Marloth Park Management Plan. - Nkomazi Local Municipality

Recommendations

Info

Table 11: The current stocking densities, based on the September 2005 game count, if only parkland and road reserves are accepted as potentially available habitat areas on Marloth Park Type of animal Number of Mean mass Large-animal Browse-animal Equivalent Equivalent Percentage of Percentage of Animals of animal units units large-animal browse-animal ecological ecological in kg per animal per animal units per group units per group graze capacity browse capacity Low selectivity grazers Buffalo 0 650 1.25 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Burchell's zebra 62 300 0.66 0.00 41.17 0.00 31.67 0.00 White rhinoceros 0 1800 2.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub total 62 31.67 0.00 High selectivity grazers Blue wildebeest 40 210 0.54 0.00 21.68 0.00 16.68 0.00 Roan antelope 0 250 0.61 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sable antelope 0 220 0.50 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Tsessebe 0 130 0.35 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Waterbuck 0 200 0.50 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub total 40 16.68 0.00 Mixed feeders Common impala 437 55 0.10 0.25 45.17 108.42 34.74 225.88 Eland 0 500 0.43 1.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Kudu 33 200 0.10 0.80 3.23 26.30 2.49 54.80 Nyala 0 70 0.12 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Warthog 43 70 0.10 0.12 4.26 5.11 3.28 10.65 Sub total 513 40.51 291.34 Browse feeders Black rhinoceros 0 900 0.00 3.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bushbuck 3 40 0.02 0.20 0.05 0.59 0.04 1.22 Common duiker 6 20 0.00 0.22 0.01 1.31 0.01 2.73 Giraffe 22 1000 0.02 4.28 0.40 94.20 0.31 196.25 Steenbok 0 11 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sub total 31 0.35 200.20 TOTAL 646 89.21 491.54 © Ecological Associates/ Marloth Park 63
Recommendations on stocking rates Changing stocking rates cannot be based on grazing and browsing capacities only. Other factors such as the correct sex ratios, age and social structures as well as habitat and food selection are of importance. Sex ratios and age structure will influence the breeding performance of the herd, through mating frequency, time spent on courtship or rank fighting. Food selection is mainly considered when dividing the species into groups of high and low selective grazers. Habitat selection is primarily dependent on food palatability and availability, water, cover, and habitat structure. SPECIES DESCRIPTION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Low selectivity, bulk grazers Buffalo Syncerus caffer Sparrman 1779 Historic distribution: Sweet and mixed bushveld, fynbos, thicket, lowveld, mopane veld, Kalahari and grassland in the southeastern foothills. Habitat requirement: Buffalo prefer open savannas characterised by tall grass. They avoid trampled areas. Shade and wallows are necessary habitat features. Space requirements: Range varies between 50 and 400 km 2 . Food preference: Buffalo mainly eat grass and prefer species such as Themeda triandra, Panicum coloratum, Panicum maximum and Digitaria species. Occasionally trees and bushes of Grewia, Dichrostachys and Combretum species are browsed. Water requirements: 31 l/day, water dependent. Minimum viable group size: Eight individuals, consisting of three males and five females. Sex ratio: One male for every 5 to 15 females in the wild. Recommendation: Buffalo is considered one of the most effective non-selective grazers, with little preference shown for specific grass species; aggressive behaviour, range limitations and economic considerations usually exclude this animal from introduction on small game areas. However, if this option is considered, a viable breeding population can be obtained from the Lionspruit Game Reserve. No buffalo is currently stocked on Marloth Park, but introduction can be considered. The best alternatives to stocking buffalo are either, Burchell’s zebra or white rhinoceros. © Ecological Associates/ Marloth Park 64
Page 1 and 2:
Ecological Associates Environmental
