall, low‐density, nodal settlements.Intensive small scale agriculturedominates the land use. There areas aretransitional between urban and partlytransformed natural landscapes.1. Promote sustainable use and sound management of agricultural land.2. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecological and evolutionary processes3. Zoning permission for commercial uses outside the designated Agricultural Settlements should not be granted.4. Applications for future development should comply with the restrictions on the development below the 1:100 yearflood line.5. Development within the Agricultural Settlements should avoid or minimise negative impacts on ecosystems andshould promote efficient use of resources.6. Adverse impacts of the Agricultural Settlements on adjacent areas should be minimised.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 64Anchor Environmental

Component Description PoliciesCore UrbanIntensive settlement areas of relativelyhigh density within the study area, able toobtain and support a range of services andopportunities. These areas have definededge and contain range of land useactivities.1. Zoning permission for commercial uses outside the designated commercial areas should not be granted.2. Safeguard areas identified as important for key ecologically and evolutionary processes.3. Applications for future development should comply with the restrictions on the development below the 1:100 yearflood line.4. Development within the Core Urban Area should avoid or minimise negative impacts on ecosystems and shouldpromote efficient use of resources.5. Adverse impacts of the Core Urban Area on adjacent areas should be minimised.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment 65Anchor Environmental

Issues of surrounding land use and developmentThere is currently relatively little development and use of the margins of the Uilkraals Estuary.Nevertheless, there is increasing demand for development along the Overstrand coast, andapplications for development around the estuary margins are likely to increase in the future.Increased development will lead to the degradation and loss of estuary habitats, and will bringabout the increased use of the estuary for recreational purposes. This, in turn, could createproblems of disturbance and pollution if inadequately managed. Recreational use of theestuary is discussed further below.Not only does future development pose a threat to the estuary habitats and fauna, it alsothreatens the cultural heritage of the area in terms of changing the nature of the historicallyinterestingareas along the estuary and coastline.5.6 Non‐consumptive recreational useLegislationThere is no legislation at present that specifically controls non‐consumptive recreational use ofthe estuary. There are indirect means by which this can and has been achieved.Regulations were promulgated in 2001 that provided for a general prohibition on therecreational use of vehicles in the coastal zone and regulates the licensing and control ofrecreational boat launching sites and provided procedures for approving the use of vehicles inthe coastal zone [1] under specific circumstances (Regulations No. 13399, Government GazetteNo. 22960, promulgated under Section 44 of the NEMA). These regulations effectively bannedany person from using a vehicle in the coastal zone unless the use is a listed permissible use, isauthorised in terms of a permit or is authorised in terms of an exemption.Zonation of recreational uses of estuaries has only been applied within protected areas(national parks or nature reserves).Management issuesThe Uilkraals Estuary is used recreationally for fishing, birdwatching and photography, and iscurrently appreciated for its unspoilt, wilderness feel and the quaint settlements on itsmargins. Although these uses have not been quantified in any way, they pose little threat tothe estuary at present.[1] The “coastal zone” is described by the ORV Regulations as: “the area adjacent to the seacharacterised by coastal landforms, and includes beaches, dunes, estuaries, coastal lakes,coastal wetlands, land submerged by the waters of the sea, or of any estuary, coastal lake orcoastal wetland, boat-launching sites, proclaimed harbours and recreational use areas”Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment66Anchor Environmental

