THE ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF RIEMVASMAAK’S NATURAL RESOURCES M. Timm Hoffman Dan Sonnenberg Jeanne L. Hurford Barry W. Jagger NATIONAL BOTANICAL INSTITUTE THE ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF RIEMVASMAAK’S NATURAL RESOURCES Report on a baseline ecological survey conducted in Riemvasmaak, Northern Cape, South Africa between 16-29 January, 1995, and an outline of a proposed monitoring programme for the region. M. Timm Hoffman, Dan Sonnenberg, Jeanne L. Hurford & Barry W. Jagger July 1995 National Botanical Institute, Private Bag X7, Claremont, 7735, South Africa Tel: +27-21-762-1166; FAX: +27-21-797-6903; e-mail: hoffman@nbict.nbi.ac.za PLATE 1.1. National Botanical Institute members of the survey team and authors of this report: Clockwise from upper left: Barry Jagger, Dan Sonnenberg, Jeanne Hurford and Timm Hoffman PREFACE During the last five years South Africans have witnessed dramatic political and social changes and genuine attempts are currently being made to redress some of the injustices which occurred during decades of minority government rule. One of the worst of these injustices was the removal and re-location of entire communities as part of a large-scale, social engineering programme which accompanied the South African government’s apartheid legislation from 1948 onwards. This programme of ethnic cleansing or “black spot removal” profoundly affected the lives of millions of South Africans. One such group was a small community of about 1 500 people living an agrarian existence in one of the most arid parts of the country in an area known as Riemvasmaak. Boasting a diverse ethnic heritage the Riemvasmakers colonized this approximately 75 000 ha region immediately north of the Orange River towards the end of the last century and during the first few decades of this century. It was a peaceful and religious community which managed its natural resources effectively, provided schools for the education of its children and which also enjoyed good relationships with its neighbours. However, as part of a well-orchestrated “black spot removal” programme, the South African government forcibly relocated some of the Riemvasmakers during 1973 and 1974. Those with an historical Xhosa ethnicity were moved to the Ciskei in South Africa in 1973 while those with Nama and Damara heritage were moved, against their wishes, to northern Namibia in 1974. A number of Riemvasmakers classified as “Coloured” were dispersed in and around the greater Orange River environment at the same time. Tremendous subsequent hardships ensued for the majority of Riemvasmakers in their adopted lands including livestock losses and debilitating poverty.1 Following their exodus in 1974, Riemvasmaak was used by the South African Defence Force (now known as the South African National Defence Force but referred to as the SADF throughout this document) and other military establishments as a troop-training and arms-testing facility. However, in anticipation of the changes sweeping the country in the early 1990’s a group of Riemvasmakers began to initiate procedures for re-claiming their land. After an intensive struggle in which a number of individuals comprising the Riemvasmaak Coordinating Committee, the Surplus People Project (SPP) and the Legal Resources Centre (LRC) played pivotal roles it was agreed by the Commission on Land Allocation in December 1993 that the people who were forcibly removed from Riemvasmaak should return. But what was there to return to and how would the Riemvasmaak community rebuild their livelihoods? The national as well as the regional economic, social and agricultural environment has changed considerably since 1974. Which agricultural enterprises should be developed or supported, where would the necessary capital be 1 Although elaborated upon in the report which follows, a more detailed account of the history of Riemvasmaak, the brutal nature of the forced removal, their period in the “wilderness” and the community’s claim to the land is contained in Smith & Bozalek (1993) and in the Riemvasmaak Coordinating Committee’s “Submission to the Commission on Land Allocation on behalf of the community of Riemvasmaak” (SPP & LRC, 1993). Other aspects, especially the landuse history of the region are dealt with in more detail elsewhere in this report. i found and who would assist the Riemvasmakers in their attempts to rebuild their lives? FARM Africa has an extensive and growing experience in agricultural development programmes in Africa and it is to this organization that the Riemvasmaak Trust Committee has turned to provide assistance with the planning of the agricultural development of the region. Planning, however, requires an extensive knowledge of the region’s natural resources and its potential. Responsible and sustainable development programmes also require the measurement of a variety of indicators with which to assess the effectiveness or otherwise of the programme. In order to fulfill its task of developing the agricultural base of Riemvasmaak, FARM Africa, in turn, has requested assistance from the National Botanical Institute (NBI), an organization with expertise in the ecology and management of southern Africa’s arid and semi-arid zones. This report of the National Botanical Institute has six main objectives: a. To synthesize available ecological information about the area including all available plant and animal checklists; b. To conduct a baseline survey of the region and to describe the landscape as it existed in January 1995; c. To assess landscape “condition” in the context of the environmental and landuse history of the region; d. To assess the landscape’s potential and livestock carrying capacity; e. To describe landuse practices in “Old Riemvasmaak”; f. To outline a monitoring programme for Riemvasmaak. Firstly, numerous unpublished reports and plant and animal checklists have emerged concerning the Riemvasmaak environment and our first task, therefore, was to synthesize available information pertaining to the physical and biotic environment of the region. Where applicable we have tried to redraw the key figures and redraft important technical data from other sources so as to make them more accessible to a broader, non-specialist audience. Secondly, a survey of the region was conducted by the authors of this report between January 16-29, 1995. This document serves as a useful vehicle to summarize the main findings of the survey which describes the condition of the landscape after 20 years without livestock. It was important that the survey be conducted in January, before the return of the Riemvasmakers with their stock from January to June 1995. In a sense, the survey describes the Riemvasmaak environment at “time zero” and future changes can now be interpreted according to this benchmark period. Thirdly, a detailed knowledge of the past often helps in the planning for the future. This report, therefore, also emphasizes the environmental and landuse history of the region. An analysis of long-term rainfall records, aerial and ground photographs and the re-sampling of key plant survey sites has helped us to develop a more complete understanding of the changing Riemvasmaak ecological environment over time and to assess its current ecological “condition”. Interviews with a number of livestock farmers has also helped considerably in our understanding of landscape condition in “Old Riemvasmaak”. Fourthly, many Riemvasmakers possess a keen interest in livestock and wish to farm either on a full- or part-time basis. However, FARM Africa, and indeed many other planning agencies, need to know something about the ecological potential and livestock carrying capacity of the region in order to make important decisions ii concerning future development projects. We address this thorny carrying capacity issue in our report and draw on the historical testimony of a number of Riemvasmakers to describe the grazing practices and fluctuations in stock numbers which existed in “Old Riemvasmaak”. Finally, in order for the livestock owners and crop farmers of Riemvasmaak to make decisions about their agricultural enterprises in the future they will need to keep track of environmental and economic conditions. Therefore, FARM Africa explicitly wanted this report to advise on the development of a monitoring programme for the region. The National Botanical Institute’s team has been acutely aware throughout this survey that although the Riemvasmakers have been away from their land for 20 years, many retain an impressive knowledge of the region’s natural resources. Because of this we have tried, wherever possible, not only to extract relevant information from key informants but also to feed back to interested members and especially the livestock owners, knowledge that we have gained during the course of our survey. In this way we have also been able to assess the accuracy of our information and data. To this end we met with available Riemvasmakers on the 16 January to discuss our survey intentions. It was suggested at this meeting that we take along a local guide and for three days we enjoyed the expert guidance, advice and warm company of Mr Willem Vass. The last day of our survey was concluded with a brief report-back and discussion of our observations and preliminary findings. Between February and April 1995 the survey data were analyzed and prepared for presentation. A further trip was made to the region by the senior author of this report together with Dr David Catling of FARM Africa from May 2-6 1995. A more detailed three-hour report-back session was arranged for the morning of the 4 May 1995. Highlights of this report, including the long-term rainfall record, stocking rates, water resources, the Prosopis problem and aspects of the monitoring programme were discussed with about 40 Riemvasmakers, most of whom were livestock owners. Further discussions were conducted in smaller groups for the next two days and important details of these fruitful exchanges have been incorporated into the text, figures and tables of this report. A seminar, attended by about 40 academics was also held in the University of Cape Town’s Botany Department on 17 May 1995. The frank and sometimes hostile responses to some of the issues raised in this report, especially those concerning carrying capacity estimates, have been considered in the relevant sections of this report. Finally, our relationship to this project has changed considerably during the last 6 months. While we do “advise” on certain key aspects of the agricultural development programme for the region we would now rather like to emphasize our role as interpreters and advocates of especially the aspirations of the livestock owners of Riemvasmaak. Only a small amount of their extensive knowledge and management expertise has been captured in this report. We would advise that far more effort in the future be spent on simply listening to the history and aspirations of the Riemvasmakers themselves before any far-reaching decisions are taken on crucial aspects such as stocking rates and grazing systems. Without an extensive and inclusive consultation process there is little doubt in our minds that even the most elaborate and expensive development programmes will ultimately fail. Authoritarian grazing “rules” if not developed and agreed to by the livestock owners themselves will iii meet with determined resistance. Also, the success of other constructive development programmes will ultimately be jeopardized. References: Smith H & Bozalek L (1993). Riemvasmaak: Application to the Commission on Land Allocation by Riemvasmaak community. Legal aspects and status of Riemvasmaak land. Unpublished report, 12 November 1993. Legal Resources Centre, Cape Town. SPP & LRC (1993). A claim to Riemvasmaak: Submission to the Commission on Land Allocation on behalf of the community of Riemvasmaak. Unpublished report. Surplus People Project (SPP), Cape Town and Legal Resources Centre (LRC), Cape Town. M. Timm Hoffman Dan Sonnenberg Jeanne L. Hurford Barry W. Jagger Kirstenbosch July 21, 1995 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many individuals and organizations have helped in this project. Firstly, we would like to acknowledge the contribution of the Riemvasmaak community itself. Not only have they supplied a great deal of the information contained in this report but they have also directed much of our line of investigation. Although we mention throughout the text, the names of individuals who have helped with specific aspects of our study, we would like to highlight the assistance we have received from Mr Freddy Bosman Snr, Mr Freddy Bosman Jnr, Mrs Rita Maasdorp, Mr Pieter Malgas, Mr James Mapanka and especially Mr Willem Vass. The frank and constructive response of all the livestock farmers to our report-back session on 4 May 1995 is also much appreciated. The National Parks Board assisted us in a number of ways during our baseline survey. Dr Anthony Hall Martin, Dr Hugo Bezuidenhout, Dr Michael Knight and especially Mr Barry Hopgood, the Augrabies Falls National Park Game Warden, are thanked for their help. This report would not have been possible without the supportive encouragement of Dr David Catling, the FARM Africa representative who has been intimately involved with the agricultural development initiatives at Riemvasmaak. Together with Dr Dick Sandford, who suggested the need for the survey and monitoring programme, we have received nothing but constructive assistance. Mr David Makin-Taylor has also provided helpful comment on a number of issues. Ms Sue Power and Ms Glenda Glover of the Surplus People Project have made their very valuable resource files available to us and have provided us with a great deal of historical information concerning Riemvasmaak. Together with Mr Henk Smith of the Legal Resources Centre, the Surplus People Project was pivotal in the struggle for the return of the land to the Riemvasmakers. These people willingly shared their insights of the region and wealth of experience with us. We have benefited from the botanical expertise of many of our colleagues at the National Botanical Institute. In particular we would like to mention the Compton Herbarium staff: Dr John Rourke, Mr Koos Roux and Dr Deidre Paterson-Jones. Other colleagues, including Dr George Davis, Dave Macdonald, Guy Midgley, Dr Mike O’Callaghan, Les Powrie and Dr Mike Rutherford helped with interpretation and analysis of key aspects of the data. An afternoon in the University of Cape Town, Botany Department’s “Bear Pit” discussing aspects of this report with Professor William Bond, Dr Peter Linder, Dr Jeremy Midgley, Dr Willie Stock and others has sharpened our thinking considerably. Other colleagues who have provided information include Professor Noel van Rooyen of the University of Pretoria, Dr Kevin Balkwill of Wits University, Dr Dave Richardson from the University of Cape Town and Tanya Anderson of the McGregor Museum in Kimberley. Carl Stoltsz of the Plant Protection Research Institute provided information and helpful advice on the Prosopis problem at Riemvasmaak. Dr Mariane Tredoux of the Geology Department at the University of Cape Town helped to simplify Riemvasmaak’s complex geology for us. The archaeological work mentioned in the report has benefited from the advice of Professor Andy Smith of the University of Cape Town and Mr Peter Beaumont of the MacGregor Museum. v The South African National Defence Force, and especially Captain Willie van der Merwe, have been most cooperative in providing access to their files on Riemvasmaak. They have also sent us a great deal of ecological information collected during their tenure of the region from 1974-1993. Ms Rachel Wynberg of the Environmental Evaluation Unit has also provided us with assistance especially regarding the development of the monitoring programme for the region. We would also like to acknowledge the support of the National Botanical Institute and the Department of Environment Affairs and Tourism. Finally, decisions taken at the household level appear critical for any enterprise whether it be ecological research or livestock farming. In the light of this, the senior author would like to acknowledge the generous support and encouragement that his wife Carolyn has provided throughout this project. vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • • This report of the National Botanical Institute has six main objectives: We synthesize available ecological information about the area including all available plant and animal checklists; conduct a baseline survey of the region and describe the landscape as it existed in January 1995; assess landscape “condition” in the context of the environmental and landuse history of the region; assess the landscape’s potential and livestock carrying capacity; describe landuse practices in “Old Riemvasmaak”; finally, we outline a monitoring programme for Riemvasmaak. The report has four chapters and 10 Appendices. CHAPTER 1: THE BASELINE SURVEY • • • • • • • • • This first chapter describes the baseline survey conducted in Riemvasmaak between 15-29 January 1995. Riemvasmaak is 74 563 ha in extent. It is situated in the Northern Cape province and borders on the Orange River in the south and Namibia in the west. Commercial farmland occurs to the north and northeast of Riemvasmaak while the National Parks Board owns adjoining land in the east and leases 4 270 ha of Riemvasmaak land from the Riemvasmaak Trust in the southeast; A map of local place names including those of veeposte (stockposts) shows the wealth of knowledge which still exists within members of the Riemvasmaak community regarding the ecology and management of the landscape; The geology of the region is tightly coupled to the landforms of the region and is comprised of 3 main geological groups: the Namaqualand Mobile Belt sediments and intrusive rocks; the Nama sediments comprising the plateau; the more recent Kalahari and Quaternary sands; Numerous pegmatites exist in the region and form the basis for the mining industry that existed in the region in the past. The six main pegmatites that have been exploited in the past are described; The results of an analysis of 12 soil samples is presented and a description of the Molopo alluvial fan that has been earmarked for cropland development is included based on the results of previous research in the area; The mean annual rainfall for the region is 125 mm.yr-1 with a coefficient of variation of 59 per cent. Mean annual rainfall increases only marginally from west to east but slightly more from the Orange River basin (75 mm.yr-1) to the northern borders of Riemvasmaak (145 mm.yr-1). Long-term rainfall data for the period 1918-1994 is presented for two rainfall stations situated close to Riemvasmaak and indicate large fluctuations in annual rainfall totals. In some years, less than 25 mm was recorded while for 1976 more than 350 mm was measured. This very high rainfall period, from 1972-1976 coincided with the period when the Riemvasmakers were removed from the region in 1973/74; The Molopo River catchment area is the largest of the four main catchment areas which decrease in size from the Bak, Kourop and Orange River catchments respectively. The water points, including boreholes, dug wells, fountains, natural vii • • • • • • • • • • springs as well as the Riemvasmaak Hot Spring are mapped and details of each water point is synthesized from previous reports. Only three of the twenty water points sampled by Toens (1994) contained potable water; A lengthy description of the methodology used in the baseline survey is presented to enable future workers to re-sample the area. Our itinerary is presented in Appendix 1. We adopt a landscape approach and couple photographs with our sample plots. 29 photostations provide the basis of our vegetation and landform classification analysis. Details of the photostations and the main view (photograph) used at each photostation are provided in Appendix 8; With the assistance of aerial photographs, five main landforms are mapped: the Plateau (26 % of the area); Rocky slopes (25 %); Rocky footslopes and rocky pediments (34 %); Sandy pediments (14 %); and River beds (1.4 %) with inselbergs forming a sixth rather minor unit; The general composition and dominant species associated with each landform are presented in Appendix 2 and described in the text. A checklist comprising 443 plant species is contained in Appendix 3. None of the species are listed as Endangered or Vulnerable in the Red Data book. A stylized diagram shows Euphorbia gregaria dominating the plateau and rocky slope environments with Acacia mellifera and Stipagrostis spp. common on the sandy pediments. Three variations of the River beds, differing in their species composition are proposed; An analysis of the size class distributions of three important range species (Acacia mellifera, Acacia erioloba and Schotia afra) shows that there has been much recruitment in all three species in the last twenty years and these species have “benefited” greatly from the absence of domestic stock. The widespread recruitment of these species may also be closely linked to the high rainfall period between 1972-1976; The widespread distribution of the alien leguminous shrub Prosopis spp. is highlighted. Because of its potential threat to the production potential as well as to the hydrology of the region we recommend its immediate eradication from the open range and the release of seed-eating weevils to reduce the further spread of the species in Riemvasmaak; A preliminary checklist of reptiles and amphibians comprising 11 frogs, 2 tortoises, 1 turtle, 19 snakes and 35 lizard species is shown in Appendix 4. Three Peripheral and one Rare species are listed while no Endangered or Vulnerable Red Data book species were identified; 192 bird species have been recorded in and around Riemvasmaak and the checklist is shown in Appendix 5. The Red Data book status of three species is listed as Vulnerable, while a further 2 species are listed as Rare. The status of 3 species is unknown (Indeterminate) but is also probably Rare; We observed 72 birds during the course of the survey and their abundance at this time is listed; A checklist of 51 mammal species for the Riemvasmaak and Augrabies Falls National Park regions is presented in Appendix 6 of which one species (the black rhinoceros) is Endangered, 2 are Vulnerable, 2 are Rare and one is listed as Indeterminate in the South African Red Data book for mammals; We observed 12 mammal species in the field during our survey and their abundance and locality as well as that of domestic livestock is also shown in viii • • • • • • • • Appendix 6. The most common wild ungulate was the klipspringer and 89 individuals were recorded; 474 goats, 20 sheep, 12 head of cattle; 3 horses and 24 donkeys were seen by the survey team; The results of a helicopter survey conducted by the National Parks Board are presented in Appendix 7 and show that for Riemvasmaak in March there were 31 gemsbok, 64 kudu, 26 springbok, 5 steenbok and 7 klipspringer although the abundance of the last species was clearly underestimated; The grazing environment of Riemvasmaak is described. Firstly, we suggest that based on our understanding of the composition, structure and abundance of important forage species, the vegetation of Riemvasmaak is in an “excellent” condition. It has benefited greatly from the 20 years without domestic livestock and this view is corroborated by the testimony of the Riemvasmakers who have returned to the region. However, the sandy pediments in the east, that were used by the military for their mechanized infantry manouvres appear heavily disturbed; The range potential and carrying capacity of Riemvasmaak are calculated from standard agricultural models which have historically been applied to commercial farms. Recognizing their limitations in a communal land context we nonetheless show that the relationship between long-term annual rainfall data and stocking rate indicates that about 60 ha will be needed to support one Large Stock Unit (LSU) at Riemvasmaak. This sums to 1 243 LSU’s (1 130 mature cows or 7 312 Boer goats) for the area. If the 4 270 ha currently leased to the National Parks Board is excluded from the calculation then the recommended carrying capacity drops to 1 172 LSU’s (1 065 head of cattle or 6 894 goats); Using standard methods for estimating carrying capacity we show that, of all the landforms it is the undisturbed sandy pediments and dry river beds (i.e. the bottomlands) that are able to support the most number of animals; If the carrying capacity and size of each landform is included in the calculation of carrying capacity for Riemvasmaak then only 1 028 LSU’s (935 cattle or 6 047 goats) can be supported on the available range. These values are in agreement with stock numbers that were censused in 1960/61 at the height of a severe drought but three times lower than the Riemvasmakers themselves claimed they possessed in “Old Riemvasmaak”. We explore this apparent contradiction in Chapter 2; The economic analysis of the livestock industry presented by the Department of Agriculture and based on a commercial farming enterprise shows that the gross income from the livestock industry at Riemvasmaak could amount to R684 000 per year. If costs of 60 % are subtracted from this total then a profit of R273 600 or R60-80 per ewe results We conclude this chapter by recommending (a) that the wide interest shown by the Riemvasmakers in owning stock be understood and accepted by all involved in the area; (b) that the general aridity of the region cannot accommodate all interested livestock farmers and the allocation of grazing resources to full-time and part-time farmers is going to be problematic; (c) consensus must be reached amongst livestock farmers concerning stock numbers; (d) no one magic number (e.g. 60 ha/LSU) should dominate the debate as stock numbers should probably track environmental conditions; (e) the establishment of an elected, respected and ix influential “stock committee” or similar such institution will probably be the key to the success of the livestock industry’s future. CHAPTER 2: LANDUSE HISTORY • • • • • • • • • • • This chapter presents an archaeological and historical landuse continuum for the region summarized in a general chronology from pre-history to the present; Prior to the ancestors of the present inhabitants of Riemvasmaak settling in the area the Orange River itself was home to a mixed group of Khoikhoi pastoralists and San hunter-gatherer-fishers; By all accounts the area carried abundant game although domestic livestock probably didn’t graze away from the river itself; The results of an archaeological survey conducted by the SADF during their term of tenure are presented and show a wealth of archaeological artefacts in the region; We recommend that there is an urgent need to have the region comprehensively surveyed by an experienced archaeologist especially those areas that have been earmarked for cropland development near the Molopo River mouth. The archaeological history could form an important part of the ecotourism potential of the region; A brief history and chronology of the settlement of Riemvasmaak is provided which suggests that the ancestors of the majority of the current inhabitants of Riemvasmaak arrived in the area from many different regions in southern Africa from about the 1870’s onwards; A discussion of the landuse practices in “Old Riemvasmaak” begins with an analysis of the stock numbers owned by Riemvasmakers in 1960/61, 1973/74 and in 1994. Problems with each of the data sets are described. The data show that stock numbers have changed from a low of 974 LSU’s in 1960/61 to a high of 3593 LSU’s in 1973/74. In 1994 the Riemvasmaak farmers in exile possessed 1302 LSU’s. Differences in the composition of the herds associated with each village in “Old Riemvasmaak” (?1973/74 ) suggest that goats were preferred by livestock owners at or near the river while sheep became common in the herds of farmers living away from the river. Donkeys were only abundant in the herds around the Mission Station while cattle numbers were never high; Who owned livestock in “Old Riemvasmaak”? Our analysis shows that only 8 of the 318 household heads censused in 1960/61 gave their occupation as “veeboer”. The majority of household heads worked as farm workers on the numerous islands of the Orange River. However, it was this group of people who possessed the majority of animals at Riemvasmaak even though each person only owned about 6 goats; Local testimony of a number of farmers at Riemvasmaak was used to reconstruct key aspects of the land tenure and grazing management practices in the years before 1973/74; The functioning of the Mr Jacob Booysen as the Hoofman in the land allocation and grazing management system of “Old Riemvasmaak” is outlined. His role and that of the “voormanne” who helped him govern the region from 1934 until his death in 1972 was integral to the entire landuse system of the area; x • • • • • • • • No internal limits appear to have been placed on stock numbers although the state introduced a “head tax” as well as set maximum stock numbers (50 goats, 5 cows, 4 donkeys) to discourage too many animals on the range. Although transgressors were severely punished in the 1940’s it is unclear whether the law was enforced in later years. Oral testimony suggests that as many as 800 goats were owned by a single farmer during the 1950’s; The most important resting system applied was that which set aside large areas of Riemvasmaak, always the productive bottomlands, for the exclusive use of large bulk grazers such as cattle and donkeys. Sheep and goats were not allowed to graze in these “spaarveld” areas without the permission of the Hoofman and then only during a drought; Livestock owners from different parts of Riemvasmaak employed different strategies to deal with the severe droughts which ravaged the area. Those living in and around the Riemvasmaak Mission Station made use of the Orange River while livestock owners living in Deksel and Bok se Puts made use of veeposte (stock posts) where perennial springs were available; The marketing of livestock was non-existent in some areas and the livestock owners were severely exploited by local speculators; Conflicts between livestock owners appeared to have been few and far between. During the mid-1960’s, however, conflict over grazing resources in one area is outlined and the central role that Mr Booysen apparently played in resolving this conflict is described; The results of a re-survey of John Acocks’ sample sites which he visited in 1952 is presented in the text and in Appendix 10. One of the sites exists within the communal land of Riemvasmaak while the other borders the reserve on the south east. Both of the sites show a large decrease in diversity between the two time periods although the site in Riemvasmaak itself appears to have “lost” fewer species than the site in the commercial farmland. It is difficult to explain the changes that we observed at these two sites although overgrazing by domestic livestock is the hypothesis we favour most. Three matched photographs illustrate the nature of the changes that we have measured at these sites; The impact of the 8 South African Infantry Training Unit, Armscor and the South African Airforce on the vegetation of Riemvasmaak is describes and a map of their activities presented; Finally, we use our understanding of the historical landuse practices to comment on the future. We suggest that the Orange River environment could form an integral part of the livestock industry in Riemvasmaak but that one of the greatest challenges faced by FARM Africa lies in the incorporation of the part-time farmers into the livestock industry. We suggest that any new institution which has a role in the management of the livestock industry in Riemvasmaak should be aware of the region’s livestock management history. CHAPTER 3: A PROPOSED MONITORING PROGRAMME • • There is a general paucity of advice on how to develop a monitoring programme, especially for communal lands; We suggest a number of elements that should be considered. The first relates the need of the programme. Who needs it and who stands to benefit? xi • • • • • • • Next, we explore the aims of the programme and propose the following objectives: “The purpose of the monitoring programme is to provide the Riemvasmaak community with sufficient knowledge about the state of their environment (including climate, vegetation, stock condition, crop yields and market forces) at any one time so that informed decisions can be made by all Riemvasmakers, from household to village to community level, about their various agricultural enterprises”; Six main variables or indicators of change are suggested: Climate (rainfall, temperature), Water (quantity & quality), Vegetation “condition” (using matched photographs, key species abundances and demonstration plots) , Livestock (movements, births and deaths and market trends), Croplands and Community health. The location, sampling intensity and frequency, and type of measurement that will be required as well as the proposed responsible person(s) involved are also discussed; Pitfalls regarding data analysis and interpretation are highlighted and the use of participatory methods to present the results of the programme are emphasized; A preliminary budget is provided which suggests that capital equipment expenditure would amount to R51 000 while annual running costs will be about R40 000 including the salary of a Monitoring Warden drawn from the local community; The role of the Monitoring Warden will be crucial to the success of the programme. This individual would see to the day to day running of the programme and could also act as an important link with the Agricultural Extension Services facilitating technology transfer if and when needed by the communal farmers The selection and training of a Monitoring Warden should commence as soon as possible and the necessary infrastructure be developed between August and December 1995. By the beginning of 1996 the monitoring programme could begin. CHAPTER 4: BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RIEMVASMAAK LITERATURE • • • 24 articles which deal specifically with the history and agricultural potential of Riemvasmaak are listed; Details of 26 press clippings relating to community life, the removal, resettlement and the present are provided; Finally, reference to the general scientific and popular literature as well as numerous unpublished reports which deal with the history and natural resources of Gordonia district, the Kalahari ecosystem and the greater Orange River environment is given. This list comprises 95 articles. xii TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY vii CHAPTER 1: THE BASELINE SURVEY 1.1 Introduction 1-2 1.2 Location, settlements, place names and infrastructure 1-2 1.3 The physical environment 1.3.1 Geology 1.3.2 Mining 1.3.3 Soils 1.3.4 Climate 1.3.5 Hydrology and water sources 1-7 1-7 1-11 1-15 1-19 1-24 1.4 The biotic environment 1.4.1 Vegetation 1.4.1.1 General methodology 1.4.1.2 Landform classification 1.4.1.3 Vegetation associated with landforms 1.4.1.4 Size class distributions of key species 1.4.1.5 Alien plant control 1.4.2 Reptiles and amphibians 1.4.3 Birds 1.4.4 Mammals 1-30 1-30 1-30 1-33 1-36 1-45 1-52 1-58 1-58 1-59 1.5 The grazing environment 1.5.1 Veld “condition” 1.5.2 Range potential and carrying capacity 1.5.3 Economic potential of the livestock industry 1-60 1-60 1-62 1-67 1.6 1-69 References CHAPTER 2: LANDUSE HISTORY 2.1 Introduction 2-75 2.2 The archaeological and historical record 2-77 2.3 Settlement at Riemvasmaak 2-81 xiii 2.4 Landuse practises in “Old Riemvasmaak” 2.4.1 Stock numbers 2.4.2 Land tenure and grazing management 2.4.3 Vegetation change since 1952: Acocks revisited 2-84 2-84 2-89 2-94 2.5 Military occupation: The last 20 years 2-102 2.6 The future 2-106 2.7 References 2-107 CHAPTER 3: THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MONITORING PROGRAMME FOR RIEMVASMAAK 3.1 Introduction 3-110 3.2 Key elements of a monitoring programme 3-110 3.3 Need 3-111 3.4 Purpose 3-111 3.5 Methods 3.5.1 Climate 3.5.2 Water 3.5.3 Vegetation 3.5.4 Livestock 3.5.5 Croplands 3.5.6 Community health 3-112 3-114 3-115 3-115 3-115 3-116 3-116 3.6 Analysis, interpretation and presentation 3-116 3.7 Capital equipment and infrastructural costs 3-117 3.8 Training 3-119 3.9 Programme initiation 3-119 3.10 Operation 3-119 3.11 Termination 3-120 3.12 References 3-130 xiv CHAPTER 4: BIBLIOGRAPHY OF LITERATURE PERTAINING TO RIEMVASMAAK AND SURROUNDING AREAS WITHIN THE DISTRICT OF GORDONIA, NORTHERN CAPE 4.1 Articles which deal specifically with the history and agricultural potential of Riemvasmaak 4-122 4.2 Press clippings about Riemvasmaak 4-123 4.3 Published scientific and popular articles and unpublished reports which deal with the history and natural resources of Gordonia district, the Kalahari ecosystem and the greater Orange River environment. 4-125 APPENDIX 1: The itinerary of the ecological survey team between 16-30 January, 1995. APPENDIX 2: The percentage cover of species within sites and landforms in Riemvasmaak (see back cover). APPENDIX 3: Checklist of plants in Riemvasmaak and Augrabies Falls National Park. APPENDIX 4: Checklist of amphibians and reptiles at Riemvasmaak and surrounding areas. APPENDIX 5: Checklist of birds recorded for Riemvasmaak and the Augrabies Falls National Park, and an annotated list of birds recorded at Riemvasmaak between 17-29 January, 1995 by the survey team. APPENDIX 6: Checklist of mammals for Riemvasmaak and surrounding areas and the type, number and locality of the 12 mammal species that were observed by the survey team between 17-29 January, 1995. APPENDIX 7: List of mammal species and their abundances determined by the National Parks Board during helicopter surveys in “Bokvasmaak” and Riemvasmaak in March 1995. APPENDIX 8: Description of photostations in Riemvasmaak. APPENDIX 9: Large Stock Unit (LSU) equivalents of grazing animals. APPENDIX 10: Checklist and abundance classes of plant species collected by John Acocks in May 1952 at two localities in and adjacent to Riemvasmaak and resurveyed by the National Botanical Institute’s survey team in January 1995. xv LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 1.1. Location, settlements, infrastructure, place names and general topography of Riemvasmaak derived from a composite of 1:50 000 topographical maps: 2820 AC, 2820 AD, 2820 CA, 2820 CB. Fig. 1.2. Place names in “Old Riemvasmaak” including those of topographic features, settlements and veeposte. Table 1.1 provides a translation and interpretation of many of the names shown. Fig. 1.3. The geology of Riemvasmaak enlarged from the 1:250 000 Geological Series 2820 Upington map (Moen, 1988). Fig. 1.4. Major geological groups comprising the Riemvasmaak environment. Fig. 1.5. Occurrence of minerals at Riemvasmaak. (See also Von Backstrom (1967) for a more detailed account of mining operations in the area). Fig. 1.6. Soil unit map of the Molopo alluvial fan (redrawn from Van Niekerk (1994)) showing the distribution of regions with moderate to high irrigation potential (dots) and those with moderate, moderate to low and low irrigation potential (left blank). Rocky, mountainous terrain is indicated by diagonal lines; D = drainage line of Orange River, Molopo River or smaller tributaries of these two rivers. Soil unit map symbols are those used in Table 1.3 where details of the soil units are presented. Star indicates position of photostation 12. Fig. 1.7. Walter-Leith climate diagram for Augrabies close to the south eastern boundary of Riemvasmaak. a = climate station: [rainfall data are taken for the period 1946-1994 from Augrabies village (station number 0281760 1) (28°40’S 20°26’E) while temperature data are for the period 1984-1994 and are from Augrabies Water Falls (station number 0281606 0) (28°36’S 20°21’E) some 14 km northwest of Augrabies village]; b= height above sea level (Augrabies village = 640 m; Augrabies Water Falls = 626 m); c = duration of observation in years (the first figure indicates temperature, the second, precipitation); d = mean annual temperature; e = mean annual precipitation; f= mean daily maximum temperature of the warmest month; g = mean daily temperature variations; h = mean daily minimum temperature of the coldest month; i = curve of mean monthly temperature; j = relative period of drought; k = curve of mean monthly precipitation. Fig. 1.8. Mean annual rainfall for Riemvasmaak and surrounding areas calculated from CCWR (1994) modeled data. Fig. 1.9. Total annual rainfall (histograms) and three-year running mean (solid line) for Augrabies village (station number 0281760 1) (28°40’S, 20°26’E) for the period 1946-1994 and for Geelkop (station number 0283098 3) (28°38’s, 21°04’E) for the period 1918-1988. xvi Fig. 1.10 Percent deviation from mean long-term rainfall at Augrabies village (station number 0281760 1) (28°40’S, 20°26’E) for the period 1946-1994 and at Geelkop (station number 0283098 3) (28°38’s, 21°04’E) for the period 1918-1988. Fig. 1.11. Catchment areas of the four main river systems in Riemvasmaak: 1 = Bak River; 2 = Kourop River; 3 = Molopo River; 4 = Orange River. Fig. 1.12. Location of different water sources in Riemvasmaak. Numbers refer to those in Table 1.6. Fig. 1.13 Location of 29 photo stations in Riemvasmaak. Large circles show the general area covered by the images, small dot indicates approximate position of photostation and line indicates the direction of the “main” photograph and sample area. Fig. 1.14. Major landforms in Riemvasmaak: blue = Plateau; purple = Steep slopes; red = Rocky footslopes, rocky toeslopes and rocky pediments; yellow = Sandy pediments; green = River beds. Fig. 1.15. Generalized view of vegetation associated with different landforms in Riemvasmaak. Fig. 1.16. Size class distributions of a population of Acacia mellifera on a sandy pediment at photostation 6. Fig. 1.17. Size class distributions of Acacia erioloba populations recorded at six different photostations in Riemvasmaak. Filled sections indicate dead individuals while hashed sections show the number of individuals in a size class which had one or more pods. Fig. 1.18. Size class distributions of a population of Schotia afra in a rocky river bed at photostation 4. Fig. 1.19. Location of Prosopis glandulosus populations observed between 16-31 January 1995 at Riemvasmaak. Fig. 2.1. Location of Stone Age (dots) and Pastoralist (circles) archaeological sites in Riemvasmaak as indicated in the preliminary survey data in the South African Defence Force (1990) report. The absence of archaeological sites in places such as the upper Kourop River Valley and lower Bak River simply means that these areas have not been surveyed. See Table 2.2 for a description of the sites. Figure 2.2. The distribution of different types of military activity during the South African Defence Force’s tenure of Riemvasmaak between 1974-1994. xvii LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1.1. Place names and their meaning in “Old Riemvasmaak”. TABLE 1.2. The geology and lithology of Riemvasmaak (after Moen, 1988). TABLE 1.3. A description of soil units on the Molopo alluvial fan indicating their geomorphological position, dominant soil form, map symbol (see Fig. 1.6) and their irrigation potential (L = Low; M-L = Moderate to Low; M = Moderate; M-H = Moderate to High). Information for this table has been compiled from data in Van Niekerk (1994). TABLE 1.4. Results of an analysis of soil samples from 12 sites in Riemvasmaak. Number refers to the photostation number (see Appendix 8) and the letter refers to the landform wherein the soil sample was taken. Landform abbreviations are Rf = rocky footslope, Sp = Sandy pediment, Pl = Plateau, Pa = Pan on plateau, Rb = River bed. The soils are all loamy sands except for 5c which is a sandy clay loam. TABLE 1.5. The % cover and area (ha) of each river catchment in Riemvasmaak. TABLE 1.6. Water quality and other characteristics of water sources (boreholes, dug wells (= put), springs (= fonteine) and natural waterholes)) in Riemvasmaak. TABLE 1.7. The % cover and area (ha) of each land form in Riemvasmaak TABLE 1.8. Characteristics of the three Prosopis species that occur in the arid zones of southern Africa (information from Harding, 1987; Poynton, 1990). TABLE 1.9. Size class distributions of Prosopis spp individuals seen at photostations in Riemvasmaak. TABLE 1.10. Mean percentage cover (+ std. dev.) and mean Grazing Index Score (+ std. dev.) for 96 sites encompassing different landforms and their variations at Riemvasmaak. TABLE 1.11. Number of cattle or large stock units (LSU) able to be accommodated within different landforms at Riemvasmaak assuming a mean Grazing Index Score (GIS) for the 74 563 ha reserve of 120.6 equivalent to the recommended stocking rate of 60 ha/LSU. TABLE 2.1. General chronology of key historical events relating to land tenure, management and landuse practices in Riemvasmaak and the broader Middle Orange River environment (taken in part from Smith & Bozalek, 1993). TABLE 2.2. List of site numbers and description of archaeological sites in Riemvasmaak (from SADF (1990)). Abbreviations are: ESA = Earlier Stone Age, MSA = Middle Stone Age, LSA = Later Stone Age, OES = Ostrich Egg Shell. xviii TABLE 2.3. Number of domestic livestock and their Large Stock Unit (LSU) equivalents in Riemvasmaak in 1960 (unpublished census data), in “Old Riemvasmaak” probably around 1973/74 (see Isaacs & Phillips, 1994) and held by Riemvasmakers in exile in 1994 before their return to Riemvasmaak (unpublished records, Surplus People Project). LSU conversion factors are for adult animals (see Appendix 9, Table 2.4). TABLE 2.4. Number and per cent (in brackets) of the total number of livestock in and around different settlements in “Old Riemvasmaak” as reported by the “Blue Group” in the PRA workshop held on 19 May 1994 (data in Isaacs & Phillips, 1994). LSU conversion factors are for adult animals (see Appendix 9). TABLE 2.5. Mean number of livestock (+ std. dev.) owned by 318 household heads censused in 1960/61 according to their occupation listed in the census records. Mean values for the number of horses and mules owned by different occupation groups were never above 1.6 animals and usually below 0.3 and these livestock categories have therefore been excluded from this table. LSU values include horses and mules and use conversion factors for mature animals (Appendix 9). TABLE 2.6. Comparison of changes between Acocks’ May 1952 sample data and that of the National Botanical Institute’s (NBI) Jan 1995 survey team at two Photostations in Riemvasmaak (see also Appendix 10).. TABLE 2.7. Dates in 1989 and kind of activities carried out by three military organizations using Riemvasmaak as a training facility. Table 3.1. Key variables that could be monitored at Riemvasmaak with some indication of their sampling intensity, location and frequency, the type of measurement and units needed and the individual(s) or agency responsible for the task. TABLE 3.2. Capital equipment and some of the running costs associated with the monitoring programme. xix LIST OF PLATES PLATE 1.1. National Botanical Institute members of the survey team and authors of this report: Clockwise from upper left: Barry Jagger, Dan Sonnenberg, Jeanne Hurford and Timm Hoffman. PLATE 1.2. Flat, stony landscape of the plateau between Riemvasmaak Mission Station and Deksel. The landscape is dominated by Euphorbia gregaria with a number of species including Monechma spartioides, Boscia foetida, Panicum arbusculum and Sarcostemma viminale as common elements. The pan in the mid-ground depression is obscurred by a fringe of 2-3 m high Parkinsonia africana trees. Part of panorama of photostation 5. PLATE 1.3. Steep rocky slopes below the plateau dominated by Euphorbia gregaria, Stipagrostis uniplumis and Monechma spartioides. The witgatboom (Boscia albitrunca) which dominates the right foreground is frequently associated with the rocky slope environments. PLATE 1.4. Rocky pediment below the Kouropberg about 1km south of Deksel. The vegetation is dominated by Euphorbia gregaria, Acacia mellifera, Monechma spartioides and Stipagrostis uniplumis. PLATE 1.5. Broken topography and rocky pediment below the plateau near the Molopo gorge about 2 km southwest of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station. The vegetation is dominated by Euphorbia gregaria and Stipagrostis uniplumis on the interfluves and by Schotia afra in the narrow and rocky river valleys. PLATE 1.6. Sandy pediment 5 km north of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station dominated by Acacia mellifera, Stipagrostis uniplumis and Rhigozum trichotomum. This photo represents site 6a of photostation 6. It is also the site where Acacia mellifera size classes were measured (see Fig. 1.16) PLATE 1.7. Wide and sandy river bed about 4.5 km north of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station dominated by Stipagrostis namaquensis in the foreground and Acacia erioloba in the distance. This photo represents site 6b of photostation 6. PLATE 1.8. Wide and saline river bed near the confluence of the Molopo and Orange Rivers close to photostation 12. The vegetation is dominated by Tamarix usneoides, Euclea pseudebenus and Acacia mellifera. PLATE 1.9. Narrow and rocky river bed about 8 km north of Riemvasmaak Mission Station at the point where the road ascends the plateau. The vegetation is dominated by Schotia afra, Acacia mellifera and Cyperus marginatus. PLATE 1.10. An isolated pocket of Kalahari sand little more than 500 m2 dominated by Stipagrostis ciliata and Rhigozum trichotomum (foreground) and Euphorbia gregaria (mid-ground). xx PLATE 1.11. Recruitment of Acacia erioloba saplings at old kraal sites near Deksel. The 2 m tall ranging rod in left midground marks the deep dung deposits of an old kraal while Jeanne points to a 1.6 m tall Schotia afra sapling. Note the dominance of mature Acacia erioloba trees in the river course in the right background (see Fig. 1.17, site 3). PLATE 1.12. David Catling of FARM Africa providing scale for the recruitment of a cohort of Acacia erioloba saplings near Gyam/Vaalputs (see Fig 1.17, site 24). PLATE 1.13. Mr Willem Vass standing in front of a single large Prosopis glandulosus individual near Xubuxnap. The large trees in left and right background are all Acacia erioloba individuals while the saplings in the foreground are all Acacia mellifera individuals. PLATE 2.1. Unmarked grave sites south of Deksel in the Kourop River valley. PLATE 2.2. Mr Willem Vass at Xubuxnap sitting on the ruins of his father's oxwagon that was brought to the area in 1939. PLATE 2.3. Matched photograph pair at photostation 25 taken about 7 km east of Wabrand looking west towards the Orange River. The top photograph was taken by John Acocks (#5563) on 22 May 1952 while the lower image was taken on 27 January 1995 (see text for a discussion of the major changes in the landscape). PLATE 2.4. Matched photograph pair at photostation 25 taken from the same camera position as in Plate 2.3 but looking north along the "priest's road winding down the hill." Photographers and dates are the same as for Plate 2.3 (Acocks #5564). (See text for a discussion of the changes). PLATE 2.5. Matched photograph pair of photostation 25 taken from the same camera position and by the same photographers as indicated in Plate 2.3 but looking east (Acocks #5565). (See text for a detailed discussion of the changes in the images). PLATE 2.6. Sandy pediment near Gyam/Vaalputs. The dominance of the landscape by Rhigozum trichotomum suggests that heavy disturbance of the environment has occurred in the past. This may possibly be related to the mechanized infantry manoeuvres or arms-testing exercises carried out during the SADF's tenure of the region. [PHOTOGRAPHS OF PHOTOSTATIONS 1-29 ARE ALSO SHOWN IN APPENDIX 8] xxi Chapter 1 : THE BASELINE SURVEY 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Location, settlements, place names and infrastructure 1.3 The physical environment 1.3.1 Geology 1.3.2 Mining 1.3.3 Soils 1.3.4 Climate 1.3.5 Hydrology and water sources 1.4 The biotic environment 1.4.1 Vegetation 1.4.1.1 General methodology 1.4.1.2 Landform classification 1.4.1.3 Vegetation associated with landforms 1.4.1.4 Size class distributions of key species 1.4.1.5 Alien plant control 1.4.2 Reptiles and amphibians 1.4.3 Birds 1.4.4 Mammals 1.5 The grazing environment 1.5.1 Veld “condition” 1.5.2 Range potential and carrying capacity 1.5.3 Economic potential of the livestock industry 1.6 References 1-1 1.1 INTRODUCTION Agricultural development programmes require a comprehensive knowledge of the region’s natural resources. Information about the geological, climatic, ecological and agricultural environment is essential if the full potential of an area is to be developed. There is already a considerable body of literature pertaining to Riemvasmaak and the general surrounds of Gordonia (see bibliography). However, much of it is unpublished and exists in difficult-to-locate internal reports. One of our first tasks, therefore, was to synthesize this information in one document and to develop a broad overview of the region’s environmental resources and potential. In addition to this synthesis we have also reported on the results of a baseline survey conducted in mid to late January 1995. An itinerary of this expedition is provided in Appendix 1. A description of major landforms within Riemvasmaak and their associated vegetation is summarized in this chapter. Also, the abundance of key forage species is analyzed and the potential danger posed by the invasive alien genus, Prosopis, is discussed. The difficult and contentious debate around veld “condition”, range potential and carrying capacity is addressed in this chapter and we conclude with a discussion of the economic potential of the proposed livestock industry at Riemvasmaak. 1.2 LOCATION, SETTLEMENTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE Riemvasmaak is located in the Northern Cape province of the Republic of South Africa (Fig. 1.1). It lies between 28° 13' and 28° 32' S and between 20° 00' and 20° 25' E. Riemvasmaak is 74 562.8124 ha in extent (Van Zyl & Van Zyl, 1994). It is bordered in the west by Namibia and in the north by the privately-owned, commercial farms of Aries, Narougas and Enna. Similarly, a number of commercial farms including Waterval and Omdraai form the eastern boundary of the reserve. The perennial waters of the Orange River form the southern border of Riemvasmaak. On the southern banks of the river itself the table grape-producing farms of Zeekoeisteek and Blouputs occur. The southeastern border is comprised of the Augrabies Falls National Park, a tourist and conservation enterprise owned and administered by the National Parks Board. Part of Riemvasmaak itself is also currently leased to the National Parks Board as part of an agreement with the Riemvasmaak Trust. This region, of about 4 270 ha, forms the extreme southeastern section of Riemvasmaak. It has become known as “Bokvasmaak” or the “Melkbosrandgebied” and is bordered in the south by the Orange River and in the north by the low ridge marked as │Haodaos in Fig. 1.2. A number of farmers, who lived in the settlements in this area prior to their removal in 1974, are unhappy with the fact that they are denied access to this land. An acrimonious protest has recently developed over the lease agreement. A number of fairly widely-dispersed permanent settlements occurred in "Old Riemvasmaak" the largest of which remains the Riemvasmaak Mission Station itself (Fig. 1.1). Historically, Bok se Puts, Deksel and Xubuxnab were the next largest villages and are all located near permanent water supplies within the Bak, Kourop and Orange River valleys respectively. In the southeastern part of Riemvasmaak, in the region now leased to the National Parks Board, the small but permanent settlements of Wabrand and Melkbosrand were situated. Two smaller settlements, probably better described as homesteads, existed in the northeastern parts of Riemvasmaak. These are 1-2 Gyam/Vaalputs and Perdepoort. There were no permanent settlements on the plateau, presumably because there is no permanent water in this environment. A rudimentary road network exists within Riemvasmaak. However, for much of the region it has degenerated to such an extent that it is only negotiable by means of an off-road vehicle or donkey cart (see Hawkins et al 1994). Some of the place names shown on the 1:50 000 topographic maps published by the Chief Director of Surveys and Mapping are not recognized by the Riemvasmakers. For example, Riemvasmaakkop is known locally as Groot Rooiberg or Kai │nabab, while Donkieboud is better known as Donkiemond. There are also errors of location. For example, Twakputs did not exist along the banks of the Orange River but according to local testimony was located further inland. To clarify some of these inaccuracies and to develop a better understanding of the names and locations of settlements, physiographic features and stock posts (veeposte) an informal workshop was held on the 5 May 1995. Mr Hans April, Mr Dawid Isaacs, Mr James Mapanka, Mr Pieter Malgas, Mr April Silwer, Mr Jan Silwer and Mr Gys Simon assisted in the identification and pronunciation of key place names in “Old Riemvasmaak.” Ms Claudia Simon who learnt to read and write Damara at school acted as the scribe. The place names are shown in Fig. 1.2 and described in Table 1.1. This clearly only scratches the surface of the wealth of nomenclatural information that exists for the region. None of the people who helped in the identification of place names had knowledge of the whole of Riemvasmaak. Some parts of the reserve were poorly known and because of this, some inaccuracies and omissions have undoubtedly occurred. We suggest that a group of the older members of the community be taken around the region with the express purpose of establishing the boundaries and more accurate locations and terminology of the key features in Riemvasmaak. As discussed in Chapter 2 this has important implications in understanding the grazing strategies employed in “Old Riemvasmaak”. 1-3 Fig. 1.1. Location, settlements, infrastructure, place names and general topography of Riemvasmaak derived from a composite of 1:50 000 topographical maps: 2820 AC, 2820 AD, 2820 CA, 2820 CB. 1-4 Fig. 1.2. Place names in “Old Riemvasmaak” including those of topographic features, settlements and veeposte. Table 1.1 provides a translation and interpretation of many of the names shown. 1-5 Table 1.1. Damara and Nama place names and their meanings in “Old Riemvasmaak”. Afrikaans place names are not listed here but are shown in Fig. 1.2. Name Kai │nabab !Ôraros │Nabagu Tsu!aos │Nûb !Nun║gaes Kaivlei │Naruxas Matroos║as │i║khoêb Tabetamés ╪Nudaob !Nu║khais !Nu-║naes !Noi╪nâras Doë!nas ╪Ôs ╪Narun|khais ║Nana║as ║Hôb Khukao║Nab Aogu║khoe!nab ║Nam!haob │e║haob Twakputs │Hus !Nugu║ais │Hurugus Khunigu╪nubib !Haodaos Remarks Also known as “Groot Rooiberg”, (from Kai = groot or big) and called “Riemvasmaakkop” on 1:50 000 topographical maps. “Vlaketjie” (little flat land or depression). “Rooies” (reddish or red ?region). Also known as Sagtehoek. Meaning unknown. “Sandgat” (sand hole or well perhaps). “Grootvlei” (large vlei or marsh). “Vol biesies” (full of reeds - probably Mariscus marginatus). Someone’s surname-Matroos, and from “║as” = kloof or narrow valley or ravine. “Maanhaarjakkals se plek” (place of the aardwolf, Proteles cristatus). “Abwikaboom” (Tamarix usneoides tree). “Ver pad” (long or far road. From “daob” = pad or road). Located somewhere north of Bok se Puts. “Swartbevolkings tradisionele dans” (black community’s traditional dance from “║khais” = traditional dance). Also known as “Wildehondsekloof” (wild dog’s kloof). !Noi (boom) kraal (kraal made out of !Noi (Acacia mellifera). “Iets soos ‘n intrek” (something like a hauling in, gathering or settlement). “Spreekword” (a saying or proverb). “Houtstomp is nie daar nie” (“the tree stump isn’t there”). Also known as Kameeldoringhoek. Meaning unknown. Also known as Skaaphoringkloof. “Waar die manne lê” (“where the men lie” - casualties from the German war. “Waterbank” (water ridge). “Erdmanshoek” (from “erdman” = ground squirrel). Also known as ╪Nus!nâb. Means fountain. Meaning unknown. “Hy is vergeet” (“he (or maybe “it”) is forgotten”) - also known as “Blok Twee”. More commonly known as Wabrand. “Bankpad” (ridge road). 1-6 1.3 THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 1.3.1 Geology A clear interpretation of the geology of Riemvasmaak is crucial for an understanding of the various landforms of the region since they exist largely as a direct consequence of the geological environment. Although fairly complex in detail (Fig. 1.3, Table 1.2) (see also Von Backstrom, 1967; Gerringer & Botha, 1975) the geology of the region is easily understood when collapsed into its main lithological groups (Fig. 1.4) which together span a tremendous age range. The oldest group of rocks is represented by the basement material of the Namaqualand Mobile Belt which dates to about 1.1 billion years. These are sedimentary, volcanic and intrusive rocks. Following the collision of the original continental material or Kaapvaal craton with other major blocks to the north of it (e.g. the Zimbabwe craton) an unstable region called a mobile belt or geosyncline was created. The sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Koronnaland sequence and Hartbees River complex were deposited within this region at the time and the intrusive rocks of the Keimoes and Eendhoorn suites are also related to this collisional event. Subsequent erosion over millions of years has exposed both the basement gneisses and other material of the Namaqualand Mobile Belt. This material forms much of the rocky pediments at the base of mountains in the region. An unrelated and substantially more recent event (from 550 million years ago) has been the laying down, within a shallow sea environment of the Nama Group of sediments. It is this sedimentary grey and red-brown quartzite, shale and conglomerate which comprises the plateau and steep rocky slopes of Riemvasmaak. The Kalahari group of sandy alluvial depositions occurred relatively recently during the Quaternary. It is these wind- and water-transported materials which comprise the sandy pediments and sandy dry river beds below the plateau today. 1-7 Fig. 1.3. The geology of Riemvasmaak enlarged from the 1:250 000 Geological Series 2820 Upington map (Moen, 1988). 8 TABLE 1.2. The geology and lithology of Riemvasmaak (after Moen, 1988). MAP SYMBOL SEQUENCE/ COMPLEX GROUP/SUITE FORMATION LITHOLOGY Q Qg Kalahari group sandy alluvium Kalahari group Kalahari group Gordonia Sandy alluvium Red-brown, wind-blown sand and dunes Nk Nama group sediments Nama group Kuibis Grey and red-brown quartzite, shale, conglomerate Mgo Mra Mpu Mo Mcl Mbo Mko Mw Mtw Mc Mdo Mba Md Mga Ma Mrm Korannaland sequence Hartbees River complex Namaqualand Mobile Belt - Sedimentary and volcanic rocks Goedehoop Quartzite, sericitic and/or feldspathic in places Biesjepoort group Rautenback se kop Fine-grained, pink-weathering gneiss Puntsit Quartz-rich and mafic calc-silcate rocks with lenses of wollastonite and marble Omdraai Leucocratic quartz-microcline gneiss, amphibole gneiss, quartzite Koelmanskop metamorphic suite Collinskop Bok-se-puts Kourop Migmatite Witwater Gneiss Twakputs Gneiss Namaqualand Mobile Belt - Intrusive rocks Keimoes Suite Cnydas Subsuite Donkieboud Granite Gneiss Eendhoorn Suite Bak River Granite Gneiss Daberas Granodiorite - Augrabies Gneiss Riemvasmaak Gneiss Kinzigite Yellow-weathering gneiss with quart-rich and pelitic zones Migmatitic leucogneiss and biotite gneiss, garnetiferous in places; amphibole gneiss White, garnetiferous mica-poor gneiss, pegmatitic in places Mega blastic, garnetiferous biotite gneiss Unfoliated, equigranular granites, with tormaline nodules in places Biotite rich granite gneiss, garnetiferous and/or megacrystic in places Biotite-rich, garnetiferous granite gneiss Charnockitic granodiorite Undifferentiated basic rocks (metagabbro, diabase, etc) Grey to red-brown granite gneiss Pink-weathering granite gneiss with a granular or augen texture 9 Fig. 1.4. Major geological groups comprising the Riemvasmaak environment. 1-10 1.3.2 Mining This section is drawn directly from the work contained in the South African Defence Force report (SADF, 1990) and except for a few minor editorial changes and the exclusion of a number of figures it is reproduced in its entirety. Where applicable, additional material drawn from Toens’ (1994) brief synopsis is included. This information is extracted “from the study of certain unpublished reports, most of which are not generally available” (Toens, 1994). Important early sources of information concerning the mining potential are contained in Gerringer & Bothas’s (1975) excellent description of the pegmatite-granite association in Riemvasmaak . Three maps, providing an accurate location and description of each pegmatite field, are also contained in their article. Von Backstrom (1967) presents important details of the pegmatite minerals, including their composition, history of extraction and potential for further exploitation. Although we provide some additional references in our bibliography, a comprehensive survey of the geological and mining literature by a skilled consultant is needed. The pegmatite belt of the Northern Cape Pegmatites occur mainly as relatively sporadic deposits that are connected with granitic intrusive activity. The pegmatites in the northwestern Cape occur along a fairly continuous belt approximately 25 km wide and 250 km long, and is estimated to contain in excess of 50 000 pegmatites of various sizes. The pegmatites, ranging from homogenous to inhomogenous types, are found in the area west of Upington. They are concentrated in distinct areas and seven such fields have been recognized by Gerringer & Botha (1975). The pegmatites have been divided into groups according to their main economical mineralisation. Four different types, namely, rare earth bearing, beryl bearing, andalusite bearing and tourmaline bearing pegmatites have been recognized. Riemvasmaak itself displays a wealth of pegmatite intrusions, including some of the most renowned Rare earth and beryl bearing pegmatites in the country A close association exists between the mineralisation and distribution of the pegmatites and the various granitic occurrences in the area. Gerringer & Botha (1975) have shown that the Rare earth bearing pegmatites are associated with the Central Massif of the Bakriver granite, the beryl bearing pegmatites are associated with the Southern Massif of the Bakriver granite. The andalusite bearing pegmatites are related to the Kouropriver granite and the tourmaline rich types are associated with the younger granites of the Cnydas complex. Several of the pegmatites in the area have been economically exploited in the past, but only in small quantities. The mining of pegmatites has mostly been done by nomadic prospectors who move from one pegmatite to another. The large scale exploitation of pegmatitic mineralisation is hampered by the general lack of geological information pertaining to the size of the pegmatites and the extent of mineralisation. 11 Economically exploited pegmatites in Riemvasmaak. The Bakriver pegmatite This pegmatite is situated on the eastern slope of the Bakriver valley about 9 km south of Bok se Puts. It is approximately 30 m long and between 10 m and 30 m wide. It forms an irregular body with a discordant off-shoot. The body exhibits a complicated structural relationship with the enclosing country rock. The pegmatite has three distinct zones: a border zone, a wall zone and a core with the mineralisation occurring in the wall zone. Between 1952 and 1959 the pegmatite was prospected for gadolinite and allanite, producing several tons. The pegmatite is now largely worked out. Toens (1994) states that “....approximately 75 tons of radioactive materail (was) produced in the Bakriver pegmatite containing 0.07 % uranium oxide.” The Murasie pegmatite At Murasie, five thin tabular parallel pegmatites dip 40 degrees south and form a low hill 9 km south of Bok se Puts. A prospecting pit 500 m reveals a well-developed zonal structure consisting of a quartz core, a perthitic intermediate zone and a wall zone of graphic granite consisting of quart, plagioclase and biotite. The Rare earth minerals are concentrated in the intermediate zone. Allanite and gadolinite generally occur as small anhedral lumps close to the contact with the wall zone and a few tons of the se minerals have been mined. The Japie pegmatite This pegmatite lies 5 km northeast of the confluence of the Orange and Bak rivers, on the southern slope of a steep hill. The east-west trending body dips vertically and plunges east. It is 80 m long and between 10 m and 20 m wide. A creek has cut its way across the western part of the body and exposed the internal structure. The central and largest part of the pegmatite is the quartzitic core surrounded by a perthitic shell. On the northern side of the body considerable quantities of ?ergusonite was allegedly recovered from pockets of biotite, quartz and perthite lying close to the core. The pegmatite was prospected for Rare earth minerals from 1956 to 1958, producing seven tons of gadolinite. The Mosterthoek pegmatite This pegmatite is situated approximately 10 km west of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station. It forms a concordant lenticular dyke 1 000 m long and 7 m to 30 m wide. The pegmatite consists of a quartz-perthite core in contact with a zone consisting of albite, cleavlandite, quartz, muscovite, beryl, schorl and columbite tantalite. Some of the beryl crystals from this pegmatite measure in excess of one meter in length. According to local prospectors (and Toens, 1994), more that 225 tons of beryl have been produced (see also Von Backstrom, 1967). 12 The Kourop pegmatite This pegmatite forms the crest of a steep hill 5 km east of the confluence of the Kourop and Orange Rivers. The pegmatite is a dyke-like body 200 m long and 6 m to 12 m wide. It strikes northwest and dips slightly to the northeast. The pegmatite consists of a border zone and wall zone and a core, which contains radial clusters of andalusite. Elluvial lumps of andalusite in excess of 12 kg can be found in the rubble of the old diggings. No information pertaining to the amount of andalusite produced could be found. The Riemvasmaak pegmatite This pegmatite is exposed 3 km north of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station. It is 60 m long and 3 m wide and lies on the steep slopes of the spur jutting out from the hill on which the northwestern beacon of the farm Waterval is located. Rare earth minerals, mainly gadolinite, have replaced microcline perthite close to and along the contacts with the core. Approximately 140 kg of gadolinite was produced during 1945 from a small mineralized portion of the pegmatite estimated to contain 0.1 % Rare earth minerals (see also Toens, 1994). Other economical deposits in the area Approximately 1.5.km south of Bok se Puts lies the locality of an old Rose Quartz mine. The colour of Rose Quartz is due to the presence of manganese. Although Rose Quartz is common and widespread it is nearly always cloudy and cracked so that clear pieces are scarce. The same mine evidently also produced some smoky quartz, which is a colourless to black variety of quartz. The colour is due to irradiation or due to heat. On the farm Aries, forming the northwestern border of the area, baryte deposits have been found in addition to a gypsum deposit constituting approximately 22 million tons of 67 % gypsum. The deposit is presently (i.e. 1990) being mined by Blue Circle Mines. 13 14 Fig. 1.5. Occurrence of minerals at Riemvasmaak. (See also Von Backstrom (1967) for a more detailed account of mining operations in the area). 15 1.3.3 Soils No detailed soil survey of the whole of Riemvasmaak has as yet been undertaken. However, because the Molopo alluvial fan (see photostation 12 for a view of the region) has been ear-marked as a potential crop irrigation site it has been thoroughly investigated by Van Niekerk (1994) who provides a soil unit map of the alluvial fan and a detailed physical and chemical analysis of each unit. Because of its importance to the agricultural development of the region, the soil unit map (Fig. 1.6) and brief description of the soil units is included in this report (Table 1.3). In addition to Van Niekerk’s (1994) soil analysis we also collected and analyzed 12 soil samples from a range of landforms in Riemvasmaak and present the data in Table 1.4. We discuss salient features of the soil data set in our description of the vegetation associated with landforms (Section 1.4.1.3). 16 TABLE 1.3. A description of soil units on the Molopo alluvial fan indicating their geomorphological position, dominant soil form, map symbol (see Fig. 1.6) and their irrigation potential (L = Low; M-L = Moderate to Low; M = Moderate; M-H = Moderate to High). Information for this table has been compiled from data in Van Niekerk (1994). NAME DESCRIPTION SOIL FORM Lower Orange River terrace • Young, alluvial, deep, fine sand deposits • Uniform, very deep, fine sand deposits • Shallow to very deep, wind redistributed, fine sandy alluvium • Very stony, bouldery area • Gently sloping alluvial fan with deep gravelly coarse sand • Recent, gravelly soarse sand alluvium • Recent,deep, gravelly coarse sand alluvium • Deep, calcareous gravelly, coarse sand to gravelly loamy coarse sand • Deep, calcareous, very gravelly loamy coarse sand • Non-calcareous gravelly coarse sand Higher Orange River terraces Alluvial fans Very low Molopo River terrace Higher Molopo River terrace Gently sloping pediment slopes Narrow, north-aspect pediment Sloping, eroded, upper pediment slopes Moderately deep to shallow soils Lower pediment slope alluvium Stony, older terrace remnants • Aeolian fine sand and coarse alluvium • Deep, calcareous, gravelly loamy coarse sand • Occur as narrow bands on the upper pediments • Fine sand to loamy fine sand alluvium • Gravel, stones and boulders in a calcareous coarse sand to loamy coarse sand Dundee Namib Namib MAP SYMBOL Du1 Nb1 Nb2 IRRIGATION POTENTIAL M M-H M Namib Dundee Nb3 Du2 M M Dundee Dundee Dundee/ Augrabies Augrabies Dundee/ Clovelly Dundee Augrabies Du3 Du4 Du5 L M-L M-H Ag1 Du6 M-H M-H Du7 Ag2 M M-H Augrabies Dundee Dundee Ag3 Du8 Du9 M-H M-H M-L 1-17 Fig. 1.6. Soil unit map of the Molopo alluvial fan (redrawn from Van Niekerk (1994)) showing the distribution of regions with moderate to high irrigation potential (dots) and those with moderate, moderate to low and low irrigation potential (left blank). Rocky, mountainous terrain is indicated by diagonal lines; D = drainage line of Orange River, Molopo River or smaller tributaries of these two rivers. Soil unit map symbols are those used in Table 1.3 where details of the soil units are presented. Star indicates position of photostation 12. 1-18 TABLE 1.4. Results of an analysis of soil samples from 12 sites in Riemvasmaak. Number refers to the photostation number (see Appendix 8) and the letter refers to the landform wherein the soil sample was taken. Landform abbreviations are Rf = rocky footslope, Sp = Sandy pediment, Pl = Plateau, Pa = Pan on plateau, Rb = River bed. The soils are all loamy sands except for 5c which is a sandy clay loam. VARIABLE Number Landform Colour % Coarse sand % Medium sand % Fine sand % Silt % Clay pH Resistance (ohm) P (mg/kg) Ca (mg/kg) Mg (mg/kg) K (mg/kg) Na (mg/kg) T-Value [meq%] % Ca % Mg %K % Na % Base saturation Cu (mg/kg) Mn (mg/kg) Zn (mg/kg) 2e Rf BR 22.1 18.9 49.0 4.0 6.0 8.1 417 307 4264 221 335 115 24.45 87.0 7.4 3.5 2.0 100 0.8 37.0 1.3 2f Sp LT R BR 24.5 20.7 46.8 4.0 4.0 7.0 2500 158 486 62 116 52 3.46 70.1 14.8 8.6 6.5 100 0.5 57 0.7 5a Pl RD 20.7 18.0 55.3 2.0 4.0 4.6 1667 31 362 134 163 55 4.03 44.9 27.4 10.4 5.9 89 0.8 37.0 0.8 5c Pa RD 26.7 6.9 38.4 12.0 16.0 6.4 833 230 1216 187 419 61 8.94 67.8 17.2 12.0 3.0 100 2.1 187 2.0 7a Sp LT R BR 22.5 20.7 50.8 2.0 4.0 7.6 200 165 1192 59 129 52 6.99 85.1 6.9 4.7 3.2 100 1.0 45.0 0.6 SOIL SAMPLE 7c 8a Sp Sp LT R BR BR 19.0 20.5 16.7 16.7 54.3 54.8 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 6.2 6.5 2500 3333 94 142 474 611 108 78 96 106 58 53 3.75 4.19 63.0 72.7 23.7 15.3 6.5 6.5 6.7 5.5 100 100 0.5 0.5 43.0 45.0 1.0 0.6 9a Sp BR 24.5 18.9 50.6 2.0 4.0 6.5 2000 155 646 92 111 52 4.49 71.8 16.9 6.3 5.0 100 0.7 53 0.5 11b Rb BR 19.8 16.0 58.2 2.0 4.0 5.7 3731 100 382 85 108 52 3.19 59.7 21.9 8.7 7.1 97 0.5 41.0 0.7 12a2 Rb BR 20.4 16.7 56.9 2.0 4.0 7.2 1190 98 838 51 90 75 5.16 81.1 8.1 4.5 6.3 100 0.7 42.0 0.5 18a Sp RD 26.0 20.7 43.3 4.0 6.0 6.3 3846 59 211 71 53 51 1.99 52.8 29.3 6.8 11.1 100 0.4 31.0 0.7 18b Sp RD 24.1 22.0 43.9 4.0 6.0 6.7 308 157 355 75 107 273 3.85 46.0 16.0 7.1 30.8 100 0.6 49.0 0.9 1-19 1.3.4 Climate Werger & Coetzee (1977) provide an excellent introduction to the climate of the Augrabies Falls National Park including descriptions of the solar radiation, temperature, wind, rainfall and ralative humidity. With a mean annual rainfall figure of 124.4 mm (std. dev. = 73.47 mm) there are few places in South Africa as arid as Riemvasmaak (Fig. 1.7). Although highly unpredictable (coefficient of mean annual rainfall = 59.06 %) long-term records indicate that rainfall is greatest between February and April with a distinct peak in March. The mean annual temperature is 21.6 °C and although the mean daily maximum temperature for January - the warmest month is 37.4 °C, summer temperatures frequently exceed 40 °C. When considered on a monthly basis, at no time during the year does water availability exceed evaporative demand and a state of permanent drought therefore exists. The spatial variation, between 75-155 mm.yr-1 in Riemvasmaak's annual rainfall totals (Fig. 1.8), suggests that only small gradients in moisture availability exist. Rainfall increases only slightly from west to east reflecting the more general regional trend for an increase in mean annual rainfall totals in more eastern parts of the Northern Cape. The most pronounced trend within Riemvasmaak itself, however, is for an increase northwards away from the lower elevations of the Orange River channel onto the higher-lying plateau environment. The modelled data indicate that places along the Orange River receive between 75-85 mm.yr-1 but that this increases to between 135-145 mm.yr-1 on the plateau north of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station. The long-term rainfall records for Augrabies village and Geelkop, about 50 km east of Augrabies (Fig. 1.9, Fig. 1.10), show that the region is characterised by periods of alternating low and high rainfall which have been interpreted by some researchers as pseudocycles (Tyson, 1988). The general pattern in rainfall for the region during the last 65 years may be interpreted as follows. There appears to have been a general aridification of the region from 1918-1933 with only 4 years showing any significant increase above the long-term mean annual amounts (Fig. 1.9, Fig. 1.10). Between 1934 and 1941, however, a series of generally higher rainfall years followed. From 1942 right up until 1948 (for Augrabies village at least) mean annual totals were very low. The early 1950's are characterised by large fluctuations in annual totals but from 1956 to the end of 1966 there was a clear decrease in rainfall totals. From 1967 in Augrabies but a little later in Geelkop, an unparalleled and sustained increase in annual rainfall occurred. These "wet" conditions were to last until 1977 in Augrabies and have been followed by one of the most extended dry spells on record which continues to the present. The significance of the wet 1970's which coincidentally occurred at the very beginning of the SADF's tenure has important implications for the recruitment of key tree species such as Acacia erioloba and Schotia afra and will be discussed in more detail later. 1-20 Fig. 1.7. Walter-Leith climate diagram for Augrabies close to the south eastern boundary of Riemvasmaak. a = climate station: [rainfall data are taken for the period 1946-1994 from Augrabies village (station number 0281760 1) (28°40’S 20°26’E) while temperature data are for the period 1984-1994 and are from Augrabies Water Falls (station number 0281606 0) (28°36’S 20°21’E) some 14 km northwest of Augrabies village]; b= height above sea level (Augrabies village = 640 m; Augrabies Water Falls = 626 m); c = duration of observation in years (the first figure indicates temperature, the second, precipitation); d = mean annual temperature; e = mean annual precipitation; f= mean daily maximum temperature of the warmest month; g = mean daily temperature variations; h = mean daily minimum temperature of the coldest month; i = curve of mean monthly temperature; j = relative period of drought; k = curve of mean monthly precipitation. 1-21 Fig. 1.8. Mean annual rainfall for Riemvasmaak and surrounding areas calculated from CCWR (1994) modeled data. 1-22 400 Augrabies (1946-1994) 350 Rainfall (mm) 300 250 200 150 100 50 19 94 19 92 19 88 19 90 19 86 19 84 19 80 19 82 19 78 19 76 19 74 19 72 19 70 19 68 19 66 19 64 19 60 19 62 19 58 19 56 19 54 19 52 19 50 19 46 19 48 0 Year 450 Geelkop (1918-1988) 400 350 Rainfall (mm) 300 250 200 150 100 50 19 1 19 8 20 19 22 19 24 19 2 19 6 28 19 3 19 0 32 19 34 19 36 19 3 19 8 40 19 4 19 2 44 19 4 19 6 48 19 5 19 0 52 19 5 19 4 56 19 5 19 8 60 19 62 19 64 19 6 19 6 68 19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 7 19 8 80 19 82 19 8 19 4 86 19 88 0 Year Fig. 1.9. Total annual rainfall (histograms) and three-year running mean (solid line) for Augrabies village (station number 0281760 1) (28°40’S, 20°26’E) for the period 1946-1994 and for Geelkop (station number 0283098 3) (28°38’s, 21°04’E) for the period 1918-1988. 1-23 200 Augrabies (1946-1994) Mean = 124.4 mm.yr-1 100 50 0 19 46 19 48 19 50 19 52 19 54 19 56 19 58 19 60 19 62 19 64 19 66 19 68 19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 78 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 19 92 19 94 per cent deviation 150 -50 -100 -150 Year 200 Geelkop (1918-1988) Mean = 147.8 mm.yr -1 100 50 0 19 18 19 20 19 22 19 24 19 26 19 28 19 30 19 32 19 34 19 36 19 38 19 40 19 42 19 44 19 46 19 48 19 50 19 52 19 54 19 56 19 58 19 60 19 62 19 64 19 66 19 68 19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 78 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 per cent deviation 150 -50 -100 Year Fig. 1.10 Percent deviation from mean long-term rainfall at Augrabies village (station number 0281760 1) (28°40’S, 20°26’E) for the period 1946-1994 and at Geelkop (station number 0283098 3) (28°38’s, 21°04’E) for the period 1918-1988. 1-24 1.3.5 Hydrology and water sources Four river systems occur in Riemvasmaak (Fig. 1.11; Table 1.5) and the general direction of drainage is from north to south although the Molopo River channel itself runs slightly transverse to this pattern The Bak River drains the western portion of Riemvasmaak and is the second largest catchment within the region. The central portions of the reserve are drained by the marginally smaller Kourop River. The eastern parts are drained by the Molopo River and its tributaries forming the largest catchment in Riemvasmaak. Three small subcatchments of the Orange River occur between each of the Bak, Kourop and Molopo Rivers. TABLE 1.5. The % cover and area (ha) of each river catchment in Riemvasmaak. No. 1 2 3 4 (4a) (4b) (4c) Catchment Area Bak River Kourop River Molopo River Orange River (Orange River) (Orange River) (Orange River) % 23.4 23.3 36.0 17.3 (4.8) (5.0) (7.5) ha 17 433 17 369 26 898 12 863 (3 579) (3 700) (5 584) Total 100.0 74 563 Over the years a number of boreholes and dug wells or “putte” have been established while the location of a number of natural springs and water holes are still remembered by local people. Upon the request of FARM Africa, P D Toens and Associates - a consulting geological and geohydrological enterprise - investigated the water sources of Riemvasmaak. This study (Toens, 1994) was conducted in August 1994 and together with information contained in the SADF report (SADF,1990) has been synthesised into a more user-friendly format in Fig. 1.12 and Table 1.6. The most crucial finding of Toens (1994) was that only three of the twenty water points sampled contained potable water (numbers 5, 6 & 20). The remaining sources had excessive levels of either fluoride or nitrates or were too saline for healthy human consumption. These findings are in stark contrast to the views expressed by the Riemvasmaak community who during a workshop in May 1994 (Isaacs & Phillips, 1994) described many of their water sources as "vars" (fresh). 1-25 Fig. 1.11. Catchment areas of the four main river systems in Riemvasmaak: 1 = Bak River; 2 = Kourop River; 3 = Molopo River; 4 = Orange River. 1-26 Fig. 1.12. Location of different water sources in Riemvasmaak. Numbers refer to those in Table 1.6. 1-27 Table 1.6. Water quality and other characteristics of water sources (boreholes, dug wells (= put), springs (= fonteine) and natural waterholes) in Riemvasmaak. No. Description Water level (m) Depth (m) Nitrate (mg/l) Acc. limit = 6.00 Max. limit = 10.00 26.40 1 RIEM 1 B1 Production borehole 12.5 17.3 2 RIEM 2/ G38354 RIEM 3/ G38355 RIEM 4 RIEM 5 RIEM 6 RIEM 7 RIEM 8 RIEM 9 RIEM 10 RIEM 11 RIEM 12 RIEM 13 RIEM 14 RIEM 15 RIEM 16 RIEM 17 RIEM 18 RIEM 19 RIEM 20 RIEM 21 RIEM 22 RIEM 23 - Production borehole 27.2 80.0 114 3.40 4.03 - Borehole 26.9 81.0 116 3.21 <0.01 Dug well Natural waterhole Dug well Duwell Spring Dug well Dug well Dug well Dug well Dug well Dug well Dug well Borehole Dug well Dug well Dug well Seepage in river bed Seepage in river bed Dug well Spring 4.0 2.9 1.2 14.3 5.15 5.0 - 6.95 10.0 - 126 31 77 160 1160 350 760 850 56 310 380 3.80 0.76 0.87 5.00 10.00 5.50 15.50 5.50 0.38 2.80 4.70 3.10 <0.01 3.13 0.44 0.15 32.72 1.80 0.66 <0.01 0.14 28.14 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 SADF (1990) No. Fluoride (mg/l) Acc. limit = 1.00 Max. limit = 1.50 5.00 Conductivity (mS/m) Acc. limit = 70 Max. limit = 300 185 3 Toens (1994) No. P4 N1 P3 P1 F4 P6 P7 P8 B3 ?P9 P5 N3 F3 - Remarks Diesel-driven monopump (at Mission Station). Yield (according to locals) = 0.93 l/s. Adjacent to septic tank Drilled by Water Affairs. Pump and pipeline removed. Situated in riverbed. Yield = 4.0 l/s Borehole in riverbed. Dead animal in borehole Yield = 0.33 l/s Well dries up during periods of drought Seasonal A perennial well on the bank of the Molopo R. Well dry Seasonal spring On a fault. Well dry Well in Loeriesfontein river. Silted up Well in Loeriesfontein river - dry On a fault alongside the river. Well silted up On a fault - silted up Well collapsed - windmill dismantled Well situated on riverbank Vandalised Windmill dismantled On a fault In foliated biotite schist Perennial Perennial Well on riverbank. Completely silted up Situated on a fracture 1-28 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 RIEM 24 RIEM 25 T34100 T34002 T34004 T34005 G38357 G38351 G38352 G39390 G38359 - F2 B2 P2 F1 N2 N4 N5 Spring Dug well Borehole Dug well Dug well Spring Borehole Borehole Borehole Borehole Borehole Natural waterhole Natural waterhole Natural waterhole 7.5 12.3 10.8 (11.5) 26.7 5.79- 10.0 (15.0) 69.0 80.0 - 475 640 215 465 155 190 - 4.60 3.90 6.30 10.20 4.10 7.10 - 2.97 37.44 11.24 26.91 19.21 4.31 - Hot spring (35-40°C). On a fault, flow = 3-5 l/s Windmill in working order Windmill dismantled Well next to school at Mission Dry well situated on basic dyke Dry silted up Srilled by Water Affairs. Yield = 4 l/s Silted up. Yield <0.14 l/s Silted up. Dry Dry Windmill in working order. Yield = 0.5 l/s 1-29 Hot spring This section has been taken directly from the SADF report (1990). The Riemvasmaak thermal spring is the only natural source of perennial water away from the course of the Orange River. The temperature of the water issuing from the spring was measured by von Backstrom (1962), at 2 p.m. on 11 May, 1957 at 38.3 °C. The spring therefore falls under the class of Hot Springs (37-50 °C) according to Kent (1949). The spring is estimated to yield approximately 1800 litres/hr (von Backstrom, 1962). The point of emergence of the spring is not associated with any clearly definable geological feature such as faults or joints. The spring is near the foot of the dissected escarpment formed by the rocks of the Nama system to the northwest, resulting in a rapid fall of country from the northwest to the southeast, accentuated by the presence of the Molopo River canyon. The final difference in elevation between the thermal spring and the edge of the plateau is greater than 335 m. In the area main joints strike predominantly N 25 - 28 E, N 60 -65 W and N 73 - 83 E. Perhaps the strike of the canyon in the area, (N 35 E) is significant. The canyon could thus have formed along one of the main joint directions in the area and the spring could therefore have issued from a principle joint in the Pink Gneiss, which has subsequently been covered by superficial material forming the bed of the Molopo River. The thermal water appears to be of meteoric (rainfall) origin, having percolated to sufficient depth along suitable fractures and joints in order to achieve the high temperature. Von Backstrom (1962) has shown that the depth of the origin of the thermal water must be considerable greater than that of the elevation difference depicted. 