Technologies

Wetland rehabilitation [South Africa]

technologies_1377 - South Africa

Completeness: 67%

1. General information

1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:

Bronkhorst Frik

Mpumalanga Parks Board

South Africa

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1112, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Authority Board (MTPA) - South Africa', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

To rehabilitate/stabilise distorted wetlands as close as possible to its original state/function.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Two wetland rehabilitation sites that are part of a large wetland area (15 and 10ha).

Purpose of the Technology: The purpose of the rehabilitation work was to stabilise, landscape and re-vegetate distorted areas to again fulfil their original function in the catchment.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Maintenance included follow-up on re-seeding distorted areas and alien plant control (cut down plants and treads strips with roundup). Structure maintenance (such as gabions, roads) is also done.
Fire management to protect and manage the area of rehabilitation until such time as it has proved to be stabilised. Leave for ± 3 years before considering burning.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

South Africa

Region/ State/ Province:

Mpumalanga

Further specification of location:

Mpumalanga

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, specify area covered (in km2):

0.3

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 0.1-1 km2
Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 0.3 km2.

Wetland rehabilitation work has been executed on two wetlands in the upper catchment of the Blyde River in Mpumalanga.

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • through projects/ external interventions
Comments (type of project, etc.):

Subjective inputs/discussions with specialists in variety of disciplines (scientist, botanists, hydrologists, managers, ecologists)

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

  • conserve ecosystem

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Grazing land

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:
  • Ranching
  • game
Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Afforestation: Pine plantations destroys diversity, also has a major effect on quality & quantity of water run-off, mining opencast activities

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Production of wood/timber, job creation

Ranching: Game occur natural in this area/nature reserve

Grazingland comments: Area in which these two wetlands are situated is proclaimed conservation land. The aim is to manage the area in an as natural as possible condition as it was historically.

Type of grazing system comments: Area in which these two wetlands are situated is proclaimed conservation land. The aim is to manage the area in an as natural as possible condition as it was historically.

Constraints of nature reserve: Fire management/adjacent to pine plantations

Longest growing period in days: 240; Longest growing period from month to month: Oct - May

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • area closure (stop use, support restoration)
  • wetland protection/ management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

vegetative measures

vegetative measures

structural measures

structural measures

Comments:

Main measures: vegetative measures, structural measures, management measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

soil erosion by water

  • Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
physical soil deterioration

physical soil deterioration

  • Pu: loss of bio-productive function due to other activities
water degradation

water degradation

  • Ha: aridification
Comments:

Main causes of degradation: industrial activities and mining, education, access to knowledge and support services (Mineral affairs don’t inspect and allows anything.), Lack of enforcement of legislat./authority (2.1.3.2 Government has not enough authority), Mining

Secondary causes of degradation: Forestry

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'content_type': 'image/jpeg', 'preview_image': '/media/17/d/17dd7b0a-56b1-47f6-8b35-f408269700f5.jpg', 'key': 'Technical drawing', 'value': '/media/6c/0/6c0ccb32-21f0-4fa6-9a77-4aa69ab6b20c.jpg', 'template': 'raw'}
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Wetland rehabilitation

Location: Blyde canyon. Mpumalanga

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, control of concentrated runoff: retain / trap, improvement of ground cover, increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, control of fires, fire management

Secondary technical functions: control of concentrated runoff: drain / divert, reduction of slope length, increase of surface roughness, increase in organic matter, water spreading, increase in soil fertility

Vegetative measure: contour
Vegetative material: G : grass
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.1
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.5

Vegetative measure: graded strips
Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass


Grass species: Eragrostis, Stiburus, Cynodon

Gradient along the rows / strips: 3.00%

Diversion ditch/ drainage
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.5
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.5
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 60

Structural measure: road
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.15
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 120

Structural measure: filling heddle

Structural measure: bunds/banks: contour
Vertical interval between structures (m): 0.15
Spacing between structures (m): 0.15

Construction material (earth): Contour muttrocking

Construction material (stone): At Heddlespruit: gabions & stonewall to spread high velocity runoff

Construction material (concrete): Strip road with 1m interval openings to allow for draining

Construction material (other): Heddle filling: pine logs, hay bales, wood chips

Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.

Other type of management: Fire management

Author:

Frik Bronkhorst

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

rand

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

8.0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

4.00

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Hydro-seeding Directly after landscaping/levelling
2. Hand seeding Directly after landscaping/levelling
3. Harvesting & replanting of vlei grass Directly after landscaping/levelling
4. Scarifying forming Directly after landscaping/levelling
5. Horizontal chills Directly after landscaping/levelling
6. Gabion building March
7. Landscaping March
8. Muttrocking April
9. Replanting grasses April
10. Hydroseeding April/May
11. Tracers and firebreaks (to secure rehabilitation work) Autumn/winter

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit Total costs per input % of costs borne by land users
Labour Rehabilitate wetland ha 1.0 56000.0 56000.0 80.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 56000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 7000.0
Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 12 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Fire protection June /Once a year
2. Gabion maintenance /Ad hoc
3. Hydroseeding September/Once
4. Gabion maintenance Ad hoc/Ad hoc
5. Road maintenance Ad hoc/Ad hoc
6. Tracers & firebreaks Autumn / Annual

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labour: By using machinery where applicable, work can be done less expensive.
Weather conditions: High rainfall areas, delays work, can destroy half done/partially done processes.

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

2500.00

Agro-climatic zone
  • humid

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil depth on average: Very shallow for Watervalspruit wetland and moderatly deep for Heddlespruit wetland

Soil texture: Coarse for Watervalspruit wetland and fine for Heddlespruit wetland

Topsoil organic matter: Medium for Heddlespruit wetland and low for Watervalspruit wetland

Soil fertility is high for Watervalspruit wetland and very low for Heddlespruit wetland

Soil drainage / infiltration is good for Watervalspruit wetland and medium for Heddlespruit wetland

Soil water storage capacity is very high for Heddlespruit wetland and medium for Watervalspruit wetland

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Relative level of wealth:
  • very poor
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

(State budget limitations (Parks board)).

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:
  • state
  • company

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Other socio-economic impacts

Employment

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

Approx. 100 people for 4 month employed

Socio-cultural impacts

conflict mitigation

worsened
improved

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

water quantity

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Only during rainy seasons, prevent water

excess water drainage

reduced
improved
Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased

soil cover

reduced
improved

soil loss

increased
decreased
Other ecological impacts

soil fertility

decreased
icreased

biodiversity

diminished
enhanced

Conservation

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

Distracted wetland areas on reserve rehabilitated

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

reliable and stable stream flows in dry season

reduced
increased

downstream flooding

increased
reduced

downstream siltation

increased
decreased

groundwater/ river pollution

increased
reduced

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Comments:

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: 3.4.2.4 Mpumalanga is the first. A proposal for the Lowveld has been submitted and also D. Lindley.
Moderate increase; next year there will be another wetland in the project.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Hydroseeding

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Provides quick basal cover to limit erosion
Cement strip-road

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Almost no maintenance necessary
Stabilization of erosion

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Gabions well build, minimal maintenance

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Landscaping of stabilized areas Must be done to re-shape area - no solution
Access roads Correct choice of season for construction phase

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Business plan: Wetland rehabilitation, Blyde River Catchment

Available from where? Costs?

Mpumalanga Parks Board, P.O. Box 511, Graskop 1270,Lydenburg,South Africa

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules