You are on page 1of 149

1

FOSAF

THE FEDERATION OF SOUTHERN AFRICAN FLYFISHERS

PROCEEDINGS OF THE
TH
13 YELLOWFISH WORKING GROUP
CONFERENCE

STERKFONTEIN DAM, HARRISMITH


06 08 MARCH 2009

Edited by Peter Arderne

PRINTING SPONSORED BY:

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


2

CONTENTS
Page
Participants 3
Chairmans Opening Address Peter Mills 4
Water volumes of SA dams: A global perspective Louis De Wet 6
The Strontium Isotope distribution in Water & Fish Wikus Jordaan 13
Overview of the Mine Drainage Impacts in the West Rand Goldfield Mariette 16
Liefferink
Adopt-a-River Programme: Development of an implementation plan Ramogale 25
Sekwele
Report on the Genetic Study of small scaled yellowfishes Paulette Bloomer 26
The Biology of Smallmouth & Largemouth yellowfish in Lake Gariep Bruce Ellender 29
& Olaf Weyl
Likely response of Smallmouth yellowfish populations to fisheries development Olaf 33
Weyl
Early Development of Vaal River Smallmouth Yellowfish - Daksha Naran 36
Body shape changes & accompanying habitat shifts: observations in life cycle of 48
Labeobarbus marequensis in the Luvuvhu River Paul Fouche
Alien Fish Eradication in the Cape rivers: Progress with the EIA Dean Impson 65
Yellowfish Telemetry: Update on the existing study Gordon OBrien 67
Bushveld Smallscale yellowfish (Labeobarbus polylepis): Aspects of the Ecology & 68
Population Mananagement Gordon OBrien
Protected River Ecosystems Study: Bloubankspruit, Skeerpoort & Magalies River & 71
Elands River (Mpumalanga) Hylton Lewis & Gordon OBrien
Legislative review: Critical review of the legislative framework for angling Morne 74
Viljoen
Smallmouth yellowfish: Status in the Great Kei Catchment Unathi Tshayingca 86
Status of yellowfish populations in Kwazulu-Natal Rob Karssing 87
Free State Status Report Johan Hardy 91
Yellowfish Regional Report for the Western Cape 2008/9 Martine Jordaan & Dean 93
Impson
River Monitoring in Limpopo Province 2009- Mick Angliss & Stan Rodgers 96
Gauteng Report Piet Muller 101
Northern Cape Regional Report Carl Nel 103
Yellowfish populations & RHP programme report in NW Province 2009 :
Part 1: Yellowfish Population Status Report Daan Buijs 111
Part 2: RHP Report Jan.2005 to March 2009 - Hermien Roux & Daan Buijs 117
Main Issues/Concerns Raised & Resolutions taken at the Conference 149

Printing sponsored by:

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


3

PARTICIPANTS

NAME ORGANISATION PHONE E-MAIL


Angliss, Mick Environmental Affairs, Limpopo 015-2959300 fish@pixie.co.za

Arderne, Peter FOSAF Northvaal & YWG secretary 083 4577478 mwardern@mweb.co.za

Bloomer, Prof.Paulette University of Pretoria 012 4203259 Paukette.bloomer@up.ac.za

Buijs, Daan NW Prov. Conservation Services 083 3202727 Dbuijs@nwpg.gov.za

Buthelezi, Siyabonga Gauteng Nature Conservation 072 1548863 Siyabonga.Buthelezi@gauteng.gov.


za
De Wet, Dr Louis Waterlab 012-3491044 ldewet@waterlab.co.za

Du Toit, Thomas SAVE 082 4196526 tom.savethevaal@gmail.com

Filter, Horst Guide & Land owner 034 9950017 none

Fouche, Paul University of Venda 072 2831391 psofouche@vodamail.co.za

Gerber, Ruan University of Johannesburg 011-5593442 aquarium@uj.ac..za

Hardy, Johan Free State Nature Conservation 083 2312768 jchardio@telkomsa.net

Hinrichsen, Etienne Aqua Eco 082 8221236 aquaeco@telkomsa.net

Jordaan, Martine CapeNature 021-8668019 mjordaan@capenature.co.za

Jordaan, Wikus Council for Geosciences 082 8632935 wikusj@geoscience.org.za

Impson, Dean CapeNature 082 4140020 impsond@capenature.co.za

Karssing, Rob EKZN Wildlife & YWG KZN 073 3794323 karssinr@kznwildlife.com

Lewis, Hylton ERYCA & EWT 082 9075164 hylton.fish@gmail.com

Liefferink, Mariette Fed. of Sustainable Development 073 2314893 mariette@pea.org.za

McGinn, Andrew Komati Gorge 017-8431497 komatigorge@telkomsa.net

Mills, Peter YWG chairman & FOSAF 082 5557972 peterjm@mweb.co.za

Mincher, Bill FOSAF 011-8878787 razorspike@mweb.co.za

Muller, Piet Gauteng Nature Conservation 072 1105075 mullerpa@absamail.co.za

Naran, Daksha SAIAB 046-6035800 d.naran@ru.ac.za

Nel, Carl Northern Cape YWG 072 1997254 webmaster@ncywg.co.za

OBrien, Gordon Zoology Dept. Johannesburg Univ. 084 5804161 gordono@uj.ac.za

Ramoejane, Mpho SAIAB 046-6035800


Rodgers, Stan Environmental Affairs, Limpopo 015-2959300 RodgersSSM@ledet..gov.za

Roux, Hermien NW Prov. Conservation Services 082 4665966 hroux@nwpg.gov.za

Sekwele, Ramogale DWAF 082 5742234 sekweler@dwaf.gov.za

Sinclair, Trevor Sundowner Adventures 083 4140391 sundown@iafrica.com

Sinclair, Wayne Sundowner Adventures 083 4140391 sundown@iafrica.com

Tempelhoff, Elize Beeld newspaper 083 3091192 eliset@beeld.com

Venter, Bernard Eco-Care Trust 083 4442790 BVenter@justice.gov.za

Viljoen, Morne Environmental lawyer 083 3953929 Morne.viljoen@consult-cls.com

Weaver, David Guide 083 3034230 eff@ohs.dorea.co.za

Weyl, Olaf SAIAB 046-6035834 o.weyl@saiab.ac.za


Wilkinson, Turner Guide 082 8815789 turner@altonet.co.za

Wolhuter, Dr Louis FOSAF 011 6784156 louiswolhuter@gmail.com

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


4

CHAIRMANS OPENING ADDRESS

Peter Mills
147 Mariana Ave, Clubview 0157. Email: peterjm@mweb.co.za

Welcome to the 13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference. Firstly, I would like to extend
a special word of welcome to one of the YWG founder members who is also a Vice
President of FOSAF, Bill Mincher. Also, welcome to Louis Wolhuter, a member of FOSAF
and long time supporter of the YWG. It is also good to see a large number of old faces
returning to this event year after year and showing your support. Of course it is good to see
a number of new faces as well. The backbone, to my mind, of this conference is the
presence and support by the Provincial Conservation Authorities. You at the coal face of
conservation and your inputs regarding river health is an important component to this
conference.

The YWG was started by people like Bill, Louis and Pierre De Villiers to encourage fishing
for yellowfish. We all know how popular this has become. But there has been a shift in
emphasis over the years to that of having a greater conservation focus and this is because of
a collection of complex matters. Surfing the web will show internationally acclaimed
organisations like Trout Unlimited have also moved into the conservation realm its a
natural progression because good fishing will only take place in a healthy environment and
with this comes conservation actions. Another reason for this shift in thinking in this
country is because of the rapid deterioration of our river systems. As fly anglers we are on
the water and witness, at first hand, the poor state of our rivers and waters. And, the
situation is worsening by the day. The main culprits of this problem are the agricultural
sector, mining and the local authorities who poorly manage the countrys waste water and
sewage systems. The latter issue is seemingly a national dilemma.

Anyone involved in conservation action will know that charity begins at home. In other
words, any change that comes about for the better is by individuals doing extraordinary
things within their own sphere of influence. We are fortunate therefore to have that kind of
person at the conference. There is Horst, fighting to protect his own land from prospecting
and mining. Not only is he working against mining companies but Government
Departments who feel their mandate supersedes everything else. There is CapeNature who
wishes to rehabilitate seriously degraded streams in the Western Cape region. Opposition is
coming from seemingly friendly sources. The Northern Cape YWG are actively involved in
encouraging river conservation by establishing river conservancies and preventing mining in
the stream bed of both the Orange and the Vaal Rivers. Mariette Liefferink is actively
working against the mining industry and Government who are polluting our ground water in
the Krugersdorp area. Free State Conservation have done much to conserve the Vaal by
establishing and supporting the Orange/Vaal River Yellowfish Management and
Conservation Association. And, Thomas du Toit, who with his team at SAVE are doing
much to keep the local authorities from polluting the Vaal because of poorly managed
sewage facilities. This is where change will happen, at local level, driven by people who are
affected by an environmental injustice and are willing to put in the extra effort to fix
whatever is wrong.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


5

The strength of the YWG is in our diversity. Our structure is informal, as is our
membership. We have no legal mandate to act but serve more as a forum to identify issues
and exchange ideas of how to rectify them. To this end the YWG has:

Produced the State of the Yellowfishes in South Africa 2007 report in


collaboration with the Water Research Commission.
Coordinated and endorsed various scientific studies including the genetic work done
in the Orange/Vaal system by the University of Pretoria.
We have been involved at various levels with projects already mentioned above.
We keep members in touch through the circulation of a monthly news letter, and
Hold this workshop/conference on an annual basis in order to keep everyone in
touch with those involved, in one or other way, with river conservation, aquatic
science/research and fishing.

In closing I would like to thank all of you who have come here to make presentations. It is
you that are involved at various levels and making that difference I have been talking about.
It is also here, with you, where much of the knowledge is held that can help make a
difference to our river and aquatic systems.

Finally, I would like to thank our sponsors; FOSAF for the ongoing sponsorship of the
YWG and for SAPPI for assisting with the publication of the conference proceedings. I
would also like to request that we all put our hands together for Peter Arderne, our secretary,
who really keeps things together and for arranging this event.

So, welcome to you all, thank you for supporting the YWG and I hope you all have fruitful
and enjoyable conference.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


6

WATER VOLUMES OF SOUTH AFRICAN DAMS: A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Louis De Wet
Waterlab (Pty) Ltd, P.O.Box 283 Persequor Technopark 0020 : ldewet@waterlab.co.za

We often hear in the media about large potential shortages of natural and artificial resources
such as fuel, electricity, water, etc. The sharp rises in the prices of these commodities are
often a great source of worry to the general public. Given the recent conditions prevailing in
South Africa with regards to sewage purification and waterborne diseases, one cannot help
to wonder how scarce and expensive water is going to become.

Due to the limited freshwater resources available currently in South Africa, and potable
water reservoirs increasingly being threatened by pollution, the awareness of water quality
amongst the general public has increased significantly. More often reports appear in the
media covering incidents of sewage-, industrial- or mining pollution, or spillages of
potentially toxic chemicals into the environment. We are bombarded by reports of fish- and
crocodile mortalities, as well as infant deaths in hospitals due to polluted water. The past
couple of months, the Cholera bacterium has been instrumental in a large number of deaths
in Zimbabwe and the northern parts of South Africa. Each one of us, whether we are a user
of water, or use water for sport, do have an obligation towards the water environment. This
is a cultural-educational process where we as parents need to transfer this knowledge and
compassion for water conservation to our children and grandchildren.

Again often we hear in the media how water-scarce South-Africa is, and how we should
conserve water, and invariably one asks oneself: how much water is actually in our
country? It would obviously put our situation in perspective when we compare our
situation with the state of dams and lakes in other countries and continents. Before we can
really appreciate the magnitude of water volumes, a number of concepts need to be
understood. A cube having the dimensions of 1X1X1cm or 1cm3 contains 1 milliliter of
water. For a cube to contain 1 liter of water, the dimensions thereof should be
10X10X10cm or 1000cm3. Should a tank containing 1000 liter be required, the dimensions
thereof could be 1X1X1m if a perfect cube is needed. In order to understand dimensions of
dams, volume needs to be expressed as billions of cubic meters. If a cube of
1000X1000X1000 cubic meters is constructed, it will contain 1 000 000 000 or 1 billion or
109 cubic meters of volume. This is equivalent to 1 000 000 000 000 or 1012 or 1 Tera-liter of
water. This may sound like an incredible amount of water, but this is more or less the
volume of water contained by Bloemhof Dam. To be precise, this dam contains
approximately 1.24 cubic kilometers of water at full capacity, and is ranked the 7th largest
dam or reservoir in South Africa (DWAF, 2008).

By comparison, the Vaal and Sterkfontein Dams are more or less double the size of
Bloemhof Dam, containing 2.60 and 2.62 km3 respectively, while the Gariep, which is the
largest dam in South Africa, contains 5.34 km3 of water (Table 1). This may sound a
reasonably impressive figure, and one could be assured that sufficient amounts of water are
available in South Africa, especially when all the volumes of dams are added together.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


7

According to Department of Water Affairs and Forestry figures, the total amount of water in
South African dams on 2009-02-02 was 34.12 km3, representing an average capacity of 81%.

Should we compare the amount of water available the amounts of water present on earth
(fresh- and seawater), the figures are quite astounding. The sea contains approximately 1 320
000 000 km3 of water, which represents 97.2% of all water present on earth. Glaciers, ice-
caps and the poles contain approximately 25 000 000 km3, or 1.8% of water, while 13 000
000km3 or 0.9% is found as subterranean or underground water. Freshwater in lakes, inland
seas, dams and rivers represent only 250 000km3 (0.02%), while the moisture in the
atmosphere represents a volume of 13 000km3 or 0.0001%.

Table 1: South-African man-made Dams (Reservoirs) ranked according to volume (Top 10)
Full Storage
Name of % Full on
River Province Capacity (FSC)
Reservoir 2009-02-02
(km3)
Gariep Orange Orange Free-State 5.3406 82.3
Vanderkloof Orange Orange Free-State 3.1713 82.6
Sterkfontein Nuwejaar Spruit Orange Free-State 2.6169 98.8
Vaal Vaal Orange Free-State 2.6035 79.0
Pongolapoort Phongolo Kwazulu-Natal 2.2671 71.5
Katse Malibamatso Lesotho 1.5191 100.8
Bloemhof Vaal Orange Free-State 1.2402 88.3
Mohale Sequnyane Lesotho 0.8571 63.5
Western-Cape
Theewaters Kloof Riviersonderend 0.4802 88.1
(winter rainfall)
Woodstock Tugela Kwazulu-Natal 0.3733 96.8
Reference: Department of Water Affairs and Forestry : Weekly State of the Reservoirs. Data available on internet: http://www.dwaf.gov.za

These figures would place the amount of water in South Africa in context to some extent on
a global scale. However, to really establish the magnitude (or lack of) in comparison with
that of other countries, let us start by flying over the northern border and visit the Cabora
Bassa Dam. This dam, which is ranked as the 17th largest man-made dam in the world,
contains 55.8 km3 of water, which is approximately 1.6 times more than the total amount of
water available in South Africa. Upstream of the Cabora Bassa Dam, Lake Kariba contains a
massive 180.6km3 of water, which places this dam in the 2nd place of largest dams in the
world. The largest man-made dam in the world is the Owen Falls dam in Uganda, which
contains 204km3 of water (Table 2). This, one would say, places the South-African water
situation well into perspective, when compared to other dams in other countries. However,
even the relatively large volume of the Owen Falls Dam pales into insignificance when the
volume of this dam is compared to the large natural lakes of the world.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


8

Table 2: Largest man-made dams (Reservoirs) ranked according to volume (Top 10)
Year Nominal
Name of Dam Reservoir River Country
Completed Volume (km3)
Owen Falls Victoria Lake White Nile Uganda 1954 [1]204, [2]205

Kariba Dam Kariba Lake Zambezi River Zimbabwe 1959 [1]180.6, [2]160.3

Bratsk
Hydroelectric Bratsk Resrvoir Angara River Russia 1964 169 169.3
Plant
Aswan High
Nasser Lake Nile River Egypt 1971 [1][2]157
Dam
Akosombo Dam Volta Lake Volta River Ghana 1965 [1]150, [2]148

Manicouagan Manicouagan
Daniel Johnson Canada 1968 [1]141.85, [2]141.7
Reservoir River
Guri Dam Guri Lake Caroni River Venezuela 1986 [1]135

W.A.C. Bennet
Williston Lake Peace River Canada 1967 [1]74.3
Dam
Krasnoyarsk
Hydroelectric --- Yenisei River Russia 1967 [1]73.3

Dam
Zeya Zeya Reservoir Zeya River Russia 1978 [1][2]68.4

[1] International Commission on Large Dams Database


[2] Avakayan, A.B. & Ovchinnikova, S.P. (1971). Foreign experience and techniques. Hydrotechnical Construction, 5(8) : 773-777.

The largest freshwater lake in the world is Lake Baikal in Russia, which contains
approximately 20% of all freshwater on earth. This is equivalent to a massive 23 000km3 of
water! This lake is also the deepest (Max Depth : 1 637m : Average Depth : 749m) and
second longest (630km) lake in the world. At a height of 1100 km above earth, this lake is
easily observed by satellite (Figure 1). The largest inland water-body is the Caspian sea in
Asia, which has a volume of approximately 78 200km3. However, this lake is a saltwater
lake, but is still considered per definition as a lake (Table 2). Lakes, in contrast to storage
dams, are created by natural phenomenon such as tectonic movements, glacial action, or
large tears in the earths crust. Lake Baikal, as well as Lakes Malawi and Tanganyika in the
rift valley of Africa, are examples of long and deep lakes formed in the crust of the earths
crust (Table 2).

The largest volume of freshwater is found in the northern hemisphere, while 60% of the
worlds lakes are found in Canada. The state of Manitoba harbors more than one hundred
thousand lakes, while Finland is known as the land of a thousand lakes in fact, there are
187 888 lakes in this country, of which 60 000 are considered as large lakes. It is interesting
to note from Table 2 that the top 2 largest lakes are in Russia, while the larger lakes are in
Canada and America. The two rift valley lakes, Malawi- and Tanganyika in Africa, count
amongst the largest in the world.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


9

610 km

Figure 1 Lake Baikal in Russia from a height of 1100km. (Photo : Google Earth)

To really comprehend the enormous size of Lake Baikal, in comparison with the absolute
relative water scarcity in our country, the outlines from this lake traced from a satellite photo
of this lake, super-imposed on South Africa, is shown in Figure 2. If we were blessed with a
Lake Baikal in South Africa, it would have stretched from Gariep Dam in the south, through
the Orange Free State to Johannesburg in the north. Indeed, our largest dams look like mere
specs when compared to the enormous size and volume of this lake. If we compare the
volume of Lake Baikal (23600 km3) with the total volume of water available in South Africa
(31.72 km3), this lake is a massive 744 times larger in volume.

One can only speculate what the positive social and economic impact on South Africa would
have been, should this lake have been present in our country.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


10

Table 2: Top 10 largest lakes in the world according to volume


Surface Maximum Volume
Lake Region Length (km)
Area (km2) Depth (m) (km3)
Azerbaijan-
Russia-
Caspian
Kazakhstan- 371 000 1 199 1 025 78 200
Sea[saline]
Turkmenistan-
Iran
Baikal Russia 31 500 636 1 637 23 600
Tanzania-
DRC-
Tanganyika 32 893 676 1 470 18 900
Burundi-
Zambia
Superior Canada U.S 82 414 616 406 12 100
[3]Michigan-
Canada U.S 117 702 710 282 8 458
Huron
Malawi-
Malawi Mozambique- 30 044 579 706 8 400
Tanzania
Vostok Russia 15 690 250 900-1000 5400 + 1600
Kenya-
Victoria Tanzania- 69 485 322 84 2 750
Uganda
Great Bear Canada 31 080 373 446 2 236
Great Slave Canada 28 930 480 614 2 090
Ontario Canada U.S 19 477 311 244 1 639

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


11

Outline of Lake Baikal

Vaal Dam

Bloemhof Dam

610 km

Van der Kloof Dam

Gariep Dam

Figure 2 South-Africa from a height of 1100km showing the relative size of Lake Baikal in
comparison with SA as whole and our largest dams. (Photo : Google Earth)

In our efforts to conserve water and supply this precious resource to a fast-growing
population, every effort is being made to contain as much possible water in dams. The
development of the Lesotho Highland scheme was aimed at supplementing water for the
demands of Gauteng with the highest human population, and an extremely high
concentration of industries and mines. However, even this source would not in the coming
future be sufficient to comply with the demands of this area. Any significant prospects of
the construction of large water storage dams in South Africa is indeed remote, and we are
indeed dependent on further developments of the Lesotho Highlands Scheme to supplement
our water supply.

Indeed most of us live in a world where a false sense of security is a driving factor. As long
as there is water in our taps, and the lights work, the real world outside does not really
matter. We dont want to think of these things, and do not try to place orders of magnitude
into perspective with our own small world in which we live. We are not lucky that we live in
a geographical area or climatic region (as the northern hemisphere) where we have a high
rainfall and sufficient storage dams. In addition, we are not blessed with the tectonic or
glacial action to provide us with great natural lakes. Even if we had only the smallest of the
Great Lakes, Lake Ontario, with a volume of 1 640km3 in South Africa, we never would
have a problem with water supply in our country. And yet still, the majority of us have this
dont-care attitude towards water. By letting the tap run when we brush our teeth or shave
in the morning, over-filling our baths, or using too much water when we wash our cars, we
exhibit a culture most of us practice without any thought or conscience. These things may
seem small, but the additive effect by a total population practicing the same bad habits

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


12

makes us as guilty as the mine, factory or sewage treatment works discharging untreated
effluent into a river.

We have indeed a cross-road in South-Africa as far as water availability and pollution is


concerned. There are a significant number of practical and socio-cultural factors which work
negatively against South-Africa and its population, and may in future become factors which
may mean the difference between life and death for many of us:

Low rainfall over most of South Africa


Surface and underground water resources are limited
No large natural lakes
Any available water is stored in relatively small dams
South Africa has a rapidly growing population
There is a high water demand by mining, industry, etc.
Water cannot be piped from neighboring countries such as Zimbabwe (Cahora
Bassa)
Pollution of limited water resources is increasing significantly
Education on water conservation is still insufficient
Indifferent attitude of South Africans towards water conservation.

In retrospect, South-Africa is indeed not blessed with an abundant water supply. The little
water we have is increasingly being placed under severe pressure both by increasing demand,
as well as a social culture amongst South-Africans which leaves a lot to be desired.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


13

THE STRONTIUM ISOTOPE DISTRIBUTION IN WATER AND FISH:


WITHIN MAJOR SOUTH AFRICAN DRAINAGE BASINS.

L.J. Jordaan1, L.P.D. de Wet2, M.C. Rademeyer3 and V. Wepener4


1 Council for Geoscience, Private Bag X112, Pretoria, 0001, South Africa. E-mail: wikusj@geoscience.org.za
2 Waterlab (Pty) Ltd, PO Box 283, Persequor Park, Pretoria, 0020, South Africa. E-mail:

ldewet@waterlab.co.za
3 PO Box 4082, Robina, 4230, Queensland, Australia. E-mail: marirademeyer@yahoo.com
4 Department of Zoology, University of Johannesburg, PO Box 524, Auckland Park, 2006, South Africa. E-
mail: victorw@uj.ac.za

Introduction
The Council for Geoscience was requested in early 2006 to find a scientific method of
minimizing illegal entries at major South African freshwater sport fishing tournaments. The
organizers of these competitions suspected that some participants were entering large fish
that were not caught during that specific competition and then illegally claiming substantial
prizes. These prizes usually include cash, vacations, property, ski boats, cars, trailers and a
range of fishing, camping and outdoor gear. There is thus serious competition for these
prizes and much unhappiness amongst competitors when foul play is suspected.

This study was undertaken to find ways of linking fish to specific environments. The initial
approach was to chemically analyze water and fish from specific dams for as many
components as possible and then to find correlations between the fish chemistry and
chemistry of their specific habitat. The approach is based on the assumption that fish living
in a specific dam should be in equilibrium with that dam. This implies that there should be a
measurable chemical correlation between the dam sediments, dam water and fish organs. Sr
(strontium) is an ideal element for this type of study as it is present in high enough
concentrations for all analytical purposes, while Sr isotope ratios remains independent of
biological processes. It has also been used very successfully in solving similar problems
relating to the illegal ivory trade (Van der Merwe, et.al., 1990). Dams are very special habitats
as fish migration and movements are limited by dam walls and usually very shallow waters at
the inlets. Large fish of the size that are caught during fishing tournaments are therefore
expected to spend their entire lives within a relatively limited area.

Analytical Method
Trace element concentrations in fish tissue, liver, gills and bone samples were investigated as
possible methods to link fish to a specific dam. This approach is complicated by the dilution
of element concentrations in the dam and river waters during the rainy season. The biology,
species and sex of the fish also plays a role. The very clear correlation between the Sr isotope
ratios of dam water and the bones in fish fins however proved to be the most useful.
Common Carp, Mozambique Tilapia, Sharptooth Catfish and Largemouth Bass formed the
major focus of the study while limited samples of a few minor species were also included. A
database was established for major dams where fishing tournaments took place, but it was
later extended to also include some minor dams and rivers. The investigation initially
concentrated on Loskop Dam where most irregularities were suspected, but was later
extended to the entire Olifants River drainage basin as well as to the Mgeni River basin, the
Orange/Vaal River basin and the Crocodile River basin.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


14

The analytical method for the water samples, consisted of filtering through a 0.45 micron
filter and drying down a two liter sample to concentrate the Sr, followed by purification of
the sample using Bio-Rad AG50Wx12 cation resin. The purified sample could then be
analyzed for its Sr isotope ratio using a Finnigan MAT 261 Thermal Ionization Mass
Spectrometer. Bone from the dorsal, ventral or pectoral fins of fish is a suitable material for
study as it is formed throughout a substantial portion of the fishs life cycle while
incorporating Sr from the surrounding aquatic medium. All fish fins were physically removed
from the collected fish and dried in an oven at approximately 75 C. All soft tissues were
removed followed by pulverizing in an agate swing mill and dissolution in nitric acid. Sr was
extracted from the acid solution again using Bio-Rad AG50Wx12 cation resin followed by
analysis on the above mentioned mass spectrometer. A set of five samples were analyzed at
the University of Cape Town on a HR-ICP-MS for verification.

Results
The data obtained in this fashion indicated that there is a definite and measurable correlation
between the 87Sr/86Sr isotope ratio of the fins and the dam water in which the fish lived
while developing these organs. Table 1 lists the average 87Sr/86Sr ratios of fish and water
samples from Loskop Dam. This parameter is independent of the specific fish species, the
sex of the fish, the age of the fish and the season in which the fish was caught. Sr ratios were
in some cases determined over a three year period in which time there were no significant
changes in these ratios. It can therefore be extrapolated that fish from a specific dam can be
correlated with the water from that dam and it would therefore be possible to verify whether
fish presented at a fishing competition were in fact caught in the dam where the fishing
competition was held. The only limiting factor is that there is not a large natural variation in
Sr ratios and therefore some dams may have similar ratios, which would imply that fish
would be indistinguishable in terms of their Sr isotope ratios. Fortunately there are large
natural variations among most of the dams of the Olifants River making Loskop Dam clearly
distinguishable. The range of values for water samples from any specific dam is generally
smaller than the range of values for fish samples from that same dam. At some dams, like
Middelburg, Witbank, Doornpoort and Loskop the range of values for fish bones slightly
exceed the upper limit for the range of values for water samples.

Table 1. Strontium isotope composition of fish and water samples from Loskop Dam
Average Minimum Maximum
Sample Tissue Laboratory Instrument n
87Sr/86Sr 87Sr/86Sr 87Sr/86Sr
Water Surface CGS TIMS 0.728904 0.728487 0.729804 7
Cyprinus carpio Dorsal spine CGS TIMS 0.731084 0.728923 0.732730 21
Cyprinus carpio Ventral spine CGS TIMS 0.731274 0.730982 0.731566 2
Dorsal & ventral
Cyprinus carpio CGS TIMS 0.730796 0.729586 0.731842 8
spines
Dorsal & ventral
Cyprinus carpio UCT HR-ICP-MS 0.730460 0.729233 0.731332 5
spines
Oreochromis
Dorsal fin spines CGS TIMS 0.731388 0.730440 0.732303 6
mossambicus
Clarias
Pectoral spines CGS TIMS 0.728734 0.728734 0.728734 1
gariepinus

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


15

In comparison, data from the Mgeni River basin (KwaZulu-Natal) show a constant increase
in 87Sr/86Sr ratio from Midmar Dam, through Albert Falls and Nagle Dam to Inanda Dam.
The 87Sr/86Sr ratio of fish from Inanda Dam can again be correlated perfectly with the
water from Inanda Dam. In the Crocodile River basin (Gauteng/North West Province) the
Sr isotope ratios are more complex. A slight increase in the 87Sr/86Sr ratio is observed
moving downstream except for Roodekopjes and Vaalkop Dams where a decrease in the Sr
isotope ratio is observed. The Orange/Vaal River basin is significantly larger than the other
systems that were studied. In this system a good correlation again exists between the
87Sr/86Sr ratio of fish and water for both Vaal and Bloemhof Dams.

Discussion
Sr isotope ratios were in all cases determined on the dissolved Sr fraction. The origin of this
fraction can therefore be either from the natural weathering of upstream geological units or
from an upstream anthropogenic source. An investigation of the Vaal and Orange rivers by
De Villiers, et.al. (2000) showed that much of the Sr isotope ratio of a river is determined by
the isotope ratio of the predominant geological strata in the upper part of the catchment
basin. In the upper Olifants River system there is certainly ample proof of additions to the
river water from mine, municipal or industrial sources. The Sr isotopic ratios of the water
samples were however constant over a three year period suggesting that the main source may
be the more consistent geological environment. Most of the larger fish that were analyzed
were also much in access of five years old indicating that a relatively constant Sr source may
have been available to them for several years. The dams may also have a buffering effect on
the Sr isotope ratio of the river water. Dams are remarkably homogenous, at least within the
upper layers where the samples for isotope analysis were taken. This is also evident from the
metal and anion content. In larger dams with only one major inlet the Sr isotope ratio is very
constant, even close to the inlet. In large dams with two major inlets like the Vaal or
Bloemhof dams, slight differences may exist between the inlets.

In the Olifants River basin, the Middelburg, Witbank and Doornpoort Dams have a similar
Sr isotope ratio, which is distinct from Bronkhorstspruit Dam. Loskop Dam which is
downstream from these dams has a Sr isotope ratio between these two extremes, indicating
mixing of water from upstream sources. Similarly Arabie Dam, which is even further
downstream, shows a Sr isotope composition between the composition of Loskop Dam and
the dams in the Elands River. The Sr isotope composition of a single dam may therefore be
the result of several factors that may give a dam and the fish living within it a distinctive
character and therefore provide excellent possibilities for forensic applications.

References
De Villiers, S., Compton, J.S. and Lavelle, M. (2000). The strontium isotope systematics of
the Orange River, Southern Africa. S.A. Jour. Geol. Vol. 103. p237-248.
Van der Merwe, N.J., Lee-Thorpe, J.A., Thackeray, J.F., Hall-Martin, A., Kruger, F.J.,
Coetzee, H., Bell, R.H.V. and Lindeque, M. (1990). Source-area determination of
elephant ivory by isotopic analysis. Nature Vol. 36. p744-749

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


16

OVERVIEW OF ACID MINE DRAINAGE IMPACTS:


IN THE WEST RAND GOLDFIELD

Mariette Liefferink
Federation for a Sustainable Environment, Postnet suite 87, P/Bag X033, Rivonia 2128. Email:
mariette@pea.org.za

The Witwatersrand* has been mined for more than a century. It is the worlds largest gold
and uranium mining basin with the extraction, from more than 120 mines, of 43 500 tons of
gold in one century and 73 000 tons of uranium between 1953 and 1995. The basin covers
an area of 1600 km2, and led to a legacy of some 400 km2 of mine tailings dams and 6 billion
tons of pyrite tailings containing low-grade uranium. (Reference: A Remote-Sensing and
GIS-Based Integrated Approach for Risk Based Prioritization of Gold Tailings Facilities
Witwatersrand, South Africa)
(*The Witwatersrand Mining Basin is composed of the Far East Basin, Central Rand Basin, Western Basin, Far Western
Basin, KOSH and the Free State gold mines.)
120 Years of gold mining activity within the gold mining areas of the West Rand and Far
West Rand (Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment Area Figure 1) and the non-internalisation of
negative externalities, have resulted in "the mean values for the Wonderfonteinspruit samples to
exceed not only natural background concentrations, but also levels of regulatory concern for cobalt, zinc,
arsenic, cadmium and uranium, with uranium and cadmium exhibiting the highest risk coefficients.