Other recreational activities are of more concern. There is reportedly also some use of theestuary margins by quad bikers that may be causing environmental damage. Aircraft such asgyrocopters and microlights have been observed flying low over the estuary, and causingdisturbance of birds.With increasing development pressure in the area, disturbance of wildlife is likely to increase.Appropriate management measures such as protected areas and zonation could be developedto guard against impacts associated with increased use.5.7 Potential for protected area statusLegislative contextThe White Paper on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of South Africa’s Biological Diversity(1998) recognises the importance of estuaries and commits the government to a number ofstrategies to protect wetlands in general, such as facilitating the development of appropriatelegislation to secure their conservation, promoting the establishment of a National System ofProtected Wetlands, preventing inappropriate activities and development around wetlands,finding ways to recognise wetlands in planning and decision‐making, determining the impact offishers and developing guidelines for managing them.Marine reserves were previously proclaimed under the Sea Fishery Act 12 of 1988 or under theNational Parks Act 57 of 1976. Now all marine reserves have been re‐proclaimed under theMarine Living Resources Act. However, this only affords protection up to the high tide mark.Estuaries can also be protected within regular protected areas (see below), though the latterdo not have jurisdiction over the use of estuarine living resources. Estuaries may also beprotected within World Heritage Sites under the World Heritage Convention Act 49 of 1999.The General Policy in terms of the Environment Conservation Act – Terrestrial and Marineprotected areas (1994) categorises protected areas into 7 categories (based on IUCN and oneadditional category). It prescribes the management objectives and criteria for selecting andmanaging each category. The policy suggests that estuaries, fish, spawning areas andseascapes should generally be treated as Category IV – Habitat and wildlife management areas,regardless of who owns those resources. In reality, estuaries could fall into any category.Those such as Kosi could be classified as Category V – Protected land/seascapes, while otherscould be classified as Category VI ‐ Sustainable Use Areas. Each estuary should be classified onthe basis of the management objectives of the estuary (Smith & Cullinan 2000).The Biodiversity Act (2004) provides for the conservation of biological diversity. It requiresidentification of important landscapes, ecosystems, ecological process and species forbiodiversity conservation, and promotes monitoring of these. It also provides for theproclamation of protected areas, recognising South Africa’s obligations to internationalconventions. The Protected Areas Act (2003) provides for the declaration and management ofprotected areas, and can also provide for co‐operative governance, the sustainable utilisationof protected areas that preserves their ecological character, and the participation of localcommunities in the management of protected areas, where appropriate. A consultation andpublic participation process is outlined in the Act. It also contains the requirement that marineand terrestrial protected areas with common boundaries must be managed as an integratedUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment67Anchor Environmental

protected area by a single management authority. It is also important to note that under thisAct, commercial prospecting or mining is prohibited in any nature reserve.Potential for protection of the Uilkraals EstuaryThe Uilkraals Estuary is rated as a very important estuary in South Africa from a conservationperspective, having a Biodiversity Importance Score of 75.3 for its size, habitats, and type raritywithin its biogeographical zone, and biodiversity (Turpie et al. 2004). It ranks highly for birdsand macrophyte diversity.Based on these criteria, there is justification for establishment of a protected area whichencompasses at least part of the estuary. Although it would be highly desirable, based on theabove arguments, to provide no‐take protection to the estuary in its entirety, it wouldprobably not be feasible to achieve complete protection of the system.Turpie & Clark (2007) conducted a conservation planning exercise in conjunction with theestuarine research and management community of the CAPE region under the C.A.P.E.Estuaries Management Programme. The study aimed to elicit the minimum set of estuariesthat would be required to meet conservation targets (i.e. set percentages of habitats andpopulations of estuary‐dependent species). Without worrying about costs, this can be donewith the partial protection (50% of estuary as a sanctuary area) of some 50 of the 159temperate estuaries.The Uilkraals Estuary was not included in this primary set of 50. When costs and benefits ofconservation measures were incorporated into the analysis, the configuration changes, and itmakes sense to afford partial protection to about 80% of estuaries. This creates a goodargument for a general zonation system to be applied to most South African estuaries in which50% of the estuary is declared a no‐take zone. The Uilkraals Estuary was included in this latterselection ‐ when estuary value and management costs were taken into consideration.Recommendations and procedure for establishing a protected areaWith the lack of development around the estuary, the establishment of a protected area ishighly feasible and would be strongly recommended. The protection should include asubstantial no‐take zone or zones and the protected area should extend to supratidalsaltmarsh areas and to some of the fringing terrestrial area.Under current regulations, this would require establishment of a nature reserve that contains amarine protected area, both of which would be managed by a single authority. A naturereserve is needed in order to protect areas above the high tide mark (important fringinghabitats) that the marine protected areas act does not cover, and in order to protect theestuarine habitat areas a marine protected area needs to be established so that zoning of theestuary can be developed. Specific recommendations, to be further developed in consultationwith stakeholders, are as follows:1. Establish a nature reserve encompassing as much of the land around the estuary aspossible including supratidal estuarine habitats;Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment68Anchor Environmental

