Katana VentraIP

Wildlife corridor

A wildlife corridor, habitat corridor, or green corridor[1] is an area of habitat connecting wildlife populations separated by human activities or structures (such as development, roads, or land clearing), allowing the movement of individuals between populations, that may help prevent negative effects of inbreeding and reduced genetic diversity (via genetic drift) that can occur within isolated populations. Corridors also help facilitate the re-establishment of populations that have been reduced or eliminated due to random events (such as fires or disease) and may moderate some of the worst effects of habitat fragmentation,[2] through urbanization that splits up habitat areas, causing animals to lose both their natural habitat and the ability to move between regions to access resources. Habitat fragmentation due to human development is an ever-increasing threat to biodiversity,[3] and habitat corridors serve to manage its effects.

—animals are able to move and occupy new areas when food sources or other natural resources are lacking in their core habitat.

Colonization

—species that relocate seasonally can do so more safely and effectively when it does not interfere with human development barriers.

Migration

—animals can find new mates in neighboring regions, increasing genetic diversity.

Interbreeding

Habitat corridors can be considered a management tool in places where the destruction of a natural area has greatly affected native species, whether it is a result of human development or natural disasters. When areas of land are broken up, populations can become unstable or fragmented. Corridors can reconnect fragmented populations and reduce population fluctuations by contributing to three factors that can help to stabilize a population:


Daniel Rosenberg et al.[4] were among the first to define what constitutes a wildlife corridor, developing a conceptual model that emphasized the role of a wildlife corridor as a facilitator of movement that is not restricted by requirements of native vegetation or intermediate target patches of habitat.[5]


Wildlife corridors also have strong indirect effects on plant populations by increasing pollen and seed dispersal from animals, facilitating movement of disparate taxa between isolated patches.[6] Corridors must be large enough to support minimum critical populations, reduce migration barriers, and maximize connectivity between populations.[7]


Wildlife corridors may also encompass aquatic habitats (often called riparian ribbons[8]) and usually come in the form of rivers and streams. Terrestrial corridors can come in the form of wooded strips connecting woodland areas or an urban hedge.[7]

Users[edit]

Most species can be categorized in one of two groups; passage users and corridor dwellers.


Passage users occupy corridors for brief periods of time. These animals use corridors for such events as seasonal migration, dispersal of juveniles, or moving between parts of a large home range. Animals such as large herbivores, medium to large carnivores, and migratory species are passage users.[9]


Corridor dwellers can occupy the passage anywhere from several days to several years. Species such as plants, reptiles, amphibians, birds, insects, and small mammals can spend their entire lives in linear habitats. In this case, the corridor must provide sufficient resources to support such species.[9]

Regional – (>500 metres (1,600 ft) wide); connect major ecological gradients such as migratory pathways.

Sub-regional – (>300 metres (980 ft) wide); connect larger vegetated landscape features such as and valley floors.

ridge lines

Local – (some <50 metres (160 ft)); connect remnant patches of , wetlands, ridge lines, etc.

gullies

Habitat corridors can be categorized according to their width, with wider corridors generally encouraging more use.[10] However, overall corridor quality depends more on design when creating an effective corridor.[7] The following are three divisions in corridor widths:


Habitat corridors can also be divided according to their continuity. Continuous corridors are strips that are not broken up, while "stepping stone" corridors are small patches of suitable habitat. However, stepping-stone corridors may be more susceptible to edge effects.


Corridors can also take the form of wildlife crossings, underpasses or overpasses used for crossing human-made feature such as roads, reducing human-wildlife conflict such as roadkill. Observations have shown that underpasses are actually more successful than overpasses because many times animals are too timid to cross over a bridge in front of traffic and would prefer to be more hidden.[11]

Design[edit]

Wildlife corridors are most effective when they are designed with the ecology of their target species in mind. Other factors like seasonal movement, avoidance behavior, dispersal, and habitat requirements can be considered.[14]


Corridors are best built with a certain degree of randomness or asymmetry and when oriented perpendicular to habitat patches.[15][7] Wildlife corridors are susceptible to edge effects; habitat quality along the edge of a habitat fragment is often much lower than in core habitat areas. Habitat corridors are important for large species requiring significant-sized ranges; however, they are also vital as connection corridors for smaller animals and plants, as well as ecological connectors to provide a ‟rescue effect’’.[16] Wildlife corridors are additionally designed to reduce human-wildlife conflicts.[17]

The Paséo Pantera (also known as the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor or )[24]

Paséo del Jaguar

The Eastern Corridor[25]

Himalayan

China-Russia Tiger Corridor

[26]

Tandai Tiger Corridor

[27]

The [28]

European Green Belt

The Siju-Rewak Corridor, located in the Garo Hills of India, protects an important population of elephants (thought to be approximately 20% of all the elephants that survive in the country). This corridor project links together the and the Rewak Reserve Forest in Meghalaya State, close to the India-Bangladesh border. This area lies within the meeting place of the Himalayan Mountain Range and the Indian Peninsula and contains at least 139 other species of mammals, including tigers, clouded leopards and the Himalayan black bear.[29]