Figure 1

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


17

The Wonderfonteinspruit valley is densely populated because of its agricultural value and
presence of gold mines. The majority of the inhabitants live in informal settlements, using
contaminated ground- and stream water for personal hygiene and drinking. With above-
average infection rates of HIV/AIDS and chronic and acute malnutrition, this
subpopulation is particularly vulnerable to additional stress of the immune system by
contaminants such as uranium.
Uranium is generally associated with the gold ores of the Witwatersrand. Uranium and its
radiogenic progeny are therefore found in many of the residues and wastes produced in the
mining and processing of gold. (Reference: Radiometric Surveying in the Vicinity of Witwatersrand
Gold Mines by H. Coetzee.)
Uranium is identified as the principal contaminant of concern within the gold mining areas
of the West Rand and Far West Rand (Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment Area). Uranium is
emitted by a single industry namely the gold mining industry. Uranium is radioactive and
chemically toxic with an extremely long half-life. It has been shown that the risk posed by
uranium, an important by-product of gold mining in the West Rand and Far West Rand and
an identified hazardous component of the wastes and effluents from gold mining activities,
occurs due to both radiotoxicity and chemical toxicity with, in some cases, the chemical
toxicity dominating over the radiotoxicity. ( Reference: South Africas Challenges Pertaining to
Mine Closure The Concept of Regional Mining and Closure Strategies by D.M. van Tonder et al;
Establishing a Framework for Intervention and Remediation of Radioactive Contamination from Gold
Mining Learning from the Past by J.F. Ellis.)
The documents that hold the history of the Wonderfonteinspruit would exceed 5m if
stacked. The bibliography of relevant literature that has been compiled would, if printed,
extend to nearly 120 pages. In this paper copious reference will be made to the following
official public domain.
Reports:
An Assessment of Sources, Pathways, Mechanisms and Risks of Current and Potential Future
Pollution of Water and Sediments in Gold-Mining Areas of the Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment -
Report to the Water Research Commission. Compiled by Henk Coetzee, Council for
Geosience - WRC Report No 1214/1/06 ; ISBN No 1-77005-419-7 March 2006.

Contamination of wetlands by Witwatersrand gold mines processes and the economic potential of
gold in wetlands - Henk Coetzee, Jaco Venter & Gabriel Ntsume - Council for
Geoscience Report No. 2005-0106

A comprehensive radiological risk assessment performed by German physicists on


behalf the National Nuclear Regulator, the radiological risks to the public, was
published in the Report entitled: Radiological Impacts of the Mining Activities to the Public
in the Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment Area.
The impacts of mining in the West Rand and Far West Rand on the surface and ground
water system, in particular impacts related to uranium, with elevated levels of
radioactivity are well documented. It was found that tailings dams within the
Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment Area contain 100 000 tons of U. Groundwater
pollution arises as a result of the poorly designed and managed tailings dams, which
allow leachate to seep into the underlying aquifers and due to the lateral migration of
water from the shallow portions of flooded mine voids into the surrounding aquifers.
An important local groundwater issue has arisen in the Far West Rand, where mine

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


18

tailings dams were established in sinkhole prone areas, with the stated aim of
encouraging drainage of the tailings, and where tailings were used as a fill material after
the development of sinkholes in the dolomite which covers large parts of the area. In
both of these cases, uraniferous tailings which can have a severe impact on water quality
were deliberately introduced into a major aquifer. (Reference: South Africas Challenges
Pertaining to Mine Closure The Concept of Regional Mining and Closure Strategies by D.M. van
Tonder et al.) It was found that:
50 Tons of U are discharged annually into the Wonderfonteinspruit.

Through seepage/percolation 24 tons U, with concentrations 1 000 to 1 million


higher than the background U concentrations, enter the Wonderfonteinspruit
annually.

From point sources 12 tons of U are discharged annually into the


Wonderfonteinspruit.

Stormwater discharges10 tons of U annually into the Wonderfonteinspruit.

Sinkholes, historically filled with uraniferous tailings, will become secondary sources
of U contamination, when mines close and pre-mining flow patterns and volumes
are restored.
It was found that the chemical risk quotient associated with drinking river water is 6,67
and the radiological risk quotient is 2,22. Both the numbers are above 1,00 meaning that
there is a risk of ill-health effects by drinking water from contaminated streams in the
Wonderfonteinspruit.

In terms of the NNRs Report Radiological Impacts of the Mining Activities to the Public in the
Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment Area it was found that:
The measured uranium content of many of the fluvial sediments in the
Wonderfonteinspruit, including those off mine properties and therefore outside the
boundaries of licensed sites, exceeds the exclusion limit for regulation by the
National Nuclear Regulator.

For approximately 50% of the 47 sampling sites, the calculated incremental doses of
the respective critical group are above 1 mSv per annum up to 100 mSv pa (548 mSv
pa Blyvooruitzicht Mine/Bridge Carletonville)

The radioactive contamination of surface water bodies in the Wonderfonteinspruit


catchment area caused by the long-lasting mine water discharges and diffuse
emissions of seepage and runoff from slimes dams poses radiological risks to the
public resulting from the usage of polluted environmental media;

The pathway sedimentSPM cattlemilk/meatperson (SeCa) can cause


radioactive contamination of livestock products (milk, meat) resulting in effective
doses of the public in some orders of magnitude above those resulting via the
pathway WaCa.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


19

Mining has resulted in the dispersal of radioactive material into the environment via
windblown dust, waterborne sediment and the sorption and precipitation of radioactivity
from water into sediment bodies. The use of contaminated material and mine residues in
construction has also been identified as a means of dispersal of radioactive material into the
environment. Contaminated areas have been identified and the need for comprehensive
monitoring and study as well as epidemiological studies in affected communities are
recommended. Figure 2 shows the surface distribution of radioactive material for the West
Rand goldfield.

Figure 2

In terms of the NNRs Status report on the actions arising from the study of radiological contamination
of the Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment Area (WCA) it was found:
The study undertaken by the NNR has confirmed the presence of radioactive
contamination in the WCA.
Preliminary results of analyses conducted on produce grown in the area have
indicated that the dose levels are of radiological concern to the regulator.
The study has also highlighted the need for all the regulators to work closely together
since the contamination includes non radiological contaminants such as heavy metals
and salts.
The issues involved in the contamination in the Wonderfontein Catchment Area are
complex.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


20

In terms of the WRC Report 1095/1/02 and the WRC Report 1214/1/06:
Andries Coetzee Dam has U concentrations of 900mg/kg**

Upper Wonderfonteinspruit has U concentrations of 1 100 mg/kg

Klerkskraal Dam, a dam which has not received any mine effluent has U
concentrations of 1 mg/kg

The radioactivity in the Tudor Dam was found to be 10 000 100 000 Bq/kg***

The radioactivity in the Sluice was found to be 1 000 10 000 Bq/kg

The radioactivity in the Andries Coetzee Dam was found to be 1 000 10 000
Bq/kg

The radioactivity in the Attenuation Dam was found to be 100 1 000 Bq/kg

The radioactivity in the Donaldson Dam was found to be 100 1 000 Bq/kg
**16mg/kg uranium is equivalent to an activity concentration of 0,2Bq/g, the limit for
regulatory control set by the NNR.
***Regulatory Limit: 500 Bq/kg
The following are examples of radioactive sites within the West Rand and Far West Rand:
Tudor Dam
The Tudor dam is located in the south eastern portion of the headwaters of the WCA. The
dam was built before the establishment of Rand Water for water supply to the mine(s) in the
area. The area behind the dam is currently dry and being mined to recover gold from the
sediments that have accumulated as a result of inefficient mining practices by todays
standards.

At the time of the field visit it appeared that the re-mining had ceased. During the inspection
there was no inflow or outflow of water and the dam was dry. There is however evidence
that during rainy periods that water would flow into and out of the dam.

The soils and sediments at the site are potentially contaminated with radionuclides. There is
evidence of sulphate evaporates on the surface of the sediments. The specific activity of
uranium in the soils and sediments behind the dam are high, 8000-10000 Bq/Kg with
radium 226 at 1700-2800 Bq/Kg.

Stream Bottom 150m Downstream of Tudor Dam


This site is a dry wetland below Tudor Dam. The channel contained well-sorted fine
sediments, most likely, slimes deposited from the overflow from Tudor Dam.
Uranium and radium specific activity levels were high here, at 2000 Bq/kg for uranium and
1200 for radium, as would be expected if they originated from the Tudor Dam
(contamination of radioactive material exceeding clearance levels of 0.5 Bq/g per nuclide and
will need to be remediated prior to the site receiving clearance).
The site presents medium-high uranium and/or radium levels, exceeding national or
international standards.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


21

Mine water from Doornfontein Shaft and Runoff Water from Slimes Dam
This area is largely problematic due to the poor housekeeping at the site. There was a leak at
the pump station that was not contained and has not been addressed. There is evidence of
slimes around and downstream of the pump station. There was also evidence of cattle
grazing around the pump station, with relatively fresh manure directly on top of the escaped
slimes. Radiation from water and the slimes was unacceptable, according to the reports,
particularly in the form of radium, at 1750 Bq/kg.

Former Wetland Downstream of Lancaster Dam

The area behind the Lancaster Dam appeared to have filled with slimes that have recently
been mined. The Dam had been breached by heavy equipment so as to allow acidic slimes
water and fine slimes to drain into the pond and wetland immediately below the dam. On
this downstream side of the dam, there is an orange pool of settled slimes, filled with acid
mine drainage water, where there are few plants and there are signs of dead wildlife. Dry
slimes were observed blowing throughout the Lancaster dam site. Drainage of water from
this area was ongoing at the time of the site visit.

As the site presently exists it is suspected that acutely toxic acidic drainage is currently
draining from the site through the breach in the dam into the pond and wetland immediately
below the dam. Because of the lack of any flow restriction this could become an extremely
serious situation following a heavy rainfall. The main pollutants are suspected of being acidic
water and associated toxic metals arising from oxidation of sulphides such as iron sulphide,
also known as pyrite. The stream presently passes through the breach in the Lancaster Dam,
with visible seepage of slimes from the Lancaster Dam into the stream which forms the
upper Wonderfonteinspruit.

At present the U and other heavy metals, such as cadmium, copper, zinc, arsenic and cobalt
are adsorbed in the sediment. Plausible environmental conditions such as:
Acid mine drainage

Acid rain

Drying out of the sediment and influx of water

Dredging operations

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


22

Tailings spillages

Turbulence caused by cattle drinking the water or children playing in the water can
cause the mobilization or transport of uranium in the Wonderfonteinspruit.
In 2002 in the Krugersdorp-Randfontein area water had started to decant from a number of
shafts into the Tweelopiespruit and the Wonderfonteinspruit. The water had a pH of 2.2. It
is commonly known as Acid Mine Drainage (AMD).

The combination of the pH and redox driven reactions resulted in a measured uranium
concentration of 16mg/l of the Robinson Lake, and resulted in the NNR declaring the lake a
radiation area. The background U concentration in water is 0,0004mg/l. In terms of the
DWAF regulations for drinking water, the U concentration should not exceed 0.07mg/l and
for irrigation, 0.01mg/l.

Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) is responsible for the most costly environmental and socio-
economic impacts. Production of AMD may continue for many years after mines are closed
and tailings dams decommissioned. AMD is not only associated with surface and
groundwater pollution, degradation of soil quality, for harming aquatic sediments and fauna,
and for allowing heavy metals to seep into the environment.
Long-term exposure to AMD polluted drinking water may lead to increased rates of cancer,
decreased cognitive function and appearance of skin lesions. Heavy metals in drinking water
could compromise the neural development of the fetus which can result in mental
retardation. If indeed the extent of problems related to mining waste may be rated as second only
to global warming and stratospheric ozone depletion in terms of ecological risk (EEB, 2000), then the
Witwatersrand gold mining area of South Africa is at serious risk.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


23

The impacts of the mine void water on the surface water system, in particular the increased
salt loads, can be inferred from the subjoined figure (Figure 3)

Volumesandloads

Pollutedwaterisdischargedintoareceiving
environment
Volume=~25Ml/d
Saltcontent=~4g/l
Saltload=~100tonsperda

20t 20t 20t 20t 20t

Photo:CourtesyDr.HenkCoetzee

Figure 3

In terms of A hydrogeological assessment of acid mine drainage impacts in the West Rand Basin
Gauteng Province it was found that the:
Decanting Volumes are currently between 18 and 36 ML/per day
An unqualified volume still escapes downstream
The decant takes place at the north/south intercontinental water divide with
impacts to both the Tweelopiespruit (to the North) and the seepage of AMD into
the Wonderfonteinspruit during heavy rainfall events (to the South)
The environmental critical level not absolute decant management solution
Dolomitic Outlier is not a low permeability barrier. There are faults and fractures
In terms of the Harmony Gold EIA Report, entitled: Hydrological/Chemical aspects of the
Tweelopie-/Riet-/Blaaubankspruit, with specific reference to the impact water, decanting from the Western
Basin Mine Void, has on the system it was found:
The AMD causes accelerated void formation in the dolomite of the Zwartkrans
compartment.

The void created by the mine void water is 8 960 m3 and was formed in only 2.5
years. The Wondercave was formed over a period of millions of years.

There are people living and operating businesses in the area and these people should
be warned about the potential ground instability in their area.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


24

The potential greatest disaster could occur if part of the N14 Roadway collapses.
This road carries a high traffic load, as it is the main arterial between Johannesburg
and Botswana.
The DWAF and the NNR has established the Wonderfontein Regulators Steering
Committee (WRSC) on the 21 st of December, 2006. This Committee, consisting of officials
of all the relevant Departments as well as from the Local Municipalities, will steer the whole
remediation process. The NNR will chair the WRSC and the NNR will have stricter control
on the discharges from the mines. The DWAF will ensure that all water use licenses be
issued to the mines as soon as possible in an endeavour to stop contamination of the
Wonderfontein Spruit. All regulators agreed that remediation of the hotspots was required.
A Team of Experts (TOX) was appointed to determine the priority hotspots. The mines
were approached to contribute financially towards the remedial work to be done as per the
findings of the TOX. The approach will therefore be to get community involvement as soon
as possible and for this purpose the author of this document was appointed by the DWAF
as the convener of the public involvement and participation component of the remediation
of the Wonderfonteinspruit Catchment area.

The following closure risks remain:


Latent impacts may take decades, or even centuries, to manifest themselves.

Inherent water quality risks

Gold mine ore bodies associated with radionuclides

Hydrological interconnections between mines cannot be considered in isolation

Tailings dams and waste rock dumps can never be maintained in completely reducing
environment - water risk ad infinitum

Long term risk re formation of sinkholes

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


25

ADOPT-A-RIVER PROGRAMME: DEVELOPMENT OF AN IMPLEMENTATION


PLAN FOR SOUTH AFRICAN RIVERS

Ramogale Sekwele
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Directorate Resource Quality Services, Private Bag X313, Pretoria,
0001. Email: sekweler@dwaf.gov.za

The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry has initiated the Adopt-a-River
programme as a means of creating awareness among all South Africans of the need to care
for our scarce water resources and to facilitate their participation in the protection and
management of water resources.

This programme was initiated when a question was asked in Parliament whether South
Africas rivers were healthy and fit for use. Some Members of Parliament volunteered to
adopt a river and serve as patron for that river, as a sign of their own commitment in
protecting the health of our rivers.

A phased approach is being followed for its implementation. The first phase that was
completed in 2007 was to draft a Strategic Framework for the development of the Adopt-a-
River programme. The second phase (current) which started in 2008 is focusing on the
development of an implementation plan and is due for completion in July 2009. This entails
the development of an appropriate model, institutional framework and governance structure
for implementing the Adopt-a-River programme in South Africa. It also includes the
development of communication structures, and manuals and other training material for
volunteer monitoring and to support Adopt-a-River type of activities. The project provides
information on some of the success stories and challenges that the programme is facing in
the country where the ethic of volunteerism is not as well established as in first world
countries like the USA, Canada and Australia. Piloting of the Adopt-a-River programme will
commence towards the end of 2009. The programme design and the implementation plan
will be tested in a selected river in each Province and the design will be revised where
practical constraints render that necessary as part of phase three. Phase four will focus on
development of tools, techniques and training material and will take place on an ongoing
basis, as well as information and task sharing with interested parties. In this final phase the
Adopt-a-River programme will be expanded to any area where interested parties would want
to participate in the Adopt-a-River programme and learn about the protection and
management of their water resources. The aim will be to mobilise volunteers to assist in
keeping the South African rivers safe for use and to safeguard the health of the rivers,
wetlands, estuaries and reservoirs in a sustainable way.

Typical challenges are creating a workable institutional arrangement, sustainable funding, and
issues around management and use of data collected by volunteers and others. More
information on the Adopt-a-River programme can be obtained from Ramogale Sekwele at
DWAF, Directorate: Resource Quality Services (sekweler@dwaf.gov.za / 012 808 9500) or
Linda Rossouw (lrossouw@wmeb.co.za).

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


26

REPORT ON THE GENETIC STUDY OF SMALL SCALED YELLOWFISHES

Paulette Bloomer1, Carel Oosthuizen1 & Rob Karssing2


1Molecular Ecology and Evolution Programme, Dept of Genetics, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0002
2Biodiversity
Division, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, P.O. Box 13053, Cascades, 3202

The main focus of the presentation was diversity within the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN)
yellowfish Labeobarbus natalensis, for which the sequencing of a mitochondrial DNA
(mtDNA) region has been completed. A short overview of the research agenda for 2009
and 2010 was also provided.

Progress during 2008 and early 2009


During 2008 DNA sequencing of the mtDNA control region was completed for a pilot
study of variation within L. polylepis for a WRC report (see OBrien Overview Smallscale
yellowfish study). The mtDNA study of the within species variation in L. natalensis was
completed as part of an NRF funded research initiative to improve our understanding of
endemic freshwater fish biodiversity in South Africa.

Between 2003 and 2007 samples were collected from ~ 25 sites, largely representative of the
distribution of L. natalensis. DNA sequences were successfully generated for 182 samples.
Analysis of these data revealed considerable genetic diversity in the species. Our previous
research found 22 unique lineages among 92 Orange-Vaal yellowfishes from the upper and
lower Orange, with many fish sharing two closely related mtDNA lineages (58 fish)
(Bloomer et al. 2007). In addition, only a single divergent smallmouth conservation unit (17
fish) from the lower Orange could be distinguished from the remainder of the smallmouth
and largemouth yellowfishes analysed (Bloomer et al. 2007). In contrast, the present study
found 38 unique mtDNA lineages among 180 KZN yellowfish using the same DNA region
(Figure 1). From the allele tree there is clear distinction between five groups of lineages.
From north to south they are: Mkuze/Mfolozi, Tugela (including the Tugela, Mvoti, Mdloti
and Molweni), Mbokodweni, Mkomazi and Mzimkulu/Mtamvuna. Genetic variation in the
species is thus geographically highly structured and until the relationship between the five
groups is fully understood they should be treated as five distinct conservation units.

In addition to the variation summarized above, our analysis identified two highly divergent
individuals sampled from the White Umfolozi. An analysis including the other small scaled
yellowfish species surprisingly showed that these two individuals are even more distinct from
the rest of the small scaled species, than what the Clanwilliam yellowfish is. Highly distinct
individuals have also been identified in L. polylepis and we hope that analysis of all ~ 500
yellowfish DNA sequences generated to date will shed some light on what species these
individuals represent.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


27

Figure 1. Allele tree based on maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA sequences


generated for 180 KZN yellowfish. The tree shows the relationships among the 38 unique
alleles (i.e. variants distinguished by different numbers of DNA base pair differences relative
to each other). Values in parentheses indicate the number of fish that share the same
variant. The analysis connects the alleles with the fewest genetic changes; the connecting
lines/branches joining the alleles are drawn to scale, thus shorter branches indicate a closer
genetic relationship. Five clear groups of alleles can be distinguished based on the longer
branch lengths connecting them (the genetically central variant in each group is indicated in
bold). These groups likely represent separate conservation units and their degree of
distinction should be evaluated relative to genetic diversity within other cyprinid species and
through comparison of the mtDNA results with variation in nuclear DNA genes (i.e. genes
inherited from both parental lines).

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


28

What next?
Prior to publication of the KZN yellowfish results in the international literature the
following actions need to be taken in early 2009: (1) More detailed analyses of the mtDNA
data, (2) detailed GIS mapping of the genetic results, (3) a review of the available literature
on the drainage history of the region and (4) DNA sequencing of a few representatives of
each of the five lineages, as well as the two divergent individuals, for the protein coding
mtDNA cytochrome b gene and two nuclear DNA genes. The latter genes will also be used
to extend the Orange-Vaal analyses to enable publication of the follow-up study findings
(the original pilot study results will also be integrated).

In addition, we have started with the development of highly variable nuclear DNA markers
that should allow a thorough assessment of gene flow processes in the small scaled
yellowfishes. These markers, called microsatellites, are for example used in human forensic
cases to distinguish individuals, or for parentage testing. Through this we aim to resolve the
relationships among the identified historically isolated lineages, as well as to address the
question of hybridization in the group (especially between the two Orange-Vaal species).

Acknowledgements
This research would not have been possible without the considerable effort in 2003, 2006
and 2007 by several individuals to collect samples from throughout KwaZulu-Natal. We
thank R. Karssing, M. Nkosi, N. Rivers-Moore, J. Craigie, R. Arderne, A. Howell, J. Wakelin,
H. Filter, H. Plank, T. Wilkinson and G. OBrien for their invaluable contributions. We also
thank the YWG and in particular Peter Arderne for initiating and coordinating the sampling
effort. The research was made possible by funding support from the National Research
Foundation to PB. Any opinion, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed
herein are those of the authors and therefore the NRF does not accept any liability in regard
thereto.

References cited
Bloomer P, Bills IR, Van der Bank FH, Villet MH, Jones N & Walsh G. 2007.
Multidisciplinary investigation of differentiation and potential hybridization between
two yellowfish species Labeobarbus kimberleyensis and L. aeneus from the Orange-Vaal
system. YWG report. 67 pp.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


29

THE BIOLOGY OF SMALLMOUTH AND LARGEMOUTH YELLOWFISH IN LAKE


GARIEP

B.R. Ellender* O.L.F. Weyl, H. Winker


Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries Science, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa.
Email:*g06e3146@campus.ru.ac.za

This work is a synthesis of a MSc thesis and two publications:

Thesis
Ellender B (2009) The impact of angling on smallmouth and largemouth yellowfish,
Labeobarbus aeneus and Labeobarbus kimberleyensis, in Lake Gariep, South Africa. MSc Thesis
Rhodes University.

Under Review
Ellender, B.R., Weyl, O.L.F., Winker, H. The biology of a large riverine cyprinid Labeobarbus
aeneus in a large turbid impoundment in South Africa. in preparation J. Fish Biology.

Ellender, B.R., Weyl, O.L.F., Winker, H. The biology of the largemouth yellowfish,
Labeobarbus kimberleyensis in Lake Gariep, South Africa. in preparation J. Fish Biology.

Synthesis
This project is part of the Lake Gariep fisheries research programme, which aims to develop
policy advice for the sustainable utilisation of fisheries resources. Specifically the project
aimed to assess the impact of recreational and subsistence fishing on two species with high
conservation priority, the smallmouth yellowfish Labeobarbus aeneus and largemouth
yellowfish Labeobarbus kimberleyensis in Lake Gariep.

Sampling was undertaken in the two open access fishing areas, namely: Oviston (OV) and
Gariep (GD). Experimental gillnetting (5 x 45 m multi-meshed gillnets) was conducted bi-
monthly between March 2007 and May 2008. All fish collected in gillnets underwent full
biological analysis to determine: age and growth; length weight; maturity and population
structure.

Age and growth was determined using whole otoliths. Age was validated by Marginal Zone
Analysis and the mark/recapture of chemically tagged captive fish. Both methods indicated
that a single growth zone was deposited annually in L. aeneus and L. kimberleyensis otoliths.
The growth of L. aeneus was best described by the von Bertalanffy growth model as Lt =
481.80 (1- e-0.22(t+0.61)). Growth differed between sex, with female L. aeneus growing faster than
the males. Gonadal development for L. aeneus was seasonal, with the gonadosomatic index
peaking in January, revealing a distinct spawning season. The length at 50 % maturity for
female L. aeneus was attained at a fork length of 354.7 mm. Natural mortality (M) was
estimated at 0.55 year-1.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


30

From a summary of biological data on L. aeneus, the species has similar growth rates and
maximum ages of other L. aeneus populations (Table 1).
Table 1 Summary of von Bertalanffy growth parameters of South African Labeobarbus aeneus
populations (Weyl et al., in press). Lmat = length at maturity; A mat = age at maturity; =
KL; VGBF = Von Bertalanffy growth function; L = asymptotic length; K = Brody growth
coefficient; t0 = age at zero length; M = Natural mortality; 1Koch, (1975); 2Hamman, (1981);
3
This study; 4Weyl et al., (in press); 5Mulder, (1973); 6Tmasson, (1983); 7Straub, (1972);
8
Richardson et al., (in press).

Maturity VBGF Parameters Natural mortality


Location Lmat Amat L K t0 M
Males
Boskop Reservoir1 - - 345 0.195 -0.07 -
Lake Gariep2 210 3 676 0.110 -0.09 -
Lake Gariep3 231 3 398 0.330 -0.34 0.46 year-1
Glen Melville Reservoir4 297 4 407 0.193 -0.20 -
Great Fish River4 247 3 374 0.403 -0.06 -
Vaal River5 280 4 1115 0.059 -0.48 -
Lake van der Kloof 6 - 3 603 0.190 0.52 -
Females
Boskop Reservoir1 - - 1560 0.031 -0.53 -
Lake Gariep2 310 5 684 0.120 -0.20 -
Lake Gariep3 354 5 491 0.236 -0.29 0.55 year-1
Glen Melville Reservoir4 327 6 13259 0.001 -6.85 -
Great Fish River4 333 4 516 0.235 -0.15 -
Vaal River5 340 5 1221 0.051 -0.51 -
Lake van der Kloof 6 300 4 710 0.160 0.47 -
Combined sexes
Glen Melville Reservoir4 - - 650 0.066 -4.23 0.96 year-1
Barberspan Reservoir7 - - 1281 0.036 -1.15 -
Xonxa Reservoir8 - - 276 0.250 -0.63 0.30 year-1
Lake van der Kloof5 - - 465 0.234 0.369 -
Great Fish River4 - - 498 0.230 -0.37 0.56 year-1
Vaal River5 - - 765 0.150 0.11 -

Labeobarbus aeneus cpue two regions of the lake was seasonal. In the middle basin cpue was
highest in winter and lowest in summer, while the opposite was true for dam wall region.
The high summer cpue near the lake wall was concurrent with peak gonadal development.
This indicates that the Lake Gariep L. aeneus may not undergo a spawning migration up the
inflowing rivers, but congregate near the lake wall. This evidence suggests that L. aeneus may
spawn in the lake.
The abundance and catch rates of L. aeneus in Lake Gariep has increased from early fishery
surveys on Lake Gariep just after impoundment. The species is now the second most
dominant fish in Lake Gariep gillnet catches.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


31

The growth of L. kimberleyensis was described by the von Bertalanffy growth model as Lt =
763.22 (1- e-0.11(t+0.63)) and the oldest fish was 17 years old. Only 6 mature female and 15
mature male L. kimberleyensis were recorded during the study period. The smallest mature
female was a 390 mm FL stage four female and the earliest recorded mature male was a 337
mm FL, ripe running male.
Table 2 Summary of South African von Bertalanffy growth parameters for L. kimberleyensis
(1Mulder, 1973; 2 Hamman, 1981; 3 Tmasson, 1983; 4This study).
Maturity VBGF Parameters
Location
Lmat (minimum) L K t0
Males
Vaal River1 350 mm 667 mm 0.12 0.27
Lake Gariep2 400 mm 1108 mm 0.06 0.08
Lake van der Kloof3 - 541 mm 0.17 0.20
Females
Vaal River1 460 mm 1039 mm 0.12 0.27
Lake Gariep2 440 mm 1141 mm 0.06 0.20
Lake van der Kloof3 - 614 mm 0.14 0.22
Both Sexes
Vaal River1 - - - -
Lake Gariep2 - - - -
Lake van der Kloof3 - 1073 mm 0.09 0.48
This study4 390 mm 763 mm 0.118 -0.634

In conclusion, yellowfish are fully established in the dam. Both species are slow growing and
long lived, with the oldest recorded smallmouth being 12 years and the Largemouth 17 years
(not full size structure). In the Orange River, smallmouths were older than recorded from
the lake (52 cm FL female = 14 years). Maturity is delayed and L. aeneus has medium rates of
natural mortality. These species are likely to have relatively stable population sizes but will
take a long time to rebuild if overfished.

References
Hamman, K.C.D., 1981. Aspekte van die bevolkingsdinamika van die Hendrik Verwoerddam met
verwysing na die ontwikkeling van n visserybestuursplan. Rand Afrikaans University, South
Africa.
Koch, B.S., 1975. n Visekologiese ondersoek van Boskop Dam, Wes Transvaal, met spesiale
verwysing na die bevolkingsdigtheid van Labeo capensis en Labeo umbratus in verhouding tot
die ander hengelvissoorte. Rand Afrikaans University, South Africa.
Mulder, P.F.S., 1973. Aspects of the ecology of Barbus kimberleyensis and Barbus holubi in the Vaal
River. Zoologica Africana 8, 15-24.
Richardson, T.J., Booth, A.J., Weyl, O.L.F., in press. Rapid assessment of the fishery potential of
Xonxa Dam near Queenstown, South Africa. African Journal of Aquatic Science.
Straub, C.C., 1972. The value of certain morphological features in the age determination of the small
mouth yellow fish Barbus holubi (Steindachner 1894). University of Potchefstroom, South
Africa.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


32

Tmasson, T., 1983. The biology and management considerations of abundant large Cyprinids in
Lake le Roux, Orange River, South Africa. Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa,
p. 218.
Weyl, O.L.F., Stadtlander, T., Booth, A.J., 2009. Establishment of translocated populations of
smallmouth yellowfish, Labeobarbus aeneus (Pisces: Cyprinidae) in lentic and lotic habitats
within the Great Fish River system, South Africa. African Zoology 44(1)

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


33

LIKELY RESPONSE OF SMALLMOUTH YELLOWFISH POPULATIONS TO


FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT
IS THERE CAUSE FOR CONCERN IN SA DAMS?

Olaf Weyl1, Bruce Ellender, Henning Winker and Hermine Stelzhammer


Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries Science, Rhodes University, 6139 Grahamstown. 1O.weyl@ru.ac.za

In South Africa food security, economic empowerment, tourism development, optimal


economic benefit from water and poverty eradication are major national policy objectives.
Government has legislated that local authorities (municipalities) are to promote local
economic development. Provincial nature conservation authorities are expected to
participate in this process and have been empowered to allocate licences for subsistence,
commercial and recreational fishing. They are guided by the National Environmental
Management Act 1998(NEMA) which emphasises issues of sustainability, biological
diversity, ecosystem integrity, the precautionary principle, the use of natural resources for the
national good. The potential of fisheries to create livelihood and economic opportunities is
often misunderstood and as the demand for subsistence and commercial fishing rights grows
there is an increasing need for informed decision making processes.

Our research into the biology of smallmouth Labeobarbus aeneus and largemouth Labeobarbus
kimberleyensis yellowfish on Lake Gariep has shown that they are slow growing, long lived and
late maturing species with medium rates of natural mortality. These traits imply stable
population sizes in unfished populations but also imply that when these fish are overfished
their stocks will require a relatively long time to rebuild. We, therefore, assessed the impact
of angling on smallmouth yellowfish in the 364 km2 Lake Gariep. This is South Africas
largest inland water body, from an economic and biological perspective. We attempt to
answer the question whether fisheries development on the lake would lead to socio-
economic development without a compromising a typical conservation goal i.e. the
maintenance of yellowfish populations at levels where the relative biomass of mature adults
is at least 50% of that if they were not exploited.

Characterising the current fishery


Household interviews in the settlement of Venterstad (population 7000) showed that
unemployment is high (66%) and 85% of households relying on social grants for cash
income. Fishing is important with 57 % of all households having a member that had fished
in the last year and in 25 % of households at least one family member fished weekly. Ninety
five percent of households ate fish at least once a week.

From on lake interviews with anglers (n=650 interviews) and direct weighing of their catches
we estimate that 79 tons of fish is harvested by subsistence and recreational anglers annually.
The main angling target species and the most preferred fish is carp Cyprinus carpio which
comprises 80% of subsistence (creel survey) and recreational anglers catches and 65 % in
angling competitions. Therefore, carp is the most important food fish and has the highest
perceived value for sport anglers. The latter was also supported by results from interview
surveys conducted during angling competition events. Not only do yellowfishes make up a

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


34

small portion of the catch (< 10%) but they are also caught mainly at sizes larger than
maturity.

Spawner biomass per recruit modeling showed that the current fishery resulted in a
negligible impact on yellowfish and that the stock was in a pristine state being reduced by
only 7% as a result of fishing. In comparison, the marine inshore kob and white steenbras
spawner biomass are currently estimated at below 5% of pristine levels. The model also
implies that shore angling could increase almost indefinitely without resulting in a depletion
of the spawning stock to 50% of pristine levels.

Angling has major socio-economic impacts and we estimate that there are 450 regular
subsistence anglers utilizing the lake. These anglers sell their excess at R5/kg and angling is
considered an important contributor to livelihoods in the area. Casual recreational anglers
harvested about 30 tons/yr and competition anglers landed 7.5 tons/yr. These anglers
contribute to the local economy and our questionnaire data show that competition anglers
spent R525/angler/night locally which equated to a total R523 000 in assessment year. The
value of fish caught by this sector to the local economy was therefore valued at was R70/kg
of fish

We therefore conclude that subsistence angling is important to the livelihood of the rural
poor. Recreational angling creates employment in associated industries (B&Bs, restaurants,
filling stations) and imports significant capital to the local economy. Both fisheries are based
on the harvest of an alien species, carp, and yellowfishes make up only a small portion of the
catch. Subsistence and recreational angling therefore contributes to socio-economic
development without compromising conservation goals.