2. Establish a Marine Protected Area on the estuary incorporating the most significantbird habitats and fish nursery areas as well as a representative section of all habitattypes present in the estuary (mudflat, salt marsh, submerged and emergentvegetation)3. Develop a zonation plan in which 50% of the MPA (not necessarily contiguous) isdeclared a no‐take zone;4. The whole protected area to be managed by the provincial (CapeNature), district(Overberg District Municipality) or local (Overstrand Municipality) authority.The details of the above will have to be finalised in consultation with stakeholders. AnchorEnvironmental Consultants will draw up a detailed management plan including plans for theproposed protected area based on outcomes of the consultative process.5.8 Potential and need for restoration on the Uilkraals EstuaryThere is no specific legislation pertaining to the restoration of ecosystems. The estuary hasbeen highly modified and is classified as being largely modified, and has been identified as onein which there is a need for rehabilitation. In the case of the Uilkraals Estuary restoration of theestuary to a better state of health would be straightforward, and would mainly entail (in orderof priority):1. Restoration of the quantity of freshwater inflows;2. Restoration of water quality;3. Removing significant obstructions to flow; and4. Removal of alien vegetation.In general, the degree to which these factors should be managed to restore the health of thesystem depends largely on the vision that is developed for the estuary, and on its futureprotection status. Protection status will provide a strong case for the provision of restoringflow quality and quantity.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment69Anchor Environmental

6. REFERENCESAdams, J.B., Bate, G., & O'Callaghan, M. 1999. Primary producers. In: B.R. Allanson & D. Baird(Eds.) Estuaries of South Africa, pp 91‐117. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Adams, J.B., Bornman, T. & C. Bezuidenhout. 2006. Olifants/Doring Ecological WaterRequirements Study Appendix D: Macrophyte specialist study.Barbier, E.B. 1994. Valuing environmental functions: tropical wetlands. Land Economics 70:155‐173.Barnes, K.N. 1996. Specialist bird report on the proposed resort development on Farm SandDown (estate number 200, Bredasdorp), and the impacts on the Uilkraals River Estuary.Avian Demography Unit Research Report No. 15.Breen, C.M. & McKenzie, M. 2001. Managing estuaries in South Africa: an introduction.Institute of Natural Resources, Pietermaritzburg. 66pp.Begg, G.W., 1984. The estuaries of Natal. Part 2. Natal Town and Regional Planning Report 55:1‐631.Brigham, S.D., Megonigal, J.P., Keller, J.K., Bliss, N.P. & Trettin, C. 2006. The carbon balance ofNorth American wetlands. Wetlands 26:889 – 916.Childers, D.L. & J.W. Day (Jr.) 1990. Marsh‐water column interactions in two Louisianaestuaries. II: Nutrient dynamics. Estuaries 13: 404‐417.Clark, J.R. 1977. Coastal Ecosystem Management. John Wiley and Sons, N.Y.Coetzee, J.C., J.B. Adams & G.C. Bate. 1997. A botanical importance rating of selected Capeestuaries. Water SA 23: 81‐93.Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S.,O'Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P. and van den Belt, M. 1997. The value ofthe world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253‐259.Cooper, J.A.G., 2001. Geomorphological variability among microtidal estuaries from the wavedominatedSouth African coast. Geomorphology 40: 99‐122.Cooper, A., Wright, I., Mason, T., 1999. Geomorphology and sedimentology. In: Allanson, B.R.,Baird, D. (Eds.), Estuaries of South Africa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 5‐25Day, JH. 1981. Estuarine Ecology with Particular Reference to Southern Africa. AA Balkema,Cape Town.Department Of Water Affairs & Forestry (DWAF). 2004b. Thukela Bank: impacts of flow onprawn and fish catch. Thukela water flow decision support phase. IWR.Du Preez, D. & Sasman, M. 1999. Kraaibosch Dam Environmental Operational ManagementPlan. Ecosense report. 50pp.Field, J. G. & Griffiths, C.L. 1991. Littoral and sublittoral ecosystems of South Africa. In: A. C.Mathieson & P. H. Nienhuis. Intertidal and Littoral Ecosystems 24: 323‐346.Amsterdam, Elsevier.Forbes, A.T. 1974. Osmotic and ionic regulation in Callianassa kraussi Stebbing (CRUSTACEA :DECAPODA : THALASSINIDEA). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology 16: 301‐311.Fredette, T.J., R.J. Diaz, J. Von Montfrans & R.J. Orth. 1990. Secondary production within aseagrass bed (Zostera marina and Ruppia maritima) in lower Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries13: 431‐440.Gaigher, C.M. 1984. The effects of bridge building on the bloodworm population in the UilkraalRiver estuary. The Naturalist 28: 16‐18.Gale, B.A. 1998. Scoping report on the possible environmental effects of a proposed dam onthe Uilkraals River. Aquatic and catchment management consultantsUilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment70Anchor Environmental