1-30 1.4 THE BIOTIC ENVIRONMENT 1.4.1 Vegetation 1.4.1.1 General methodology The chief aim of the expedition in January 1995 was to conduct a baseline survey of the region. Not only does such an exercise help to familiarise development and research agencies with the general environment, but, more importantly, it also forms the springboard from which a monitoring programme can be launched (Chapter 3). We sought to classify the Riemvasmaak environment into landforms; to describe the vegetation (in terms of species composition and cover) associated with each landform; to assess the overall "condition" of the vegetation and how it has changed in the last few decades; and to provide some indication of the carrying capacity of each landform. In addition, one of our aims was to establish an extensive set of baseline photographs, widespread throughout Riemvasmaak, which can be used in future matched photographic studies of the region. Matched photography remains a powerful tool for assessing vegetation change, particularly so in semi-arid and arid environments. It has been used very successfully in the United States of America. For example, Rogers et al (1984) document over 450 studies which incorporate matched photographic techniques in their overall assessment of vegetation change. In southern Africa, Shantz & Turner (1958) and Hoffman & Cowling (1990) provide examples of matched photographic studies to assess dryland degradation of the Karoo and arid savanna regions. One of the important strengths of using matched photography in communal areas is that no scientific expertise is required to compare the images from two time periods. There is no analytical or statistical manipulation of the raw data and the images can be understood by people who may not have had access to an advanced education but who nonetheless have an intelligent ecological and historical knowledge of their own landscape. In developing our general methodology for this survey we have used many of the techniques and tools employed traditionally by the Zurich-Montpellier school of vegetation survey (Werger, 1972). However, there are a number of important differences. Firstly, we have tried to link our photographic documentation of the region directly with our sampling strategy. As outlined above and shown in Appendix 2 and Appendix 8, this adds a valuable monitoring component to the study. We believe that our methods will enable future workers and local farmers to assess accurately the changes in the Riemvasmaak environment with the aid of the photographs and detailed vegetation descriptions. Secondly, we have adopted a landscape focus, describing the vegetation associated with key landforms rather than only with the identification and description of important plant communities (Werger & Coetzee, 1977). Because of this our sample “plot” sizes were usually two to three orders of magnitude larger than is usually the case in standard phytosociological analyses (e.g. Werger & Coetzee, 1977). We think that this “scaling up” is important for a number of reasons not least of which is the fact that it is at this level of scale that farmers interpret and manage their landscapes. Farmers talk of “koppies”, “vlaktes” and “riviere” and divide their landscape into these components. It has been our experience that they do not identify plant communities in the way that vegetation scientists have traditionally done and that these plant community 1-31 units have little value in day to day communal as well as commercial farm managment activities. Another reason for us to adopt a landscape approach is that we were required to produce a “range map” of the region and provide some idea of the utilization potential of each region. In the very short time available to us to complete our field work, we thought that a focus on the composition and potential of different landscape elements would be the most appropriate method to use. Site selection We decided that while as much of the region should be covered as possible there should also be some focus to our sampling strategy. Since the road network links individual villages within Riemvasmaak, we decided to locate our photostations and survey sites in and around major settlements with due care to cover as many landforms as possible. Our photostations were also selected for their aesthetic appeal and panoramic views and the wide open valleys within all the river catchments lent themselves to such documentation. The location of the photostations is shown in Fig. 1.13. A high position on a hill or rocky slope, overlooking the study site was usually sought and a camera position selected. Time did not permit us to sample the entire landscape and so once the panorama was evident before us we selected one image within the panorama to sample intensively. Criteria for selection usually incorporated aspects of the view's diversity of landforms, its representativeness of the local environments, aesthetic quality and potential as a site from which future landscape changes can be assessed. Photographic documentation Although photographic details are recorded in Appendix 8 some information about the equipment used is necessary here. All photographs were taken on a sturdy tripod (Bogen 3001) with camera heights ranging from 138.5 cm to 160 cm. Four cameras were used at each photostation. Once an image had been selected for detailed analysis a Mamiya 645, medium format camera with a standard 80 mm lens and blackand-white Ilford FP4 Plus 120 mm film (ASA 125) was used to capture the image. Due care was taken to record the camera height, photographic details (f-stop, shutter speed) and exact time of photograph. The camera position was also recorded with a Sony PYXIS Global Positioning System, marked on a 1:50 000 topographic map and the direction of the field of view of the "main image" recorded by means of a standard compass. After this image was captured the field of view was swivelled 30° left, 60° left and so on until that part of the panorama to the left of the main image was photographed. Then the procedure was repeated 30° right, 60° right and so on, for the panorama to the right of the main image. With the aid of a built-in tripod spirit level, appropriate care was taken at each position to ensure that the camera remained horizontal at all times. The second camera used was a 135 mm Minolta X-300s with a standard 50 mm Minolta lens loaded with black-and-white Ilford FP4 Plus film (ASA 125). The same procedure, outline above, was repeated with this camera after which one member of the team moved to a location a few hundred metres from the camera position and 1-32 Fig. 1.13 Location of 29 photo stations in Riemvasmaak. Large circles show the general area covered by the images, small dot indicates approximate position of photostation and line indicates the direction of the “main” photograph and sample area. 1-33 photographed the photostation with the Minolta X-300s. This image will help future investigators to relocate the exact position of each photostation. A third camera, a 135 mm Minolta X-70 with a 35-200 zoom lens with (Fujichrome ASA 100) colour slide film was also used to record the main image only. Finally, a cheap Polaroid camera was used to record the main image so that an immediate record of the site to be sampled was available. The spot directly below the camera position was marked with a metal dropper which, because of the rockiness of the terrain, usually had to be supported within a small rock cairn. It is our intention to place a copy of this report, together with a set of 7”X5” prints and a set of negetatives of either the medium or 35 mm format with a reputable archival institution such as the South African Library. In doing so it is our hope that this record of the Riemvasmaak environment will be accessible to future generations. Vegetation analysis Once the photographs were taken with all four cameras, the main image captured on the Polaroid film was classified by consensus within the survey team into its different landscape elements such as rocky slopes, sandy pediments, dry river beds and so on. These different elements were marked with a permanent pen, numbered (a-f) on the Polaroid image and briefly described from the camera position (Appendix 8). With the Polaroid image as our guide we walked from the camera position "into" the main image sampling each element (e.g. rocky footslope, rocky pediment, dry river bed, etc) in detail as we moved through the landscape. Sampling consisted of identifying each plant species we encountered and assigning, by consensus within the survey team, a percentage cover value for that species within a particular landscape element. Unknown plant species were collected and later identified in the Compton Herbarium at Kirstenbosch, Cape Town where voucher specimens have been deposited. The different landscape elements effectively formed our plots or “sites” and ranged in size from less than one ha in rare instances to hundreds of hectares. Generally the sites were between 10-100 ha in size (Appendix 8). These data collected from each landscape element formed the basis of our vegetation and landform classification. A two-way matrix of species-by-sites was constructed and subjected to standard two-way indicator species (TWINSPAN) (Hill, 1979) classification procedures. The resultant dendrogram was refined by means of a manual adjustment of sites (Appendix 2; Appendix 8). 1.4.1.2 Landform classification The classification procedure outlined above sorted sites into major landform categories (Appendix 2). Although we assigned each site to a particular landscape element in the field our categories and classification was refined with the aid of the TWINSPAN analysis. Once these basic landform units were established a composite image of about 40, 1:30 000 aerial photographs of the region was created (Job No. 771, Series 1-9, June 1976). This composite was used to classify the Riemvasmaak environment into its component landforms and to map the elements onto the 1:50 000 topographic maps for the region. These topographic maps were photo-reduced and the area of each landform determined using a standard cut-and-weigh method. 1-34 Five main landforms are recognised in Riemvasmaak (Fig. 1.14, Table 1.7), with a sixth one - inselbergs - covering only a very small part of the landsurface area of the region. The different landforms are closely associated with the major geological groups of the region. The plateau is comprised almost exclusively of Nama group sediments and covers about a quarter of the region (Fig. 1.14, Table 1.7). A surprisingly high proportion of Riemvasmaak, also about 25 %, is comprised of the rocky slopes which fringe the plateau. The largest landform is that of the rocky footslopes, toeslopes and rocky pediments which cover slightly more than a third of the area in Riemvasmaak. They represent a diverse set of environments formed within the extremely complex geological mosaic of the Namaqualand Mobile Belt. There is some indication from our analysis that the very broken topography which exists below the escarpment represents a landform distinct from the rocky pediments in the upper reaches of the Kourop River, Bak River and the Molopo River. However, too few sites were located in this environment to adequately assess this. The sandy pediments occur largely as a result of the recent alluvial and aeolian sandy deposits within the broad river valleys of the region. Plant species composition appears to change between sandy pediments west of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station and those in the more eastern parts. This will be discussed in more detail later. Finally, the dry river beds which bisect the river valleys cover only 1.4% of the region. They contribute a disproportionate amount to the biomass and production potential of the landscape and are key landscape elements in the ecology and management of Riemvasmaak. Narrow rocky river beds, wide and saline river beds and wide and sandy river beds are recognised as important variations in our analysis (Appendix 2; Appendix 8; Fig. 1.15) TABLE 1.7. The % cover and area (ha) of each land form in Riemvasmaak. Land form Area Plateau Rocky slopes Rocky footslopes & rocky pediments Sandy pediments River beds % 25.6 25.0 33.9 14.1 1.4 ha 19 121 18 615 25 285 10 496 1 046 Total 100.0 74 563 1-35 Fig. 1.14. Major landforms in Riemvasmaak: blue = Plateau; purple = Steep slopes; red = Rocky footslopes, rocky toeslopes and rocky pediments; yellow = Sandy pediments; green = River beds. 1-36 1.4.1.3 Vegetation associated with landforms The matrix of species (listed alphabetically) and sites (grouped into the major landforms in Riemvasmaak) is presented in Appendix 2. A checklist of the 159 plants identified during this study and those in the general Riemvasmaak environment, comprising a total of 443 species, is shown in Appendix 3. A highly stylised description of the main species and growth forms associated with different landscape elements is also shown in Fig. 1.15. We discuss below the composition and structure of the vegetation associated with each landform and recommend that Werger & Coetzee’s (1977) excellent phytosociological treatment of the plant communities of the Augrabies Falls National Park be consulted for additional information on the vegetation of the region. Plateau The plateau is a flat and featureless plain comprised of acidic red loamy sands with an abundance of large (10-15 cm) rounded or angular rocks covering the surface. Because of its apparent uniformity and difficulty of access we only sampled one region of the plateau (Photostation 5; see Fig. 1.13). The vegetation of the plateau is dominated by Euphorbia gregaria, and to a lesser extent by the very similar-looking Sarcostemma viminale and by Monechma spartioides (Appendix 2). Boscia foetida and Petalidium lucens are other common shrubs while the most abundant grasses include Panicum arbusculum, Enneapogon scaber and Stipagrostis uniplumis. In places, isolated Aloe dichotoma individuals rise above the succulent shrubland. To the north of Riemvasmaak in particular, the plateau environment is characterised by a series of depressions or pans ranging from tens of meters to kilometers in length or breadth (Fig. 1.1). The pans themselves (Site 5c) possess soils with high clay contents (Table 1.4) and have a very sparse vegetation dominated by the leaf-succulent halophytes Zygophyllum retrofractum and Salsola aphylla. Other common species include the two disturbance-related species: Aptosimum spinescens and Geigaria ornativa. On the sandy fringes of the pan a distinctive flora occurs. It is similar to the vegetation of the sandy pediments east of Riemvasmaak and is dominated by Parkinsonia africana, Stipagrostis uniplumis and Monechma spartioides. From discussions with members of the Riemvasmaak community there is some indication that the pans become seasonally inundated with water enabling the plateau environment to be utilized by stock farmers for extended periods during high rainfall events. Although not adequately documented, individual pans appear to have their own names (e.g. Keivlei) suggesting that they may have formed an important part of the grazing and strategies employed in "Old Riemvasmaak". Rocky slopes, footslopes, toeslopes and rocky pediments The Nama sediments of the plateau are deeply dissected in places and an escarpment, running haphazardly from west to east, dominates the Riemvasmaak skyline. Although there are many similarities, our analysis suggests that two variations of this landform may occur. The rocky slopes, footslopes, toeslopes and 1-37 rocky pediments associated, either directly with the Nama sediments or those of the upper reaches of the Bak and Kourop Rivers, may support a vegetation distinct from the pediments associated with the Namaqualand Mobile Belt sediments and granites below the escarpment (i.e. roughly south of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station) (Appendix 2; Plates 1.3, 1.4; 1.5). Dominant species common to both these rocky pediments include Acacia mellifera, Euphorbia gregaria, Monechma spartioides and Stipagrostis uniplumis with the dominance of E. gregaria being a distinctive feature of both variations. However, some of the rocky slopes and pediments of the upper reaches of the Bak and Kourop River valleys possess a number of interesting local dominants including the aphyllous shrub Calicorema capitata, the grass Stipagrostis hochstetteriana and the annual Zygophyllum simplex. Similarly, some of the unique features of the vegetation below the escarpment include the occurrence of Schotia afra, paraticularly along drainage lines, Enneapogon scaber, Aptosimum spinescens and especially Hermannia spinosa which appears to be widespread in this region only. Inselbergs Although forming an insignificant percentage of the land cover, a number of inselbergs arise from the rocky or sandy pediments within the river valleys (Appendix 8, Photostation 15). Probably because of their different geological composition, the vegetation appears to differ markedly between different inselbergs (Appendix 2). For example, Enneapogon scaber is dominant on some but Panicum arbusculum, Stipagrostis uniplumis or Triraphis ramosissima is the dominant grass on others. Similarly, any one of a number of shrubs such as Rhigozum trichotomum, Adenolobus gariepensis, Boscia foetida or Sisyndite spartea may be common. In general, vegetation cover was usually very sparse on the rocky slopes of the inselbergs. Sandy pediments The sandy pediments associated with the wide valleys in Riemvasmaak are comprised of recent alluvial or aeolian material (Plate 1.6). Based on our analysis of the vegetation we divide this landform into those occurring west of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station and those occurring east of this settlement. Both, however, share common dominants such as Acacia mellifera, Monechma spartioides and Stipagrostis uniplumis. In the west, vegetation cover is generally higher and species such as Boscia foetida, Sisyndite spartea, Stipagrostis hochstetteriana and Zygophyllum simplex are generally co-dominants. In the east, the dominance or wide-spread occurrence of species such as Rhigozum trichotomum, Lycium cinereum, Geigaria ornativa and Sesamum capense suggests that these pediments have been subjected to higher levels of disturbance in the recent past than those west of Riemvasmaak. Although the main body of the Kalahari dune fields ends a few km north of Riemvasmaak, a few isolated pockets of Kalahari sands occur, usually adjacent to the sandy pediments (Plate 1.10). Stipagrostis ciliata and Schmidtia kalahariensis are usually associated with these red sands. River beds 1-38 We recognize three main variations of the dry river beds in Riemvasmaak (Fig. 1.15). In the upper reaches of the Bak and Kourop rivers and the tributaries of the Molopo River, large round boulders are exposed at the surface. The narrow and rocky river channels here are dominated by Acacia mellifera, Cyperus marginatus, Monechma spartioides, Cenchrus ciliaris, Stipagrostis uniplumis and especially by Schotia afra (Appendix 2, Plate 1.9). It is in these habitats that most of the recruitment of Schotia afra and Pappea capensis was observed. Where wide and sandy river beds occur there are two main forms. Those which are dominated by Euclea pseudebenus and Tamarix usneoides (Plate 1.8) may be relatively saline. In places, such as below the Hot Springs in the Molopo River, T. usneoides form impenetrable thickets. More commonly, however, the wide and sandy river beds contain very little T. usneoides, if any, and are characterised by large Acacia erioloba individuals, by Stipagrostis namaquensis tussocks and by the occurrence of a range of other species such as Acacia mellifera, Phaeoptilum spinosum, Sisyndite spartea and Rhigozum trichotomum (Plate 1.7). 1-39 Fig. 1.15. Generalized view of vegetation associated with different landforms in Riemvasmaak. 1-41 PLATE 1.2. Flat, stony landscape of the plateau between Riemvasmaak Mission Station and Deksel. The landscape is dominated by Euphorbia gregaria with a number of species including Monechma spartioides, Boscia foetida, Panicum arbusculum and Sarcostemma viminale as common elements. The pan in the mid-ground depression is obscurred by a fringe of 2-3 m high Parkinsonia africana trees. Part of panorama of photostation 5. PLATE 1.3. Steep rocky slopes below the plateau dominated by Euphorbia gregaria, Stipagrostis uniplumis and Monechma spartioides. The witgatboom (Boscia albitrunca) which dominates the right foreground is frequently associated with the rocky slope environments. 1-42 PLATE 1.4. Rocky pediment below the Kouropberg about 1km south of Deksel. The vegetation is dominated by Euphorbia gregaria, Acacia mellifera, Monechma spartioides and Stipagrostis uniplumis. PLATE 1.5. Broken topography and rocky pediment below the plateau near the Molopo gorge about 2 km southwest of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station. The vegetation is dominated by Euphorbia gregaria and Stipagrostis uniplumis on the interfluves and by Schotia afra in the narrow and rocky river valleys. 1-43 PLATE 1.6. Sandy pediment 5 km north of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station dominated by Acacia mellifera, Stipagrostis uniplumis and Rhigozum trichotomum. This photo represents site 6a of photostation 6. It is also the site where Acacia mellifera size classes were measured (see Fig. 1.16) PLATE 1.7. Wide and sandy river bed about 4.5 km north of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station dominated by Stipagrostis namaquensis in the foreground and Acacia erioloba in the distance. This photo represents site 6b of photostation 6. 1-44 PLATE 1.8. Wide and saline river bed near the confluence of the Molopo and Orange Rivers close to photostation 12. The vegetation is dominated by Tamarix usneoides, Euclea pseudebenus and Acacia mellifera. PLATE 1.9. Narrow and rocky river bed about 8 km north of Riemvasmaak Mission Station at the point where the road ascends the plateau. The vegetation is dominated by Schotia afra, Acacia mellifera and Cyperus marginatus. 1-45 PLATE 1.10. An isolated pocket of Kalahari sand little more than 500 m2 dominated by Stipagrostis ciliata and Rhigozum trichotomum (foreground) and Euphorbia gregaria (mid-ground). 1-46 1.4.1.4 Size class distributions of key species Because one of our objectives was to assess the "condition" of the vegetation we sampled the size classes of three key species (Acacia mellifera, Acacia erioloba and Schotia afra) at a few widely-dispersed sites. This was done in the following way. Two recorders, with two, 2 m long ranging rods each walked along a transect measuring the heights of every individual of the species of interest within the transect. One member of the survey team recorded the measurements and, walking along a central line, kept the transect focused on a pre-determined direction and distance. Transect lengths varied for each analysis but were usually 20 m wide. The area convered by each transect is indicated in the appropriate figure legends. For Acacia erioloba we also recorded the mortalities of all individuals as well as the presence and absence of pods. Acacia mellifera Our analysis of one population of Acacia mellifera occurring on a sandy pediment at photostation 6 shows that much recruitment of this species has occurred in recent years (Fig. 1.16). In other parts of the Northern Cape and Namibia where higher rainfall occurs (e.g. near Kimberley) the active recruitment and "thickening-up" of dense stands of this species considerably reduces the grazing potential of the region. In these regions the species is considered invasive and the Swarthaak problem remains the focus of considerable research activity (Joubert, 1962; Fugle, 1990). Reasons for the species' increase are usually given as changing fire regimes and overgrazing by domestic stock. We have included this analysis of A. mellifera in our report to suggest that future arguments which may use the size class distributions of this species to support statements about the degradation of the Riemvasmaak environment as a result of livestock grazing should be carefully constructed. The patterns evident in this analysis of a single population (Fig. 1.16) were further supported by our general observations of there being many young A. mellifera individuals throughout the region. In the absence of livestock grazing during the last 20 years at Riemvasmaak this species appears to have actively recruited young individuals into the population. However, the timing of this recruitment and age of the smaller individuals is crucial. We show in Chapter 2 that this general area was used by the South African Defence Force as one of three main training grounds for their military activities. From 1988 onwards 8 SAI became mechanized and manouvres in the region included the use of heavy military vehicles such as Ratels. Whether they rode over the area where our transect is located is not clear but it is possible that the recruitment of the small size classes of A. mellifera, observed by us, may be in response to these disturbance events. 1-47 Fig. 1.16. Size class distributions of a population of Acacia mellifera on a sandy pediment at photostation 6. 1-48 Acacia erioloba Since camelthorn is such a valuable forage and firewood species in Riemvasmaak we assessed the size class distributions of six widely-dispersed populations (Fig. 1.17). While the patterns varied considerably between populations all showed a healthy recruitment of small (i.e. young) individuals. However, the absence of very small individuals in the 0-0.5 m size class at two sites (photostations 14ii and 24) as well as the mortality of individuals within the smallest size classes at a number of sites (e.g. at photostations 3 and 24) suggests that recruitment conditions have not been favourable throughout the region during the last few years. We suggest that the very high rainfall conditions which prevailed in the region during the early to mid- 1970's (Fig. 1.9, Fig. 1.10) as well as the absence of grazing, coincident with these favourable growing conditions, may be responsible for the "healthy" population structure which exist in the region at present. Discussion around the sustainable use of this species so that the favourable population structure is maintained should be initiated within the Riemvasmaak community. Decisions about the harvesting and grazing of immature individuals should be taken as a matter of urgency. 1-49 Fig. 1.17. Size class distributions of Acacia erioloba populations recorded at six different photostations in Riemvasmaak. Filled sections indicate dead individuals while hashed sections show the number of individuals in a size class which had one or more pods. 1-50 PLATE 1.11. Recruitment of Acacia erioloba saplings at old kraal sites near Deksel. The 2 m tall ranging rod in left midground marks the deep dung deposits of an old kraal while Jeanne points to a 1.6 m tall Schotia afra sapling. Note the dominance of mature Acacia erioloba trees in the river course in the right background (see Fig. 1.17, site 3). PLATE 1.12. David Catling of FARM Africa providing scale for the recruitment of a cohort of Acacia erioloba saplings near Gyam/Vaalputs (see Fig 1.17, site 24). 1-51 Schotia afra While this species is not one of the most valuable forage or firewood species in Riemvasmaak it is nonetheless one of the most dominant species especially within the narrow rocky river beds of the region. Furthermore, the general absence of any seedlings of this species throughout its distribution in the semi-arid Karoo is a frequent talking point of South African arid zone ecologists. With nearly a decade of field experience in the arid regions of southern Africa the senior author of this report has seen only two seedlings of Schotia afra in other regions of the Nama- and Succulent Karoo biomes and in the arid subtropical thicket/Valley Bushveld vegetation of the eastern Cape. We were, therefore, intrigued to discover an abundance of Schotia afra seedlings in Riemvasmaak and we recorded the size class distributions of one exceptionally dense concentration of S. afra seedlings within the river bed at photostation 4 (Fig. 1.12). The data indicate two peaks in the size class distributions. Firstly, a mature group of individuals from about 3 - 5.5 m was recorded along the river banks. Secondly, within the river course itself we recorded a second peak in the size class structure centred on individuals between 0.5 - 1.5.m. The senior author has some horticultural experience of the relative growth rates of this species and, as is the case for Acacia erioloba, we suggest that its recruitment may have been related to the exceptional rainfall conditions which prevailed in the region between 1974-1976 and that the bimodal structure reflects this period. For the sake of completeness we should point out that the fairly regular sitings of Pappea capensis seedlings also surprised us as these are extremely rare in other Karoo environments. 1-52 Fig. 1.18. Size class distributions of a population of Schotia afra in a rocky river bed at photostation 4. 1-53 1.4.1.5 Alien plant control Of all the invasive alien species in South Africa’s arid zone none poses as great a threat to the region’s agricultural productivity as does the genus Prosopis. Six different species have been introduced to this country since 1879 (Poynton, 1990) and today the genus covers about 200 000 ha of some of the most productive parts of the arid interior of South Africa (Fig 1. 19) (Harding & Bate, 1991). The potential for further invasion is great with an additional one million ha potentially at risk (Harding & Bate, 1991). Three main species are implicated (Table 1.8). The least invasive of these is Prosopis chilensis which forms large, single-stemmed ornamental trees (Poynton, 1990). P. glandulosus var torreyana, P. velutina and the numerous hybrid swarms associated with these three species, however, form dense multi-stemmed thickets. Prosopis spp. present an important threat to the production potential of Riemvasmaak. The most dense stands of the genus are usually associated with the most productive landforms in South Africa’s arid zones, i.e. the dry river beds and sandy pediments. When heavily infested, these landforms become inaccessible to livestock which may also suffer terribly from injuries sustained if individual animals become entangled in the spiny thickets. An additional, seldom considered problem associated with dense infestations, is the impact of these species on the hydrology of a region. Prosopis spp. are “extravagant” and wasteful water users and dense thickets could lower the water table and thereby reduce water availability in the dug wells associated with the dry river beds (Harding, 1988). The rate of infestation of Prosopis spp. is dramatic. In other arid areas of South Africa, some 200 km to the east of Riemvasmaak in the agricultural districts of De Aar and Britstown, farmers have recorded a 400 % increase in Prosopis spp infestations between 1974 and 1991 (Anonymous, 1990). This dramatic increase in the species complex during the last 20 years is a wide-spread phenomenon apparently linked to the large and widespread rainfall events of the early and mid-1970’s (Macdonald, 1985; Henderson, 1991). Infestations seem to occur in “steps” related to rainfall and as Macdonald indicated in 1985, the Prosopis problem is a “bomb” ready to explode with the next set of above-average rainfall events. Just north of Riemvasmaak, slightly higher up the Molopo River, Prosopis is a serious pest. For example, during his survey of areas in north of the Orange River in 1989, Henderson (1991) noted that “the most extensive stands of Prosopis spp were located along the Molopo River....They were not confined to the river bed of the Molopo but in places had invaded dune valleys and the lower slopes of dunes.” Henderson (1991) concludes that “All watercourses [in the northwestern Cape] are potentially at risk from invasion by Prosopis spp and it is predicted that without drastic control measures dense infestations could develop along large stretches of the Molopo and Kuruman Rivers....seed washed down to the very arid uncultivated lower reaches of the [Molopo] river....could also result in infestations of Prosopis spp” What is the occurrence of the species at Riemvasmaak? Our survey results indicate that Prosopis spp are widespread throughout Riemvasmaak but still in relatively low numbers (Fig 1.19, Table 1.9). We did not however, sample along the Orange River. Mature trees which were probably planted for shade at the large settlements (e.g. around the Riemvasmaak Mission Station and Deksel) still exist around these habitations but are also found now as isolated trees in the general 1-54 landscape. A number of seedlings were also observed although no dense stands were recorded anywhere during our survey. To date, control of the dense thickets in South Africa has been either by mechanical or chemical means or through the release of host-specific, seed-eating insects. Mechanical and chemical clearing, however, is a costly affair (Harding, 1987) with the added requirement of repeated treatments to prevent re-infestation. Recent recommendations have suggested a thinning of dense stands both to save on costs associated with clear-felling and to render these thickets utilizable once more as pods and leaf production increases as the canopy becomes more open. An additional, slightly more long-term solution has been a biocontrol experiment centered on the release of a few of Prosopis spp natural pests, i.e. hostspecific seed-eating weevils imported from North America. Host-specificity trials have been carried out in South Africa over two years and 70 potential hosts, including Acacia erioloba, have been screened (Zimmerman & de Beer, 1992). Two biocontrol agents, viz. Algarobius prosopis and Neltumius arisonensis are currently being released to control the seed output of Prosopis spp in the arid zones of South Africa (Stoltsz, 1994). Despite the potential dangers that Prosopis spp thickets pose for the agricultural productivity of Riemvasmaak, the genus also possesses many potential uses. Besides the fuel and construction materials derived from the species, the pods of this legume are very nutritious with high protein and fat contents (Harding, 1987). They can provide an excellent stock feed and trials suggest that if broken down by a hammer mill, the seed and pod material can make up to 40 % of the food intake of sheep. Yields from mature trees can be 90-140 kg in a single season (Harding, 1987). In an agrarian community which will remain dependent on the region’s natural resources for construction materials, fuel and forage for their livestock for some time to come, decisions to eradicate the species should be carefully considered. Recommendations After consultation with Mr Carl Stoltsz of the Plant Protection Research Institute (see also Harding & Bate, 1991) and after careful consideration of the evidence above, we suggest that the risks of Prosopis spp infestations are simply too great for us to propose anything other that their complete eradication from the veld of Riemvasmaak. If mono-specific Prosopis spp thickets were to dominate the dry river beds and sandy pediments, the impact on the carrying capacity and hydrology of the region would be catastrophic. We recommend that the eradication be accomplished in two ways. Firstly, large trees which occur away from major settlements should be cut and used for firewood and construction materials. There should also be an active seedling removal programme and farmers and herders should be encouraged to remove any seedlings that they come across in the veld. When we spoke to the live-stock owners of Riemvasmaak on 4 May 1995, they appeared generally unfamiliar with the species. A broader education or awareness programme may be necessary to inform people of the threat that this species poses to their livelihoods. Those mature individuals that already exist as shade trees should be identified by a competent systematist with experience in Prosopis taxonomy. We recommend that those individuals that are not P. chilensis but represent individuals of the P. 1-55 glandulosus var torreyana/P. velutina complex should be replaced by non-invasive tree species. The second way to deal with this problem is to release the two biocontrol agents onto the mature trees around the Riemvasmaak Mission Station and at other localities where sufficient numbers of trees exist. These host-specific insect populations will ensure that seed production will be reduced although there will probably always be an input of Prosopis spp seeds into Riemvasmaak from the heavily-infested surrounding areas. Finally, we recommend that the dynamics of this species complex should be carefully monitored and appropriate steps taken if infestations appear. TABLE 1.9. Size class distributions of Prosopis glandulosus individuals seen at photo stations (see Fig. 1.13) in Riemvasmaak. Size class (m) Photo station number 2 0-0.5 0.5-1.0 1.0-1.5 1.5-2.0 2.0-2.5 2.5-3.0 3.0-3.5 3.5-4.0 4.0-4.5 4.5-5.0 5.0-5.5 5.5-6.0 6.0-6.5 6.5-7.0 Total 9 12 14 3 1 16 Total 22 24 26 2 1 1 3 1 4 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 6 3 11 1 1 0 5 0 0 3 3 0 1 4 0 2 3 2 2 25 1-56 TABLE 1.8. Characteristics of the three species of Prosopis that occur in the arid zones of southern Africa (information from Harding, (1987); Poynton, (1990)). Species Place of origin Year introduced Growth form P. chilensis South America 1894 Shapely, singlestemmed tree P. glandulosus var torreyana S.W. USA, N. Mexico 1880 Single to multistemmed tree or spiny shrub P. velutina S.W. USA, N. Mexico early 1900’s Hybrids - - Preferred habitat Deep alluvial soils, high water tables Pod production Pod quality Low/ none High Invasive potential Low/none Periodically inundated river courses High Medium Very high Multi-stemmed shrub Dry stony slopes High Medium Very high Usually a multistemmed shrub Variable Often high Medium-high Very high 1-57 Fig. 1.19. glandulosus Location of Prosopis populations observed between 16-31 January 1995 at Riemvasmaak. 1-58 PLATE 1.13. Mr Willem Vass standing in front of a single large Prosopis glandulosus individual near Xubuxnap. The large trees in left and right background are all Acacia erioloba individuals while the saplings in the foreground are all Acacia mellifera individuals. 1-59 1.4.2 Reptiles and amphibians The checklist of reptiles and amphibians, shown in Appendix 4, is drawn from standard herpetological field guides of the southern African subregion (Passmore & Carruthers, 1979; Branch, 1988), from the list compiled for the Augrabies Falls National Park (see Appendix 4) and from the list in the SADF (1990) report. It comprises 11 frogs, 2 tortoises, 1 turtle, 19 snakes and 35 lizards. There were important discrepancies between some of the lizard and snake species noted in the Augrabies Falls National Park checklist and the distribution maps listed in Branch (1988) (e.g. Lygodactylus capensis, Homoroselaps lacteus)). As none of the survey team is competent to judge the relative merits of the respective lists and distribution maps we have included all species. There are thus undoubtedly many inaccuracies in our checklist. The use of common names for lizards and snakes also proved to be problematic. We have used Branch (1988) for all English common names but since he does not list Afrikaans common names we have relied on the Augrabies Falls National Park checklist for these. However, in some instances either no Afrikaans common name was available to us or the Afrikaans common name given in the Augrabies Falls National Park checklist was a direct translation of an English common name which differed from that in Branch (1988). Therefore, rather than confuse the literature with additional names we have simply left the column blank. Although none of the survey team has any herpetological experience we were especially keen to note the occurrence of tortoises and it is of interest that none were recorded during our survey. 1.4.3 Birds A checklist of birds for the Riemvasmaak area is shown in Appendix 5 and comprises 192 species. This list is a combination of three separate checklists. Firstly, we combine the list of birds recorded for the Augrabies Falls National Park (AFNP, n.d.) with that of the South African Defence Force (SADF, 1990) (see Appendix 5). This latter list is for the Riemvasmaak area only. We also list and mark with an asterisk (*) the birds seen during our casual observations in the two week period (1729 January, 1995) during which our ecological survey was carried out. These latter observations were incidental and this checklist was not one of the main aims of the survey. However, we feel it is a reasonably accurate account of what was present at Riemvasmaak at the time. Descriptors of abundance (rare, common etc.), when listed at all, are based on the duration of this study only and therefore do not refer to the actual status of the bird at Riemvasmaak. The duration spent at a particular site influenced the number of species seen as well as the abundance of each species. Skulking species (e.g. Cape Reed Warbler, Cape Robin) are listed as rare whereas they may well be common. The Augrabies Falls National Park (AFNP, n.d.) and SADF (1990) checklists are worth consulting independently as they provide additional information on the species’ habitat preference, status (i.e. whether resident, migrant, vagrant etc.), Red Data category and months when present in the area. During our survey we noted 72 species or 37.5 % of the total number of species on the checklist. 1.4.4 Mammals 1-60 The mammals for the Riemvasmaak region are shown in Appendix 6. This list has been compiled from Rautenbach et al (1979) for the Augrabies Falls National Park and surrounding areas, from AFNP (n.d. - an updated list for the Augrabies Falls National Park) and from the SADF (1990) report. It comprises 51 species. Besides this checklist synthesis, we also recorded the type, number and locality of any mammals seen during the course of our baseline survey. By so doing, it is hoped that changes in abundance, accredited to human disturbance, will be detected in future surveys of the area. We began recording mammals on the 17th January and ended on the 29th January, 1995. To record the abundance of mammal species, a grid system was compiled for the Riemvasmaak area at the start of the survey. This grid consisted of squares divided into latitude and longitude of 1’ x 1’ (approximately 1.5 km x 1.5 km). Mammal species, together with numbers of individuals seen (and appropriate care taken not to record the same individual twice) were recorded on this grid system at the time of observation. Maps were subsequently produced using a Geographical Information System. These maps do not reflect actual distribution since not all areas of Riemvasmaak were surveyed. However, they do reflect the presence and abundance of mammals in those areas which are likely to be subjected to heaviest human disturbance, i.e. the areas of importance for future monitoring programmes. In total we saw 12 mammal species or 23.5 % of those listed for the area. The majority of our observations were of conspicuous, diurnal mammal species. Klipspringers and dassies were by far the most abundant mammals recorded by us. The 89 klipspringer that we saw are of special interest as the National Parks Board helicopter survey of Riemvasmaak conducted on 10 March 1995 (see Appendix 7) yielded only 7 individuals. This cryptic species is difficult to see from the air and a ground survey of the region is probably the best method to use in determining the abundance of this species. We used the same method to list the number and location of goat, sheep, cattle, horses and donkeys seen during our survey and discuss these data later. Finally, in Appenidix 7 we present data on the abundance of mammal species censused during helicopter surveys undertaken by the National Parks Board in Riemvasmaak in March 1995 and in “Bokvasmaak”, the area leased by the National Parks Board from the Riemvasmaak Trust. Details of the methods used during these surveys may be obtained from Dr Mike Knight at National Parks Board, Scientific Services Department, PO Box 110040, Hadison Park, Kimberley, [Tel: 0531-25488, Fax: 0531-34543]. It should be noted that when the South African Defence Force vacated the area in 1994, the National Parks Board caught and removed 21 Gemsbok, 10 Kudu and 4 Ostrich in a game capture excercise (Barry Hopgood, personal communication, 2 February 1995). 1-61 1.5 THE GRAZING ENVIRONMENT 1.5.1 Veld “condition” The current composition and structure of the vegetation at Riemvasmaak, as well as the relative abundance or rarity of different species is a function of two main influences. Firstly, climatic factors such as soils, rainfall and temperature exert an important influence on the vegetation of arid lands. We have shown in previous sections of this chapter how the Riemvasmaak landscape is structured, which species dominate under specific environmental conditions and what some of the possible influences of large rainfall events might have been on the dymanics of key species in the region during the last two decades. Landuse history, however, also has a profound influence on the vegetation of any region and a comprehensive history of landuse practices in Riemvasmaak from pre-colonial times to the end of 1994 is described in Chapter 2. So, based on our experience, what is the current state of the Riemvasmaak environment and which factor - climate or humans - exerts the most important control on the vegetation of this arid land? This discussion forms part of a much broader debate currently evolving in the ecological and grazing science literature (Behnke et al, 1993; Scoones, 1995). Firstly, how does one measure veld “condition”? Usually, long-term data, including matched photography, fence-line contrast studies or an analysis of the population dynamics of key forage species are used. Since we did not have access to a comprehensive historical photographic collection and historical environmental data for the region are generally absent we have assessed Riemvasmaak’s veld condition using our estimates of the composition, structure and abundance of important forage species. Despite the low rainfall that the region has experienced in the last few years (Fig. 1.9; Fig. 1.10) we considered the veld in Riemvasmaak generally to be in an excellent condition. This subjective assessment is based on the fact that: (a) The cover of perennial plant species, especially grass cover, was generally good (see Appendix 2 and Table 1.10) and we seldom encountered large bare patches which are usually indicative of degraded arid lands; (b) The vegetation was usually diverse with a mix of growth forms including trees, shrubs, perennial grasses and annuals. There appeared not to be a dominance of annual species as is usually the case in degraded arid lands and important perennial, palatable forage species such as Limeum aethiopicum, Monechma spartioides, Hermannia spp., and a number of legumes and many palatable grasses were regularly encountered in the mix of plant species; (c) There was a noticeable lack of a distinct browse line on important tree species such as Acacia erioloba, Boscia albitrunca, Pappea capensis and the physical structure of other forage species, especially some of the shrubs such as Limeum spp., Monechma spp. and palatable grasses (Cenchrus ciliaris, Stipagrostis ciliata, Stipagrostis hochstetteriana) suggested “healthy” plants, capable of flowering and contributing to the seed pool; (d) The population structure, inferred from size class distributions of the dominant tree and shrub species suggested that active recruitment of new individuals had occurred in the recent past and that the populations of important forage species comprised a mix of individuals of different ages; 1-62 (e) The few fence-line contrast studies that we conducted at photostations 4, 25 and 26 and our general observations of the vegetation surrounding Riemvasmaak all indicated that the Riemvasmaak environment supported vegetation with a greater cover and more diverse mix of species; (f) Except for a few erosion scars running parallel with the roads in some places there was no evidence of widespread and active gulley, rill or wind erosion; (g) Without exception, the returning Riemvasmakers all stated that vegetation cover and the abundance of important species such as Acacia erioloba and Acacia mellifera had increased considerably in their absence and that the veld looked to be in an excellent condition. Although we have suggested that the Riemvasmaak landscape is in an excellent condition a few qualifications of this general statement are required. It is also important that we assess the impact of the South African Defence Force’s tenure on the region. The eastern parts of the area, particularly on the sandy pediments east of the Mission Station, around Perdepoort and around Gyam/Vaalputs, appear to have been subjected to fairly extensive recent disturbance. This is reflected in the low cover of plants in general and dominance by classic disturbance species such as Rhigozum trichotum and by annuals (see Plate 2.6). Since the South African Defence Force used these areas for their militarized infantry exercises (see Chapter 2) it is likely that much of what we measured and observed may be related to this period. However, without a thorough account of the condition of the landscape at the time of their occupation it would appear illogical to place all of the responsibility for the current state of the veld in this area at the door of the SADF. The imact of several decades of livestock farming on the vegetation of the sandy pediments of the eastern parts of Riemvasmaak may also be partly responsible for current landscape condition. Besides the ubiquitous presence of military debris and the shattered ruins of old homesteads, schools and churches we could find little direct evidence of the impact that the South African Defence Force’s tenure might have had on the rest of the Riemvasmaak landscape. Here and there we noticed clear signs of bomb craters and we suspect that the more remote parts of the plateau might have been more severely impacted since these regions were used as target areas for Air Force bombing practice (Chapter 2). However, we suggest that except for a few localized regions, covering perhaps less than 15 % of the area of Riemvasmak, the impact of the South African Defence Force on the Riemvasmaak landscape has been slight. Indeed, the absence of large numbers of domestic livestock during their period of tenure appears to have had important benefits for key forage species such as Acacia erioloba, Pappea capensis, Limeum aethiopicum, Monechma spartioides and many of the palatable grasses listed in Appendix 2. In addition, the SADF also initiated an effective programme of clearing the alien plant, Nicotiana glauca (Wild tobacco/Wildetabak) from the river courses where it was apparently an important invasive element (SADF, 1990). We did not observe any populations of wild tobacco during our survey in Riemvasmaak. Given the discussion above, which factor - humans or climate - appears most important in determining the condition of Riemvasmaak’s vegetation? This debate is critical since an influential body of range scientists with an impressive experience of conditions in sub-saharan Africa has recently challenged long-held views of grazing 1-63 systems and the impact of livestock on arid communal rangelands (see Sandford, 1983; Behnke et al, 1993: Scoones, 1995). Many of these scientists emphasize climatic controls of rangeland productivity and composition and suggest that livestock numbers in communal rangelands are seldom able to reach the sort of levels that are destructive to the vegetation and healthy functioning of the environment. Currently South African models of arid rangeland dynamics suggest that, while climate plays a pivotal role (Roux, 1966; Milton & Hoffman, 1994), the impact of livestock grazing over decades also has an important influence in changing the composition of the veld (O’Connor & Roux, 1995). Our study has suggested that the Riemvasmaak environment has benefitted greatly from the twenty year “rest” that it has received from domestic livestock grazing. Wild ungulates such as kudu, gemsbok and klipspringer have been present in the area but in low numbers and their impact appears to have been neglible. Clearly, the preservationists are not incorrect in saying that arid land ecosystem “health” and veld “condition” are well served if left alone to the forces of nature. What should be kept in mind, however, is the fact the Riemvasmaak environment was utilized and grazed for several decades by communal farmers and their livestock prior to their removal in 1974. If the Riemvasmaak environment has been able to “recover” to the extent that it has, then the obvious question to ask is “Does livestock grazing really have such an impact in the long-term?” Of course the full impact of any landuse practice such as livestock grazing can never be completely known, but despite its historical treatment prior to 1974, today the Riemvasmaak environment appears little influenced by these landuse practices (but see the discussion in Chapter 2 on the re-sampling of one of John Acocks’ sites - our photostation 21). Unfortunately this whole debate is confounded by the fact that the removal of domestic livestock coincided almost exactly with a period of unprecedented high rainfall. Would the landscape have responded in the same way if domestic livestock had remained in Riemvasmaak? We think not but can can only suggest that a well designed and on-going monitoring programme as outlined in Chapter 3 will be the best way to understand the relative influence of climate and grazing on the Riemvasmaak environment. 