Page 3 and 4:
THE ASSESSMENT OF AVAILABLE BROWSE
Page 5 and 6:
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Location
Page 7 and 8:
LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1: A li
Page 9 and 10:
Three different scenarios are analy
Page 11 and 12:
Ecosystems disturbed by clearing op
Page 13 and 14:
INTRODUCTION Although only a few ve
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 1: Location of the Marloth P
Page 17 and 18:
GEOMORPHOLOGY Looking down from the
Page 19 and 20: Figure 4: Geology of the Marloth Pa
Page 21 and 22: Tonalitic granite and gneiss A sect
Page 23 and 24: Figure 6: Soil depth of the Marloth
Page 25 and 26: Figure 7: Land Types of the Marloth
Page 27 and 28: Figure 8: Land use in the Marloth P
Page 29 and 30: A 610.1 B 104.0 C 7.4 D 19.9 E 39.8
Page 31 and 32: INTRODUCTION VEGETATION CLASSIFICAT
Page 33 and 34: METHOD For an initial and broad sca
Page 35 and 36: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Analysis and
Page 37 and 38: The dominant grass species are broa
Page 39 and 40: The characteristic tree species are
Page 41 and 42: VELD CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND THE C
Page 43 and 44: Degradation gradients are models th
Page 45 and 46: The nearest grass species to each s
Page 47 and 48: Calculation of grazing capacity The
Page 49 and 50: Table 2: Contribution of ecological
Page 51 and 52: Table 3: Grazing capacities for the
Page 53 and 54: THE ASSESSMENT OF AVAILABLE BROWSE
Page 55 and 56: X Y D1 Y Dimensional measurements:
Page 57 and 58: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The browsing
Page 59 and 60: Table 6: Browsing capacities for th
Page 61 and 62: INTRODUCTION ESTIMATION OF HERBACEO
Page 63 and 64: The resulting Large Stock Units are
Page 65 and 66: INTRODUCTION GAME MANAGEMENT ON MAR
Page 67 and 68: STOCKING RATES Current stocking The
Page 69: Table 10: The current stocking dens
Page 73 and 74: High selectivity grazers Blue wilde
Page 75 and 76: Waterbuck Kobus ellipsiprymnus Ogil
Page 77 and 78: Space requirements: Kudu have range
Page 79 and 80: Recommendation: The range requireme
Page 81 and 82: Food preference: Steenbok utilise A
Page 83 and 84: Table 12: The potential stocking de
Page 85 and 86: Table 14: The potential stocking de
Page 87 and 88: Table 15: The recommended stocking
Page 89 and 90: The proteins may be less available
Page 91 and 92: When urea is incorporated into a ph
Page 93 and 94: Recommended intake for game is 150
Page 95 and 96: Ticks The main parasite of concern
Page 97 and 98: Figure 12: Sketch of Cyphostemma /C
Page 99 and 100: NOXIOUS AND INVASIVE WEEDS An invas
Page 101 and 102: Management plans need to be reviewe
Page 103 and 104: Ricinus communis, Solanum sisymbrii
Page 105 and 106: Although soil treatment with chemic
Page 107 and 108: Planning errors must be expected, a
Page 109 and 110: To further reduce grazing pressure
Page 111 and 112: Lightning induced fires can also ca
Page 113 and 114: TIME OF BURNING Least damage is cau
Page 115 and 116: A low intensity fire will be achiev
Page 117 and 118: Recommendations for Marloth Park Ma
Page 119 and 120: Surface erosion will reduce water i
Page 121 and 122:
Several different types of waterhol
Page 123 and 124:
Stones Ground level Reinforced conc
Page 125 and 126:
For safety reasons these requiremen
Page 127 and 128:
Adaptive management Applying adapti
Page 129 and 130:
Figure 15: Location of the monitori
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix 1 (Continue) A list of tre
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix 2 (Continue) A list of gra
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix 3 (Continue) A list of for
Page 137 and 138:
Appendix 3 (Continue) A list of for
Page 139 and 140:
Appendix 4: Alien invaders found on
Page 141 and 142:
Appendix 5: Frequency occurrence of
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Appendix 6: Photographs of each veg
Page 157 and 158:
Appendix 6: Photographs of each veg
show all

Marloth Park Management Plan. - Nkomazi Local Municipality

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?