Wildlife corridor

Last updated

A green forest corridor in Brazil Corredor Florestal - Pontal do Paranapanema.jpg
A green forest corridor in Brazil

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 roads, development, or logging). This allows an exchange of individuals between populations, which may help prevent the negative effects of inbreeding and reduced genetic diversity (via genetic drift) that often occur within isolated populations. Corridors may also help facilitate the re-establishment of populations that have been reduced or eliminated due to random events (such as fires or disease).

Contents

This may potentially moderate some of the worst effects of habitat fragmentation, [2] wherein urbanization can split up habitat areas, causing animals to lose both their natural habitat and the ability to move between regions to use all of the resources they need to survive. Habitat fragmentation due to human development is an ever-increasing threat to biodiversity, [3] and habitat corridors are a possible mitigation.

Purpose

The main goal of implementing habitat corridors is to increase biodiversity. When areas of land are broken up by human interference, population numbers become unstable and many animal and plant species become endangered. By re-connecting the fragments, the population fluctuations can decrease dramatically. Corridors can contribute to three factors that stabilize a population:

Rosenberg et al. (1995) [4] were among the first to define what constitutes a wildlife corridor. The definitions of "biological corridor" (i.e., wildlife corridor) had, in the early years of studying corridors, been "vague and inconsistent, and often they confound form and function" Rosenberg et al. developed 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. Their definition simply required that movement to a target patch via the corridor be greater that if the corridor were absent.

Although corridors had originally been implemented with the assumption that they would increase biodiversity, not enough research had been done to come to a solid conclusion. The case for corridors has been built more on intuition and much less on empirical evidence (Tewksbury et al. 2002). Tewksbury et al. claimed that the early controversies had arisen because most studies had been limited in that they had a narrow taxonomic focus and, that if corridors facilitate animal movement, they should also have strong indirect effects on plant populations due to increased pollen and seed by animals. Results of their 2002 experiment provided a large-scale experimental demonstration that habitat (or wildlife) corridors facilitate movement of disparate taxa between otherwise isolated patches even after controlling for area effects (Tewksbury et al., 2002 [5] ). Another factor that needs to be taken into account is what species the corridor is intended for. Some species have reacted more positively to corridors than others.

A habitat corridor could be considered as a possible solution in an area where the destruction of a natural area has greatly affected its native species. Development such as roads, buildings, and farms can interrupt plants and animals in the region being destroyed. Furthermore, natural disasters such as wildfires and floods can leave animals with no choice but to evacuate. If the habitat is not connected to a safer one, it will ultimately lead to death. A remaining portion of natural habitat is called a remnant, and such portions need to be connected because when migration decreases, extinction increases (Fleury 1997).

Corridors can be made in two distinct areas—either water or land. Water corridors are called riparian ribbons and usually come in the form of rivers and streams. Land corridors come on a scale as large as wooded strips connecting larger woodland areas. However, they can also be as simple as a line of shrubs along a sidewalk (Fleury 1997). Such areas can facilitate the movement of small animals, especially birds, from tree to tree, until they find a safe habitat to rest in. Not only do minimal corridors aid in the movement of animals, they are also aesthetically pleasing, which can sometimes encourage the community to accept and support them.

Users

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 a juvenile, or moving between parts of a large home range. Usually large herbivores, medium to large carnivores, and migratory species are passage users (Beier & Loe 1992). One common misconception is that the corridor only needs to be wide enough for the passage users to get through. However, the corridor still must be wide enough to be safe and also encourage the animals to use it, even though they do not live out their entire lives in it.

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 include everything that a species needs to live and breed, such as soil for germination, burrowing areas, and multiple other breeding adults (Beier & Loe 1992).

Types

Habitat corridors can be categorized according to their width. Typically the wider the corridor, the more use it will get from species. However, the width-length ratio, as well as design and quality play just as important of a role in creating the perfect corridor (Fleury 1997). The strip of land will suffer less from edge effects such as weeds, predators, and chemicals if it is constructed properly. 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. When stepping stones are arranged in a line, they form a strip of land connecting two areas, just like a continuous corridor.