Gillanders, B.M. & Kingsford, M.J. 2002. Impact of changes in flow of freshwater on estuarineand open coastal habitats and associated organisms. Oceanography and MarineBiology: An Annual Review 40:233–309.Harrison, T.D. 2002. Preliminary assessment of the biogeography of fishes in South Africanestuaries. Marine Freshwater Research 53: 479‐490Harrison, T.D. 2004. Physico‐chemical characteristics of South African estuaries in relation tothe zoogeography of the region. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 61: 73‐87Harrison, T.D. 2005. Ichthyofauna of South African estuaries in relation to the zoogeography ofthe region. Smithiana 6:2–27Harrison, T.D., Cooper, J.A.G., Ramm, A.E.L. & Singh, R.A. 1995a. Health of South Africanestuaries, Palmiet ‐ Sout. Technical Report, Catchment and Coastal EnvironmentalProgramme, CSIR, Durban.Harrison, T.D., Cooper, J.A.G., Ramm, A.E.L. & Singh, R.A. 1995b. Health of South Africanestuaries, Palmiet ‐ Sout. Executive Report, Catchment and Coastal EnvironmentalProgramme, CSIR, Durban.Heydorn, A.E.F. & Bickerton, I.B. 1982. Estuaries of the Cape Part II: Synopsis of availableinformation on individual systems (A E F Heydorn and J R Grindley eds.). Report No. 9:Uilkraals. CSIR Research Report 425. Stellenbosch.Heydorn, A.E.F. & Tinley, K.L. 1980. Estuaries of the Cape part I: Synopsis of the Cape Coast.Natural features, Dynamics and Utilisation. CSIR Research Report 380. 97 pp.Hockey, P.A.R., Dean, W.R.J. & Ryan, P.G. (eds) 2005. Roberts – Birds of Southern Africa, VIIthed. The Trustees of the John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape Town.Kennish, M.J. 2002. Environmental threats and environmental future of estuaries.Environmental Conservation 29: 78‐107.Lamberth, S.J. 2003. Orange River Ecological Water Requirements Study. Specialist report onthe fish of the Orange River Estuary.Lamberth, S.J. & Turpie, J.K. 2003. The role of estuaries in South African fisheries: economicimportance and economic implications. African Journal of Marine Science 25: 131‐157.Mann, B.Q., James, N.C. and L. E. Beckley 2002 – An assessment of the recreational linefisheryin Lake St Lucia, KwaZulu‐Natal. South African Journal of Marine Science. 24: 263‐279.McGrath, M.D., Horner, C.C.M., Brouwer, S.L., Lamberth, S.J., Sauer, W.H.H. & Erasmus, C.1997. An economic valuation of the South African linefishery. South African Journal ofMarine Science 18:203‐211.Midgley, D.C. and Pitman, W.V. 1969. Surface water resources of South Africa. Johannesburg.University of Witwatersrand, report 2/69. 127 pp.Millenium Ecosystem Assessment 2003. Ecosystems and Human‐wellbeing: A Framework forAssessment. Island Press, Washington, pp 245.Mucina, L., Phuthaditjhaba, John A. M. Janssen, Wageningen and Mike O’Callaghan. 2003.Syntaxonomy and zonation patterns in coastal salt marshes of the Uilkraals Estuary,Western Cape (South Africa). Phytocoenologia 33: 309‐334Noble, R.G. and Hemens, J. 1978. Inland water ecosystems in South Africa – a review ofresearch needs. South African National Science Programmes Report 34. 150 pp.Pradervand, P., Beckley, L. E., Mann, B. Q. and P. V. Radebe 2003 – Assessment of thelinefishery in two estuarine systems in KwaZulu‐Natal, South Africa. African Journal ofMarine Science. 25: 111‐130.Ryan, P.G., Underhill, L.G., Cooper, J. & Waltner, M. 1988. Waders (Charadrii) and otherwaterbirds on the coast, adjacent wetlands and offshore islands on the southwesternCape Province, South Africa. Bontebok 6: 1‐19.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment71Anchor Environmental

