ECOLOGICAL INVERTEBRATE HABITAT SURVEY
VELE COLLIERY
Hodogenes troglodytes, rock scorpion, a delicate scorpion which can become very large (individual in
picture is young) and which is restricted to some rocky patches at the site.
Photo: R.F. Terblanche February 2012
MARCH 2012
COMPILED BY:
Reinier F. Terblanche
(M.Sc, Cum Laude; Pr.Sci.Nat, Reg. No. 400244/05)
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................
1
2. STUDY AREA ...................................................................................................
1
3. METHODS .........................................................................................................
1
4. RESULTS ..........................................................................................................
4
5. DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................
14
6. IMPACT ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................
21
7. RECOMMENDATION .......................................................................................
23
8. CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................
26
9. REFERENCES ..................................................................................................
28
APPENDIX 1: LIST OF SCORPION SPECIES ............................................
35
APPENDIX 2: LIST OF BUTTERFLY SPECIES ............................................
36
2
1
INTRODUCTION
An ecological habitat survey of invertebrates, of known high conservation priority, was required
for the Vele mine area in the Limpopo Province. The survey focused on the possibility that
invertebrate species, especially arachnids (which include scorpions and baboon spiders) listed
in the TOPS list are likely to occur at the site or not. Known threatened invertebrate species of
the Limpopo Province which are based on IUCN categories and criteria have also been
incorporated including the recently published South African Red Data Book: butterflies
(Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009).
2
STUDY AREA
The study area is approximately 40km west of Mucina in the Limpopo Province at the Vele mine
site. Low ridges are are embedded in gentle slopes towards a sandy alluvial plain at the banks
of the Limpopo river. The site is part of the Savanna biome. Savanna on the flatter areas with
gentle slopes is represented by Musina Mopane Bushveld. Savanna at the low ridges is part of
the Limpopo Ridge Bushveld (Mucina & Rutherford 2006). Subtropical Alluvial Vegetation
occurs on the banks of the Limpopo river (Mucina & Rutherford 2006). Croplands and orchards
are present between the low rocky ridges and Limpopo river. Some vegetation has also been
transformed by mining. The area is characterised by summer rainfall and very dry winters (MAP
300-400mm) (Mucina & Rutherford 2006). High maximum temperatures in the summer and in
general frost-free winters are present.
3
METHODS
A desktop study comprised not only an initial phase, but also it was used throughout the study
to accommodate and integrate all the data that become available during the field observations.
Invertebrate habitat surveys that consisted of visits by R.F. Terblanche from 1-3 February 2012
were conducted to note key elements of habitats on the site, relevant to the description and
conservation of invertebrate fauna at the site.
The following sections highlight the materials and methods applicable to different aspects that
were observed.
3.1
HABITAT CHARACTERISTICS AND VEGETATION
The habitat was investigated by noting habitat structure (rockiness, slope, plant
structure/physiognymy) as well as floristic composition. Voucher specimens of plant species
were only taken where the taxonomy was in doubt and where the plant specimens were of
significant relevance for invertebrate conservation. Field guides such as those by Germishuizen
(2003), Manning (2003), Manning (2009), Van Oudtshoorn (1999), Van Wyk (2000), Van Wyk &
Malan (1998) and Van Wyk & Van Wyk (1997) were used to confirm the taxonomy of the
3
species. Works on specific plant groups (often genera) such as those by Goldblatt (1986),
Goldblatt & Manning (1998), Jacobsen (1983), McMurtry, Grobler, Grobler & Burns (2008), Smit
(2008), Van Jaarsveld (2006) and Van Wyk & Smith (2003) were also consulted to confirm the
identification of species. In this case no plant specimens were needed to be collected as
voucher specimens or to be send to a herbarium for identification. For the most recent treatise
of scientific plant names and broad distributions, Germishuizen, Meyer & Steenkamp (2006) as
well as Raimondo, Von Staden, Foden, Victor, Helme, Turner, Kamundi and Manyama (2009)
were followed to compile the lists of species.
3.2
BUTTERFLIES
Butterflies were noted as sight records or voucher specimens. Voucher specimens are mostly
taken of those species of which the taxa warrant collecting due to taxonomic difficulties or in the
cases where species can look similar in the veldt. Many butterflies use only one species or a
limited number of plant species as host plants for their larvae. Myrmecophilous (ant-loving)
butterflies such as the Aloeides, Chrysoritis, Erikssonia, Lepidochrysops and Orachrysops
species (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), which live in association with a specific ant species, require
a unique ecosystem for their survival (Deutschländer & Bredenkamp, 1999; Terblanche,
Morgenthal & Cilliers, 2003; Edge, Cilliers & Terblanche, 2008; Gardiner & Terblanche, 2010).
Known food plants of butterflies were therefore also recorded. After the visits to the site and the
identification of the butterflies found there, a list was also compiled of butterflies that will most
probably be found in the area in all the other seasons because of suitable habitat. The
emphasis is on a habitat survey.
3.3
FRUIT CHAFER BEETLES
Different habitat types in the areas were explored for any sensitive or special fruit chafer
species. Selection of methods to find fruit chafers depends on the different types of habitat
present and the species that may be present. Fruit bait traps would probably not be successful
for capturing Ichnestoma species in a grassland patch (Holm & Marais 1992). Possible chafer
beetles of high conservation priority were noted as sight records accompanied by the collecting
of voucher specimens with grass nets or containers where deemed necessary.
3.4
MYGALOMORPH SPIDERS AND ROCK SCORPIONS
Relatively homogenous habitat / vegetation areas were identified and explored to identify any
sensitive or special species. The area was searched for possible signs of trap door spiders or
other mygalomorph spiders (for example traces of wafer-lids, cork-lids or silk-lined burrows).
Investigations by brushing the soil surface, scraping or digging into the soil with a spade, were
made. All the above actions were accompanied by the least disturbance possible.
4
3.9 LIMITATIONS
For the site visited, it should be emphasized that surveys can by no means result in an
exhaustive list of invertebrates present on the site, because of the time constraint. The on site
survey was conducted during February which is an optimal time of the year to find animals such
as butterflies, other invertebrates as well as habitat sensitive plant species high conservation
priority. In general the weather was optimal for recording of invertebrates. At the time of the
survey the local area was very dry though. The focus of the survey remains sensitive habitats
and species of particular conservation priority.
4
RESULTS
4.1
HABITAT AND VEGETATION CHARACTERISTICS
Table 4.1: Outline of the main habitat and vegetation characteristics of the site proposed for
development.
HABITAT FEATURE
Topography
Rockiness
Presence of wetlands
Vegetation in general
DESCRIPTION
Plains with gentle slopes, sandy streambeds, low hills with
some rocky outcrops and the banks of the Limpopo Province
are all part of the landscape.
Rocks are conspicuous at the rocky ridges, but patches with
rocks have also been found on the flatter areas adjacent the low
hills.
Wetlands are confined to the riparian zones of the major
drainage channels at the site and the Limpopo river.
The vegetation in general ranges from pristine savanna at hills
and some slopes to plains where savanna has been
transformed by savanna. A mosaic of plant assemblages is
present. The vegetation overall contains many indigenous plant
species of which the life forms and structure varies
considerably. From an invertebrate perspective habitats which
contained a conspicuous dominance of Colophospermum
mopane on sands, habitats with few rocks, including calcrete in
some places where Colophospermum mopane is dominant but
where Boscia albitrunca, Commiphora species, Grewia flava
and other tree species are also well represented, ridge
bushveld where Kirkia acuminata, Combretum apiculatum and
various other tree species are recorded with Colophospermum
mopane as well as the alluvial vegetation with remnants of
riparian forest along the banks of the Limpopo river. Also
5
Signs of disturbances
Characteristics of
surrounding areas (with a
view to buffer zones,
corridors and connectivity of
habitats with more natural
vegetation)
noteworthy the occurence of Acacia nigrescens along dry sandy
streambeds and the occurence of Lonchocarpus capassa at
drainage lines near the alluvial section of the Limpopo river.
Orchards (citrus) and cotton fields replaced indigenous
vegetation at plains at some areas between the low ridges and
the Limpopo river. Excavations of mining activities are present
as well as roads that link mining centres.
There is scope for a number of conservation corridors and
buffer zones of particular importance at the site, which need
careful planning, considering the type of development, if
approved.
Photo 1 Low rocky ridge near the Limpopo river at Vele.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
6
Photo 2 View towards the north-east from low rocky ridge at the Vele site. Limpopo river
with, riparian vegetation in the background. Mopane bushveld interrupted by agriculture in
the foreground.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
7
Photo 3 View towards the north from highest rocky ridge at Vele. Mopane bushveld,
croplands and orchards (citrus). Hill in the background part of Zimbabwe. Thin green strip in
the background is alluvial vegetation at the banks of the Limpopo river.
Photo: 3 February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
Photo 4 Air-strip with adjacent Mopane bushveld at Vele.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
8
Photo 5 Alluvial section with remnants of riparian forest.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
Photo 6 Remnants of riparian forest near the banks of the Limpopo river.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
9
Photo 7 Hadogenes troglodytes is one of the TOPS listed scorpion species which appears
to occur at many rocky patches at the site, including rocky patches, not only at the rocky hills
but also at gentle slopes.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
Photo 8 Parabuthus transvaalicus which appears to favour undersides of old dead trees at
the site.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
10
Photo 9 Young Opistophthalmus wahlbergii. All Opistophthalmus scorpions are TOPS listed.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
Photo 10 Charaxes jasius subsp. saturnus, a common resident at the site.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
11
Photo 11 Fruit baited trapnet (“Charaxes type trapnet”) at highest ridge near the Limpopo
river at the site. The higher Dongola hill outside the site is visible in the background towards
the south.
Photo: February 2012, R.F. Terblanche.
12
4.2
INVERTEBRATE SPECIES OF PARTICULAR CONSERVATION PRIORITY
4.2.1 Butterflies of particular conservation priority
Table 4.2 Threatened butterfly species of the Limpopo Province (Henning, Terblanche & Ball
2009). Invertebrates such as threatened butterfly species are often very habitat specific and
residential status imply a unique ecosystem that is at stake.
Species
Red Listed
Status
Resident
at site
Recorded
at site
during
survey
Likely to
be found
based on
habitat
assessment
Alaena margaritacea
Wolkberg Zulu
Critically
Endangered
No
No
No
Aloeides stevensoni
Stevenson’s Copper
Vulnerable
No
No
No
Anthene crawshayi
juanitae
Juanita’s
Ciliated Blue/Hairtail
Vulnerable
No
No
No
Dingana clara
Wolkberg Widow
Vulnerable
No
No
No
Dingana jerinae
Jerine’s Widow
Vulnerable
No
No
No
Erikssonia edgei *
Edge’s Acraea Copper
Critically
Endangered
No
No
No
Lepidochrysops lotana
Lotana Blue
Critically
Endangered
No
No
No
Pseudonympha
swanepoeli
Swanepoel’s Brown
Critically
Endangered
No
No
No
Telchinia induna
salmontana
Soutpansberg Acraea
Vulnerable
No
No
No
* Formerly this butterfly species has been known as the Waterberg population of
Erikssonia acraeina. The Waterberg population of Erikssonia, known from only one
locality, has recently been described as a new species, Erikssonia edgei by Gardiner &
Terblanche (2010).
13
Table 4.2 Butterfly species of the Limpopo Province that is not threatened but of special
conservation concern. Invertebrates such as threatened butterfly species are often very habitat
specific and residential status imply a unique ecosystem that is at stake.
Species
Anthene liodes
Liodes Ciliated
Blue/Hairtail
4.2.2
Red Listed
Status
Resident
at site
Very
restricted
range in
South Africa
Recorded
at site
during
survey
Yes
Likely to
be found
based on
habitat
assessment
Yes
Yes
Beetles of particular conservation priority
Table 4.4 Fruit chafer species (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Cetoninae) in the Limpopo Province
which are of known high conservation priority.
Species
Red
Listed
Status
Resident at
site
Recorded at
site during
survey
Likely to be
found based on
habitat
assessment
Ichnestoma
stobbiai
Uncertain
(Some
population
s maybe
endanger
ed:
taxonomic
difficulties)
No
No
No
Tmesorhina
viridicyanea
Uncertain/
rare
No
No
No
Trichocephala
brincki
Uncertain
No
No
No
14
4.2.3
Scorpions of particular conservation importance
Table 4.5 Scorpion species (Scorpiones: Ischnuridae) species that are of known high
conservation priority in the Limpopo Province.
Species
Red List
Status
Resident at
site
Recorded at
site during
survey
Likely to be
found based
on
habitat
assessment
Hadogenes
troglodytes
Not
threatened
(but all
Hadogenes
species are
on TOPS
list)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Opistophthalmus
wahlbergii
Yes
Not
threatened
(but all
Opistophthal
mus species
are on TOPS
list)
Yes
Yes
4.2.4
Mygalomorph spiders of particular conservation importance
Table 4.6 Baboon spiders (Arachnida: Theraphosidae) species that are of known high
conservation priority in the Limpopo Province.
Species
Red List
Status
Resident at
site
Recorded at
site during
survey
Likely to be
found based
on
habitat
assessment
15
Ceratogyrys
bechuanicus
Not
threatened
(but all
Ceratogyrus
species are
on TOPS
list)
?
No
Possibly, yes
(suitable
habitat)
Ceratogyrys
brachycephalus
Not
threatened/
Uncertain
(but all
Ceratogyrus
species are
on TOPS
list)
?
No
Possibly, yes
(suitable
habitat)
Pterinochilus species
(Pterinochilus junodi,
P. pluridentatis)
Not
threatened
(but all
Pterinochilus
species are
on TOPS
list)
Yes
No
Yes
16
5
DISCUSSION
5.1
HABITAT AND VEGETATION CHARACTERISTICS
A brief outline of the overall habitat and vegetation characteristics is given in Table 4.1. and
serves as a reference for the invertebrate habitat survey.
5.2
INVERTEBRATES
5.2.1
Butterflies
Assessment of threatened butterfly species
Studies about the vegetation and habitat of threatened butterfly species in South Africa showed
that ecosystems with a unique combination of features are selected by these often localised
threatened butterfly species (Deutschländer and Bredenkamp 1999; Edge 2002, 2005;
Terblanche, Morgenthal & Cilliers 2003; Lubke, Hoare, Victor & Ketelaar 2003). Threatened
butterfly species in South Africa can then be regarded as bio-indicators of rare ecosystems.
Table 4.2 lists nine butterfly species as threatened in the Limpopo Province such as given in the
South African Red Data Book: butterflies (G.A. Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009). The expected
presence or not of these threatened butterfly species follows.
Alaena margariticea (Wolkberg Zulu)
The proposed global red list status for Alaena margariticea according to the most recent IUCN
criteria and categories is Critically Endangered [CR A3ce; B2ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v)] (G.A. Henning,
Terblanche & Ball 2009). Alaena margariticea is only known from one restricted area in the
vicinity of Haenertsburg in the Wolkberg. The secluded colony is found on steep grassy slopes
in the Wolkberg with where lichen covered rocks are a crucial part of the habitat (Henning,
Terblanche & Ball 2009). No Alaena margaritacea was recorded on the site and it is highly
unlikely that the butterfly will be present.