Siju Wildlife Sanctuary

The is a network of corridors and habitats created for wildlife in the Netherlands[30]

Ecologische hoofdstructuur

The 16 kilometres (9.9 mi) long Kanha-Pench elevated corridor on .[31]

NH 44

Two elephant passes and two minor bridges on in Assam’s Lumding Reserve Forest.[32][33]

NH 54

Three elephant underpasses, each with 6 metres (20 ft) of vertical clearance on and NH 58 in Uttarakhand, India.[34]

NH 72

Lower Himalayan Region.[35]

Terai Arc Landscapes

Evaluation[edit]

Some species are more likely to utilize habitat corridors depending on migration and mating patterns, making it essential that corridor design is targeted towards a specific species.[36][37]


Due to space constraints, buffers are not usually added in.[4] Without a buffer zone, corridors can become affected by disturbances from human land use change. There is a possibility that corridors could aid in the spread of invasive species, threatening multiple populations.[38]

Aquatic organism passage

Biolink zones

Emerald network

Habitat conservation

Habitat destruction

Landscape connectivity

Marine Protected Area

Natura 2000

The Pollinator Pathway

Roadkill

wildlife corridor conservationist

Gary Tabor

Tugay

Wildlife crossing

Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative

Beier, Paul; Noss, Reed F. (December 1998). "Do Habitat Corridors Provide Connectivity?". Conservation Biology. 12 (6): 1241–1252. :1998ConBi..12.1241B. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.98036.x. S2CID 16770640.

Bibcode

Bennett, A.F. 1999. Linkages in the Landscape: The Role of Corridors and Connectivity in Wildlife Conservation. The World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland.

De Chant, T. 2007. A Future of Conservation. Northfield Habitat Corridors Community Plan, Northfield, Minnesota.

[39]

Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC). 2004. Wildlife Corridors. DEC, New South Wales.

Dole, J.W., Ng, S.J., Sauvajot, R.M. 2003. Use of Highway Undercrossings by Wildlife in Southern California. Biology Conservation, 115 (3):499-507.

[19]

Foreman, Dave. Rewilding North America: a Vision for Conservation in the 21st Century. Washington: Island, 2004.

Fleury, A.M.; Brown, R.D. (1997). "A Framework for the Design of Wildlife Conservation Corridors with Specific Application to Southwestern Ontario". Landscape and Urban Planning. 37 (8): 163–186. :1997LUrbP..37..163F. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(97)80002-3. hdl:10214/4617.

Bibcode

M., S. 2002. Ecology: Insects, Pollen, Seeds, Travel Wildlife Corridors. Science News, 162 (10):269.

Mech, S.G.; Hallett, J.G. (2001). "Evaluating the Effectiveness of Corridors: a Genetic Approach". Conservation Biology. 15 (2): 467–474. :2001ConBi..15..467M. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.015002467.x. S2CID 84520743.

Bibcode

Roach, J. 2006. First Evidence that Wildlife Corridors Boost Biodiversity, Study Says. National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C.

[40]

Rosenberg, D.K.; Noon, B.R.; Meslow, E.C. (1997). . BioScience. 47 (10): 667–687. doi:10.2307/1313208. JSTOR 1313208.

"Biological Corridors: Form, Function, and Efficacy"

Simberloff, D.; Farr, J.A.; Cox, J.; Mehlman, D.W. (1992). "Movement Corridors: Conservation Bargains or Poor Investments?". Conservation Biology. 6 (4): 492–504. :1992ConBi...6..493S. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.06040493.x.

Bibcode

Sutcliffe, O.L.; Thomas, C.D. (1996). "Open Corridors Appear to Facilitate Dispersal by Ringlet Butterflies (Aphantopus hyperantus) between Woodland Clearings". Conservation Biology. 10 (5): 1359–1365. :1996ConBi..10.1359S. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10051359.x.

Bibcode

Tewksbury, J.J.; Levey, D.J.; Haddad, N.M.; Sargent, S.; Orrock, J.L.; Weldon, A.; Danielson, B.J.; Brinkerhoff, J.; Damschen, E.I.; Townsend, P. (2002). . PNAS. 99 (20): 12923–12926. Bibcode:2002PNAS...9912923T. doi:10.1073/pnas.202242699. PMC 130561. PMID 12239344.

"Corridors Affect Plants, Animals, and Their Interactions in Fragmented Landscapes"

Defragmentation in Belgium (Flanders) - Connecting nature, connecting people. Accessed: 22 January 2009

Project Regeneration

Wildlife Corridors

Wildlife passages - De-Fragmentation in the Netherlands - How to evaluate their effectiveness? Accessed: 22 January 2009

CorridorDesign.org - GIS tools for designing wildlife corridors Accessed: 9 March 2010

ConservationCorridor.org - information, tools and links to connect the science of landscape corridors to conservation in practice. Accessed: 14 September 2012