1.5.2 Range potential and carrying capacity "...there is no method whereby any technician can go into a new country and measure anything which will automatically give him the grazing capacity" (Stoddart, 1960 in Bartels et al, 1993) "Let us admit the problems with the carrying capacity concept in sub-Saharan Africa, and stop trying to apply it." (Bartels et al, 1993) The assessment of the carrying capacity for an area is notoriously difficult. This is particularly so for arid and semi-arid regions managed under communal tenure. Recent opinions even suggest that under many African circumstances the exercise may be pointless. While acknowledging the emerging debate around the theme we also feel that it is important to provide an estimate of the carrying capacity of the region calculated 1-64 using the most recent, and standard agricultural methods available. By doing this we hope to provide some material around which the Riemvasmaak farmers can formulate their own ideas about carrying capacity concepts and to provide a broader context for management decisions. It also enables more fruitful interaction with neighbouring commercial farmers and with the Department of Agriculture extension services if some knowledge of the recommended carrying capacities is available. For the semi-arid and arid Karoo environments of South Africa the recommended carrying capacities for commercial farms are correlated with long-term rainfall records (Van Den Berg, 1975; Dean & Macdonald, 1994; Fig. 1.20). For arid Riemvasmaak this means that the departmental recommendation translates to a value of about 60 ha/LSU (Fouche, 1994). Large Stock Unit equivalents are presented in Appendix 9 and by using these tables the number of animals of any particular species within any herd structure for any size farm can be calculated. In fact, in chapter 2 we have used this table and general method to assess the stock levels present in "Old Riemvasmaak". 60 ha/LSU translates to about 1 243 LSU’s for Riemvasmaak which in turn is 1 130 mature cows or 7 312 mature Boer goats. Strictly speaking, the area currently leased to the National Parks Board should not be included in the calculation as it is unlikely that livestock will be grazing there in the immediate future. When this land of 4 270 ha with the ability to support about 71 LSU’s (65 mature cows or 418 Boer goats) is excluded a total of about 1 172 LSU’s for the remaining grazing lands of Riemvasmaak results. This translates to a total of either 1 065 mature cows or 6 894 mature Boer goats if the recommendations of the Department of Agriculture are to be applied. The economic implications of these stocking rates are discussed later. Fig. 1.20. The relationship between mean annual rainfall (mm) and actual stocking rate (ha/Large Stock Unit equivalent) on commercial farms between the period 19711981 for 34 magisterial districts in the arid savanna, central karoo and succulent karoo regions of South Africa. The exponential relationship is significant at p< 0.0001. Data are derived from Dean & Macdonald (1994). 1-65 Locally, there have been two recent refinements to these general carrying capacity recommendations both of which have emanated from workers within the South African Department of Agriculture's Grootfontein Agricultural Development Institute situated in the eastern Karoo in Middelburg, some 570 km southeast of Riemvasmaak. These are the Ecological Index Method (EIM) (Vorster, 1982) and more recently, the Grazing Index Method (GIM) (Botha et al, 1993). Both methods are aimed at adjusting the carrying capacity value of a camp, farm or region depending on an objective assessment of range condition, based on standard measurements of species composition and cover. Both the EIM and GIM use some benchmark value against which individual sites, camps or farms are assessed and carrying capacity recommendations subsequently adjusted. This benchmark value incorporates the rainfall/carrying capacity relationship discussed above, the economic performance of monitored marker groups under different carrying capacities as well as the experience of researchers and farmers, all of which operate within the ranch or commercial livestock model. An accurate assessment of carrying capacities for communal rangelands in the semi-arid and arid Karoo has not received any attention in the southern African literature. We used the Grazing Index Method (Botha et al, 1993) in our assessment of the carrying capacity of the different landforms within Riemvasmaak. Firstly, we assigned a Grazing Index Value to every species that we recorded during our survey. These values range from 1-10 with “valuable” species scoring higher that less valuable species (see Appendix 2) and are based on the following five criteria (Botha et al, 1993): (a) The ability of the species to produce forage; (b) The value of the forage during both the growing and dormant seasons; (c) The degree of spinescence and relative ease with which the species can be grazed; (d) The perenniality or longevity of species with long-lived perennials scoring higher than annuals; (e) The ability of the plant to protect the soil against surface erosion. We used the values for 75 of the 165 species in our checklist that are contained in the unpublished booklet of Grazing Index Values for Karoo species compiled by Botha et al (1995). Three of the values were later modified as conservators with experience of the vegetation of the region and Riemvasmaak farmers disagreed with the values assigned to these species in Botha et al (1995). These values either underor over-estimated the local expression of the grazing value of the species. The GIV was increased from 2.9 to 6.0 for Acacia mellifera, from 3.7 to 4.5 for Diospyros lycioides and decreased from 2.0 to 1.5 for Tamarix usneoides. For species that were not listed in Botha et al (1995) Grazing Index Vaues were assigned by us in consultation with Dr Hugo Bezuidenhout, a range and wildlife ecologist with the National Parks Board who has extensive experience of the vegetation and grazing value of individual species. For each site (e.g. 5a, 4d1, 13b etc.) the Grazing Index Value for each species was multiplied by the percentage cover score for that species at that site. The summation of these values reflects the Grazing Index Score for the site. The mean Grazing Index Score and percentage cover for each landform and a mean value for Riemvasmaak was then calculated (Table 1.10). 1-66 1-67 TABLE 1.10. Mean percentage cover (+ std. dev.) and mean Grazing Index Score ((+ std. dev.) for 96 sites encompassing different landforms and their variations at Riemvasmaak. Landform n Cover (%) Mean Std. dev. Grazing Index Score Mean Std. dev. Plateau 2 32.5 10.6 101.2 66.0 Rocky slopes, footslopes, and pediments - Rocky slopes, footslopes,and pediments - Broken topography below escarpment 36 22.9 9.4 96.7 50.0 (26) (24.5) (9.9) (101.8) (56.8) (10) (18.5) (5.3) (83.7) (31.1) 5 11.4 3.5 47.1 17.6 Sandy pediments - West of Riemvasmaak - East of Riemvasmaak 23 (13) (10) 29.8 (37.3) (20.0) 16.8 (18.7) (5.8) 145.1 (184.7) (93.7) 59.3 (97.0) (41.8) River channels - Narrow and rocky - Wide and saline - Wide and sandy 30 (6) (5) (19) 36.4 (44.2) (54.0) (29.3) 18.5 (15.0) (26..1) (13.4) 142.8 (200.7) (118.4) (131.0) 69.5 (86.4) (55.3) (60.0) 27.0 15.0 120.6 72.5 Inselbergs Mean1 1 includes data for main landforms only. Based on these calculations, it is evident that the Grazing Index Score is highest for the sandy pediments and river channels (with the exception of those dominated by Tamarix usneoides). The plateau and rocky pediments had Grazing Index Scores below the overall mean with the few inselbergs that we sampled possessing very low Grazing Index Scores. Knowledge of the Grazing Index Score for a particular landform has only enabled us to rank the relative value of each landform. In the absence of benchmark sites for the region it is not possible to use this method to arrive at an objective stocking rate for the region. However, in order to assign stock numbers to the Grazing Index Score and to calculate a relative carrying capacity for each landform we made the mean value of 120.6 for the region equal to the recommended stocking rate of 60 1-68 ha/LSU. The number of Large Stock Units for each landform was then calculated by the following formula: No. LSU's = 120.6/GIS x 60 ha/LSU. This provided a total number of Large Stock Units for the 74 563 ha reserve of 1 084 LSU which is equivalent to 985 head of cattle or 6 376 mature Boer goats (Table 1.11). If the 4 270 ha leased to the National Parks Board, comprised predominantly of rocky pediments, are subtracted from the calculation, then the total number of LSU’s drops to 1 028. This is about 935 head of cattle or 6 047 mature Boer goats. TABLE 1.11. Number of cattle or large stock units (LSU) able to be accommodated within different landforms at Riemvasmaak assuming a mean Grazing Index Score (GIS) for the 74 563 ha reserve of 120.6 equivalent to the recommended stocking rate of 60 ha/LSU. Landform Plateau Rocky slopes, footslopes & pediments Sandy pediments River channels Total 1 Grazing Index Score 101.2 96.7 145.1 142.8 ha/LSU1 71.5 74.8 49.9 50.7 Area of landform ha 19 121 43 890 10 496 1 046 74 563 No. of LSU’s 267 586 210 21 1 084 (=120.6/GIS x 60 ha/LSU) When these numbers were presented, on 5 May 1995, to a group of about 45 Riemvasmakers, some of whom were farmers, they made two comments. Firsly, they felt that it was too early to start talking about carrying capacities with the expressed intention of setting limits to stock numbers. All people who owned stock had not returned and before rules, set by outside agencies were applied, the people at the meeting felt that they needed to settle in and bring those animals which they had in their possession back to Riemvasmaak. But who will bring animals back to Riemvasmaak? Some record of the stock holdings of Riemvasmakers in the Ciskei, Khorixas and elsewhere was made between March and July 1994 by the Surplus People Project (SPP). Of the 207 household heads for whom data were available, 102 or roughly half, possessed at least one animal. Of these 102 household heads, 18 or roughly 18 % stated that they were stock farmers. The rest of the household heads who owned animals, did not state explicitly that they were stock farmers, preferring to write their occupation as “labourer”, “manager” or “pensioner”. Thus, despite the harsh conditions under which the Riemvasmakers have been living for the last two decades many have retained an interest in stock while working in other occupations. This pattern will more than likely continue in the future. As is the case in many communal systems people do not have to invest exclusively in stock farming to make a living and will probably 1-69 continue to seek alternative livelihoods while retaining a small number of animals under the care of relatives, friends, or recognized stock farmers in the region. How many animals are expected to return? The total number of animals listed by the 102 household heads who owned stock during SPP’s March-July 1994 census was: 3 818 goats; 1 244 sheep; 252 cattle; 25 horses and 219 donkeys. Applying the conversion factors for mature animals listed in Appendix 9 this sums to a grand total of 1 302 LSU’s. This value exceeds the recommended stocking rate, based on a “straight” 60 ha/LSU for the 74 563 ha region (giving 1 243 LSU’s) by about 5 percent. If the “Bokvasmaak “ region leased to the National Parks Board is excluded, then the number of returning animals will exceed the recommended stocking rate (1 172 LSU’s) by about 11%. If the calculations derived in Table 1.11 are used as a guide then the returning herds will exceed the estimated carrying capacity of the landscape by between 20 % and 27 % depending on whether the land leased to the National Parks Board is included or excluded from the calculation. A crucial factor that is difficult to predict is the number of animals that have been either added or subtracted in the 12 months since July 1994. It is also not known whether the Riemvasmakers will augment these herds with the animals of relatives, friends or even entrepreneurs from Namibia or those living in neighbouring settlements such as Kakamas or Marchand. The second comment that the Riemvasmaak farmers made was that the recomended stocking rates of 60 ha/LSU (or 1 000 LSU’s for the area) was far too conservative. They felt that they have had up to three times that number in the past. Indeed, data from Isaacs and Phillips (1994) supports this contention although these high numbers have been questioned by some members of the Riemvasmaak community. Clearly stock owners in Riemvasmaak did not maintain their herds at these high levels all the time and the numbers reported in Isaacs and Philips (1994) may merely be a product of the good rainfall conditions that occurred in the early 1970’s. A stock census undertaken in Riemvasmaak in 1960 or 1961, during poor conditions, indicates that only 970 LSU’s were kept by a total of 319 household heads. A more detailed account of historical stocking rates and grazing strategies employed by the communal stock farmers in “Old” Riemvasmaak is presented in Chapter 2. 1.5.3 Economic potential of the livestock industry Using assumptions applicable to a commercial farming situation, Fouche (1994) has calculated the economic potential of the livestock enterprise in Riemvasmaak. He suggests firstly that an area of only about 60 000 ha can realistically be farmed in Riemvasmaak given the area leased to the National Parks Board and the areas that are inaccessible to livestock (e.g. very steep slopes). With a carrying capacity of 60 ha/LSU it follows that 60 000 ha divided by 60 ha/LSU provides for about 1 000 Large Stock Units in Riemvasmaak or (according to Fouche’s (1994) calculations but not according to the conversion factors in Appendix 9) about 4 500 Dorper ewes or 5 000 Boerbok ewes. Usually within a commercial farming enterprise the following calculations apply. Firstly, 20 % of the older ewes (900 individuals) in the flock are sold every year. Secondly, if a 100 % lambing success rate occurs then 4 500 new additions are added to the flock every year. Thirdly, about 20 % (900 individuals) of these new 1-70 additions are kept as replacements for the older ewes leaving a stock of 3 600 lambs that can be marketed. The total income from the meat and pelts amounts to R684 000 broken up as follows: 3 600 lambs @ + R150 per lamb1 = R 540 000 900 ewes @ + R160 per ewe = R 144 000 TOTAL INCOME R 684 000 1 Local famers (see Nel, 1994) suggest that a value of R120-R130 for lambs and ewes is probably a more accurate estimate of the market price. Costs are normally set at 60 % of Gross Income or R410 400. This leaves a profit of R273 600 or R60-80 per ewe. If 20 families with equal herd sizes share these profits then each family will earn R13 680 per year or R1 140 per month. If 100 families with equal herd sizes share these profits then each family will earn only R2 736 per year or R228 per month from the sale of their livestock. Clearly not all farmers will have the same size herds and there is going to be a large difference in the herd sizes between full-time and part-time farmers. Also, the stocking rate determinations and the economic viability assessments outlined above completely ignore the dynamic herding strategies and social arrangements evident in most communal rangelands. Although we have outlined many of the standard range management techniques in our discussion of carrying capacity and the economic potential of the livestock industry we are fully aware of the weaknesses and dangers of applying a commercial ranch model to a communal rangeland environment. At this stage, however, we simply do not have alternative models to apply especially not to a region where it is unclear as to how exactly the communal grazing and marketing systems will be developed and applied. Conclusions Recognizing the importance of the livestock industry for many Riemvasmakers and the difficulty of the task which faces them in developing this region we conclude that: (a) Planners, government officials, development agencies, Riemvasmaak Trust committee members, National Parks Board personnel and indeed all who are connected with the development of Riemvasmaak should accept that probably at least half of the returning household heads are going to want initially to keep at least some animals on the veld. Many economic, cultural and social aspects of their lives appear intimately connected to livestock ownership. This fact cannot be ignored, wished away or simply dismissed as unacceptable; (b) Riemvasmaak is an extremely arid land and is neither large enough nor productive enough to enable all those interested in owning livestock to make a living from livestock alone. There will always be a wide range of interest in the industry with some farmers possessing large herds and others retaining only a few animals. Enormous difficulties lie ahead in apportioning grazing resources in an equitable manner; (c) All discussions around stock numbers should be undertaken with great awareness. The issue is an extremely sensitive one within the Riemvasmaak 1-71 (d) (e) (f) (g) community particularly when viewed in its proper historical context where stock numbers were set and controlled by unpopular outside agencies; Consensus around stock numbers and the control of numbers must be reached within the community either via an open forum which meets regularly or within an elected and functioning stock committee. Unless carrying capacities are set by the Riemvasmaak farmers themselves there is little chance of controlling or enforcing stock numbers in this rugged terrain; No one “magic” number (e.g. 60 ha/LSU) should be imposed for all environmental conditions. Clearly, during favourable years stock numbers should be allowed to track vegetation condition and during drought years stock numbers should be reduced. This suggests that relatively sophisticated grazing and marketing strategies need to be developed for the effective functioning of the region as a whole; The monitoring programme (see Chapter 3) should form the basis within which decisions around stock numbers are taken. Reliable data concerning rainfall patterns, veld condition and resource-related stock mortalities are crucial if informed decisions are to be made; The key to the management of Riemvasmaak’s livestock industry lies in the creation and development of an effective institution such as a stock committee with the mandate to act and make decisions around a wide range of stock issues including grazing systems, stock numbers, watering points, vetinary services and marketing strategies. It is vital that this body be established as soon as possible. Without it, we predict a dismal future for both the livestock industry as well as the general ecology of Riemvasmaak. 1.6 References ANONYMOUS 1990. Karoo dorpe soek oplossings vir Prosopis. Agricultural News, 8 June 1990, p. 4. BARTELS G B, NORTON B E & PERRIER G K 1993. An examination of the carrying capacity concept. In: (eds) Behnke R H, Scoones I & Kerven C, Range Ecology at Disequibrium. Overseas Development Institute, London. pp. 89103. BEHNKE R H, SCOONES I & KERVEN C (eds) 1993. Range Ecology at Disequibrium. Overseas Development Institute, London. BOTHA W v D, DU TOIT P C V, BLOM C D, BECKER H R, OLIVIER D J, MEYER E M & BARNARD G Z J 1993. A technique for estimating the grazing index values of Karoo plants. Karoo Agric 5(2), 10-14. BRANCH BOTHA W v D, DU TOIT P C V, BLOM C D, BECKER H R, OLIVIER D J, MEYER E M, BARNARD G Z J & SCHOEMAN P 1993. Weidingwaardes (WIW) vir Karoo plantspesies. Unpublished booklet, Grootfontein Agricultural Development Institute, Middelburg. 1-72 BRANCH W 1988. Field guide to the snakes and other reptiles of southern Africa. Struik, Cape Town. CCWR 1994. Centre for Computing and Water Research, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa. DEAN W R J & MACDONALD I A W 1994. Historical changes in stocking rates of domestic livestock as a measure of semi-arid and arid rangeland degradation in the Cape Province, South Africa. Journal of Arid Environments 26, 281-298. GERRINGER G J & BOTHA B J V 1975. Die Pegmatiet-Graniet assosiasie in ‘n gebied noord van die Oranjerivier in die Distrik Gordonia. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 11, 267-278. FOUCHE H 994. Besoek aan Riemvasmaak. Unpublished report. 2 May 1994. Glen Agricultural Development Institute, Department of Agriculture. 2pp. plus 6 maps. FUGLE E 1990. Deurbraak in Swarthaak-navorsing/(Breakthrough in Swaarthaak (Acacia mellifera) research). Landbouweekblad, 6 April 1990. HARDING G B 1987. The status of Prosopis as a weed. Applied Plant Science 1: 43-48. HARDING G B 1988. The genus Prosopis as an invasive alien in South Africa. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth. HARDING G B & BATE G C 1991. The occurrence of invasive Prosopis species in the north-western Cape, South Africa. South African Journal of Science 87: 188-192. HAWKINS, HAWKINS AND OSBORN 1994. Riemvasmaak: Potential for development. Unpublished report. 19pp. HENDERSON L 1991. Invasive alien woody plants of the northern Cape. Bothalia 21(2): 177-189. HILL M O 1979. TWINSPAN - A Fortran program for arranging multivariate data in an ordered two-way table by classification of the individuals and attributes. Section of Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. HOFFMAN M T & COWLING R M 1990. Vegetation change in the semi-arid, eastern Karoo over the last two hundred years: an expanding karoo -fact or fiction? South African Journal of Science 86, 286-294. ISAACS J & PHILLIPS T 1994. Report of the participatory rural investigation ot the Riemvasmaak convention, 18-20 May 1994. Unpublished report, Land Development Unit, Cape Town. 1-73 JOUBERT J G V 1962. Bosindringing - die invloed van verskillende behandelings op die verhouding van Acacia detinens Burch. (Swarthaak) tot gras in die Damaralandse doringboom savannahveld in Suidwes-Afrika/(Bush encroachment - the influence of different treatments on the ratio of Acacia detinens Burch. to grass in the Damaraland thorn savanna in South West Africa) . Unpublished MSc Thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch. MACLEAN G L 1993. Robert’s Birds of southern Africa. John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape Town. MACDONALD I A W 1985. Mesquite - a time “bomb” ready to explode. Custos 14(6): 35-39. MILTON S J & HOFFMAN M T 1994. The application of state-and-transition models to rangeland research and management in arid succulent and semi-arid grassy Karoo, South Africa. African Journal of Range and Forage Science 11(1), 1826. MOEN H F G (Compiler) 1988. 1:250 000 Geological Series 2820 Upington. Department of Mineral and Energy Affairs. Government Printer, Pretoria. NEL E 1994. Conceptual report on agricultural development of Riemvasmaak. Unpublished report. 13pp O’CONNOR T G & ROUX P W 1995. Vegetation changes (1949-1971) in a semiarid, grassy dwarf shrubland in the Karoo, South Africa: influence of rainfall variability and grazing by sheep. Journal of Applied Ecology (In Press). PASSMORE N I & CARRUTHERS V C 1979. South African Frogs. Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg. POYNTON R J 1990. The genus Prosopis in southern Africa. South African Forestry Journal 152: 62-66. RAUTENBACH I L, SCHLITTER D A & DE GRAAFF G 1979. Notes on the mammal fauna of the Augrabies Falls National Park and surrounding areas, with special reference to regional zoogeographical implications. Koedoe 22: 157175. ROGERS G F, MALDE H E & TURNER R M 1984. Bibliography of repeat photography for evaluating landscape change. University of Utah Press, Salt lake City. ROUX P W 1966. The effect of seasonal rainfall and grazing on mixed Karoo veld. Proceedings of the Grassland Society of South Africa 1, 103-110 SADF (South African Defence Force) 1990. Military-Ecological Management Plan for Riemvasmaak. Compiled by H Eckhardt, Edited by P Scogings with contributions from C Campbell, L Gottschalk, A van Zyl, W Matthews and K McCallum. 1-74 Environmental Services, Chief of the South African Defence Force, Department of Logistics, Pretoria. SANDFORD S 1983. Management of Pastoral Development in the Third World. Wiley, Chichester and Overseas Development Institute, London. SCOONES I (ed) 1995. Living with uncertainty. International Institute for Environment and Development, London. SHANTZ H L & TURNER B L 1958. Photographic documentation of vegetational changes in Africa over a third of a century. Report No 169. University of Arizona Press, Arizona. SKINNER J D & SMITHERS R H N 1990. The Mammals of the Southern African Subregion. University of Pretoria, Pretoria. 2nd ed. STOLTSZ C 1994. Converting useless mesquite thickets to agricultural assets. Unpublished research proposal. Plant Protection Research Institute, Stellenbosch. TOENS P D & VISSER D 1994. Riemvasmaak hydrological investigations. Progress Report No. 1. A preliminary assessment of the ground water potential. Unpublished Report, Toens and Associates, Cape Town. TYSON P D 1988. Climatic Change and Variability in Southern Africa. Oxford University Press, Oxford. VAN DEN BERG J A 1980. Die verwantskap tussen die langtermyn gemiddelde en jaarlikse gemiddelde reënval en die langtermyn weidingskapasiteit van natuurlike veld. Karoo Agric 1(5), 3-5. VAN NIEKERK B J 1994. Soils of the riverine area of Riemvasmaak in the vicinity of the Molopo-Orange confluence. Unpublished report, Elsenburg Agricultural Development Institute, Stellenbosch. May 1994. VAN ZYL H G & VAN ZYL J L N 1994. Die Plaas Riemvasmaak N. 498. Unpublished land survey of Riemvasmaak conducted in August-September, 1994. VON BACKSTROM J W 1962. The geology along the lower reaches of the Molopo River and a note on the Riemvasmaak Thermal Spring, Gordonia District Cape Province. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 1, 57-65. VON BACKSTROM J W 1967. The geology and mineral deposits of the Riemvasmaak areas, northwest Cape Province. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 6, 43-53. 1-75 VORSTER M 1982. The development of the Ecological Index Method for asessing veld condition in the Karoo. Proceedings of the Grassland Society of southern Africa 17, 84-89. WERGER M J A 1972. On concepts and techniques applied in the ZürichMontpellier method of vegetation survey. Bothalia 11, 309-323. WERGER M J A & COETZEE B J 1977. A phytosociological and phytogeographical study of Augrabies Falls National Park, South Africa. Koedoe 20, 11-51. ZIMMERMAN H G & DE BEER H 1992. Concern over Prosopis weevils unfounded. Plant Protection News 30: 6-7. 1-76 Chapter 2 : LANDUSE HISTORY 2.1 Introduction 2.2 The archaeological and historical record 2.3 Settlement at Riemvasmaak 2.4 Landuse practices in “Old Riemvasmaak” 2.4.1 Stock numbers 2.4.2 Land tenure and grazing management 2.4.3 Vegetation change since 1952: Acocks revisited 2.5 Military occupation: The last 20 years 2.6 The future 2.7 References 2-77 2.1 INTRODUCTION A knowledge of the past helps us to understand the present and plan for the future. This is particularly relevant for the agricultural development of Riemvasmaak since many of the livestock owners are keen to return to the same general landuse practices that were in place before their removal in 1973. But what were these practices and how did the people of Riemvasmaak survive in these arid and droughtprone environments? To understand these and other questions we present an archaeological and historical landuse continuum which focuses on the landuse practices employed by the diverse set of human communities that have made the broader Riemvasmaak and Middle Orange River environment their home over the last few millennia. We advocate that the rich archaeological heritage of the region must be preserved in the development plans for the region. Next we summarize briefly the settlement history of the current inhabitants of the region i.e. the “Riemvasmakers”, and discuss the main elements of their livestock management systems that were in place in the middle part of this century. A series of interviews with senior members of the community explore the stock movement and drought avoidance strategies that were used in “Old Riemvasmaak”. Changes in stock numbers between 1960 and 1974 provide insight into the dynamic nature of the Riemvasmaak environment. By re-sampling a few sites in the region some insight is gained into the changes in the vegetation that have taken place in the last 40 years. We also discuss details of the way in which the South African Defence Force used the land between 1973-1994 . Finally, based on this historical understanding of landuse practices in the region, we explore some of the intervention possibilities that FARM Africa could pursue in the development of the agricultural potential of Riemvasmaak. A general chronology of key events in the history of Riemvasmaak is presented in Table 2.1. 2-78 TABLE 2.1. General chronology of key historical events relating to land tenure, management and landuse practices in Riemvasmaak and the broader Middle Orange River environment (taken in part from Smith & Bozalek, 1993). DATE Prehistory 1770’s 1868-9 & 1878-9 ?1870’s1900 COMMENTS Hunter-gatherer-fishers living along the Orange River corridor and the hinterland. After 2 000 BP joined and largely displaced by herders First European travelers visit the region Korana and northern border wars along the Orange River Damara, Nama, Herero, Coloured and other groups of herders settle in Riemvasmaak where Khoikhoi pastoralists and San hunter-gatherers had lived or perhaps were still living 1885 Bechuanaland Protectorate declared and British Bechuanaland Colony (incorporating the area now known as Riemvasmaak) proclaimed 1895 British Bechuanaland Colony incorporated into the Cape Colony 1904-06 German-Herero war in Namibia 1923 Riemvasmaak land set aside for Blacks 1930 Roman Catholic school established at Riemvasmaak 1936 Development Trust and Land Act promulgated and Riemvasmaak vesting in the South African Development Trust 1947 Independent mission station established at Riemvasmaak with outstations with schools and chapels at Melkbosrand, Bok se Puts and Omdraai. Clinic opened 1957 Regulations applicable to Native Trust land applied to Riemvasmaak 1973 First group of Riemvasmakers (from Xubuxnab) moved off the land and sent to the Ciskei Feb 1974 Rest of Riemvasmakers dispersed to Namibia and other locations 1974 South African Defence Force assumes responsibility for the region. 1981 Proclamation 257 purportedly amending the list of scheduled land in terms of the 1913 Act and excising Riemvasmaak land therefrom 1982 Proclamation 44 declaring the Bokvasmaak area as part of the Augrabies Falls National Park June SADF and National Parks Board develop Riemvasmaak contractual park 1988 agreement 1990 Declaration of the extension of the boundary of the Augrabies Falls National Park 1991 Correction Notice regarding the extension of the boundaries of the Augrabies Falls National Park 1993 Successful land claim application Jan - May Riemvasmakers from Ciskei, Namibia and other localities resettled at 1995 Riemvasmaak 2-79 2.2 THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RECORD Anatomically-modern humans have been in southern Africa for the last 100 000 years and many Earlier Stone Age hunter-gatherer-fisher sites are located in and adjacent to the greater Orange River Environment (Deacon, 1986). Khoikhoi pastoralists arrived in southern Africa much later, around 2 000 years B.P. (Before Present), and according to one hypotheses (Elphick, 1985) used the Orange River as a main dispersal corridor to Namibia and Namaqualand. The first European travelers to the Augrabies region in the 1770’s (e.g. Wikar, Gordon - see Raper & Boucher, 1988) describe communities of both San hunter-gatherer-fishers and Khoikhoi pastoralists living in small villages both above and below the Augrabies Falls. Some of these communities kept domestic animals including cattle, sheep and goats but all lived at least partly on the bountiful game that frequented the luxuriant Orange River corridor. During the course of his travels up the river in October 1779, Robert Jacob Gordon describes a spectacular variety and abundance of especially large mammals in the area (Raper & Boucher, 1988, Smith, 1995a). In one particularly idyllic description of the teeming wildlife in the region he provides a window on a world that is unimaginable in relation to the relative sterility of the Orange River environment today. Gordon writes (Cullinan, 1992) (pp. 105-106): “....below the Great Waterfall Aukoerebis in the Orange or Garieb River in the country of the Einiquas....[in fact very close to the confluence of the Orange and Molopo Rivers].... I saw the most beautiful and singular sight in all my journeys, seeing, all at one glance through a semi-circle: twelve giraffes, about fifty elephants, 5 rhinoceros, a flock of 20 ostriches, a herd of 13 kudu, and one great herd of zebra. Saw hippopotamus in the river below, swimming and playing together.” Throughout the next few weeks, Gordon describes numerous encounters with elephants, rhinoceros, hippopotamus and many other animals. Black rhinoceros, in particular were often described and killed by Gordon during his travels in this region. From his description of the many pit traps dug by indigenous people living along the river, rhinoceros were, together with hippopotamus, a frequent source of protein and fat for these people. Both herders and San hunter-gatherer-fishers lived along the river; not always in harmony and often as part of complex mixed economies that could change quite quickly depending on local and even regional events such as drought, cattle raids or even war - the “cycle of fortune” described by Smith (1995b). Beaumont et al (1995) have proposed that despite an extensive overlap, the Orange River corridor and the hinterland were partitioned between these two separate economies. When present at the river it appears that the hunter-gatherers had to fit between the interstices of the dominant herder economies which occupied the more productive Orange River environment itself. In their model, hunting and gathering occurred mostly away from the river while herding was more or less confined to the river corridor itself. This proposal describing pre-colonial land use practices is crucial in that it suggests that prior to the arrival of the Riemvasmakers, the region away from the Orange River did not have a history of domestic livestock grazing pressure. Instead, a diverse mixture of mostly browsing animals (giraffe, kudu, rhinoceros) existed there with grazers such as buffalo, hippopotamus and later cattle frequenting the riverine areas. Morris & Beaumont (1991) and Beaumont et al (1995) summarize the range and context of archeological sites in the Middle Orange River region and its environs (including a site at “Bokvasmaak”) while the SADF (1990) report provides a detailed (albeit preliminary) account of archaeological sites in Riemvasmaak itself (see later). 2-80 The poorly investigated Kourop and Molopo alluvial fans in particular possess rich collections of archaeological material and sites. These relatively undisturbed flood plains are some of the few areas along the middle reaches of the Orange River that have not been ploughed and irrigated. Many thousands of invaluable archaeological sites have probably been lost forever in the last few decades because of the recent agricultural development of these alluvial fans on commercially owned farms that fringe the Orange River. The value of archaeological artefacts situated within the Molopo alluvial fan should be emphasized and we suggest that a thorough survey of the region be done before any agricultural work commences on the Molopo. This is not to suggest that archaeological sites should prevent or retard the agricultural development of Riemvasmaak. On the contrary this is a marvelous opportunity to integrate the potential ecotourism value of such sites within a more general development programme for the region. In addition, the Riemvasmaak community will be afforded considerable prestige if they conserve these rare sites when neighbouring commercial farms throughout the region have long since destroyed them. Besides, a number of the archaeological sites may represent ancient settlements or burial grounds of the ancestors of some of the Riemvasmakers. We suggest that an experienced archaeologist be contracted as a matter of urgency to investigate, firstly the Molopo alluvial fan, and later the other areas earmarked for cropland development. The SADF (1990) report devotes considerable discussion to the archaeological material at Riemvasmaak and is produced in detail here (Table 2.2; Fig. 2.1). Their findings are based on three archaeological surveys conducted between July 1988 and August 1989 which focused on specific areas within Riemvasmaak. It is clear from this preliminary survey that Riemvasmaak possesses a rich and valuable archaeological heritage that must be considered in the development of the full potential of the region. 2-81 TABLE 2.2. List of site numbers and description of archaeological sites in Riemvasmaak (from SADF (1990)). Abbreviations are: ESA = Earlier Stone Age, MSA = Middle Stone Age, LSA = Later Stone Age, OES = Ostrich Egg Shell. NUMBER 2820AC: 1 2820AC: 2 2820AC: 3 2820AC: 4 2820AC: 5 2820AC: 6 2820AC: 7 2820AC: 8 2820AC: 9 2820AC: 10 2820AC: 11 2820AC: 12 2820AC: 13 2820AC: 14 2820AC: 15 2820AC: 16 2820AC: 17 2820AC: 18 2820AC: 19 2820AD: 1 2820AD: 2 2820AD: 3 2820AD: 4 2820AD: 5 2820AD: 6 2820AD: 7 2820AD: 8 2820AD: 9 2820AD: 10 2820AD: 11 2820AD: 12 2820AD: 13 2820AD: 14 2820AD: 15 2820AD: 16 2820AD: 17 2820AD: 18 2820AD: 19 2820AD: 20 2820AD: 21 2820AD: 22 2820AD: 23 2820AD: 24 2820CA: 1 2820CA: 2 2820CA: 3 2820CA: 4 DESCRIPTION Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Pastoralist Stone Age Stone Age Pastoralist Stone Age Pastoralist Pastoralist Stone Age Pastoralist Pastoralist Pastoralist Stone Age Pastoralist Pastoralist Pastoralist Pastoralist Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Pastoralist Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age Stone Age NOTES ESA ESA, MSA?, LSA ESA, MSA Ceramic LSA ESA (not located in SADF, 1990) ESA (not located in SADF, 1990) Stone artefacts, pottery, OES, LSA Five San graves Stone artefacts, ceramic, charcoal, slag, LSA Charcoal, slag Two San graves Stone artefacts, bone, OES, OES beads, grindstone, slag, LSA Pottery Stone artefacts, pottery, bone (fish), charcoal LSA Two San graves Stone artefacts, pottery, OES beads, bone (fish), charcoal, LSA Stone artefacts, pottery, OES beads, bone, charcoal, LSA Pottery scatter, few amorphous quartz pieces Ceramic LSA Indeterminate MSA ESA ESA Scatter of quartzite flakes, cores and end scraper LSA MSA, LSA Scatter of quartz flakes LSA LSA ESA Two quartzite flakes and small core. Indeterminate MSA, LSA ESA ESA, MSA ESA ESA, MSA, LSA Ceramic LSA ESA ESA LSA? ESA LSA ESA, MSA, LSA? ESA handaxe and MSA blade, plus cores and flakes One quartzite flake and two quartzite cores Large cores and flakes, blade and blade core found MSA MSA Isolated cores and flakes MSA Scatter of large & small quartzite cores and flakes 2-82 Fig. 2.1. Location of Stone Age (dots) and Pastoralist (circles) archaeological sites in Riemvasmaak as indicated in the preliminary survey data in the South African Defence Force (1990) report. The absence of archaeological sites in places such as the upper Kourop River Valley and lower Bak River simply means that these areas have not been surveyed. See Table 2.2 for a description of the sites. 2-83 2.3 SETTLEMENT AT RIEMVASMAAK The expansion of the settler frontier in South Africa during the 18th and 19th centuries was to have far-reaching implications for southern Namibia and the northern Cape as a range of displaced and indigenous ethnic groups contested grazing and hunting lands in these regions (Strauss, 1979). It is within the context of this extremely complex and dynamic mix of ethnicities and cultures that the origins of the Riemvasmaak community should be sought. Smith & Bozalek (1993) provide an excellent general history of the settlement of Riemvasmaak with a focus on the legal aspects of the claim. This history suggests that around the 1870’s or perhaps a little later, a number of families of Nama, Damara and Herero origin trekked from southern Namibia to the Riemvasmaak area and were joined by “Coloured” pastoralists and Xhosa-speakers from south of the Orange River (see Anderson 1987 for a history of the Xhosa of the northern Cape up to 1879). What is not clear is the ethnicity of the people who were already present in the region at this time and who also form part of the region’s history (Nurse & Jenkins, 1978). Even Father Zaby’s account (Zaby, 1982) focuses on the Damara founders since his interviews in the 1970’s were with the Riemvasmakers who were re-located to Namibia. Zaby (1982) suggests that Dawid Dawids, born in 1840 and also referred to as “Koning Dawid”, is regarded as the “actual founder of Riemvasmaak”. Oral testimony suggests that he settled in the region now known as Riemvasmaak “at the turn of the century”. While he left for a brief period during the First World War he settled permanently in Riemvasmaak in 1923 with an enlarged group of four other families numbering perhaps “30 armed men with families, wagons, large and small stock” (see Zaby, 1982). A detailed account of the relationships between descendants of these founder Damara families is provided by Zaby (1982) and should be consulted by anyone interested in the full details of the history of settlement of Riemvasmaak. The arrival of other groups of people has not been clearly documented. Oral testimony of Mr Vass suggests that his family, who claim a Xhosa heritage, arrived in Riemvasmaak in 1939 (Plate 2.2). His own father was born in Lady Frere (see Smith & Bozalek 1993, Annexure R) and Mr Vass remembers trekking from Van Wyksvlei to Kenhardt to the Buchuberg to Koross and then to Riemvasmaak where they settled in 1939. At the time Mr Vass suggests that at Xubuxnap there were lots of people living there who were working on the mine at Koelmanskop and that the place “het iets soos ‘n lokasie” gelyk. Like so many other Riemvasmakers it appears that before coming to the area Mr Vass’ own father worked as a labourer on white farms in parts of the northern Cape acquiring livestock as part-payment for service. Once large numbers of animals had been accumulated, however, their owners were forced to keep trekking since they effectively didn’t have the “rights” to any grazing land in the northern Cape. Because Riemvasmaak provided these farmers with legitimate grazing rights they settled in the region if permission to stay was granted by the Headman, Jacob Booysen and if grazing fees were paid to the local magistrate. Although the history of arrival and origins of the complex mix of people comprising the Riemvasmakers remains poorly known, the 1960 census provides an interesting account of the racial composition of the community at the time. As dubious as some of the classification procedures may have been, of the 318 “Household Heads” censused in 1960, 38.9% were classified as Damara, 22.9% as “Hotnot” (which is perhaps a reference to 2-84 PLATE 2.1. Unmarked grave sites south of Deksel in the Kourop River valley. 