Commercial gill net fishing


Results from our experimental gill net surveys show that catch rate was dependant on mesh
size. Best catch rates were obtained using a 100 mm mesh size but the catch was dominated
by indigenous smallmouth yellowfish (37 %) and mudfish (48%) rather than carp (4 %). In
addition, the risk of catching largemouth yellowfish Labeobarbus kimberleyensis, a protected
species in the Free State, increases with mesh size and at mesh sizes larger than 144 mm,
which do not target smallmouth yellowfish, 25% of the catch was largemouth yellowfish.
We also showed that because of their slow growth rate and late maturity, gill net fisheries
would result in a rapid depletion of the smallmouth yellowfish stock to below 50% of
pristine levels.

Using our experimental catch data we also conducted an economic assessment based on our
experimental gill net catch data. We have conducted a financial analysis and at the current
fish price of R5/kg the internal rate of return on a small operation with a realistic boat
powered by a 15 Hp motor and a small vehicle (total loan R 150 000) would only be in the
region of 15%. This is only marginally better than the bank lending rate and, therefore, does
not constitute a viable business. It is also likely that a commercial fishery would compete
directly with the subsistence fishers for market and will affect livelihoods.

We conclude that a commercial gillnet fishery would be marginally viable, create few jobs,
would be based on indigenous species, may compete with subsistence fishers for market and
will definitely conflict with recreational anglers. The positive economic impacts of a

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


35

commercial gill net fishery would not outweigh the negative impact on the yellowfish
stocks. Given that gillnet fisheries and commercial fishing is being identified as
development opportunities there is cause for concern with regard to yellowfish.
Fisheries development should rather focus on developing recreational opportunities
through angling or to explore alternative harvest strategies such as beach seine
netting that would avoid yellowfish.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


36

EARLY DEVELOPMENT OF VAAL RIVER SMALLMOUTH YELLOWFISH

Daksha Naran
Consultant researcher - Centre for Aquatic Research, University of Johannesburg & SAIAB, Private Bag 1015,
Grahamstown 6140. Email: d.naran@saiab.ac.za)

ABSTRACT

The yellowfishes are an important group of fishes within South Africa, in that they are
widely used as a food source, are a targeted angling species and are widely used by biologists
and ecosystem managers within South Africa as an indicator or flagship species. In order to
ensure that we are able to conserve these fishes a detailed understanding of the life-cycle
biology of these species is required. This paper describes the embryonic and early stage
development of the Orange-Vaal Smallmouth yellowfish (Labeobarbus aeneus). The aim of the
study is to provide a description of the embryo and larval stages of the Orange-Vaal
Smallmouth yellowfish reared under controlled laboratory conditions. Individual Orange-
Vaal Smallmouth yellowfish from the Gariep state fish hatchery were artificially spawned in
early December 2008 and thereafter embryos were reared in aquaria to juvenile stage.
Tracking early stage development of the species presents key characteristics of larval and
juvenile morphology that supports the early stage identification, as well as the periods of
transition particular to a species. The findings of the experiment resulted in the
identification and detailed descriptions of the embryonic period and post-hatching
development of the artificially spawned Orange-Vaal Smallmouth yellowfish.

INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND TO EARLY DEVELOPMENT IN FISH

The early development of fishes is highly dynamic, with changes in ontogenetic state often
coinciding with shifts in diet, microhabitat, behaviour, performance or any combination of
these (Sagnes et al., 1997; Gozlan et al., 1999). Fish develop strategies such as predator
avoidance and swimming capacity earlier on during ontogeny, these characteristics also
influences a young juvenile fish and/or fish larvas ability to survive. Information and
knowledge of early development, therefore, is fundamental to understanding the changing
ecological requirements of a species (Baras & Nindaba, 1999; Kovac & Copp, 1999) and the
factors affecting population recruitment (Houde, 1994).

Morphologically, early life ontogeny in fish can be described according to developmental


periods and steps (Balon, 1975, 1999; Penz et al., 1986), or quantitatively scaling
developmental events against a selected criterion (Fuiman, 1994; Fuiman et al., 1998).
Describing key developmental events of the early stages of fish life chronologically, could
improve the techniques used to rear progeny during this critical period, provide comparative
data, as well as provide information for addressing fisheries questions. Larval development
of the yellowfish species Labeaobarbus kimberleyensis and Labebarbus aeneus have not been
previously reported, despite the importance of such studies for the sustainable management
and conservation of these indigenous fisheries.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


37

Early development is a complex process. Balinsley 1948 recognised 46 stages of fish


development from unfertilised egg to stage 46 when lateral line is fully developed and
morphogenesis is complete. There is much contestation concerning the early development
proceeds via a series of steps or salutatory development, continuous or as inconspicuous
accumulation of small changes (gradual ontogeny). Many of these theories and ideas of early
stage development in fishes have been captured in the journal Environmental Biology of
Fishes volume 56, 1999. Aspects of research investigated include:
Does development proceed gradually over time, or by a series of relatively distinct
steps?
Does the larval period begin with hatching or with the onset of exogenous feeding?

Although, cognisance of the above mentioned, theoretical concepts to the understanding of


early development research was considered. The aim of this research project was to
successfully rear embryos to juvenile stage. The purpose of the present early life history work
is also to support ongoing yellowfish biological and ecological research projects that are
being undertaken by the University of Johannesburg and other collaborators.

AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY


The aim of the study is to provide a description of the embryo and larval stages of the
Orange-Vaal Smallmouth yellowfish reared under controlled laboratory conditions.
Systematic collection and analysis of larval and early stage juvenile fishes is therefore an
approach to resolve the early stage species identification. In order to reach this aim the
following objectives have been established:
Provide species specific early development characters and features which can be used
to confirm the species identity. These determinations will contribute towards the
identification of the larval and juvenile fish field based collections.
Behaviour observation of larvae and early stage juveniles will allow for speculation
with regard to their distribution, ecological and environmental requirements,
including habitat and niche preferences and will assist with the sampling approaches
for early stage fish.
Provide a comparative analysis of the above objective for L. aeneus and L.
kimberleyensis

METHODS
EARLY FISH DEVELOPMENT
The artificial spawning and larval studies were structured to run concurrently, in that the
results of artificially induced fish were used to support the larval development component.
This was undertaken according to the following steps:

1. Orange-Vaal Smallmouth yellowfish embryos were obtained from an artificial


spawning experiment conducted at Gariep Dam Hatchery, from 6-7 December 2008.
Commercially obtained Aquaspawn, was dispensed at the recommended dosage of
0.5ml/kg to broodstock. The broodstock were estimated to be between 2 and 4kg,
thus 1-2ml was administered to each fish. Aquaspawn was injected intramuscularly,
below the dorsal fin. The fish were anesthetised in a solution of 0.2ml/l of 2-
phenoxyethanol until they were placid, prior to handling procedures.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


38

2. Ripe running fish were hand stripped, the eggs and sperm were collected in a plastic
bowl and activated using aquarium water in which the embryos were to be incubated.
The fertilized eggs were suspended on hatching trays in well aerated aquaria at
approximately 22C.
3. 36 hours after activation, embryos were transferred from the Gariep Dam State
Hatchery to glass aquaria kept at the Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries
Sciences facility (DIFS). During the transfer embryos were kept in a plastic bag, and
chilled to reduce mortality. During the 5 hour journey water temperature dropped to
15C.
4. Embryos were incubated on plastic mesh hatching trays in glass aquaria, kept at the
Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries Sciences facility (DIFS). The aquaria were
aerated, and initially the embryos were incubated in Gariep dam water. Thereafter,
weekly water (10 - 20l) changes were done using previously collected green water.
Water temperature was 17C -20C throughout the experiment.

Examination of specimens
Embryo development was observed and photographed following the schedule:
1. two and four, (six hour intervals for a period of 2 weeks after activation)
2. 24 hour (3-4 weeks after activation)
3. two day intervals (1-4 months after activation )

Further observations were made using a stereomicroscope Leica E24D and Wild Heerburgg
fitted with a digital camera (Olympus 4.1 megapixel). Observations were made under a range
of magnifications and larval measurement were taken using an objective micrometer.

Fertilised embryos were siphoned, and collected in a Petri dish for observations. Sub-
samples of embryos, larval to early stage juveniles were collected as vouchers, for deposition
at SAIAB. The samples were fixed in 99% wt/vol buffered ethanol, as well as 4% buffered
formalin.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Embryo transfer
The impact of transferring embryos to a different locality, the transfer approach and
conditions served to provide insight into how embryos survive. Several factors contributed
to the operations success. At the onset the transfer process was designed to keep the
variables at a minimum. The embryos were transported with adherence to the same water
chemical condition as that used for spawning and activation. The plastic bags were filled with
fresh water tapped directly from the dam, and saturated with pure oxygen. The bags were
sealed and placed in a polystyrene box to minimize temperature fluctuation. To facilitate
transport a sealed bag of ice, wrapped in a towel, was placed in the polystyrene box.

After the 5 hour journey embryos were transferred to glass aquaria filled with Gariep river
water. Transported embryos at 15C were acclimatised to 19C and 23C, into 2 separate
aquaria, over a period of 3 hours. The overall effect of the reduction in temperature was to
slow the rate of development down, consequently the embryos hatching period was
extended by 24-30 hours.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


39

Larval and juvenile rearing


Thereafter the developing embryos were generally kept in water temperature ranging
between 19C to 23C. The embryos, larvae and juveniles were kept under a fluorescent
light, with approximately 12-14 hours of darkness. After hatching larvae were fed newly
hatched brine shrimp, Artemia salina nauptilii in excess quantities twice a day. Older larvae
and juveniles were weaned on a diet of fish flakes and chironomid larvae (blood worms).

Fertilised embryos
Fertilised eggs are negatively buoyant and slightly adhesive to the glass and mesh trays.
Adhesiveness was lost after a few minutes.

Embryo period
This period consists of five key steps: activation; cleavage; epiboly; organogenesis; onset of
blood circulation. Embryo phase (E1-E5 respectively) are described below. The time from
activation to hatching lasted between 84 h 30 min and 153 h (3.5days 6 days).

L. aeneus eggs are spherical pale yellow and are negatively buoyant.

E-1, Activation phase


Eggs and sperm were gently mixed using a bird feather. After a few seconds the fertilization
was activated by adding river water to the stripped eggs and sperm.
After activation the eggs become adhesive to the tray and to each other Shortly after
activation the egg begins to swell. Step E1, activation, began at 0.58h, 7 December 2008.
During this step the eggs rapidly took in water and increased in size until the diameter
measured between 0.22 mm and 0.24 mm The swelling of the eggs also caused them to
change from their initial spherical form, becoming slightly oval in shape and flattened on the
surfaces that adhered to other eggs in the strip. During this step the perivitelline space was
created

E-2, Cleavage phase


Onset on certain initial steps of the cleavage phase was not observed due to technical
problems. The result of cleavage phase is the blastula formation, where cells divide and begin
to surround the yolk. The phase ends with the descending blastula to encircle the yolk. This
marks the onset of the next phase.

E-3, Epiboly, had commenced by 20h00 with the onset of the cell layer migrating across the
yolk surface. The morula became progressively smaller and more flattened in shape and by
07 h 35 min the embryonic shield, which surrounded 75% of the circumference of the yolk,
was evident. At this stage, the cell layer covered approximately three-quarters of the yolk
surface. Closure of the germ ring occurred around 31 hours (figure 1)

E-4, Organogenesis began with the development of the neural plate and cephalization of the
embryo. This is a complex step where the optic vesicle becomes evident in the majority,
myomeres begin to form. There is separation of the caudal section from the yolk, which
started to divide into a large anterior section and a more slender posterior section. The
extension of the tail region has the effect of stretching the yolk sac, where the posterior
section is more slender than the anterior section.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


40

E5, Circulation, Onset of blood circulation, had developed with the first muscular
contraction being observed, the process ended with hatching. The brain is visible, pigment
was first visible in the eyes. At 4-6 days the initial formation of the otic vesicles and the
rudimentary buds of the pectoral fins were first evident. At this stage otoliths were first
visible and the blood began to take on a red colour. The pectoral lobes are evident and
began to move. This step gives way to the onset of the free embryo phase (figure 2).

Note: Certain events in the E3- E5 were not observed directly due to transit, and the estimation of these
events can be provided using photographic records.

Post-hatching development
After hatching, free embryos and larvae in the aquarium were subjected to temperatures
ranging between 19C.and 22C. These two periods of development consisted of one free
embryo step and five larval steps. The time scale from activation to the end of the larva
period, when the first larvae became juveniles, lasted 69-73 days. The extended periods of
development could have been due to the lower water temperature and the twice a day
feeding regime.

Free embryo phase


E-6, free embryo, began with hatching and ended with the onset of exogenous feeding.
Hatching occurred between 84 h 30 minutes and 153 hrs, on the 10-12 December 2008, 4 to
6 days after activation. Post hatched embryos were 7.2 mm long with a substantial yolk
reserve. The following features were also evident with cephalisation; oral region with a pore,
lens and choroid areas, heart, otoliths, notochord which is surrounded by myomeres and an
anal pore.

Post-hatching, free embryos generally displayed varying degrees of swimming capability. The
earliest embryos to hatch were only able to perform sudden bursts of activity and appeared
to be able to swim a few centimetres from the bottom before sinking again. Those embryos
that hatched later, however, were able to perform more sustained swimming and were soon
able to swim to the surface. Upon hatching, the embryos were with the head bent down over
the yolk and generally un-pigmented. During this step various developmental processes were
taking place, including the jaw and gill structures, the gradual straightening of the head and
the formation of the chambers of the swimbladder and fin fold transition to fin rays (figure
3a & b).

Larval period
Larva, stage 1: The onset of L1 step was characterized by the onset of exogenous feeding
and ended with the onset of flexion of the urostyle and the switch to purely exogenous
nutrition. The first free embryos reached this step after 2 days. The ability of L1 larvae to
open their mouths corresponded with the ability to swim to the surface and begin gulping air
to inflate the anterior and posterior chamber of the swimbladder. This consequently resulted
in the ingestion of air and the mouth becoming functional. The opening of the mouth also
coincided with the onset of branchial respiration and the functionality of the gills. At the
beginning of L1, larvae still had a large pear-shaped yolk sac and the mouth remained in a
sub-terminal position. A few days later (fifth and sixth day post hatching), the head was
straight and the body took on a yellow colouration. Melanophores also became evident on

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


41

the head, heart region and the ventro-visceral and medio-ventral lines with faint dashes of
pigment just becoming evident on the lateral line. As this step progressed, these pigments
became more obvious. By day 9-11, the mouths had migrated into terminal positions and
Artemia nauplii were first found in the gut. At this stage, only a small amount of yolk reserves
remained to be absorbed.

Young larval stage 2


This step, started from the 15th December 2008, the ninth day after activation, with the
switch to purely exogenous nutrition and the beginning of flexion of the urostyle. This step
proceeded until the onset of inflation of the anterior chamber of the swimbladder. By 19
December, rays were beginning to develop below the urostyle within the caudal finfold.
From the beginning of this step, melanophores became distributed on the head, lips and
opercula. Pigment also became evident above the notochord. After 16 days the dorsal finfold
was showing the first signs of differentiation and later starting to form in both the dorsal and
anal fins. The onset of this step also corresponded with a clear shift in behaviour. While the
remaining L1 larvae were still swimming at the surface, L2 larvae were forming a shoal
between 5 and 10 cm from the bottom of the tank. The larvae were 9.7mm in length (figure
4).

Intermediate larval stage 3


By day 16-20, air was first evident in the anterior chamber of the swimbladder. This signified
the beginning of larva step L3 with the end of this step indicated by the dorsal finfold no
longer being connected to the dorsal fin. By day 22, flexion was complete and the caudal fin
was forked and almost fully developed. By now pigment was well developed both above and
below the notochord and rudiments of the pelvic fins were first evident. During this step the
mouth began to migrate towards the sub terminal position. Feeding is exogenous (figure 5).

Older larval, stage 4


By day 23- 28 the dorsal finfold first became separated from the dorsal fin, indicating the
beginning of larva step L4. By now all individuals had pelvic buds present and rays were
forming in the pectoral fins. At the end of this stage all fins except for the pelvic fins were
fully formed and only a small amount of pelvic finfold remained. The mouth was almost in
the final, sub terminal position. The scales were evident just below the lateral line.

Young juvenile, Larval stage 5


Complete disappearance of the finfold, indicating the beginning of larva step L5 and
completion of fin formation, was first evident. The mouth was now in its final, sub terminal
to inferior position. Scales were first evident just below the lateral line.

Juvenile period
The first fully scaled fish, with the lateral line formed, were observed in mid to late January.
The transition from larvae to young juvenile is completed with the disappearance of the fin
fold and the ray formations in the fins. The development of the scales, with full coverage
over the body, indicates the transition from larvae to juveniles. Juveniles are not quite silvery,
but rather well pigmented.
Going forward there are other features that can be quantitatively determined to facilitate the
larval early development work undertaken in this project. These are as follows:

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


42

Myomeres

In some instances reliable separation between species is only possible by counting the
numbers of myomeres or muscle bands. Myomeres can be separated into pre-anal and post-
anal groups. The larval fish are sufficiently transparent for the myomeres to be readily
visible. Post anal myomeres start with the first muscle band that lies entirely within the
caudal section of the body, ie posterior to the anus and anterior to the urostyle. Pre anal
myomeres are in the trunk region anterior to the anus and ending just behind the head.

Relative body dimensions


Caudal trunk ratio: Trunk region / caudal region includes head, and is important for
distinguishing percids from cyprinid and can assist in distinguishing certain species of
cyprinids.

After stage 5, cyprinids do not possess teeth inside the mouth. Instead, at the back of the
pharyngeal cavity, cyprinids have developed a pair of pharyngeal bones armed with
projections resembling teeth that crush and chew food as it passes to the back of the
pharynx. Adult cyprinid can be identified by the arrangement, and number of teeth.

Eye diameter
Inter ocular distance and the snout length, ratios of relative measurements of eye diameter,
inter ocular distance and the length of snout are useful characters, that can be measured
using the eyepiece graticule.

CONCLUSIONS
The current project represents work that is being undertaken using a systematic approach,
which serves to give value to early development studies, which has not previously conducted
with these objectives. The project is contributing to the state of knowledge of the larval and
juvenile stage freshwater fishes as well as providing insight into the early stage fish
behaviours which can assist with ecological interpretation and serve to refine sampling
strategies.

Furthermore, the project is catering for the parameters to identification of early stage
embryo and larvae with characteristics such as
Stages /Period
Length at hatching
Length at absorption of yolk
Pigment presence and pattern
Myomere ratios
Morphological ratios
Such knowledge and data have not previously been used to describe early stage freshwater
fishes in South Africa

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


43

REFERENCES
Balon, E. K. (1971). The intervals of early fish development and their terminology.
Vestnik Ceskoslovenske Spolecnosti Zoologicke 35, 18.
Balon, E. K. (1979). The theory of saltation and its application in the ontogeny of fishes:
steps and thresholds. Environmental Biology of Fishes 4, 97101.
Baras & Nindaba, 1999, Seasonal and diel utilization of inshore microhabitats by larvae and
juveniles of Leuciscus cephalus and Leuciscus leuciscus. Environmental Biology of
Fishes 56, 183197
Gozlan et al., 1999 Early development of the sofie, Chondrostoma toxostoma.
Environmental Biology of Fishes 56, 6777.
Houde 1994 Differences between marine and freshwater fish larvae: implications for
recruitment. ICES Journal of Marine Science 51, 9197.
Kovac & Copp, 1999 Prelude: looking at early development of fishes. Environmental
Biology of Fishes 56, 714.
Pinder, A. C. (2001). Keys to larval and juvenile stages of coarse fishes from fresh waters in
the British Isles. Scientific Publication No. 60. Ambleside: Freshwater Biological
Association.
Sagnes et al., 1997 Shifts in morphometrics and their relation to hydrodynamic potential and
habitat use during grayling ontogenesis. Journal of Fish Biology 50, 846858.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The early development of smallmouth yellowfish was a collaborative initiative with various
partners sharing expertise, experience and resources. The following organisations and
individuals within the organisations are thanked for their valuable contributions in realising
the goals of this component.

Mr Gordon O Brien & colleagues (Centre for Aquatic Research, Zoology Department,
University of Johannesburg), Mr Martin Davies (Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries
Sciences, Rhodes University), Staff and management of Elgro River Lodge, Prof. A.
Hodgson, Mrs Shirley Pinchuck and Mr Mervin Randall (Electron Microscopy Unit, Rhodes
University), Fisheries staff of Gariep State Hatchery, Mr N James (Rivendell Hatchery),
Prof. M. Hill (Zoology Department, Rhodes University) Mr Stephan Van Der Walt (Rivers
of Life, Randfontein, Johannesburg), Water Research Commission.

Selected photographs of the developing embryo, larvae and juvenile stages of


smallmouth yellowfish are on the following 4 pages.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


44

Selected photographs of the developing embryo, larvae and juvenile stages of small mouth
yellowfish

Figure 1 Embryo stage 3, Epiboly, onset of the


Epiboly Stage E3
cell layer migrating across the yolk surface

Descending blastoderm,
encircling yolk
19mm

07/12/08, 23h11

Onset of circulation Figure 2. Embryo stage 5, Circulation, Onset of


Stage E5 blood circulation
Notocord

Myomeres/myoseptum

Optic lens

Otoliths

10/12/08, 09h35

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


45

Selected photographs of the developing embryo, larvae and juvenile stages of small mouth
yellowfish

Free embryo -Larval Stage 1 Figure 3a. Free embryo phase began with
Lens,Choroid fissure, Oral pore hatching and ended with the onset of
Heart
exogenous feeding
Cephalisation

Yolk
Notocord

Myomeres

10/12/08, 11h35 Finfold

Free embryo Larval Stage 1 Figure 3b. Free embryo phase began with
Anal pore hatching and ended with the onset of
exogenous feeding
Circulatory
pathways

Truck region Caudal region

10/12/08, 11h35

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


46

Selected photographs of the developing embryo, larvae and juvenile stages of small mouth
yellowfish

Figure 4.Young larvae stage 2, the switch to


purely exogenous nutrition and the beginning
Gills & operculum of flexion of the urostyle

Pectoral lobes

Swim bladder

Onset of pigmentation

17/12/08, 10h00

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


47

Selected photographs of the developing embryo, larvae and juvenile stages of small mouth
yellowfish

Intermediate larvae, Stage 3


Figure 5. Intermediate larvae stage 3, flexion
was complete and the caudal fin was forked
and almost fully developed

Dorsal lobe

Urostyle

19/12/09, 11h00
Juvenile stage melanophore extent Figure 6. Young juvenile complete
disappearance of the finfolds, and fish in
juvenile pigment dress.

16/02/09, 08h30

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


48

BODY SHAPE CHANGES AND ACCOMPANYING HABITAT SHIFTS:


OBSERVATIONS IN THE LIFE CYCLE OF LOWVELD LARGESCALE
YELLOWFISH, LABEOBARBUS MAREQUENSIS, IN THE LUVUVHU RIVER
CATCHMENT.

P.SO. Fouch1, W. Vlok 2 and A. Jooste3


1 Department of ,Zoology, University of Venda, 2BioAssets, Polokwane; 3 Department of Biodiversity
(Zoology), University of Limpopo. 1Email: pso1@telkomsa.net

Abstract
As part of a habitat utilization study specimens of L. marequensis were collected in previously
identified biotopes at eleven sites in the Luvuvhu River and selected tributaries during 2006
and 2007. The morphometric characters of each specimen collected were measured and
analysed using truss analyses. The biotopes at site each were delineated and mapped in detail.
During each survey the physical characters, which included the water velocity, depth and
substrate composition of each biotope were determined and recorded. Analyses of the body
length to body mass relationship showed that nine stanzas or growth phases could be
distinguished in the life cycle of the species. Statistical analyses showed that each of these
stanzas had distinctly different morphometric characters that could be regarded as
ontogenetic changes. A distinct pattern of habitat utilization by the stanzas in the biotopes in
which the specimens were collected was identified.

1. Introduction

Broader habitat characteristics define the tolerance limits, and consequently the distribution
of fish species, in a river (Gaigher, 1973). Variation on a finer scale within a river reach leads
to the formation of different micro-habitats within habitats (Gatz, 1981) and differences in
water velocity and substrate size inter alia forms part of this variation. The size, shape,
swimming ability and feeding strategy of a species defines its suitability to a micro-habitat.
The micro-habitat utilized by the different life history stages differs and is often a reflection
of the evolutionary history. While broader habitat characteristics do not directly lead to
morphological adaptations, Wood and Bain (1995) were of the opinion that morphological
differences could be related micro-habitat characteristics.

In addition to micro-habitat adaptation, the idea of associating the morphology of a species


with its niche is an old and persistent one. Already in 1980 Bock (in Gatz, 1981) proposed
equating the niche of an organism to the sum of the biological roles of its morphological
features and the selective forces that operate on those roles.

Since previous studies by Gaigher (1969) and Fouch et al., (2005) indicated that while the
large specimens of the Lowveld largescale yellowfish, Labeobarbus marequensis, were usually
present in deep, slow-flowing water, the smaller specimens occurred in fast-flowing shallow
water it was postulated that differences in the biotope preferences of the various size classes
of L. marequensis might exist.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


49

It was hypothesized that morphological differences between various size classes or growth
phases of L. marequensis existed and that these differences were related to the characteristics
of the preferred biotopes and to biological aspects such as feeding. The aim of this study was
to determine the morphological characteristics of the various size classes of L. marequensis
and to relate that to habitat. i.e. biotope, preference.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Site selection, delineation and mapping.


Sites where L. marequensis historically occur were selected in the Luvuvhu River and
tributaries. Care was taken to ensure that each site was representative of the specific river
reach in which it occurred and that each site had a well defined pool-riffle-sequence. Areas
belonging to the different velocity-depth classes (Kleynhans, 2007) were identified at each
site and each area was then treated as a separate micro-habitat. In each micro-habitat the
substrate was identified and classified as bedrock, boulder, cobble, pebble, gravel, sand or
sediment according to the prescriptions of Rowntree and Wadeson (2000). Because
velocity-depth classes and substrate composition was used in combination it was decided to
use the term biotope rather than micro-habitat (Paxton, 2004). In each biotope the depth
was then measured at four randomly selected points. At these points the velocity was
measured in ms-1 using a Pasco velocity meter. A sketch map to illustrate the site
heterogeneity was then drawn on which the biotopes were delineated and numbered.

2.2 Collection and measurement of the fish specimens.


In fast-deep and fast-shallow biotopes the fish were electro-narcotized and collected with
scoop nets. In the slow-deep and slowshallow biotopes, that were clear of snags, a small
seine net was used. A pole-seine was used in the small pools, backwaters and in particular
where sampling had to be done under and amongst vegetation. All the specimens collected
were identified using the key proposed by Skelton (2001). Care was taken to keep specimens
from each biotope separate until the fork lengths and masses were determined. The fork
length of the specimens collected was measured to the nearest millimetre and the mass to the
nearest milligram.

2.3 Length-mass relationship.


To establish the length-mass relationship a regression analyses was performed after which
trend line was fitted to resulting scatter plot. To determine whether stanzas could be
identified the slope of the trend line at the fork length mid-point of each 10mm interval fork
length class was determined and compared.

2.4 Morphometrics
Morphometric data of the attributes related to the feeding and habitat preference categories
(Appendix 1) were measured and recorded. Measurements consisted of a combination of the
truss measurement method described by Wood and Bain (1995) and physical measurements
using calipers and string. For the truss measurements the specimen was placed on water-
resistant paper and the selected landmark locations (Figure 1) marked on the paper with
pin pricks. The distances between selected land marks were measured and recorded on a data
sheet. These measurements and the consequent calculations are shown appendix 2.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


50

Figure 1: The location of the truss landmarks used for morphometric calculations
(Adapted from Wood and Bain, 1995)

2.5 Statistical analyses of the habitat preference of the species.

To investigate the habitat preference of the stanzas the data analyses focused on the local
scale i.e. the biotopes. Non-metric multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) was used to display the
unconstrained relationships between fish sizes and the biotopes. An attempt was also made
to classify the biotope types using hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis with group
average linking in Primer v.6 (Clarke & Ainsworth, 1993). The robustness of the groups
identified was tested by randomly permuting the similarity matrix that is used to construct
the cluster classification.

3. Results

3.1 The selected sites and biotope identification and mapping.


Eleven sites were surveyed in the Luvuvhu River and its tributaries during 2006 and 2007
(Figure 2). At each of the sites the biotopes were identified and mapped. Figure 2 is an
example of the sketch maps drawn at each site.

3.2 The fork length: mass relationship and the observed stanzas.
As is the case in most fish the length mass relationship is an indication of allometric growth
(M = cLn, where M is the mass, L the length and c and constants). Regression analyses of the
length mass relationship of L. marequensis indicated that a power or multiplicative trend line,
with the formula M = 0,023L3,0575, fits best with an R-squared

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


51

Figure 2: The selected sites in the Luvuvhu River catchment.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


52

1.2 X
60m 1.1

X
X
1.3
X
X
X
X
1.4
X

1.5

X
X
X
X 1.6 X

X 25m

Figure 2: Sketch map of the site at the Gauging weir (Site 1) in the Luvuvhu River.

value of 0,9876 (Figure 4). This type of trend line is typical of the larger cyprinids
(Fouch, 1995; Hamman, 1974). Inflection points were visually identified on the trend
line and the slope at each point was calculated and from the observed trends (Table 1)
nine possible growth phases or stanzas were identified. Where stanza 1 consisted of
specimens that were less than 50mm in length the boundaries of the other stanzas are:
stanza 2 - 51 to 80mm, stanza 3 - 81 to 100mm, stanza 4 - 101 to 120mm, stanza 5 -
121 to 150mm, stanza 6 151 to 200mm, stanza 7 - 201 to 250mm, stanza 8 - 251 to
320mm. Stanza 9 consisted of specimens longer than 320mm.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


53

1000

900

800

700 R2 = 0.9868

600

Mass ( g)
500

400

300

200

100

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Fork length (mm)

Figure 3: Regression analyses of the length: mass relationship of L. marequensis


collected from the Luvuvhu River.

Table 1: Calculation of the observed inclines at the inflection points observed in


the fitted exponential trend line in the L. marequensis length:mass
relationship.
Average
Average fork length mass at Increase Increase Calculated slope
at inflection point. inflection in X-axis in Y-axis of fitted trend
(mm) point (g) value value. line
44 0,8
56 2.52 15 1,72 0.1147
80 7.98 24 5.46 0.2275
102 15.70 22 7.72 0.3509
131 46.75 29 31.05 1.0707
151 64.60 20 17.85 0.8925
175 106.32 24 41.72 1.7383
204 145.00 29 38.68 1.3338
228 240.00 24 95.00 3.9583
253 320.00 25 80.00 3.2000
275 405.00 22 85.00 3.8636
300 505.00 25 100.00 4.0000
325 530.00 25 30.00 1.2000

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


54

3.3 Morphometric characters of the stanzas.

As could be expected values of the measured and calculated attributes changed as the
species grew with most attributes increasing as the fork length increased. It was therefore
decided, with the exception of the caudal fin aspect ratio, to rather express all the values
as a ratio of the fork length of the specimen.

Table 2 shows that the relative eye diameter and relative mouth width, which both are
associated to feeding, decreased as the species increased in fork length. This was however
not the case with the relative head length that increased as the fish increased in size.
Statistical analyses showed that with regard to the eye diameter the difference between all
stanzas were significantly different (p = 0.05). Table 3 shows the changes in the relative
morphological features related to habitat preference observed between the stanzas. In
figure 4 these changes are graphically illustrated and it is shown that while some aspects
increase others either decrease or remain reasonably constant. Statistical analyses showed
that difference between the stanzas were significantly different (p = 0.05) in the majority
of the aspects. In table 4 the changes in the aspect ratio of the caudal fin should be noted
as it is low in the first two stanzas, large in the next four stanzas and again smaller in the
last three.