Some kinds provide linkages between protected core areas and stimulate or allow species to migrate.

Wildlife overpass in Singapore Wildlife overpass in Singapore.jpeg
Wildlife overpass in Singapore

Corridors can also come in the form of underpasses or overpasses, which can be very safe for both animals and humans. Many busy highways cross through natural habitats that native species occupy, as well. Large animals such as deer become a hazard when they cross in front of traffic and get hit. An overpass or an underpass serves as a bridge to facilitate the movement of animals across a busy road. 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 (Dole et al. 2003).

Costs

Corridors can be expensive to plan out and put into action. For example, Daniel Simberloff et al. states that “a bridge that would maintain a riparian corridor costs about 13 times as much per lane-mile as would a road that would sever the corridor.” He also states that maintenance of a corridor would be much more costly than refuges for endangered species. It would simply be easier to move animals between refuges than to buy land, install a corridor, and maintain it. However, where the goal is not just to preserve a few large animal species but to protect biodiversity among all plants and animals, then habitat corridors may be the only option. Corridors are going to be expensive to implement no matter what, but it does depend on the type, location, and size, which can all vary to a great degree. With the lack of field data on the effectiveness, many agencies are not willing to consider putting in corridors.

Monitoring use

It is extremely important for researchers to pay attention to the population changes in animals after a corridor has been implemented to ensure that there are no harmful effects. Researchers can use both mark-recapture techniques and evaluate genetic flow in order to observe how much a corridor is being used. Marking and recapturing animals is more useful when keeping a close eye on individual movement (Mech & Hallet 2001). The only problem is that tagging animals and watching them does not tell anyone whether the migrating individuals are successfully mating with other populations in connected areas of land. On the other hand, genetic techniques can be more effective in evaluating migration and mating patterns.

One of the most important goals of developing a corridor is to increase migration in certain animal species. By looking at a population's gene flow, researchers can understand the genetic consequences of corridors (Mech & Hallett 2001). The migration patterns of an entire population are much more important than the movements of a few individuals. From these techniques, researchers will better understand whether or not habitat corridors are increasing biodiversity.

Stephen Mech and James Hallett introduce an additional reason genetic techniques are more useful; they “measure average migration rates over time, which reveals the effects of fragmentation of several generations and is not as sensitive to current population sizes as mark-recapture studies are.” For example, when a population is extremely small, mark-recapture is almost impossible. Clearly, genetic analysis of a species is the best way to determine if animals are actually using corridors to move and reproduce.

Design

According to new research, wildlife corridors are best built with a certain degree of randomness or asymmetry, rather than built symmetrically. The research was conducted at UC Davis. [6]

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. Wildlife 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 .

Examples

Both the safety of animals and humans can be achieved through the creation of corridors. For example, deer commonly cross roads in order to get to other grazing land. When they are faced with a car coming at them, they freeze; this puts both the deer and the human's life in danger. In Alberta, Canada, an overpass was constructed to keep animals off the busy highway; the area is part of a national park, so many different creatures roam the area. The top of the bridge is covered in the native grass of the area so that it blends in better and animals will not know the difference. Gates were also put on either side of the overpass to help guide animals in the right direction (Semrad 2007).

Wildlife underpass for bears in Florida, United States Bear underpass ecoducOurs.jpg
Wildlife underpass for bears in Florida, United States

In Southern California, 15 underpasses and drainage culverts were observed to see how many animals used them as corridors. They proved to be especially effective on wide-ranging species such as carnivores, mule deer, small mammals, and reptiles, even though the corridors were not intended specifically for animals. Researchers also learned that factors such as surrounding habitat, underpass dimensions, and human activity also played a role in how much use they got. From this experiment, much was learned about what would constitute a successful habitat corridor (Dole et al. 2003).