Smith, N & Cullinan, C. 2000. Review of South African Environmental Laws regulating Estuaries.In Report on the National Estuaries Workshop. 3 – 5 May 2000, Port Elizabeth, SouthAfrica. Boyd, AJ, Barwell, L & Taljaard, S (eds.). Report No. 2, Marine and CoastalManagement implantation Workshops. Cape Town: Marine and Coastal Management.Statistics South Africa. 2007. Community Survey Results.Summers, R.W., Pringle, J.S. & Cooper, J. 1976. The status of Coastal Waders in the southwesternCape, South Africa. Report on the summer 1975/76 ornithological survey ofcoastal wetlands and shorelines of the south‐western Cape by the Western Cape WaderStudy Group. Percy FitzPatrick Institute, University of Cape Town. 162pp.Taljaard, S. 2007. C.A.P.E. Estuaries Guideline 1: Interpretation of Legislation pertaining toManagement of Environmental Threats within Estuaries. Report prepared by the CSIRfor C.A.P.E. estuaries programme, DEAT/Cape Nature.Turpie, J.K. 1995. Prioritising South African estuaries for conservation: a practical example usingwaterbirds. Biological Conservation 74: 175‐185.Turpie, J.K. 2004. South African Spatial Biodiversity Assessment, Technical Report Vol 3: Estuarycomponent. DEAT: SANBI.Turpie, J.K. 2007. C.A.P.E. Estuaries Guideline 9: Maximising the economic value of estuaries.C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme.Turpie, J.K. & Clark, B.M. 2007. The health status, conservation importance, and economicvalue of temperate South African estuaries and development of a regional conservationplan. Report to CapeNature.Turpie, J.K., Adams, J.B., Joubert, A., Harrison, T.D., Colloty, B.M., Maree, R.C., Whitfield, A.K.,Wooldridge, T.H., Lamberth, S.J., Taljaard, S. & van Niekerk, L. 2002. Assessment of theconservation priority status of South African estuaries for use in management andwater allocation. Water SA 28, 191‐206.Urban‐Econ Development Economists. 2008. Overberg District Local Economic DevelopmentStrategy. Prepared for the Department of Trade and Industry.Van der Merwe, H. 2008. Development of a spatial planning database and analysis ofagriculture and tourism potential in the Strandveld region of the Overstrand localmunicipality. Part 3 Agriculture and rural tourism potential.van Niekerk, L. & Taljaard, S. 2002. Recommendations on a framework for effective cooperativegovernance of South African estuaries. CSIR Environmentek Draft report 8 July 2002,Eastern Cape Estuaries management Programme, Co‐operative governance sub‐project.van Niekerk, L. & S. Taljaard 2007. Proposed Framework for Estuarine Management Plans.C.A.P.E. Estuaries Management Plan. CSIR, Stellenbosch. 44 pp.Wallace, J.H., Kok, H.M., Beckley, L.E., Bennett, B. & Blaber, S.J.M. 1984. South African Estuariesand their importance to fishes. South African Journal of Science 80: 203‐207.Whitfield, A.K. 1984. The effects of prolonged aquatic macrophyte senescence on the biologyof the dominant fish species in a southern African coastal lake. Estuarine Coastal andShelf Science 18: 315‐329.Whitfield, AK. 1989. The benthic invertebrate community of a southern Cape estuary:Structure and possible food sources. Transactions of the Royal Society of SouthernAfrica 47: 159‐179.Whitfield, A.K. 1994. An estuary‐association classification for the fishes of southern Africa.South African Journal of Science 90: 411‐417.Whitfield, A.K. 1998. Biology and ecology of fishes in southern African estuaries. JLB SmithInstitute of Ichthyology, Grahamstown.Whitfield, A.K. 2000. Available scientific information on individual estuarine systems. WRCReport no. 577/3/00.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment72Anchor Environmental