Table 2: Average of the relative morphological features related to feeding habits


of the nine stanzas of L. marequensis specimens collected in the
Luvuvhu River. (Standard deviations in parentheses).
Fork length classes N Relative eye Relative mouth Relative head
diameter width length
ED:FL MW:FL HL:FL
< 50 15 0.079 (0.01) 0.080 (0.01) 0.218 (0.04)
51 80 86 0.067 (0.01) 0.071 (0.01) 0.269 (0.19)
81 100 85 0.064 (0.01) 0.070 (0.01) 0.223 (0.02)
101 120 83 0.059 (0.006) 0.068 (0.005) 0.205 (0.02)
121 150 91 0.053 (0.008) 0.066 (0.009) 0.197 (0.08)
151 200 31 0.049 (0.006) 0.069 (0.009) 0.187 (0.02)
201 250 10 0.040 (0.005) 0.053 (0.03) 0.163 (0.04)
251 320 16 0.037 (0.003) 0.067 (0.01) 0.188 (0.02)
> 321 11 0.033 (0.003) 0.062 (0.01) 0.176 (0.03)

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


55

Table 3: Average of the relative calculated morphological features related to


habitat preference of the nine stanzas of L. marequensis specimens collected
in the Luvuvhu River. (Standard deviations in parentheses).
Fork Relative Relative Relative Relative Relative Relative Relative Relative Relative
length body body caudal caudal peduncle caudal dorsal pectoral pelvic
classes n depth width fin span length width fin area fin area fin area
(mm) surface
BD:FL BW:FL area CS:FL RPL RCD DFA:FL PCA:FL PVA:FL
CFA:FL
0.301 0.124 1.430 0.287 0.195 0.122 0.465 0.300 0.057
< 50 15 (0.04) (0.01) (0.32) (0.04) (0.03) (0.03) (0.13) (0.10) (0.03)
0.241 0.202 2.118 0.262 0.209 0.120 0.839 0.674 0.450
51 80 86 (0.03) (0.04) (0.32) (0.04) (0.01) (0.01) (0.21) (0.32) (0.20)
81 - 0.239 0.231 2.746 0.269 0.209 0.119 1.157 1.080 0.639
100 85 (0.02) (0.02) (0.39) (0.03) (0.02) (0.02) (0.29) (0.27) (0.11)
101 - 0.259 0.231 3.294 0.283 0.207 0.119 1.388 1.012 0.665
120 83 (0.03) (0.03) (0.34) (0.04) (0.02) (0.01) (0.53) (0.50) (0.20)
121 - 0.280 0.216 4.002 0.294 0.219 0.124 1.764 1.171 0.621
150 91 (0.04) (0.05) (0.60) (0.04) (0.02) (0.02) (0.62) (0.67) (0.39)
151 - 0.287 0.197 5.116 0.304 0.217 0.126 2.086 1.296 0.779
200 31 (0.03) (0.07) (0.75) (0.03) (0.03) (0.01) (0.91) (0.54) (0.45)
201 - 0.302 0.183 6.778 0,311 0.204 0.126 3.101 1.259 0.650
250 10 (0.03) (0.05) (1.02) (0.03) (0.02) (0.01) (0.82) (0.33) (0.48)
251 - 0.291 0.188 8.264 0.299 0.219 0.132 4.558 2.140 1.422
320 16 (0.03) (0.05) (1.68) (0.03) (0.02) (0.01) (1.68) (0.80) (0.66)
0.285 0.178 9.629 0.293 0.208 0.120 5.271 2.545 1.218
> 321 11 (0.03) (0.06) (1.59) (0.02) (0.02) (0.01) (1.41) (0.95) (0.84)

Table 4: Average of the calculated morphometric characters of the nine stanzas


of L. marequensis specimens collected in the Luvuvhu River.
(Standard eviations in parentheses).
Fork N Caudal Caudal fin Pectoral fin Pelvic fin surface area
length fin aspect surface area surface area
classes ratio
< 50 15 2.02 (0.33) 67.6 (14.21) 21.36 (29.35) 2.83 (1.42)
51 - 80 86 1.95 (0.43) 150.66 (35.32) 48.04(25.66) 31.94 (15.34)
81 - 100 85 2.28 (0.44) 249.88 (45.44) 98.35 (27.08) 58.02 (11.72)
101 - 120 83 2.1 (0.27) 362.12 (47.15) 123.06 (38.3) 72.64 (21.72)
121 - 150 91 2.3 (0.16) 543.86(101.79) 160.04 (93.7) 84.58 (55.28)
151 - 200 31 2.1 (0.29) 874.85 (188.4) 212.79 (93.5) 139.05 (100.79)
201 - 250 10 2.04 (0.24) 1514.3 (324.08) 279.05 (67.9) 154.77 (123.27)
251 - 320 16 2.01 (0.36) 2418.51 (598.2) 621.8 (22.69) 417.63 (202.51)
> 321 11 2.01 (0,35) 3443.27 (852.3) 908.7 (392.8) 436.24 (304.77)

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


56

0.35

Avr\erage of relative morphological features


0.3

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Fork length classes

Relative body depth

Relative body w idth

Relative caudal peduncle span

Relative caudal peduncle length

Relative caudal peduncle w idth

Figure 4: A graphical illustration of the changes in the averages of five of the


relative calculated morphological features of the nine stanzas of
L. marequensis collected in the Luvuvhu River.

Figure 5: Hierarchical agglomerative cluster analysis based on group average


linking for all biotopes.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


57

3.4 Habitat utilization by the stanzas.

Cluster analysis, using hierarchical agglomerative methods with group average linking in
Primer v.6., identified six groups of closely related biotope types in which L. marequensis
were collected (Figure 5).

Non-metric multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) used to display the unconstrained


relationships between fish stanzas and biotopes (Figures 6 to 8) show that a definite
relationship exists. However none of the biotope preferences of the stanzas was
completely distinct and overlaps in varying degrees did occur. For example, while figure 6
shows that only a slight degree of overlap could be detected between stanzas 1 and 2, a
comparison between figures 6 and 7 shows considerable overlap between stanzas 2 and
3. Although there is no clear cut division in the biotope:stanza relationship it can be
accepted that a change in habitat preference occurs during the life cycle of the species.
This change is regarded as an ontogenetic shift.

Slow-deep
Slow shallow

Fast-shallow

Fast-deep

Figure 6: MDS ordination of stanzas 1 and 2 of L. marequensis in the biotopes.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


58

Figure 7: MDS ordination of stanzas 3, 4, 5 and 6 of L. marequensis in the


biotopes.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


59

Figure 8: MDS ordination of stanzas 7, 8 and 9 of L. marequensis in the biotopes.

4. Conclusion

As is the case with many fish species and in particular the larger cyprinids, the length-
mass relationship, in this species is best described by the formula M L3. From the
calculated slopes of the trend line fitted to the scatter plot of the length-mass data nine
stanzas, each with its own distinctive length-mass relationship could be identified.

Cyprinids have a body form that closest to what referred to by Helfman et al, (2000) as
sub-carangiform body shape and L. marequensis is no exception. This body shape,
which is characterized by a streamline body and broad V-shaped caudal fins, has the

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


60

propulsive elements concentrated in the posterior part of the body where it is evident in
the median caudal fin aspect ratio and the length of the caudal peduncle. This gives them
the ability to accelerate rapidly and swim strongly. In addition to the caudal fin the
short posteriorly placed dorsal fin makes L. marequensis more suitable for flowing rather
than non-flowing habitat. According to Hildebrand (1974) sub-carangiform fish are
regarded as locomotory generalists and can switch between modes, depending on what is
needed

For the sake of the discussion that follows and in order to compare the morphometrics
of L. marequensis the concept flowing and in particular fast flowing is going to be
equated with the concept fast swimmer. This reasoning is based on the premise that in
order to survive and live in a fast flowing habitat, the specimen should be able to swim as
fast as or faster than the velocity of the current.

Based on its sub-carangiform body shape and with its the short posteriorly placed
dorsal fin and the V-shaped caudal fin it is apparent that L. marequensis has a general
bauplan most suitable to cope with a flowing water habitat rather non-flowing habitat.
The caudal fin aspect ratio of the species, which ranges from just below 2 in the juveniles
to 2.3 in the sub-adults falls within what can be described as median and indicates that
although the fish are not as fast as the other fish that swim with the posterior trunk and
tail, namely the carangiform and thunniform swimmers, they are faster than the fish that
only use their fins. The calculated ratio indicates that the species do not continuously
cruise (Gatz, 1981). Other aspects, such as the relative caudal peduncle length, indicate
that the species is a strong swimmer.

As indicated in the results, the aspect ratio of the caudal fin, which is also a relative value,
initially decreased, then increased after which it again decreased. The changes in body
width in particular are of note as the cross section of fish obtains its most circular
format from stanza 3 to stanza 6 (Table 3). The circular cross section is typical of the
sub-carangiform body and as is stated by Nikolsky (1963), Hildebrand (1974) and
Helfman et al. (2000) is the classic cross section form that minimizes drag to a great
extent. Based on these changes in the relative morphological aspects it would seem that
initially the species does not have the ability to swim fast, or cope with fast flowing water.
It then develops the ability to swim faster and this adaptation is maintained for a few
stanzas. The final adaptation then seems to refer back to slower habitats.

Ontogenetic changes in the caudal fin and related aspects were observed. Similar changes
were observed in the relative caudal span and in the relative body depth and to an extent
in the body width. It was therefore inferred that while the juveniles, stanzas 1 and 2, are
adapted to slow flowing habitats, stanzas 3, 4, 5 and 6 which include the sub-adults and
young adults, were adapted to the fast flowing habitats. The more mature adults, stanzas
7, 8 and 9, however again prefer slow flowing habitats. These inferences were vindicated
and proven when the biotope preferences of stanzas were investigated.

With regard to the eye diameter, mouth width and head length differences in both the
actual and relative sizes were observed. Palomares and Pauly (1998) found strong
relationships between food ingestion, in the various body mass classes, and
morphometric characters such the aspect ratio of the caudal fin and the body depth ratio.
This indicated that the change in feeding habits and diet of the various size classes could
be related to the morphometry. It was shown that ontogenetic changes in both the aspect
ratio of the caudal fin and the body depth also occurred in L. marequensis and it can be

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


61

inferred that these changes can be related to changes in both the feeding habits and diet.
Although this indicates that ontogenetic differences in the trophic adaptation of the
species are imminent, no actual inference could be made to the actual diet make-up.

In conclusion it can be accepted that the changes in morphology and the accompanying
habitat preferences observed in L. marequensis would constitute a what is regarded as
ontogenetic shift as was described by Huckins (1997).

5. Reference list

CLARKE, K.R. and AINSWORTH, M. 1993. A method of linking multivariate


community structure to environmental variables. Marine Ecological Progress Series
92 :205-219.
FOUCH, P.S.O. 1995. An investigation of the scale morphology and scale annulus
formation and an evaluation of the scale method for age determination of Labeo
umbratus (Smith) (Pisces, Cyprinidae). Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, University of
Venda. 102 pp.
FOUCH, P.S.O., FOORD, S.H., POTGIETER, N. van der WAAL, B.C.W. and van
REE, T. 2005. Towards an understanding of the factors affecting the biotic
integrity of rivers in the Limpopo Province: Niche partitioning, habitat
preference and microbiological status in rheophilic biotopes of the Luvuvhu and
Mutale rivers. WRC Report no. 1197/1/05.GAIGHER, I.G. 1969. Aspekte met
betrekking tot die Ekologie, Geografie en Taksonomie van Varswatervisse in die
Limpopo- en Incomatiriviersisteem. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Randse
Afrikaanse Universiteit. 261 pp.
GAIGHER, I.G. 1973. Habitat preferences of fishes from the Limpopo River system,
Transvaal and Mocambique. Koedoe 16 , 103 116.
HAMMAN, K.C.D. 1974. n Ondersoek na die lengte, massa ouderdom en gonade
ontwikkeling van die groter visspesies in die H.F. Verwoerddam. Unpublished
M.Sc. Thesis, Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit. 78 pp.
GATZ, A.J. 1981. Morphologically inferred niche differentiation in stream fishes. The
American Midland Naturalist 106 (1) 10 21.
HELFMAN, G.S., COLETTE, B.B. and FACEY, D.F. 2000. The diversity of fishes.
Blackwell Science Inc., Massachusetts. 528pp.
HILDEBRAND, M. 1974. Analysis of vertebrate structure. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New
York. 710pp.
HUCKINS, C.J.F. 1997. Functional linkages among morphology, feeding performance,
diet and competitive ability in molluscivorous sunfish. Ecology 78 (8) : 121 138.
KLEYNHANS, C.J. 2007. Module D: Fish Response Assessment Index in River
EcoClassification: Manual for EcoStatus Determination (version 2). 72pp.
NIKOLSKY, G.V. 1963. The Ecology of Fishes. Academic Press, New York. 351pp.
PALOMARES, M.L.D. and PAULY, D. 1998. Predicting food consumption of fish
populations as functions of mortality, food type, morphometrics, temperature
and salinity. Mar. Freshwater Res. 49: 447 453.
PAXTON, B.R. 2004. Catchment-wide movement patterns and habitat utilization of
freshwater fish in rivers: Implications for dam location, design and operation. A
review and methods developed for South Africa. Water Research Commission Report
KV 145/04. 69pp.
ROWNTREE, K. and WADESON, R. 2000 Field manual for channel classification and
condition assessment. 62 pp.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


62

SKELTON, P.H. 2001. A Complete Guide to the Freshwater Fishes of Southern Africa. (2nd
Edition). Southern Book Publishers, Halfway House. 395pp.
WOOD, B.M. and BAIN, M. 1995. Morphology and micro-habitat use in stream fish.
Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sc. 52 1487 1498.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


63

Appendix 1: Some of the morphological features of fish and their relation to


habitat and food dimensions (Adapted from Gatz, 1981).

Category Group Feature Code Comments


Habitat Caudal Aspect ratio CFAR High aspect ratio indicates continuous cruising
preference fin
and Caudal Flatness ratio CPFI Flat peduncle relates to high amplitude in movements
foraging peduncle Caudal span/body CSBD As above the lower ratio relates to a high relative swimming
site depth ratio speed
Amount of red muscle RED More muscle in stronger swimmer
Relative peduncle RPL Longer peduncle in stronger swimmer
length
Dorsal Dorsal fin position DORP Determines steering abilities
fin
Eye Eye position EYEP Dorsally in benthic species
Body Flatness index of body FI Laterally flattened in stiller water and vice versa
Relative body depth RBD Deep body in still water
Index of trunk shape ITS High value in cruising species
Lateral Lateral line LLC Incomplete in benthic and sluggish fishes
line completeness
Lateral line position LLP Indicates benthicity or vertical predator-prey relationship
Mouth Mouth orientation MOUO Indicates vertical position of prey
Mouth position MOUP As above
Pectoral Area PCA Large in benthic species
fin Aspect ratio PCAR
Distance from center of PCCG Anteriorly placed in maneuverable fish.
gravity
Length PCL Long fins enhance low speed maneuvering
Position PCP Relates to turning capacity
Shape PCS Unclear
Pelvic fin Area PVA Large if fish is demersal
Aspect ratio PVAR High aspect ratio for good maneuvering
Distance from center of PVCG Away from centre enhances maneuvering
gravity
Length PVL Free swimmers have short fins
Position PVP Relates to ability to turn and brake
Shape PVS Falcate fins of current dwellers
Features Number of barbels BARB More barbels in non-optic feeding
related to Number of caeca CAEC More pyloric caeca with more protein in diet
food size Eye size EYE Directly proportional to importance of sight in feeding
and type Gill raker number GILN The more rakers the smaller the food particles
Gill raker shape GILS Long thin rakers indicate small prey
Gill raker fine structure GRFS Fine teeth on rakers for large prey.
Gut length GUTL Gut length related to diet
Jaw tooth presence JAWP Jaw teeth present if large prey is taken
Jaw tooth shape JAWS Long pointed or canine like for large prey
Hypertrophy of teeth PHAR If feeding is through suction
Pharyngeal tooth shape PHAS
Mouth protrusibility MOPR Highly protrusible for small prey
Mouth height MOUH Directly proportional to prey size
Mouth width MOUW Directly proportional to prey size
Relative head length RHL Directly proportional to prey size
Standard length SL Directly proportional to prey size

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


64

Appendix 2: Illustration of the morphometric measurements and consequent


calculations carried out on L. marequensis.
Feature Code Measurements between truss marks and calculations.
Fork length FL 2 15
Body depth BD 45
Relative body depth RBD BD/FL
Body width BW Caliper measurement
Relative body width RBW BW/FL
Caudal fin aspect ratio CFAR (7 14) / (7 15)
Relative caudal fin aspect ratio RCFAR CFAR / FL
Caudal fin area CFA [0,5 (7 15) X (14 15)] + [0,5(716) X(78)]
Relative caudal fin area RCFA CFA/FL
Caudal span CS String measurement
Relative caudal span RCS CS/FL
Caudal span/body depth ratio CSBD CS / BD
Caudal peduncle length CL 17 8
Relative caudal peduncle length RPL CL / FL
Caudal peduncle width RD 78
Relative caudal peduncle width RCD RD/FL
Dorsal fin position DORP 35
Dorsal fin height V 59
Dorsal fin area DFA 0,5[(5 6) x (6 9)]
Relative dorsal fin area RDFA DFA:FL
Relative body depth RBD BD / FL
Pectoral fin area PFA 0,5[(11 13) x (12 13)]
Pectoral fin length PFL 11 13
Pectoral fin position PFP 18 4
Relative pectoral fin area RPFA PFA/FL
Pelvic fin length PVL 4 10
Pelvic fin area PVA 0,5[(1719) X (1920)]
Relative pelvic fin area RPVA PVA/FL
Pelvic fin position PVP 18 4
Eye size (diameter) ED Caliper measurement
Relative eye diameter RED ED/FL
Mouth width MOW Caliper measurement
Relative mouth width RMOW MOW/FL
Relative head length RHL (2 3) / FL

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


65

ALIEN FISH ERADICATION: PROGRESS WITH THE EIA FOR THE CAPE
RIVER REHABILITATION PROJECT.

Dean Impson
Scientific Services, CapeNature, Pvt Bag X5014, Stellenbosch 7500. E-mail: dimpson@capenature.co.za

Project Objectives
1. Background to the project is given by Stafford and Tweddle in the 2008
Conference Proceedings.
2. Main aim is river rehabilitation returning otherwise healthy rivers to a more
natural condition, by eradicating invasive alien fishes such as smallmouth bass
and rainbow trout that threaten biodiversity.
3. Four pilot rivers have been selected. Can we achieve complete eradication in
certain areas? If so, develop protocols for other invaded rivers in priority
conservation areas. Experiences in the USA and other first world countries have
shown that eradication of alien fishes from river areas above natural (e.g.
waterfalls) or man-made barriers (e.g. weir or dam walls) can be achieved in a
cost effective way.
4. The project is linked to the development of regulations for alien fish species
under NEM:BA. That is because the rivers being targeted for treatment have
invasive alien species such as largemouth bass, smallmouth bass and rainbow
trout that will be regulated by area (category 2). Outside of designated areas or
zones, such alien fishes should be subject to control which can include
eradication. Eradication is seen as an important rehabilitation objective in
priority aquatic areas. Such areas are presently being identified as part of the
National Freshwater Ecosystem Priority Areas project undertaken under the
auspices of SANBI.
5. The project is NOT the beginning of a government sponsored campaign to
eradicate alien fishes from across RSA or the Western Cape. Point 4 above makes
it clear that alien fishes to be regulated by area, such as rainbow trout, carp and
largemouth bass, will be protected in designated areas.
6. For the project to be successful it is essential that CapeNature work closely with
other authorities (especially DWAF, Dept Agriculture, DEAT, WCape
DEA&DP) and key stakeholder groups (riparian land-owners on affected rivers,
local angling bodies, environmental NGOs).
Project progress
1. Progress has been hampered by opposition to the project, primarily by some
trout anglers who have been effective in getting media to write and air hostile
articles on the project.
2. Critical articles in media newspaper reports in the Weekend Argus of 10 May
2009 Experts slam plans to poison fish, in The Weekender of 5 July 2008
Stupidity and venality are not adaptive traits and on investigative TV
programme Carte Blanche in early 2009 that defended the trout industry in RSA.
3. Personal attacks on CapeNature and its employees in Flyfishing Forums,
presentations have not aided progress. The focus of these attacks; often
incorporating lies, slander and misinformation has been to discredit CapeNature
and its staff and thus stop the project.
4. Sadly most of the public opposition has been outside the formal communication
channels of the EIA. This is the logical vehicle to engage the project.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


66

5. Despite this, the EIA consultants have objectively and steadfastly proceeded with
their study and have recently released an Environmental Impact Report for
public comment
6. The EIR has found in CapeNatures favour the rivers proposed for treatment
are appropriate, as is the preferred method of treatment (Rotenone). The EIR
recommended that physical methods of eradication are tried first in the Krom
River, Cederberg, due to the greater sensitivity of this river system.
7. The Cape Piscatorial Society and CapeNature had a successful meeting in
February 2009 to discuss matters of mutual concern around the project.
Furthermore, both organizations, in late 2008, concluded an agreement that will
see priority trout waters in the south-western Cape, including several on
CapeNature reserves, secured for trout angling.
8. Five public meetings were held in March 2009 to discuss the findings of the EIR.
These meetings were in Cape Town, at Joubertina (Krom River, E Cape) and
three in the Cederberg (for the Krom, Rondegat and Suurvlei rivers).
Plans for 2009 / 2010
1. One key issue that arose during conflict around the project was the lack of a
Rotenone policy to guide stillwater and river treatments. CapeNature has
recently prepared a draft policy which should be finalized by mid 2009.
2. Complete EIA likely end April 2009
3. Authority decision hopefully by end May 2009
4. If positive decision start pre-implementation research and monitoring mainly
focusing on aquatic invertebrates, as these animals are could be affected by
rotenone treatments at the concentrations proposed for treatment.
5. Secure funds for pre-implementation research and actual implementation by mid
2009.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


67

YELLOWFISH TELEMETRY:
UPDATE TO THE EXISTING EWT/WRC/FLYCASTAWAY STUDY AND WAY
FORWARD.

Gordon OBrien
University of Johannesburg, Box 524 Aucklandpark 2006. Email: gordono@uj.ac.za

The yellowfish telemetry study aims to characterise the habitual behaviour of mature
yellowfish individuals across changing seasons and environmental conditions. This will
be to obtain an indication of the effects of these changing conditions on the biology of
these species. This information will be used to establish a yellowfish conservation plan
for the Vaal River that has the potential to change the way in which this nationally
important aquatic ecosystem is used and conserved.

As is to be expected from this type of study, from inception in 2006 more questions
seemed to have been raised than answers obtained. We have learned that during some
parts of the season individuals may remain in relatively small areas (very small for
Smallmouth - +/- 500m and up to 3km for Largemouth) and move continually over
large distances during elevated flow conditions. Some individuals seemed to show some
signs of territorial behaviour and moved back to precisely the same location as they were
captured. Both species appear to have a very good idea of their surrounding areas and
during stable climatic periods adopt daily habitual patterns. We are still not convinced
that we have determined the time, frequency and location of where Largemouth spawn
and we have not determined what environmental conditions are required to act as a cues
to initiate the spawning biology of these fishes.

To date, this study has involved the continued monitoring of 24 individual yellowfish
over two consecutive seasons by Linda Nel (formerly of the University of Johannesburg).
In addition to this, we have collected extensive environmental data and are in a position
to assess the initial outcomes of the study. These potential outcomes include developing
the use of radio telemetry methods to monitor fish behaviour in Southern Africa, the
effects of changing environmental conditions on the yellowfishes of the Vaal River
ecosystem and it will be a contribution to known biology of these species.

Currently the researchers of the study are writing up the outcomes of the initial phase of
the study which will be published in 2009. Following the completion of the first phase,
the research team feels that we are in a position to build on this information and answer
some important questions pertaining to the management and conservation of these
yellowfishes. In 2009 the second phase of the study has been initiated. The focus of this
phase is to address the breeding biology and general ecology of primarily the Largemouth
yellowfish in greater detail. This involves a change in the study area from the Vaal River
at Wag n Bietjie Ekoplaas to the Vaal River in the vicinity of Scandinavia Drift (Elgro
River Lodge).

The second phase of this study has been initiated with the tagging and releasing of a
single Smallmouth and a Largemouth yellowfish. Monitoring of these two individuals has
been initiated and by the end of June, with the support from local stakeholders, we
intend to have the quota of 25 Largemouth yellowfish and 5 Smallmouth yellowfish
tagged and being monitored in preparation for the 2009/10 spawning period.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


68

BUSHVELD SMALLSCALE YELLOWFISH (LABEOBARBUS POLYLEPIS):


ASPECTS OF THE ECOLOGY AND POPULATION MANAGEMENT

Gordon OBrien1, Amanda Austin1, Andrew Husted1, Victor Wepener1, Carel


Oosthuizen2 and Paulette Bloomer2.
1 University of Johannesburg, Box 524 Aucklandpark 2006. Email: gordono@uj.ac.za
2
University of Pretoria

This report will be available from the Water Research Commission in 2009.

Yellowfishes (Labeobarbus spp.) are of the most easily related to and are amongst the most
widely distributed indigenous fishes of South Africa. These fishes are actively targeted
and utilised by various angling and subsistence fishing communities throughout South
Africa. They are also used as indicator species by resource managers and
conservationists to facilitate the management of river ecosystems. This gives them a high
ecological, economical and social value to South Africans. Very little is known about
these valuable fishes and before we have the chance to fully understand the biology of
these species we risk losing them.

The Bushveld smallscale yellowfish is a large, small-scaled yellowfish that occurs in the
upper reaches of the Limpopo, Inkomati and Phongolo River systems in Southern
Africa. Throughout this distribution many fragmented populations of this species occur.
Apart from two recent assessments of this species, very little is known and to date no
formal conservation initiatives have been established to address the conservation
requirements of any potentially unique populations of this species. One population of the
Bushveld smallscale yellowfish that historically occurred in the Letaba catchment
(Limpopo Province of South Africa) is now locally extinct, potentially due to the
unsustainable use of the goods and services of this system by people.

This study has been established to address the conservation and/or management
implications associated with the potential determination of any unique populations of the
Bushveld smallscale yellowfish from five isolated populations of this species from the
greater Inkomati and Phongolo River catchments in Mpumalanga. In particular, this
study considers potential differences in the biology and ecology of these populations by
undertaking selected assessments that are concerned with the genetic and morphological
differences between these populations. In addition it considers the occurrence of metals
in the liver and muscle tissues within these populations and the feeding biology. This
study has been undertaken on behalf of the Water Research Commission by the Centre
for Aquatic Research, Zoology Department of the University of Johannesburg in
collaboration with the Department of Genetics, School of Biological Sciences, University
of Pretoria.

The Bushveld smallscale yellowfish populations used in this study were obtained from
the Inkomati River catchment including populations from the Elands River, Ngodwana
Dam and the Komati River, and two populations from the Phongolo River catchment
including populations from the Assegaai River and the Phongolo River. An out-group
population of the KwaZulu-Natal yellowfish, obtained from the Umvoti River in
KwaZulu-Natal was included in some of the analyses to facilitate the assessments.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


69

Findings from the morphological and genetic assessment indicate that consistent
morphological and genetic differences do exist between the five populations of Bushveld
smallscale yellowfish considered in this study. Based on the genetic assessment of these
five populations, findings indicate that three groups, consisting of the
Phongolo/Assegaai populations (group 1), individuals from the Komati and selected
individuals from the Elands and Ngodwana populations (group 2) and most of the
individuals from the Elands and Ngodwana populations (group 3), should be considered
as separate conservation units. An extreme case of genetic variation was obtained in this
study in the discovery of a group of individuals from the Elands River and Assegaai
River that shows a clear unique genetic divergence not only from the remaining
populations of Bushveld smallscale yellowfish but also from all of the other small-scaled
yellowfishes considered in South Africa to date.

Following the morphological assessment, outcomes indicate that although all of the
individuals from the populations considered in this study are very similar, consistent
differences in the morphology of the populations do exist. Findings suggest that the
Elands River and Ngodwana Dam populations of the Bushveld smallscale yellowfish are
unique and that they are the only populations that can with certainty be separated
morphologically from the other Bushveld smallscale yellowfish populations.
Interestingly, this study showed that although the Elands River and Ngodwana Dam
individuals of the Bushveld smallscale yellowfish could be separated from the remaining
populations considered, no other populations including the KwaZulu-Natal yellowfish,
which is a different species, could be separated with confidence in this study.

The metal assessment was used as an indication of the extent of metal exposure and
uptake in the five different Bushveld smallscale yellowfish populations. The highest
concentrations for the selected metals were found in the liver samples for all the sampled
populations with the exception of one population which showed the highest Ni
concentration in the muscle. However, this was not consistent within all five populations
as some populations showed higher bioaccumulation patterns for certain metals in the
muscle samples. The metal concentrations found in this study were relatively low and at
most, very similar in concentration when compared to other studies completed on other
indigenous South African fish species.

The results of the feeding biology assessment undertaken in this study suggest that the
Bushveld smallscale yellowfish seems to be an opportunistic omnivore that preys
predominantly on aquatic macro-invertebrates and also feeds on detritus. This species is
well adapted to forage in substrates to capture their prey as well as in the water column
and from the water surface. This ability makes this species a successful predator which
can adapt to changing ecosystem types and take advantage of various ecosystem niches.
This study suggests that different ecosystem types drive the feeding biology of this
species of yellowfish and that they may be able to adapt to moderate changes in
ecosystem structure and function.

This study reveals that not only are there genetically based differences between the
populations that warrant conservation action, but that there are also morphological
differences that can successfully be used to separate at least two of the populations from
the rest of the group. Furthermore this study has revealed that additional
experimentation should be undertaken to address the potential genetic differences within
this species in order to ascertain if the indication of a unique group of individuals
obtained in this study warrants evolutionary significant unit status. This would result in it

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


70

being established as a new species of smallscaled yellowfish. Of the five populations


considered in this study, three groups of populations were determined to be sufficiently
different from one another to warrant conservation significant unit status at this time.
Very little concerning the other remaining isolated populations of this species throughout
South Africa has been considered.

Finally, following the outcomes of this study, the current approach to conserve the
Bushveld smallscale yellowfish as one species is considered to be erroneous and it is
suggested that the isolated populations of the Bushveld smallscale yellowfish that are
determined to be unique should be awarded with an individual conservation status and
be conserved and/or managed accordingly.

Following the outcomes it is recommended that the approach adopted in this study
should be expanded to consider the genetics, morphology, biology and general ecology
of the remaining populations of Bushveld smallscale yellowfish in South Africa. In
addition, the following recommendations should be considered by ecosystem users,
conservators, regulators and managers in accordance with the outcomes of this study:

This study has shown that the isolated population of the Bushveld smallscale
yellowfish in the Elands River and associated Ngodwana Dam is unique and as
such is of great ecological importance. The conservation status of this isolated
population should be addressed with urgency as this population has historically
been impacted on by chemical spillages and possibly by genetic contamination
through individuals from the Komati River, that have been released into this
system.
More comprehensive geographic sampling of the Bushveld smallscale yellowfish
individuals from the systems included in the study as well as nuclear DNA
markers, to confirm the past and current gene flow between the separate rivers, is
required.
Further research is required to validate the findings of the metal assessment and
to possibly establish causes for the levels obtained in this study.
Additional assessments of the gut length and/or nutrient uptake potential of the
gut of Bushveld smallscale yellowfish should be undertaken to contribute in
addressing the uncertainty obtained in this study. In addition, due to the
unavailability of seasonal data in this study we recommend that additional feeding
biology assessments of this species be carried out during the spring/summer
periods. Finally, some stomach morphological assessments should be undertaken
which would address the uncertainty of the uptake of detritus matter by this
species and similar assessments should be undertaken to address differences
within and between the feeding biology of other isolated populations of L.
polylepis in South Africa.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


71

PROTECTED RIVER ECOSYSTEMS STUDY:


BLOUBANKSPRUIT, SKEERPOORT AND MAGALIES RIVERS (GAUTENG)
AND ELANDS RIVER (MPUMALANGA). CONCEPT DOCUMENT

Hylton Lewis1 and Gordon OBrien2


1Endangered Wildlife Trust, Private Bag X11 Parkview 2122. Email: hylton.fish@gmail.com.
2 University of Johannesburg

The Endangered Wildlife Trust has commissioned a study to establish a comprehensive


proposal to assess aspects pertaining to the rationale, development and management of
river protected areas in South Africa.

Introduction:
Ecosystem diversity is the key to efficient ecosystem functioning. It is this biodiversity on
which many industries from pharmaceutical to tourism are based and many of the
services that natural biodiversity offers are vital to both human and animal life. In
essence healthy functioning ecosystems are the life support systems on which we rely and
their continued abuse is unsustainable.

The establishment of protected areas is a principal means for conserving South Africas
biodiversity. Today more than 1200 national parks, wildlife reserves and other categories
of protected areas representing more than 2 million square kilometres exist. Although
there is a commitment to biodiversity conservation throughout Africa, the capacity and
resources required to carry out these endeavours effectively are not available. This results
in enormous pressure being placed on the supposedly protected ecosystems by growing
populations, excessive exploitation of natural resources and unsustainable development
that ultimately leads to the degradation of the natural habitats. Activities that threaten
biodiversity such as over-exploitation of individual species, poor relations with relevant
stakeholders, lack of funding and alien invasive species are real and severe. Furthermore,
agencies directly mandated to undertake conservation efforts often lack the capacity to
implement comprehensive management strategies. There is often a lack of dialogue with
the diverse stakeholders, an indispensable factor in the conservation practice. The
involvement of local communities in the planning, establishment and management of
protected areas can provide human resources and due to their vested interest, on-site
management of ecosystem use.

While the standard practice of conservation is not new, primary conservation efforts are
often centred on terrestrial ecosystems. While this may be suitable for terrestrial
ecosystems they do not always afford protection for the aquatic ecosystems that pass
through these terrestrial islands. To illustrate this, within South Africa large national
parks contain river ecosystems that are currently in a poor ecological state and are not
provided with adequate protection as the protected areas do not encompass the source
of the rivers that pass through them. Despite the level of protection afforded within
current protected areas, impacts occurring outside can still have consequences for the
freshwater biodiversity within.

There is an urgent need for protected areas that specifically target freshwater habitats and
protect biodiversity, representative habitats, threatened species and intact habitat
remnants. It is important that these protected areas guard against primary threats to
freshwater ecosystems. Research into protected area design focuses on general

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


72

conservation principles, but such is the nature of rivers that it may be necessary to
approach the demarcation of protection in a new manner and to consider the overall
management to ensure complete catchment integrity. Currently there are no standard
protocols on which to base the design and management of river protected areas,
however, local efforts that do show promise are evident.