In South Carolina, five remnant areas of land were monitored; one was put in the center and four were surrounding it. Then, a corridor was put between one of the remnants and the center. Butterflies that were placed in the center habitat were two to four times more likely to move to the connected remnant rather than the disconnected ones. Furthermore, male holly plants were placed in the center region, and female holly plants in the connected region increased by 70 percent in seed production compared to those plants in the disconnected region. The most impressive dispersal into the connected region, though, was through bird droppings. Far more plant seeds were dispersed through bird droppings in the corridor-connected patch of land (M. 2002).

There have also been positive effects on the rates of transfer and interbreeding in vole populations. A control population in which voles were confined to their core habitat with no corridor was compared to a treatment population in their core habitat with passages that they could use to move to other regions. Females typically stayed and mated within their founder population, but the rate of transfer through corridors in the males was very high. Researchers are not sure why the females did not move about as much, but it is apparent that the corridor effectively transferred at least some of the species to another location for breeding (Aars 1999).

In 2001, a wolf corridor was restored through a golf course in Jasper National Park, Alberta, which enabled wolves to pass through the course. After this restoration, wolves passed through the corridor frequently. [7] This is one of the first demonstrations that corridors are used by wildlife, and can be effective in decreasing fragmentation. Earlier studies had been criticised for failing to demonstrate that corridor restoration leads to a change in wildlife behaviour. [8]

Elephant corridor

Elephant corridors are narrow strips of land that allow elephants to move from one habitat patch to another. There are 88 identified elephant corridors in India.

In Africa, Botswana houses the largest number of free-roaming elephant herds. [9] Elephants Without Borders (EWB) studies the movement of elephants is working to gain community support of local community corridors, so that elephants and humans can co-exist. [10]

Elevated stretch of NH 44 through Pench Tiger Reserve Elevated stretch of NH 44 through Pench Tiger Reserve.png
Elevated stretch of NH 44 through Pench Tiger Reserve

Major wildlife corridors

Several artificial wildlife corridors have been planned or created, these include:

Evaluation

Some animal species are much more apt to use habitat corridors than others depending on what their migration and mating patterns are like. For example, many cases of birds and butterflies successfully using corridors have been observed. Less successful stories have come out of mammals such as deer. How effective a corridor is may simply rely on what species it is directed towards (Tewskbury 2002). Corridors created with birds in mind may be more successful because they are highly migratory to begin with.

Human interference is almost inevitable with the quickly increasing population. The goal behind habitat corridors shows the most hope for solving habitat fragmentation and restoring biodiversity as much as possible. Although there are many positives and negatives, there may be enough positives to continue studying and improving corridors. It is truly difficult to say whether corridors are the solution to increasing biodiversity, because each one must be judged on its own. Each corridor has its own set of standards and goals that may set it apart from another one.

Negatives

A major downfall to habitat corridors is that not much information has been gathered about their success. Due to the lack of positive data, many agencies will not allow corridors to be established because they are unsure of their effectiveness. Another problem with corridors is that they are not as useful as simply preserving land so that it cannot be fragmented. However, it is becoming very difficult to set aside land for nature reserves when road-building, industry, and urban sprawl are all competing for space.

Even if corridors are sought as a solution, it does not necessarily mean that animals will use them. Especially in the case of overpasses, research shows that animals do not like to use them to get to another remnant area of land. Usually overpasses are built over busy highways, and many species are too timid to expose themselves in front of all of the traffic. As more roads and buildings arise, there becomes less space to try to preserve.

Habitat corridors need to be species-specific (not every kind of animal will use every kind of corridor) and corridors can be barriers to some species. For instance plants may use road verges as corridors however some mammals will not cross roads to reach a suitable habitat.

When a corridor is implemented, many times development is so close by, that it becomes difficult to build a wide enough passage. There is usually a very limited amount of space available for corridors, so buffers are not usually added in (Rosenberg 1997). Without a buffer zone, corridors become susceptible to harmful outside factors from city streets, suburb development, rural homes, forestry, cropland, and feedlots.