2-85 PLATE 2.2. Mr Willem Vass at Xubuxnap sitting on the ruins of his father's oxwagon that was brought to the area in 1939. 2-86 people with Korana or Einiqua Khoikhoi heritage (Zaby, 1982)), 14.7% as Xhosa, 13.5% as Coloured and 9.4% as other (including Herero, 4.4% and Tswana, 3.4%). The total population at Riemvasmaak, suggested by the census data, was 1 540 people. Of the 318 household heads 210 or 66.0% were born in Riemvasmaak while many of the rest stated that they came originally from areas within the Keimoes/Kakamas/Upington region. These census data suggest that all racial groups enjoyed a long history in the region as there are records of “coloured”, Damara, “Hotnot” and even one record of a person classified as Zulu having been born in Riemvasmaak in the late 1880’s and early 1890’s. The mean length of time that the household heads had been living in Riemvasmaak is given as 32.3 years although many of these household heads were young adults who had been born in Riemvasmaak, had lived there all there life, and perhaps whose parents were already deceased. 2.4 LANDUSE PRACTICES IN “OLD RIEMVASMAAK” 2.4.1 Stock numbers Knowledge of the size and composition of herds at different times provides important insights into the rangeland dynamics, management practices and agricultural potential of an area. But how reliable are stock number estimates especially when collected by different institutions whose reason for asking about the number of animals differs widely? TABLE 2.3. Number of domestic livestock and their Large Stock Unit (LSU) equivalents in Riemvasmaak in 1960 (unpublished census data), in “Old Riemvasmaak” probably around 1973/74 (see Isaacs & Phillips, 1994) and held by Riemvasmakers in exile in 1994 before their return to Riemvasmaak (unpublished records, Surplus People Project). LSU conversion factors are for adult animals (see Appendix 9, Table 2.4). Livestock Type Goats Sheep Cattle Donkeys Horses Mules TOTAL 1960 Number LSU 1973/74 Number LSU 1994 Number LSU 3 183 660 56 334 10 32 541 112 62 217 10 32 8 700 3 450 560 1 340 40 - 1 479 587 616 871 40 - 3 818 1 244 252 216 25 - 649 211 277 140 25 - 4 275 974 14 090 3 593 5 555 1 302 In Table 2.3 we document the number of livestock owned by people within the Riemvasmaak community at three different time periods. The first set of data reflect an undated but official government census of the region which we located in the files of the Surplus People Project. Based on the birthdates of known individuals listed in 2-87 the census we suggest that the records are for 1960 or perhaps 1961. Since individuals were allegedly taxed on the number of animals in their possession it is possible that this census underestimates the actual number of animals in Riemvasmaak at the time, although, as we suggest later is may not have been that easy to provide false information. The second set of data for stock numbers was collected in 1994 at a Participatory Rural Appraisal workshop organized by FARM Africa in Upington in May 1994 (Isaaks & Phillips, 1994). Not all of the livestock owners who were removed from Riemvasmaak in 1973/74 were present at this 1994 workshop. Some individuals could not be contacted, couldn’t make the event or in some cases were deceased. The values listed in Table 2.3 for 1973/74 are those given by the 27 members of the “Blue Group” at the workshop and must therefore reflect estimates of the size of many livestock owners herds. It is clear from the nature of the numbers too (e.g. 8 700, 560, etc.) that these are estimates and not actual numbers. There are a few reasons why these 1973/74 values should be treated with caution. Firstly, it is not clear as to the exact date reflected in these values. Are these stock numbers in “Old Riemvasmaak” the numbers that livestock owners possessed when they were moved from the area or do they reflect a general value for an unspecified time period? Secondly, and perhaps the most important reason why these 1973/74 values should be questioned, is that the 27 members of the “Blue Group” were asked to report, not only on the stock numbers which they possessed, but also on those which were owned by friends and relatives not present in the group or at the May 1994 workshop. While it was our experience that all of the livestock owners in “Old Riemvasmaak” that we spoke to possessed a remarkable historical knowledge of their herds for almost any time period from 1930 to the present in some cases, inaccuracies may have developed when estimates for other livestock owners were being made. Individual farmers may find reason to enhance the wealth of that of family members or friends or of Riemvasmaak as a whole by supplying inflated values, or they may simply not have known the actual number of animals. A third reason to treat the 1973/74 data with caution is that livestock owners know the concern that most official agencies have towards livestock numbers. By presenting higher numbers than were actually present, a case is immediately made for disregarding “official” values since the impression is then given that people survived successfully in the landscape with these high numbers of animals. When the discrepancy between official carrying capacity estimates and the stock numbers for 1973/74 was presented by the senior author of this report to the group of about 40 Riemvasmakers, most of whom were livestock owners, on 4 May 1995 their immediate response was to reject the official estimate as too low. However, the most vociferous objection came from the younger urbanized members of the community who did not own livestock but who understood very well the political importance of this issue. Finally, the third set of data in Table 2.3 were collected by Surplus People Project field workers with a rich experience of taking oral testimony from rural communities. A questionnaire was used to record the number of animals possessed by individuals. Of all the data it is probably the 1994 estimates that are the most accurate although livestock owners may have hoped to increase their herd sizes before returning to Riemvasmaak and presented these projected values instead. One other factor needs to be considered in Table 2.3. We have used LSU conversion factors for mature animals only. When appropriate age classes structures 2-88 for each livestock type (David Makin-Taylor, personal communication) are included in the analysis we found that the values in Table 2.3 overestimated actual LSU equivalents by about 10 %. Assuming that the data in Table 2.3 are a reasonably accurate reflection of stock numbers owned by Riemvasmakers then it is clear that these numbers have fluctuated with time. During the dry years of the late 1950’s and 1960 stock numbers were low but increased dramatically with the high rainfall years of the early 1970’s. Oral histories testify to the hardships endured by the livestock owners in Namibia and in the Ciskei and stock numbers in 1994 were relatively low compared to the 1973/74 estimates and only slightly higher than those of 1960. If the 1960 data are an accurate reflection of how many animals were present at Riemvasmaak then it is interesting that the total number of animals was well below, in fact only 75 % of the stocking rate currently suggested by the Department of Agriculture for the region (i.e. 60 ha/LSU or 1 243 LSU’s, see Chapter 1). Goats have always been the dominant livestock type and account for between 62-74 % of all the animals during the three time periods (Table 2.3). The proportion of sheep has been remarkably constant making up between 16-24 % of the total herd. Cattle (1-5 %) and donkey (4-10 %) populations have always been a relatively minor component of the herds although their value increases when considered in terms of Large Stock Unit equivalents. Data collected during the PRA workshop in 1994 (Isaaks & Phillips, 1994) also makes it possible to enquire whether different villages in “Old Riemvasmaak” had different concentrations of different livestock types (Table 2.4). It is clear that areas around the Riemvasmaak Mission Station itself appeared to have supported a far greater proportion of donkeys than other villages. For all the other villages, donkeys comprise between 1 and 10 % of the animal numbers but around the mission station nearly 30 % of the total number of animals was made up of donkeys. This high number may have arisen because of the need for transport from the more densely populated mission centre to neighbouring towns such as Kakamas and Marchand where many of the Riemvasmakers earned a living as short-term contract labourers (Table 2.5). Other differences between the villages are that those closer to the Orange River (Blousyfer, Wabrand & Melbosrand; Blok 1 & 2; Xubuxnab) kept proportionately more goats in their herds (78-82 %) than villages in the hinterland (mean of only 50 %). Sheep were favoured more by farmers in the Gyam/Vaalputs area and those living in Deurspring, Deksel and Bok se Puts than livestock owners elsewhere. Cattle never comprised more than 11 % of the village herd and proportionately more cattle were kept at Riemvasmaak and in the villages of Blousyfer, Wabrand and Melkbosrand than anywhere else. Whether these differences in herd composition reflect different environmental conditions or cultural preferences is unclear. The general pattern, however, suggests that goats were preferred by livestock owners at or near the river while sheep became common in the herds of farmers living away from the river. Donkeys were only abundant in the herds around the mission station while cattle numbers never reached high values. This exercise should be repeated for the 1960 census data once the household heads have been assigned to villages. 2-89 TABLE 2.4. Number and per cent (in brackets) of the total number of livestock in and around different settlements in “Old Riemvasmaak” as reported by the “Blue Group” in the PRA workshop held on 19 May 1994 (data in Isaacs & Phillips, 1994). LSU conversion factors are for adult animals (see Appendix 9). SETTLEMENT Riemvasmaak Mission Station Gyam/Vaalputs Perdepoort Blousyfer, Wabrand & Melkbosrand Blok 1 & 2 Xubuxnap Deurspring, Deksel & Bok se Puts TOTAL NUMBER LSU CONVERSION FACTOR TOTAL LSU’s GOATS 1 000 (37) 600 (39) 500 (68) 1 500 (82) 1 600 (82) 1 600 (78) 1 900 (58) 8 700 (62) 0.17 1 479 (41) NO. & (%) OF EACH LIVESTOCK TYPE SHEEP CATTLE DONKEYS HORSES 600 (22) 300 (11) 800 (30) 900 (58) 20 (1) 20 (1) 200 (27) 20 (3) 20 (3) 200 (11) 20 (11) 100 (5) 10 (0.5) 150 (8) 50 (3) 150 (8) 200 (10) 50 (2) 200 (10) 1 200 (37) 100 (3) 50 (2) 30 (1) 3 450 (24) 0.17 587 (16) 560 (4) 1.10 616 (17) 1 340 (10) 0.65 871 (24) 40 (0.2) 1.00 40 (1) TOTAL NUMBER LSU’s 2 700 1 122 1 540 290 740 154 1 830 386 1 950 451 2 050 491 3 280 700 14 090 3 593 2-90 TABLE 2.5. Mean number of livestock (+ std. dev.) owned by 318 household heads censused in 1960/61 according to their occupation listed in the census records. Mean values for the number of horses and mules owned by different occupation groups were never above 1.6 animals and usually below 0.3 and these livestock categories have therefore been excluded from this table. LSU values include horses and mules and use conversion factors for mature animals (Appendix 9). OCCUPATION No. % OWNING LIVESTOCK MEAN No. (+ STD. DEV) OF ANIMALS MEAN No. OF LSU’s TOTAL No. OF LSU’s Hoofman & Onder Hoofman 2 100 CATTLE 1.0+1.4 SHEEP 19.0+15.6 GOATS 42.5+38.9 DONKEYS 4.0+0 14 28 Livestock farmers (“Veeboere”) 8 100 2.4+2.7 22.6+36.1 85.6+64.6 4.8+2.1 26 206 Labourers - employed locally • Farm workers on “island” • Mine, road, railway workers, etc. • Shearers • Shepherds 176 41 4 10 42.6 53.7 100 90.0 0.1+0.4 0.2+0.8 0 0 0.3+2.1 3.4+12.5 9.5+1.0 19.4+38.1 6.0+14.1 13.1+32.3 17.5+2.1 13.6+13.9 0.7+1.7 1.8+3.2 0 0.8+1.7 2 4 5 6 309 177 18 66 Migrant labourers • Various (clerks, municipal, etc.) • Shepherds 21 5 52.4 80.0 0 0 0.4+1.2 0 7.5+9.7 25.2+23.8 0 1.8+1.8 1 6 28 27 Pensioners 43 53.5 0.2+1.5 0.2+1.5 5.6+10.8 1.3+2.0 2 92 Unspecified, Disabled, Unemployed 8 75.0 0.1+0.4 0 11.3+11.4 1.0+2.1 3 22 2-91 2.4.2 Land tenure and grazing management “The land all along the Orange River is being very rapidly developed and many European farmers are already settled there, and their numbers will steadily increase in the next few years. A large number of native labourers will be required by them for certain periods of the year, e.g., when ploughing and harvesting operations are in progress. These labourers will not be permanently employed and must of necessity have an area available where their families could reside and the few head of stock, they may be possessed of, may graze.” (Letter from the Magistrate’s Office in Upington to the Secretary for Mines and Industries suggesting that the land now called Riemvasmaak be “made available for native occupation”. Dated 8 November 1932.) One of the first questions that will need to be asked of any grazing strategy is “Who will own livestock and thus have a stake in the process”? Ownership is obviously a dynamic process and will also take some time to sort itself out amongst members of the community who will return to Riemvasmaak. Whether stock ownership profiles that existed in “Old Riemvasmaak” will be emulated in the future is impossible to predict but knowledge of these profiles provides a baseline against which development objectives can be judged. The stock census data for 1960/61 have been used to create a stock ownership profile for the community by grouping the 318 Riemvasmaak household heads censused into their respective occupations and recording the number of livestock owned by each member of the group (Table 2.5). From these data the following key points arise: • • • • Only 8 (i.e. 2.5 %) of household heads listed their occupation as “veeboer”; all the rest derived their income working as labourers outside of Riemvasmaak, especially on the numerous islands of the Orange River (thus fulfilling to the letter the prediction made by the Magistrate’s office in 1932 outlined in the quotation above); While bona fide “veeboere” possessed more livestock on average than other occupations, the number of animals owned by the veeboere, as a proportion of the total number of animals on Riemvasmaak land, was less than 22 %. The vast majority of animals were owned by household heads who worked outside of Riemvasmaak itself but who kept relatively low numbers of livestock in the care of family and friends; In almost all occupations, at least half of the household heads possessed at least one animal emphasizing the tremendous interest that existed in keeping stock; Goats were the preferred animal in all occupations, except for local shepherds who kept more sheep than goats. The work on the islands provided crucial employment for the community at Riemvasmaak and was also very tightly coupled to the livestock industry. The work was very labour intensive and the hours long involving a variety of skills such as ploughing, leading water, clearing trees (e.g. Acacia erioloba) for new irrigation lands, shepherding, shearing and crop harvesting. Many of the labourers would work as 2-92 share-croppers in the Kakamas/Marchand area harvesting commercial farm cash crops such as corn, beans, peas, lentils and cotton. Verbal contract agreements would usually be reached between the labourer and farmer in which payment for the harvest would be part cash, maybe one third of the going weekly wage of about R2-50 in the 1960’s, and the rest would be payment in kind i.e. a share of the harvest measured in terms of sacks of mielies or beans. These sacks were then often brought back to Riemvasmaak for domestic consumption or if there was a surplus they were used as payment for livestock at the going rate of one sack of mielies for one goat. In this way goat herds could be enlarged fairly quickly emphasizing the importance of outside employment to Riemvasmaak’s livestock industry. In what follows we address a series of land tenure and management questions relating to “Old Riemvasmaak”. This evidence was collected during January and between 4-5 May 1995 in the course of 3 main interviews with members of the Riemvasmaak community. Mr Willem Vass, Mr Pieter Malgas, Mr Abrahaam Adams and Mr Petrus Basson and his son are thanked for their valuable contributions in this regard. Additional material concerning historical landuse practices was found in the files of the Surplus People Project and has been incorporated where applicable. What institutional arrangements existed in “Old Riemvasmaak” to manage the livestock industry? “Koning” Dawid Dawids died in 1940 aged 100 years. For many years he had acted as the leader of the community. Although this date has not been confirmed, it appears that in 1934, 6 years before Mr Dawid Dawids’ death, Mr Jacob Booysen was appointed as the Hoofman or Headman of Riemvasmaak by the local magistrate. His appointment was to last for 38 years until his death in 1972 at the age of 82 years. His long and respected tenure as Hoofman was a key factor in the successful management of a wide range of affairs at Riemvasmaak including that of the communal grazing system. Mr Jacob Booysen apparently relied heavily on a group of regional committees in each of the outlying villages to act as his “eyes and ears”. This group of “voormanne” (see Annexure L in Submission to the Commission on Land Allocation) met regularly to discuss livestock and grazing management matters and, if necessary, Mr Booysen would travel to the outlying stations to see for himself the conditions at these centres. In what appear to have been open community meetings at which the Onderlandros presided, matters relating to land tenure and veld management were discussed. The minutes of one such meeting held on 23 October 1958 are invaluable in that they suggest a fairly consultative process in which a number of people voice their opinions on a range of matters. At this meeting which probably lasted for three or four hours ending at 12.30 pm, there were 22 men, 10 women and Mr Booysen. Although the Onderlandros is not listed as being present it is likely that he wrote the minutes as there is some reference to legal jargon that is unlikely to have come from Mr Booysen who apparently could not read or write. 2-93 How were grazing lands and watering points allocated? New comers to the Riemvasmaak Native Reserve had to ask permission from the Hoofman to settle. Failure to do so meant certain expulsion from the area and the minutes of the meeting in 1958 in fact, deal with a transgression of this protocol and the subsequent legal expulsion of a perpetrator who had been squatting in Riemvasmaak for more than a year. It appears also that once permission was granted to settle in an area then it was necessary to remain in the allotted area or at least permission had to be granted to set up permanent abode elsewhere. Again the minutes of the October meeting provide some insight in stating: “Jacob Booyse (sic) kla dat [‘n persoon van die gemeentskap] getrek het van die woonplek aanhom uitgewys gedurende 1956 en tans woon in die gemeentskaplike weiveld op Kameelkloof met sy huisgesin. Niemand anders woon in die weiveld nie. Vee raak weg. Die plek waar hy nou staan is nie die plek wat aan hom uitgewys is op 26/7/1956 nie”. This item is interesting for a number of reasons not least of which is the fact that a chief concern on Mr Booysen’s is that this person has chosen “community grazing land” on which to settle and has thus meddled with the grazing system that exists in the area. It is difficult to understand what this “community grazing land” is but it could be a reference to ║ana║as, (also called Kameeldoringkloof) which was an area used most commonly as a veepos during drought years. In the 1930’s and 1940’s, however, oral testimony indicates a high degree of mobility and “trekking” from one region within Riemvasmaak to another. Reasons for moving were varied and included to seek better grazing lands, to avoid drought, to escape stock diseases and to move closer to the schools established in a number of the outlying villages so that their children could attend school. In 1966 the primary schools at Deksel and Bok se Puts were closed by the state because Riemvasmaak was a Native (i.e. Bantu) Reserve and the school teachers was funded out of a Department of “Coloured” Affairs budget. With the removal of the teachers the schools could no longer function and people with children of school-going age then moved to the Mission Station itself because the independent Roman Catholic school was not similarly affected. It is unclear whether permission to move was sought during the earlier years and in the 1960’s. Also, a distinction should be made between moving temporarily during drought years to veeposte and better grazing lands and shifting one’s permanent place of abode. What limits were places on stock numbers? All evidence suggests that there was never any attempt by Mr Booysen or his committee to limit the stock numbers of individual farmers. However, from about 1940 onwards there were attempts on the part of the administration to do just that in Riemvasmaak: “Die wet het gesê ons mag net 50 bokke (or 25 sheep, 25 goats) en vyf bees, vier donkies aanhou en jy mag nie meer as dit hou nie”. To discourage people keeping more animals a “kop belasting” of £2 per animal per year was required. Failure to pay meant imprisonment. In fact, Mr Petrus Basson’s father died in an Upington jail in 1948 after being arrested, together with a number of other 2-94 Riemvasmakers (“hele klomp”) for falling behind in his kop belasting payments. Stock numbers were apparently checked by surprise visits by the (?state) veterinarian and it was not easy to hoodwink the authorities about animals numbers. It is not clear whether both the stock quotas as well as the stock tax were enforced throughout the period from the 1940’s to 1974. Certainly, there were many livestock owners who either ignored the state quotas or who could afford to pay the tax. The census records of 1960 and oral testimony indicate many livestock owners who possessed far in excess of the 50 goats allowed. In fact, some estimates for the 1950’s are for individual herds of over 800 goats and it is interesting that some of the people interviewed indicated that “ons het oorgeboer”. What resting systems were in place? The most important resting system developed by the Riemvasmakers was the concept of “spaarveld” - literally “spare rangeland”. Each outlying settlement had its own designated spaarveld in which only bulk grazers such as cows, donkies, horses and mules could graze. These areas were always the bottom lands, including the sandy pediments and dry river beds. In 1958, for the land around the Mission Station, the spaarveld areas were: Brand se Hoek, Sandhoek, and Onkais se hoek. At Deksel, Deurspring (photostation 19) and Oshoek were designated spaarveld areas while Loeriesfontein se vlak (we suspect at photostation 15) catered for the needs of the Bok se Puts community. At Gyam/Vaalputs the area now called Perdepoort (photostation 23) was kept for the exclusive use of cattle while the Xubuxnap farmers used the Mostertshoek (photostation 8) valley as spaarveld. The areas set aside as spaarveld in the Wabrand, Blousyfer, Melbosrant as well as the Blok Twee regions have not been determined. Goats and sheep were not allowed into these areas except under drought conditions and then only after discussion with Mr Booysen and the committee and with the Hoofman’s permission. The minutes of the 1958 meeting state that one of the local farmers at the meeting requested that the spaarveld for his area be opened up because it was so dry while this motion was opposed by another farmer. Mr Booysen ruled that the spaarveld would remain closed for the time being. Any transgressions would result in the trespassing animals being impounded and a fee charged for their release. This system was initiated in 1946 and the money was initially used for the creation of a loan fund. By 1958 the fund had grown to £50 and had been changed to a burial fund. The reason why the spaarveld was kept for the use of cattle only was that they were unable to climb the steep slopes of the escarpment in search of grazing while the goats were quite at home in these rocky environments. There is a story that one of the farmers who owned cattle constructed a pathway from the valley bottom to the plateau. To do this he had to move, by hand, many thousands of rocks so that his animals could more easily negotiate the very broken terrain on their way to the grassy plain on the plateau. How did Riemvasmakers cope with drought? 2-95 It appears that livestock owners in “Old Riemvasmaak” had many ways of dealing with the frequent droughts in the region. Firstly, during wet years, their herds would graze fairly close to the homesteads following similar daily paths. As key forage species became heavily grazed the livestock owners would note from the veld, as well as from their livestock condition, that they should alter their grazing pattern and select another local region, perhaps even another kloof in which to graze their herds. As the drought period deepened so the spaarveld became open and they would utilize these regions for awhile. If the droughts persisted then livestock owners were forced to graze their herds further and further away from their settlements going higher and higher up the rocky slopes each day even up to the plateau in search of grazing. Finally, during really bad years livestock owners would move with their herds to outlying veeposte until conditions improved. It appears that farmers from different parts of Riemvasmaak employed different strategies during the very protracted drought periods. Those farmers with livestock living in and around the Mission Station would “sak groot rivier toe” during these periods and graze their herds along the banks and on the numerous islands of the Orange River. Once conditions improved, usually after a few months, they would return to their homesteads in and around the Mission Station. For farmers around Deksel, however, they used veeposte at a well or put at Narougas (photostation 4). Nobody owned the veeposte and nobody directed individual farmers where to go. One testimony suggests that individuals knew or “had a feeling” of how many people each veepos could sustain and based on the knowledge of how many people were already occupying the veepos decided in what direction to move. How were livestock marketed? Two views have emerged with regard to the marketing of livestock in “Old Riemvasmaak” which may relate to the relative distances to markets. Firstly, testimony from a farmer living in Xubuxnap at the time (Annexure K2, Submission to the Commission on Land Allocation) suggests animals were sold at auctions and that the farmers in this area “...het plekke soos Marchand en Kakamas voorsien met slag diere”. Xubuxnap is just across the Orange River and with the aid of a sturdy pont it would have been easy to transport slaughter animals across the river and take them the short distance to the local markets. However, the farmers living further inland away from the main markets at places like Deksel and at the Mission Station itself report an entirely different history. These farmers indicate that their animals were sold to speculators (mostly one or two neighbouring white farmers) for “‘n appel en ‘n ei”. One person suggested that three pounds for a mature animal (‘n kraaklid kapater) was an excellent price at the time and that sometimes tobacco was exchanged for one or more animals. Many of the poorest members of the community lived from day to day and were happy to receive very low cash offers for their animals. 2-96 How were conflicts over land tenure and grazing rights resolved? From all accounts there were very few conflicts relating to these issues in “Old Riemvasmaak”. One testimony states that there was an excellent understanding between individual farmers and that: “...ons het nooit die ander man uitgestoot nie...om te sê ‘Jou goed is te veel en jy kan nie hierso in die area al die grond plat maak.’ Nee. ...by die groot ou Damaras daar was nie so ‘n ding nie. Hulle het altyd saam gewerk en dit was klaar gewees”. This idyllic view is not the whole story however, and we relate one situation where the leadership skill and respect of the Hoofman, Mr Booysen played a crucial role in settling a dispute concerning someone moving into an area with large numbers of animals and overgrazing the area. . 1966 was a very dry year especially coming as it did so soon after the record low rainfall year of 1964. The entire region was drought-stricken. Because of the conditions away from the Orange River, one farmer with his and his extended family’s very large flock of karakul sheep (swartskaap) moved from one end of Riemvasmaak to the other in search of better grazing. This extra pressure that was now placed on the veld meant that the vegetation very quickly became overgrazed (uitgetrap) and the original inhabitants of the area were forced to move. Some individuals moved to the veeposte at !Xob and ║ana║as while at least one of livestock farmers left Riemvasmaak altogether (“sommer aangetrek en nie weer teruggekom nie”). Mr Jacob Booysen was approached to settle the dispute (“ons het almal opgestaan”) and the initial transgressor was told to return to his original grazing lands. Prior to 1966 it appears no control on stock movement existed and the need for tighter control at this time may be related to the drought as well as to the enclosure of neighbouring commercial farms by wire fencing from the early 1950’s onwards. Fencing prevented the Riemvasmakers from grazing their herds on these traditional grazing lands and restricted their movements within the borders of the declared “Native Reserve” for the first time. 2.4.3 Vegetation change since 1952: Acocks revisited In chapter 1 we have assessed the “condition” of the vegetation within the current landscape after 20 years of military activity in the area. In the section which follows we expand on the analysis and in Appendix 10 we present the results of a survey of two sample sites of renowned South African botanist John Acocks’ (19111979). He traveled in the Riemvasmaak area in May 1952 and listed the vegetation of two areas which now correspond to our photostations 21 and 25 (see Appendix 8). At photostation 21 we were interested to know what the impact of communal grazing may have been between 1952-1974 as well as the subsequent 20 year “rest” period. In particular we were interested in the impact of landuse on species composition and cover of key forage species. This site is only a few kilometres from the Mission Station itself and is also just above the Molopo Gorge close to a number of important dug wells and springs in the area. It is likely to have been heavily utilized by the communal farmers of the area. Since 1974 the area around 2-97 photostation 21 has not been grazed by small stock but klipspingers and other ungulates may well have used the area. Photostation 25 is located on a commercial farm forming the eastern border with Riemvasmaak. This farm has only recently been sold to the National Parks Board (NPB). Although open to black rhinoceros for the last two years (i.e. since January 1993) the area is not utilized much by these animals (Barry Hopgood, personal communication). There are indications that this particular area of the farm was very heavily stocked once the decision to sell the land to the NPB had been made. We were interested to measure the changes that had occurred in the vegetation in the intervening 43 years following a period of commercial farming. Three of Acocks’ photographs, taken at photostation 25 in May 1952, and forming a discontinuous panorama, were also re-photographed by us to provide additional information concerning vegetation changes in the area. Plate 2.3 is taken looking west into the Wabrand area of Riemvasmaak while Plate 2.4 and Plate 2.5 are looking north and east respectively and show changes in the vegetation and landscapes of the neighbouring commercial farm, Waterval. One of the difficulties we faced in re-sampling Acocks’ sites is that he didn’t indicate precisely where he walked when compiling his species list. Unpublished sources suggest that he covered a very large area, walking for perhaps 2-4 km, sampling every possible habitat in the general locality until he no longer found new species to add to his list. His knowledge of plant species and ability to recognize them from the smallest of scraps was legendary. Although we attempted to emulate Acocks’ general methodology by covering a very large area in our sampling strategy we recognize with hindsight that we could have worked further and spent longer than the three hours that we did spend sampling at each site. However, with two field workers covering 2-3 km each in searching for plants to add to the list, a total of 6 person-hours were spent at each of the sites. Regional climatic conditions had also been extremely dry when we sampled and the grass inflorescences, in particular were seldom present. Although we feel confident that we all possessed a good working knowledge of the flora of the region after nearly 10 days of collecting in the area, the dry condition of some of the species often made accurate identification very difficult. One other difficulty in re-sampling Acocks’ sites is that he had, over the years, developed a unique method of assessing the abundance of different species in the landscape, complete with its own notation. While it has been well described in Acocks (1988) it is, nonetheless, difficult to implement with accuracy in the field. We assigned, by consensus, Acocks abundance classes to the species that we observed at these re-sampled sites. 2-98 TABLE 2.6. Comparison of changes between Acocks’ May 1952 sample data and that of the National Botanical Institute’s (NBI) Jan 1995 survey team at two Photostations in Riemvasmaak (see also Appendix 10).. COMPARISON Total number of species in Acocks sample Number of species found only in Acocks sample PHOTOSTATION NUMBER 21 25 70 131 42 87 Total number of species in NBI sample Number of species found only in NBI sample 50 22 63 19 Number of species present in both samples (i.e.shared species) 28 44 Total number of different species recorded at photostation 92 150 Number of grass species in Acocks sample Number of grass species in NBI sample 17 8 27 12 Number of shared species whose abundance class value has stayed the same between 1952-1995 Number of shared species which have shown a decrease by one or more abundance classes Mean decrease Number of shared species which have shown an increase by one or more abundance class Mean increase 10 16 8 22 4.6 10 4.0 6 3.3 1.3 Changes at Photostation 21. Only 28 of the 50 species found by us were also recorded by Acocks at this site (Table 2.6). His total species list is also considerably larger than ours and 42 of the species in his checklist (or 45.6 % of the total species complement at this site) were not found by the NBI survey team. However, 22 “new” species were recorded by us and not by Acocks in 1952. Some of the most important differences in the species abundance values that are evident between the two time periods are (see Appendix 10): • A decrease in both the number and cover of most grass species including Aristida spp., Danthoniopsis ramosa, Enneapogon desvauxii, Eragrostis spp., Melinis repens, and Stipagrostis anomela, although the abundance of some grass species didn’t change and that of Stipagrostis uniplumis and Triraphis ramosissima even increased significantly; • A decrease in the abundance of many perennial dwarf shrubs such as Aptosimum marlothii, Hermannia spinosa; Indigofera pungens; but an increase in others (e.g. 2-99 • • • • Indigofera heterotricha, and the very palatable dwarf shrub, Limeum aethiopicum). Interestingly, the abundance of some of the dominant shrubs in the region, Monechma spartioides, Sisyndite spartea haven’t changed; A significant decrease in the abundance of Euphorbia gregaria; The absence of any geophytes (e.g. Dipcadi glaucum) in the 1995 sample; A drop in abundance of herbaceous species such as Forsskaola candida, Lotononis crumanina, and the toxic Tribulis cristatus although the herbaceous Cleome oxyphylla was fairly frequent in 1995; An increase in the abundance of some large shrubs and trees such as Acacia mellifera; Schotia afra. The changes that are outlined above are difficult to interpret. When Acocks sampled the vegetation in 1952 he was not entering a pristine landscape. As indicated in earlier sections it had probably already been grazed by domestic stock for at least two and possibly up to five decades prior to 1952. In fact, in the only reference to the condition of the vegetation, Acocks notes: “In bed of Molopo (very t.-o [notation for “tramped out”]), Sisyndite spartea is F (eaten down) with much Zygophyllum microcarpum and some Aristida namaquensis (eaten down) & of course Acacia giraffae”. The presence of a number of herbaceous species and geophytes in Acocks’ sample also suggests that he may have sampled during a wetter period than the NBI survey team. In these arid environments a small rainfall event of only 10 mm a few weeks before the survey can make an enormous difference to the germination and growth of a wide range of species. We conclude that the overall loss of species in the landscape is alarming but we would like to sample the site again after good rains have fallen in the area before drawing more definite conclusions about the degree of degradation and long-term effect of the historical landuse practices at this site. Changes at Photostation 25. Differences in the vegetation between 1952 and 1995 are far more dramatic for photostation 25 than photostation 21 (Table 2.6). 87 species (or 58 % of the total species complement at this site) were not recorded in the 1995 survey with only 19 (or 12.6 % of the total species number) being recorded as “new” additions to the checklist. Less than a third (44 or 29.3 %) of the species were shared between the two time periods. The most important points to note are (see Table 2.6 and Appendix 10): • An almost complete crash in the grass component in which many species such as Chloris virgata, Eragrostis lehmanniana, E. porosa have changed from being abundant to rare or even absent in the landscape; • The loss of a broad spectrum of dwarf shrubs that were once abundant, common or frequent on either the upper or lower slopes in the region; • An important reduction in the abundance of Euphorbia gregaria and other succulents in the landscape (e.g. Sarcostemma viminale); 2-100 • A slight increase or no change in many of the dominant trees (e.g. Acacia mellifera, Boscia albitrunca, Euclea undulata, Schotia afra. Some of the differences that can be measured between the two time periods may relate to climatic conditions in the months preceding the different surveys. The presence, often in abundance, of a number of geophytes (e.g. Eriospermum sp.), herbaceous species (e.g. Forsskaolea candida) and members of the Cyperaceae (e.g. Bulbostylis volubilis), suggests that Acocks sampled this landscape soon after a fairly wet period. Despite this obvious climate effect, however, there is little doubt that something fairly dramatic has occurred in this landscape since 1952. The matched photographs (Plates 2.3, 2,4, 2.5) illustrate this point more clearly in that they show a marked reduction in vegetation cover on the pediments below the rocky ridges. Most of this reduction is caused by the mortality of Euphorbia gregaria and we noticed many dead skeletons of this and other succulent species (e.g. Aloe dichotoma) in the region. We noticed large-scale sheet erosion of the bottomlands for the first time at this site characterized by a number of shrub species “standing on root-stilts” about 30 cm above the soil surface and it appeared that much of the pediment had been either washed or blown away. We are unable to explain adequately the changes that we have measured at this site but suggest a number of competing hypotheses that could account for these differences. Hypothesis 1: Differences between the two time periods are simply a function of rainfall patterns. The prolonged drought in the area that has lasted for nearly a decade may have been extreme in this specific locality and local aridification has caused the differences in the vegetation in the two time periods. Whether these changes are permanent or can be switched on and off by good and poor rainfall cycles is not clear. It is possible that following good rains in the area many of the species listed by Acocks in 1952 will germinate from long-lived seed banks and return to dominate the landscape once more. One bit of evidence supporting this “climate hypothesis” is the fact that the matched photograph (Plate 2.3) looking west into the Riemvasmaak area has reportedly been protected from domestic livestock grazing since 1974, yet it too shows a large change in the abundance of species on the sandy and rocky pediments. Hypothesis 2: Differences between the two time periods have been caused by human factors such as over-grazing. These changes indicate a permanent reduction in the production potential of the land since the soil and geomorphological environment has been altered. This degradation may have been caused: • either by domestic livestock overgrazing the range; • or by the impact of the rhinoceros population which has fed in the area since 1993. While the hypothesis which suggests that overgrazing by domestic livestock is responsible for the clear degradation of the site is currently the one we favour most, an ongoing monitoring programme will help to eliminate some of the other competing hypotheses. 2-101 PLATE 2.3. Matched photograph pair at photostation 25 taken about 7 km east of Wabrand looking west towards the Orange River. The top photograph was taken by John Acocks (#5563) on 22 May 1952 while the lower image was taken on 27 January 1995 (see text for a discussion of the major changes in the landscape). 2-102 PLATE 2.4. Matched photograph pair at photostation 25 taken from the same camera position as in Plate 2.3 but looking north along the "priest's road winding down the hill." Photographers and dates are the same as for Plate 2.3 (Acocks #5564). (See text for a discussion of the changes). 2-103 PLATE 2.5. Matched photograph pair of photostation 25 taken from the same camera position and by the same photographers as indicated in Plate 2.3 but looking east (Acocks #5565). (See text for a detailed discussion of the changes in the images). 2.5 MILITARY OCCUPATION: THE LAST 20 YEARS 2-104 The main South African Defence Force base was at the Riemvasmaak Mission Station from where the training activities of three main sections of the military were co-ordinated. These three sections were: 8 South African Infantry Training Unit; Armscor; and the South African Airforce. Their respective impacts are discussed separately in the SADF (1990) report and we paraphrase and provide some interpretation of this account. 2.5.1 8 South African Infantry Training Unit Three main areas were used for troop training by the 8 SAI Infantry Training Unit which together account for about 6 % of the land area of Riemvasmaak. The first was the broad valley north of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station incorporating Brand se Hoek, Tsu!aos and │Nûb (Fig. 1.2, Fig 2.2). The second was the region northeast of the mission station bordering on the farm Waterval. Between 1974 and 1988 these regions were used mainly for basic and advanced infantry troop training but from 1988 onwards 8 SAI became mechanized. This meant the inclusion of heavy military vehicles such as Samils and Ratels in the manoeuvres as well as the use of 12.7 mm and 20 mm ammunition. The SADF (1990) report is explicit in listing the areas in these two regions where disturbance was greatest. The report states that both Ratels and Samils only used the region in the “A-Valley” which was “west of A-base” (marked “a” in Fig. 2.2) while the use of Ratels in training exercises also occurred in the region “east of C-base” (marked “c” in Fig. 2.2). The third main area used by 8 SAI for troop training was the broad sandy pediment in the Gyam/Vaalputs region (Fig. 2.2). It appears that the entire valley was used for manoeuvres and the SADF (1990) report highlights the impact of these activities on the vegetation, soils and roads within this region. It concludes that most of the Gyam/Vaalputs area has been moderately (“redelik”) disturbed. Our findings outlined in chapter 1 confirm this conclusion where the presence of many disturbancerelated perennial and annual plants suggests a landscape that has been disturbed in the recent past (Plate 2.7). In places we suggest that this disturbance is more that “moderate” but the long-term implications for the healthy functioning of the landscape are unclear. Two other activities of 8 SAI have implications for the landuse history of the region. Firstly, an area south of Groot Rooiberg (Riemvasmaakkop) was used as a mortar range. While we saw evidence of much military debris in the area it did not appear as if the region had been severely disturbed. Secondly, a driver’s training area was also established south west of Groot Rooiberg. We did not visit this area but surmise that it would have been severely disturbed by the impact of heavy vehicles. 