Aloeides stevensoni (Stevenson’s Copper)
The proposed global red list status for Aloeides stevensoni according to the most recent IUCN
criteria and categories is Vulnerable [VU D2] (Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009). Aloeides
stevensoni colonies are found on south facing, high-altitude grassy slopes of the Wolkberg.
There is not an ideal habitat of Aloeides stevensoni on the site and it is unlikely that the butterfly
is present at the site.
Anthene crawshayi juanitae (Juanita’s Ciliated Blue)
The proposed global red list status for Anthene juanitae according to the most recent IUCN
criteria and categories is Vulnerable [VU B1a(iv)c(iv)+2ab(iv)c(iv); D1+2] (Henning, Terblanche
17
& Ball 2009). From 1990 to 2011 Anthene juanitae was only known from six specimens from
riverine vegetation on the banks of the Olifants River at Manoutsa Park (Henning, Terblanche &
Ball 2009). Very recently the butterfly has been rediscovered by Gardiner at Manoutsa Park
(November 2011) and by Williams (January 2012) at the Legalameetse Nature Reserve. There
appears to be no ideal habitat of Anthene juanitae on the site and it is unlikely that the butterfly
is present at the site.
Dingana clara (Wolkberg Widow)
The proposed global red list status for Dingana clara according to the most recent IUCN criteria
and categories is Vulnerable [VU D2] (Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009). Dingana clara is
known from only four small montane localities in the Wolkberg area of the Limpopo Province.
Adults are found on steep, rock-strewn, grassy slopes as high elevations among proteas
(Henning, Ball & Terblanche, 2009). There is not an ideal habitat of Dingana clara on the site
and it is unlikely that the butterfly is present at the site.
Dingana jerinae (Jerine’s Widow)
The proposed global red list status for Dingana jerinae according to the most recent IUCN
criteria and categories is Vulnerable [VU D2] (Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009). Dingana
jerinae is only known from the Kransberg part of the Waterberg where one of its localities
extends into the Marekele National Park. Adults fly on steep slopes, below high cliffs, among
fallen rocks as well as in rocky terrain on the summits (Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009). There
is not an ideal habitat of Dingana jerinae on the site and it is unlikely that the butterfly is present
at the site.
Erikssonia edgei (Edge’s Acraea Copper)
Erikssonia edgei was previously referred to as the Waterberg population of Erikssonia acraeina
before it was described as a new species from South Africa by Gardiner & Terblanche (2010).
The proposed global red list status for Erikssonia edgei (hitherto known as the South African
population of Erikssonia acraeina) according to the most recent IUCN criteria and categories is
Critically Endangered [CR A1ac+2a; B1ab(iii,v)c(iv) + 2ab(iii,v)c(iv)] (Henning, Terblanche & Ball
2009). Erikssonia edgei is only known from one restricted area in the vicinity of Rankin’s Pass
on deep sands of the Waterberg (Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009; Gardiner & Terblanche
2010). No Erikssonia edgei was recorded on the site and it is highly unlikely that the butterfly
will be present.
Lepidochrysops lotana (Lotana Blue)
The proposed global red list status for Lepidochrysops lotana according to the most recent
IUCN criteria and categories is Critically Endangered [CR B1ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v) + 2a(i,ii,iii,iv,v)]
(Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009). The type locality where the butterfly was first discovered is
on the farm Rietvlei 30km south of Polokwane. Another locality is known on the Wolkberg east
of Polokwane and very recently the butterfly was found in the Legalemeetse Nature Reserve by
M.C. Williams. The butterfly is present where the larval host plant Ocimum obovatum occurs on
grassy slopes (Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009). Note that the distribution of the butterfly is
18
much more restricted than the distribution of the host plant. No Lepidochrysops lotana was
recorded on the site and it is highly unlikely that the butterfly will be present.
Pseudonympha swanepoeli (Swanepoel’s Brown)
The proposed global red list status for Pseudonympha swanepoeli according to the most recent
IUCN criteria and categories is Critically Endangered [CR B2ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v)] (Henning, Terblanche
& Ball 2009). Pseudonympha swanepoeli is only known from one restricted marshy area near
Houtbosdorp in the Wolkberg mountains. Previously known localities of the butterfly in the
vicinity of Houtbosdorp have been destroyed (Henning, Terblanche & Ball 2009). No
Pseudonympha swanepoeli was recorded on the site and it is highly unlikely that the butterfly
will be present.
Telchinia induna salmontana (Soutpansberg Acraea):
The proposed global red list status for Telchinia induna salmontana according to the most
recent IUCN criteria and categories is Vulnerable [VU B2ab(iii)] (Henning, Terblanche & Ball
2009). Telchinia induna salmontana is found in Soutpansberg Summit Sourveld (Mucina &
Rutherford 2006) on the higher peaks in the Soutpansberg Mountains. Adults fly along exposed
high rocky ridges where the food plant of the larva, Aeschynomene nodulosa, grows (Henning,
Ball & Terblanche 2009). There is not an ideal habitat of Telchinia induna salmontana on the
site and it is unlikely that the butterfly is present at the site.
Conclusion on threatened butterfly species
There appears to be no threat to any red listed butterfly species if the study site were
developed.
Assessment of butterfly species which are not threatened but of particular conservation concern
Anthene liodes bihe
A new locality for Anthene liodes bihe has been discovered at the remnants of riparian forest at
the banks of the Limpopo river during this survey. This marginal species (with tropical affinity) is
not threatened, but are well-known to be rare in South Africa with only a few localities from
which it has been recorded in this country (Kloppers & Van Son 1978, Pringle, Ball & Henning
1994, Woodhall 2005). It has been described in 1847 but only in 1966 was the first specimen to
be recorded in South Africa, caught at Balule on the Olifants river in the Kruger National Park by
J. Kloppers (Kloppers & Van Son 1978). Another locality in the Kruger National Park is Punda
Maria (Kloppers & Van Son 1978). Other known localities include habitats near Malelane and
Komatipoort in Mpumalanga, Rondalia Ranch and Pafuri in the Limpopo Province as well as
Pongola river below the Yozini dam (Pringle, Ball & Henning 1994, Woodhall 2005).
Butterfly diversity
High butterfly diversity appears to be present on the site, owing to the remaining natural
vegetation as well as micro-habitat diversity. A preliminary list of seventy-four butterfly species
is given based on the habitat survey of February 2012. This is unlike the Legalameetse Nature
Reserve in the Limpopo Province where numerous endemic butterfly species could be found
19
and the species richness is 183 species, approaching 200 (Terblanche & Henning 1994).
Overall, highly endemic butterfly species that are found in the Limpopo Province in the
Wolkberg and on the Soutpansberg are absent from the series of low rocky hills on the site. Yet
an interesting butterfly diversity is present.
5.2.2
Fruit chafer beetles
Assessment of threatened or other high conservation priority fruit chafer beetle species
Table 4.4 lists the fruit chafer beetle species (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Cetoninae) that are of
possible high conservation priority in the Limpopo Province. No Ichnestoma species or
Trichocephala brincki were found during the surveys. There appears to be no suitable habitat for
these localised fruit chafer beetles at the site. There appears to be no threat to any of the fruit
chafer beetles of particular high conservation priority if the site is developed.
Fruit chafer beetle diversity
During the site visits of February 2012 a number of fruit chafer beetle species were observed on
the site. Because of time constraint, fruit chafer diversity was not explored in detail. The focus of
this initial exploration was to look out for possible habitats of known rare and localised fruit
chafer beetles.
5.2.3
Scorpions
Assessment of threatened or other high conservation priority scorpion species
Table 4.5 lists scorpion species that are of known high conservation priority in the Limpopo
Province. Hadogenes troglodytes, a rock scorpion that is not a threatened species, has been
found at the site during the February 2012 site visits. Though not threatened, all Hadogenes
species are perceived to be quite habitat sensitive and on the TOPS list. Hadogenes troglodytes
is particularly sensitive to habitat destruction owing to its small brood size and slow rate of
reproduction (Leeming 2003). Hadogenes troglodytes is restricted to discrete rocky outcrops
and mountain ranges in the northern parts of South Africa and further north in Zimbabwe and
Mozambique (Leeming 2003). Hadogenes troglodytes is the longest scorpion in the world (up to
210mm). Opistophthalmus wahlbergii (a burrowing scorpion) has also been found at the site.
Opistophthalmus is also on the TOPS list.
There appears to be no known threatened scorpion species on the site.
Scorpion diversity
A preliminary list of nine scorpion species is given based on the survey of of February 2012 at
the site (Appendix 1). These scorpions occupy various microhabitat types and are a reflection of
the habitat diversity present on the site. The scorpion species recorded are widespread in the
South African savanna though the rock scorpion, Hadogenes troglodytes, is restricted to rocky
outcrops and mountains where significant rocky ridges are present. On the site however,
20
Hadogenes troglodytes appears to be present at vairous rocky patches, not only on slopes and
summits of hills, but also on more flat terrain. There is clearly an interesting and highly diverse
scorpion diversity at the site.
5.2.4
Mygalomorph spiders with special reference to baboon spiders
Assessment of threatened or other high conservation priority baboon spider species
Table 4.6 lists baboon spider species (Araneae: Theraphosidae) that are of known high
conservation priority in the Limpopo Province. In the South African context baboon spider
species belonging to the genus Ceratogyrus has a particular presence in the Limpopo Province.
Ceratogyrus (“horned baboon spiders”) is also of importance to the pet trade and appears on
the TOPS list with other baboon spider genera Harpactira and Pterinochilus.
Despite intensive searching for burrows and in a variety of habitats presence of Ceratogyrus
species at the site, only two abandoned burrows were found, which may belong to Ceratogyrus
at the southern slopes near the summit of the highest rocky ridge near the Limpopo river, but
the identity could not be confirmed.
Ceratogyrus bechuanicus and Ceratogyrus brachycephalus appear to be only found to occur in
small colonies of a few burrows scattered over wide area at each locality (De Wet & Schoeman
1991). This is in contrast to other baboon spider species such as Pterinochilus which is found in
much larger colonies. Distribution of Ceratogyrus bechuanicus ranges from Botswana, Central
Namibia, Zimbabwe (widespread), Mozambique to the northern parts of South Africa (Limpopo
Province) (Dippenaar-Schoeman 2002). Ceratogyrus bechuanicus has also been recorded from
the western Soutpansberg (Foord, Dippenaar-Schoeman & Van der Merwe 2002). In contrast to
Ceratogyrus bechuanicus, Ceratogyrus brachycephalus has a much more restricted distribution,
being confined to localities in central Botswana, southern Zimbabwe and the extreme northern
Limpopo (De Wet & Dippenaar-Schoeman 1991; Dippenaar-Schoeman 2002).
Burrows of Ceratogyrus can be found in different types of soils, ranging from sandy to very hard,
compacted soils in areas sparsely covered with grass (De Wet & Dippenaar-Schoeman 1991).
Most burrows are J-shaped (De Wet & Dippenaar-Schoeman 1991). In arid regions the burrow
of baboon spiders (Theraphosidae) are usually deep to provide protection from high
temperatures (Smith 1990). Adult males are usually not found in burrows and actively seeking
females, freely wandering at night, and may also be shorter-lived than the females (De Wet &
Dippenaar-Schoeman 1991; De Wet & Schoonbee 1991). Pitfall traps are found to be
unsuccessful, as the males of Ceratogyrus are not easily captured in this manner (De Wet &
Schoonbee 1991).
Ceratogyrus bechuanicus is well-represented in the Kruger National Park, Musina, D’nyala and
Atherstone Nature Reserves as well as in the Klaserie and Sabi Sand private nature reserves
(De Wet & Schoonbee 1991). Ceratogyrus brachycephala has only been found in the Messina
Provincial Nature Reserve whilst its historic distribution includes the Langjan Nature Reserve
21
(De Wet & Schoonbee 1991). Ceratogyrus brachycephala with its much smaller distribution has
a higher conservation priority than Ceratogyrus bechuanicus. Since Ceratogyrus species are
found in areas sparsely covered with grass, a balanced utilisation of habitat must be prescribed,
and for management purposes the complete ecosystem must thus be taken into account (De
Wet & Schoonbee 1991). Though De Wet & Schoonbee (1991) recommended determination of
veld condition boundaries of habitats where colonies of Ceratogyrus occur, no detailed habitat
study could be tracked in an extensive literature survey for this study.
There appears to be no threatened baboon spider species at the site, though more research is
necessary to inform the ecological management plan if the development is approved.
Baboon spider diversity
A diversity of microhabitats are present at the site which are likely to include habitats of
Ceratogyrus species which appear on the TOPS list.
6
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES
A review of possible impacts are given with a view to rehabilitation and partial restoration that
should address these anticipated impacts as far as possible if the development (mining) is
aproved.
Habitat conservation is the key to the conservation of invertebrates such as threatened
butterflies (Deutschländer and Bredenkamp 1999; Edge 2002, 2005; Terblanche, Morgenthal &
Cilliers 2003; Lubke, Hoare, Victor & Ketelaar 2003; Edge, Cilliers & Terblanche, 2008).
Furthermore corridors and linkages may play a significant role in insect conservation (Pryke &
Samways, 2003, Samways, 2005). Habitats of threatened plants are in danger most often due
to urban developments such as is the case for the Limpopo Province (Pfab & Victor, 2002).
Urbanisation is a major additional influence on the loss of natural areas (Rutherford & Westfall
1994). In South Africa the pressure to develop areas are high since its infrastructure allows for
improvement of human well-being in some way. Nevertheless the conservation of habitats is the
key to invertebrate conservation, especially for those red listed species that are very habitat
specific. This is also true for any detailed planning of corridors and buffer zones for
invertebrates. Though proper management plans for habitats are not in place, setting aside
special ecosystems is in line with the resent Biodiversity Act (2004) of the Republic of South
Africa.
Corridors are important to link ecosystems of high conservation priority. Such corridors or
linkages are there to improve the chances of survival of otherwise isolated populations
(Samways, 2005). How wide should corridors be? The answer to this question depends on the
conservation goal and the focal species (Samways, 2005). For an African butterfly assemblage
this is about 250m when the corridor is for movement as well as being a habitat source (Pryke
22
and Samways 2003). Hill (1995) found a figure of 200m for dung beetles in tropical Australian
forest. In the agricultural context, and at least for some common insects, even small corridors
can play a valuable role (Samways, 2005). Much more research remains to be done to find
refined answers to the width of corridors in South Africa. The width of corridors will also depend
on the type of development, for instance the effects of the shade of multiple story buildings will
be quite different from that of small houses.
To summarise: In practice, as far as urban, industrial or mining developments are concerned,
the key would be to prioritise and plan according to special ecosystems.
In the case of this study site, many areas of the site overall appear to be in a fair condition while
others are in a poor and severely degraded condition and some extensively transformed by
agriculture or mining. There appears to be no loss of threatened fauna and flora but there may
be a loss of abundances of TOPS species, particularly scorpion species such as the rock
scorpion, Hadogenes troglodytes. Therefore their appears to be a moderate loss of habitat but
the full scale of this loss can only be estimated once a better idea of the lay-out of developments
are available. A loss of conservation corridors of particular significance is likely if the mining
takes place on the rocky hills, especially the upper slopes or summits and at the major drainage
lines.