Unfortunately, another limiting factor to the implementation of corridors is money. With such inconclusive data about the effectiveness of connecting land, it is difficult to get the proper funding. Those who would be in charge of the corridor design and construction would ask such questions as, “What if the corridors affect species negatively?” and “What if they actually aid in the spread of disease and catastrophic events?” Furthermore, there is a possibility that corridors could not only aid in the dispersal of native organisms, but invasive ones, as well (Beier & Loe 1998). If invasive species take over an area they could potentially threaten another species, even to the point of extinction.

Although wildlife corridors have been proposed as solutions to habitat and wildlife population fragmentation, there is little evidence that they are broadly useful as a conservation strategy for all biodiversity in non-developed or less-developed areas, compared to protecting connectivity as the relevant ecological attribute. In other words, corridors may be a useful meme for conservation planning/ers, but the concept has less meaning to wildlife species themselves. Very few wildlife follow easily identified "corridors" or "linkages" (e.g., using computer modeling), instead most species meander and opportunistically move through landscapes during daily, seasonal, and dispersal movement behavior. Wildlife corridors may be useful in highly developed landscapes where they are easily identified as the last remaining and available habitat.

Positives

Habitat corridors may be defenseless against a number of outside influences, but they are still an efficient way of increasing biodiversity. Strips of land aid in the movement of various animal species and pollen and seed dispersal, which is an added benefit to the intended one (M. 2002). For example, when insects carrying pollen or birds carrying seeds travel to another area, plant species effectively get transported, as well.

Another positive aspect of corridors is that they allow both animals and humans to occupy virtually the same areas of land, and thus co-exist where without the corridor this would not be possible. Large animals such as bears can be attracted to residential areas in search of food due to lack of natural resources because of habitat fragmentation. A corridor would provide a passage for the bears to forage in other locations, so that they would not pose as much of a threat to humans.

See also

Further reading

Related Research Articles

This is an index of conservation topics. It is an alphabetical index of articles relating to conservation biology and conservation of the natural environment.

In-situ conservation is the on-site conservation or the conservation of genetic resources in natural populations of plant or animal species, such as forest genetic resources in natural populations of Teagan species. This process protects the inhabitants and ensures the sustainability of the environment and ecosystem.

Habitat conservation

Habitat conservation is a management practice that seeks to conserve, protect and restore habitats and prevent species extinction, fragmentation or reduction in range. It is a priority of many groups that cannot be easily characterized in terms of any one ideology.

Gene flow The transfer of genetic variation from one population to another

In population genetics, gene flow is the transfer of genetic variation from one population to another. If the rate of gene flow is high enough, then two populations are considered to have equivalent allele frequencies and therefore effectively be a single population. It has been shown that it takes only "One migrant per generation" to prevent populations from diverging due to drift. Gene flow is an important mechanism for transferring genetic diversity among populations. Migrants change the distribution of genetic diversity within the populations, by modifying the allele frequencies. High rates of gene flow can reduce the genetic differentiation between the two groups, increasing homogeneity. For this reason, gene flow has been thought to constrain speciation by combining the gene pools of the groups, thus preventing the development of differences in genetic variation that would have led to full speciation. In some cases migration may also result in the addition of novel genetic variants to the gene pool of a species or population.

Wildlife crossing

Wildlife crossings are structures that allow animals to cross human-made barriers safely. Wildlife crossings may include underpass tunnels or wildlife tunnels, viaducts, and overpasses or green bridges ; amphibian tunnels; fish ladders; canopy bridge, tunnels and culverts ; and green roofs.

Habitat fragmentation

Habitat fragmentation describes the emergence of discontinuities (fragmentation) in an organism's preferred environment (habitat), causing population fragmentation and ecosystem decay. Causes of habitat fragmentation include geological processes that slowly alter the layout of the physical environment, and human activity such as land conversion, which can alter the environment much faster and causes the extinction of many species. More specifically, habitat fragmentation is a process by which large and contiguous habitats get divided into smaller, isolated patches of habitats.

