Spatial Assessment for the revised Mpumalanga Biodiversity Expansion

Strategy

Mervyn LotterScientific Services8 June 2016

Mpumalanga Protected Area Expansion Strategy (MPAES)

• Developed our first MPAES early in 2009.

• MTPA PA expansion unit established in 2009.

• Various mechanisms for Protected Area Expansion, but focus has been on proclaiming land under private/communal ownership.

• Currently managed to declare 102 000 ha since 2009 in terms of Protected Areas Act.

• Since 2014 there has been no further progress.

Need to revise MPAES

• MPAES v1 was completed in 2009.

• Development of the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan (MBSP) completed in 2014.

• Revised biodiversity plan included many new changes: new species and localities, climate change priorities, detailed corridor network, and an accurate land-cover map.

• Need to revise MPAES so that it was in line with best available science and information.

• We also felt the need to try and avoid conflict with mining areas and areas where municipalities wish to develop.

Revising spatial priorities

• Long-term strategy with 20-year horizon (broad priorities).

• Include a shorter term 5-year horizon to identify immediate priorities.

• Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan (MBSP) meets biodiversity targets in smallest possible area. MPAES must be informed by this framework so as to meet biodiversity targets.

• Yet in MPAES, final prioritisation of areas may differ based on an approach that may be more aligned to PA expansion and establishment of nature reserves.

Important layers that we included within spatial

assessment

Converted data from the

Mpumalanga

Biodiversity Sector

Plan (MBSP) -

converted into three

categories

• CBA Irreplaceable = 15

• CBA Optimal = 10

• ESA (all) = 5

Terrestrial Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs) and Ecological Support Areas (ESAs)

Biodiversity Feature Richness

• Output from the MBSP.

• First selected all non-

protected planning units

(PUs) (richness range 0-36)

• Then selected all PUs with

20 or more features (n=267).

Analysis of hot spots of diversity for all species of conservation concern

• Hotspots of all species of conservation concern (n=14,0000.

• Statistically significant clusters of areas with high values for species of conservation concern.

Unprotected Threatened Plant Species

• Lize von Staden PhD study - Focusing on protecting threatened plant species that are not currently afforded protection within any protected areas

Priority Intact Grasslands

Intact grasslands = without

spurs and gaps and patches

larger than 100 ha.

Map showing the intact

grassland patches in blue.

The green areas are those

intact grassland patches that

contribute more towards

supporting connectivity

between intact grasslands in

terms of stepping stones or

number of connections.

Protection level of terrestrial ecosystems

Developing 20-year Priorities

• MBSP Terrestrial categories (ESA, CBA Optimal, CBA Irreplaceable: 0, 5, 10, 15)

• MBSP biodiversity feature richness (0,5)

• Species Hotspot (0, 5, 10)

• Unprotected Threatened Plant Species (0, 5, 10)

• Vegetation map - zero protected units (0, 5)

• Intact grasslands (0, 5)

• Output categorised into 3 categories

• Priority 1: 21-45 value, High biodiversity value (required to meet targets),

• Priority 2: 11-20 value, Moderate biodiversity value (required to meet targets),

• Priority 3: 5-10 value, Lower biodiversity value (not necessarily required to meet targets),

MPAES 20 –year priorities

NameCount of polygons Size (ha)

% of Priorities

Priority 1 476 322 380 14.65

Priority 2 2006 1 132 613 51.48

Priority 3 2978 744 992 33.86

Moving from 20-year to 5-year strategy

20 -year strategy

Priority 3

Priority 2

Priority 1

5 -year strategy

Development of constraints and opportunities to inform immediate priorities

Overlapping mining areas Wilderness areas

Avoid Favour

Mining as a constraintLowered values of priority areas where there was more than 1 mining application

Removing conflict with municipal plans

• Municipalities identify Strategic Development Areas (SDAs) where they plan to expand within next few years.

• Sourced SDAs and erased areas of overlap from any MPAES priorities so that MPAES does not identify priorities in SDAs.

• This approach would ensue better support from municipalities.

Wilderness areas are scarce

• Travelling around Mpumalanga, there are few wild areas left where no signs of development can be seen.

• “Wilderness” or “remoteness” values are an important features to include within any protected area expansion program.

• Tourism value as well as benefit to sensitive biodiversity.

Components of Wilderness analysis

1. Plantations: >200 ha; random points 500 meters apart ; Visibility (geodesic); (n = 11,925)

2. Cultivated: >200 ha; random points 600 meters apart; Visibility (geodesic); (n = 3,000)

3. Mining: > 100 ha; random points 300 meters apart; Visibility (geodesic); (n = 1,410)

4. Buildings (noise & light pollution, persecution): summarised (point to raster, integrate); Visibility (geodesic); (n = 17,767)

• Translate 5-year priorities into cadastral units.

• Selected farm portions that intersect MPAES 5-year priority.

• Summarise MPAES values for farm portions.

Converting output into farm portions

Hot Spot Analysis

Threatened plants not found within any Protected Areas

Developing 20- and 5-year spatial priorities

An

aly

sis

Info

rman

ts

Fro

m 2

0-y

ear to

5-y

ear p

rioritie

s

5-year MPAES priorities

Wildernessareas

(favour)

Critical Biodiversity Areas (CBAs)

MBSP

Biodiversity

Richness

Unprotected vegetation types

Priority connectedintact grasslands

20-year MPAES priorities

Mining Priorities(avoid)

Conclusion

• The MBSP is a revision of the Mpumalanga Protected Areas Expansion Strategy of 2009.

• The MPAES is used to prioritise where we should be working with limited budgets and manpower.

• It is important to protect species not already protected within any protected area and to try and achieve national & provincial targets.

• Used ModelBuilder in running spatial analysis so easy to discuss, adapt, weight, change, etc. – consultative process.

• Important to try and work within current political environment to ensure that we are able to protect areas while still meeting biodiversity targets.

• Avoiding municipal priorities would contribute towards acceptance from municipalities authorities.

THANK YOUmervyn.lotter@mtpa.co.za

Sentinel 2 satellite imager

European Space Agency

Copernicus Program

SPOT5 - RGB

Sentinel 2 – NI,R,G - 8,4,3

SPOT5 – NI,R,G

Sentinel 2 – NI,R,G - 8,4,3

https://scihub.copernicus.eu/dhus/#/home

10 x 10 m = 4 bands

20 x 20 m = 6 bands

60 x 60 m = 3 bands