The Elands River Yellowfish Conservation Area (ERYCA) is a conservation initiative


which has been established to conserve a 60km segment of the Elands River
(Mpumalanga) which is isolated by two waterfalls. The ERYCA aims to promote the
sustainable use of a unique population of Bushveld smallscale yellowfish (Labeobarbus
polylepis) as a flagship species, thereby facilitating the conservation of the biodiversity of
this aquatic ecosystem. It also aims to develop the yellowfish in this river as a valuable
sustainable resource for the local communities. Although this endeavour does recognise
the need for the development and/or use of a range of goods and services offered by the
Elands River (such as yellowfish angling) to support the conservation efforts, the
conservation of this system should not be dependent on these resources. As such a tight
line between the use and conservation of the goods and services of the Elands River is
being established.

This aquatic ecosystem was considered by public and private, local and national use,
conservation and management stakeholders to be of immense value. This was due to the
current relatively pristine ecological state of the system which currently maintains a vast
diversity of aquatic organisms, some of which are listed as being rare, endangered and in
the case of the Inkomati Rock-catlet, critically endangered according to the International
Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). It was proposed in 2002 that this
segment of the Elands River be declared a conservation area and the result was the
formation of the ERYCA strategy in 2004.

The ERYCA was developed in 2004 and in 2009 (five years later) the conservation
initiative exists in principle but has not become operational. Some reasons which have
been ascribed, by stakeholders, to the delayed implementation include limited ecosystem
resources, in the form of yellowfish that can be used to generate resources for the
initiative. Other reasons include limited external financial and skilled human resources
for the endeavour, and the inability of the ERYCA members to establish an awareness
programme and again for them to maintain day to day operational activity expenses.
This study aims to address these shortcomings.

Additional river systems that have been identified as potential case studies for protected
area establishment are the Bloubankspruit, Skeerpoort and Magalies rivers (Gauteng).
These aquatic ecosystems are considered to be in a relatively good ecological state when
compared to other Gauteng rivers. Through the actions of local land owners, registered
water users, aquatic biologists and public organisations they can be afforded some
protection in terms of provincial biodiversity conservation endeavours. The
Bloubankspruit is a small perennial tributary of the upper Crocodile River, upstream of
the Hartebeespoort Dam, west of Johannesburg. This small tributary originates in the
Kromdraai area of western Gauteng, specifically in the Swartkops area/Sterkfontien
caves. It then flows north-easterly and enters the Crocodile River at the confluence
located on the Glenburn Lodge estate. Within the catchment of the Bloubankspruit
various anthropogenic activities, including agricultural, small industrial, waste water
treatment works, limited mining activities and recreational activities occur. In the
Bloubankspruit a wide variety of indigenous fishes still occur, in fact, as of 2006, the

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


73

diversity of fishes in the Bloubankspruit is considered to be somewhat comparable to


natural conditions. In Gauteng where a vast majority of the local fish communities have
been severely impacted by altered water qualities, habitat destruction, flow alterations,
excessive water abstraction, population fragmentation, excessive harvesting and many
other stressors, few areas remain in a state similar to that of the Bloubankspruit.

An additional two river ecosystems in the upper Crocodile River catchment (Gauteng)
that do warrant conservation action, due to the high ecological importance of the
systems based on the aquatic biodiversity of the systems, includes the Skeerpoort and
Magalies rivers. Of the possible 21 fish species which may occur within these systems at
least two species are listed red data species whilst an additional seven species can be
considered to be listed as having local and or provincial endangered status. The protected
rivers conservation endeavour may potentially provide a sanctuary for these endangered
species along with an additional local endemic species standing to benefit from the
endeavour. It is recognised that conservation efforts centred on a single species are not
always effective. A species becoming threatened may indicate an already degraded
ecosystem, it is reasonable to believe that this programme will be able to afford
protection to the various ecosystems due to their current relatively pristine state.

It is the aim of this study to establish a complete proposal pertaining to the development
and management of protected rivers. As part of this it will be our aim to promote the
areas of the Bloubankspruit and the Skeerpoort and Magalies rivers (Gauteng) in the
greater Magaliesberg in the same manner as that proposed for the Elands River
(Mpumalanga) and these will serve as case studies for future reference. It will be required
that the following tasks be carried out in order to achieve these aims.

1. Carry out a desktop assessment considering the motivation for, and an


approach needed to have a protected river ecosystem established along a
segment of relevant rivers.
2. Collect information pertaining to the establishment of the Elands River
Yellowfish Conservation Area in Mpumalanga for use in the proposal.
3. Carry out a reconnaissance and low confidence survey of the Bloubankspruit
and Skeerpoort River to collect initial information for the establishment of
the proposal.
4. Establishment of a comprehensive proposal titled: Protected river ecosystems
study using the Bloubankspruit, Skeerpoort and or Magalies River (Gauteng)
and Elands River (Mpumalanga) as case studies.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


74

LEGISLATIVE REVIEW: A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE LEGISLATIVE


FRAMEWORK FOR ANGLING IN SOUTH AFRICA

Morn Viljoen
CLS Consulting Services (Pty) Ltd. Email: morne.viljoen@consult-cls.com

Angling in South Africa is governed by a plethora of contradicting laws. Anglers are


faced with national legislation, as well as contradicting legislation pertaining to the same
fish species in different provinces. The following legislation is directly applicable to
anglers in the various provinces:

Province Applicable Legislation


Eastern Cape Cape of Good Hope Nature & Environmental Conservation
Ordinance (Cape Ordinance),
Threatened or Protected Species Regulations (TOPS Regs)
Alien and Invasive Species Regulations (AIS Regs) (possibly to
be enacted in 2009) and
Marine Living Resources Act (MLRA)
Western Cape Cape Ordinance,
TOPS Regs and
MLRA
AIS Regs
Northern Cape Cape Ordinance,
TOPS Regs and
MLRA
AIS Regs
North West Cape Ordinance;
Transvaal Nature Conservation Ordinance, and
TOPS Regs
AIS Regs
KwaZulu-Natal Natal Nature Conservation Ordinance,
TOPS Regs
AIS Regs
MLRA
Mpumalanga Mpumalanga Nature Conservation Act
TOPS Regs
AIS Regs
Free State Free State Nature Conservation Ordinance and
TOPS Regs
Gauteng Transvaal Nature Conservation Ordinance
TOPS Regs
AIS Regs
Limpopo Limpopo Environmental Management Act
TOPS Regs
AIS Regs

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


75

Each province views angling and angling permits, conservation and management of its
freshwater resources differently. With the introduction of the TOPS Regs (and the Alien
Invasive Regulations to be introduced shortly), we now also have national legislation
governing fish thats already been governed by provincial legislation.

The abovementioned legislation is to be implemented by the National Department of


Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT), as well as the provincial departments
managing environmental matters. Add to the mix the National Water Act in terms of
which the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) must protect the
biological characteristics of water as well as the characteristics, condition and
distribution of aquatic biota and we have a recipe which leads to confusion amongst
anglers and government officials alike. In the process legal certainty, a corner stone of a
sound legal system is lost.

In light of the above, I conducted a study to ascertain how anglers feel about the
situation. The questionnaire was published in the Tight Lines Magazine and other
anglers were contacted via e-mail. The results are as follows:

Do you think we should have angling


licences in SA at all?
100 89
80
60
%
40
20 11

0
Yes No

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


76

What should the licence fees be


used for? Conservation of fish
habitat
Conservation of fish
50
44 stocks
45 Combating Water Pollution
40 37
Upkeep of angling w aters
35 31 30 30
30 General Environmental
24 Conservation
25 21
Admin. and enforcement of
20 angling legislation
15 All of these
10
4 Community upliftment &
5 2 1 aw areness
0 Funding of angling bodies
and clubs
Number of respondents Other

How much are you willing to pay for a national


angling licence (per year)?
10% 9%

0
26% 50
28%
100
150
>150

27%

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


77

Is there a need for a single national angling


licence?
No

Yes
No

Yes

Should there be a single, national law for


angling?
No
7%

Yes
93%

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


78

Should there be separate licences for fresh


and salt water angling?

No
45% Yes
55%

Should there be separate legislation for each


province, each with its own licence?
Yes
7%

No
93%

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


79

Should there be separate legislation for each


province which is summarised on a single
national angling licence?
Yes
28%

No
72%

Should there be separate legislation and


licences for each province?

Yes
5%

No
95%

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


80

Where should one be able to obtain an angling


licence?
64
Number of respondents
70
56
60
50 38
40
30 17
20 14 10
10
0

How many rods should an angler be allowed


to fish with?

50 46

40
30
% 21
17
20 13
10 2 0 0
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 No limit

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


81

How many hooks per rod should an angler be


allowed to fish with?

80 69

60

% 40
20 10 14
7

0
1 2 3 No limit

Should anglers be prohibited from using keep


nets?

Yes
11%

No
89%

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


82

Should all species of fish caught be released?


Only
indigenous
Yes
species
18%
24%

No
58%

Should feeding places be allowed?

No Yes
51% 49%

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


83

Should markers for feeding spots be allowed?

Yes
35%

No
65%

Should fresh water anglers be allowed to fish


with live bait?
No
23%

Yes
77%

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


84

Should anglers be forced not to return any


alien invasive species?

60
50
40
% 30
20
10
0
Yes No Only in certain zones

Should fishing with gill nets/any other manner


of fishing that does not involve a rod and reel
be allowed?
Yes
17%

No
83%

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


85

Should anglers in possession of an angling


licence be allowed to enter any angling
waters, without having to pay and entrance
fee?
Yes
Only in
17%
respect of
government
property
38%

No
45%

In an interview with the Department of Environmental Affairs and Forestry (DEAT) it


was indicated that, the TOPS Regulations will be applied in such a way by the
government departments that a TOPS permit will not be required where one practices
catch and release. DEAT is also contemplating looking at drafting a single, national
licensing system for freshwater angling, although this is a mere thought at this time and
no work has been done in this regard. However, DEAT is apparently not keen on
separate legislation just for angling. A possible solution will be to list all fishes in South
Africa either as Threatened or Protected or as Alien and Invasive. A single, national
licence is then issued, dealing with each species, making provision for provincial
circumstances (i.e. where some species are to be protected in one province, but is to be
regarded as invasive in another. An electronic licensing system for freshwater angling
may also be looked at in future.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


86

SMALLMOUTH YELLOWFISH, LABEOBARBUS AENUS, STATUS IN THE


GREAT KEI CATCHMENT

U. Tshayingca1, S.Mzileni, E. Weni.


Department of Water Affairs & Forestry, Box 7019, East London 5200. 1Email:
TshayyingcaU@dwaf.gov.za

ABSTRACT

Resource Protection, within DWAF, conducts seasonal biomonitoring in both WMA 12


and WMA 15 rivers, within the Eastern Cape. Indices used in determining river
condition are drivers such as water quality, geomorphology and riparian vegetation;
which affect the responders such as invertebrates and the fish. L. aenus has been
introduced in the following systems to mention but a few, the Great Fish, Kei and
Mbashe and has now infested these systems, together with their tributaries. Its natural
range is the Vaal-Orange system (Skelton)
Great Kei sampling proved that this fish prefers fast deep water, where there is bedrock,
boulders and cobbles. Habitat degradation (resulting from sedimentation) is a threat to
this fish community. Juveniles were always caught in slow deep water. This is usually the
pocket or backwater of the main stem. Skelton recorded that this fish preys on small
fish, including, but not limited to, the indigenous chubby headed barbs, Barbus anoplus.
This has been evidenced by the diminishing numbers of the B. anoplus in these systems.
In areas where the river forms a secondary channel (usually slow shallow), the indigenous
barbs use that channel as a refuge to escape predation by the adult yellowfish. The
juvenile yellowfish co-exist with the indigenous minows in the backwater or secondary
channel. Smallmouth yellowfish have easily adapted to this system as they were
abundant throughout the catchment and showed no signs of infection.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


87

STATUS OF YELLOWFISH POPULATIONS IN KWAZULU-NATAL

Rob Karssing
Senior Aquatic Research Technician, Biodiversity Division, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, P.O.Box 13053,
Cascades, 3202. E.mail: karssinr@kznwildlife.com

Species present
There are three indigenous yellowfish species in Kwa-Zulu Natal, including the
ubiquitous KwaZulu-Natal Yellowfish Labeobarbus natalensis which is widespread from the
Mkuze River southwards to the Umtamvuna River on the Eastern Cape Border.
This fish occurs at altitudes as low as 100 m and may migrate into the Drakensberg to
altitudes of 1500 m or more during the summer months. The other two species include
the Bushveld Smallscale Yellowfish Labeobarbus polylepis and the Lowveld Largescale
Yellowfish Labeobarbus marequensis, both of which are restricted to the Phongolo system
in northern KZN. Although there may be some overlap between these two species,
L.polylepis is a more temperate species typically inhabiting rivers above 600 m while L.
marequensis on the other hand prefers warmer water and is generally limited to altitudes
below 600 m.

Status of species
Although widely spread throughout the province the KwaZulu-Natals yellowfish are
coming under increased pressure due to man induced habitat change. Freshwater fish are
globally the most threatened group of vertebrates after amphibians with more than a
third of all species currently threatened with extinction.

Threats
Pollution has come to the forefront as being one of the major threats to yellowfish in
KZN. A major pollution event occurred in the Mgeni River at Howick towards the end
of last year when yellowfish, barbel, bass and carp were killed by pollutants. The main
source of pollution emanated from the Siphumele Township and Thokoza informal
settlement on the outskirts of Howick. Despite numerous earlier complaints to the
Umgeni Municipality about the state of overflowing sewers and dysfunctional sewage
pumping stations, no direct action was taken by the authorities until reports were
received about fish dying downstream of the point source of pollution. Besides
yellowfish, hardy species like bass, barbel and carp also died in this incident. A report was
also received about a dead Cape Clawless Otter. An investigation by DWAF officials
revealed that the small stream which leads through the Siphumele/Thokoza settlement,
had astronomical high e-coli and unionized anmmonia levels that were largely
instrumental in creating the fish kill. The investigation also revealed the presence of milk
solids in the stream which originated from the Fairfield Dairy processing plant. The
pollution event occurred at a time when the flow in the river, although regulated by a
release of water from Midmar, was low and water temperatures were increasing. It is
surmised that a progressive build of pollutants, low oxygen levels, and unnaturally high
levels of un-ionised ammonia, produced a lethal concoction of toxins resulting in the
massive fish kill. Several local authorities can be held responsible for this incident; the
local uMngeni municipality that was ironically in the process at the time of transferring
the responsibility for sewage treatment to the greater Umgungundlovu district
municipality, Umgeni Water Board, and ultimately DWAF. Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife
have proposed at a recent Upper Mngeni Catchment Management Agency (CMA) that

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


88

water released from Midmar en-route to Albert Falls, be periodically pulsed during early
spring period as a proactive measure to flush out toxins which could accumulate in the
system.
A regulated flow of approximately 0.5 cumecs is routinely released from Midmar Dam.

The Howick West sewage plant remains a concern since it flushes treated water down a
hillside directly into the Umgeni Valley Nature Reserve managed by the Wildlife and
Environmental Society of South Africa (WESSA). Water released from this facility is in
many instances sub-standard and according to an Umgeni Board can be related to
ongoing technical problems as well as the presence of specific bacterium in the system
that prevents the flocculation and sedimentation of solid matter. The compliance rating
of this facility is currently set at 76%. 21 % of residents of Howicks residents currently
do not have adequate sanitation while 43 % do not have refuse removal. A further 3 457
households have been added to the sewage reticulation system at Howick without further
enhancements to the existing infrastructure.

Another matter of great concern is the proposed increase in the HEP generating capacity
of the Drakensberg Pumped Storage Scheme. With the advent of Katze Dam as an
additional source of water for the Vaal the focus of the Thukela-Vaal inter-Basin
Transfer Sceme (IBWTS) has shifted more towards it power generation capabilities. To
the best of our knowledge water released into Kilburn Dam (KZN) from Sterkfontein
Dam (OFS) for HEP purposes has to date never overflowed directly into the Thukela
system.
It is a well known fact that Kilburn Dam has a full complement of Orange-Vaal species
as well as a host of exotic species that could potentially invade the Thukela system. There
have been a few records of some escapees which can be linked to DWAF operation staff
testing release valves without having adequate screening in place.

Eskom is seeking permission to allow the dam to overflow should they be faced with a
black start. A black start relates to a major blackout occurring in the national grid
whereby Eskom would seek to use an alternative supply source (not coal fired) that can
fed into the national grid at short notice. A similar HEP installation is being developed at
Braamhoek where surplus power generated by coal fired power station at night will be
used to pump up water during the night (low demand period) and released via turbines
during the day (low demand period). In essence, the stored water in the high altitude
dams effectively function as large batteries, releasing their stored energy as water is
released back via giant turbines to receiving dams on the KZN side of the water.

Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife formally objected to a proposal by Eskom to release the


overflow water of Kilburn Dam directly into the Thukela River. Africon environmental
consultants were commissioned by Eskom to obtain environmental authorization from
DEAT for the proposed increase in HEP generation. Subsequent discussions with the
department revealed that an EIA was not required in terms of national legislation for the
activity. They did indicate however that it would be good policy for Eskom to undertake
a risk assessment which could help make informed decisions on this issue. It was further
proposed that Eskom undertake some form of public participation as well as incorporate
their recommendations into a Biodiversity Management Plan (BMP). The fish study was
to be conducted by Johann Rall of Golder and the BMP completed by Africon
consultants.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


89

Another matter of great concern is the increase of poaching taking place primarily in the
vicinity of state controlled dams. In most instances Yellowfish are becoming decimated
at several localities during their annual spawning runs. Some of the worst poaching is
taking place at Inanda and Nagle Dams. Poachers are using high quality gill nets and are
also attempting to buy cast nets at local tackle shops. The management authority of
Inanda (Msinsi) is unable to cope with the magnitude of the problem and has requested
the involvement of EKZNW. It would appear that in most instances that the poaching is
taking place on an organized basis with the bulk of the catch being marketed in the
Durban metropolitan area. Although EKZNW is the mandated authority to deal with
fish poaching problems it also lacks the capacity to do so effectively. A task team
comprising of concerned anglers and police reservists carried out a surprise raid on both
Inanda and Nagle Dams. The team recovered more than 500 m of gill nets, destroyed
two boats and confiscated six other in three days of raiding. There were some reported
incidents of the task team being fired upon by local community members as they
removed gill nets. This raid was privately funded with the cost of fuel alone amounting to
R 3000.

A new threat in KZN is the occurrence of armoured sail-fin catfish Plecostomus spp in the
Mhlatuze River and tributaries in the Richards Bay/Empangeni region. It is uncertain
whether these alien fish, which have been introduced into the natural environment via
the aquarium trade, will overlap with the distribution of yellowfish. It is predicted
however that these South American aliens are going to flourish in the sub tropical
climate of KZN wherever they unfortunately occur.

Conservation measures to conserve the yellowfish resource

(1) Establishment of conservancies and conservation areas


Ezemvelo KZN Wildlifes stewardship programme supports yellowfish conservation

The new EKZNW stewardship programme recognizes that a large proportion of the rich
biological diversity of KZN is not being adequately protected, but is instead found on
privately and communally-owned land. This new initiative encourages landowners within
the province to become partners with Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife in applying the
stewardship principles on their land and to take responsibility for the protection of these
particular assets. The programme offers various stewardship options to landowners who
retain all ownership rights and can tailor-make an option to suit their particular situation
and needs. Nature reserve status was conferred on the Dalton Private Reserve which is
located just upstream from EKZNWs Moor Park Nature Reserve on the Bushmans
River. This section of the Bushman River is home to formidable annual run of KZN
Yellowfish which makes their way up from Wagendrift Dam and venture as far as the
Giants Castle Game Reserve. The management staff of Dalton Private Reserve has
successfully cleared the river banks on their property of invasive wattle trees and other
alien vegetation. A similar stewardship agreement was signed with the Mbandala
Traditional Authority along the Ngwangwane River which supports both exotic trout and
yellowfish. The signing of these agreements allows landowners to formally become part
of the conservation network in the province, and in this way it is hoped that unprotected
biological assets will receive the protection they need, while giving landowners an added
sense of pride in their biodiversity conservation contribution.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


90

(2) Stocking
Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife does not support the movement of yellowfish outside of their
natural range for recreational fishing.

(3) Education and awareness

(4) Legislation
The introduction of a national freshwater fishing licence would assist greatly in making
the yellowfish resource more sustainable. There would need to be general agreement
however amongst all the provincial nature conservation authorities to achieve this goal
which may take several years to implement. Funds from the collection of licences could
be used for both compliance and research purposes. In the short term however it would
wise to extend the protection of existing legislation to cover certain other yellowfish
species by also including them among the list of protected species listed in terms of the
current TOPS regulation. I believe that a strong case could be made for the added
protection of the KwaZulu-Natal Yellowfish L.natatalensis since it is an endemic species
of the province that is long lived and which grows slowly. The fish also has a high
recreational value as a freshwater sport fish. Currently populations of this species,
although generally common in the province, are largely becoming decimated by
unscrupulous poaching. Much of this poaching is taking place during the annual
spawning run when large numbers of these fish congregate in shallow water at the head
of streams and at the base of barriers like waterfalls and dams, this makes them highly
susceptible to poaching. Having a protected status would require that all anglers have a
TOPS permit to capture them. Conditions of the permit can potentially stipulate both a
bag and a size limit for the species. Hefty fines, in terms of a contravening the
regulations of a national act, could then be imposed by the courts on persons abusing
this valuable natural resource.

(5) Monitoring
No dedicated monitoring programmes have been implemented by Ezemvelo KZN
Wildlife towards the monitoring of yellowfish in the province. The occurrence of
yellowfish in field surveys is treated more incidentally as part of the fish assemblages.
EKZNW is currently more committed to carrying out field surveys that provide
representative samples of the fish assemblages occurring in aquatic bioregions identified
by its systematic conservation plan.

(6) Research
Research has been carried out by Prof. Paulette Bloomer on the genetics of KZN
Yellowfish (Labeobarbus natalensis). Her results indicate distinct genetic differences
between geographically isolated populations in this province. Many of KZNs river
systems flow eastwards and are isolated from one another spatially.

(7) Value of yellowfish resource to anglers and subsistence fishers


KZN Yellowfish are increasingly becoming a more valuable natural asset to the province
as the free supply of products and services provided from the natural environment
become eroded away by man induced habitat change.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


91

FREE STATE STATUS REPORT

Johan Hardy
Manager, North & East region, Free State Nature Conservation, P O Box 1965, Welkom 9460. Email:
jchardio@telkomsa.net

The Free State Department of Tourism, Environmental and Economic Affairs do not
have a fish scientist at the moment. Johan Hardy from the Sub Directorate
Environmental Empowerment and Awareness is doing it as part of his job description
through Forums.
The Orange Vaal River Yellowfish Conservation and Management Associations
management team has been registered as the Vaal River Yellowfish Forum.

Does the Free State have a water crisis, not possible? According to the map, we are right
in the middle and thus have Sterkfontein in the East; Vaaldam in the north,
Bloemhofdam in the west and Gariep in the South, so see, there is more than enough
water. Some of these dams are connected by canals, either to import of export water. So
see, if we are short, we call and they send water by pump.

Either imported or connected by canal to export, what a pleasure to use it for recreation,
or fishing to be exact. But can we have an invasion, an invasion of what? Dark clouds
are hanging over our precious water because lots of stuff can go wrong, but like what?

Are the Free States freshwater fish one day going to be only aliens or genetic modified
due to the doings of Homo sapiens. We are importing and exporting water from other
water catchments in other provinces, what if fish, eggs, larvae etc are being transported
through this intervention. Proof exists that the Small and Largemouth Yellowfish and
Oranje River Mud fish went through to Killburn dam, from Sterkfontein. Then it must
be vise versa that fish endemic or alien to KZN might be a possibility in Sterkfontein.
The Natal Scaly and Smallmouth are from the same genus and can interbreed, this must
be checked out. If it is so and water is transferred from Sterkfontein into the Vaaldam
system, what then? Is it really then neccesary to try and not move fish from one system
to another if it might be already infested?

A proper fish survey has to be done to determine the status of fish populations in each
water catchment. If they are connected, they must be managed like that. Only the
separate geographic rivers must then be managed as an entity, with no movement of fish
between them. AS in the case of KZN, they have 5 different catchments, each with his
own gene pool.

Let us look at the water we receive from the Vaal, Klip, Riet and Barrage. By sight it
seems clean and nice water to use for recreational purposes, but!

A Transdiciplinary study on the water quality of the Vaal River from Barrage down to
Schoemansdrift was undertaken by Potchefstroom University, under leadership of Prof.
Johann Tempelhof. The team exist of different persons from Water Affairs,
Potchefstroom University, Landowners, Business people, Municipal officials, Health
officers, Environmentalists, Human resources etc.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


92

Water samples were taken to test for Cryptosporidium, Garnea and other unsafe coli
forms that could exist in the river. Physical site inspections took place and here the local
community which were found near or next to the river, were interviewed to find out how
they are experiencing the river. People directed or showed us problems which they knew
of in the river. Signs of pollution were visible, stuff drifted on the water; some dead
fish were floating past. Toilet outlet pipes ran into the river, lots and lots of hyacinths
and other plants usually found in sewer plants, were sighted on the river and along the
banks.

Culprits of serious pollution in the study area were private riparian land owners and local
municipalities. A person pumped water from the river to irrigate his resort and fill up the
small dam for animals, the pump was leaking lots of oil and it on the bank of the river. A
Chinese toilet paper factory was sending their effluent, white paper pulp and chemicals,
through a marshland down to the river. The Parys sewer works did not operate and
spillages occur on site; it flushed down to the river. The final effluent showed lots of
solids still within, whilst it was released into the river.

The Parys Aquatic Weeds Forum is managed by Working for Water, DWAF. Quarterly
meetings are held in Parys where feedback is given to the community and issues related is
discussed. Contract teams do mechanical clearing and chemical spraying are being done
by rubber duck on the water. Problem is that some of the teams have been found taking
river water to dilute the herbicide; this is useless due to the herbicide to disintegrate
because it was formulated to do so, to be aquatic invertebrate and fish safe. However
biological control agents exist, they are more than once spayed and then die. The sprayed
plants die and sank to the bottom where they rot, and the breaking up process releases
ammonia which is toxic to fish and other water life.

The Orange Vaal River Yellowfish Conservation and Management Association were
established to enhance the survival of mainly the Largemouth Yellowfish, however all
other indigenous species are benefiting from this effort. We promote Yellow fish
conservation through awareness initiatives, like stickers, posters, billboards and making
use of volunteers. Fishermen are encouraged to report fish mortalities, diseases, big
catches etc. The catch and release program ensured that fish up to 13 kg were caught
recently, were it was difficult to catch a fish bigger than 3 kg several years ago.

Threats to our water systems are chemical and fertilizer over use which leads to seepage
and spillages which land directly in our water systems, causes fish deaths. Blocked sewer
manholes and pipelines are the order of the day, millions of litres of raw sewage ends up
in our water systems daily. What is the effect of hormones, excretion of body diseases
which ends up in our water systems; surely it must have an enormous effect?

Yes you can do something, before pointing a finger, know that 3 are pointing back to
you, asking you, are you right in what you do. Thus start now and practice what you
preach. Awareness is our only weapon to fight this threat facing us, act now.

Thanks for the opportunity and know that all is fine for 2010, and enjoy fishing in our
clean water.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


93

YELLOWFISH REGIONAL REPORT FOR THE WESTERN CAPE 2008/2009

Martine Jordaan1 and Dean Impson2


River Conservation Unit, Scientific Services Division, CapeNature Pvt Bag X5014, Stellenbosch 7500.
Email: 1mjordaan@capenature.co.za; 2dimpson@capenature.co.za

Summary
The Western Cape Province has four yellowfish species, three of which are indigenous
(Skelton, 2001). These are the Clanwilliam Yellowfish (Labeobarbus capensis), the sawfin
(Barbus serra) and the whitefish (Barbus andrewi). The latter two species are considered
endangered, while the Clanwilliam yellowfish is considered as vulnerable according to
IUCN criteria (Impson, 2007). The smallmouth yellowfish (Labeobarbus anaeus) naturally
occurs in the Orange-Vaal system, but has been introduced to the Gouritz river system in
the Western Cape where it is considered an alien invasive species. The main threat to
indigenous fish species, including the yellowfishes, in the Western Cape is the widespread
occurrence of alien invasive species such as bass (Micropterus spp.), rainbow trout
(Onchorynchus mykiss), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), carp (Cyprinus carpio) and catfish (Clarias
gariepinus). These species negatively impact indigenous fish through predation,
competition and habitat modification. Studies by Shelton (2003), Woodford et al. (2004)
and Lowe (2008) have clearly illustrated the negative effects that the presence of alien
fish has on indigenous fish and general river ecology. Other threats to indigenous fish
include invasive alien plants, water over-abstraction, agrichemical pollution and
uncontrolled habitat degradation, especially within commercial deciduous fruit farming
areas.

Taking into account the current conservation status of yellowfishes in the Province, there
is an urgent need for a partnership between the private sector (WCYWG) and the formal
conservation sector (CapeNature) and an important development for 2009 is the
proposed close cooperation between the two parties. The WCYWG has a critical role to
play in yellowfish conservation in the Western Cape and their priorities for 2009 have
been formalized and communicated to CapeNature towards the end of 2008. These
have been evaluated and approved by CapeNature by early 2009 and the way forward
will be the implementation of proposed WCYWG actions with assistance of CapeNature.

The aims of WCYWG include:


1. To protect healthy populations of yellowfishes presently found in the Western
Cape Province.
2. To restore depleted populations in sections of the Doring-, Olifants-, Berg- and
Breede River systems.
3. To maintain and improve habitat and riparian zones in river systems where
yellowfish are found.
4. To stimulate research and improve awareness of the species.

CapeNature, with the assistance of the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry
(DWAF) is presently implementing the national River Health Program (RHP) in the
Western Cape through the River Conservation Unit (RCU). The RCU consists of
aquatic scientists from both CapeNature and DWAFs Resource Protection Unit, and
staff members are in the process of finishing a comprehensive assessment of the greater

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


94

Breede River using a number of biological indices. The main findings of the assessment
include:
The 1/100 year flood that was experienced in the second half of 2008 resulted in
large scale environmental damage to most of the Breede catchment. This was
followed by extensive bulldozing in many parts of the catchment, especially
around the town of Montagu and in the Hex River valley.
After surveying almost 50 sites throughout the Breede river system, no whitefish
were caught at any of sites surveyed. This is a shocking finding for a species
that was widespread and abundant throughout this system until alien fish started
to dominate the system after the 1950s. Since the 1/100 year flood event and the
resultant bulldozing activity, there is also no record of whitefish population that
occurred in the Hex River. On a positive note, a small population of whitefish
was found immediately below the Roode-Elsberg dam on the Sanddrif River in
the Hex River Valley. The local farmers report that the dam itself has a large
whitefish population but CapeNature has not yet verified this.
The spread of Sharptooth catfish in the Breede River system is a major source of
concern. This species was not recorded in the system prior to 1990 and their
presence in the Breede system is the result of illegal introductions. Sharptooth
catfish have now widely invaded the system, including several tributaries
such as the upper Keisie River outside Montagu and the Hex River near De
Doorns. The latter area is a priority area for indigenous fish conservation and is
presently home to large populations of galaxias (Galaxias zebratus), Cape Kurper
(Sandelia capensis) and redfins (Pseudobarbus burchelli). The presence of catfish will
no doubt have a deleterious impact on the indigenous fish assemblage of the
Hex River.

The way forward for the year ahead:


The WCYWC has identified the key issues for yellowfish conservation in the Western
Cape and a Yellowfish Management Plan is now needed. The WCYWG, with the
assistance of CapeNature, will aim to identify and work closely with farmers and
landowners who have an interest in yellowfishes so that these fish can be stocked into
suitable farm dams and stretches of river where the introduced fish will have a good
chance of surviving and becoming established. It must be noted that the stocking of
these fish will be subjected to strict genetic principles to prevent genetic contamination
of distinct populations. Stocking will also only be allowed within the historic distribution
range of a species. The work of the RCU continues and after completion of the
comprehensive survey on the Breede River the surveying of the Berg River system will
start. Another positive development is the aquatic stewardship program that is envisaged
for the greater Cederberg area. This project will focus on the identification of areas that
are of importance for conservation of priority aquatic ecosystems. This will include
several rivers with Clanwilliam Yellowfish (Labeobarbus capensis) and sawfin (Barbus serra).
The proposed Ratels River Yellowfish Conservancy in the Porterville area is presently on
hold and a final decision will be made once an invertebrate assessment is complete.
Regarding the proposed CAPE Alien Fish Eradication Project, CapeNature is pleased to
report that the EIA team has found that the rivers selected as pilot projects to be
appropriate, as is the preferred method of eradication (rotenone). The Environmental
Impact Report is presently out for public comment and the project is discussed in greater
detail in these proceedings in the project summary of Impson (2009).

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


95

References
IMPSON, ND (2007) Freshwater Fish Chapter, Western Cape Province State of
Biodiversity Report: 19-34.

LOWE S, WOORDFORD DJ, IMPSON ND, DAY JA (2008) The impacts of invasive
alien fish and invasive alien plants on the invertebrate fauna of the Rondegat
River, Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. African Journal of Aquatic Sciences
33(1): 51-62.