For a more refined ecological impact assessment the location of the mining impacts are to be
understood more properly.
23
7
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation for follow-up surveys and analyses:

A survey for Ceratogyrus species should be continued and include visits following rain.

Quantitative butterfly surveys and fruit chafer beetle surveys are viable options to add to the
bio-indicators on the site. Pitfall-traps may also be considered for epigeal fauna in particular
ants.
Recommendations if the development is aproved (including mitigation measures):

The least possible developments are recommended for the areas that contains rocky ridges.

The least possible developments are recommended for the areas that contain drainage
lines, these include sandy streambeds which are dry on the surface for the better part of a
year.

Measures to mitigate the riparian (or wetland) zones along water courses and ridges in the
less sensitive matrix should be refined and followed.

An ecological management plan for the possible mining developments should be compiled
by a team of engineers, planners, soil expert, hydrology expert, air pollution expert and
ecologist. For the ecological management plan the following key issues have been
identified and are given in the section that follows.
Ecological management plan:
An ecological management plan is imperative, but need to be constructed with a clear idea of
the type and location of developments, if approved. This ecological management plan should at
least include the following:
 An appropriate strategy for the rehabilitation of impacted sites. Partial of full restoration
should only be considered for areas less impacted or adjacent the possible development
of a tailings storage facility. Owing to the nature of developments full restoration may not
be possible in all the cases if the development is approved.
 Partial restoration of low rocky ridges and their buffer zones or riparian zones and their
buffer zones where impacted by proposed development or previous impacts (agriculture,
alien invasive species, overgrazing).
24
 The water run-off system of the whole area would deserve attention.
 Conservation of upper layer of would be very important for the rich arachnid fauna at the
site which include TOPS listed species.
 Control of exotic and alien invasive plant species. Exotic invasive plant species may
spread from disturbed areas to the adjacent by various means. Exotic plant species
cover habitat that would have been otherwise available for indigenous invertebrate
species. Furthermore, exotic plant species may also decrease the quality of habitat or
attract unwanted fauna.
 Minimization of edge effects:
 Pollutants
Ecological monitoring is required for the area in which the Vele mining development is taking
place (elsewhere referred to as the site) to determine its ecological status more clearly. The
monitoring should be broken down into a twofold approach which is in line with the Biodiversity
Act of 2004. Conservation priorities were identified by 1) verifying the presence or not of species
and subspecies of particular high conservation priority (which was largely done in this and
previous studies) and by 2) describing biodiversity for future references. The first step of this
description of biodiversity would be species lists that serve as a biodiversity inventory for future
references and planning.
Monitoring of biodiversity should focus on invertebrate fauna at the site to provide:
1) Integration of biodiversity information from all the surveys up to date with the aim at
formulating possible impacts and constructing a practical ecological management plan.
2) Providing a basis for more informed decisions on possible ecological management
plans, partial restoration or rehabilitation.
Monitoring differs from survey, the latter often being more of a once only inventory (Goldsmith,
1991). Monitoring is purpose orientated, repeated at regular intervals and often provides the
baseline for possible change in the future (Goldsmith, 1991). In the case of this study the
purpose of the monitoring should be to note the present ecological state and possible future
changes, if further mining of coal has been approved. Monitoring actions in different seasons of
the year often provides diverse but complementary insights much needed for an informative
baseline of data. Faunal surveys such as butterfly and scorpion studies should be added to the
vegetation studies to serve as additional bioindicator for monitoring purposes. Note that many
more factors than only floristic diversity regulate faunistic diversity. The main objective overall is
to compile and inventory of biodiversity so that management plans and management of
rehabilitation or partial restoration, should the development be aproved, can be enhanced.
25
8
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGEMENT

The biodiversity in general at the site is diverse and interesting and deserve careful planning
if developments are approved.

Endemism, considering invertebrate fauna, at the low rocky hills and flatter areas at the Vele
mine are not as high and cannot compare to those of the Wolkberg and Soutpansberg
regions of the Limpopo Province. Similarly no threatened species or near threatened
species appears to be present. For example, none of the threatened butterfly species of the
Wolkberg region or Soutpansberg region are present on the site.

Invertebrate fauna of particular conservation priority have been found, in particular scorpions
of the genus Hadogenes and Opistophthalmus. Note that though these species are on the
TOPS list (as genera), none of these qualify for threatened status (Critically Endangered,
Endangered or Vulnerable) according to the present IUCN system. There appears to be
suitable habitat for both Ceratogyrus bechuanicus as well as the less widespread
Ceratogyrus brachycephala at the site, both these baboon spider species are on the TOPS
list. Main findings are summarised beneath:
 No suitable habitats of any threatened butterfly species in South Africa were found and it
is unlikely that any of these threatened butterfly species will be found on the site.
 No scorpions that are threatened or that are likely to be categorised as threatened in the
near future are found on the site. One of the nine scorpion species that have been found
at the site during the recent surveys in February 2012 Hadogenes troglodytes, a rock
scorpion, is considered to be of particular conservation concern owing to their possible
sensitivity to changes in the environment.

Overall the low rocky hills and riparian zone of the Vele mine area appear to be more
sensitive than the flatter areas where agriculture has also transformed some areas.

Present efforts to monitor alien invasive plant species are to be commended and should be
continued in the interest of invertebrate conservation.

The riparian zone along the Limpopo river is of particular importance. For example a tropical
butterfly species, Anthene liodes, which after centuries of exploration has been found to be
clearly scarce and restricted in South Africa. This riparian zone should as far as possible be
maintained as a mosaic because the alternation of open areas, forest and alluvial vegetation
appear to be ideal for invertebrate conservation.

The presence of more sensitive habitat and species of particular conservation priority
adjacent impacted areas (where the mining occurs) could be monitored because their long
preservation in the area maybe possible with careful planning. In this regard an audit of the
biodiversity of the granite hills and Dongola which fell outside the scope of the present study
would improve the perspective of invertebrate conservation in the area.
26

Finally it appears that there is no threat to threatened invertebrate species at the site, if the
development is approved. Yet there is for example an interesting arachnid and butterfly
diversity which underlines the importance of a mosaic of ecosystems at the site. Monitoring
and more surveys could shed more light on this biodiversity and is likely, if the development
is approved, to improve the knowledge on which an ecological management plan could be
based.
27
9 REFERENCES
Bromilow, C. 2001. Problem Plants of South Africa. Pretoria: Briza Publications.
De Wet, J.I. & Dippenaar-Schoeman, A.S. 1991. A revision of the genus Ceratogyrus Pocock
(Araneae: Therphosidae). Koedoe 34(2): 39-68.
De Wet, J.I. & Schoonbee, H.J. 1991. The occurrence and conservation status of Ceratogyrus
bechuanicus and C. brachycephalus in the Transvaal, South Africa. Koedoe 34(2): 69-75.
Deutschländer, M.S. & Bredenkamp, C.J. 1999. Importance of vegetation analysis in the
conservation management of the endangered butterfly Aloeides dentatis subsp. dentatis
(Swierstra) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Koedoe 42(2): 1-12.
Dippenaar-Schoeman, A.S. 2002. Baboon and trapdoor spiders in southern Africa: an
identification manual. Plant Protection Research Institute Handbook No. 13. Pretoria:
Agricultural Research Council.
Dippenaar-Schoeman, A.S. & Jocqué, R. 1997. African spiders: an identification manual. Plant
Protection Research Institute Handbook No. 9. Pretoria: Agricultural Research Council.
