Figure 1. Infrastructure map
GAENP boundary
AllInland - coastal lowlandInland - uplandUpland - coastal lowland
Figure 2. Upland-lowland interfaces
Forest - FynbosGrassland - Forest
Nama Karoo – Fynbos
Grassland – Forest - FynbosGrassland – Fynbos
Thicket – Forest Thicket – Forest - Fynbos
GAENP boundary
Thicket – Fynbos Thicket – Grassland Thicket – Grassland - ForestThicket – Grassland - Forest - Fynbos
Thicket – Grassland - Fynbos Thicket – Nama Karoo Thicket – Nama Karoo - Fynbos Thicket – Nama Karoo - GrasslandThicket – Nama Karoo – Grassland - Fynbos
N
Forest - FynbosGrassland - Forest
Nama Karoo – Fynbos
Grassland – Forest - FynbosGrassland – Fynbos
Thicket – Forest Thicket – Forest - Fynbos
GAENP boundary
Thicket – Fynbos Thicket – Grassland Thicket – Grassland - ForestThicket – Grassland - Forest - Fynbos
Thicket – Grassland - Fynbos Thicket – Nama Karoo Thicket – Nama Karoo - Fynbos Thicket – Nama Karoo - GrasslandThicket – Nama Karoo – Grassland - Fynbos
NN
Figure 3. Biome interfaces
Sundays Basin – Sundays Inland
Sundays Basin – Zuurberg Montain
Zuurberg Montain– Sundays Inland
GAENP boundary
N
Sundays Basin – Sundays Inland
Sundays Basin – Zuurberg Montain
Zuurberg Montain– Sundays Inland
GAENP boundary
Sundays Basin – Sundays Inland
Sundays Basin – Zuurberg Montain
Zuurberg Montain– Sundays Inland
GAENP boundary
NN
Figure 4. Thicket interfaces
GAENP boundary
Riverine Corridors (North/South)
N
GAENP boundary
Riverine Corridors (North/South)
NN
Figure 5. Riverine corridors linking inland and coastal biotas
Riverine corridors (East/West)
GAENP boundary
N
Riverine corridors (East/West)
GAENP boundary
NN
Figure 6. Riverine corridors through mountainous terrain
Figure 7. Algoa dunefield with 500 m buffered inland boundary
GAENP boundaryBuffered dune (500m)
GAENP boundaryBuffered dune (500m)
Figure 8: Algoa dunefield with 2000 m buffered inland boundary
GAENP boundaryDrought refuges
Figure 9. Rainfall gradients as drought refuges in drought-prone habitat
GAENP boundaryAll processes
Figure 10. All ecological and evolutionary processes combined
Figure 11. Current Land use in the planning domain
Natural
Grazed
Agriculture
Settlement
Natural Estuary
Figure 12. The current extent of alien invasive plants
High density
Medium density
Low density
GAENP Boundary
IntactRestorableTransformed
Figure 13. Restorability of the landscape
Figure 14. Composite threat weighting for each land class
Darlington Dam
Medium
High
Future threat weightings
Figure 15. The distribution of grazing threats in the landscape
Darlington Dam
Medium
High
Threat weightings
Low
Figure 16. The distribution of cultivation threats in the landscape
Darlington Dam
Medium
High
Threat weightingsLow
Figure 17. The distribution of potential human settlement-related disturbance in the landscape
Darlington Dam
Medium
High
Threat weightingsLow
Figure 18. The distribution of potential alien threats in the landscape
Darlington Dam
Medium
High
Threat weightings
Low
0 0
5
8
6
7
3 3 3
8
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
<=10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100
Overall Target as Proportion of Extant Vegetation (%)
Num
ber o
f Lan
d C
lass
es
Figure 19. The percentage of intact area required by each landclass to meet its’ overall target
GAENP boundary
IntactRestorableTransformed
Figure 20 The extent of transformation of the spatially defined landscape processes in the GAENP planning domain
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
14
3
2
56
7 8
GAENP boundary
Existing and earmarked reservesStatutory reservesNon-statutory reservesEarmarked, with fundingEarmarked, without funding
Figure 21. The existing reserve system (both statutory and non-statutory) and land earmarked for purchase within the GAENP planning domain. (Numbers on the map are referred to in the text.)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
CoastalForest
InlandForest
MesicThicket
XericThicket
Grassland Fynbos Nama-Karoo
DunePioneer
Riparian Estuarine
Primary land classes
% C
ontr
ibut
ion
to p
atte
rn ta
rget
Statutory reservesNon-statutory reservesEarmarked, with fundingEarmarked, without funding
60%
308%
85%
41%
132%
224%
77%
188%
116%
0%
Figure 22. Effectiveness of the existing and earmarked reserve system for the protection of primary level land classes.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11121314 15161718 1920212223 24252627 28 293031 32333435 36 373839 40414243
Land classes
% C
ontr
ibut
ion
to p
atte
rn ta
rget
135%
82%
46%
0%30
8%
0%48
%5%
42%
165%
235%
0%32
%
0% 2%13
5%
0%92
%30
4%
4%11
5%
62%
6%34
%
35%
c18
%11
% 20%
0% 3%
144%
114%
249%
175%
84%
188%
55%
0% 0%
117%
114%
224%
171%
FOREST1. Kaba Forest2. Nonqausa Forest3. Springmount Forest4. Alexandria Bontveld5. Tootabie Forest
MESIC THICKET6. Wycombe Thicket7. Boknes Thicket8. Kromrivier Thicket9. Ncanaga Thicket10 Woody Cape Thicket11. Enon Thicket12. Olienhout Bontveld13. Paterson Bontveld14. Zuney Bontveld15. Congoskraal Bontveld16. Suurkop Bontveld17. Coega Bontveld18. Melkhoutboom Bontveld19. Kruisrivier Bontveld20. Colchester Strandveld
XERIC THICKET21. Kabouga Thicket22. Coerney Spekboomveld23. Vaalfontein Spekboomveld24. Witrug Spekboomveld25. Darlington Noorsveld26. Ann’s Villa Noorsveld27. Addo Bontveld28. Kleinpoort Bontveld29. Wapadskloof Bontveld30. Ongegund Bontveld
GRASSLAND31. Round Hill Sour Grassland32. Modderfontein Shrubby Grassland
FYNBOS33. Zuurberg Proteoid Fynbos34. Spring Vale Grassy Fynbos35. Klein Winterhoek GrassyFynbos36. Klipvlei Asteraceous Fynbos
NAMA KAROO37. Crown Hill Broken Veld38. Wolwefontein Pentziaveld39. Klipfontein Pentziaveld
AZONAL VEGETATION40. Algoa Dunefield41. Kirkwood Riparian Woodland42. Waterford Riparian Woodland43. Sunday’s Salt Marsh
Statutory reservesNon-statutory reservesEarmarked, with fundingEarmarked, without funding
Figure 23 Effectiveness of the existing and earmarked reserve system for the protection of secondary level land classes.
0102030405060708090100
Aar
dvar
k A
ardw
olf
Afri
can
elep
hant
A
frica
n w
ild c
at
Bat
-ear
ed fo
x B
lack
rhin
ocer
os
Bla
ck w
ildeb
eest
B
lack
-bac
ked
jack
al
Blu
e du
iker
B
row
nhy
aena
B
urch
ell’s
zebr
a B
ushb
uck
Bus
hpig
C
ape
buffa
lo
Cap
e cl
awle
ss o
tter
Cap
e fo
x C
ape
mou
ntai
n ze
bra
Car
acal
Cha
cma
babo
on
Che
etah
C
omm
on d
uike
r E
land
G
rey
rheb
ok
Gry
sbok
H
ippo
pota
mus
H
oney
bad
ger
Klip
sprin
ger
Kud
u Le
opar
d Li
on
Mou
ntai
n re
edbu
ck Orib
i P
orcu
pine
R
ed h
arte
bees
t R
eedb
uck
Ser
val
Sm
all s
potte
d ca
t S
potte
dhy
aena
S
potte
d-n
ecke
d ot
ter
Spr
ingb
ok
Ste
enbo
kV
erve
tm
onke
y W
arth
og
Wild
dog
Mammal species
Statutory reservesNon-statutory reservesEarmarked, with fundingEarmarked, without funding
% C
ontr
ibut
ion
to p
atte
rn ta
rget
Figure 24 Effectiveness of the existing and earmarked reserve system for the protection of larger mammals.
Landscape-level classes
% C
ontr
ibut
ion
to p
roce
ss ta
rget
s
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Biome interfaces
Thicket interfaces
North-south riverine corridors
East-westriverine
corridors
Dunefield + 500 m
Dunefield + 2000 m
Drought refugerainfall gradient
Statutory reservesNon-statutory reservesEarmarked, with fundingEarmarked, without funding
45%48%
51%
61%
82%
64%
37%
Figure 25. Effectiveness of the existing and earmarked reserve system for the protection of landscape level processes.
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
14
3
2
56
7 8
GAENP boundaryExisting and earmarked reserves
Biome and upland lowland interfacesIntactRestorableTransformed
Figure 26 The distribution of upland-lowland and biome interfaces in relation to the existing and earmarked reserve system. Numbers on the map are referred to in the text.
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
14
3
2
56 7 8
GAENP boundaryExisting and earmarked reserves
Thicket interfacesIntactRestorableTransformed
Figure 27. The distribution of thicket interfaces in relation to the existing and earmarked reserve system. Numbers on the map are referred to in the text.
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
14
3
2
56
7 8
GAENP boundaryExisting and earmarked reserves
North South riverine corridorsIntactRestorableTransformed
East West riverine corridorsIntactRestorableTransformed
Figure 28. The distribution of north-south and east-west riverine corridors in relation to the existing and earmarked reserve system. Numbers on the map are referred to in the text.
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
14
3
2
56
7 8
GAENP boundaryExisting and earmarked reservesBuffered dune (2000m)Buffered dune (500m)
Figure 29. The distribution of sand-movement corridors in relation to the existing and earmarked reserve system. Numbers on the map are referred to in the text.
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
14
3
2
56
7 8
GAENP boundaryExisting and earmarked reservesDrought refuges
Figure 30. The distribution of drought refuge rainfall gradients in relation to the existing and earmarked reserve system. Numbers on the map are referred to in the text.
Initial ReserveNegotiated ReserveMandatory ReserveExcluded
Site Irreplaceability1 (Totally Irreplaceable)>0.8 - <1>0.6 - 0.8>0.4 - 0.6>0.2 - 0.4 >0 - 0.2IRREPL = 0
Figure 31. Patterns of irreplaceability for achieving land class targets in the GAENP planning domain
Initial ReserveNegotiated ReserveMandatory ReserveExcluded
Site Irreplaceability1 (Totally Irreplaceable)>0.8 - <1>0.6 - 0.8>0.4 - 0.6>0.2 - 0.4 >0 - 0.2IRREPL = 0
Figure 32. Patterns of irreplaceability for achieving mammals targets in the GAENP planning domain
Initial ReserveNegotiated ReserveMandatory ReserveExcluded
Site Irreplaceability1 (Totally Irreplaceable)>0.8 - <1>0.6 - 0.8>0.4 - 0.6>0.2 - 0.4 >0 - 0.2IRREPL = 0
Figure 33. Patterns of irreplaceability for achieving process targets in the GAENP planning domain
Initial ReserveNegotiated ReserveMandatory ReserveExcluded
Site Irreplaceability1 (Totally Irreplaceable)>0.8 - <1>0.6 - 0.8>0.4 - 0.6>0.2 - 0.4 >0 - 0.2IRREPL = 0
Figure 34. Patterns of irreplaceability across the GAENP planning domain after the selection of statutory reserves (Step 1).
Initial ReserveNegotiated ReserveMandatory ReserveExcluded
Site Irreplaceability1 (Totally Irreplaceable)>0.8 - <1>0.6 - 0.8>0.4 - 0.6>0.2 - 0.4 >0 - 0.2IRREPL = 0
Figure 35. Patterns of irreplaceability across the GAENP planning domain after the selection of farm properties containing processes (Step 2).
Initial ReserveNegotiated ReserveMandatory ReserveExcluded
Site Irreplaceability1 (Totally Irreplaceable)>0.8 - <1>0.6 - 0.8>0.4 - 0.6>0.2 - 0.4 >0 - 0.2IRREPL = 0
Figure 36. Patterns of irreplaceability across the GAENP planning domain after the selection of rivers and the GAENP-MPA (Steps 3 and 4).
Initial ReserveNegotiated ReserveMandatory ReserveExcluded
Site Irreplaceability1 (Totally Irreplaceable)>0.8 - <1>0.6 - 0.8>0.4 - 0.6>0.2 - 0.4 >0 - 0.2IRREPL = 0
Figure 37. The notional conservation system for the GAENP planning domain derived from the set of criteria followed in Steps 1-6.
Implementation priority
Vulnerability
Irrep
lace
abili
ty
I
III
II
IV
Figure 38. Irreplaceability-vulnerability graph used to derive implementation priority.
Conservation prioritiesIIIIIV
Figure 39. Map showing implementation priorities within the GAENP planning domain.
Top Related