SHELTON JM, DAY JA, GRIFFITHS CL (2003) Influence of largemouth bass,


Micropterus salmoides, on abundance and habitat selection of Cape galaxias,
Galaxias zebratus, in a mountain stream in the Cape Floristic Region, South
Africa. African Journal of Aquatic Sciences 33(3): 201-210.

SKELTON P (2001) A Complete Guide to the Freshwater Fishes of Southern Africa.


Struik Publishers, Cape Town, South Africa, 395pp.

WOORDFORD DJ, IMPSON ND (2004) A preliminary assessment of the impacts of


alien rainbow trout (Onchorynchus mykiss) on the indigenous fishes of the upper
Berg River, Western Cape, South Africa. African Journal of Aquatic Sciences
29(1): 107-111.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


96

RIVER MONITORING IN LIMPOPO PROVINCE 2009

MK Angliss1 and SSM Rodgers


Limpopo Environmental Affairs. Box 217, Polokwane 0700. 1Email: fish@pixie.co.za

Abstract.

The Biodiversity Section of Limpopo Environmental Affairs continues to progress with


limited staff. During 2008, the section undertook a systematic survey of the Matlabas
River Catchment. Due to the presence of Marakele National Park, the survey was
conducted in collaboration with South African National Parks (SANParks). Technical
reports on the survey were written (Angliss et al 2008) while additional poster
publications have been produced to publicise findings of earlier surveys.

The Biodiversity Section undertakes such river surveys, primarily to collect State of
Environment Report (SoER) monitoring data, while coincidentally championing work
under the auspices of the River Health Programme (RHP). The future of the RHP in
Limpopo Province as a stand alone programme is seriously questioned due to the poor
performance of the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) in implementing
environmentally friendly actions.

1. River Monitoring.

1.1 The Matlabas River Catchment.

The following text is extracted from the executive summary of the Matlabas report as prepared for
Limpopo Dept. of Economic Development Environment and Tourism (LEDET) by Angliss (2008)

The Matlabas River Catchment was surveyed by a multi disciplinary team of scientists
from Biodiversity and Resource Use Management between July and August 2008. Due
to the fact that the Matlabas River rises within the Marakele National Park, the survey
was coordinated through Dr A Deacon of SANParks. The team was also assisted by
colleagues from the regional DWAF office.

This was considered to be an exploratory survey, because none of the project team had
any prior knowledge of the catchment and the most recent historical work had been
conducted in this catchment by Kleynhans (1980). The 1980 survey only addressed the
distribution of fish. There have been no assessments of any other ecological parameters.
The flow regime of the river was poorly documented and the suitability of some
biomonitoring methods was in question. A substantial amount of effort was expended in
locating biomonitoring sites and in gathering local knowledge on the status quo of the
river geomorphology, hydrology and ecology.

A total of twelve sites were visited and conditions documented, but there was only flow
at eight of these sites. The results of this biomonitoring survey should therefore be
viewed with a low moderate confidence.

Where appropriate, the survey was conducted using standardized River Health
Programme monitoring protocols with the objective of providing an assessment of the

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


97

Eco-Status of the river. Six components were assessed using the following monitoring
protocols.

Geomorphology. Desktop study only.


Fish (FRAI) Fish Response Assessment Index.
Invertebrates (SASS5) South African Scoring System (version 5)
Riparian Vegetation (RVI) Riparian Vegetation Index.
Instream habitat (HQI) Habitat Quality Index.
Invertebrate habitat. (IHAS) Invertebrate Habitat Assessment System.

The data gathered during this survey, together with this ecological report provide a
scientifically credible assessment of the State of the Environment (SOE) of the Matlabas
Catchment. All monitoring protocols are recognized as National Indicators for the
purposes of SOE reporting on aquatic ecosystems. The report may provide a valuable
baseline for water resource managers in determining the Ecological Reserve of the
Catchment and water licensing in terms of the National Water Act (1998).

Results indicate that although the catchment was reeling from the effects of drought at
the time of the survey, it still has a Moderate Ecological Importance and Sensitivity
(EIS), largely due to the fact that a substantial portion of the catchment falls in Marakele
National Park, private nature reserves or game farms.

The results of this survey also led to an assessment of the Eco Status of the catchment,
which at this time places the entire catchment in a Fair Ecological Category.

1.2 Letaba River Catchment.

A biomonitoring survey of 14 representative sites in the Letaba River Catchment was


completed in 2007. A technical report on the study was completed in February (Angliss
2008).

Results have shown that the river remains in a Fair ecological category, although some
survey sites remain in a better condition.

Although previously expected, the red data fish Opsaridium peringueyi (Southern barred
minnow) was recorded for the first time in this catchment. Furthermore, Chiloglanis
engiops (Lowveld suckermouth) was reported extinct in the catchment in 2000, but it is
heartening to report that it was found in moderate abundance during this survey.

1.3 Other river publications.

A poster on the 2007 biomonitoring survey of the Nwanedzi River Catchment was
produced in collaboration with the DWAF Polokwane office. A first ever joint
publication.

Other posters have been produced, which depict the fish which are found in specific
rivers and reserves.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


98

2. The future of the River Monitoring in Limpopo Province.

2.1 State of Environment Reporting.

As indicated above, the Biomonitoring Office of LEDET is tasked with the production
of periodic State of Environment Reports.

As a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity, South Africa is obliged to


develop environmental indicators and to produce periodic State of Environment (SoE)
reports. (Agenda 21: Rio Declaration)

The responsibility for producing detailed environmental reports has been delegated to
the provincial environmental authorities. It is then the responsibility of the national
DEAT to provide the international community with a summarized national assessment.
The first national assessment was completed in 1999.

State of the Environment Reports, are intended to support sustainable development and
decision-making through the provision of credible environmental information (Rump,
1996). SoE reporting plays an important role in assessing and interpreting data and
making it readily available and meaningful to both decision-makers and the public,
creating an important communication channel between scientists and the authorities.

In Limpopo Province, Limpopo Environmental Affairs published an introductory, phase


1 SoER in 2004, while a more detailed, phase 2 report was published in 2006.

In terms of aquatic monitoring, those indices developed by specialists at DWAF


Resource Quality Services (RQS) and consultants, during the development phases of the
River Health Programme, together with a structured monitoring strategy, are valuable
indicators and provide some important information for the provincial SoER.

2.2. The River health Programme.

Despite the fact that the original custodians of the RHP were DWAF, the Department of
Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) and the Water Research Commission
(WRC), the programme is strongly perceived to be a DWAF programme. The National
Water Act requires that DWAF develops a fleet of monitoring programmes, one of
which is the RHP. Since LEDET are driving river monitoring in the province, this leads
to various conclusions, which suggest that the LEDET biomonitoring team is doing
DWAFs work.

On the other hand, since the inception of the RHP, DWAF has demonstrated its
inability to implement environmental programmes within the province. On the ground,
the RHP is now being viewed as toothless window dressing which may be sending out
conflicting messages to the public.

Consider the following.

13 years into the programme, only 1 unqualified person is currently positioned to


implement the programme in DWAF Polokwane.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


99

o >250 monitoring sites have been established, which are widely regarded
as DWAF sites.
o >20% of our sites are regarded as DWAF National Monitoring sites.
o With the exception of RQS specialists, nobody from DWAF has visited
any of these sites.
My management thinks I am doing DWAF public relations (PR) work.
The National RHP management has devolved from an effective DWAF Chief
Director to the current DWAF Assistant Director level that now focuses on PR
work.
o Several provinces are now managed at the same level (rank) as the
national programme.
In most provinces the implementation of the RHP is far worse than in Limpopo
Province. Only 4 provinces (Limpopo, Gauteng, North West and Western Cape)
have viable monitoring teams, which are led by dedicated individuals.

In terms of managing ecological flows,

There has been no progress in implementing the ecological Reserve in any of our
rivers, yet countless Water Use Permits are being issued for golf course
developments and to mining houses.

In terms of water quality.

DWAF appear to have lost control in monitoring point source pollution.


Raw Water discharges from sewage works are common place. The lack of
expertise at municipal sewage works is well documented, yet the problem
persists with DWAF standing as impotent observers to the pollution.
The DWAF office of Social and Ecological Studies has been disbanded. A new
environmental office may develop in future, which will fall under the Engineering
Directorate. (Pers. Com P. Ackerman of DWAF)
Our systems are becoming more and more fragmented with DWAF developing
weirs without referral to LEDET.
Furthermore, the concept of the RHP, which shows that Healthy Fish are
indicators of a Healthy River Environment which in turn is indicative of
Healthy People, is contradictory, given the current cholera epidemic. We
cannot be telling rural communities that the river is in a good or fair condition
if there is a possibility of Cholera being present. A situation which is being
amplified by the presence of raw sewage being discharged in many catchments.
While other monitoring programmes may be addressing the monitoring of
cholera, they clearly do not interlink with the RHP.

3. Conclusions.

While the monitoring of aquatic indicators will continue, it is likely that our SoERs will
be documenting the decline in the state of our rivers.

As an environmental department, we cannot condone the failure of DWAF to address


the above issues. Nationally, the DWAF RHP appears to have become a public relations
exercise and in Limpopo Province we need strong commitment and actions to conserve
our riverine ecology and to inform the public of health risks.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


100

In terms of cooperative governance, LEDET will continue to support the RHP, through
the provision of data, education and training, while distancing ourselves from the RHP
corporate image, which we have strongly displayed in our work in the past.

4. References.

Agenda 21 (1992). The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. The


United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Rio de Janeiro
1992.

Angliss MK. (2007). A Biomonitoring Survey of the Nwanedzi River Catchment,


Limpopo Province. Field Survey of 2006 2007. Internal report for Limpopo
Dept. of Economic Development Environment and Tourism.

Angliss MK (2008). A Biomonitoring Survey Of Representative Sites Within The Letaba


River Catchment. Field Survey of 2007. Internal report for Limpopo Dept. of
Economic Development Environment and Tourism.

Angliss MK. (2008). An Exploratory Biomonitoring Survey of The Matlabas River


Catchment, Limpopo Province. Field Survey of 2008. Internal report for
Limpopo Dept. of Economic Development Environment and Tourism.

Department of Finance and Economic Development (DFED) (2004). Limpopo State of


the Environment Report (phase 1). Compiled by African and Economics.
Polokwane. Limpopo. South Africa.

Republic of South Africa (2004). National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act


(10 of 2004). Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. Pretoria.

Rump P. (1996). State of Environment Reporting: Source Book of Methods and


Approaches. UNDP/DEIA. Report no. TR.96-1

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


101

GAUTENG REPORT

Piet Muller
Department of Agriculture, Conservation, Environment & Land Affairs, Box 8769, Johannesburg 2000.
Email: mullerpa@absamail.co.za

Current Status of yellowfish in Gauteng Rivers:


To date, no official fish surveys have been undertaken in the rivers of Gauteng except
for a once-off survey of the upper Magalies River at Maloneys Eye. This is mainly due to
a shortage of skilled personnel, i.e. a fish specialist.

Available data collected during the River Health Programme surveys at 74 sites over the
last 9 years indicate that all 5 species; Labeobarbus marequensis, L. polylepis, L. kimberleyensis,
L. aeneus and Barbus rapax, still occur in the rivers of the province. Although specimens
of different ages were found, nothing is known about the ecological health of these
populations.

Yellowfish, as is the case for all other species, are under constant threat as result of the
activities in the catchments such as increased urban sprawl, mining and industry as well
as agriculture. The surface water runoff from these activities has a severe impact on both
water quality, chemical and physical, as well as quantity. Irregular, modified seasonal
flows through the untimely release of water from dams and barrages have had a severe
impact on the breeding cycles of all the fish species in the rivers of Gauteng.

Protection status of yellowfish in Gauteng:


Primary protection - The legal protection of yellowfish in the province is covered in the
form of the issuing of TOPS (Threatened or Protected Species) permits as well as angling
licenses, which are put into place to protect the over utilization of the species. Although
this is a prerequisite for all anglers and fishermen to adhere to, very few applications for
permits and licenses are received annually!

Illegal fish harvesting by subsistence fishermen by use of gill nets in rural areas is of grave
concern and irregular inspections are undertaken by the law enforcement directorate to
attempt to stop these destructive activities.

Secondary protection The implementation of the River Ecoclassification process for


the determination of the EcoStatus of rivers by DWAF, will result in the ecological
classification of all rivers which in turn will determine the seasonal flow requirements for
the respective rivers. During this process, the ecological needs of all occurring fish
species, including yellowfish are taken into account. This process which is imbedded in
the National Water Act of 36 of 1998, lends protection to all the biota as well as the
environment in which they have to survive.

The implementation of the Gauteng Conservation Plan (C-Plan) in the province will in
essence protect the sensitive catchments by means of setting strict requirements for
development in sensitive catchments where rivers are still in a good to natural ecological
state. The rationale behind this thinking is to prevent the impact of urban and industrial
development on these rivers in order to protect the aquatic ecosystems which are still in

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


102

a near natural state of functioning. Through this process, by maintaining the processes
needed for yellowfish to survive (habitat and food), yellowfish will be protected. The 3
identified sensitive catchments in Gauteng include the natural occurrence of all 5
yellowfish species.

Water quality:
The surface water in most of the rivers in Gauteng is of poor chemical and physical
quality mainly as result of the uncontrolled runoff from urban, industrial and agricultural
development activities over the last 150 years. However, the implementation of the
NWA in 1998, and through the issuing of water users licenses containing strict water
quality and quantity conditions, to industries and local councils over the last 10 years is
now starting to show results. A water quality trend analysis was done at 3 sites on the
Blesbokspruit on the East Rand using water quality data donated by Rand Water. All
indications are that the chemical water quality shows an improvement over time, but
concerns over the increase in phosphates remain. Water quality data for the Upper Vaal
is obtainable on the Rand Water website (www.reservoir.co.za ).

Future impacts:
The future need to meet the demand for water as result of the constant human
population growth will have a grave impact on the natural aquatic ecosystems. The
demand for water for the production of food, the generation of power for energy, the
use of water for construction of houses, roads and industries, will grow exponentially
along with the increase in human population to the extent that natural river and wetlands
will act as aqua ducts to transport high volumes of water across catchments from one
basin to another to cater for the ever-increasing demand for water.

Conclusion:
Although legislation is in place to protect aquatic ecosystems through wise use of water
by all the sectors (basic human use environmental use international obligations
agricultural and industrial use), basic human rights in SA demand that all people have
access to potable water. So, for that matter, the equation is simple. As long as there is an
increase in human population there will be a primary demand for potable water (basic
human rights). But what will happen if the demand for water exceeds the supply (basic
human rights)? The answer is simple. As the population expands, more water is needed
for human consumption, (basic human rights) less water will be available for the
industries, international obligations, the environment to the point where no water will be
available for human consumption! Basic human rights? And the Yellowfish? Whats that?

There must come a point in time, soon, where a balance must be struck between human
population growth and the limitations of the water resource to sustain such a population.
At some point in time somehow, someone will have to stand up and promote human
population regulation based on sound environmental principles, or will one species,
Homo sapiens, with all its wisdom cause the total environmental collapse on the Blue
Planet

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


103

NORTHERN CAPE REGIONAL REPORT

Carl Nel
14 Scanlan St, New Park, Kimberley 8301. Email: webmaster@ncywg.co.za

Background:
The predominantly arid Northern Cape and North-west provinces are home to two of
South Africas seven true yellowfish species:
Labeobarbus kimberleyensis (Orange-Vaal largemouth yellowfish) and Labeobarbus aeneus
(Orange-Vaal smallmouth yellowfish), confined to the Orange, Vaal, Harts and Riet
rivers.
Despite their immense biodiversity, sport fishing and tourism value, the Northern Cape
and Northwest provinces yellowfishes are increasingly under threat from anthropogenic
impacts.
Because of a fast growing sport and tourism industry and increased agricultural and
mining development, it is likely that yellowfish will be subject to increased pressure in
future.
An awareness of the value of our yellowfish and the potential environmental problems -
such as the destruction of riparian vegetation and in-stream habitat, physical barriers,
water abstraction, pollution and enrichment of water resources, introduction of alien
fishes, illegal gillnet and long line operations - will do much to change the fortune of
these species.
The NCYWG has been initiated to focus attention on the plight of these yellowfish
species and implement remedial measures to ensure the continued existence of our
yellowfish and its habitat

Logo:
Resembling the international CAR logo, with two arrows indicating put back what you
take out

Mission:
To promote the conservation and sustainable use and management of yellowfish and its
habitat in the Northern Cape and Northwest provinces

Objectives:
To promote the conservation of the Northern Cape and Northwests yellowfish
assemblage and its habitat
To participate in research and monitoring programs
To create awareness of our yellowfish amongst all water users
To address the needs, aspirations and problems of yellowfish anglers
To interact with land owners in the conservation of yellowfish as a species
To act in a consulting capacity in the planning of tourism activities
To influence policy and decision making at all levels

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


104

Fish Tagging Programme:


Example of conservation and tagging signs that can be found at our three established
conservancies.
Two on the Vaal at Christiana and below Warrenton and one at Lilydale on the Riet
River now part of Mokala National park (SANParks)

Fish tagging programme sign at Christiana

Our tagging programme was launched during the 2005 Bells festival at Christiana.
We currently make use of the numbered UV tags inserted with an applicator by NW
marine
The database is updated as tags are used and whenever tagged fish are caught again.
Currently only tracking movement and growth patterns as information gets updated
Areas of tagging:
Christiana, Vaal below Warrenton & Lilydale

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


105

Threats:
Mines not being rehabilitated.

Picture taken at Lilydale on the Riet river.


Alluvial mining companies go bankrupt and leave everything as is.
A lot can be done by enforcing DME and DWAF regulations w.r.t. EIAs

One of our recent successes! Closed down barge mining after three months of operation
on the Vaal at Barkly West.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


106

Fish traps in the Orange river below Vanderkloof dam.


When water is released from the dam, the traps fill up and when the water recedes, the
locals harvest these traps with any type of culling implement available pangas, spears,
pick handles, garden forks, etc. The dead fish including a large number of yellows are
then sold in town for as little as R5 a fish!
The farmer discovered this practice on his land and started levelling these traps with
earthmoving equipment.
This issue has also been brought to Pierre de Villiers attention via Dirk Human

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


107

Illegal fishing nets are taken out of the river and burnt on almost every angling trip.
This is an ongoing headache, but the number of nets being burnt hopefully puts some
holes in the pockets of these illegal trappers, as most nets are not cheap home-made
types.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


108

Sewerage Spills:

Taken at Christiana in September 2008, reported to local authorities who repaired within
a few days. This is quite a frequent occurrence, but Christiana authorities do seem to
heed our urgent calls to action. This sewer is in a vlei which runs down into the Vaal
about 1km away and also affects the groundwater, especially during the rainy season.

Dilapidated sewer at Warrenton, next to the N12.


The struggle at this site has been going on for over 6 years to get repairs done.
Various reports to local authorities, but no-one seems to care.
They are never available for contact or comment and dont answer e-mails.
Comparison since 2006.
A new water scientist (Peter Ramollo) was appointed at DWAFs Kimberley offices more
than a year ago, and after several invitations to attend meetings and even a personal visit
from myself, still no response or indication of involvement.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


109

A bilge pump supposed to pump raw sewerage to the processing plant about 2km away.
Water leaking into a vlei (now almost a small river), flowing under the N12, through the
town of Warrenton and into the Vaal which is less than 1km away.
DEAT Kimberley became aware of this struggle through the fishing owl website, but
still no word from them after replies to their initial mail:

I am with the Department of Tourism, Environment and Conservations Compliance and Enforcement
Unit. When and where can I get in contact with you to discuss NCYWGs concerns regarding the
sewage spills in the Warrenton area?

Please feel free to contact me at the numbers indicated below or on my email address.

Regards

Obopeng Tokgamo Gaoraelwe


Deputy Director: Compliance and Enforcement
Department of Tourism, Environment and Conservation
Private Bag X6102
Kimberley
8301
Tel: +27(53) 807 4800
Fax: +27(53) 831 3530
Cell: +27(82) 414 0310
email: ogaoraelwe@half.ncape.gov.za

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


110

Our public awareness programme includes:


Pamphlets and flyers at various points of interest
Tourism offices, angling shops, schools, hotels & guesthouses and our annual Bells
festival
We also conduct educational programmes at schools
Rely on information from club members and the public to act on threats

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


111

YELLOWFISH POPULATIONS & RHP PROGRAMME REPORT IN NORTH


WEST PROVINCE 2009:

Daan Buijs & Hermien Roux


Biodiversity Specialist Support Unit, Directorate Biodiversity Regulation and Conservation, NW
Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Environment, PO Box 510, Zeerust, 2865, Email:
dbuijs@nwpg.gov.za and hroux@nwpg.gov.za

PART 1: YELLOWFISH POPULATION STATUS - Daan Buijs

Abstract

Four Labeobarbus spp and Barbus rapax occur in four Water Management Areas in the
North West province.

Little yellowfish specific research is conducted in the province except for the work in the
Vaal River. The efforts of the province regarding aquatic monitoring are focused on the
River Health Programme, and some results are presented.

Severe pollution and flow threats are experienced in the work horse rivers originating
in industrial areas, namely the Vaal and Crocodile Rivers, while rural rivers experience
problems caused by dams and erratic water release regimes, alien vegetation and limited
mining activities. However, there are some near-pristine rivers in the upper reaches and
these are of high biodiversity value.

Introduction

Four water management areas (WMA) are present in the North West Province, namely
the Upper, Middle and Lower Vaal River WMAs in the south feeding into the west
flowing Orange River and the Crocodile West and Marico WMA feeding into the east
flowing Limpopo River in the north (Figure 1). The Vaal River WMAs harbour two
different yellowfish species and the Marico/Crocodile WMA contains two yellowfish
species and the papermouth.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


112

NW Water Management Areas N

W E

L. marequensis S

B. rapax
L. polylepis
Marico Crocodile

Lower Vaal
Upper Vaal

Middle Vaal

L.
kimberleyensis
L. aeneus

Figure 1: Water Management Areas and yellowfish occurrence in the North West
Province.

Species present

Labeobarbus kimberleyensis and L. aeneus in the west flowing Vaal River system.
L. marequensis, L. polylepis and B. rapax in the east flowing Marico/Crocodile River system.

Rouhani (2004), in a survey of 10 large dams in the North West Province, recorded
Labeobarbus kimberleyensis in the Taung dam, L. aeneus in the Taung and Koster dams and
L. marequensis in Lindleyspoort, Vaalkop and Roodekopjes dams. Cochrane (1985) and
Koekemoer & Steyn (2005) recorded L. marequensis in Hartebeespoort Dam. Barbus rapax
was recorded in Hartebeespoort, Molatedi, Lindleyspoort, Vaalkop and Roodekopjes
dams (Rouhani, 2004).

Koekemoer, (2009) reported on a fish population study of selected dams in NW


Province. Some of the results will be discussed.

All the dams contained yellowfish (Table 1), but the occurrence of L. aeneus in Koster
Dam is the result of stocking of the species into the Marico/Crocodile system where they
do not naturally occur. (Rouhani (2004) reports that a Mr. Smith stocked yellow fish
(though he was not aware which species) into Koster dam in 1995 from a hatchery near
Hartebeespoort Dam. Mr. Smith mentioned that he did not have any permits for this,
and was not sure if these fish were endemic to the catchment). These introduced fish
seem to do well, being the second most abundant species in the dam.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


113

Table 1: Results of surveys of selected dams in NW Province (Koekemoer, 2009).

Number % Ranking Mass % Ranking


Number numbers (kg) Mass mass
Koster Dam (August 2008)
Labeobarbus aeneus 49 29.5 2 13.21 8.13 3
Total (all fish species) 166 6 162.59 6
Lindleyspoort Dam (September 2008)
Barbus rapax 258 29.3 2 18.09 4.10 5
Labeobarbus marequensis 84 9.5 4 35.45 7.90 3
Total (all fish species) 880 445.97
Hartebeespoort Dam, 2004 (two surveys)
Labeobarbus marequensis 540 8.5 3 80 13.2 2
Barbus rapax 70 1.1 8 4 0.7 7
Labeobarbus polylepis 20 0.3 9 2 0.3 8
Total (all fish species) 6390 606
Hartebeespoort Dam, April/May 2008
Labeobarbus marequensis 134 8.0 3 30.41 10.5 3
Barbus rapax 18 1.1 7 5.48 1.9 6
Labeobarbus polylepis 1 0.1 9 0.098 0
Total (all fish species) 1673 289.69

Labeobarbus marequensis seems to be well adapted to dam conditions, with the highest
ranking in Lindleyspoort Dam (9.5% of total number of fish caught). In Hartebeespoort
Dam, L. marequensis ranked 3rd in numbers, between 8.0 and 8.5% of the total. It must be
noted however that the average mass of this species was low (Table 2), but this may be
biased because large numbers were caught in the gill nets with smaller mesh sizes. The
large numbers of small fish does, however, indicate successful breeding.

Labeobarbus polylepis only occurred in small numbers in Hartebeespoort Dam.

Barbus rapax occurs in high numbers in Lindleyspoort Dam (29.3% of all fish collected),
but to a much lesser extent in Hartebeespoort Dam. The study by Rouhani (2004) also
found B. rapax to be the one of the dominant species in Molatedi, Lindleyspoort,
Vaalkop and Roodekopjes dams.

Table 2: Average mass (kg) of yellowfish collected by Koekemoer (2009).

Labeobarbus Labeobarbus Barbus rapax Labeobarbus


aeneus marequensis polylepis
Koster Dam 0.27
Lindleyspoort 0.422 0.070
Hartebeespoort 2004 0.15 0.06 0.10
Hartebeespoort 2008 0.23 0.304 0.098

In the Taung Dam L. aeneus dominated the numbers of fish collected by Rouhani (2004)
in terms of numbers (21.2/net/night), with Labeobarbus kimberleyensis ranked second
(3.1/net/night). The lengths recorded by Rouhani (2004) are presented in Table 3.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


114

Table 3: Average length (cm) of yellowfish in selected dams in the North West
Province (Rouhani, 2004)

Labeobarbus Labeobarbus Barbus rapax


aeneus kimberleyensis
24.0 - 33.9cm 26.0 - 47.9 cm
Taung Dam
(max 58cm) (max 58cm)
21.7 4.2cm
Lindleyspoort Dam
(max 38cm)
22.6 5.7cm
Roodekopjes Dam
(max 38cm)
18 24cm
Koster Dam
(max 42cm)
23.8 2.5cm
Vaalkop Dam
(max 36cm)
23.2 5.9cm
Molatedi Dam
(max 40cm)

Status of species

Labeobarbus kimberleyensis - Vulnerable (VU A1c)* (IUCN, 2004).


*
(A = Reduction in population size; 1 = an observed, estimated, inferred or suspected
population size reduction of >50% over the last 10 years or three generations & c = a
decline in area of occupancy, extent of occurrence and/or quality of habitat.)

L. kimberleyensis is also listed as a Threatened or Protected Species under the regulations


of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act.

The other species are not listed, but catch restrictions are imposed.

Sub-populations present: Unknown


Sub-populations status: Unknown

Threats
Annexure A reports on the anthropogenic impacts on the rivers in the NW Province
which pose a serious threat to aquatic biota.

Another cause for concern is the illegal distribution and stocking of fish species,
including yellowfish, as the introduction of L. aeneus into Koster Dam clearly illustrates.
This practice not only results in the introduction of species alien to specific ecosystems,
but can also be a source of genetic pollution and disease.

Man-made impoundments reduce natural spawning sites, which may cause different
species to congregate at the remaining suitable sites at the inflow of the river. This can
lead to hybridization, as is suspected between L. aeneus and L. kimberleyensis in Taung
Dam.

Conservation measures to conserve yellowfish resource


Conservancies Orange Vaal River Yellowfish Conservation and Management
Association

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


115

Stockings None by NW DACE, but illegal stocking by private individuals have been
reported (Labeobarbus aeneus in Koster Dam).

Education and awareness Wetland Awareness Campaign by North West Wetland


Forum, Crocodile (West)/Marico State of the Rivers Report and Poster.

Legislation New provincial angling license conditions have been approved by the
MEC and are currently at the Government Printers for gazetting.

Table 4: New bag limits for the North West Province

Species Bag limit Minimum size (Fork length)


L. kimberleyensis Catch and release only N/A
L. aureus 2 300mm
L. marequensis 4 300mm
L. polylepis 2 300mm

Monitoring - The National River Health Programme (RHP) is included in the Strategic
Plan of NW DACE. Although not aimed specifically at yellowfish, the programme
monitors the biodiversity at selected sites with different indices (including SASS5 and
VEGRAI) and also (but currently to a lesser extent) includes fish surveys. A progress
report is attached (Annexure A)

Research No yellowfish-specific research is done by NW DACE. J.H. Koekemoer is


conducting a Ph.D. study on fish population structures in Hartebeespoort Dam,
Lindleyspoort Dam and Koster Dam (see results under Species present).

The University of Johannesburg and the Endangered Wildlife Trust are conducting
research on yellowfish in the Vaal River.

Intermediate Ecological Reserve determinations are in progress for the all four Water
Management Areas in NW (commissioned by DWAF).

Action plan & Progress Report - The Conservation Plan for the Crocodile (West) and
Marico Rivers will be integrated in provincial biodiversity conservation strategy and
bioregional plans.

Value of yellowfish resource to anglers and subsistence fishers


No data available.

Concluding remarks

The rivers in North West are, as in the rest of South Africa, under severe threat from
urban development, mining and agriculture. This has a severe impact on yellowfish
populations, but fortunately there are still several river reaches in the higher lying areas
that are in near pristine condition and with high biodiversity values.

The NW province is a stronghold for L. marequensis and thanks to research projects and
conservation endeavours of FOSAF and the Orange Vaal River Yellowfish Conservation

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


116

and Management Association, L. kimberleyensis and L. aeneus receive attention. There is


concern regarding the status of L. polylepis and a more intense survey of its preferred
habitat is required.

Acknowledgements

Paul Fouche is thanked for conducting two fish surveys for the RHP in the North West
Province and for the training given to our field staff. Johan Koekemoer is thanked for
making his preliminary data available to NW DACE for this report.

References

Cochrane, K.L. 1985. The population dynamics and sustainable yield of the major fish
species in Hartbeespoort Dam. Ph.D.-Dissertation, University of the
Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.

De Villiers, A.J. 1983. Vis populasie opname uitgevoer by die Molopo Oog: Lichtenburg
Distrik. Unpublished report quoted in Skelton et al 1994.

IUCN 2004. 2004. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. www.iucnredlist.org

Kleynhans, C.J. & Louw M.D. 2006. River Ecoclassification: Manual for Ecostatus
Determination (Version 2). Department of Water Affairs & Forestry, Resource
Quality Services, Pretoria Water for Africa, Pretoria.

Koekemoer, J.H. & Steyn, G.H. 2005. Final Report: Fish Community Study of
Hartebeespoort Dam. North West Department of Agriculture, Conservation &
Environment.

Koekemoer, J.H. 2009. Interim Results of the First Fish Surveys (Early Summer) for the
Second Set of Dams. Part of the WRC Project No: 1643

Koekemoer, J.H. and Steyn, G.J. 2009. Interim Results of the First Fish Survey (Late
Summer) for Hartebeespoort Dam, 2008.

Rouhani, Q. 2004. A report on the survey of selected dams in the North West Province: with a view to
develop fisheries. Report for the Department Of Agriculture, Conservation and
Environment, North West Province, South Africa.

Skelton, P. 2001. A complete guide to the freshwater fishes of southern Africa. Struik Publishers,
Cape Town, South Africa.

Skelton, E., A.J. Ribbink & V. Twentyman-Jones. 1994. The Conservation of Dolomitic
Ecosystems in the Western Transvaal, South Africa. JLB Smith Institute of Ichthyology,
Grahamstown. 81pp.

Smith-Adao, LB., Nel, JL., Roux, DJ., Schonegevel, L., Hardwick, D., Maree, G., Hill, L.,
Roux, H., Kleynhans, CJ., Moolman, J., Thirion, C. and Todd, C. 2006. A
Systematic Conservation Plan for the Freshwater Biodiversity of the Crocodile (West) and
Marico Water

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


117

YELLOWFISH POPULATIONS & RHP PROGRAMME REPORT IN NORTH


WEST PROVINCE 2009

Daan Buijs & Hermien Roux

PART 2: NW RIVER HEALTH PROGRAMME REPORT, JAN. 2005 TO MARCH


2009 Hermien Roux

Table of Contents Page


1 Introduction 118
2 Background 118
3 Biomonitoring indices used 119
4 Monitoring 121
5 Upper Vaal Water Management 122
6 Middle Vaal Water Mangement 125
7 Lower Vaal Water Managemennt 128
8 Molopo, Marico River and tributaries 131
9 Elands River and tributaries 138
10 Hex and Sterkstroom Rivers 141
11 Crocodile River and tributaries 143
12 Conclusion 147
13 References 147

List of Figures Page


Figure 1 Water management Areas in the North West Province 119
Figure 2 Distribution of Biomonitoring sites and Ecoregions in the Province 121
Figure 3 SASS5 sites in the Upper Vaal WMA 123
Figure 4 SASS5 sites in the Middle Vaal WMA 126
Figure 5 SASS5 sites in the Lower Vaal WMA 129
Figure 6 Molopo River Sites 133
Figure 7 Marico River Sites 134
Figure 8 Elands River Sites 139
Figure 9 Hex and Sterkstroom River Sites 142
Figure 10 Crocodile River Sites 144

List of Tables Page


Table 1 Summary of major indices used in the NW River Health Programme 120
Table 2 Summary of IHI and SASS5 Ecological class results for the Upper Vaal 124
Table 3 Summary of IHI and SASS5 Ecological class results for the Middle Vaal 127
Table 4 Summary of IHI and SASS5 Ecological class results for the Lower Vaal 130
Table 5 Summary of IHI and SASS5 Ecological class results for Molopo & 135
Marico Rivers
Table 6 Summary of IHI and SASS5 Ecological class results for Elands River 140
Table 7 Summary of IHI and SASS5 Ecological class results for Hex 143
& Sterkstroom Rivers
Table 8 Summary of IHI and SASS5 Ecological class results for Crocodile River 145

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


118

1 Introduction
The purpose of this document is to provide a brief report on the progress of the
Provincial River Health Programme (RHP) in the North West Province since 2005. The
origin and background of this programme will also be discussed. Progress with the
monitoring programme in the different biomonitoring regions, linkages to other projects
and a summary of products will be provided.