Edge, D.A. 2002. Some ecological factors influencing the breeding success of the Brenton Blue
butterfly, Orachrysops niobe (Trimen) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Koedoe, 45(2): 19-34.
Edge, D.A. 2005. Ecological factors influencing the survival of the Brenton Blue butterfly,
Orachrysops niobe (Trimen) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae).
North-West University,
Potchefstroom, South Africa (Thesis - D.Phil.).
Edge, D.A., Cilliers, S.S. & Terblanche, R.F. 2008. Vegetation associated with the occurrence of
the Brenton blue butterfly. South African Journal of Science 104: 505 - 510.
Filmer, M.R. 1991. Southern African spiders: an identification guide. Cape Town: Struik.
Foord, S.H., Dippenaar-Schoeman, A.S. & Van der Merwe, M. 2002. A check list of the spider
fauna of the Western Soutpansberg, South Africa (Arachnida: Araneae). Koedoe 45(2): 3543.
Gardiner, A.J. & Terblanche, R.F. 2010. Taxonomy, biology, biogeography, evolution and
conservation of the genus Erikssonia Trimen (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). African
Entomology 18(1): 171 – 191.
Germishuizen, G. 2003. Illustrated guide to the wildflowers of northern South Africa. Briza,
Pretoria. 224 p.
28
Germishuizen, G., Meyer, N.L. & Steenkamp (eds) 2006. A checklist of South African plants.
Southern African Botanical Diversity Network Report No. 41. SABONET, Pretoria.
Goldblatt, P. 1986. The Moraeas of Southern Africa. Annals of Kirstenbosch Botanic Gardens,
Volume 14. National Botanic Gardens, Cape Town. 224 p.
Goldblatt, P. & Manning, J. 1998. Gladiolus in Southern Africa. 320 p.
Henderson, L. Alien weeds and alien invasive plants: a complete guide to the declared weeds
and invaders in South Africa. Plant Protection Research Institute Handbook No. 12.
Pretoria: ARC: Plant Protection Research Institute.
Henning, G.A. & Roos, P.S. 2001. Threatened butterflies of South African wetlands.
Metamorphosis 12(1): 26-33.
Henning, G.A., Terblanche, R.F. & Ball, J.B. (eds) 2009. South African Red Data Book:
butterflies. SANBI Biodiversity Series No 13. South African National Biodiversity Institute,
Pretoria. 158 p.
Henning, S.F. 1983. Biological groups within the Lycaenidae (Lepidoptera). Journal of the
Entomological Society of Southern Africa 46(1): 65-85.
Henning, S.F. 1987. Outline of Lepidoptera conservation with special reference to ant
associated Lycaenidae. Proceedings of the first Lepidoptera conservation Symposium,
Roodepoort: Lepidopterists’ Society of southern Africa: 5-7.
Henning, S.F. & Henning, G.A. 1989. South African Red Data Book: butterflies. South African
National Scientific Programmes Report No. 158. Pretoria: CSIR. 175 p.
Hill, C.J. 1995. Conservation corridors and rainforest insects. (In Watt, A.D., Stork, N.E. &
Hunter, M.D. (eds.), Forests and Insects. London: Chapman & Hall. p. 381-393.)
Holm, E. & Marais, E. 1992. Fruit chafers of southern Africa. Hartebeespoort: Ekogilde.
IUCN. 2001. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival
Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
Kloppers, J. & Van Son, G. 1978. Butterflies of the Kruger National Park. National Parks Board
of Trustees, Pretoria.
Kudrna, O. 1995. Conservation of butterflies in central Europe. (In Pullin, A. S. ed. Ecology
and conservation of butterflies. London: Chapman & Hall. p. 248-257.)
29
Larsen, T.B. 1995. Butterfly biodiversity and conservation in the Afrotropical region. (In Pullin,
A.S. ed. Ecology and conservation of butterflies. London: Chapman & Hall. p. 290-303.)
Leeming, J. 2003. Scorpions of southern Africa. Cape Town: Struik.
Leroy, A. & Leroy, J. 2003. Spiders of southern Africa. Cape Town: Struik.
Low, A.B. & Rebelo, A.G. (Eds.) 1996. Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland.
Pretoria: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.
Lubke, R.A., Hoare, D., Victor, J. & Ketelaar, R. 2003. The vegetation of the habitat of the
Brenton Blue Butterfly, Orachrysops niobe (Trimen), in the Western Cape, South Africa.
South African Journal of Science 99: 201-206.
Manning, J. 2003. Photographic guide to the wild flowers of South Africa. Briza, Pretoria.
p.
Manning, J. 2009. Field guide to the wild flowers of South Africa. Struik, Cape Town.
352
487 p.
McMurtry, D., Grobler, L., Grobler, J. & Burns, S. 2008. Field guide to the orchids of northern
South Africa and Swaziland. Umdaus Press, Hatfield. 482 p.
Mucina, L. & Rutherford, M.C. eds. 2006. The vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and
Swaziland. Strelitzia 19. Pretoria: South African National Biodiversity Institute. 807 p.
Munguira, M.L.
1995.
Conservation of butterfy habitats and diversity in European
Mediterranean countries. (In Pullin, A.S. ed. Ecology and conservation of butterflies.
London: Chapman & Hall. p. 277- 289.)
New, T.R. 1993. ed. Conservation biology of Lycaenidae (butterflies). Occasional paper of the
IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 8. 173 p.
New, T.R. 1995. Butterfly conservation in Australasia – an emerging awareness and an
increasing need. (In Pullin, A.S. ed. Ecology and conservation of butterflies. London:
Chapman & Hall. p. 304 – 315.)
Oates, M.R. 1995. Butterfly conservation within the management of grassland habitats. (In
Pullin, A.S. ed. Ecology and conservation of butterflies. London: Chapman & Hall. (p. 98112.)
Opler, P.A. 1995. Conservation and management of butterfly diversity in North America. (In
Pullin, A.S. ed. Ecology and conservation of butterflies. London: Chapman & Hall. p. 316324.)
30
Picker, M., Griffiths, C. & Weaving, A. 2004. Field guide to insects of South Africa. 2 nd ed. Cape
Town: Struik.
Pooley, E. 1998. A field guide to wild flowers of KwaZulu-Natal and the eastern region. Natal
Flora Publications Trust, Durban. 630 p.
Pringle, E.L., Henning, G.A. & Ball, J.B. eds. 1994. Pennington’s Butterflies of Southern Africa.
Cape Town: Struik Winchester.
Pryke, S.R. & Samways, M.J. 2001. Width of grassland linkages for the conservation of
butterflies in South African afforested areas. Biological Conservation 101: 85-96.
Pullin, A.S. ed. 1995. Ecology and conservation of butterflies. London: Chapman & Hall. 363
p.
Raimondo, D., Von Staden, L., Foden, W., Victor, J.E., Helme, N.A., Turner, R.C., Kamundi,
D.A. & Manyama, P.A. (eds) 2009 Red list of South African Plants 2009. Strelitzia 25.
South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria. 668 p.
Retief, E. & Herman, P.P.J. 1997. Plants of the northern provinces of South Africa:
keys and diagnostic characteristics. Strelitzia 6. Pretoria: National Botanical Institute.
Rutherford, M.C. & Westfall, R.H. 1994. Biomes of southern Africa: An objective categorisation,
2nd ed. Memiors of the Botanical Survey of South Africa, Vol. 63, pp. 1-94. Pretoria:
National Botanical Institute.
Samways, M.J. 2005. Insect diversity conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
342 p.
Smit, N. 2008. Field guide to the Acacias of South Africa. Briza, Pretoria. 127 p.