2.5.2 Armscor The Gyam/Vaalputs area was also use by Armscor for the testing of newlydeveloped vehicles, armaments and ammunition (Fig. 2.2). Long-range artillery equipment was also tested by firing from Gyam/Vaalputs across to targets at 2-105 Donkiemond, 35 km to the west and a few kms east of the Namibian border. While there was evidence of a few bomb craters and much military debris at Donkiemond we did not observe a severely disturbed landscape, as a result of Armscor’s activities, in this region. Armscor also tested vehicles and vehicular equipment at the Driver Training area southeast of the mission station. 2.5.3 South African Airforce Although about 30 000 ha within Riemvasmaak was set aside for the testing of newly developed equipment by the South African Airforce probably only a small part of this area was disturbed by their activities. Several glass-fibre models and scrap motor vehicles were positioned in target areas within the Loeriesfontein and Kourop Valleys as well as the plateau areas west and east of the Kourop River valley (Fig. 2.2). Airforce vehicles apparently did not operate in the region and the SADF report suggests that the impact of the airforce’s activities was slight (“klein van skaal”). Except for the craters caused by exploding bombs in a few of the areas that we sampled we found no evidence to reject this general view. However, we could not reach many of the more inhospitable plateau environments used by the airforce and we cannot comment on their impact in these regions. Details of military manoeuvres at Riemvasmaak in 1989 are shown in Table 2.7. Activities prior to this are not listed in the SADF report. In 1989 activities occurred in short intensive spells from a few days up to four weeks at a time totaling about 4½ months or slightly more than a third of the year. TABLE 2.7. Dates in 1989 and kind of activities carried out by three military organizations using Riemvasmaak as a training facility. UNIT & DATE DAYS COMMENTS 8 SAI Training Unit Apr 10-26 17 Basic training: 450 troops May 1-28 28 Section commanders training: 160 troops Jun 12-30 19 General training: 530 troops, 50 Ratels Jul 17-28 12 General training: 530 troops, 50 Ratels Armscor Feb 8-20 13 Direct shelling, Engine and tyre testing May 1-5 5 Engine and tyre testing Oct 30 - Nov 2 4 Direct and long-range artillery South African Airforce Apr 10-21 12 May 5-20 16 Jun 12-23 12 TOTAL DAYS 138 2-106 Figure 2.2. The distribution of different types of military activity during the South African Defence Force’s tenure of Riemvasmaak between 1974-1994. 2-107 PLATE 2.6. Sandy pediment near Gyam/Vaalputs. The dominance of the landscape by Rhigozum trichotomum suggests that heavy disturbance of the environment has occurred in the past. This may possibly be related to the mechanized infantry manoeuvres or arms-testing exercises carried out during the SADF's tenure of the region. 2.6 THE FUTURE 2-108 A number of important issues have emerged in our rather superficial treatment of historical landuse practices in Riemvasmaak which can be used in the future development of the livestock industry. Firstly, Riemvasmaak is too small to be able to move livestock very large distance and it is unlikely that the region will be increased in size. Although local testimony suggests a more patchy landscape in Riemvasmaak relative to the rangelands around Khorixas, in Namibia, the situation is nothing like in the communal rangelands of many sub-saharan countries where animals are able to trek over very large distances to make use of the variable rainfall regime (see chapters in Behnke et al 1993). In Riemvasmaak, climatic gradients are shallow and a severe drought will probably extend over the entire region. The land area is small in comparison with what is required for a productive and extensive small stock industry with the ability to support an economically viable community paying for all of the essential services that will be provided for them. The Orange River environment is a huge boon to the development of any range management system. They are few arid areas that can boast a major river on their doorstep and although some of the stock farmers used to move to the river during extreme drought years, it seems not to have been developed to its full potential. By building on the historical landuse practices it will be possible to cater for drought years and poor seasons by providing a permanent fodder bank of cultivated pastures along the river itself. Tenure of these croplands will be a crucial issue, however, and communally-owned and managed cropland areas may be the answer. The full economic, social and cultural implications of and potential interactions between the livestock and crop industries need to be carefully understood. The development of an effective marketing strategy will be an important contribution to the livestock industry. Knowledge of when to buy and sell and developing access to local markets will assist Riemvasmaak farmers greatly. Goats are likely to be the preferred animal in Riemvasmaak and a stud herd to improve drought tolerance could be implemented. Not all of the livestock farmers have lived a subsistence existence while in exile and even if they have many are fully aware of the value of selection. The greatest challenge faced by the development programmes will be in the incorporation of the part-time farmers into the grazing and livestock management systems. It is possible that many of the people returning the region will want to keep some livestock while earning their major source of income from jobs maintained outside Riemvasmaak itself. In the past it was this group of people who collectively possessed the majority of animals. How can their needs and aspirations be accommodated? Finally, the importance of the management structures in “Old Riemvasmaak” cannot be underestimated. Although the Hoofman was appointed and not elected he appears to have illicited great respect from the majority of people in Riemvasmaak. Decisions on such important issues as settlement rights and seasonal grazing strategies were based on consultation and sometimes even after inspection of local conditions. An elected stock committee faced with similar responsibilities should build on this history of “Old Riemvasmaak”. 2.7 REFERENCES 2-109 ACOCKS J P H 1988. The veld types of South Africa. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 57, 1-146. 3rd ed. ANDERSON E 1987. A history of the Xhosa of the Northern Cape. Centre for African Studies Communications No. 12, 1-184. BEAUMONT P B, SMITH A B & VOGEL J C 1995. Before the Einiqua: The archaeology of the frontier zone. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. (In press). CULLINAN P 1992. Robert Jacob Gordon 1743-1795. Struik Winchester, Cape Town. DEACON J C G 1986. Human settlement in South Africa and archaeological evidence for alien plants and animals. In The ecology and management of biological invasions in southern Africa, eds. I. A. W. Macdonald, F. J. Kruger & A. A. Ferrar, pp. 3-19. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. ELPHICK R 1985. Khoikhoi and the founding of White South Africa. Johannesburg: Raven Press. MORRIS D & BEAMONT P 1991. !Nawabdanas: Archaeological sites at Renosterkop Kakamas District, Northern Cape. South African Archaeological Bulletin 46, 115-124. NURSE G T & JENKINS T 1978. Riemvasmaak before settlement. South African Journal of Science 74, 339-341. RAPER P E & BOUCHER M 1988. Robert Jacob Gordon. Cape Travels, 1777 to 1786. The Brenthurst Press, Houghton. SMITH A B 1995A. Ecology and resources of the Middle and Lower Orange River and hinterland. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town (In press). SMITH A B 1995b. The Orange River lifeline. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. (In press) SMITH H & BOZALEK L 1993. Riemvasmaak: Application to the Commission on Land Allocation by Riemvasmaak community. Legal aspects and status of Riemvasmaak land. Unpublished report, 12 November 1993. Legal Resources Centre, Cape Town. STRAUSS T 1979. War along the Orange. Centre for African Studies Communications No. 1, 1-129. 2-110 ZABY A 1982. Geschichte und Kultur einer Gemeinschaft (The story and culture of a community). Namibiana 4(1). 2-111 Chapter 3 : THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MONITORING PROGRAMME FOR RIEMVASMAAK 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Key elements of a monitoring programme 3.3 Need 3.4 Purpose 3.5 Methods 3.5.1 3.5.2 3.5.3 3.5.4 3.5.5 3.5.6 Climate Water Vegetation Livestock Croplands Community health 3.6 Analysis, interpretation and presentation 3.7 Capital equipment and infrastructural costs 3.8 Training 3.9 Programme initiation 3.10 Operation 3.11 Termination 3.12 References 3-112 "Monitoring is the process by which we keep the characteristics of the environment in view. It provides the essential data on how systems are changing and how fast. It provides the essential feed-back loops to management, so that we can adjust what we are doing and get the best out of the system." (Spellerberg, 1991). "....counsel on how to plan a monitoring study seems not to exist." (Mentis & Walker, 1989). 3.1 INTRODUCTION To plan effectively, both in the short-term (i.e. daily to seasonal time horizons), medium-term (i.e. annual) and long-term (i.e.decadal) requires a sound understanding of any resource base. This includes knowledge of not only the fluctuations in the natural components such as the rainfall and vegetation upon which an agricultural industry is ultimately based but also incorporates knowledge of market fashions, trends and cycles. But how is it possible to keep track of fluctuations in these resources and markets? More importantly, how can this knowledge be used by individual farmers and communities to make decisions about their day to day farming operations so that their activities are both profitable and sustainable in the long-term? Answers to these questions form part of the broad and developing field of monitoring, defined rather formally by Goldsmith (1991a) (pg. 2) as the "intermittent (regular or irregular) surveillance carried out in order to ascertain the extent of compliance with a predetermined standard or the degree of deviation from an expected norm" and described less formally by Spellerberg (1991) in the quotation at the start of this chapter. Spellerberg (1991) in particular, emphasizes that monitoring is an integral part of management and that it should not to be conducted simply for the sake of monitoring. One problem, as Mentis & Walker (1989) point out, however, is that there is little guidance to draw from in the development of a monitoring programme. Although this position has been somewhat alleviated by the publication of two recent text books on the theme (Goldsmith, 1991a; Spellerberg, 1991), and a number of unpublished reports (e.g. Anonymous, 1990), details of site-specific monitoring programmes are seldom available. Where details are provided they often describe programmes established for conservation-orientated problems where one or a few rare, endangered or threatened plant and animal species are at risk from habitat destruction or other human impacts (e.g. Goldsmith, 1991b). Examples of monitoring programmes developed specifically for the sustainable development of arid, communally-managed rangelands are lacking. This chapter is an attempt to redress this imbalance. We have drawn on the key principles outlined in the literature above as well as on the results of our baseline survey and collective monitoring experience in the semi-arid and arid rangelands of southern Africa to propose a preliminary structure for a monitoring programme for Riemvasmaak. Although the main aspects of the monitoring programme were discussed with the livestock owners on 4 May 1995, we emphasize that it requires considerable additional discussion before further steps for its implementation can be taken. 3.2 KEY ELEMENTS OF A MONITORING PROGRAMME All monitoring programmes emphasize a sequential arrangement of key elements in their structure (Usher, 1991). These steps and related questions usually incorporate one or more of the following: Need: Who wants or needs the monitoring programme? Purpose: What is the aim of the programme? Methods: What methods will be used to achieve the aim? Analysis: How will the data be analyzed and presented? Equipment: What equipment and infrastructure are needed? Training: Who will undertake the monitoring? Initiation: When will monitoring begin? Operation: How will the decisions be made? 3-113 Termination: When will the monitoring programme end? 3.3 NEED The first step in any monitoring programme, but particularly in a rural development situation where community support is crucial for its success, is to clarify who it is who wants the programme, who will be supporting it in terms of financial and personpower costs and who stands to benefit from it? Who wants the programme? For Riemvasmaak, it is clear that much of the early initiative to develop a monitoring programme has thus far come from FARM Africa. This is line with their commitment to sustainable development in the region. What would it benefit them or the community which they are committed to assist, if agricultural development were conducted at the expense of the environment and if it were non-sustainable in the short-, medium- or long-term? What is not entirely clear, to date, is the full interest that the Riemvasmakers themselves have in the programme. It was encouraging to note, however, that during the report-back on 4 May 1995 the livestock owners perceived a need for a monitoring programme and indicated their support for its development and intended use. As will be discussed later, this includes providing input into raw data collection such as stock numbers and vegetation condition assessment as well as involvement in all decision-making processes. Without their support and active control of the monitoring process and associated management decisions there is little hope of the monitoring programme achieving anything beyond a rather superficial and patchy scientific assessment of the condition of the natural resource base. Tracking the state of the region's resources is not the same as managing the resources. A fully integrated monitoring programme should aim to be part of the broad agricultural management strategy of the Riemvasmaak environment. Who will provide the financial and personpower costs for the programme? Clarity on these details is essential. At this stage it seems reasonable to assume that various state and non-governmental development and agricultural agencies, possibly co-ordinated by FARM Africa, will provide the initial financial support for the programme. If significant benefits are perceived to arise from the programme, then the feasibility and interest of the Riemvasmaak agricultural community assisting with the financial costs will need to be addressed at some stage. Personpower costs are likely to be borne firstly by limited voluntary contributions by the farmers when supplying, for example, details of stock mortalities or births and in making decisions about management options. Secondly, the need for a full-time Monitoring Warden will be discussed later but he or she together with specialist consultants will probably provide the bulk of the personpower costs of the programme. Who stands to benefit from the monitoring programme? For it to succeed, unequivocal benefits, derived directly from information drawn from the programme, must be evident to all farmers within Riemvasmaak, irrespective of economic or social status. Benefits must also be evident at different scales from individual households to the entire community. 3.4 PURPOSE Before any monitoring programme is initiated the objectives need to be clearly stated (Usher, 1991). These should be formulated by all parties who have an interest in the programme. Such objectives should include statements about the environmental quality or state of the environment at any one time so that Riemvasmakers, from household to village to community level can make informed decisions about how best to manage their animal and rangeland resources. Without being prescriptive we suggest the following as a starting point for the development of a set of objectives for the monitoring programme: "The purpose of the monitoring programme is to provide the Riemvasmaak community with sufficient knowledge about the state of their environment (including climate, vegetation, stock condition, crop yields and market forces) at any one time so that informed decisions can be made by all Riemvasmakers, from household to village to community level, about their various agricultural enterprises." 3-114 3.5 METHODS The choice of methods should be directly related to the objectives of the monitoring programme since they provide the means for achieving them. Three main concerns about the choice of methods arise. Firstly, a baseline survey should be conducted to provide an initial interpretation of the environment. Secondly, appropriate variables or indicators of change need to be selected. Thirdly, the intensity (how many measurements are needed in order to say something statistically meaningful about the variable's behaviour within the reserve?); the spatial arrangement or measurement grid (i.e. where will what be measured?); and the frequency (how often must something be measured in order to capture the change in a parameter?) must be established for each variable. Each one of these concerns is shown in Table 3.1 and discussed in more detail below. 3-115 Table 3.1. Key variables that could be monitored at Riemvasmaak with some indication of their sampling intensity, location and frequency, the type of measurement and units needed and the individual(s) or agency responsible for the task. Variable Sampling intensity Sample location Sampling frequency Type of measurement & units Responsible individual(s)/agency 1. CLIMATE - Rainfall 4-6 rain gauges At each main settlement Rainfall amount (mm) 1 higher order station Riemvasmaak Mission St. Daily, synthesized monthly Daily, synthesized monthly Maximum/minimum temperature (°C) Designated recorders, Monitoring Warden Monitoring Warden 5-10 permanently monitored water sources 5-10 permanently monitored water sources At major wells, fountains and boreholes At major wells, fountains and boreholes Initially monthly, later seasonally Initially monthly, later seasonally Depth ((m); rate (l/s) Monitoring Warden Various (e.g. Conductivity (mS/m); Fluoride (mg/l), Nitrates (mg/l)) Monitoring Warden and outside agency 29 permanently-marked photo stations Replicated samples of 46 key species 3 replicates in 5 localities (= 15 plots) Widespread, concentrated around settlements Widespread Every 5-10 years Riemvasmaak Mission St., Deksel, Bok se Puts, Xubuxnap; Perdepoort Annually Species and growth form composition and % cover Abundance (No., % cover), height (m); seed production, condition, etc. Species composition (No. ), abundance (No., % cover) Ecologist, Monitoring Warden Ecologist, Monitoring Warden Ecologist, Monitoring Warden All livestock owners All settlements Annually Local and national indices All crop farmers As contained in agricultural reports All croplands Monthly No. of animals, herd structure, deaths, births Meat, pelt, wool prices (R/c) Livestock owners, Monitoring Warden Monitoring Warden Seasonally Area planted, crop yields (kg/ha) Monitoring Warden As many cases of selected ailments as possible All settlements Ad hoc, but synthesized annually No. of cases Medical practitioners, Monitoring Warden - Temperature 2. WATER - Quantity - Quality 3. VEGETATION - Matched photos - Key species abundance - Demonstration plots 4. LIVESTOCK - Census, births & deaths - Markets 5. CROPLANDS 6. COMMUNITY HEALTH Annually 3-116 A baseline survey provides invaluable assistance when planning the monitoring programme in detail. Firstly, it synthesizes information (maps, aerial photographs, literature) about the region and makes this available to all involved in the development of the monitoring programme. Planning requires knowledge about a region and the more that is available for synthesis and discussion the better. A reasonably thorough and photographically-documented ecological survey of the region, as contained in the earlier sections of this report, also provides important information about the state of the environment at the start of the programme. In the case of Riemvasmaak, which has experienced 20 years without domestic livestock, the detailed survey describes an environment as "pristine" as there has been, probably since the late 19th century. A baseline survey also identifies the key resources within the region. This not only suggests which variables may be the important ones to select for observation and measurement but also provides information about the spatial and temporal intensity necessary for the monitoring process. The choice of parameters to be measured is a crucial part of any monitoring programme. Indeed, inappropriate selection would invalidate the process completely. However, if chosen correctly, these parameters should reflect the "pulse" of the environment. They should indicate the state and condition of key resources and knowledge about these parameters should precipitate decisions about the agricultural enterprises of the region. A distinction is generally made between parameters that measure changes in processes (e.g. decomposition, productivity, succession, etc.) and those that measure changes in variables (e.g. biomass, percentage cover, composition, species diversity, population size class distributions, etc.) (Spellerberg, 1991). We suggest that the initial emphasis should be on the measurement of changes in five main groups of variables and if key processes emerge, that could provide additional insight into the state of the environment, then they should be incorporated later. For an effective monitoring programme we suggest that information about the following five main groups of variables is needed (see Table 3.1): Climate Water Vegetation Livestock Croplands Community health 3.5.1 Climate Riemvasmaak is an arid region and the amount of rainfall over any one period is critical for the region's agricultural productivity. It is also important that the spatial pattern of rainfall is understood so that decisions about, for example, livestock movements and concentrations can be made at both a village and reserve level. Although the rainfall gradients suggested in Fig. 1.8 indicate a slight increase in annual rainfall from north to south and from west to east there will undoubtedly be enormous variation within and between years. To keep track of the amount of rain falling on Riemvasmaak it is suggested that a series of standard rain gauges be erected at each of the main settlements such as Bok se Puts, Deksel, Xubuxnab, Riemvasmaak Mission Station, Perdepoort, and possibly also one on the plateau close to one of the larger settlements. It is also suggested that since the Riemvasmaak Mission Station is likely to represent the administrative centre of the reserve that a higher order weather station, which would record at least maximum and minimum temperatures, would be useful. The Weather Bureau should be consulted about the most cost-effective instrumentation. In addition, instruction about how to collect the data will need to be provided. Ideally, the outlying rainfall stations would be handled by designated villagers and synthesized by the Monitoring Warden who would also be responsible for the higher order weather station at the Riemvasmaak Mission Station itself (Table 3.1). (The rationale for the Monitoring Warden and his or her terms of reference will be discussed later under the section which deals with Training). 3.5.2 Water 3-117 Both the quantity and quality of the water must be monitored on a regular basis. Changes in both of these variables could impact severely on livestock condition which in turn could have farreaching implications for individual farmers and villages Fig. 1.12 suggests the location of water sources within Riemvasmaak. Those sources used most frequently by the greatest number of people and livestock should be selected and monitored initially on a monthly basis. This could change to a seasonal (three-monthly) or even annual periodicity once initial patterns have been established. Both water depth and an assortment of tests which assess water quality (e.g. salinity, fluoride and nitrates) should be measured. This task should be conducted by the Monitoring Warden who will be able to measure water depth and collect the samples before sending them off for analysis by an outside agency such as the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). 3.5.3 Vegetation A permanent record of the landscape and vegetation has been captured by the ground photographs taken during the baseline survey and this record is described in Appendix 2 and Appendix 8. Twenty-nine photostations spread throughout Riemvasmaak, incorporating some 150 different images, provide adequate photographic documentation of the region. These images can be used every five to ten years as part of a long-term, matched photography monitoring programme that has been used so successfully in many arid regions (e.g. Hastings & Turner, 1965; Bahre, 1991), including southern Africa (Hoffman & Cowling, 1990), to assess landscape change over decades. More frequent analysis of these photographs will not be cost-effective at this level of scale where the identification of gross changes is documented. It is suggested that an ecologist skilled in the methodology and with a knowledge of the region be used for the task. This person should be assisted by the Monitoring Warden. Finer-scale tracking of changes in the vegetation and an assessment of the seasonal impact of livestock on the resource should be conducted differently. We suggest two approaches that might be useful. Firstly, the state of key forage species should be assessed annually. These species should be selected in consultation with the farmers but would probably include one or some of the following species: Acacia mellifera, Acacia erioloba, Pappea capensis, Schotia afra, Prosopis spp, Limeum aethiopicum, Monechma spp. and an assortment of grasses, succulents and herbaceous species. Individuals and populations of these species should be marked and their abundance, height (where applicable), phenology, reproductive behaviour, and general condition noted annually, during the same season each year. Secondly, replicated demonstration plots, of probably 10 x 10 m each should be constructed at a number of localities within Riemvasmaak. These should be fenced off to serve as ungrazed controls. They should be matched with adjacent grazed plots. If possible, matched sites inside and outside the area which will be leased to the National Parks Board and grazed by black rhino should be established. Suitable matched plots on adjacent commercial farms should also be erected. Measurements of species composition and abundance should be made annually, initially by a field ecologist together with the Monitoring Warden, and later by the Monitoring Warden operating alone. Problems of autocorrelation should be considered in the experimental design (Spellerberg, 1991; Usher, 1991). The demonstration plots could also form part of the discussion material around which grazing management workshops can be based. 3.5.4 Livestock Goats, sheep and to a lesser extent cattle and donkeys are likely to form, at least in the initial stages, the backbone of the agricultural industry in Riemvasmaak. Birth and death rates should be monitored at least once a year to keep track of herd sizes within households and villages. The quality (e.g. mass gain, incidence of specific diseases) of individuals and herds could also be monitored regularly. This information could feed directly to any veterinary intervention that may be needed by livestock owners. It is important that stock numbers are determined for all farmers from all the villages every year so that an accurate annual census is returned for the reserve. Stock losses due to predators should also be recorded. 3-118 The monitoring programme will be directly dependent on the individual farmers for this information. Although discussion around stock numbers remains problematic, honest reporting is essential if the objectives of the monitoring programme are to be achieved. The intention of an annual census must be raised with all members of the community at the start of the monitoring programme. This must be done not only to determine the value and purpose of collecting the data but also to gauge support for the exercise. The collation of stock census data should form one of the major tasks of the proposed Monitoring Warden who will, however, ultimately be dependent on the goodwill of the farmers of the region for accurate information. In addition to the task of keeping track of stock numbers it is important that the monitoring programme maintains a good record of stock movements and concentrations. For a variety of reasons, not least of which is water availability, some areas will be favoured more than others. The location of and duration that veeposte or stockposts are occupied is likely to vary considerably depending on seasonal and annual climatic conditions. An effective and adaptive range management programme can only develop if a sound knowledge of stock movement patterns and their concentrations is available. Without this information it will also be impossible to ascribe changes in the ecological resource base to climate or landuse practices and to understand how these two important ecosystem driving variables interact. Another task of the Monitoring Warden will be to keep track of local and national agricultural market indices including such items as meat, pelt and wool prices and any other traded products deemed of interest to the farming community of Riemvasmaak. These indices should be extracted from relevant agricultural journals and reports and a permanent subscription to these sources of information is essential. 3.5.5 Croplands Although it will take some time before the region's potential croplands are fully developed the location, area and yields of these lands should be recorded annually. More detailed information concerning development costs, input costs (e.g. fertilizer) and labour costs can be monitored as the different enterprises gain momentum. Again it is suggested that the Monitoring Warden be given the responsibility for developing this focus in addition to assessing trends in local and national market forces for individual products. 3.5.6 Community health A viable agricultural industry is only possible if the human community in Riemvasmaak is also healthy. Statistics of key ailments which may be influenced by the ecological (e.g. water quality) and agricultural (e.g. stock disease) resource base should be kept. A positive and reciprocal working relationship between the Monitoring Warden and health practitioners of the region, including midwives, herbalists, doctors, traditional healers, and nurses should be developed as a key objective of the monitoring programme. Medical consultants with an experience of the primary health care issues in the region should also be consulted at the start of the programme in an attempt to better understand the links between agriculture and community health. 3.6 ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND PRESENTATION Once the data have been collected the question arises as to how this information will be analysed, interpreted and presented to the community in a format that is palatable to a variety of educational and literacy levels. Firstly, with regard to analysis, each variable will have to be assessed separately. The choice of analytical tools, however, will vary depending on the spatial and temporal nature of the data. Interregional and inter-time period comparisons will probably be the most effective way of tracking the resource base so as to discern more clearly the impact of different agricultural practices on the land. It is important that, where applicable, statistically-valid experimental designs are constructed to ensure that unequivocal interpretations of the data are possible. There is nothing worse than having to discard data collected from months of field work because of excessive pseudoreplication or 3-119 autocorrelation or some other statistical flaw that could have been corrected at the outset. The general monitoring programme design should be discussed with an experienced statistician before its implementation. Once the data have been analyzed a further problem arises as to the interpretation of the results. How will it be possible to distinguish between trends, cycles or simply noise in the data-set? More importantly, how will the causes of change be explained and how much faith will one be able to place in the predictions suggested by the patterns of change? We suggest that a more accurate interpretation of the patterns will be facilitated by a thorough analysis of historical trends and cycles. In this regard we suggest that the process begun in Chapter 2, concerning landuse history, be strengthened. A more detailed analysis of rainfall records, early traveller’s notes and old photographs will provide a broader framework within which to interpret the general ecology and observed patterns of change. Also, changes in district stock records, shifts in animal types in relation to rainfall patterns and agricultural economies will provide a more comprehensive framework for understanding the landuse history of the region. Economic and survival strategies which have an historical precedent may augment the decision-making process. Announcing the need for such work at the numerous academic institutions in South Africa may attract the required focus from qualified environmental historians who are often keen to work in an applied context. The presentation of the data poses interesting challenges for a community with as wide an array of education and literacy levels as in Riemvasmaak. Recently, however, there has been an upsurge in Participatory Rural Appraisal (PTA) methodologies (Chambers, 1992) which could be used very effectively to convey the patterns evident in the monitoring data sets to all interested parties. We suggest that the presentation be conducted as frequently as needed or requested but at least once a year a workshop be held to discuss the details of the previous year’s monitoring results. It is important that any irregularities between the community’s perception of events and the data set itself be resolved at such a meeting. 3.7 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT & INFRASTRUCTURAL COSTS Table 3.2 suggests some of the capital equipment and running expenses that will be required to develop and operate the monitoring programme. Tentative costing is also provided although the final amounts will depend greatly on choices about type of rainfall gauge, vehicle purchase (whether off-road motor cycle or 4x4 vehicle), salary scales for the Monitoring Warden, and so on. In addition, the monitoring programme may also require the services of specialist consultants and this also needs to be considered within the running expense budget. 3-120 TABLE 3.2. Capital equipment and some of the running costs associated with the monitoring programme. ITEM QUANTITY VARIABLE MEASURED OR REASON PROVISIONAL COST TOTAL AMOUNT Rainfall @ ca. R100 ea. R600 Rainfall, temperature @ ca. R5 000 Water quantity, vegetation @ R400 CAPITAL EQUIPMENT Rain gauges 4-6 Higher order weather station 1 Tape measures, metre sticks, ranging rods etc. Various Demonstration plots (poles, droppers, concrete, fencing, transport etc.) 15 Vegetation @ R1 000 ea. R15 000 Off-road vehicle 1 Transportation R30 000 R30 000 SUB-TOTAL R5 000 R400 R51 000 ANNUAL RUNNING COSTS Salary (depending on qualification, experience and training) 1 Monitoring Warden R30 000 R30 000 Off-road motor vehicle 1 @R6 000 R6 000 @R20 ea. R2 000 Water analysis 100 Petrol, service & repairs Water quality Vials 100 Water quality @ R200 for 100 R200 Agricultural magazine/report subscription 5 Livestock/crop markets @ R150 ea. R750 Stationery & sundry expenses - @ R500 R500 - SUB-TOTAL R39 450 3-121 3.8 TRAINING An extensive and on-going training programme of all participants will be required before initiation of the monitoring programme. For example, all rainfall recorders will have to become familiar with the methods of recording accurate rainfall totals and the safe storage of records. Similarly, livestock owners will have to be encouraged to keep detailed stock records, particularly of disease, death and predation. The person most crucial for the success of the programme, however, is undoubtedly the Monitoring Warden. This individual should come from the Riemvasmaak community and should be employed on a full-time basis. A salary commensurate with the individual’s education and aspirations will have to be negotiated. Suitable applicants should be educated and should possess at least a Matric school leaver’s certificate or higher. He or she should also have some basic knowledge of the sciences and an interest in agriculture and community development is essential. The basic tasks of the Monitoring Warden are listed in Table 3.1. These could also include a broader educational focus, particularly in the school environment where this individual’s knowledge and expertise can be incorporated into school curricula and standing interpretative displays. The further training of the Monitoring Warden should be considered very carefully. Firstly, a productive working relationship with the local Agricultural Extension service should develop. If necessary the Monitoring Warden should attend short courses provided by the Department of Agriculture and other institutions so that technological innovations developed within the broader agricultural environment are returned to the community and made available for discussion. A close association with the National Parks Board should also be encouraged and additional responsibilities which deal with the ecotourism potential of the region could also form part of the candidate’s portfolio. However, the task of monitoring the large number of variables will be an onerous one and dilution of the Monitoring Warden’s effort in this regard should be watched. 3.9 PROGRAMME INITIATION In one sense, the monitoring programme has already been initiated with the completion of the baseline survey. The day to day running of the programme, however, can only begin once the objectives have been established and once the numerous issues outlined above have been discussed with the Riemvasmaak community. It is suggested that the programme be built sequentially but that a start be made with the establishment of the rainfall monitoring grid as soon as possible. Of major importance is the selection and training of the Monitoring Warden. Selection should occur as soon as possible and training should take place during the rest of 1995. The weather station should be purchased during the course of 1995 and should be fully operational by the start of 1996. Further discussions with the Riemvasmaak community should also take place around when different variables should be recorded. For example, should livestock censuses start and end; in December each year or should these be more closely associated with lambing seasons? Similarly, should the annual vegetation assessment be undertaken during spring each year or should this be done at the end of the rainy season in April or May of each year? 3.10 OPERATION Responsibility for the day to day operation of the programme will ultimately rest with the Monitoring Warden. However, data should regularly be made available for workshop discussions and decision-making sessions. The most appropriate time to hold these sessions will need to be discussed. It is important, however, that all people are involved in decisions taken at the appropriate level. The focus of the monitoring programme should be on the adaptive management of agricultural enterprises within Riemvasmaak. The value of the monitoring programme will itself need to be assessed by the stock farmers and other role players. Particular interest should be shown in analysing the “returns” to investments. Does an outlay on veterinary drugs result in lower mortality of animals, or does a new water point result in less grazing pressure overall or does it merely increase the area of grazing-induced degradation? 3-122 3.11 TERMINATION Once the objectives of the programme have been met it should be terminated. However, financial and logistic constraints may also influence the decision to terminate the monitoring programme. Smaller-scale operations should therefore, be considered as alternative solutions to the proposal outlined above. 3.12 REFERENCES ANONYMOUS 1990. Preliminary indicators for monitoring changes in the natural resource base. A.I.D. Program Design and Evaluation Methodology Report No. 14, Agency for International Development (A.I.D.), Washington, D. C. BAHRE C J 1991. A Legacy of Change. Historic Human Impact on Vegetation of the Arizona Borderlands. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson. CHAMBERS R 1992. Rural Appraisal: rapid relaxed and participatory. IDS Discussion Paper 311. Institute of Development Studies, Brighton. GOLDSMITH F B (ed.) 1991a. Monitoring for Conservation Biology. Chapman and Hall, London. GOLDSMITH F B 1991b. Monitoring Overseas: Prespa National Park, Greece. In: F. B. Goldsmith, (ed.), Monitoring for Conservation Biology. Chapman and Hall, London. pp. 1213-224. HASTINGS J R & TURNER R M 1965. The Changing Mile: An Ecological Study of Vegetation Change with Time in the Lower Mile of an Arid and Semiarid Region. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. HOFFMAN M T & COWLING R M 1990. Vegetation change in the semi-arid, eastern Karoo over the last two hundred years: An expanding Karoo - fact or fiction? South African Journal of Science 86, 286-294. MENTIS M T & WALKER R S 1989. An expert system for monitoring vegetation. South African Journal of Science, 85: 241-245. SPELLERBERG I F 1991. Monitoring Ecological Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. USHER M B 1991. Scientific requirements of a monitoring programme. In: F. B. Goldsmith, (ed.), Monitoring for Conservation Biology. Chapman and Hall, London. pp. 15-32. 3-123 Chapter 4 : BIBLIOGRAPHY OF LITERATURE PERTAINING TO RIEMVASMAAK AND SURROUNDING AREAS WITHIN THE DISTRICT OF GORDONIA, NORTHERN CAPE This bibliography consists of three parts. Firstly, we list the mostly unpublished literature concerning Riemvasmaak, its agricultural resources and potential. Much of this material can be obtained from the FARM Africa office which is currently at the University of the Western Cape. Numerous small memoranda are also available from this source. Secondly, we list the newspaper articles that have dealt with Riemvasmaak. This list has been compiled from that in Smith & Bozalek (1993). We retain the broad subject headings provided by these authors. A few additional sources, which we located in the comprehensive files of the Surplus People Project , are also included. This list is not exhaustive as we have missed a number of press articles concerning the resettlement programme that has occurred during the first six months of 1995. For some articles we could only find the title - the source and date was unknown. Thirdly, we include some of the many scientific and popular articles that concern the general ecology, geology, archaeology and history of Riemvasmaak and the broader surrounds within the Gordonia district and Kalahari environments. The composition, structure and dynamics of Riemvasmaak’s natural resources are best understood in the context of its regional environment . It is our hope that this list of references will help in developing a fuller understanding of the ecological, agricultural and economic potential of the region. The references have been extracted from the bibliography of over 7 000 southern African arid zone references compiled by the senior author of this report and available on diskette (see Hoffman, 1994). We have been very selective in our choice of articles and there are many ecological articles for the Kalahari environment, especially the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park, that we have not included. Finally, we suggest that anyone interested in seeking additional information on Riemvasmaak, especially smaller articles, minutes of meetings, archival documentation and so on, should contact the Cape Town offices of FARM Africa, the Surplus People Project (SPP) and the Legal Resources Centre. There is a wealth of additional material and personnel to consult at these institutions. SPP, in particular, have a comprehensive file on the archival material, from the national and various local archives around the country, that deals specifically with the history of Riemvasmaak. 4-124 ARTICLES WHICH DEAL SPECIFICALLY WITH THE HISTORY AND AGRICULTURAL POTENTIAL OF RIEMVASMAAK ANONYMOUS 1990. Proclamation concerning the Augrabies Falls National Park extension of boundary. Government Gazette No. 1520, 6 July 1990. ANONYMOUS 1991. Proclamation concerning a correction to the area of land set aside for the Augrabies Falls National Park. Government Gazette No. 13273, 30 May 1991. ANONYMOUS 1993. Personally speaking: Freddie du Pokoy. Work in Progress, June 1993, 8-9. ANONYMOUS 1994. Johannes Andeas - the man who said no. FARM Africa News Quarterly, December 1994, pp. 2-3. ANONYMOUS 1995. Riemvsmaak Development Project. Unpublished project proposal for the agricultural development of Riemvsmaak. FARM Africa, London. 36pp. ANONYMOUS 1995. Riemvasmakers Nuus. Second newsletter produced by the Trust Committee. May 1995. 2pp. CATLING H D 1994. Proposed agricultural development plan for Riemvasmaak. Unpublished mimeo. 