APPENDIX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCEThe development of the Uilkraals Estuary Management Plan will be carried out in two phases,as follows:Phase 1: Situation Assessment1. Review of legislation pertaining to the management of environmental threats withinestuariesThe focus of this task will be explaining the specific relevance of legislative instrumentshighlighted in the generic legislative review compiled for the GEMP, on how interaction ofthe respective Governmental Departments will affect management of the Olifants estuary,and also the relevance of any local by‐laws to management of the estuary. A summary of allrelevant information will be included in the Phase 1 Situation Assessment Report.2. Description and GIS map of the estuaryA clear GIS map of the estuary will be prepared indicating important biophysical features(open channel area, macrophyte beds, invertebrate beds, etc.), protected/conservationareas, areas earmarked for rehabilitation, land‐use and planning provisions of surroundinglands, infrastructure (e.g. roads, bridges), cultural & heritage sites, recreational activities(e.g. swimming, boating), living resource exploitation (e.g. bait collection, fishing areas, etc),mariculture activities, wastewater discharges (sewage, industrial), stormwater drains, andsolid waste dump sites.3. Description of goods and services provided by the estuaryInformation on goods and services provided by the Uilkraals Estuary will be extracted fromany relevant literature and studies completed on the system.4. Identification of issues relating to the exploitation of living resourcesA brief description of current levels and trends in exploitation of living resources in theUilkraals Estuary will be provided, and on the likely impacts of this harvested on goods andservices provided by the system.5. Synopsis of water quantity and quality requirementsDetails on water quantity and quality requirements of the system will be extracted fromstudies and any information that can be obtained from DWAF on the system.6. Determination of priority restoration actions.All issues affecting or impacting on the health of the estuary will be identified, prioritized andspecific rehabilitation measures proposed.7. Determination of protected area potentialProtected area potential of the Olifants estuary will be assessed using information providedin the recently completed C.A.P.E. Estuaries Programme: Classification, prioritization,protection and rehabilitation document as well as other relevant documents. Specificrecommendations will be provided as to the type of protection that should be applied andassociated application procedure that must be completed in order to achieve this status.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment73Anchor Environmental

8. Plan for awareness‐raising and public participation/stakeholder involvementA generic awareness programme for the Olifants estuary will be prepared that will includedetails on processes for involving relevant stakeholders and user groups in estuarymanagement and decision‐making processes. Much of the necessary material will be drawnfrom relevant reports produced by the East Cape Estuaries Management Programme.9. Work plan and budget for Phase 2A detailed workplan and budget for Phase 2 of the project will be prepared and submitted tothe C.A.P.E. Estuaries Task Team for approval along with the Task 1 Situation AssessmentReport before work on Objective 2 is initiated.Phase 2: Stakeholder consultation and compilation of Estuary Management Plan1. Vision & Strategic ObjectivesThe primary activity for this task will be to convene a stakeholder workshop aimed atdeveloping a local vision and associated objectives for the Olifants estuary. This vision willunderpin the entire EMP and will need to be consistent with the vision and StrategicObjectives for the Estuaries of the CFR and with the findings of the C.A.P.E. EstuariesConservation Planning report (Turpie & Clark 2007).2. Management StrategiesClear management strategies will be formulated that will ensure that the Vision and StrategicObjectives developed for the Olifants estuary are achieved that makes optimal use ofavailable financial and human resources.3. Estuarine Zonation Plan & Operational ObjectivesManagement strategies developed as part of task 2 above will be spatially explicit and linkedwith the GIS map prepared during Phase 1 of the project. This will become the EstuaryZonation plan (EZP). Appropriate annotations will be added to the map to ensure thatmanagement objectives and visions for all sections of the estuary are clearly laid out andeasy to follow.4. Management Action PlansDetailed Management Action Plans (MAPs) will be developed to ensure that all definedoperational objective can be achieved in an efficient and effective manner. MPAs to bedeveloped for this purpose will include those dealing with conservation, social issues, landuseand infrastructure development, water quality and quantity, and exploitation of livingresources. Each MAP will include a prioritized list of management actions, related legal,policy and/or best practice requirements, monitoring plans, work and resource plans.5. ImplementationA detailed five year implementation plan for the EMP will be developed in which agenciesand individuals responsible for implementation of all aspects of the EMP are identified.Qualifications required by key individuals responsible for implementation of the plan will beclearly articulated as will opportunities for capacity building and empowerment ofHistorically Disadvantaged Individuals (HDIs). The implementation plan will take cognisanceof available human and financial resources.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment74Anchor Environmental

6. Monitoring and evaluationAn appropriate monitoring programme will be designed for the Uilkraals Estuary with theprimary objective being the ongoing evaluation of the health of the system and success ofthe EMP. The following key components of the monitoring programme will be definedwithin the monitoring plan: monitoring objectives, parameters (indicators) to be monitored,staff and budgetary requirements, spatial and temporal resolution of monitoring activities,sampling and analytical techniques to be employed, and protocols for evaluation andreporting, and for incorporation of results into the MAPs.7. ResearchFocal areas for further research effort that will contribute to improved management of theestuary.Uilkraals Estuary Situation Assessment75Anchor Environmental