Smith, A.M. 1990. Tarantulas of Africa and the Middle East. Fitzgerald Publishing, London.
South Africa. 2004. National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act No. 10 of 2004.
Pretoria: Government Printer.
Stuart, C. & Stuart, T. 2000. A field guide to the tracks and signs of Southern and East Africa.
Cape Town: Struik. 310 p.
Terblanche, R.F., Morgenthal, T.L. & Cilliers, S.S. 2003. The vegetation of three localities of the
threatened butterfly species Chrysoritis aureus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Koedoe 46(1):
73-90.
31
Terblanche, R.F. & Van Hamburg, H. 2003. The taxonomy, biogeography and conservation of
the myrmecophilous Chrysoritis butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in South Africa.
Koedoe 46(2): 65-81.
Terblanche, R.F. & Van Hamburg, H. 2004. The application of life history information to the
conservation management of Chrysoritis butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in South
Africa. Koedoe 47(1): 55-65.
Terblanche, R.F. & Edge, D.A. 2007. The first record of an Orachrysops in Mpumalanga.
Metamorphosis 18(4): 131-141.
Thomas, C.D. 1995. Ecology and conservation of butterfly metapopulations in the fragmented
British landscape. (In Pullin, A.S. ed. Ecology and conservation of butterflies. London:
Chapman & Hall. p. 46-64.)
Van Jaarsveld, E.J. 2006. The Southern African Plectranthus and the art of turning shade to
glade. 176 p.
Van Oudtshoorn, F. 1999. Guide to grasses of southern Africa. Pretoria: Briza.
Van Wyk, B. 2000. A photographic guide to wild flowers of South Africa. Struik, Cape Town.
144 p.
Van Wyk, B. & Malan, S. 1998. Field Guide to the Wild Flowers of the Highveld. Cape
Town:Struik.
Van Wyk, B.E. & Smith, G.F. 2003. Guide to the aloes of South Africa. 2nd ed.
Pretoria: Briza Publications. 304 p.
Van Wyk, B. & Van Wyk, P. 1997. Field guide to trees of southern Africa. Cape Town: Struik.
Warren, M.S. 1995. Managing local microclimates for the high brown fritillary, Argynnis adipe.
(In Pullin, A.S. ed. Ecology and conservation of butterflies. London: Chapman & Hall.)
Watt, A.D., Stork, N.E. & Hunter, M.D. (eds.), Forests and Insects. London: Chapman & Hall. (p.
381-393.)
32
Appendix 1
List of scorpion species that have been recorded at the site
Compiled by R.F. Terblanche
Sources of names and identifications:
Leeming (2003)
FAMILIES AND SPECIES
COMMON NAMES
ENGLISH/ AFRIKAANS
FAMILY: BUTHIDAE
THICK-TAILED SCORPIONS
1
Hottentotta trilineatus
......
2
Parabuthus transvaalicus
......
3
Pseudolychas pegleri
......
4
Uroplectes flavoviridis
.....
5
Uroplectes planimanus
.....
6
Uroplectes vittatus
.....
FAMILY ISCHNURIDAE
ROCK SCORPIONS
.....
7
Opistacanthus asper
8
Hadogenes troglodytes
Rock Scorpion
FAMILY SCORPIONIDAE
BURROWING SCORPIONS
9
Opistophthalmus wahlbergii
Burrowing Scorpion
Appendix 2
Preliminary list of butterfly species (Order Lepidoptera; superfamilies Papilionoidea,
Hesperioidea) that have been or is likely to be recorded at the site
Compiled by R.F. Terblanche
Sources of names and identifications:
Henning, Terblanche & Ball (2009); Pringle, Henning & Ball (1994);
Woodhall (2005)
FAMILIES, SUBFAMILIES AND SPECIES
COMMON NAMES
ENGLISH/ AFRIKAANS
33
FAMILY: PAPILIONIDAE
SUBFAMILY PAPILIONINAE
1
2
3
SWALLOWTAIL FAMILY
SWAELSTERTFAMILIE
SWALLOWTAILS AND SWORDTAILS
SWAELSTERTE EN SWAARDSTERTE
Graphium angolanus angolanus
Angola White Lady
(Goeze, 1779)
Angolawitnooientjie
Papilio demodocus
Citrus Swallowtail
(Esper, 1798)
Lemoenswaelstert
Papilio nireus lyaeus
Doubleday, 1845
FAMILY PIERIDAE
Green-banded Swallowtail
Groenlintswaelstert
WHITES, YELLOWS AND TIPS
WITJIES, GELETJIES EN PUNTJIES
SUBFAMILY COLIADINAE
YELLOWS AND CLOUDED YELLOWS
GELETJIES EN WOLK-ORANJES
4
Catopsilia florella
(Fabricius, 1775)
5
Colias electo electo
(Linnaeus, 1763)
6
Eurema brigitta brigitta
(Stoll, 1780)
SUBFAMILY PIERINAE
African Migrant
Afrikaanse Migreerder
African Clouded Yellow
Afrikaanse wolk-oranje
Broad-bordered Grass Yellow
Grasveldgeletjie
WHITES AND TIPS SUBFAMILY
WITJIES EN PUNTJIES SUBFAMILIE
7
Belenois aurota aurota
(Fabricius, 1793)
8
9
African Common White
(Stoll, 1781)
Afrikaanse Gewone Witjie
Colotis antevippe gavisa
Colotis eris eris
(Klug, 1829)
11
12
Grasveldwitjie
Belenois creona severina
(Wallengren, 1857)
10
Brown-veined White
Red Tip
Rooipuntjie
Banded Gold Tip
Goudpuntjie
Colotis euippe omphale
Smoky Orange Tip
(Godart, 1819)
Donker-oranjepuntjie
Colotis evinina evinina
Common Orange Tip
(Wallengren, 1857)
Gewone Oranjepuntjie
34
13
14
Colotis regina
Queen Purple Tip
(Trimen, 1863)
Koninginperspuntjie
Colotis subfasciatus subfasciatus
(Swainson, 1833)
15
Mylothris agathina agathina
(Cramer, 1779)
16
Pinacopteryx eriphia eriphia
(Godart, 1819)
17
Pontia helice helice
(Linnaeus, 1764)
FAMILY NYMPHALIDAE
Lemon Traveller Tip
Suurlemoensmous
Common Dotted Border
Gewone Spikkelrandjie/ Voëlentwitjie
Zebra White
Kwagga
African Meadow White
Bontrokkie
BRUSH-FOOTED BUTTERFLIES
BORSELPOOTSKOENLAPPERS
SUBFAMILY DANAINAE
MONARCH SUBFAMILY
MONARG-SUBFAMILIE
18
Danaus chrysippus chrysippus
(Linnaeus, 1758)
SUBFAMILY CHARAXINAE
African Monarch
Afrikaanse Melkbosskoenlapper
CHARAXES SUBFAMILY
DUBBELSTERT SUBFAMILIE
19
Charaxes candiope
(Godart, 1824)
20
Charaxes jahlusa rex
Henning, S.F., 1978
21