25 July 1994. 2pp. EKSTEEN J n.d. ?1994. Riemvasmaak verslag: Besproeiing en veeboerdery. Unpublished report, Department of Agriculture, Upington. 5pp. FOUCHE H 1994. Besoek aan Riemvasmaak. Unpublished report. 2 May 1994. Glen Agricultural Development Institute, Department of Agriculture. 2pp. plus 6 maps. HAWKINS, HAWKINS AND OSBORN 1994. Riemvasmaak: Potential for development. Unpublished report. 19pp. ISAACS J & PHILLIPS T (eds) 1994. Report of the participatory rural investigation at the Riemvasmaak Convention, 18-20 May 1994, organised by the Land Development Unit (LDU). Unpublished report. 63pp. KNIGHT M H 1995. Helicopter survey of Riemvasmaak. Unpublished report, National Parks Board, Kimberley. 2 pp. (See Appendix 7). LAND DEVELOPMENT UNIT 1994. Riemvasmaak: Natural resources and agricultural potential. Unpublished report. 13pp. NATIONAL PARKS BOARD 1994. Voorgestelde ontwikkelingsplan vir die Augrabies/Riemvasmaak ooreenkoms Nasionale Park. Unpublished report. 10pp. NEL E 1994. Conceptual report on agricultural development of Riemvasmaak. Unpublished report. 13pp. ROBINSON G A, DE GRAAFF G, VAN DER WALT P T & DEVENHAGE A W A 1982. Bestuursplan: Augrabieswaterval Nasional Park. Unpublished report of the National Parks Board. 7pp. plus three maps. ROSENTHAL 1994. Notarial Deed of Trust establishing the Riemvasmaak Community Development Trust. Richard Rosenthal Consultancy. 36pp. 1 Appendix. SADF (South African Defence Force) 1990. Military-Ecological Management Plan for Riemvasmaak. Compiled by H Eckhardt, Edited by P Scogings with contributions from C Campbell, L Gottschalk, A van Zyl, W Matthews and K McCallum. Environmental Services, Chief of the South African Defence Force, Department of Logistics, Pretoria. 4-125 SMITH H & BOZALEK L 1993. Riemvasmaak: Application to the Commission on Land Allocation by Riemvasmaak community. Legal aspects and status of Riemvasmaak land. Unpublished report. 32pp plus 21 annexures. SURPLUS PEOPLE PROJECT 1993. Submission to the Commission on Land Allocation on behalf of the community of Riemvasmaak. Unpublished document. 20pp plus 25 annexures. SURPLUS PEOPLE PROJECT 1993. A claim to Riemvasmaak: Abridged version of the submission to the Commission on Land Allocation on behalf of the community of Riemvasmaak. Unpublished document. 20pp. SURPLUS PEOPLE PROJECT n.d. ?1993. SPP Factsheet. Unpublished pamphlet. 4pp. TOENS P D & VISSER D 1994. Riemvasmaak hydrological investigations. Progress Report No. 1. A preliminary assessment of the ground water potential. Unpublished Report, Toens and Associates, Cape Town. VAN NIEKERK B J 1994. Report on the soils of the riverine area of Riemvasmaak in the vicinity of the Molopo-Orange confluence. Unpublished report, Elsenburg Agricultural Development Institute. Ref. No. GOR1. May 1994. 12pp. plus very large Appendix and map. PRESS CLIPPINGS ABOUT RIEMVASMAAK Community life at Rievasmaak “Wedding of the year” - Cape Times, 4/4/70. The removal “Nie-blanke gemeenskap verhuis na Damaraland” - Gemsbok, 31/8/73. “Entire community to be moved to open SWA land” - Cape Times, 29/9/73. “Riemvasmakers face big move of 1300 km” - Cape Times, 4/10/73. “Riemavsmaak: Saga of a reluctant ‘trek’” - Cape Times, 12/10/73. “The Riemvasmaak trek” - Editorial, Cape Times, 12/10/73. “Riemvasmaak trek begins as 130 set off” - Cape Times, 30/10/73. “Ouma, 106, prepares for a great trek” - Cape Times, 30/10/73. “Rains come as people go” - Cape Times, 28/1/74. “Moving people” - Source unknown, undated. (Probably the Cape Times, in January, but most likely in the first week in February, 1974). 4-126 “Trek to SWA postponed” - Source unkown, undated. (Probably the Cape Times in January or February 1974). “Riemvasmaak: New delay” - Source unkown, undated. (Probably the Cape Times in January or February 1974). “300 to make 3rd attempt at SWA trek” - Source unkown, undated. (Probably the Cape Times in February 1974). “Last tents struck for big move” - Source unkown, undated. (Probably the Cape Times in February 1974). Resettlement “Damaras ontevrede” - Suidwes Afrikaner, 30/10/73. “Riemvasmaak trek riles the Damaras” - Source unknown, undated. (Probably the Cape Times in November since it reports on the Suidwes Afrikaner article outlined above). “A tent town fears lions” - Source unknown, undated. The present “Riemvasmaak se mense wil hul erfgrond nou terughê” - Rapport, 28/2/93. “SADF gives land to rhinos” - Cape Times, 15/3/93. “Inhabitants want army to return land” - Cape Times, 16/3/93. “Apartheid shadow over new conservation area” - The Argus, 22/3/93 “Victims of forced removal speak out” - Cape Times, 24/8/93. “Landless trek to Upington for hearing” - The Argus, 1/12/93. “Parks Board willing to quit Riemvasmaak land” - Cape Times, 2/12/93. “Action on Riemvasmaak bombs promised” - Cape Times, 23/7/94. “Riemvasmaak se lag het plek gemaak vir geweerskote” - Source unknown, undated. 4-127 PUBLISHED SCIENTIFIC AND POPULAR ARTICLES AND UNPUBLISHED REPORTS WHICH DEAL WITH THE HISTORY AND NATURAL RESOURCES OF GORDONIA DISTRICT, THE KALAHARI ECOSYSTEM AND THE GREATER ORANGE RIVER ENVIRONMENT ANDERSON E 1987. A history of the Xhosa of the northern Cape, 1795-1879. Centre for African Studies Communication No. 12, 1-184. ANONYMOUS 1976. The lure of water: Augrabies-place of great noise. S.A. Water Bulletin 1(3), 8-9. BARKER J F 1983. Towards a biogeography of the Kalahari. Part 1 & 2. Botswana Notes and Records. 15, 85-98. BEAUMONT P B, SMITH A B & VOGEL J C (In Press). Before the Einiqua: The archaeology of the frontier zone. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. BENNIE A T P & DIETRICHSEN J A V 1973. Bodemopname van die Neuseiland-Augrabies besproeiingsgebied/(Soil survey of the Neus island Augrabies irrigation area). Unpublished report No. 779/221/73, N.I.G. & B., Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Pretoria. BOSAZZA V L, ADIE R J & BRENNER S 1946. Man and the Great Kalahari Desert. J. Natal Univ. Coll. scient. Soc. 5, 6-12. BOTHMA J DU P 1971. Notes on river habitat use by the larger ungulates in the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park. Koedoe 14, 33-48. BOTHMA J DU P 1972. Short-term response in the ungulate number to rainfall in Nossob River of the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park. Koedoe 15, 127-133. BOTHMA J DU P 1980. Die witgatboom as ekologiese faktor/(Boscia albitrunca as an ecological factor). Journal of the South African Biological Society 21, 9-21. BOTHMA J DU P 1982. Shepherd's tree a shady haven for strange creatures. Custos 11(10), 22-23. BOTHMA J DU P 1982. There's no end to the shepherd's tree. Custos 11(9), 21-23. BOTHMA J DU P & DE GRAAFF G 1973. Habitat map of the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park. Koedoe 16, 181-188. BOTHMA J DU P & SWART D R 1990. Landsat-based remapping of the southwestern Kalahari. Koedoe 33, 89-94. CAMBRAY J A 1984. Gariep, Augrabies and Colonel Gordon. Elephant's Child 7(2), 11-16. CHOUDHURY B J & TUCKER C J 1987. Satellite observed seasonal and inter-annual variation of vegetation over the Kalahari, Southern Africa, the Great Victoria desert and the Great Sany desert, Western Australia, 1979-1984. Remote Sens. Environ. 23, 233-242. COATON W G H 1963. Survey of the termites (Isoptera) of the Kalahari thornveld and shrub bushveld of the Republic of South Africa. Koedoe 6, 38-68. COOKE H J 1985. Kalahari today: a case of conflict over resource use. Geographical Journal 151(1), 75-85. De SWARDT D H 1983. Interesting birds at Riemvasmaak, Upington. WBC Newssheet 121, 5. DEGRE A, ROBERT S, KNIGHT M H & CHERRY L 1989. Kalahari - Rivers of Sand. Southern Book Publishers, Johannesburg. 4-128 DREYER H V A 1987. Die gebruiuk van water en soutlekke deur die groter hoefdiere in die Kalahari Gemsbok Nasionale Park/(The use of water and salt licks by larger ungulates in the Kalahari Gemsbok national park). Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch. DREYER H V A 1989. Kwaliteit van water wat aan wild in die Kalahari Gemsbok Nasionale Park voorsien/(Quality of water provided for game in the Kalahari Gemsbok national park). Koedoe 32, 121-132. ELOFF F C 1984. The Kalahari ecosystem. Koedoe (Suppl.) 27, 11-20. ENGELBRECHT E 1972. Augrabies Falls National Park. Custos 1(3), 33-35. FOURIE JH 1983. Karaterisering van die weidingskapasiteit van natuurlike weiding in Noord-Kaapland/(Characterisation of the grazing capacity of natural pastures in the Northern Cape). Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of the Orange Free State, Bloemfontein. FOURIE J H, De WET N J & PAGE J J 1987. Veld condition and trend in Kalahari duneveld under an extensive stock production system. Journal of the Grassland Society of South Africa 4(2), 48-54. GERRINGER G J 1973. Die geologie van die Argeiese gesteentes en jongere formasies in die gebied wes van Upington, met spesiaale verwysing na die verskillende granietvorkomste. Unpublished DSc Thesis, University of the Orange Free State, Bloemfontein. GERRINGER G J & BOTHA B J V 1975a. Die stratigrafie van die Mobiele Gordel Namaqualand , wes van Upington. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 11, 191-204. GERRINGER G J & BOTHA B J V 1975b. Metamorfose in die Mobiele Gordel Namaqualand in die gebied wes van Upington. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 11, 205-218. GERRINGER G J & BOTHA B J V 1975c. Die pegmatiet-graniet assosiasie in ‘n gebied noord van die Oranjerivier in die distrik Gordonia. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 11, 267-278. GERRINGER G J & BOTHA B J V 1975c. Die sisteem Nama in distrik Gordonia noordwes-Kaap. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 11, 279-288. GERRINGER G J & BOTHA B J V 1980. The gneisses and regional structural pattern of the Namaqualand Mobile Belt in part of the Gordonia District, northwestern Cape. Transactions of the Geological Survey of South Africa 80, 93-95. GWYNNE M D 1969. The nutritive values of Acacia pods in relation to Acacia seed distribution by ungulates. East African Wildlife Journal 7, 176-178. HAACKE W D 1984. The herpetology of the southern Kalahari domain. Koedoe 27, 171-186. HAAGNER C 1976. Kalahari has gone cracy! Custos 5(5), 4-6. HALL-MARTIN A J 1984. Symposium on the Kalahari ecosystem. Summary and conclusions. Koedoe (Suppl.) 27, 327-333. HAUGHTON S H 1927. Note on the river system of southwest Gordonia. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 14(3), 232-255. HOFFMAN M T (Compiler) 1994. Blbliography of southern African arid zone literature up until 1993. National Botanical Institute and Arid Zone Ecology Forum, Cape Town. HUGO P J 1969. The pegmatites of the Kenhardt and Gordonia districts, Cape Province. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of South Africa 58. IMMINK R J 1976. Park with the incredible granitic wonder. (Augrabies Falls National Park). Custos 5(6), 78-85. 4-129 JORDAAN J C 1976. Rooiwang-lemoene uit Kalahari/(Red cheek oranges from the Kalahari). Landbouweekblad 64-66. September 10. KALIKAWA, M C 1990. Baseline vegetation description at artifical watering points of a Central Kalahari Game Reserve. African Journal of Ecology 28(3), 253-256. KNIGHT M H 1986. Kalahari: this is how animals survive. Custos 14(3), 19-22. KNIGHT M H 1989. Rabies outbreak - Kalahari Gemsbok National Park. IUCN/SSC Hyaena Specialist Group Newsletter 4, 9-10. KNIGHT M H 1991. Ecology of the gemsbok Oryx gazella gazella (Linnaeus) and blue wildebeest Connochaetes taurinus (Burchell) in the southern Kalahari. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria. KNIGHT M H & HALL-MARTIN A J 1989. Southern Kalahari ungulates - the importance of a large conservation area. Kalahari Conservation Society Newsletter 26, 10. KNIGHT M H, KNIGHT-ELOFF A K & BORNMAN J J 1988. The importance of borehole water and lick sites to Kalahari ungulates. Journal of Arid Environments 15, 269-281. LATEGAN F S 1992. Veld rehabilitation practices and perspectives in the southern Kalahari of Namibia (abstract). Bulletin of the Grassland Society of southern Africa 3(1), 22. LEISTNER O A 1959. Notes on the vegetation of the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park with special reference to its influences on the distribution of antelopes. Koedoe 2, 128-151. LEISTNER O A 1961. On the dispersal of Acacia giraffae by game. Koedoe 4, 101-104. LEISTNER O A 1961. The Kalahari: Desert of the future? Farming in South Africa, February, pp. 45-48. LEISTNER O A 1967. The plant ecology of the Southern Kalahari. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 38, 1-172. LEISTNER O A 1968. Plant life of the Namib Desert, Kalahari and Namaqualand. Journal of the South African Biological Society 9, 15-16. LEISTNER O A & WERGER M J A 1973. Southern Kalahari phytosociology. Vegetatio 28, 353-399. LEWIS A D 1936. Sand dunes of the Kalahari within the borders of the Union. South African Geographical Journal 19, 22-32. LIVERSIDGE R & BERRY M P S 1989. Game ranching in the arid regions. In: (ed) J du P Botha. Game ranch management, Van Schaik, Pretoria. pp. 608-633. MACDONALD I A W 1977. Report on the proposed nature reserve on the Molopo River, with special reference to comparisons between this area and the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park. Unpublished Report. Cape Department of Nature and Environmental Conservation. 24pp and 2 Appendices MACLEAN G L 1970. An analysis of the avifauna of the southern Kalahari Gemsbok Park. Koedoe 5, 249-274. MACLEAN G L 1971. The breeding seasons of birds in the south western Kalahari. Ostrich suppl. 8, 179-192. MACLEAN G L 1984. Avian adaptations in the Kalahari environment: a typical continental semidesert. Koedoe (Suppl.) 27, 187-193. MARTENS H E 1971. The effects of tribal grazing patterns on the habitat in the Kalahari. Botswana Notes and Records Special Edition 1, 234-241. 4-130 MARTIN R J 1971. Livestock production in relation to the maintenance of habitat in the Kalahari. Botswana Notes and Records Special Edition 1, 242-247. MILLS M G L & RETIEF P F 1984. The response of ungulates to rainfall along the riverbeds of the southern Kalahari 1972-1982. Koedoe (Suppl.) 27, 129-141. MORRIS A G (In Press). The Einiqua: An analysis of the Kakamas skeletons. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. MORRIS A G (In Press). Descriptions of new specimens from the 1984 excavations at Omdraai and Waterval. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. MORRIS J J 1958. Veldaangeleenthede en beweging van wild in die Kalahari-Gemsbokpark/(The importance of vegetation and the movement of game in the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park). Koedoe 1, 136-142 ORANGE RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL TASK GROUP 1990. Orange River ecology: Assessment of environmental water requirement for the Orange River mouth. Unpublished report on the Orange River Environmental workshop, Oranjemund 1989 compiled by Bruinette, Kruger and Stoffberg Inc. Department of Water Affairs, Directorate of Design Services, Pretoria. PENN N (In Press). The Orange River frontier zone, C.1700-1805. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. PRAEKELT H E 1984. Die geologie van die gebied rondom Augrabies (2820C)/(The geology of the region around Augrabies (28020C)). Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of the Orange Free State, Bloemfontein. 80 pp. RAUTENBACH I L, SCHITTER D A & De GRAAFF G 1979. Notes on the mammal fauna of the Augrabies Falls National Park and surrounding areas, with special reference to regional zoogeographical implications. Koedoe 22, 157-175. SKARPE C 1983. Cattle grazing and the ecology of western Kalahari, Botswana. In: Proceedings of a Symposium held under the auspices of the Kalahari Conservation Society in Gaberone. pp. 21-24. SKARPE C 1986. Plant community structure in relation to grazing and environmental changes along a north-south transect in the western Kalahari. Vegetatio 68, 318. SKARPE C 1990. Shrub layer dynamics under different herbivore densities in an arid savanna, Botswana. Journal of Applied Ecology 27, 873-885. SKARPE C 1990. Structure of the woody vegetation in disturbed and undisturbed arid savanna, Botswana. Vegetatio 87, 11-18. SKARPE C 1991. Spatial patterns and dynamics of woody vegetation in an arid savanna. Journal of Vegetation Science 2(4), 565-572. SKARPE C and BERGSTROM R 1986. Nutrient content and digestibility of forage plants in relation to plant phenology and rainfall in the Kalahari, Botswana. Journal of Arid Environments 11, 147-164. SMITH A B (ed) (In Press). Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. SMITH A B (In Press). Ecology and resources of the Middle and Lower Orange River and hinterland. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. 4-131 SMITH A B (In Press). Before the Einiqua: The archaeology of the frontier zone. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. SMITH A B (In Press). The Orange River lifeline. In: (ed.), A B Smith, Einiqualand: Studies on the people of the Orange River frontier. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. SNYMAN N 1977. Sweet oranges from the (Kalahari) desert. Farmer's Weekly, 26-28. August 10. STRAUSS T 1979. War along the Orange. Centre for African Studies Communications No. 1, 1-129. THOMAS D S G & SHAW P A 1991. The Kalahari environment. Cambridge University Press, 300 pp. THOMAS M A 1982. The geology of the Kalahari in the Northern Cape Province (areas 2620 and 2720). Unpublished MSc thesis, University of the Orange Free State, Bloemfontein. 133 pp. UNEP 1991. The plan of action for the Kalahari-Namib. Desertification Control Bulletin 19, 83-74. VAN DER WALT P T & LE RICHE E A N 1984. The influence of veld fire on an Acacia erioloba community in the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park. Koedoe (Suppl.) 27, 103-106. VAN RENSBURG D J 1984. Publications relevant to the Kalahari ecosystem. Koedoe (Suppl.) 27, 307-326. VAN ROOYEN N, BEZUIDENHOUT D, THERON G K & DU P BOTHMA J 1990. Monitoring of the vegetation around artificial watering points (windmills) in the kalahari Gemsbok National Park. Koedoe 33(1), 63-88. VAN ROOYEN N, BREDENKAMP G J & THERON G K 1991. Kalahari vegetation: veld condition trends and ecological status of species. Koedoe 34, 61-72. VON BACKSTROM J W 1962. The geology along the lower reaches of the Molopo River and a note on the Riemvasmaak Thermal Spring, Gordonia District Cape Province. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 1, 57-65. VON BACKSTROM J W 1967. The geology and mineral deposits of the Riemvasmaak areas, northwest Cape Province. Annals of the Geological Survey of South Africa 6, 43-53. WERGER M J A 1973. Notes on the phytogeographical affinities of the southern Kalahari. Bothalia 11, 177-180. WERGER M J A 1978. Vegetation structure in the southern Kalahari. Journal of Ecology 66(3), 933-941. WERGER M J A 1986. The Karoo and southern Kalahari. In: (eds) M Evanari, I Noy-Meir and W Goodall. Hot deserts and arid shrublands. Elsevier, Amsterdam. pp 283-359. WERGER M J A & COETZEE B J 1977. A phytosociological and phytogeographical study of Augrabies Falls National Park, South Africa. Koedoe 20, 11-51. WINTERBOTTOM J M 1970. The birds of the Augrabies Falls National Park. Koedoe 13, 171-180. 4-132 Appendix 1: The itinerary of the ecological survey team between 16-30 January, 1995. We include below details of our movements during our survey of Riemvasmaak to assist teams who may re-sample the area at some future date. Additional information concerning photostation location, length of time spent at each location and details of what was photographed and sampled may be found in Fig. 1.13 and Appendix 8. Place names used are those in Fig. 1.1 and Fig. 1.2. Supporting four people who are constantly on the move, in mid-summer in the inhospitable Riemvasmaak terrain resulted in considerable logistic problems with regard to petrol, vehicle repairs (e.g. flat tyres), food and especially water. We were forced to return to Augrabies Falls National Park at least every third evening to replenish our water, food and petrol supplies and to affect any equipment repairs that might have been necessary. In addition, this opportunity was taken to develop the film exposed during the previous few days in the field. DAY 1: (Monday, 16th). Travelled from Cape Town to Augrabies Falls National Park. Logistic arrangements and vehicle hire from the National Parks Board finalised. DAY 2: (Tuesday, 17th). Met members of the Riemvasmaak community who had arrived from Welcomewood in the Ciskei a few days before. Outlined details of our intended survey with them and arranged to have Mr Willem Vass accompany us later in the week. Familiarised ourselves with the area in and around the Mission Station, Perdepoort, Gyam/Vaalputs and Droëputs with the assistance of Barry Hopgood and a team of rangers from the National Parks Board. Travelled to Deksel, took photographs and sampled at photostation 1 in the late afternoon. DAY 3: (Wednesday, 18th). Photostations 2 and 3 near Deksel finished in the morning. Size class distribution transect of Acacia erioloba at Deksel completed (see Fig. 1,.17, “Site 3”; Plate 1.11). Drove to photostation 4 which was photographed and sampled in the late afternoon. Slept near photostation 4. DAY 4: (Thursday, 19th). Drove onto the plateau, sampled and photographed photostation 5 then travelled back to the Riemvasmaak Mission Station completing photostation 6 along the way. Size class distribution of Acacia mellifera completed at photostation 6 (Fig. 1.16). Returned to the Augrabies Falls National Park. DAY 5: (Friday, 20th). Drove to Riemvasmaak, and collected Mr Willem Vass before heading to photostation 7 which was completed in the morning. Photostation 8 sampled and photographed in the afternoon and drove to Xubuxnap where we spent the night. Mr Vass was interviewed concerning his and his family’s history in the region and his knowledge of management systems used in “Old Riemvasmaak”. DAY 6: (Saturday, 21st). Photostation 9 completed in the morning together with an Acacia erioloba size class distribution transect (Fig. 1.17 “Site 9). Photostation 10 at Petrushoek was sampled in the late morning and then we travelled back to Xubuxnap. 1 Photostation 11, in the lower reaches of the Kourop River, was finished in the early afternoon before heading towards the Molopo River mouth via ║Nana║as, ║Hôb and │Hus. Camped on a ridge about 1 km from the Molopo/Orange River confluence. Mr Vass was interviewed in the evening with regard to his knowledge of livestock and human uses of key plant species. DAY 7: (Sunday, 22nd). Photostation 12 completed in the morning together with a trip up the Molopo River to assess density of Tamarix usneoides thickets in and along the banks of the river. Travelled back to Riemvasmaak Mission Station and photographed and sampled photostation 13 along the way. Dropped off Mr Willem Vass at the Mission Station and photographed, but did not sample, photostation 14 at the base of Groot Rooiberg. Returned to the Augrabies Falls National Park. DAY 8: (Monday, 23rd). Travelled to Riemvasmaak. Headed towards Bok se Puts via Deksel stopping at photostation 4 to do a size class distribution transect of Schotia afra in the rocky river bed (Fig. 1.18). Drove to photostation 15 in the Loeriesfontein River which we finished in the late morning and then travelled up the Bak River to photograph and sample at photostation 16. Travelled south down the Bak River in the late afternoon to Donkiemond where we spent the night. DAY 9: (Tuesday, 24th). Completed photostation 17 at Donkiemond in the morning. Returned to Bok se Puts where we photographed and sampled photostation 18. Met and interviewed Mr Johannes Andreas at a dug well in the Loeriesfontein River. Drove to Deksel and down the Kourop River to photostation 19 which we completed in the afternoon. Returned to Deksel and finished photostation 20 in the late afternoon. Travelled over the plateau, past the Riemvasmaak Mission Station to the Hot Spring in the Molopo Gorge which we reached after 9 pm. DAY 10: (Wednesday, 25th). Completed photostation 21 in the morning, a re-survey of one of John Acocks sites for the region. Drove past Hoed se Kop to photograph and sample photostation 22 at Droëputs in the early afternoon. Did size class distribution transects of Acacia erioloba (Fig. 1.17, “:Site 22”) and Prosopis glandulosus (Table 1.9). Travelled to Augrabies Falls National Park. Met with FARM Africa representative, Dr David Catling in the evening and outlined our progress in the field. DAY 11: (Thursday, 26th). Travelled with David to Riemvasmaak Mission Station where we reported back to the Riemvasmakers on aspects of the work that we had completed to date. Drove to Perdepoort where we demonstrated to David the methodology we were using and completed photostation 23. Ad hoc notes concerning key forage species taken from Mr Johannes Langans, a stock farmer, working in the Perdepoort area with Mr Niels Farmer. Drove to Photostation 24 and photographed this site near Gyam/Vaalputs. Conducted size class distribution transect for Acacia erioloba at this site (Fig. 1.17, “Site 24”, Plate 1.12). Returned to Augrabies Falls National Park. DAY 12: (Friday, 27th). Together with Mr Barry Hopgood of the National Parks Board we entered “Bokvasmaak” - the area of land leased to the National Parks Board south of a low ridge called │Haodaos containing the old settlements of Wabrand and 2 Melkbosrant (Fig. 1.2). Found and re-photographed three of John Acocks photographs all taken from the same location and re-sampled his site No. 1648. Together with Barry we discussed and assessed the impact of rhino on vegetation at this photostation. Returned to Augrabies Falls National Park in the late afternoon. DAY 13: (Saturday, 28th). Drove to Riemvasmaak and completed two size class distribution transects of Acacia erioloba in the morning (Fig. 1.17, “Site 14i” & “Site 14ii”). Also sampled the vegetation for photostation 14 which had been photographed on Sunday 22 January. Drove to photostation 26 and completed this site in the late morning. Interviewed Mr Piet Neus who works for the owner of the neighbouring farm “Waterval” about the landuse history of the farm. Drove the few kms to photostation 27 which we photographed and sampled in the early afternoon. Decided to photograph and sample at photostation 28 in the late afternoon. Returned to Riemvasmaak Mission Station where we reported back to members of the Riemvasmaak community and later spent part of the evening socialising with them. DAY 14: (Sunday, 29th). Completed photostation 29 and returned to Augrabies Falls National Park to pack up and prepare for journey back to Cape Town. DAY 15: (Monday, 30th). Travelled from Augrabies Falls National Park to Cape Town. 3 Appendix 3: Checklist of plants in Riemvasmaak and the Augrabies Falls National Park compiled from data from this survey (*) and from AFNP (n.d.)1, Werger & Coetzee (1977)2 , SADF (1990)3 and from Acocks’ checklists of two sites in Riemvasmaak4. The total area covered by this checklist is 74 563 ha (Riemvasmaak) and 5 400 ha (Augrabies Falls National Park) giving a total of 79 963 ha. Taxonomic nomenclature follows Arnold & De Wet (1993)5. Common names for grass species are 6 taken from Gibbs Russell et al (1991) when listed. Other common family and species names are from the AFNP checklist, from Smith (1966)7, Le Roux & Schelpe (1981)8, Le Roux et al (1994)9, Shearing & Van Heerden (1994)10 and from names given to us by Riemvasmakers during informal discussions. No Endangered or Vulnerable Red Data Book species are evident in this checklist. FAMILY AND SPECIES BRYOPHYTA COMMON NAMES MOSSES & LIVERWORTS BRYACEAE Bryum apiculatum Moss family AYTONIACEAE Plagiochasma rupestre Liverwort family/Lewermosfamilie RICCIACEAE Riccia atropurpurea Riccia cavernosa Riccia okahandjana Riccia trichocarpa Liverwort family/Lewermosfamilie PTERIDOPHYTA FERNS & FERN ALLIES ADIANTACEAE Cheilanthes deltoidea Fern/Varing ASPLENIACEAE Ceterach cordatum Resurrection fern/Opstandingsvaring AZOLLACEAE Azolla filiculoides Aquatic fern family/Watervaringfamilie SPERMATOPHYTA ANGIOSPERMAE MONOCOTYLEDONAE SEED-BEARING PLANTS FLOWERING PLANTS AMARYLLIDACEAE Crinum bulbispermum Nerine filifolia Daffodil family Orange river lilly/Oranjerivierlelie 4 Nerine gaberonensis ASPARAGACEAE * Protasparagus africanus Protasparagus cooperi Protasparagus denudatus Protasparagus laricinus Protasparagus pearsoni * Protasparagus retrofractus * Protasparagus sp. Protasparagus suaveolens Asparagus family/Aspersiefamilie Katdoring ASPHODELACEAE Aloe claviflora * Aloe dichotoma Aloe hereroensis * Aloe gariepensis Chlorophytum undulatum Haworthia transluscens Aloe family/Aalwynfamilie Kraalaalwyn, Kanonaalwyn Quiver tree/Kokerboom Sandaalwyn COLCHICACEAE Ornithoglossum viride Ornithoglossum vulgare * Katdoring Wild asparagus/Katdoring Poison onion/Cape- or Karoo slangkop CYPERACEAE Bulbostylis hispidula Cyperus marginatus Scirpus sp. Sedge family/Biesiefamilie Matjiesgoed Biesie DRACAENACEAE Sansevieria aethiopica Bowstring hemp/Wildewortel ERIOSPERMACEAE Eriospermum sp. * HYACINTHACEAE Bowiea volubilis Dipcadi gracillimum Dipcadi glaucum Ornithogalum suaveolens Ornithogalum unifolium Schizobasis intricata Chinkerinchee family/Tjienkerintjeefamilie Knolklimop Oumasegroottoon Poison onion/Slangkop, Groenlelie Geelviooltjie Chinkerinchees/Tjienkerintjee Volstruiskos IRIDACEAE Babiana tritonioides Gladiolus sp. Lapeirousia plicata Iris family/Irisfamilie POACEAE Grass family/Grasfamilie 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Anthephora pubescens Anthephora ramosa Aristida adscensionis Aristida congesta Aristida engleri Botriochloa bladhii Cenchrus ciliaris Chloris virgata Danthoniopsis ramosa Diandrochloa namaquensis Dicanthium annulatum Digitaria ciliaris Digitaria eriantha Echinochloa colona Enneapogon cenchroides Enneapogon desvauxii Enneapogon scaber Eragrostis annulata Eragrostis aspera Eragrostis biflora Eragrostis brizantha Eragrostis cylindriflora Eragrostis echinochloidea Eragrostis homomalla Eragrostis lehmanniana Eragrostis nindensis Eragrostis cf. pilosa Eragrostis planiculmis Eragrostis porosa Eragrostis rotifer Eragrostis tef Eragrostis trichophora Eragrostis virescens Eragrostis viscosa Hermarthria altissima Heteropogon contortus Leucophrys mesocoma Melinis repens Odyssea paucinervis Oropetium capense Panicum arbusculum Panicum maximum Panicum sp. Paspalum distichum Pennisetum setaceum Polypogon monspeliensis Schmidtia kalahariensis Setaria appendiculata Setaria verticillata Wool grass/Borseltjiegras Vertakte borseltjiegrass Annual bristle grass/Steekgras Katstertsteekgras Engler’s bristle grass/Bristle three-awn Purple plume grass/Blouklosgras Buffelsgras Feathered chloris/Klossiegras Blue grama/Vlei finger grass Tropical finger grass Common finger grass Jungle rice Nine-awned grass/Suurgras Wonder grass/Kalkgras Klipgras Soetgras Grootpluimeragrostis Kwaggagras Tick grass/Bosluisgras Reengrassie Lehmannn’s love grass/Knietjiesgras Agtdaepluimgras Reëngrassie Besemeragrostis Besembiesie Reëngrassie Teff Blousaadgras Chilean love grass Sticky love grass Red swamp grass/Rooikweek Tanglehead/Pylgras, Assegaaigras Withaargras Natal red top Prickly brack grass/Steekriet Dwarf grass/Haasgras Struikpanicum Guinea grass/Blousaad soetgras Couch paspalum/Bankrotkweek Fountain grass/Pronkgras Brakgras Kalaharigras Klitsgras Bur bristle grass/Klitssetaria, Klitsgras 6 * * * * * * * Sporobolus iocladus Stipagrostis anomela Stipagrostis ciliata Stipagrostis hochstetteriana Stipagrostis namaquensis Stipagrostis obtusa Stipagrostis uniplumis Tragus berteronianus * Triraphis ramossisima Pan dropseed Torro-boesmangras Tall bushman grass/Langbeenboesmangras Spike or rye bushman grass River bushman grass/Steekrietboesmangras Kortbeenboesmangras Silky bushman gass/Blinkaarboesmangras Small carrot-seed grass/Kousklits Berggras DICOTYLEDONAE ACANTHACEAE * Acanthopsis disperma Acanthopsis hoffmannseggiana * Baleria secunda * Barleria lichtensteiniana * Barleria rigida * Blepharis furcata Blepharis mitrata * Justicia sp. Monechma divaricatum * Monechma genistifolium * Monechma incanum * Monechma spartioides * Petalidium lucens Petalidium oblongifolium * Petalidium spinescens * * * * * * * * * AIZOACEAE Aizoon asbestinum Aizoon glinoides Aizoon schellenbergii Coelanthum grandiflorum Corbichonia decumbens Galenia africana Galenia sarcophylla Galenia secunda Gisekia africana Gisekia pharnaceoides Hypertelis salsoloides Limeum aethiopicum Limeum cristatus Limeum deserticolum Limeum dineri Limeum fenestratum Limeum myosotis Limeum sulcatum Limeum viscosuum Black-eyed susan family Verneukhalfmensie Disseldoring Rolvarkie, Klapperbossie Scorpion thistle/Skerpioendissel Klapperbossie Wild lucerne/Wildelusern Bloubossie, Blouskaapbossie, Netvetbossie Besembos/Maklikbreekbossie Kudubos Brakbos family/Brakbosfamilie Skaapbossie Kraalbos Vanwyksbrak, Joubertsbrakbossie Vanwyksbossie Braksuring, Skaapsuring, Haassuring Koggelmandervoetkaroo Klosaarbossie Klosaarbossie 7 * Limeum sp. Mollugo cerviana * Plinthus arenarius * Tetragonia arbuscula * Tetragonia sp. Trianthema parvifolia Trianthema triquetra AMARANTHACEAE Amaranthus praetermissus Amaranthus thunbergii * Calicorema capitata Kyphocarpa angustifolia Leucosphaera bainesii * Sericocoma avolans Sericorema remotiflora ANACARDIACEAE Ozoroa concolor * Ozoroa crassinervia Ozoroa namaensis Rhus lancea * Rhus pendulina * Rhus populifolia ASCLEPIADACEAE * Hoodia sp. * Microloma incanum Microloma sasgittatum * Pergularia daemia * Sarcostemma viminale * * * * ASTERACEAE Amellus epaleaceus Arctotis fenuosa Arctotis leiocarpa Berkheya canescens Berkheya chamaepeuce Berkheya spinosissima Blumea cafra Blumea gariepina Chrysocoma ciliata Conyza bonariensis Dicoma capensis Didelta spinosa Dimorphotheca polyptera Gazania lichtensteinii Geigaria filifolia Geigaria ornativa Grootrooilootganna, Klappiesbrak Rooivygie Amaranth family/Misbrediefamilie Pigweed/Misbredie, Sprinkaanbossie Vaalbossie Perdebossie Katstert Mango family/Mangofamilie Nama resin tree/Namaharpuisboom Kareeboom Witkaree Rosyntjieboom Milkweed family/Melkbosfamilie -ghaap Bokhoring Bokhoring Melktou, Spantou Daisy or sunflower family/Madeliefiefamilie Gousblom Bitterbos Koorsbossie, Karmedik Perdebossie, t’arda Jakkalsblom Botterblom, Gousblom, Kougoed Vermeerbossie Vermeerbossie 8 * Geigaria pectidea Geigaria vigintisquamea Gorteria corymbosa Helichrysum argyrosphaerum Helichrysum herniarioides Helichrysum tomentosulum Ifloga molluginoides * Kleinia longiflora Leysera tenella Myxopappus acutilobus * Nidorella resedifolia Nolletia gariepina Oncosiphon piluliferum Osteospermum amplectens Osteospermum breviradiatum * Osteospermum microcarpum Othonna floribunda * Pentzia argentea Pentzia pinnatisecta Pentzia quinquefida Pentzia spinescens Platycarpha carlinoides * Pteronia sp. * Rosenia sp. Senecio arenarius Senecio consanguineus Senecio flavus Senecio inaequidens Senecio niveus Senecio sisymbrifolius Sonchus oleraceus Verbesina encelioides * BIGNONIACEAE Rhigozum trichotomum BORAGINACEAE * Ehretia rigida * Trichodesma africanum BRASSICACEAE Capsella bursa-pastoris Coronopus integrifolius Heliophila deserticola Heliophila minima Heliophila seselifolia Heliophila trifurca Lepidium africanum Lepidium desertorum Vermeerbossie Sjambokbossie Vaalteebossie Bietou, Dassiegousblom Lemoenbossie Boegoebossie Beesbossie Hongerblom Canary weed/Geelopslag Milk thistle/Melkdissel Wildesonneblom Bignonia, honeysuckle family Driedoring Forget-me-not family/Vergeet-my-nie familie Cape lilac/Deurmekaarbos Cabbage or mustard family/Koolfamilie Shepherd’s purse/Geldbeursie Peperbossie Naeltjiesbossie Bird seed, Pepper cress/Kanariesaadgras Peperbossie 9 Sisymbrium capense BURSERACEAE * Commiphora gracilifrondosa CAMPANULACEAE Wahlenbergia prostrata CAPPARACEAE * Boscia albitrunca * Boscia foetida * Cadaba aphylla * Cleome angustifolia Cleome foliosa Cleome kalachariensis * Cleome oxyphylla Cleome paxii Cleome semitetrandra * Maerua gilgii Cape mustard/Strandmostert Commiphora family (Frankincense and Myrrh) Karee corkwood/Karee kannniedood Bellflower family/Klokkiefamilie Caper family Shepherd’s tree/Witgatboom Stinkbos/knoudoring/!noemie Blackstorm/Swartstorm Peultjiebos CARYOPHYLLACEAE * Montinia caryophyllacea Carnation family CELASTRACEAE Maytenus heterophylla Maytenus linearis * Putterlickia pyracantha Spike thorn family/Pendoring familie Common spike thorn/Gewonependoring Narrow-leaved spikethorn/Smalblaarpendoring Wolwedoring CHENOPODIACEAE Atriplex semibaccata Chenopodium album Chenopodium ambrosioides Chenopodium olukonde Chenopodium schraderianum * Lophiocarpus polystachyus * Salsola aphylla Salsola arborea Salsola barbata Salsola kali Salsola tuberculata Suaeda fruticosa Sugar Beet, Beetroot and Spinach family Creeping saltbush/Australiesebrakbossie White goose-foot/Gansvoet Wormseed goose-foot/Galsiektebossie Schrader goose-foot/Vlooibossie Sandaarbossie Lye bush/Brakganna Beesganna Russian thistle, tumbleweed/Tolbos, rolbos Blomkoolganna Inkbush/Inkbos COMBRETACEAE Combretum erythrophyllum Combretum family Bushveldwillow/Bosveldwilg CONVOLVULACEAE Convolvulus sagittatus Morning glory family/Purperwindefamilie Klimop, Bobbejaantou CRASSULACEAE Crassula family/Plakkiefamilie 10 Cotyledon orbiculata Crassula ausensis Crassula elegans Crassula sericea * CUCURBITACEAE Coccinea rehmannii Cucumis africanus Cucumis meeusei Cucumis sagittatus * * * * EBENACEAE Diospyros acocksii Diospyros lycioides Euclea pseudebenus Euclea undulata EUPHORBIACEAE Chamaesyce glanduligera Chamaesyce inaequilatera * Euphorbia avosmontana Euphorbia brachiata Euphorbia decussata Euphorbia gariepina * Euphorbia gregaria Euphorbia mauritanica Euphorbia peplus * Euphorbia rhombifolia Euphorbia spartaria Euphorbia spinea Phyllanthus burchellii Phyllanthus maderaspatensis * * * * * * FABACEAE Acacia davyi Acacia erioloba Acacia haematoxylon Acacia karroo Acacia mellifera Adenolobus garipensis Bauhinia bowkeri Crotalaria virgultalis Cullen obtusifolia Cyamopsis serrata Indigofera alternans Indigofera argyraea Indigofera argyroides Indigofera disjuncta Indigofera heterotricha Pig’s ear/Plakkie Vaalplakkie Pumpkin family/Pampoenfamilie Bitter apple/Bitterappel, Doringkomkommertjie Ebony family/Ebbehoutfamilie Star apple/Swartbas Black ebony/Swartebbehout, Sabbiboom Ghwarriebos Euphorbia or spurge family/Naboomfamilie Boesmangifboom Bloumelkbos, soetmelkbos Kareemoerbos Melkbos, Aggenysmelkbos Melkbos Milkweed/Gifbossie Skilpadbossie Pea family/Ertjiefamilie Paper-bark thorn/Papierdoring Camel thorn/Kameeldoring Red ebony/Rooiebbehout Karoo thorn/Karoo doringboom Swarthaak/ !Noi Butterfly leaf/Peultjiebos, Bloubeesklou Kei white bauhinia/Keibeesklou Blue clover/Blouklawer Skaap-ertjie Oogseerbossie 11 * * * * * * * * * * * Indigofera pungens Indigofera sp. Indigofera spinescens Lebeckia sericea Lebeckia spinescens Lotononis crumanina Lotononis platycarpa Lotononis rabenaviana Melilotus alba Melilotus indica Melolobium candicans Parkinsonia africana Piliostigma thonningii Prosopis glandulosus Prosopis velutina Ptycholobium biflorum Rhynchosia longiflora Rhynchosia totta Schotia afra Sutherlandia frutescens Tephrosia dregeana Tephrosia linearis Trigonella hamosa Drieblaarbos Vaalertjiebos, bloufluitjiesbos, t’aibie Sandganna, !Gom Bokhara clover/Bokhaargras Bitterklawer Heuningbossie Lemoendoringboom Picture-frame tree/Kameelspoor Mesquite/Suidwesdoring Velvet mesquite/Fluweelboontjie ║amiboom/Karooboerboen Cancer bush/Jantjiebarend, Kankerbos Wildeklawer FRANKENIACEAE Frankenia pulverulenta GENTIANACEAE Sebaea pentandra GERANIACEAE Monsonia luederitziana Monsonia parvifolia * Monsonia umbellata Sarcocaulon crassicaule * Sarcocaulon pattersonii Sarcocaulon salmoniflorum * * Gentian family Perlargonium family/Pelargoniumfamilie Dysentery herb/Disenteriekruid Wilderabassam Bushman’s candle/Boesmanskers HYDROPHYLLACEAE Codon schenckii Codon royeni Soetdoringbos, Suikerkelk ILLECEBRACEAE Pollichia campestris Pollichia family/Pollichiafamilie Waxberry/Aarbossie, Teesuiker LAMIACEAE Lamium amplexicaule Ocimum canum Stachys burchelliana Mint family/Kruisementfamilie Transvaal basil/Transvaal basielkruid Wildesalie 12 LOASACEAE Kissenia capensis Helicopter tree or Blazing star family Helikopterboompie LOGANIACEAE Gomphostigma virgatum Wild elder family/Wildevlierfamilie Water sprite/Besembossie LORANTHACEAE * Tapinanthus oleifolius * * * Mistletoe family/Voëlentfamilie Mistletoe, lighted matches/Voëlentf LYTHRACEAE Nesaea drummondii Pride-of-India family MALVACEAE Abutilon angulatum Abutilon pycnodon Hibiscus elliottiae Hibiscus engleri Hibiscus fleckii Malva parviflora Sida ovata Hibiscus family/Hibiskusfamilie Bread-and-cheese/Brood-en-botter, Kiesieblaar MELIACEAE Nymania capensis Mahogany family/Seringfamilie Chinese lanterns/Klapperbos MENISPERMACEAE Antizoma miersiana Curare family MESEMBRYANTHEMACEAE Aridaria sp. * Mesembryanthemum crystallinum Mesembryanthemum perlatum Psilocaulon absimile Psilocaulon inconstrictum Ruschia cyanthiformis Ruschia griquensis * Ruschia sp. Sphalmanthus olivaceus Mesembryanthemum or Vygie family Ice plant/Brakslaai Fig marigolds/Vyebossie Asbos MONTINIACEAE Montinia caryophyllacea Pepper bush/Peperbossie, t’iena MORACEAE Ficus cordata Ficus ingens Fig family/Vyfamilie Namaqua fig/Namakwavy Wildevyboom NEURADACEAE Grielum humifusum Pietsnot, duikerwortel, t’koeibee 13 * * NYCTAGINACEAE Boerhavia repens Phaeoptilum spinosum Bougainvilleas or Four o’clock family Brosdoring/Bloudoringbos ONAGRACEAE Oenothera indecora Evening primrose family/Aandblomfamilie OXALIDACEAE Oxalis cf. corniculata Oxalis obliquifolia Sorrel family/Suringfamilie Wood sorrel/Ranksuring PAPAVERACEAE Argemone ochroleuca Poppy family/Papawerfamilie Mexican poppy/Bloudissel PASSIFLORACEAE Adenia repanda Passion flowers and Granadillas PEDALIACEAE Rogeria longiflora Sesamum capense Sesame family/Sesaam familie Djirrie witblom Aprilbaadjie PERIPLOCACEAE * Curroria decidua Khadi-root family/Khadiwortelfamilie PLUMBAGINACEAE * Dyerophytum africanum Plumbago or Sea lavender family * POLYGALACEAE Nylandtia spinosa Polygala leptophylla Milkwort family/Bloukappiefamilie Tortoise berry/Duinebessie, Skilpadbessie Skaapertjie POLYGONACEAE Emex australis Oxygonum delagoense Persicaria serrulata Buckwheat family/Bokwietfamilie Devil’s thorn/Breëblaardubbeltjie PORTULACACEAE Anacampseros albissima * Ceraria namaquensis Portulaca oleracea Purslane family/Spekboomfamilie Moerbossie Hottentotsriem Purslane/Porselein, Varkkos RHAMNACEAE * Ziziphus mucronata Buffalo-thorn family/Blinkblaarfamilie Buffalo-thorn/Wag-’n-bietjie RUBIACEAE Kohautia caespitosa Kohautia cynanchica Coffee, Gardenia and Quinine family Aandblom 14 Sandalwood family/Sandelhoutfamilie * SANTALACEAE Thesium lacinulatum Thesium lineatum * SAPINDACEAE Pappea capensis Litchi family/Lietsjiefamilie Wild plum/Pruimboom SCROPHULARIACEAE Antherothamnus pearsonii Aptosimum albomarginatum Aptosimum lineare Aptosimum marlothii Aptosimum spinescens Diascia engleri Freylinia lanceolata Limosella grandiflora Manulea gariepina Manulea schaeferi Peliostomum leucorrhizum Sutera adpressa Sutera ramosissima Sutera tomentosa Snapdragon family/Leeubekkiefamilie * * * * Witstorm Koffiepit Rolvarkie, Doringviooltjie Honey bells Blouwaterblommejie Veld violet/Karooviooltjie, Springbokbossie Tongblaar SELAGINACEAE Hebenstretia parviflora Walafrida densiflora * * * * * * * SOLANACEAE Datura stramonium Lycium afrum Lycium bosciifolium Lycium cinereum Lycium oxycarpum Lycium prunus-spinosa Lycium sp. Solanum burchellii Solanum capense Solanum catombelense Solanum coccineum Solanum gifbergense Solanum nigrum Solanum pseudocapsicum Solanum rigescens Solanum sisymbrifoliuum Solanum tomentosum Solanum villosum STERCULIACEAE Hermannia bicolor Tomato and potato family Thornapple/Malpitte, Stinkblaar Kraaldoring, Slangbessie Wolwedoring Honey-thorn/Kriedoring, Wolwedoring Bloukareedoring Slangappel Nightshade/Bitterappel Slangbessie Kleingrysbitterappeltjie Black nightshade/Galbessie, Nastergal Wildelemoentjie Doringtomatie Slangappelbos Woody nightshade Cacao family/Kakaofamilie 15 Hermannia minutiflora Hermannia modesta Hermannia pulchella Hermannia solaniflora * Hermannia spinosa * Hermannia stricta * Hermannia tomentosa Hermannia vestita Melhania didyma Gannabos TAMARICACEAE * Tamarix usneoides Tamarisk family Tamarisk/Abiekwaboom, Dabbieboom Verfbossie, Bergpleisterbos Steekbossie Rooi-opslag Swaelbossie THYMELAEACEAE Gnidia polycephala Fibre-bark family/Veselbasfamilie TILIACEAE Grewia flava Linden and basswoods/Rosyntjiebosfamilie Wild currant/Wilderosyntjie URTICACEAE * Forsskaolea candida Nettle family/Brandnetelfamilie Kwaaibul VAHLIACEAE * Vahlia capensis * * VERBENACEAE Plexipus garipensis Plexipus pumilis Teak and Verbena family VISCACEAE Viscum rotundifolium Mistltoe family/Voëlent familie Mistletoe/Voëlent ZYGOPHYLLACEAE * Augea capensis * Sisyndite spartea Tribulis cristatus * Tribulis pterophorus * Tribulis terrestris Tribulis zeyheri Zygophyllum dregeanum * Zygophyllum gilfillani * Zygophyllum microcarpum Zygophyllum microphyllum * Zygophyllum simplex * Zygophyllum suffruticosum Devil-thorn family/Dubbeltjiefamilie Bobbejankos, Volstruisganna Desert broom/Woestynbesem Duiviedoring Common dubbeltjie/Dubbeltjie, duifiedoring Dubbeltjie Skilpadbossie Spekbos Sandhaarpuis, Ouooibos Inkbos Brakkies Spekbos 16 1 Augrabies Falls National Park (n.d.). A preliminary plant species list of the Augrabies Falls National Park with English and Afrikaans common names. Unpublished checklist, Augrabies Falls National Park. Compiled by H Bezuidenhout, P C Zietsman & T Peyper. 2 Werger M J A & Coetzee B J 1977. A phytosociological and phytogeographical study of Augrabies Falls National Park, Republic of South Africa. Koedoe 20, 11-51. (This study appears to have been done entirely outside of the Riemvasmaak area but its checklist has been included because it provides a fairly comprehensive coverage of the riverine vegetation. The survey was done in 1977 at a time when the vegetation was “in an excellent condition, due to favourable rains in the preceding weeks” and the addition of annual species missed in our survey in January 1995 adds considerably to the checklist). 3 South African Defence Force 1990. Voorlopige plantspesieslys vir Riemvasmaak. Aanhangsel J. In (ed.) P Scogings, Military-Ecological Management Plan for Riemvasmaak. Environmental Services, Chief of the South African Defence Force, Department of Logistics, Pretoria. 