2. Background
The River Health Programme is a subprogramme of the National Aquatic Ecosystem
Health Monitoring Programme (NAEHMP). The national custodians of the National
Aquatic Ecosystem Health Monitoring Programme (NAEHMP) are: The Department of
Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF), Department of Environmental Affairs and
Tourism (DEAT) and the Water Research Commission (WRC), that provide strategic
guidance and direction to the Programme. The Programme is administered and
coordinated by DWAFs Directorate: Resource Quality Services and have to date, been
assisted by the CSIR to fulfill this role.

The River Health Programme (RHP) was initiated on a national basis in 1994 in response
to the need to monitor, assess and report on the ecological state of river ecosystems
based on their biological condition in relation to anthropogenic influences. The RHP is
coordinated on a national level and implemented on a provincial level throughout the
country.

The River Health Programme monitors and assesses the biological and habitat integrity
of rivers (through evaluation of, for example, aquatic invertebrates, diatoms and riparian
vegetation). These assessments enable reports on the ecological state of river systems to
be produced in an objective and scientifically sound manner.

Why monitor?
We have legal obligations (National Water Act and various other conservation and
environmental legislation, NEMA, NEMBA) to monitor the ecological condition of
natural resources.
If you have to manage something, you have to know where, how much of it and in
what condition it is.
Assess the general ecological state
Assess impacts
Assess compliance with ecological objectives/ regulatory standards
Trend detection (in other words, directional changes in attributes of drivers and
biota)

The North West team is responsible for biomonitoring in parts of four water
management areas (WMA), namely; Crocodile (West) and Marico, Upper-, Middle- and
Lower Vaal Water Management Areas (see Figure 1). The WMAs are further subdivided
into 7 biomonitoring regions. The Crocodile West and Marico is divided into four
biomonitoring areas: Marico and Molopo; Western Crocodile (Elands river and
tributaries), Middle Crocodile (Hex and Sterkstroom) and the Eastern Crocodile

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


119

(Crocodile, Pienaars, Tolwane and tributaries). The Lower, Middle and Upper Vaal each
form a separate biomonitoring region.

Figure 1: Water Management Areas in the North West Province

3. Biomonitoring indices used

Biota in riverine ecosystems reflect both the present and past history of the water quality
at a particular point in the river, allowing detection of disturbances that might otherwise
be missed (Eekhout et al., 1996). Aquatic communities (e.g. fish, riparian vegetation,
macro-invertebrates) can integrate and reflect the effects of chemical and physical
disturbances that occur in river ecosystems over extended periods of time. These
communities can provide a holistic and integrated measure of the integrity or health of
the river as a whole (Barber-James, 2001; Roux, 2001). Walmsley et al. (2001) stated that
indicators could provide measurements of the success of integrated water resource
management.

Methods have been developed for the bioassessment of the integrity of aquatic systems
that are based on some or other aspect of a single species, but most are based on the
attributes of whole assemblages of organisms. Examples of such indicators include the
Fish Assemblage Integrity Index (Kleynhans, 1999), the Riparian Vegetation Index as
well as the South African Scoring System, better known as SASS (Chutter, 1998).
Although some methods have been available for many years, biomonitoring has only
recently become a routine tool in the management of South Africas inland waters
(Davies & Day, 1998). The SASS biomonitoring system has gained a large body of
support as a rapid and fairly accurate system of evaluating ecosystem health and is
currently in its fifth revised state, namely SASS 5 (Dickens and Graham, 2002).

Table 1 provides a summary of the biological indicator indices that are used in the RHP.
The person responsible and the activity status are also mentioned. There are other
indices that also form part of aquatic monitoring, these are not used due to capacity
constraints. The two main indices currently used in the NW RHP are the Index of
Habitat Integrity (IHI) and SASS5.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


120

Table 1: Summary of major indices used in the North West River Health Programme
Tools Used in NW Reason
RHP
SASS5 (South African Scoring System 5) and Yes Accredited person:
MIRAI (Macro Invertebrate Rapid Assessment H.Roux
Index)
VEGRAI (Riparian Vegetation Response Yes Botanist (started 2007):
Assessment Index) A. Barac
FRAI (Fish Response Assessment Index) NO but No Ichthyologist
Sometimes
IHI (Index of Habitat Integrity) Yes, selected rivers H. Roux and consultants
IHAS (Invertebrate Habitat Assessment System) Yes H. Roux
GAI (Geomorphologic Driver Assessment Index) Yes- basic info H. Roux
and HAI (Hydrological Driver Assessment Index)
PAI (Physico-chemical Driver Assessment Index) No, only basic PAI still under development
water quality data H. Roux (future links to
and samples ambient monitoring)
Diatoms Yes Field staff (collect)
J. Taylor (ID analyze)
Basic site information and database Yes H. Roux

Data from the various indices are analysed to provide an indication of the ecological
status or class of the rivers/ biomonitoring sites in the province. The ecological status of
a river is defined as the totality of the features and characteristics of the river and its
riparian areas that bear upon its ability to support an appropriate natural flora and fauna
(adapted from Iversen et al 2000). Ecological components include:
Hydro-morphology (Geomorphology and Hydrology) (Driver); Water quality (Driver);
Physical habitat (Driver);
Biological groups (Biological responses of fish, riparian vegetation and aquatic
invertebrates).

The river type (geomorphology very important) and the resilience, adaptability and
fragility of the biota will influence how responses to changes are analysed. The
importance of the different driver metrics will thus change as the river type changes
(weighting and ranking of metrics).

The cause and effect relationship becomes very important during reserve determination,
monitoring of the reserve in terms of monitoring compliance and systematic
conservation planning. The present condition of the drivers needs to be assessed and
interpreted in terms of the biological habitat and then the biological responses compared
to a reference condition Ecostatus approach. All of the indices use the same
classification system for the Ecostatus approach. The results from the indices can be
represented as A (Blue) to F (Red) classes, based on the degree of impacts or deviation
from reference condition:

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


121

4. Monitoring

In total 178 RHP sites are monitored across the province. These sites are registered on
the National Rivers Database and on the DWAF Water Management System database.
There are currently 277 sets of SASS5 (South African Scoring System version 5) and Site
Information data captured to the National Rivers Database for monitoring results since
2005. Each site is monitored at least twice a year, every second year, if environmental
parameters are favorable for the application of SASS5. Figure 2, provides an indication
of the RHP biomonitoring site distribution in the province. Diatoms are collected and
analyzed by the North West University (Jonathan Taylor). Basic water quality parameters
are measured and water quality samples collected and analyzed by DWAF RQS. The
botanist is training to do the Riparian Vegetation Analyses and has completed the
preliminary evaluations at some of the biomonitoring sites.

Figure 2: Distribution of biomonitoring sites and Ecoregions in the Province

The SASS5 procedure requires that the practitioner is accredited every three years to
ensure data credibility and repeatability of the methodology, the correct identification of
the aquatic invertebrates is vital for the application of the biomonitoring technique.

Annual biomonitoring plans are distributed to the RHP team and relevant stakeholders
to encourage shared resources. Feedback is also provided to stakeholders after each
biomonitoring fieldwork session. Field data
forms are completed at each site, scores calculated and data captured to MS Excel
spreadsheets and to the National Rivers Database. Data analysis is done as per
requirements for reporting purposes.

The results from the different biomonitoring will be discussed separately and major
issues identified will be discussed.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


122

5. Upper Vaal Water Management Area

The Mooi River originates in a dolomitic area upstream from Klerkskraal Dam in the
Upper Vaal Water Management Area, see Figure 3. The groundwater in the area is widely
utilised for irrigated agriculture. The SASS5 data are from two surveys in 2006 (May and
October), biomonitoring was planned for 2008 but kilometre restrictions by NW-DACE
prevented the surveys.

The upper reaches of the river above and below the Klerkskraal Dam comprise of
wetlands. The Klerkskraal Dam distributes water to farmers downstream of the dam for
irrigation purposes. This substantially reduces both the variability and volume of water
that occurs in the system downstream of the dam. No releases are being made from the
Klerkskraal Dam for the Ecological Reserve. The biological data reflects this and the area
upstream from Potchefstroom is in an overall C Ecological class and the IHI category is
overall a D class, mostly due to old unreabilitated diamond mines and crop farming, see
Table 3. The sites are all situated in the Highveld Ecoregion.

The Wonderfonteinspruit and Loopspruit are two tributaries of the Mooi River that
originate east of the Mooi River. Mine water contamination (including heavy metals)
from the Wonderfonteinspruit is a serious concern, no suitable SASS5 habitat exists but
water samples were collected in the Wonderfonteinspruit at site C2WOND-WONDE.
Peat mining takes place in the Gerhard Minnebron wetland, diamond mining and
prospecting has taken place in areas below Klerkskraal Dam and has impacted on the
riverbed and riparian zone. The Loopspruit SASS5 data indicate serious sewerage
pollution and flow problems (site C2LOOP-KOKOS), the Ecological class is
predominantly F. The IHI class is mostly D, return flows from flood irrigation and cattle
carcasses dumped in the river were observed. The raising of the Klipdrift Dam (site
C2LOOP-KLIPD) in the middle reaches enhances the deterioration by reducing flow
events.

Potchefstroom Dam and town are situated in the lower reaches of the Mooi River,
adding additional habitat modifications to the river. The SASS5 data indicate a C/D class
(sites C2MOOI-MEULS and C2MOOI-MOOIR) and a reduction in sensitive taxa, the
IHI class is D.

The Vaal River is a heavily utilised system and is impacted by various activities in the
Gauteng, North West and Free State provinces. The primary impact on the river system
is the deterioration of water quality as a result of salinisation and eutrophication of the
system, and flow modification. The SASS5 biomonitoring data indicate a low C
Ecological class; the water quality deteriorated below Parys during October 2006 and
recovered through the Vredefort Dome area, the overall IHI results in a C class.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


123

Upper Vaal WMA sites

# #
#

Moo i
Moo i
C2MOOIKLER# u it
einsp r
er fo nt
# o p W o nd
erl o
o iri vi
C2MOOIROOI# Mo
Ta

# #
a ib

C2WONDWOND#
os
sp

C2OOGGOOGG# C2LOOPWELT#
ru

t ui

C2LOOPKOKO #
it

ns pr

Ka # C2MOOIRYSM# C2LOOPTAAI #
a ls
S ko o

p ru
it C2MOOIOUDE#

C2LOOPKLIP #
Enselsp
C2LOOPMI LI# ru it
# it
# C2MOOIMEUL #
pru
C2MOOIMOOI# ps
# L oo
# C2MOOIGHOL Vaal
ui t
tspr

# Jag
t ga

sp
# #rui t
R ie

# C2VAALKNOP C2VAALSTON C2VAALPARY


#
# #
C2VAALELGR
# # #

# Vaal
#
#

30 0 30 60 Miles

Nw new border.shp W E
# Sites_2009_gis.dbf
Dams500g_rsa.shp S

Figure 3: SASS5 sites in the Upper Vaal WMA

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


124

Table 2: Summary of Index of Habitat Integrity and SASS5 Ecological class


results for the Upper Vaal
IHI
IHI
River Tributar Ripar Survey No ASP Survey
RHP Site Code Instrea SASS SASS No Taxa ASPT
Name y ian dates Taxa T dates
m 2007
2007
C2MOOI-KLERK Mooi 15/05/200
D D 123 27 4.56 03/10/2006 92 22 4.18
6
C2MOOI-ROOID Mooi Visit on
15/05/200
D D 79 19 4.16 03/10/2006 x x x
6
, river dry
C2WOND- Mooi Wonderf
15/05/200
WONDE onteinspr C D x x x 03/10/2006 x x x
6
uit
C2OOGG- Mooi Oog van
OOGGE Gerhard 16/05/200
C C 141 25 5.64 03/10/2006 134 25 5.36
Minnebro 6
n
C2MOOI-RYSMI Mooi Visit on
16/05/200 03/10/2006
C D 129 25 5.16 x x x
6 , very high
water levels
C2MOOI- Mooi Visit on
OUDED 16/05/200 04/10/2006
E F
6
115 22 5.23
, access
x x x
problems
C2MOOI-MEULS Mooi 16/05/200
D D
6
56 14 4 04/10/2006 144 30 4.8
C2MOOI- Mooi 19/05/200
MOOIR
D D
6
91 21 4.33 04/10/2006 109 22 4.95
C2MOOI- Mooi Visit on
Visit on
GHOLF 19/05/200
04/10/2006
D D 6, water x x x
, very high
x x x
levels very
water levels
high
C2LOOP-WELTE Mooi Loopspru 17/05/200
it 6
105 22 4.77 02/10/2006 121 26 4.65
C2LOOP- Mooi Loopspru 17/05/200
KOKOS it
D C
6
27 8 3.38 02/10/2006 29 8 3.63
C2LOOP-TAAIB Mooi Loopspru Visit on Visit on
it C C 19/05/200 x x x 02/10/2006 x x x
6, no veg . no veg
C2LOOP-KLIPD Mooi Loopspru Visit on
it 02/10/2006
17/05/200
F F
6
46 13 3.54 , increasing x x x
dam wall no
water
C2LOOP-MILIT Mooi Loopspru Visit on
it 02/10/2006
17/05/200
D D
6
x x x , increasing x x x
dam wall no
water
C2VAAL-PARYS Vaal 18/05/200
C C
6
130 24 5.42 05/10/2006 110 25 4.4
C2VAAL-STONE Vaal 18/05/200 Visit on
C C
6
136 25 5.44
05/10/2006
x x x
C2VAAL-ELGRO Vaal C C x x x 05/10/2006 126 27 4.67
C2VAAL-KNOPF Vaal Visit on
18/05/200
Visit on
D D 6, high x x x
05/10/2006
x x x
water
levels

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


125

6. Middle Vaal Water Management Area

This water management area is characterized by various seasonal rivers. The only river
that could be sampled during February and November 2007 was the Skoonspruit and
one site on the Vaal River, see Figure 4. This water management area is thus fairly data
deficient and difficult to discuss. The Skoonspruit River originates north of the town of
Ventersdorp as a dolomitic eye, peat wetlands are associated with these upper reaches,
see Figure 4. It contributes to the flow in the upper parts of the catchment and flows
south to the confluence with the Vaal River. The IHI and SASS5 data indicate a high C
Ecological class in the upper reaches of the Skoonspruit (site C2SKOO-VENTE), see
Table 4. The sites are all situated in the Highveld Ecoregion.

The topography is gentle sloping. A wetland system occurs in the middle reaches of the
river, in the vicinity of the confluence with the Taaiboschspruit and upstream from the
Johan Neser Dam. Water abstraction is a major impact upstream from the Johan Neser
Dam. The SASS5 data reflect the water abstraction and thus flow limitations as the
Ecological classes are high E/F (major sedimentation buildup due to lack of flow) and C
during different biomonitoring surveys. The IHI results indicate a C/D class, also mainly
attributed to flow alterations. The Johan Neser Dam receives return flow from the
mining areas.

The biomonitoring point at Uraniumville (C2SKOO-URANI) is situated below sewerage


treatment facilities, the SASS5 data indicate an E/F class, mainly attributed to water
quality impacts from nutrient enrichment. The corresponding IHI results are a D class,
with river and riparian modifications resulting from development as the main
contributors.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


126

Middle Vaal sites


#

# #
# C2SKOOVEN T
Ta a #
ib os s
rui t p ru it t #
teensp sprui
S lyps C2SKOORIET Riet
# # #
C2TAAISHEF #

ru it
t
ui
pr # #

ai sp
C2TAAINOOI s #
Ka # on #
# ko #

ra
##
als S

md
p ru #
# Bu it

K ro
isf o

Ko e
# # #
n te
in s C2KROMRIET # #
pr C2SKOOHART

k
uit # #

em
# Ja #
gs #

oe r
pr C2SKOOWITP #
uit #

sp
rui t
C2JAGSOORB
# C2JAGSRIET

oi
##C2JAGSAFRI

Mo
C2MAKWFRIS
# C2JAGSWOLW
Ma

# # Vaa # #
C2SKOOURAN C2VAALVERM l
tj ie

# Ys
te # # #
sp

r sp
ru i

C2MAKWPALM rui C2JAGSGOED


t #
t

C2UNSPSYFE
# C2MATJSTRY #
# # C2YSTEOR KN
K lip

#
Le

s pru
eu

C2MATJMATJ
do

#
it
rin
Ma

C2KLIPLEEU
gs

#
kw

C2BAMBRIET
p

# #
ru
ass

C2KLIPSYFE
it
Bambo

C2LEEUSYFE # #
ie
spr

Wo
ui

C2BAMBPOOR
esspr

lw

# C2MAKWBRAN
es

#
pru
ui t

#
t

C2BAMBKARE

C2MAKWVLIE
#
al
Va
Va a
l

50 0 50 100 Miles

Nw new border.shp W E
# Sites_2009_gis.dbf
Dams500g_rsa.shp S

Figure 4: SASS5 sites in the Middle Vaal WMA

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


127

Table 3: Summary of Index of Habitat Integrity and SASS5 Ecological class


results for the Middle Vaal
IHI
IHI
River Tributary Ripari Survey No Survey No
RHP Site Code Instrea SASS ASPT SASS ASPT
Name of an dates Taxa dates Taxa
m 2007
2007

C2VAAL-VERMA Vaal 19/02/20


100 20 5 28/11/2007 111 23 4.83
07
C2KROM-RIETK Kromdraa Koekemoer 20/02/20
No flow on
ispruit spruit 07 x x x x x x
28/11/2007
Dry
C2SKOO-VENTE Skoonspr Vaal C C 21/02/20
uit 07 x x x 26/11/2007 164 33 4.97
No flow
C2SKOO-RIETS Skoonspr Vaal C D 20/02/20
uit 07 x x x 26/11/2007 101 23 4.39
Pools
C2TAAI-SHEFF Taaibossp Skoonspruit 20/02/20
Dry on
ruit 07 x x x x x x
28/11/2007
Dry
C2TAAI-NOOIT Taaibossp Skoonspruit 20/02/20
Pools on
ruit 07 x x x x x x
28/11/2007
Pools
C2SKOO-HARTB Skoonspr Vaal C C 20/02/20
uit 07 x x x 27/11/2007 118 25 4.72
No Flow
C2SKOO-WITPO Skoonspr Vaal D D 20/02/20
No SIC on
uit 07 x x x x x x
27/11/2007
No Flow
C2SKOO-URANI Skoonspr Vaal D D 19/02/20
35 11 3.18 27/11/2007 37 10 3.7
uit 07
IHI
IHI
River Tributary Ripari Survey No Survey No
RHP Site Code Instrea SASS ASPT SASS ASPT
Name of an dates Taxa dates Taxa
m 2007
2007
C2JAGS-OORBI Jagspruit Skoonspruit 20/02/2
No Sic on
007 x x x x x x
27/11/2007
No Sic
C2JAGS-RIETK Jagspruit Skoonspruit Pollution
20/02/20
from mine?
07 x x x x x x
On
Dry
28/11/2007
C2JAGS-AFRIK Jagspruit Skoonspruit low flow
Fish site x x x (fish site) on x x x
28/11/2007
C2JAGS-WOLWE Jagspruit Skoonspruit 20/02/20
No flow on
07 x x x x x x
27/11/2007
Dry
C2JAGS-GOEDG Jagspruit Skoonspruit Pools (fish
Fish site x x x site) on x x x
27/11/2007
C2YSTE-ORKNE Vaal Ysterspruit 20/02/20
No flow on
07 x x x x x x
27/11/2007
Dry
C2MATJ-STRYD Matjiesspr Vaal 20/02/2
Dry on
uit 007 x x x x x x
27/11/2007
Dry
C2MATJ-MATJE Matjiesspr Vaal 20/02/2
Pools on
uit 007 x x x x x x
27/11/2007
Pools
C2KLIP-LEEUW Klipspruit Vaal 20/02/2
Dry on
007 x x x x x x
27/11/2007
Pools
C2KLIP-SYFER Klipspruit Vaal 20/02/2
Dry on
007 x x x x x x
27/11/2007
Dry

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


128

7. Lower Vaal Water Management Area

The sites in this water management area are distributed across three different Ecoregions:
Highveld, Ghaap Plateau and Southern Kalahari. The Harts River originates south of
Lichtenburg, the upper parts of this river are highly seasonal as indicated by Table 5.
There are major impacts from farming and diamond mining in the river channels. The
Harts River forms part of a major irrigation scheme and water transfers are made from
the Vaal River. It is unfortunate that an aerial survey and IHI was not done for this water
management area. There are several seasonal tributaries and rivers in this Water
Management Area, see Figure 5.

The site downstream from the Taung Dam (C3HART-TOLGA) is in a B/C Ecological
class, no ecological flow releases are made. The C Ecological class was during very low
flow conditions in April 2007 and the improved class B was after rain in December 2007.
The situation in and below Taung deteriorates to a C/D Ecological class (sites C3HART-
HOSPI and C3HART-TASUN) sewerage enrichment and urban runoff are contributing
factors. The lower class was in April 2007 and the slight improvement was in December
2007 after rain. The sites upstream from the major irrigation area shows an improvement
from the sites in Taung, these sites are in a high C Ecological class (C3HART-MOTSW,
C3HART-PAMPI). Wetland areas parallel to the Harts River downstream from Taung
are important features of the river system.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


129

Lower Vaal sites

# C3HAR TRIET

Mosi ta se Laagte
Doringl aa
Ga

Di

gol e
C3HAR TKARE

Th Rangolw

Mo
s ip

ut
Kh #
nye

ro
Madibeng
i

l wa
u

S etla

kw
du Sep
sal

a
nk

ne
gw Tl a ne C3HAR TSOOI
aa

ha
gte

el l at Ba # # #
gte

Ph aa rbe

a ne
ep gt au rsp
an e an
Tla

e C3HAR TSAVI C3KLEIWOLW #


Leeupan279IO #
pe

## ts
sane

ar# C3KLEIUITS
ng

Barberspan C3HAR TSANN


#
-H
Ganyesa

Kg C3HAR TBARB in
o kg
P hapo

o le # # le
K # C3KLEIHART #
rui
t C3HAR TWELG # # #
sp C3KLEIFISH #
#
eu #
Le Br ak spru
Lo it #
uit

lw ##
ts p r

a Bergs
ne pr uit
ng # # #
Ri e

# C3HAR TMIGD g te # #
ies laa
Losase B ies
Mo

Langas em # #
s

s pruit
ha

# #
we

Korob # C3HAR TJALA #


# D4MOSHDITH
ng

e la
# D4MOSHSETH Korob #
ela Schweitzer Reneke
t
ru i # C3HAR TSSCH #
es p #
olw ne
W rok a Harts ##
Ma
# C3HAR TGOUD
P udumong #
#
Droe H

# C3HAR TNOU P
#
Taung
arts

#
Blu e
# # # C3HAR TADAM
P # C3HAR TTOLG
Vaa
l
C3BLUENORL # o ol C3HAR TTASU
Va a
C3UNSPTHOM l
# # C3HAR TMOTS
Bloemhof
Ve

C3HAR TPAMP
t

C3HAR TKGOM
#
Spitskop

60 0 60 120 Miles

Nw new border.shp W E
# Sites_2009_gis.dbf
Dams500g_rsa.shp S

Figure 5: SASS5 sites in the Lower Vaal WMA

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


130

Table 4: Summary of Index of Habitat Integrity and SASS5 Ecological class


results for the Lower Vaal
IHI IHI
River No No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name Taxa Taxa
2007 2007
C3HART-RIETF Harts Vaal Dry on Pools, no flow
x x x x x x
18/04/2007 on 7/12/2007
C3HART-KAREE Harts Vaal Fish site x x x Fish site x x x
C3HART-SOOIH Harts Vaal Dry on Pools, no flow
x x x x x x
18/04/2007 on 7/12/2007
C3HART-SAVIS Harts Vaal Fish site x x x Fish site x x x
C3HART-SANNI Harts Vaal Dry on Pools, no flow
x x x x x x
18/04/2007 on 7/12/2007
C3KLEI-WOLWE Klein- Harts
Fish site x x x Fish site x x x
Harts
C3KLEI-UITSC Klein- Harts Pools on Pools, no flow
x x x x x x
Harts 18/04/2007 on 7/12/2007
C3KLEI-HARTS Klein- Harts Pools on Pools, no flow
Harts x x x x x x
18/04/2007 on 7/12/2007
C3KLEI-FISHD Klein- Harts
Fish site x x x Fish site x x x
Harts
IHI IHI
River No No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name Taxa Taxa
2007 2007
C3HART-WELGE Harts Vaal Dry on Dry on
x x x x x x
18/04/2007 07/12/2007
C3HART-BARBE Harts Vaal Dry on Dry on
x x x x x x
18/04/2007 07/12/2007
C3HART-MIGDO Harts Vaal Flood
Pools on
x x x conditions on x x x
18/04/2007
07/12/2007
C3HART-JALAJ Harts Vaal Pools on Pools, no flow
x x x x x x
18/04/2007 on 7/12/2007
C3HART-SSCHW Harts Vaal Pools on Dry on
x x x x x x
18/04/2007 07/12/2007
C3HART-GOUDP Harts Vaal Flood
Pools on
x x x conditions on x x x
18/04/2007
07/12/2007
C3HART- Harts Vaal
NOUPO Fish site x x x Fish site x x x

C3HART- Harts Vaal


Fish site x x x Fish site x x x
ADAMW
IHI IHI
River No No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name Taxa Taxa
2007 2007
C3HART-TOLGA Harts Vaal
17/04/2007 99 20 4.95 06/12/2007 138 31 4.45
C3HART-HOSPI Harts Vaal
17/04/2007 43 9 4.78 06/12/2007 98 22 4.45
C3HART-TASUN Harts Vaal
17/04/2007 63 16 3.94 06/12/2007 79 20 3.95
C3BLUE-NORLI Blue Harts Dry on Dry on
x x x x x x
Pool 17/04/2007 05/12/2007
C3UNSP-THOME Unspec Harts Very low flow very low flow on
ified x x x x x x
on 17/04/2007 05/12/2007
C3HART-MOTSW Harts Vaal Very low flow
x x x 05/12/2007 119 28 4.25
on 16/04/2007
IHI IHI
River No No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name Taxa Taxa
2007 2007
C3HART-PAMPI Harts Vaal
16/04/2007 121 25 4.84 05/12/2007 109 24 4.54

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


131

IHI IHI
River No No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name Taxa Taxa
2007 2007
C3HART- Harts Vaal
KGOMO x x x Fish site x x x

D4MOSH-DITHA Mosha Kuruman Very low flow


x x x Not in Province x x x
weng on 16/04/2007
D4MOSH-SETHA Garam Moshaweng
16/04/2007 102 23 4.43 Not in Province x x x
okwena

Crocodile West and Marico Water Management Area (biomonitoring regions


separate)

8. Molopo, Marico River and tributaries

The Molopo River originates east of Mafikeng from a dolomitic eye and flows through
the Mafikeng town complex towards the Botswana border, see Figure 6. Water is
abstracted directly from the Molopo dolomitic eye for domestic use in Mafikeng. The
extensive peat wetlands and underground water connections do not create ideal SASS5
habitat. The E/F Ecological class at D4MOLO-BUHRM is only a reflection of the
habitat limitations and not the water quality, see Table 6. Rehabilitated wetland areas in
the Mafikeng Nature Reserve, where alien vegetation has been removed, and bank and
bed stabilisation works have been undertaken play an important ecological function in
the river system.

Major water abstractions take place in and downstream of Mafikeng from various dams.
No release mechanisms or operating rules exist to release water from the major dams in
the system. The sewerage treatment facility upstream from the site D4MOLO-MAFIK is
responsible for the very low E/F Ecological class. Nutrient enrichment of the system is a
serious threat. The importance of wetlands for water quality purification is noted by the
improvement at site D4MOLO-LOMAN (D/EF). The Ecological class below
Modimola dam (D4MOLO-MODIM) improves to a C. Erosion of the catchment and
lack of ecological flow releases impact on the seasonal river reach downstream.

Marico River and tributaries

The Marico River system comprises of the Groot Marico and Klein Marico rivers. The
Klein Marico River includes the Molemane and Kareespruit tributaries, see Figure 7.

The Molemane comprises of extensive wetland and underground systems, the site
(A3MOLE-OTTOS) at Ottoshoop is situated downstream from a predator farm. The
site lacks some of the suitable SASS5 habitat and was in a high C Ecological class during
March 2007, possible nutrient enrichment from the predator farm, deteriorated the class
to an E/F in August 2007. The Molemane River originates from a dolomitic eye. Water
is diverted from the dolomitic eye for domestic use. The upper parts of the river are
impacted by a number of weirs and structures that are used for diversion of water and
recreational purposes.

The Kareespruit below the Zeerust golf course (A3KARE-GHOLF) and upstream from
the sewerage treatment facility (A3KARE-RAILW) is in a D/EF Ecological class, the
situation deteriorates below the sewerage treatment facility to an E/F class (A3KARE-
ABJAT). Raw sewerage discharges and other nutrient inputs have severely deteriorated

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


132

the water quality in the Klein Maricopoort Dam. The dam acts as a nutrient trap and the
site downstream from the dam (A3KMAR-KALKD) improves to a C/D class. The
upper reaches of the Klein Marico River are seasonal and the reaches below the Klein
Maricopoort Dam receive no ecological flow releases.

The Groot Marico River System originates on the plateau, south of the town Groot
Marico. The upper reaches are dominated by a number of dolomitic eyes and tributaries
that cut through the mountains south of Groot Marico. This creates deeply incised
gorges that are fairly inaccessible for agricultural development and are therefore relatively
un-impacted.

The Groot Marico River includes the upper and lower Marico River and the following
tributaries in the upper reaches, see Table 6:
Rietspruit (A3RIET-RENOS is in a B Ecological class, the lack of habitat
prevents this site from reaching an A Ecological class, situated 10 m from
dolomitic eye)
Kaaloog se Loop (A3KAAL-GROOT and A3KAAL-RIETS indicate an A/B
Ecological class)
Bokkraal (A3BOKK-BOKKR and A3BOKK-WATER indicate an A/B
Ecological class
Ribbokfontein se Loop (A3RIBB-SYFER indicate an E/F Ecological class, this
river is seasonal and reflected by the class.)
Draaifontein (B Ecological class in the upper reaches and D/E downstream, this
is also mainly flow related)
Van Straatensvlei (B/C Ecological class, some negative impacts from alien
vegetation in the wetland areas and diary farming)
Polkadraaispruit (The Ecological classes varies between sites but the overall class
in a B/C).

All of the tributaries have been identified as biodiversity special features and have also
been included in the targeted river reaches for ensuring that 20% of all types of aquatic
ecosystems are conserved.

The upper reaches of the Groot Marico River, up and downstream from the town, are in
an A class at A3GMAR-KOEDO and at A3GMAR-WONDE. Water abstraction for
irrigation reduces the Ecological class to B/C further downstream at A3GMAR-
DOORN. The site below Groot Marico Bosveld Dam reflects the importance of
ecological flow maintenance. This site (A3GMAR-RIEKE) was in an overall C
Ecological class for 2005 and 2007 but good rain in January, February and March 2008
increased the flow sufficiently that a B class was reached during April 2008. The river
downstream from the Groot Marico Bosveld Dam only flows seasonally due to water
abstraction (site A3GMAR-UITKY in a D class due to lack of flow). Molatedi Dam and
the Tswasa weir are the other water abstraction points. Water is exported to Botswana at
the Tswasa weir. The sites A3GMAR-TSWAS and A3GMAR-DERDE are both in B
classes during good flow conditions and deteriorate to C Ecological classes when flow is
reduced.

The Ngotwane River is also a tributary of the Groot Marico River and is fed by a
dolomitic eye close to the town of Dinokana. The dolomitic eye supplies drinking water
to the town, the Ecological class downstream from the eye (A1NGOT-DINOK) varies

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


133

according to flow A/B. Downstream at A1NGOT-PUANE, the reduced flow, urban


and rural impacts deteriorates the river to a C class.