Charaxes jasius saturnus
Butler, 1866
SUBFAMILY SATYRINAE
Greenveined Charaxes
Skelmdubbelstert
King Pearl-spotted Charaxes
Koningsilwerkol-dubbelstert
Saturn Foxy Charaxes
Saturnus-koppiedubbelstert
BROWNS SUBFAMILY
BRUINTJIES-SUBFAMILIE
22
23
Henotesia perspicua perspicua
Eyed Bush Brown
(Trimen, 1873)
Moerasbosbruintjie
Ypthima impura paupera
Bushveld Ringlet
Ungemach, 1932
SUBFAMILY BIBLIDINAE
Bosveld-ringetjie
BYBLIA SUBFAMILY
BIBLIA SUBFAMILIE
24
Byblia ilithyia
Spotted Joker
(Drury, 1773)
Leliegrasvegter
35
SUBFAMILY NYMPHALINAE
PANSY SUBFAMILY
GESIGGIE SUBFAMILIE
25
Hypolimnas misippus
(Linnaeus, 1764)
26
27
28
29
Common Diadem
Gewone Na-aper/ Blouglans
Junonia hierta cebrene
Yellow Pansy
Trimen, 1870
Geelgesiggie
Junonia oenone oenone
Blue Pansy
(Linneaus, 1758)
Blougesiggie
Precis archesia archesia
Garden Commodore
(Cramer, 1779)
Rots-blaarvlerk
Vanessa cardui
Painted Lady
(Linnaeus, 1758)
Sondagsrokkie
SUBFAMILY HELICONIINAE
ACRAEA SUBFAMILY
ACRAEA SUBFAMILIE
30
Acraea anemosa
Hewitson, 1865
31
32
Little Acraea
(Westwood, 1881)
Kuikenrooitjie
Acraea caldarena caldarena
Acraea encedon encedon
(Linnaeus, 1758)
34
35
Black-tipped Acraea
Swartpuntrooitjie
White-barred Acraea
Witstreep-rooitjie
Acraea natalica natalica
Natal Acraea
De Boisduval, 1847
Natal-rooitjie
Acraea neobule neobule
Doubleday, 1847
36
Kersboomrooitjie
Acraea axina
Hewitson, 1877
33
Broad-bordered Acraea
Wandering Donkey Acraea
Dwaalesel-rooitjie
Acraea serena
Small Orange Acraea
Fabricius, 1775
Klein-oranjerooitjie
SUBFAMILY LIMENITIDINAE
BUSH-GLIDER SUBFAMILY
BOSDANSER SUBFAMILIE
37
Hamanumida daedalus
Guineafowl Butterfly
(Fabricius, 1775)
Tarentaaltjie-skoenlapper
FAMILY LYCAENIDAE
BLUES AND COPPERS
BLOUTJIES EN KOPERVLERKIES
36
SUBFAMILY THECLINAE
HAIRSTREAKS AND COPPERS
LANGSTERTE EN KOPERVLERKIES
38
Axiocerces tjoane tjoane
(Wallengren, 1857)
39
40
Cigaritis natalensis
Deudorix antalus
Brown Playboy
Deudorix dinochares
Hypolycaena philippus philippus
(Fabricius, 1793)
43
Natal Bar
Natal-streepvlerkie
Grose-Smith, 1887
42
Ralierooivlerkie
(Westwood, 1852)
(Hopffer, 1855)
41
Common Scarlet
Iolaus sp.
Bruinspelertjie
Apricot Playboy
Appelkoosspelertjie
Purple-Brown Hairstreak
Persbruin-stertbloutjie
Sapphire species
Safierspesie
44
Leptomyrina henningi
Dickson, 1976
45
Myrina silenus ficedula
Trimen, 1879
SUBFAMILY POLYOMMATINAE
Henning’s Black-eye
Henning-swartogie
Common Fig-tree Blue
Gewone Vyeboombloutjie
BLOUTJIES AND CILIATED BLUES
BLOUTJIES EN KORTSTERTJIES
46
47
Anthene amarah amarah
Black-striped Hairtail
(Guérin-Méneville, 1849)
Swartstreep-kortstertjie
Anthene butleri livida
(Trimen, 1881)
48
Anthene contrastata mashuna
(Stevenson, 1937)
49
50
51
52
Pale Hairtail
Vaalkortstertjie
Mashuna Hairtail
Mashuna-kortstertjie
Anthene definita definita
Common Hairtail
(Butler, 1899)
Donkerkortstertjie
Anthene liodes
Liodes Hairtail
(Hewitson, 1874)
Liodes kortstertjie
Anthene otacilia otacilia
Otacilia Hairtail
(Trimen, 1868)
Boomkortstertjie
Anthene princeps princeps
(Butler, 1876)
Cupreous Hairtail
Koperglanskortstertjie
37
53
54
Azanus jesous jesous
Topaz-spotted Blue
(Guérin-Méneville, 1849)
Hemels-kolbloutjie
Azanus moriqua
(Wallengren, 1857)
55
56
Azanus ubaldus
58
59
60
61
Chilades trochylus
Grass Jewel Blue
Eicochrysops messapus mahallakoaena
Lampides boeticus
Lucerne Blue
(Linneaus, 1767)
Lusernbloutjie
Lepidochrysops plebeia plebeia
Twin-spot Blue
(Butler, 1898)
Dubbelkolbloutjie
Leptotes pirithous pirithous
Common Blue
(Linnaeus, 1767)
Gewone bloutjie
Pseudonacaduba sichela sichela
Tarucus sybaris sybaris
Tuxentius melaena melaena
Zintha hintza hintza
(Trimen, 1864)
65
Zizeeria knysna
(Trimen, 1862)
66
Grassland Cupreous Copper
Grasveldkoperbloutjie
(Trimen, 1887)
64
Grasjuweeltjie
(Wallengren, 1857)
(Hopffer, 1855)
63
Velvet-spotted Blue
Fluweel-kolbloutjie
(Wallengren, 1857)
62
Doringboombloutjie
(Stoll, 1782)
(Freyer, 1843)
57
Thorn-tree Blue
Zizula hylax
(Fabricius, 1775)
SUBFAMILY MILETINAE
Dusky Blue
Dowwebloutjie
Dotted Blue
Spikkelbloutjie
Black Pie
Swartbontetjie
Hintza Blue
Hintza-bontetjie
Sooty Blue
Duwweltjiebloutjie
Gaika Blue
Gaika-bloutjie
SKOLLIES AND WOOLLY LEGS
SKOLLIES EN WOLPOOTJIES
FAMILY HESPERIIDAE
SKIPPERS
DARTELAARS
SUBFAMILY COELIADINAE
POLICEMEN
KONSTABELS
38
67
68
Coeliades forestan forestan
Striped Policeman
(Stoll, 1782)
Witbroekkonstabel
Coeliades pisistratus
Two-pip Policeman
(Fabricius, 1793)
Dubbelkolkonstabel
SUBFAMILY PYRGINAE
69
70
Caprona pillaana
Ragged Skipper
Wallengren, 1857
Vaaljasdartelaartjie
Eretis umbra umbra
Small Marbled Elf
(Trimen, 1862)
71
Gomalia elma elma
(Trimen, 1862)
72
73
Leucochitonea levubu
76
Green-marbled Sandman
Asjas-sandmannetjie
White-cloaked Skipper
Witjas-springertjie
Spialia delagoae
Delagoa Sandman
Spialia depauperata australis
De Jong, 1978
75
Umbra-kabouter
Wallengren, 1857
(Trimen, 1898)
74
SANDMEN AND ELFINS
SANDMANNETJIES EN ELWE
Spialia dromus
Delagoa-sandmannetjie
Wandering Sandman
Dwalende Sandmannetjie
Forest Sandman
(Plötz, 1884)
Woudsandmannetjie
Spialia spio
Mountain Sandman
(Linnaeus, 1764)
SUBFAMILY HESPERIINAE
Bergsandmannetjie
RANGERS AND SWIFTS
WAGTERTJIES EN RATSVLIEËRS
77
Gegenes niso niso
(Linneaus, 1764)
78
Gegenes pumilio gambica
(Mabille, 1878)
Common Hottentot Skipper
Gewone hotnot
Dark Hottentot Skipper
Donkerhotnot
39