The MBCP in context
The Mpumalanga Tourism and Parks Agency (MTPA) and the Department of Agriculture and Land Administration (DALA) have jointly developed the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Conservation Plan (MBCP). As the first such plan produced for the Province, it is intended to guide conservation and land-use decisions in support of sustainable development.

The project has been funded by the Development Bank of Southern Africa and widely supported from outside the Province by planners and scientists from the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI), and from other provinces, universities and research institutes.

The MBCP builds on other national plans at the provincial level in Mpumalanga. It is intended to be used by all who are involved in land-use and development planning, most particularly those specialists who need a comprehensive source of biodiversity information. It provides a basis for MTPA to review its biodiversity conservation policy and to focus its attention on high value areas for future protection initiatives. The plan, and in particular its land-use guidelines, are intended to supplement other spatial planning tools such as municipal Integrated Development Plans and Spatial Development Frameworks. The MBCP will also be a useful addition to the information disseminated by agricultural extension and environmental education practitioners in Government and the private sector.

Analysis
The MBCP is founded on an extensive biodiversity database compiled over the last 21 years by the Province’s conservation biologists. These detailed records, together with the latest mapping and remote sensing data on vegetation, land use and water resources, have been combined and subjected to sophisticated analyses. The science on which MBCP is based is the best available and the data, despite having gaps and limitations, is also the best there is. Nearly 500 biodiversity features were used in the MBCP, 340 terrestrial and 157 aquatic features, covering the entire landscape of the Province.

 The MBCP uses the Systematic Biodiversity Planning approach. This involves selecting a range of biodiversity features, the data for which are allocated to 65 000 planning units of 118 hectares each. Quantitative targets are set for each biodiversity feature, indicating how much is needed to ensure their persistence in the landscape. Using sophisticated GIS-based software and the planning program Marxan, the distribution of these features relative to their targets is analysed, and allocated ‘irreplaceability’ values. The mapped output of this analysis displays the most efficient distribution of planning units that allows the biodiversity feature targets to be met. 

Two principal maps result from these analyses. The first is the Map 4 Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment which indicates where the overall biodiversity priorities are located. The second is Map 5 Aquatic Biodiversity indicates where aquatic biodiversity targets will best be met and at the same time, the location of the most important subcatchments for water production.

Land-use Guidelines
The MBCP is accompanied by land-use planning guidelines to guide planning and development within each of the biodiversity conservation categories throughout the Province. In each category there are different landuse and development consequences. In time the guidelines need to be formalised as distinct ‘Codes of Best Practice’ and eventually as regulations to achieve sustainable development. The guidelines are arranged to address terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity issues, with the aquatic ones being split into those relating to rivers and to wetlands. 

The MBCP identifies 24.2% of the Province, outside of protected areas, that must be managed using biodiversity friendly forms of land use to ensure ‘living landscapes’ into the future. Protected areas account for a further 14.8%, including the southern Kruger NP at 10.4%. The remaining 61% of the Province allows for considerable freedom of choice for development, provided EIA procedures guide all development proposals. The MBCP suggests that ‘Irreplaceable’, ‘Highly Significant’ and ‘Important and Necessary’ areas should remain unaltered and be managed for biodiversity by various means. Other categories incorporate increasing options for different types of land use that should be decided by the
application of EIA procedures and negotiation between stakeholders.