M o lo p o R iv e r S it e s

a
am
tl ab
m a ane
Ra go s
Mo
#
M
a lm
an
ie
lo
op
D is a n e n g

M o d i m o la D 4MO LOB U H R
D 4MO LOM A FI # M
# Lo t l a m o re n g o lo
D 4MO LOM O D I # # po
C o ok e s L ak e

Lo
D 4 MO LOLO M A

tl h
ak
an
e

P
ol
fo
n
te
Ka

in
sp
be

ru
it
Mad
i be

M a
ree
ts a
C a sh e l n e
Mo
K oe

ro kw
a
d oe

Tau
spr
u
it

20 0 20 40 M i le s

N w n e w b o r d e r .s h p W E
# S it e s _ 2 0 0 9 _ g is .d b f
D a m s 5 0 0 g _ r s a .s h p S

Figure 6: Molopo River Sites

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


134

Marico sites

si
St

Lenk wane

ei
nt
gs

tfo
a
nd

roo
a

So
ot hl ab

G
r ico
s em
M et

Ma
A3G M ARDE RD
#
A3G M ART SW A
#

A3G M ARLO TT
#
teins pru i t
Br a kfon

#
#

P
# ##ie
#
A3G M ARUIT K
# #
Klipspruit

a ne A3G M ARS TR A
# #
tw
S and

go ## # #
N
sl oot

A1NG OT PUA N # A3G M ARRIE K


#
A1NG OT DINO # #
Le th

#
Groot-M

A3K M AR KA LK #
# # #
la ka

# # # #
### R
A3G M ARDO O R #
n

# A3G M ARW O ND # #
a

#
ric o

# #
A3G M ARS A LL # ## #
#
## ##
# # # # # # #
Po lk

# #
# #
A3K M AR DOO R #
# ### #
a
dra

M
a A3DRA A RHE N A3V A NSR IET #
# # #
# lma ## # #
a is p

A3M O LE O TTO # Ma
n ie A3DRA A DRA A # # A3K A ALRIE T
ru

lo # # A3RIB B SY FE
op A3K A ALG ROO # # #
it

# # # #
# A3RIE TRE NO #
# # #
## # o rt
po
Po Kl ein e er
lf # Sk

H ex
on
Ma

te
L otlh
di

in s
ank
be

pr u
it B lo u b
a ka n

Blo
e

u ba
Bran
-Harts

ne
sa

n ks
re et
Ma

dv

p
40 0 40 80 Mile s

Nw new border.shp W E
# Sites_2009_gis.dbf
Dams500g_rsa.shp S

Figure 7: Marico River Sites

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


135

Table 5: Summary of Index of Habitat Integrity and SASS5 Ecological class


results for Molopo, Marico River and tributaries (2005, 2007, 2008)
IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
D4MOLO-BUHRM Molopo C C
18/04/2005 83 21 3.95
D4MOLO-MAFIK Molopo
D D 18/04/2005 36 11 3.27 20/06/2005 10 5 2

14/09/2005 18 7 2.57 21/11/2005 16 7 2.29


16/03/2007 18 7 2.57
D4MOLO-LOMAN Molopo
F F 18/04/2005 63 16 3.94 20/06/2005 34 10 3.4
14/09/2005 26 9 2.89 21/11/2005 39 11 3.55
30/08/2007 20 6 3.33
D4MOLO-MODIM Molopo C D 18/04/2005 66 16 4.13 20/06/2005 64 15 4.27
14/09/2005 60 14 4.29
16/03/2007 26 8 3.25
A3RIET-RENOS Rietspruit Groot
C C 21/04/2005 145 26 5.58 25/07/2005 96 19 5.05
Marico
20/09/2005 172 27 6.37 25/11/2005 200 34 5.88
08/03/2007 189 33 5.73 27/08/2007 191 30 6.37
10/04/2008 162 29 5.59
IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
A3KAAL-GROOT Kaaloog Groot
B B 21/04/2005 129 24 5.38 21/07/2005 88 15 5.87
se loop Marico
20/09/2005 201 28 7.18 25/11/2005 262 41 6.39
08/03/2007 249 40 6.23 21/08/2007 246 39 6.31
10/04/2008 294 47 6.26
A3KAAL-RIETS Kaaloog Groot
A A 21/04/2005 186 31 5.64 21/07/2005 147 24 6.13
se loop Marico
19/09/2005 279 41 6.8 24/11/2005 245 38 6.45
08/03/2007 277 43 6.44 22/08/2007 204 32 6.38
08/04/2008 267 42 6.36
A3BOKK-BOKKR Bokkraal Groot Poplar felling
se loop Marico on x X x 21/08/2007 208 34 6.12
08/03/2007
10/04/2008 213 35 6.09
A3BOKK-WATER Bokkraal Groot
08/03/2007 255 41 6.22 21/08/2007 264 42 6.29
se loop Marico
10/04/2008 264 43 6.14
A3RIBB-SYFER Ribbokfo Groot
ntein se Marico B B 21/04/2005 83 19 4.37 22/07/2005 66 13 5.08
loop
IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
A3DRAA-DRAAI Draaifont Groot
B C 22/07/2005 177 30 5.9
ein Marico
22/09/2005 177 33 5.36
No Veg
91 16 5.69
23/08/2007
A3DRAA-RHENO Draaifont Groot
B C 27/07/2005 169 28 6.04
ein Marico
21/09/2005 201 35 5.74 29/11/2005 236 40 5.9
23/08/2007 161 30 5.37
A3VANS-RIETF Vanstraat Groot
B C 22/04/2005 134 27 4.96 22/07/2005 100 23 4.35
ensvlei Marico
28/11/2005 156 33 4.73
05/03/2007 173 32 5.41 24/08/2007 179 31 5.77
A3DRAA-BRONK Draaifont Groot
ein Marico B C 21/04/2005 80 18 4.44 21/07/2005 74 16 4.63

07/03/2007 106 24 4.42 22/08/2007 158 32 4.94

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


136

IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
A3GMAR-KOEDO Groot
Marico B C 26/04/2005 260 41 6.34 21/07/2005 173 27 6.41

19/09/2005 285 41 6.95 24/11/2005 224 35 6.4


06/03/2007 299 46 6.5 22/08/2007 261 39 6.69
08/04/2008 242 37 6.54
A3POLK-SWART Polkadraa Groot
ispruit Marico B C 25/04/2005 109 20 5.45 25/07/2005 45 12 3.75
21/09/2005 103 20 5.15 28/11/2005 79 18 4.39
No veg
05/03/2007 120 20 6 51 13 3.92
24/08/2007
A3UNSP-RIETV Tributary Groot
of Marico
25/04/2005 144 26 5.54 22/07/2005 90 15 6
Polkadraa
ispruit
21/09/2005 157 26 6.04 28/11/2005 174 33 5.27
A3POLK-VLEID Polkadraa Groot
ispruit Marico B C 25/04/2005 62 14 4.43 26/07/2005 72 14 5.14

21/09/2005 88 19 4.63
05/03/2007 112 21 5.33 24/08/2007 98 20 4.9
A3UNSP-BOKKR Tributary Groot
of Marico
25/04/2005 115 22 5.23
Polkadraa
ispruit
IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
A3POLK-DOORD Polkadraa Groot
ispruit Marico B B 25/04/2005 79 18 4.39 25/07/2005 44 11 4

21/09/2005 92 22 4.18 29/11/2005 47 14 3.36


A3UITV-STERK Uitvlugsp Polkadr
ruit aaisprui 25/04/2005 134 25 5.36 26/07/2005 118 22 5.36
t
21/09/2005 123 22 5.59 29/11/2005 198 32 6.19
06/03/2007 143 25 5.72 27/08/2007 134 24 5.58
A3POLK-TWYFE Polkadraa Groot
ispruit Marico C D 25/04/2005 131 22 5.92 26/07/2005 120 23 5.22
21/09/2005 114 21 5.43 29/11/2005 203 34 5.97
06/03/2007 151 25 6.04 27/08/2007 166 29 5.72
A3GMAR-VERGE Groot
C C 26/04/2005 196 31 6.32 26/07/2005 180 28 6.43
Marico
19/09/2005 256 39 6.56 24/11/2005 245 37 6.62
13/03/2007 243 40 6.08 22/08/2007 247 38 6.5
A3GMAR-SALLI Groot
C C 26/04/2005 141 24 5.88 26/07/2005 166 27 6.15
Marico
16/09/2005 280 43 6.51 23/11/2005 222 34 6.53
IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
A3GMAR-WONDE Groot
Marico C C 26/04/2005 208 34 6.12 22/06/2005 249 39 6.38

16/09/2005 247 39 6.33 23/11/2005 310 49 6.33


Fire
07/03/2007 279 46 6.07 268 43 6.23
23/08/2007
08/04/2008 249 40 6.23
A3GMAR-DOORN Groot
C D 26/04/2005 136 23 5.91 22/06/2005 191 32 5.97
Marico
16/09/2005 250 38 6.58
ALL WATER
DIVERTED No Veg
x x x 160 26 6.15
BY WEIR on 23/08/2007
07/03/2007

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


137

A3GMAR-RIEKE Groot
Marico E E 20/04/2005 115 22 5.63 22/06/2005 124 24 5.17

16/09/2005 145 26 5.58 23/11/2005 151 27 5.59


07/03/2007 115 23 5 27/08/2007 119 22 5.41
07/04/2008 173 31 5.58
IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
A3KMAR-DOORN Klein Groot
Seasonal
Marico Marico B B

A3MOLE-OTTOS Moleman Klein


eloop Marico B C 16/03/2007 181 34 5.32 20/08/2007 85 18 4.72

A3KARE-GHOLF Kareespr Klein


D D 27/04/2005 69 17 4.06 27/07/2005 88 21 4.19
uit Marico
22/09/2005 104 23 4.52 02/12/2005 70 19 3.68
A3KARE-RAILW Kareespr Klein
D D 27/04/2005 63 15 4.2 26/07/2005 62 16 3.88
uit Marico
22/09/2005 79 20 3.95 02/12/2005 100 21 4.76
15/03/2007 90 19 4.74
A3KARE-ABJAT Kareespr Klein
D C 27/04/2005 18 7 2.57 27/07/2005 4 3 1.33
uit Marico
22/09/2005 8 4 2 02/12/2005 20 6 3.33
RAW
SEWERAGE
x x x
on
15/03/2007
A3KMAR-N4ROA Klein Groot
D C
Marico Marico
IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
A3KMAR-KALKD Klein Groot
E F 27/04/2005 104 24 4.33
Marico Marico
15/03/2007 137 25 5.48 29/08/2007 141 29 4.86
A3KMAR-NOOIT Klein Groot
C D 27/04/2005 64 14 4.57
Marico Marico
A3GMAR-STRAA Groot
Marico D D

A3GMAR-UITKY Groot
Marico C C 07/04/2008 76 16 4.75

A3GMAR-LOTTE Groot
Marico D D 19/04/2005 21 4 5.25

A3GMAR-TSWAS Groot
Marico E E 19/04/2005 140 32 4.38 21/06/2005 115 26 4.4

22/11/2005 144 29 4.97 12/03/2007 115 25 4.6


09/04/2008 120 26 4.62
A3GMAR-DERDE Groot
Marico C C 19/04/2005 111 25 4.44 21/06/2005 116 27 4.3

15/09/2005 70 14 5 22/11/2005 136 28 4.86


IHI
IHI
River Tributa Ripari No No
RHP Site Code Instrea Survey dates SASS ASPT Survey dates SASS ASPT
Name ry an Taxa Taxa
m 2007
2007
A1NGOT-DINOK Ngotwan Groot
02/12/2005 248 40 6.2 15/03/2007 210 34 6.18
e Marico
20/08/2007 197 34 5.79 11/04/2008 211 34 6.21
A1NGOT-PUANE Ngotwan Groot
e Marico
02/12/2005 84 18 4.67
(Mmapha
nyane)
20/08/2007 83 19 4.37 11/04/2008 117 21 5.57

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


138

9. Elands River and tributaries


The Elands River originates south of the town of Swartruggens in an extensive wetland
area and flows in a northerly direction and then north east to the Vaalkop Dam, see
Figure 8. The upper reaches of the catchment are dominated by slate mining activities
and in a B/C Ecological class, see Table 7. Sediment from some of the slate mines are
not sufficiently retained and cause deterioration to a C/D Ecological class at A2UNSP-
TRIBU. The upper reaches are steeply sloped while the middle and lower reaches are
gentle sloping. Overgrazing in the middle and lower reaches of the catchment
contributes to sediment deposition and degradation of the catchment.

The Swartruggens Dam and Lindleyspoort Dam supply water for domestic, agricultural
and mining activities. The situation below Swartruggens Dam and in Swartruggens
(A2ELAN-SWART) is in a D/EF Ecological class. The discharges from the
Swartruggens sewerage treatment facilities cause nutrient enrichment at A2ELAN-
NOOIT. The area below Lindleyspoort Dam is intensively used for agriculture and no
ecological flow releases are made, resulting in a low C/D Ecological class.

The Selons River is a highly seasonal tributary in the middle reaches. The Koster River is
a tributary of the Selons. The Koster Dam does not release ecological flow. The
Ecological class upstream from the dam at A2KOST-NAAUW is in a D/EF class,
mainly due to flow and nutrient enrichment problems. The Dwarsspruit is an important
tributary of the Selons from a fish diversity perspective. The Ecological classes of the
Dwarsspruit are B/ high C.

The Laregane River is a tributary of the lower Elands; this river originates from mining
areas and is in a C Ecological class at A2LARE-HARTB. The lower Elands consist
mainly of deep sandy pools with very little flow. The water quality has also deteriorated
as a result of erosion and high sediment loads occur in the rivers middle to lower
reaches. Sesbania have infested large parts of the river and the resulting deposition of
seeds in the Vaalkop Dam basin could potentially create problems.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


139

Elands sites
# a se ui t
laje Mo
n ya
go

Biers pruit
le

Tooyspruit
it
ru
sp it
# it ee pru
ru ar of s
sp K eklo
rak Lep enya Dr
o
B
Bierspruit
A2BOFUVARK #

e
ful
A2KOLORHEN
#

Bo
g
en
lob
Ko

# a a#rs
P ien # # Mo
# r et
Tolw ele
an e
# Klipvoor
#

e
Man kw
A2ELANBULH
#
# A2ELANRIET #
A2ELANRHEN # # Vaalkop
#
# A2ELANBUFF
A2LAREHART Roodekopjes
Cr
oc
A2ELANHOOG od
i le
-Bosveld #
A2ELANLIND A2ELANBEST
# #
Groot-M

# A2SELOSTRO #
u it
rss p#r #
Dwa# #
#
it

#
an e

#
pru

Lindleys Poort A2DW ARW ATE


aric o

#
# Bospoort # # Sand
ofs

Lerag

# A2ELANNOOI #
k lo

# # A2DW ARBULH #
ak

A2KOSTTW EE # #
#
Br

# ##
# A2ELANSW AR
# # # #
# # # # #
# A3POLKSW AR
# A2SUIGSTEE it # #
# ## # ru
sp
A2SELODOOR
##A2ELANKLIP d oe # # Hartbeespoort
# A2KOSTNAAU K oe #
#
# Olifantsnek Buffelspoort
## # ns
#
A2ELANDOOR e lo # # #
#
Koster

S #
A2UNSPTRIB #
A2ELANVLAK
# E #
la n #
ds

#
Hex

Blou ban k

Sandspru

Mo
dd
Blo

er
u

fo
Bra n

ban

nt
it

ei
ksp
d
vle

kei
ru

30 0 30 60 Miles

Nw new border.shp W E
# Sites_2009_gis.dbf
Dams500g_rsa.shp S

Figure 8: Elands River Sites

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


140

Table 6: Summary of Index of Habitat Integrity and SASS5 Ecological class


results for Elands River and tributaries (Western Crocodile)
IHI IHI
River Survey No Survey No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian SASS ASPT SASS ASPT
Name dates Taxa dates Taxa
2007 2007

A2ELAN- Elands Crocodile


C C 26/06/2006 137 26 5.15
VLAKF
Tributary Elands Bridge
of Elands constructi
A2UNSP-TRIBU 26/06/2006 102 19 5.37 on x x x
29/11/20
06
17/07/2008 141 23.00 6.13
A2ELAN- Elands Crocodile 29/11/20
C D 26/06/2006 186 33 5.64 171 32 5.34
DOORN 06
17/07/2008 121 20.00 6.25
Elands Crocodile 29/11/20
A2ELAN-KLIPB C C 26/06/2006 142 26 5.46 168 30 5.6
06
18/07/2008 179 33.00 5.42
A2ELAN- Elands Crocodile 30/11/20
C C 30/06/2006 141 22 6.41 205 36 5.69
DOORK 06
18/07/2008 179 33.00 5.42
A2ELAN- Elands Crocodile 30/11/20
D E 28/06/2006 73 13 5.62 84 22 3.82
SWART 06
A2ELAN- Elands Crocodile 30/11/20
C D 28/06/2006 112 23 4.87 90 22 4.09
NOOIT 06
18/07/2008 50 13.00 3.85
A2ELAN-LINDL Elands Crocodile D E 28/06/2006 85 19 4.47
IHI IHI
River Survey No Survey No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian SASS ASPT SASS ASPT
Name dates Taxa dates Taxa
2007 2007
Elands Crocodile 28/11/20
A2ELAN-BESTE C D 111 25 4.44
06
16/07/2008 118 26.00 4.54
A2ELAN- Elands Crocodile
C C 29/06/2006 102 21 4.86
HOOGE
16/07/2008 71 16.00 4.44
A2ELAN- Elands Crocodile
C C
RHENO
A2ELAN-BUFFE Elands Crocodile B C
Laregane Elands 27/11/20
A2LARE-HARTB 29/06/2006 111 23 4.83 105 23 4.57
06
A2ELAN-RIETS Elands Crocodile C C 29/06/2006 117 25 4.68
A2ELAN- Elands Crocodile
D D
BULHO
A2SELO- Selons Elands
DOORN
A2KOST- Koster Selons 29/11/20
27/06/2006 75 15 5 70 16 4.38
NAAUW 06
17/07/2008 81 20.00 4.2
IHI IHI
River Survey No Survey No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian SASS ASPT SASS ASPT
Name dates Taxa dates Taxa
2007 2007
Suigsloot Koster 29/11/20
A2SUIG-STEEN 148 30 4.93
06
A2KOST- Koster Selons
TWEER
A2DWAR- Dwarsspr Selons 28/11/20
uit 27/06/2006 142 24 5.92 139 30 4.63
BULHO 06
16/07/2008 131 25.00 5.24
Dwarsspr Selons Total
uit removal
of
A2DWAR-
27/06/2006 111 22 5.05 riverine x x x
WATER
vegetatio
n
30/11/20

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


141

06

A2SELO-STROO Selons Elands


A2KOLO- Kolobeng Bofule or
RHENO Bierspruit
A2BOFU- Bofule or Crocodile
VARKE Bierspruit

10. Hex and Sterkstroom Rivers


The Hex River originates south of the Rustenburg complex and flows north to the
Vaalkop Dam, see Figure 9. The Olifantsnek Dam is situated in the upper reaches of the
Hex River. The confluence of the Hex and Klein Hex is in the Olifantsnek Dam.

The upper reaches of the Hex River is in a B/ high C Ecological class (A2HEX-BUFFE,
A2HEX-LEEUW and A2HEX-OLIFA), the main impacts result from water abstraction
and farming activities. The Waterkloofspruit originates in the Kgwasane Mountain
Reserve from an important mountain catchment wetland system. The biomonitoring site
(A2WATE-WATER) is located close to Rustenburg and indicate a high B Ecological
class, see Table 8.

Below Rustenburg heavy infestations of alien vegetation, flow modifications, urban


runoff and mining are the major impacts on the river. The area upstream from Bospoort
Dam at A2HEX-PAARD is in an E/F Ecological class, below the dam at A2HEX-
ROOIW in a D/ low C. This river is degraded and contributes to water quality problems
in Vaalkop Dam.

The Sterkstroom is a tributary of the Crocodile River that has its origin in the
Magaliesberg. The upper reaches result in A/B Ecological classes (A2STER-RIETF,
A2STER-KROMR and A2UNSP-KROMR). The upper reaches must be conserved and
an Index of Habitat Integrity should be done. The agricultural activities in the vicinity of
Buffelspoort Dam reduce the Ecological class to a C (A2STER-BUFFE). The
combination of reduced flow and mining impacts downstream from Buffelspoort Dam
result in Ecological classes of D (A2STER-WAAIK) and E/F (A2STER-ZWART). The
water quality that enters the Roodekopjes Dam is thus not of a good quality.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


142

Hex and Sterkstroo m sites


K lip vo or
#

# A2E LA N BU L H

# #
#
# V aalko p
n ds #
E la
Ro ode ko pje s
Cr
o co

Sterkstroom
d il
e
#

e
hl
#

at
# A2H E X R OO IW

w
#

G
#
A2S T ER W A AI #
# B os poo rt #

e
ts w
#

uk u
# A2H E X R EIN K A2S T ER M A M O
A2H E X PAA R D #
#

Tsh
Ma
# A2H E X R U ST E #

re
##

tlw
A2K LIP PAA R A2S T ER Z W A R
#

an
# #

a
A2H E X W A T ER A2K LIP W A T E
# #
W
# a te
rkl
oo
# fs pA2W A T EW AT E A2S T ER S PR U
# Ha rtbe es poo rt
ru #
it
#
Sa
n

B uff els po ort


ds

Olifa nts ne k
pr
t

uit
ui

A2H E X OLIF A #
pr

m
# tr o o A2S T ER B U F F
fs

#
rk s #
oo

S te # A2S T ER K R OM
l
ik
oo

A2S T ER R IE T
R

#
A2H E X LEE U W
A2K LE IM ID D #

A2H E X BU F F E
#
He
x

20 0 20 40 Mil

N
Nw n ew b ord er.sh p
# Sites _ 20 09 _ gis .d b f
W E
Da m s 50 0 g_ rsa .sh p

Figure 9: Hex and Sterkstroom River Sites

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


143

Table 7: Summary of Index of Habitat Integrity and SASS5 Ecological class


results for Hex and Sterkstroom Rivers (Middle Croc)
IHI IHI
River Survey No Survey No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian SASS ASPT SASS ASPT
Name dates Taxa dates Taxa
2007 2007

Hex Elands 07/09/20


A2HEX-BUFFE B C 111 20 5.55 09/06/2008 164 26 6.31
06
A2HEX-LEEUW Hex Elands B C 09/06/2008 164 26 6.31
Hex Elands 07/09/20
A2HEX-OLIFA C C 151 28 5.39 09/06/2008 126 23 5.48
06
Rooikloofsp Hex
A2KLEI-MIDDE C C
ruit
Waterkloofs Hex 07/09/20
A2WATE-WATER 170 27 6.3
pruit 06
A2HEX-WATER Hex Elands C D
Klipgatsprui Hex
A2KLIP-WATER t?
A2HEX-RUSTE Hex Elands D D
Klipgatsprui Hex
A2KLIP-PAARD
t?
A2HEX-PAARD Hex Elands C C 08/09/2006 45 11 4.09
IHI IHI
River Survey No Survey No
RHP Site Code Tributary Instream Riparian SASS ASPT SASS ASPT
Name dates Taxa dates Taxa
2007 2007
A2HEX-REINK Hex Elands F F
Hex Elands 23/08/20
A2HEX-ROOIW D F 66 15 4.4 11/06/2008 92 20 4.6
06
Sterkstroom Crocodile 21/08/20
A2STER-RIETF 205 33 6.21 10/06/2008 130 21 6.19
06
Sterkstroom Crocodile 21/08/20
A2STER-KROMR 153 24 6.38
06
Tributary of Sterkstroom 21/08/20
A2UNSP-KROMR 98 17 5.76 10/06/2008 142 22 6.45
Sterkstroom 06
Sterkstroom Crocodile 21/08/20
A2STER-BUFFE 110 19 5.79 10/06/2008 116 20 5.8
06
Sterkstroom Crocodile 22/08/20
A2STER-SPRUI 70 14 5 10/06/2008 70 13 5.38
06
A2STER-ZWART Sterkstroom Crocodile 10/06/2008 43 10 4.3
Sterkstroom Crocodile 22/08/20
A2STER-MAMOG (Gwathle) 59 14 4.21
06
Sterkstroom Crocodile 22/08/20
A2STER-WAAIK 76 17 4.47
(Gwathle) 06

11. Crocodile River and tributaries


The Crocodile River originates in Gauteng in Johannesburg and flows in a northerly
direction through Hartbeespoort Dam and then north westwards, supplying water to
agricultural and mining activities in the North West Province, see Figure 10.

The Crocodile River and tributaries are in a D/EF Ecological class (see Table 9) with the
exceptions of:
The Ramogatla tributary at A2RAMO-KLIPK, this site was in a B class
(September 2006) and has since deteriorated to a C (December 2006) and D
(May 2008).
The Tolwane at A2TOLW-NOOIT, this site was in a C class (September 2006)
and has deteriorated to an E/F (December 2006 and May 2008).
The Pienaars downstream from Klipvoor Dam at A2PIEN-BUFFE, this site was
in a high C (September 2006), B (December 2006) and high C (May 2008).

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


144

Crocodile sites

Le
pe
ny
a

Marierietsa

at
Pl
A2BLOKDEMOA2UNSPKLIP
#s
# naar A2PIENIFR4
ab e Pie # A2PIENIFR2 # Mo
M ot lh # re
te
A2PIENBUFF le
Tol wa Pienaars
ne
Madi

A2CROCVAAL Klipvoor

Ts h
#
ba m

wa
Ma
a

ne
t sh
tsho

ikit
i

Apie
Bo
# eke
Ela nds n

s
A2TOLW PALM# ho
# # Vaalkop ut s
# pr
# ui t
Roodekopjes
Cr
oc
od
il

K ut
e
A2TOLW KLIP

s wa
#
o g atl
a A2TRIBKLIP#

ne
Ra m A2TOLW NOOI#
# A2RAMOKLIP# nd
# # A2SANDNOOI
Sa

Ros esp ruit


Bospoort A2CROCZOUT# # #
# A2ROSEMAMO A2UNSPOUDE
A2KAREZOUT
# #
#
# A2CROCBRIT
Hex

ui t

##
pr

#
es

# #
re

# # A2KAREHART A2DEKRDEKR
Ka

Hartbeespoort ui t
# r ts pr
# Sw a

Olifantsnek Buffelspoort M a gal ies


#
# # #
#

30 0 30 60 Miles

N
Nw new border.shp
# Sites_2009_gis.dbf W E

Dams500g_rsa.shp S

Figure 10: Crocodile River Sites

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


145

Table 8: Summary of Index of Habitat Integrity and SASS5 Ecological class results for Crocodile River and tributaries (Croc East)

RHP Site Code River Name Tributary IHI Instream 2007 IHI Riparian 2007 Survey dates SASS No Taxa ASPT Survey dates SASS No Taxa ASPT

De Kroon Spruit Crocodile


A2DEKR-DEKRO D D

A2CROC-BRITS Crocodile E D
A2ROSE-MAMOG Rosespruit Crocodile 11/12/2006 75 17.00 4.41
15/05/2008 36 7.00 5.14
Crocodile
A2CROC-ZOUTP C D 04/09/2006 79 18.00 4.39 11/12/2006 67 15.00 4.47

A2KARE-HARTB Kareespruit Crocodile 12/05/2008 34 9.00 3.78


A2KARE-ZOUTP Kareespruit Crocodile 04/09/2006 69 15.00 4.6
A2RAMO-KLIPK Ramogatla Crocodile 04/09/2006 138 27.00 5.11 11/12/2006 102 20.00 5.1
12/05/2008 72 15.00 4.8
RHP Site Code River Name Tributary IHI Instream 2007 IHI Riparian 2007 Survey dates SASS No Taxa ASPT Survey dates SASS No Taxa ASPT

A2CROC-VAALK Crocodile C D 06/09/2006 31 9.00 3.44 12/12/2006 77 19.00 4.05

15/05/2008 102 23.00 4.43


Sand
A2UNSP-OUDEK Tributary of Sand
Sand Tolwane No work, serious
A2SAND-NOOIT 05/09/2006 67 16.00 4.19 safety concerns x x x
13/12/2006
Tolwane Pienaars
A2TOLW-NOOIT 05/09/2006 118 24.00 4.92 13/12/2006 65 17.00 3.82
(Moretele)
14/05/2008 66 13.00 5.08
A2TRIB-KLIPG Tributary of Tolwane Tolwane
Tolwane Pienaars
A2TOLW-KLIPG
(Moretele)
Tolwane Pienaars
A2TOLW-PALMI (Moretele) 13/05/2008 87 16.00 5.44

A2PIEN-IFR4 Pienaars (Moretele) Crocodile

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


146

RHP Site Code River Name Tributary IHI Instream 2007 IHI Riparian 2007 Survey dates SASS No Taxa ASPT Survey dates SASS No Taxa ASPT

RHP Site Code River Name Tributary IHI Instream 2007 IHI Riparian 2007 Survey dates SASS No Taxa ASPT Survey dates SASS No Taxa ASPT
Tributary of Pienaars (Moretele) Pienaars
A2UNSP-KLIPV
(Moretele)
A2PIEN-IFR2 Pienaars (Moretele) Crocodile 06/09/2006 51 11.00 4.64 12/12/2006 59 15.00 3.93
Blokspruit Pienaars
A2BLOK-DEMON
(Moretele)
A2PIEN-BUFFE Pienaars (Moretele) Crocodile 06/09/2006 120 22.00 5.45 12/12/2006 181 32.00 5.66
13/05/2008 120 22.00 5.45

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


147

12. Conclusion

Most of the river systems in the Province have been impacted by human activities and
therefore the habitat integrity has deteriorated. Most rivers can be considered to be in a
moderately to largely modified state (category C to D). Integrity of a largely natural state
(category A) is rarely found in the assessed rivers. Improved management and
rehabilitation actions are required in the modified rivers to attempt improvements and to
prevent further degradation. Conservation actions are required for the largely natural
rivers as they support unique biodiversity features and subsequent ecological goods and
services.

The continued monitoring and reporting of the status of the aquatic ecosystem in the
province is essential in this water scarce area.

Challenges

Availability and appointment of experts to do biomonitoring of fish.


Availability and appointment of support staff to assist with the aquatic
invertebrates, habitat integrity, and riparian vegetation monitoring.
Low/no flow of rivers in dry seasons and high flow in wet seasons, causing a
discontinuation in the planned monitoring programme.
Application of biomonitoring indices can only be done by experts.
Server access problems prevented the direct capture to the National Rivers
Database, problem solved in June 2008.
Kilometre restrictions during 2007, 2008, 2009.
Lack of strong enforcement to prevent further degradation of river systems

Opportunities

Informed decisions, based on scientific data, can be made on issues related to


river- and catchment management.
A reliable database is being developed to support State of Environment reporting
in the province.
Biomonitoring training provided to staff members and other partners
(Universities and DWAF staff).
To develop and implement a biomonitoring programme that will support
integrated water resource management
The integration of freshwater and terrestrial conservation planning

13. References

BARBER-JAMES HM (2001) Freshwater Biomonitoring Using Benthic Macroinvertebrates. Short


course on biomonitoring. Grahamstown.

CHUTTER FM (1998) Research on the Rapid Biological Assessment of Water Quality Impacts in
Streams and Rivers. WRC Report No 422/1/98. Water Research Commission.
Pretoria.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


148

DAVIES B and DAY J (1998) Vanishing Waters. University of Cape Town Press.
University of Cape Town. Rondebosch. 487pp.

DICKENS CWS and GRAHAM M (2002) The South African Scoring System (SASS)
Version 5 rapid bio-assessment method for rivers. African Journal of Aquatic Science
27 1-10.

EEKHOUT S, BROWN, CA and KING, JM (1996) National Biomonitoring Programme for


Riverine Ecosystems: Technical Considerations and Protocol for the Selection of Reference and
Monitoring Sites. NBP Report Series No.3. Institute for Water Quality Studies,
Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria.

IVERSEN TM, MADSEN BL and BGESTRAND J (2000) River conservation in the


European Community, including Scandinavia. In: Boon PJ, Davies BR and Petts
GE (eds) Global Perspectives on River Conservation: Science Policy and Practise. John
Wiley and Sons Ltd.

KLEYNHANS CJ (1999) The development of a fish index to assess the biological


integrity of South African rivers. Water SA 25 (3) 265-270.

ROUX DJ (2001) Biomonitoring of Rivers. CSIR Environmentek. Short course on


biomonitoring. Grahamstown.

WALMSLEY RD (2000) Perspectives on Eutrophication of Surface Waters: Policy/Research Needs


in South Africa. Report No KV129/00. Water Research Commission. Pretoria.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference


149

MAIN ISSUES/CONCERNS RAISED & RESOLUTIONS TAKEN AT THE


CONFERENCE

Main Issues & Concerns Raised

1. There is a lack of capacity at DEAT and DWAF and in provincial conservation


departments. Also a steady loss of skilled and experienced staff.
2. Authorities do not implement the environmental laws.
3. Poor management of water resources by local authorities and municipalities.
4. Pollution of our water resource is a huge and growing problem and a major
threat to all water users.
5. There is a lack of good environmental education strategies.
6. DME and mining companies do not follow due legal process. For example
permits issued without stakeholder consultation.
7. There is a lack of compliance by developers. The term sustainability needs to be
defined.
8. Problem of illegal fishing increasing. Poachers resort to arms when confronted by
authorities at dams like Inanda.
9. If implemented correctly a national fishing licence could result in significant
funding for conservation of our freshwater fish resource.

Resolutions taken

1. There should be pro-active liaison with DWAF. To be discussed by YWG Exco.


2. Further research should be undertaken on the genetics of yellowfish and the
immediate focus should remain on Labeobarbus natalensis.
3. There should be increased focus on environmental education.
4. For effective management of fish in the provinces there should be a single fishing
licence which distinguishes between subsistence and sport fishing.
5. The 2010 conference to be held at the Willem Pretorius Reserve outside
Winburg.

13th Yellowfish Working Group Conference

You might also like