Archaetnos cc was requested by Wadala Mining and Consulting (Pty) Ltd. to conduct a cultural heritage impact assessment (HIA) for the Bishop Mine. The mine is located on the farm Bishop 671, close to Dingleton and Kathu, in the Kuruman District, Northern Cape Province.

Project description:

Bishop mine is a manganese mining activity. During work for the revised EMP, it was realized that an HIA had never been done on the farm. As a result an HIA was commissioned for the entire farm. This report is the result of the HIA study.


The methodology for the study includes a survey of literature followed by a field assessment. The latter was conducted according to generally accepted HIA practices and was aimed at locating all possible objects, sites and features of cultural significance in the area of proposed development.

If required, the location/position of any site was determined by means of a Global Positioning System (GPS), while photographs were also taken where needed.  The survey was undertaken by doing a physical survey via off-road vehicle and on foot and covered as much as possible of the area to be studied. Certain factors, such as accessibility, density of vegetation, etc. may however influence the coverage.

All sites, objects, features and structures identified were documented according to the general minimum standards accepted by the archaeological profession. Co-ordinates of individual localities were determined by means of the Global Positioning System (GPS). The information was added to the description in order to facilitate the identification of each locality.

Public consultation:

Public consultation is done by the Environmental Practitioner.


During the survey one site (graves) of cultural heritage significance were identified.

The following is recommended:

  • The one site identified consist of approximately 24 graves. Usually there are two options when dealing with graves:
  • The first option is to leave the graves in situ. This would be possible should there be no direct impact on the graves.  However, the possibility of secondary impacts due to dust etc. remains.
  • The second option is to exhume the graves and have the bodies reburied. This usually is only allowed if there is a direct impact on the site. Graves younger than 60 years are handled by a registered undertaker. Graves older than 60 years and those of an unknown date is regarded as heritage graves. In such a case an archaeologist is also involved in the process.
  • It is recommended that Option 1 be implemented as mitigation measure. The site should remain in situ. It should be fenced in and a management plan drafted for the sustainable preservation thereof. A buffer zone of at least 20 m should be implemented.
  • After implementation of the mitigation measures proposed above, the development may proceed.
  • It should also be noted that the subterranean presence of archaeological and/or historical sites, features or artifacts is always a distinct possibility. Due to the density of vegetation in certain areas it also is possible that some sites may only become known later. Operating controls and monitoring should therefore be aimed at the possible unearthing of such features. Care should therefore be taken when development commences that if any of these are discovered, a qualified archaeologist be called in to investigate the occurrence.
  • In this regard the following ‘Chance find Procedure’ should be followed:
  • Upon finding any archaeological or historical material all work at the affected area must cease.

§  The area should be demarcated to prevent any further work there until an investigation has been completed.

§  An archaeologist should be contacted immediately to provide advice on the matter.

  • Should it be a minor issue, the archaeologist will decide on future action. Depending on the nature of the find, it may include a site visit.
  • SAHRA’s APM Unit may also be notified.

§  If needed, the necessary permit will be applied for with SAHRA. This will be done in conjunction with the appointed archaeologist.

§  The removal of such archaeological material will be done by the archaeologist in lieu of the approval given by SAHRA, including any conditions stipulated by the latter.

§  Work on site will only continue after the archaeologist/ SAHRA has agreed to such a matter.

It is also important to take cognizance that it is the client’s responsibility to do the submission of this report via the SAHRIS System on the SAHRA website.  No work on site may commence before receiving the necessary comments from SAHRA.

Report by