4 John Acocks sampled two sites (No.’s 1647 & 1648). One is located within Riemvasmaak and the other immediately adjacent to Riemvasmaak on the farm “Waterval”. We relocated his sites and they have become our photostations 21 and 25 respectively. His plant lists are comprehensive and added 37 species to this checklist. 5 Arnold T H & De Wet B C 1993. Plants of southern Africa: names and distribution. . Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 62, 1-825. 6 Gibbs Russell G E, Watson L, Koekemoer M, Smook L, Barker N P, Anderson H M & Dallwitz M J 1991. Grasses of southern Africa. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 58, 1-437. 7 Smith C A 1966. Common names of South African plants. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 35, 1-642. 8 Le Roux A & Schelpe E A C L E 1981. Namaqualand and Clanwilliam. South African Wildflower Guide. Cape Department of Nature and Environmental Conservation. 9 Le Roux P M, Kotzé C D, Nel G P & Glen H F 1994. Bossieveld. Grazing plants of the Karoo and Karoo-like areas. Bulletin No. 28. Department of Agriculture, Pretoria. 10 Shearing D & Van Heerden K 1994. Karoo. South African Wildflower Guide 6. Botanical Society of South Africa & National Botanical Institute, Cape Town. 17 Appendix 4: List of amphibians and reptiles at Riemvasmaak and surrounding areas compiled from a checklist for the Augrabies Falls National Park (AFNP, n.d.), from a checklist in SADF (1990) and from distribution maps in Passmore (1979) [amphibians] and Branch (1988) [reptiles]. Scientific nomenclature and English common names follow Passmore & Carruthers (1979) and Branch (1988a) for amphibians and reptiles respectively. Afrikaans common names, where available are taken from AFNP (n.d.). and from Boycott & Bourquin (1988) for the tortoise fauna. Red Data Book status is according to Branch (1988b) and only three species are listed as Peripheral (P) with a subspecies of Naja nigricollis (N. nigricollis woodii) also listed as Rare. ORDER, FAMILY & SPECIES ENGLISH COMMON NAME AFRIKAANS COMMON NAME FAMILY: PIPIDAE Xenopus laevis Common Clawed Frog Platanna FAMILY: BUFONIDAE Bufo gariepensis B. gutturalis B. garmani B. rangeri Karoo Toad Common or Guttural Toad Olive Toad Raucous Toad Karoo skurwepadda Gewone skurwepadda Gevlekte skurwepadda Lawaaierige skurwepadda FAMILY: MICROHYLIDAE Breviceps adspersus Phrynomerus annectens Common Rain Frog Marbled Rubber Frog Gewone blaasop Rooirubberpadda FAMILY: RANIDAE Cacosternum boettgeri Rana angolensis R. grayi Tomopterna cryptotis Common Caco Common River Frog Clicking River Frog Tremelo Sand Frog Blikslanertjie Gewone rivierpadda Grey se rivierpadda Gestreepte sandpadda CLASS: REPTILIA (Reptiles) ORDER: CHELONIA (Chelonians) FAMILY: TESTUDINIDAE (Land Tortoises) Geochelone pardalis Psammobates tentorius verroxii Leopard tortoise Bushmanland Tent tortoise Bergskilpad Boesmanland-tentskilpad FAMILY: PELOMEDUSIDAE (Side-necked Terrapins) Pelomedusa subrufa Cape Terrapin Gewone waterskilpad ORDER: SQUAMATA (Scaled Reptiles) SUB-ORDER SERPENTES FAMILY: TYPHLOPIDAE (Blind Snakes) Typhlops schinzi (P) Beaked Blind Snake Haakneus blindeslang CLASS: AMPHIBIA ORDER: ANURA (Frogs) 18 FAMILY: LEPTOTYPHLOPIDAE (Thread Snakes) Leptotyphlops occidentalis (P) Western Thread Snake - FAMILY: COLUBRIDAE (Typical Snakes) Lamprophis fuliginosus Pseudaspis cana Prosymna frontalis Dipsina multimaculata Psammophis notostictus P. leightoni Homoroselaps lacteus Xenocalamus bicolor Dasypeltis scabra Telescopus beetzii T. semiannulatus Brown House Snake Mole Snake South-western Shovel-snout Dwarf Beaked Snake Karoo Sand Snake Fork-marked Sand Snake Spotted Harlequin Snake Bicoloured Quill-snouted Snake Common Egg Eater Namib Tiger Snake Eastern Tiger Snake Bruin huisslang Molslang Suidwes graafneusslang Vurkmerk sandslang Eiervreter Beetz se tierslang - FAMILY: ELAPIDAE (Cobras, Mambas and their relatives) Aspidelaps lubricus Naja nivea N. nigricollis Coral Snake Cape Cobra Black-necked Spitting Cobra Koraalslang Kaapse geelslang - FAMILY: VIPERIDAE (Adders & Vipers) Bitis arietans B. caudalis B. xeropaga (P) Puff Adder Horned Adder Desert Mountain Adder Pofadder Horingadder Woestynbergadder Cape Spade-snouted Worm Lizard Kalahari Round-headed Worm Lizard - Striped Legless Skink Cape Skink Western Three-striped Skink Kalahari Tree Skink Striped Skink Western Rock Skink Variegated Skink Gariep Blind Legless Skink Kaapse gladdeakkedis Westelike driestreepakkedis Gespikkelde gladdeakkedis - Spotted Desert Lizard Striped Sandveld Lizard Spotted Sand Lizard Namaqua Sand Lizard Western Sand Lizard Gestreepte sandveldakkedis Namakwa sandakkedis Westelike sandakkedis SUB-ORDER AMPHISBAENIA FAMILY: AMPHISBAENIDAE (Worm Lizards) Monopeltis capensis Zygaspis quadrifrons SUB-ORDER SAURIA (Lizards) FAMILY: SCINIDAE (Skinks) Acontias lineatus Mabuya capensis M. occidentalis M. spilogaster M. striata M. sulcata M. variegata Typhlosaurus gariepensis FAMILY: LACERTIDAE (Old World Lizards) Meroles suborbitalis Nucras tessellata Pedioplanis lineoocellata P. namaquensis P. undata FAMILY: CORDYLIDAE (Plated & Girdled Lizards) 19 Cordylosaurus subtessellatus Cordylus polyzonus Platysaurus capensis Dwarf Plated Lizard Karoo Girdled Lizard Cape Flat Lizard Karoo-skurwejantjie - FAMILY: VARINIDAE (Monitors) Varanus exanthematicus V. niloticus Rock or White-throated Monitor Water Monitor Veldlikkewaan Waterlikkewaan FAMILY: AGAMIDAE (Agamas) Agama aculeata A. anchietae A. atra Ground Agama Anchieta’s Agama Southern Rock Agama Anchieta se stekelkoggelmander - FAMILY: GEKKONIDAE (Typical Geckos) Chondrodactylus angulifer Colopus wahlbergii Lygodactylus bradfieldi Lygodactylus capensis Pachydactylus bibronii P. capensis P. laevigatus P. mariquensis P. rugosus P. serval P. weberi Ptenopus garrulus Giant Ground Gecko Kalahari Ground Gecko Bradfield’s Dwarf Gecko Cape Dwarf Gecko Bibron’s Gecko Cape Gecko Button-scaled Gecko Marico Gecko Rough-scaled Gecko Western Spotted Gecko Weber’s Gecko Common Barking Gecko Groot grondgeitjie Kalahari grondgeitjie Bibron se diktoongeitjie Gewone knopieskubgeitjie Weber se geitjie - REFERENCES AFNP (no date). Amphibians, Reptiles and Fishes of Augrabies Falls National Park. Unpublished checklist. BOYCOTT R C & BOURQUIN O 1988. The South African Tortoise Book. Southern Book Publishers, Johannesburg. BRANCH W R 1988a. Field guide to the snakes and other reptiles of southern Africa. Struik, Cape Town. BRANCH W R 1988b. South African Red Data Book - Reptiles and Amphibians. South African National Scientific Programmes Report 151, 1-241. CSIR, Pretoria. PASSMORE N I & CARRUTHERS V C 1979. South African Frogs. Witwatersrand University Press, Johannesburg. SADF (South African Defence Force) 1990. Lys van reptiele en amfibieë op Riemvasmaak. Aanhangsel M. In (ed.) P Scogings, Military-Ecological Management Plan for Riemvasmaak. Environmental Services, Chief of the South African Defence Force, Department of Logistics, Pretoria. 20 Appendix 5: List of birds recorded for the Augrabies Falls National Park (AFNP, n.d.), recorded at Riemvasmaak by the South African Defence Force (SADF, 1990) and those marked with an asterisk (*) were recorded at Riemvasmaak between 17 - 29 January 1995 by the survey team. Species which we saw during our survey and which may well respond to increasing human disturbance are highlighted. Numbers are Roberts’ numbers (Maclean, 1993). Decriptors of abundance between 17-29 January, 1995 only are: rare - seen once; uncommon - seen less than 10 times; common - seen 10 - 50 times on most days; very common - seen every day and in excess of 50 individuals per day. Categories and Red Data Book status (after Brooke, 1984) of species in the checklist are (V) = Vulnerable; R = Rare; (I) = Indeterminate. 1. Ostrich/Volstruis (Struthio camelus) - SADF (1990) checklist only. The National Parks Board removed 4 individuals when the South African Defence Force’s term of tenure expired in 1993/94 (Barry Hopgood, personal communication). 55. Whitebreasted Cormorant/Witborsduiker (Phalacrocorax carbo). 58. Reed Cormorant/Rietduiker (Phalacrocorax africanus). 60. Darter/Slanghalsvoël (Anhinga melanogaster). 62. Grey Heron/Bloureier (Ardea cinerea). 63. Blackheaded Heron/Swartkopreier (Ardea melanocephala). *64. Goliath heron/Reuse-reier (Ardea goliath) - rare; restricted to the Orange River (Molopo mouth). 67. Little Egret/ Kleinwitreier (Egretta garzetta). 71. Cattle Egret/Veereier (Bubulcus ibis). SADF (1990) checklist only. 78. Little Bittern/Woudapie (Ixobrychus minutus). 81. Hamerkop/Hamerkop (Scopus umbretta). 83. White Stork/Witooievaar (Ciconia ciconia). 84. Black Stork/Grootswartooievaar (Ciconia nigra). (I), probably (R) 85. Abdim’s Stork/Kleinswartooievaar (Ciconia abdimii). 94. Hadeda Ibis/Hadeda (Bostrychia hagedash). 95. African Spoonbill/Lepelaar (Platalea alba). *102. Egyptian Goose/Kolgans (Alopochen aegyptiacus) - uncommon; restricted to the Orange River (Molopo mouth). 103. South African Shelduck/Kopereend (Tadorna cana). 104. Yellowbilled Duck/Geelbekeend (Anas undulata). 105. African Black Duck/Swarteend (Anas sparsa). 106. Cape Teal/Teeleend (Anas capensis). 108. Redbilled Teal/Rooibekeend (Anas erythrorhyncha) 113. Southern Pochard/Bruineend (Netta erythrophthalma). SADF (1990) checklist only. 116. Spurwinged Goose/Wildemakou (Plectropterus gambensis). 118. Secretarybird/Sekretarisvoël (Sagittarius serpentarius). SADF (1990) checklist only. 126. Yellowbilled Kite/Geelbekwou (Milvus migrans). 127. Blackshouldered Kite/Blouvalk (Elanus caeruleus) 21 *131. Black Eagle/Witkruisarend (Aquila verreauxii)- uncommon; seen 5 times (including three juveniles) widespread throughout the region with a pair at a nest east of Deksel near photostation 4 . 136. Booted Eagle/Dwergarend (Hieraaetus pennatus). 140. Martial Eagle/Breëkoparend (Polemaetus bellicosus). (V) *143. Blackbreasted Snake Eagle/Swartbosslangarend (Circaetus pectoralis) rare; recorded flying above the central plateau. *148. African Fish Eagle/Visarend (Haliaeetus vocifer) - rare; restricted to the Orange River. Pair seen with a nest at Xubuxnab. A species likely to suffer from agricultural development along the banks of the Orange River. The developed southern side of the river has in places, had most of its riverine vegetation removed. 149. Steppe Buzzard/Bruinjakkalsvoël (Buteo buteo). *152. Jackal buzzard/Rooiborsjakkalsvoël (Buteo rufofuscus)- rare; recorded once at photostation 9. *162. Pale Chanting Goshawk/Bleeksingvalk (Melierax canorus) - uncommon; 169. Gymnogene/Kaalwangvalk (Polyboroides typus). 171. Peregrine Falcon/Swerfvalk (Falco peregrinus). (R) 172. Lanner Falcon/Edelvalk (Falco biarmicus). 178. Rednecked Falcon/Rooinekvalk (Falco chicquera). (R) *181. Rock Kestrel/Rooivalk (Falco tinnunculus) - rare; recorded once near photostation 29. 182. Greater Kestrel/Grootrooivalk (Falco rupicoloides). 186. Pygmy Falcon/Dwergvalk (Polihierax semitorquatus). 195. Cape Francolin/Kaapse Fisant (Francolinus capensis). 199. Swainson’s Francolin/Bosveldfisant (Francolinus swainsonii). 200. Common Quail/Afrikaanse Kwartel (Coturnix coturnix). 203. Helmeted Guineafowl/Gewone Tarentaal (Numida meleagris). 213. Black Crake/Swartriethaan (Amaurornis flavirostris). 226. Moorhen/Waterhoender (Gallinula chloropus). 228. Redknobbed Coot/Bleshoender (Fulica cristata). 230. Kori Bustard/Gompou (Ardeotis kori). (V) 232. Ludwig’s Bustard/Ludwigse Pou (Neotis ludwigii). (V) *235. Karoo Korhaan/Vaalkorhaan (Eupodotis vigorsii) - uncommon; recorded on the plateau and near photostation 29. 239. Black Korhaan/Swartkorhaan (Eupodotis afra). SADF (1990) checklist only. *249. Threebanded Plover/Driebandstrandkiewiet (Charadrius tricollaris) - rare; recorded once along the Orange River. *258. Blacksmith Plover/Bontkiewiet (Vanellus armatus) - uncommon; recorded along the Orange River. 264. Common Sandpiper/Gewone Ruiter (Actitis hypoleucos). 266. Wood Sandpiper/Bosruiter (Tringa glareola). *270. Greenshank/Groenpootruiter (Tringa nebularia) - rare; recorded along the Orange River (Molopo River mouth). 295. Blackwinged Stilt/Rooipootelsie (Himantopus himantopus). SADF (1990) checklist only. *297. Spotted Dikkop/Dikkop (Burhinus capensis) - uncommon; heard calling at dusk along the Orange River (Molopo River mouth). 298. Water Dikkop/Waterdikkop (Burhinus vermiculatus). 22 301. Doublebanded Courser/Dubbelbanddrawwertjie (Smutsornis africanus). SADF (1990) checklist only. *344. Namaqua Sandgrouse/Kelkiewyn (Pterocles namaqua) - common; seen flying early in the morning en route to or from a drinking source. In small groups to fairly large flocks of up to about 100 birds. 347. Doublebanded Sandgrouse/Dubbelbandsandpatrys (Pterocles bicinctus). 348. Feral Pidgeon/Tuinduif (Columba livia). SADF (1990) checklist only. *349. Rock Pigeon/Kransduif (Columba guinea) - common; widespread where suitable habitat (gorges, cliffs) occurs. 352. Redeyed Dove/Grootringduif (Streptopelia semitorquata). *354. Cape Turtle Dove/Gewone Tortelduif (Streptopelia capicola) - very common; widespread throughout the region. *355. Laughing Dove/Rooiborsduifie (Streptopelia senegalensis) - very common; widespread throughout the region. *356. Namaqua Dove/Namakwaduifie (Oena capensis) - common; widespread throughout the region. *367. Rosyfaced Lovebird/Rooiwangparkiet (Agapornis roseicollis) - uncommon; recorded at Riemvasmaak Mission Station, Perdepoort and Donkiemond. Seen drinking from the water tower at the mission station. (I), probably (R) *386. Diederik Cuckoo/Diederikkie (Chrysococcyx caprius) - rare; heard calling once along the Molopo River near its confluence with the Orange River. Presumably restricted by the availability of suitable hosts (weavers and bishops) which occur more commonly along the Orange river. 392. Barn Owl/Nonnetjie-uil (Tyto alba). 401. Spotted Eagle Owl/Gevlekte Ooruil (Bubo africanus). 402. Giant Eagle Owl/Reuse Ooruil (Bubo lacteus). *406. Rufouscheeked Nightjar/Rooiwangnaguil (Caprimulgus rufigena) uncommon; heard calling (Xubuxnab, Molopo River) and seen prior to a lightning storm along the Molopo River. the local rainbird according to Mr Willem Vass. 410. Pennantwinged Nightjar/Wimpelvlerknaguil (Macrodipteryx vexillaria). *412. Black Swift/Swartwindswael (Apus barbatus)- common; widespread throughout the region; especially conspicuous when hawking insects after rain storms. 413. Bradfield’s Swift/Muiskleurwindswael (Apus bradfieldii). 415. Whiterumped Swift/Witkruiswindswael (Apus caffer). *417. Little Swift/Kleinwindswael (Apus affinis) - common; widespread throughout the region. *418. Alpine Swift/Witpenswindswael (Apus melba) - uncommon; recorded after rain storm at photostation 8. Very distinctive. 424. Speckled Mousebird/Gevlekte Muisvoël (Colius striatus). *425. Whitebacked Mousebird/Witkruismuisvoël (Colius coliusi) - rare; recorded once north of the Riemvasmaak Mission Station. *426. Redfaced Mousebird/Rooiwangmuisvoël (Urocolius indicus) - rare; recorded once along the Molopo River close to its confluence with the Orange River. 428. Pied Kingfisher/Bontvisvanger (Ceryle rudis). 23 429. Giant Kingfisher/Reuse Visvanger (Megaceryle maxima). 431. Malachite Kingfisher/Kuifkopvisvanger (Alcedo cristata). *438. European Bee-eater/Europese Byvreter (Merops apiaster) - rare; heard calling above the Molopo River near its confluence with the Orange River. 440. Bluecheeked Bee-eater/Blouwangbyvreter (Merops persicus). 444. Little Bee-eater/Kleinbyvreter (Merops pusillus). *445. Swallowtailed Bee-eater/Swaelstertbyvreter (Merops hirundineus) - rare; a flock recorded in the Molopo River bed near its confluence with the Orange River. 449. Purple Roller/Groottroupant (Coracias naevia). 451. Hoopoe/Hoephoep (Upupa epops). *454. Scimitarbilled Woodhoopoe/Swartbekkakelaar (Rhinopomastus cyanomelas) uncommon; recorded twice in Acacia erioloba woodland. 459. Southern Yellowbilled Hornbill/Suidelike Geelbekneushoringvoël (Tockus leucomelas). *465. Pied Barbet/Bonthoutkapper (Tricholaema leucomelas) - common; widespread throughout the region in a variety of habitats. 474. Greater Honeyguide/Grootheuningwyser (Indicator indicator). 476. Lesser Honeyguide/Kleinheuningwyser (Indicator minor). 483. Goldentailed Woodpecker/Goudstertspeg (Campethera abingoni). 486. Cardinal Woodpecker/Kardinaalspeg (Dendropicos fuscescens). *498. Sabota Lark/Sabotalewerik (Mirafra sabota) - uncommon; recorded in the lowlands beneath the central plateau. *500. Longbilled Lark/Langbeklewerik (Mirafra curvirostris) - uncommon; recorded throughout the region. *502. Karoo Lark/Karoolewerik (Mirafra albescens) - rare; one record for the plateau. 506. Spikeheeled Lark/Vlaktelewerik (Chersomanes albofasciata). 516. Greybacked Finchlark/Grysruglewerik (Eremopterix verticalis). 517. Blackeared Finchlark/Swartoorlewerik (Eremopterix australis). *518. European Swallow/Europese Swael (Hirundo rustica) - uncommon; recorded at Xubuxnab and at the mouth of the Molopo River. 520. Whitethroated Swallow/Witkeelswael (Hirundo albigularis). 523. Pearlbreasted Swallow/Pêrelborsswael (Hirundo dimidiata). 526. Greater Striped Swallow/Grootstreepswael (Hirundo cucullata). *529. Rock Martin/Kranswael (Hirundo fuligula) - common; the commonest swallow, recorded widely throughout the region. 530. House Martin/Huisswael (Delichon urbica). ?Record doubtful. (I) *533. Brownthroated Martin/Afrikaanse Oewerswael (Riparia paludicola) uncommon; recorded at Xubuxnab and at the mouth of the Molopo River. 534. Banded Martin/Gebande Oewerswael (Riparia cincta). *541. Forktailed Drongo/Mikstertbyvanger (Dicrurus adsimilis) - rare; recorded once from the Riemvasmaak Mission Station. 551. Southern Grey Tit/Piet-tjou-tjou-grysmees (Parus afer). *552. Ashy Tit/Acaciagrysmees (Parus cinerascens) - rare; recorded at photostation 4 along a rocky river course. 557. Cape Penduline Tit/Kaapse Kapokvoël (Anthoscopus minutus). SADF (1990) checklist only. 24 558. Grey Penduline Tit/Gryskapokvoël (Anthoscopus caroli). *567. Redeyed Bulbul/Rooioogtiptol (Pycnonotus nigricans) - uncommon; recorded widely in a variety of habitats. 577. Olive Thrush/Olyflyster (Turdus olivaceus). 580. Groundscraper Thrush/Gevlekte Lyster (Turdus litsitsirupa). 583. Shorttoed Rock Thrush/Korttoonkliplyster (Monticola brevipes). SADF (1990) checklist only. *586. Mountain Chat/Bergwagter (Oenanthe monticola) - common; recorded widely and not necessarily in association with mountains. 587. Capped Wheatear/Hoëveldskaapwagter (Oenanthe pileata). *589. Familiar Chat/Gewone Spekvreter (Cercomela familiaris) - rare; a pair recorded at photostation 5 on the plateau. 590. Tractrac Chat/Woestynspekvreter (Cercomela tractrac). 592. Karoo Chat/Karoospekvreter (Cercomela schlegelii). 593. Mocking Chat/Dassievoël (Thamnoclaea cinnamomeiventris). *595. Anteating Chat/Swartpiek (Myrmecocichla formicivora) - rare; recorded once on the plateau. *601. Cape Robin/Gewone Janfrederik (Cossypha caffra) - rare; recorded only along the Orange River (Molopo River mouth). *614. Karoo Robin/Slangverklikker (Erythropygia coryphaeus) - uncommon; recorded sparsely throughout the region. 615. Kalahari Robin/Kalahariwipstert (Erythropygia paena). *621. Titbabbler/Bosveldtjeriktik (Parisoma subcaeruleum) - uncommon; seen in wide valleys. 631. African Marsh Warbler/Kleinrietsanger (Acrocephalus baeticatus). 634. European Sedge Warbler/Europese Vleisanger (Acrocephalus schoenobaenus). *635. Cape Reed Warbler/Kaapse Rietsanger (Acrocephalus gracilirostris) - rare; heard calling from a reedbed at the Molopo River mouth. *651. Longbilled Crombec/Bosveldstompstert (Sylveitta rufescens) - uncommon; recorded only from Acacia erioloba woodlands. 653. Yellowbellied Eremomela/Geelpensbossanger (Eremomela icteropygialis). 660. Cinnamonbreasted Warbler/Kaneelborssanger (Euryptila subcinnamomea). 664. Fantailed Cisticola/Landeryklopkloppie (Cisticola juncidis). *669. Greybacked Cisticola/Grysrugtinktinkie (Cisticola subruficapilla) uncommon; recorded on the plateau and along the Molopo gorge. 677. Levaillant’s Cisticola/Vleitinktinkie (Cisticola tinniens). *685. Blackchested Prinia/Swartbandlangstertjie (Prinia flavicans) - very common; widely recorded throughout the region. 687. Namaqua Warbler/Namakwalangstertjie (Phragmacia substriata). *688. Rufouseared Warbler/Rooioorlangstertjie (Malcorus pectoralis) - uncommon; recorded on the plateau and on Kalahari sand near Gyam/Vaalputs. 689. Spotted Flycatcher/Europese Vlieëvanger (Muscicapa striata) 695. Marico Flycatcher/Maricovlieëvanger (Melaenornis mariquensis). *697. Chat Flycatcher/Grootvlieëvanger (Melaenornis infuscatus) - rare; recorded on the plateau. 701. Chinspot Batis/Witliesbosbontrokkie (Batis molitor). *703. Pririt Batis/Priritbosbontrokkie (Batis pririt) - common; widespread; seen and heard calling frequently, often in the heat of the day. 706. Fairy Flycatcher/Feevlieëvanger (Stenostira scita). 25 711. African Pied Wagtail/Bontkwikkie (Motacilla aguimp). *713. Cape Wagtail/Gewone Kwikkie (Motacilla capensis) - rare; recorded only along the Orange River. 716. Grassveld Pipit/Gewone Koester (Anthus cinnamomeus). 717. Longbilled Pipit/Nicholsonse Koester (Anthus similis). 719. Buffy Pipit/Vaalkoester (Anthus vaalensis). SADF (1990) checklist only. *732. Fiscal Shrike/Fiskaallaksman (Lanius collaris) - uncommon; recorded widely in the region. A species often associated with humans. 733. Redbacked Shrike/Rooiruglaksman (Lanius collurio). *741. Brubru/Bontroklaksman (Nilaus afer) - rare; heard calling from Acacia erioloba woodland in the Molopo River alluvial fan. *746. Bokmakierie/Bokmakierie (Telophorus zeylonus)- common; widely recorded throughout the region. 748. Orangebreasted Bush Shrike/Oranjeborsboslaksman (Telophorus sulfureopectus). 759. Pied Starling/Witgatspreeu (Spreo bicolor). *760. Wattled Starling/Lelspreeu (Creatophora cinerea) - uncommon; recorded in small flocks throughout the region except the plateau. 764. Glossy Starling/Kleinglansspreeu (Lamprotornis nitens). 769. Redwinged Starling/Rooivlerkspreeu (Onychognathus morio). *770. Palewinged Starling/Bleekvlerkspreeu (Onychognathus nabouroup) common; occurs most frequently on rocky koppies, along gorges and on cliff faces. 783. Lesser Doublecollared Sunbird/Klein-roobandsuikerbekkie (Nectarinia chalybea). *788. Dusky Sunbird/Namakwasuikerbekkie (Nectarinia fusca) - very common; recorded throughout the region. 796. Cape White-eye/Kaapse Glasogie (Zosterops pallidus). *799. Whitebrowed Sparrowweaver/Koringvoël (Plocepasser mahali) - rare; recorded with nests in Acacia erioloba woodland near the confluence of the Molopo and Orange rivers. *800. Sociable Weaver/Versamelvoël (Philetairus socius) - common; nesting confined to Acacia erioloba trees. *801. House Sparrow/Huismossie (Passer domesticus) - uncommon; recorded only at the Riemvasmaak Mission. 802. Great Sparrow/Grootmossie (Passer motitensis). *803. Cape Sparrow/Gewone Mossie (Passer melanurus) - common; recorded throughout the region. 804. Greyheaded Sparrow/Gryskopmossie (Passer diffusus) 805. Yellowthroated Sparrow/Geelvlekmossie (Petronia superciliaris). 806. Scalyfeathered Finch/Baardmannetjie (Sporopipes squamifrons). *814. Masked Weaver/Swartkeelgeelvink (Ploceus velatus) - uncommon; recorded at the Riemvasmaak Mission Station and along the Orange River. 821. Redbilled Quelea/Rooibekkwelea (Quelea quelea). *824. Red Bishop/Rooivink (Euplectes orix) - rare; recorded along the Orange River (Molopo River mouth) 842. Redbilled Firefinch/Rooibekvuurvinkie (Lagonosticta senegala) *846. Common Waxbill/Rooibeksysie (Estrilda astrild) - rare; recorded at Xubuxnab along the Orange River. 26 860. 864. 870. *876. *878. *879. *885. *887. Pintailed Whydah/Koninggrooibekkie (Vidua macroura). Black Widowfinch/Gewone Blouvinkie (Vidua funera) Blackthroated Canary/Bergkanarie (Serinus atrogularis) Blackheaded Canary/Swarkopkanarie (Serinus alario) - rare; a pair recorded once at the Riemvasmaak Mission Station. Yellow Canary/Geelkanarie (Serinus flaviventris) - uncommon; recorded at the Riemvasmaak Mission Station and in Acacia erioloba woodland along the Molopo River. Whitethroated Canary/Witkeelkanarie (Serinus albogularius) - uncommon; recorded on the plateau and near the Molopo River mouth. Cape Bunting/Rooivlerkstreepkoppie (Emberiza capensis) - rare; pair recorded at photostation 4 along a rocky river course. Larklike Bunting/Vaalstreepkoppie (Emberiza impetuani) - very common; recorded everyday, everywhere. The most common bird in Riemvasmaak during the survey. REFERENCES AFNP (no date). Birds. Unpublished list of birds for the Augrabies Falls National Park. BROOKE R K 1984. South African Red Data Book - Birds. South African National Scientific Programmes Report 97, 1-213. CSIR, Pretoria. MACLEAN G L 1993. Roberts’ Birds of Southern Africa. John Voelcker Bird Book Fund, Cape Town. 6th edition. SADF (South African Defence Force) 1990. Lys van voelsoorte op terrein 15: Riemvasmaak opleidingsterrein. Aanhangsel L. In (ed.) P Scogings, MilitaryEcological Management Plan for Riemvasmaak. Environmental Services, Chief of the South African Defence Force, Department of Logistics, Pretoria. 27 Appendix 6: Checklist of mamals for Riemvasmaak and surrounding areas compiled from Rautenbauch et al (1979), AFNP (n.d.) and SADF (1990). Nomenclature follows Skinner and Smithers (1990). Red Data Book status according to Smithers (1986): E = Endangered; V = Vulnerable; R = Rare; I = Indeterminate. No. ENGLISH COMMON NAME AFRIKAANS COMMON NAME Reddish-grey musk shrew Rooigrysskeerbek Smith’s rock elephant-shrew Smith se klipklaasneus Straw-coloured fruit bat Geelvrugtevlermuis Flat-headed freetailed bat Platkoplosstert vlermuis Geoffroy’s se saalneusvlermuis Kaapse saalneusvlermuis 10 ORDER, FAMILY & Species INSECTIVORA (Shrews, hedgehogs, golden moles) SORICIDAE (Shrews) Crocidura cyanea 36 MACROSCLELIDEA (Elephant shrews) MACROSCELIDIDAE Elephantulus rupestris 45 CHIROPTERA (Bats) PTEROPODIDAE (Fruit-eating bats) Eidolon helvum 52 MOLOSSIDAE (Free-tailed bats) Sauromys petrophilus 102 RHINOLOPHIDAE (Horseshoe bats) Rhinolophus clivosus 106 R. capensis Geoffroy’s horshoe bat Cape horshoe bat 117 119 PRIMATES (Bushbabies, baboons, monkeys) CERCOPITHECIDAE (Baboons & monkeys) Papio ursinus Cercopithecus aethiops Chacma baboon Vervet monkey Kaapse bobbejaan Blouaap 123 124 LAGOMORPHA (Hares, rock rabbits, rabbits) LEPORIDAE Lepus saxitilis Pronolagus rupestris Scrub hare Smith’s red rock Kolhaas Smith se 28 rabbit rooiklipkonyn 134 RODENTIA (The rodents) HYSTRICIDAE (Porcupines) Hystrix afrcaeaustralis Cape porcupine Kaapse ystervark 135 PEDETIDAE (Springhaas) Pedetes capensis Springhaas Springhaas 136 GLIRIDAE (Doormice) Graphiurus ocularis Spectacled doormouse Gemsbokmuis 140 SCIURIDAE (Squirrels) Xerus inauris Cape ground squirrel Waaierstert grondeekhoring 149 PETROMURIDAE (Dassie rat) Petromus typicus Dassie rat Dassierot 150 151 MURIDAE (Rats & mice) Parotomys brantsii P. littledalei Brant se fluitrot Littledale se fluitrot 163 174A Rhabdomys pumilio Mastomys coucha 177 177A 179 Thallomys paedulcus T. nigricauda Aethomys namaquensis Brant’s whistling rat Littledale’s whistling rat Striped mouse Multimammate mouse Tree rat Black-tailed tree rat Namaqua rock mouse 185 186 188 Desmodillus auricularis Gerbillurus paeba G. vallinus 190 196 206 Streepmuis Vaalveldmuis Tatera leucogaster Saccostomus campestris Petromyscus collinus (I) Short-tailed gerbil Hairy-footed gerbil Brush-tailed hairyfooted gerbil Bushveld gerbil Pouched mouse Pygmy rock mouse Boomrot Swartstertboomrot Namakwalandse klipmuis Kortstertnagmuis Haarpoortnagmuis Borselsterthaarpoort nagmuis Bosveldse nagmuis Wangsakmuis Dwergklipmuis 244 CARNIVORA PROTELIDAE (Aardwolf) Proteles cristatus (R) Aardwolf Aardwolf 248 250 251 FELIDAE (Cats) Panthera pardus (R) Felis caracal F. libyca (V) Leopard Caracal African wild cat Luiperd Rooikat Vaalboskat CANIDAE (Foxes, wild 29 255 259 dog, jackal) Otocyon megalotis Canis mesomelas Bat-eared fox Black-backed jackal Bakoorvos Rooijakkals 260 264 MUSTELIDAE (Otters, polecats, weasels, honey badger) Aonyx capensis Ictonyx striatus Cape clawless otter Striped polecat Groototter Stinkmuishond 267 272 274 275 278 VIVERRIDAE (Mongoose, civers, genets, suricate) Genetta genetta Cynictis penicillata Galerella sangiunea G. pulverulenta Atilax paludinosus Small-spotted genet Yellow mongoose Slender mongoose Small grey mongoose Water mongoose Kleinkolmuskejaatkat Witkwasmuishond Swartkwasmuishond Klein grysmuishond Kommetjiegat muishond 288 TUBULIDENTATA ORYCTEROPODIDAE (Aardvark) Orycteropus afer (V) Aardvark Aardvark 290 HYRACOIDEA PROCAVIIDAE (Dassies) Procavia capensis Rock dassie Klipdas 296 PERISSODACTYLA (Odd-toed ungulates) RHINOCEROTIDAE (Rhinoceros) Diceros bicornis (E) (Re- Black rhinoceros Swartrenoster Common duiker Springbok Klipspringer Steenbok Gemsbok Kudu Eland Gewone duiker Springbok Klipspringer Steenbok Gemsbok Koedoe Eland introduced to “Bokvasmaak”) 313 314 315 318 327 329 333 ARTIODACTYLA (Eventoed ungulates) BOVIDAE (The antelopes & buffalo) Sylvicapra grimmia Antidorcas marsupialis Oreotragus oreotragus Raphicerus campestris Oryx gazella Tragelaphus strepsiceros Taurotragus oryx 30 REFERENCES AFNP (n.d.). Unpublished checklist of the mammals of the Augrabies Falls National Park. RAUTENBACH I L, SCHLITTER D A & DE GRAAFF G 1979. Notes on the mammal fauna of the Augrabies Falls National Park and surrounding areas, with special reference to regional zoogeographical implications. Koedoe 22: 157175. SADF (South African Defence Force) 1990. Voorlopige soogdierlys vir Riemvasmaak Aanhangsel K. In: (ed) P Scogings. Military-Ecological Management Plan for Riemvasmaak. Environmental Services, Chief of the South African Defence Force, Department of Logistics, Pretoria. SMITHERS R 1986. South African Red Data Book - Terrestrial mammals. South African National Scientific Programmes Report 125, 1-216. CSIR, Pretoria. SKINNER J D & SMITHERS R H N 1990. The Mammals of the Southern African Subregion. University of Pretoria, Pretoria. 2nd ed. 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Appendix 7: List of mammal species and their abundances determined by the National Parks Board during helicopter surveys in “Bokvasmaak”a and Riemvasmaak in March 1995. Calves <1 yr are listed in parentheses, except rhino calves which are assumed to be < 2yrs. Data are compiled from Knight (1995a, 1995b) who should be consulted for details of methodology. LOCATION SPECIES Gems Kudu bok 20(2) 2 Black rhino 5(2) Giraffe Eland 9(1) 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL FOR RIEMVASMAAK 0 0 GRAND TOTAL 7 10 “Bokvasmaak” Riemvasmaak Plateau Bak River Orange & Lower Kourop Rivers Kourop River Lower Molopo River Upper Molopo River “Wildevallei”/Droëputs Gyam/Vaalputs Spring bok 81 Steen bok - Klip springer 11 27 2 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 3 5 16 5 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 1 0 0 1 0 31 64 26 5 7b 8 53 66 107 5 18 a “Bokvasmaak” refers to that part of Riemvasmaak leased to the National Parks Board on the north bank of the Orange River but it also includes a small area of the farm Waterval (see Anonymous, 1991 in bibliography). b We observed 89 Klipspringers during the course of our ground survey in Riemvasmaak. The National Parks Board helicopter census provides a significant underestimate of this cryptic species. REFERENCES KNIGHT M H 1995a. Helicopter survey of Augrabies Falls National Park, March 1995. Unpublished internal report. National Parks Board, Kimberley. 3pp. KNIGHT M H 1995b. Helicopter survey of Riemvasmaak, March 1985. Unpublished internal report. National Parks Board, Kimberley. 2pp. 38 Appendix 8: Description of photostations in Riemvasmaak with information about their location (see also Fig. 1.13), direction of focus, camera height, date and time of exposure and the landforms within the main field of view that were identified and sampled during January 1995. The photograph of the main field of view at each photostation follows the table. No. NAME LOCATION 1 DEKSEL WEST 2 UPPER KOUROP VALLEY ca. 1 km W of Deksel, looking E to Kouropberg 1.25 km S of Deksel, looking down Kourop River Valley; a few hundred metres east of the road 3 DEKSEL SOUTH 4 NARUXAS 5 PLATEAU 6 BERYLKOP GRID REFERENCE S 28 21 36.5 E 20 08 47.3 S 28 22 36.7 E 20 09 22.0 DEGREES DATE TIME 90° E HEIGHT (cm) 155.5 17/1/95 18h20 212° SSW 160 18/1/95 08h18 1.2 km S of Deksel, looking N to Kouropberg, ca. 50 paces N of location for photostation 2 ca. 5.4 km ENE of Deksel, looking NE to farm Naruxas (Narougas) as road turns to ascend plateau S 28 22 15.1 E 20 09 22.7 8° N 157 18/1/95 08h42 S 28 20 16.4 E 20 12 21.2 40° NE 146 18/1/95 17h39 On top of the plateau, just E of a large pan, 50 paces south of road 5.05 km N of Riemvasmaak Mission Station, just W of S 28 22 09.1 E 20 15 51.2 250° WSW 159 19/1/95 08h15 S 28 24 14.8 E 20 18 35.8 180° S ?ca. 145 19/1/95 11h08 LANDFORMS IDENTIFIED & SAMPLED 1a Rocky pediment 1b Narrow & rocky river bed 2a Rocky footslope 2b Rocky pediment a 2c Narrow & rocky river bed 2d Rocky pediment 2e Rocky pediment 2f Sandy pediment 3a Rocky footslope 3b Wide & saline river bed 3c Rocky pediment 3d Rocky pediment 4a Rocky footslope 4b Narrow & rocky river bed 4c Narrow & rocky river bed 4d1 Rocky pediment 4d2 Rocky pediment 4e1 Rocky hillslope 4e2 Rocky hillslope 5a Plateau 5b Sandy pediment 5c Pan 6a Sandy pediment 6b Wide & sandy river bed 39 road 9.35 SW from Riemvasmaak Mission Station, ca. 200 N of road S 28 28 40.4 E 20 13 02.3 324° NW 149 20/1/95 09h33 7a Sandy pediment 7b Wide & sandy river bed 7c Sandy pediment 8a Sandy pediment 8b Wide & sandy river bed 8c Rocky pediment 8d Rocky toeslope 9a Sandy pediment 9b Inselberg 9c Inselberg 10a Rocky footslope 10b Rocky pediment 10c Sandy pediment 11a Sandy pediment 11b Wide & sandy river bed 11c Inselberg 12a1 Wide & sandy river bed 12a2 Wide & sandy river bed 12b Wide & sandy river bed b 12e1 Wide & saline river bed 12e2 Wide & saline river bed 13a Rocky pediment, below escarpment 13b Rocky pediment, below escarpment 14a Wide & saline river bed 14b Sandy pediment 14c Sandy pediment 15a Sandy pediment 15b Rocky footslope 15c Inselberg 16a Rocky pediment 16b Wide & sandy river bed 7 ║ANA║AS 8 MOSTERTSHOEK 5.6 km ENE of Xubuxnap, ca. 750 m N of road S 28 27 34.5 E 20 10 32.8 99° E 158 20/1/95 15h32 9 XUBUXNAB Just above old settlement at Xubuxnap S 28 28 37.0 E 20 07 44.4 18° NNE 152.5 21/1/95 08h10 10 PETRUSHOEK S 28 26 45.4 E 20 0.6 39.1 296° WNW 153 21/1/95 11h16 11 LOWER KOUROP VALLEY 2.1 km NW of top of Koelmanskop, just above 650 m contour. 2.2 km NE of Xubuxnap, on hillsope ca. 200 NE of road S 28 27 49.9 E 20 08 25.2 134° SE 160 21/1/95 16h03 12 MOLOPO FAN On top of high point 514 m; 1.1 km N of where the Molopo River enters the Orange River S 28 30 26.8 E 20 12 57.1 290° WNW 141 22/1/95 07h42 13 DESCENT TO MOLOPO RIVER RIEMVASMAAK MISSION EAST Just above where road turns sharp corner 1 km SE of Riemvasmaak Mission Station S 28 28 56.7 E 20 13 47.9 S 28 27 22.6 E 20 18 59.7 254° WSW 154 22/1/95 12h26 104° ESE 153 22/1/95 16h11 15 LOERIESFONTEIN RIVER 2.9 km ESE of Bok se Puts, 200 m N of road S 28 21 03.1 E 20 05 12.1 224° SW 153 23/1/95 11h44 16 UPPER BAK RIVER 5.3 km NNE of Bok se Puts, 500 m W of road S 28 17 25.1 E 20 01 21.2 104° ESE 151 23/1/95 16h20 14 40 17 DONKIEMOND 950 m E of road S 28 21 06.3 E 20 00 59.9 180° S 152.5 24/1/95 08h32 18 NEAR BOK SE PUTS 950 m W of Bok se Puts, ca. 600 SW of road S 28 19 29.1 E 20 02 20.1 258° WSW 157.5 24/1/95 10h19 19 DEURSPRING 154 24/1/95 15h31 DEKSEL EAST 80° ENE 153.5 24/1/95 18h08 21 215° SW 158.5 25/1/95 07h52 22 ABOVE MOLOPO GORGE DROËPUTS S 28 24 28.0 E 20 08 37.6 S 28 21 26.2 E 20 10 42.4 S 28 26 51.1 E 20 17 03.4 S 28 26 44.5 E 20 14 55.5 246° WSW 20 5.6 km S of Deksel, on top of low koppie, 200 m E of road 2.05 km E of Deksel, 100 m above road 1.9 km SW of the Mission Station 6 km W of the Mission Station, or ca. 3.5 km NW of high point 759 m on Hoed se Kop 317° NW 143 25/1/95 11h55 23 PERDEPOORT ca. 400 m N of the the settlement at Perdepoort S 28 23 57.7 E 20 23 52.9 26° NNE 150.5 26/1/95 09h54 24 GYAM/VAALPUTS 600 m SE of old homestead at Gyam/Vaalputs S 28 22 27.3 E 20 21 57.6 126° SE 138.5 26/1/95 14h12 25 WATERVAL SOUTH Just east of the Waterval boundary, 7.25 km east of S 28 32 03.6 E 20 20 13.3 70° ENE 138 27/1/95 10h34 16c1 ?Rocky pediment overlain by Kalahari sand 16c2 Rocky footslope 16d Narrow & rocky river bed 16e Rocky footslope 17a Sandy pediment 17b Rocky toeslope 18a 18b 18c 18d 19a 19b 20a 20b 21a Sandy pediment Sandy pediment Rocky pediment Wide & sandy river bed Sandy pediment Wide & saline river bed Rocky pediment Narrow & rocky river bed Rocky pediment, below escarpment 22a 22b 22c 22d 22e 23a 23b 23c 23d 24a 24b 24c 24d Rocky footslope, below escarpment Wide & sandy river bed Sandy pediment Wide & sandy river bed Rocky pediment Wide & sandy river bed Sandy pediment Sandy pediment Inselberg Sandy pediment Wide & sandy river bed Sandy pediment Wide & sandy river bed (Kalahari dunes) 25a Rocky pediment, below escarpment 25b Rocky footslope, below escarpment 41 26 WATERVAL NORTH 27 PERDEPOORT GYAM/VAALPUTS CROSSROADS 28 RIEMVASMAAK MISSION NORTH 29 BLYSTAAN Wabrand 550 m E of boundary between Waterval and Riemvasmaak 1.3 km NE of where road enters Riemvasmaak again from Waterval 1.95 km NNE of Riemvasmaak Mission Station, 100 m W of road 3.7 km SE of the Mission Station, 300 m W of the road S 28 26 13.1 E 20 20 48.9 330° NNW 150 28/1/95 12h34 26a Wide & sandy river bed 26b Wide & sandy river bed S 28 25 28.5 E 20 23 09.7 30° NNE 147.5 28/1/95 15h53 27a Sandy pediment 27b Wide & sandy river bed 27c Wide & sandy river bed S 28 26 03.0 E 20 18 24.8 170° S 152 28/1/95 17h49 S 28 28 58.2 E 20 19 23.9 278° W 156 29/1/95 08h42 28a 28b 28c 29a 29b 29c Rocky footslope, below escarpment Sandy pediment Wide & sandy river bed Rocky pediment, below escarpment Rocky pediment, below escarpment Rocky pediment, below escarpment a Our landform classification has proven problematic in a few cases, such as 2c, in the Kourop River valley. This is clearly a wide and sandy river bed but the river banks are rocky and are dominated by plants that are more typically represented in narrow and rocky river beds. b Both 12e1 and 12e2 are of the Molopo River bed itself which is more densely vegetated. 12e1 is of the lower reaches while 12e2 is a sample of the upper reaches of the MolopoRiver above │Hus in Fig. 1.2. 42 Appendix 9: Large stock unit (LSU) equivalents of grazing animals. Compiled from Table 2 in Anonymous (1984). Kind of animal Cattle Sex and phase of production Calf, unweaned Young animal, unshed Female or ox, 2-tooth & older Bull, 2-tooth and older Woolled sheep Lamb, unweaned Young sheep, unshed Sheep, 2-tooth and older Ram, 2-tooth and older Dual-purpose sheep Lamb, unweaned Young sheep, unshed Sheep, 2-tooth and older Ram, 2-tooth and older Mutton sheep Lamb, unweaned Young sheep, unshed Sheep, 2-tooth and older Ram, 2-tooth and older Karakul sheep Lamb, unweaned Young sheep, unshed Sheep, 2-tooth and older Ram, 2-tooth and older Boer goats Lamb, unweaned Young goat, unshed Goat, 2-tooth and older Ram, 2-tooth and older Angora goats Lamb, unweaned Young goat, unshed Goat, 2-tooth and older Ram, 2-tooth and older Shetland ponies Foal, unweaned Young animal, unshed Animal with 2 permanent incisors & older Large ponies & donkies Foal, unweaned Young animal, unshed Animal with 2 permanent incisors & older Light horses & mules Foal, unweaned Young animal, unshed Number of LSU’s equivalent to one animal 0.50 0.75 1.10 1.50 0.05 0.12 0.14 0.19 0.08 0.15 0.17 0.25 0.05 0.13 0.15 0.23 0.05 0.13 0.14 0.20 0.08 0.15 0.17 0.22 0.04 0.09 0.11 0.15 0.15 0.30 0.40 0.25 0.50 0.65 0.30 0.60 Medium draft horses Heavy draft horses Ostriches Elephants Giraffe Eland Buffalo Zebra Kudu Animal with 2 permanent incisors & older Foal, unweaned Young animal, unshed Mare with 2 permanent incisors & older Stallion or gelding with 2 permanent incisors & older Foal, unweaned Young animal, unshed Animal with 2 permanent incisors & older Stallion or gelding with 2 permanent incisors & older Chick Young bird Mature bird Calf, unweaned Weaned and older Calf, unweaned Weaned and older Calf, unweaned Female animal, weaned and older Male animal, weaned and older Calf, unweaned Female animal, weaned and older Male animal, weaned and older Foal, unweaned Weaned and older Calf, unweaned Female animal, weaned and older Male animal, weaned and older 1.00 0.25 0.50 1.20 1.30 0.50 1.00 1.50 1.60 0.12 0.26 0.37 1.00 4.00 0.75 1.50 0.50 1.00 1.30 0.50 1.00 1.20 0.50 0.70 0.20 0.40 0.50 ANONYMOUS 1984. Conservation of Agricultural Resources Act, 1983 (Act 43 of 1983). Government Gazette 227(9238), 25 May, 1984. Appendix 10: Checklist and abundance classes of plant species collected by John Acocks in May 1952 at two localities in and adjacent to Riemvasmaak and re-surveyed by the National Botanical Institute’s survey team in January 1995 (see Appendix 8 for photostation details). Taxonomic nomenclature is the same as for Appendix 3. Abundance classes are detailed in Acocks (1988): ab = abundant; c = common; f = frequent; ff = fairly frequent; o = occasional; r = rare. l = local; ll = very local. A capital letter for an abuncance class indicates that a species is conspicuous in the landscape. + and - indicate more or less; ↓↑ are lower and upper slopes respectively, e = rocky krantz; N = North slope; s = on shallow soil; T = under tree; t = under shrub; W = river banks; w = dry water course. Researcher(s) Date Site or photostation No. SPECIES Abutilon angulatum Abutilon pycnodon Acacia erioloba Acacia mellifera Adenia repanda Adenolobus gariepensis Aizoon asbestinum Aizoon schellenbergii Aloe dichotoma Amaranthus praetermissus Anthephora ramosa Antherothamnus pearsonii Aptosimum lineare Aptosimum marlothii Aptosimum spinescens Aridaria sp. Aristida adscensionis Aristida engleri Aristida congesta Acocks 21/5/52 1647 r r oR r+ R r r llf ff ff NBI 25/1/95 21 Acocks 22/5/95 1648 NBI 27/1/95 25 ABUNDANCE CLASS F-↑ o or ff+ O+↓s FF-↓s rs oR R ff↓ ff+↓ R R r ff.llf FF-s f↓ lff oo r c ff.lF+ r Barleria rigida Berkheya canescens Berkheya spinosissima Blepharis acaulis Blepharis furcata Boerhaavia sp. Boscia albitrunca Boscia foetida Bowiea volubilis Bulbostylis hispidula Cadaba aphylla Cenchrus ciliaris Ceraria namaquensis Ceterach cordatum Chamaesyce inaequilatera Cheilanthes deltoidea Chloris virgata Cleome oxyphylla Cleome angustifolia Coccinea rehmannii Codon royeni Commiphora oblanceolata (?=gracilifrondosa) Commiphora gracilifrondosa Corbichonia decumbens Crassula ausensis Cucumis saggitatus Curoria decidua Cyperus sp. Danthoniopsis ramosa Diandrochloa namaquensis Digitaria sp. Dipcadi glaucum Dyerophytum africanum Ehretia rigida Enneapogon cenchroides Enneapogon desvauxii Enneapogon scaber Eragrostis annulata Eragrostis biflora Eragrostis lehmanniana Eragrostis nindensis o o o o↓ r↓ o ff r r R o R+ o r↑ r+ r+ r llab r ff o.FF+N res r ffe llab↓s r↑ or fe o o r ct ff R+ o r r+ r+ R FF or lo ooes o↑ o llc↓W ffe o r o ff f ff o o+ f llo↓W ff.llf r or ff f c lc res llab↓W r↓ r o c r Eragrostis planiculmis Eragrostis porosa Eragrostis rotifer Eriospermum sp. Euclea undulata Euphorbia avosmontana Euphorbia decussata (?=rhombifolia) Euphorbia gregaria Euphorbia rhombifolia Ficus ingens Forsskaolea candida Geigaria filifolia Geigaria vigintisquamea Gisekia pharnaceoides Gladiolus sp. Grewia flava Helichrysum tomentosulum Hermannia spinosa Hermannia stricta Hermannia vestitia Hibiscus elliottiae Hibiscus fleckii Hoodia sp. Indigofera heterotricha Indigofera pungens Kissenia capensis Lepturella capensis1 Leucosphaera bainesii Limeum aethiopicum Limeum myosotis Lophiocarpus polystachys Lotononis crumanina Lotononis platicarpa Lycium cinereum Lycium oxycarpum Lycium prunis-spinosa Maerua gilgii Maytenus heterophylla Melhania didyma Melhania genistifolium Melinis repens Microloma incanum lf o FF+ e c o oo- llab↓W lab llC↓W llab↓W rs lR+N o O.FF+↓ or O-↓ f- vrs ab↑ lf↓ f f r r ff o+ o+ r r r o Fr ff o r ff+ ff o r↑ f-↓ r↓ ff↑ ff ff↑ r ff r o o↓W o+ ff+ lff↓ o↓ ff r r r ff o↓ r.o+s r or r↑ o↑ ff r ff r r+ Mollugo cerviana Monechma genistifolium Monechma spartioides Montinia caryophyllacea Nolletia gariepina Nymannia capensis Oldenlandia filifolia Ornithogalum sp. Ornithoglossum viride Osteospermum microcarpum Ozoroa concolor (?=crassinervia) Ozoroa crassinervia Panicum arbusculum Panicum sp. (?scopelophilum = ?arbusculum) Pappea capensis Peliostomum leucorrhizum Pentzia argentea Petalidium oblongifolium Phyllanthus burchellii Pollichia campestris Polygala leptophylla Portulaca oleracea Protasparagus cooperi Protasparagus retrofractus Protasparagus suaveolens (?=retrofractus) Pteronia sp. Putterlickia pyracantha Rhigozum trichotomum Rhus populifolia Rhyncosia longiflora Rogeria longiflora Salsola aphylla Salsola tuberculata Sarcocaulon sp. Sarcostemma viminale Schotia afra Schmidtia kalahariensis Scirpus sp. Senecio longiflora Senecio sisymbrifolius Sericocoma avolans ff+ r r ff+ r r lc o↓ F-↓ r+ oe r o r o o o o R R r o+ o R+ r ff R o F- Rw ffre ff↓W oe re Rw lo o r r r s r o r ot lfe o r r+ o↓ Oot ff↑ r O ff+ e f o o r r o r r o r r↓ lff↓ O r llab↓W r fe ff- r O r r Sesamum capense Setaria appendiculata Setaria verticillata Sisyndite spartea Solanum capense Solanum catombelense Stachys burchelliana Stipagrostis anomela Stipagrostis ciliata Stipagrostis obtusa Stipagrostis hochstetteriana Stipagrostis namaquensis Stipagrostis uniplumis Sutera ramosissima Sutera tomentosa Tephrosia dregeana Tetragonia arbuscula Thesium lineatum Trianthema parvifolia Tribulis cristatus Tribulis terrestris Trichodesma africanum Triraphis ramosissima Zygophyllum dregeanum Zygophyllum gilfillani Zygophyllym simplex Zygophyllym suffruticosum TOTAL NO. OF SPECIES 1 r o+ F r F lf r r o ff f r r r r o llabT r r o r ff↑ lf↓ llf↓ lf↓ or F.lCff-e r o rt↓ r o llffo o F.lC- r r f o e lc r o+ r r o o↓ r r+ 70 50 lf↓ lf 131 63 Lepturella capensis is not listed in Arnold & De Wet (1993). REFERENCES ACOCKS J P H 1988. The veld types of South Africa. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 57, 1-146. 3rd ed. ARNOLD T H & DE WET B C 1993. Plants of southern Africa: names and distribution. Memoirs of the Botanical Survey of South Africa 62, 1-825. View publication stats