Wildlife conservation

Wildlife conservation refers to the practice of protecting wild species and their habitats in order to maintain healthy wildlife species or populations and to restore, protect or enhance natural Ecosystems. Major threats to wildlife include habitat destruction/degradation/fragmentation, overexploitation, poaching, pollution and climate change. The IUCN estimates that 27,000 species of the ones assessed are at risk for extinction. Expanding to all existing species, a 2019 UN report on biodiversity put this estimate even higher at a million species. It's also being acknowledged that an increasing number of ecosystems on Earth containing endangered species are disappearing. To address these issues, there have been both national and international governmental efforts to preserve Earth's wildlife. Prominent conservation agreements include the 1973 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). There are also numerous nongovernmental organizations (NGO's) dedicated to conservation such as the Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, and Conservation International.

Holarctic realm

The Holarctic realm is the name for the biogeographic realm that encompasses the majority of habitats found throughout the northern continents of the world, combining Wallace's Palearctic zoogeographical region, consisting of North Africa and all of Eurasia, and the Nearctic zoogeographical region, consisting of North America, north of Mexico. These regions are further subdivided into a variety of ecoregions. Many ecosystems, and the animal and plant communities that depend on them, are found across multiple continents in large portions of this realm. The continuity of these ecosystems results from the shared glacial history of the realm. The floristic Boreal Kingdom corresponds to the Holarctic realm.

Cleland Conservation Park Protected area in South Australia

Cleland Conservation Park is a protected area located in the Adelaide Hills, South Australia about 22 kilometres (14 mi) south-east of the Adelaide city centre. Cleland Conservation Park conserves a significant area of natural bushland on the Adelaide Hills face and includes the internationally popular Cleland Wildlife Park and the popular tourist destinations of Mount Lofty summit and Waterfall Gully. It is maintained by the South Australian Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources (DEWNR).

The Mesoamerican Biological Corridor (MBC) is a region that consists of Belize, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, and some southern states of Mexico. The area acts as a natural land bridge from South America to North America, which is important for species who use the bridge in migration. Due to the extensive unique habitat types, Mesoamerica contains somewhere between 7 and 10% of the world’s known species.

Landscape connectivity in ecology is, broadly, "the degree to which the landscape facilitates or impedes movement among resource patches". Alternatively, connectivity may be a continuous property of the landscape and independent of patches and paths. Connectivity includes both structural connectivity and functional connectivity. The degree to which a landscape is connected determines the amount of dispersal there is among patches, which influences gene flow, local adaptation, extinction risk, colonization probability, and the potential for organisms to move as they cope with climate change.

Reserve design is the process of planning and creating a nature reserve in a way that effectively accomplishes the goal of the reserve.

Patch dynamics is an ecological perspective that the structure, function, and dynamics of ecological systems can be understood through studying their interactive patches. Patch dynamics, as a term, may also refer to the spatiotemporal changes within and among patches that make up a landscape. Patch dynamics is ubiquitous in terrestrial and aquatic systems across organizational levels and spatial scales. From a patch dynamics perspective, populations, communities, ecosystems, and landscapes may all be studied effectively as mosaics of patches that differ in size, shape, composition, history, and boundary characteristics.

Genetic erosion is a process where the limited gene pool of an endangered species diminishes even more when reproductive individuals die off before reproducing with others in their endangered low population. The term is sometimes used in a narrow sense, such as when describing the loss of particular alleles or genes, as well as being used more broadly, as when referring to the loss of a phenotype or whole species.

Earthwatch Institute is an international environmental charity founded as Educational Expeditions International in 1971 near Boston (USA) by Robert A. Citron and Clarence Truesdale, then superintendent of Vermont public schools. It is one of the largest global underwriters of scientific field research in archaeology, paleontology, marine life, biodiversity, ecosystems and wildlife. For over forty years, Earthwatch has delivered a unique citizen science model to raise funds and recruit individuals, students, teachers and corporate fellows to participate in critical field research to understand nature's response to accelerating global change. Earthwatch's work supports hundreds of Ph.D. researchers across dozens of countries, conducting over 100,000 hours of research annually.

Defaunation is the global, local or functional extinction of animal populations or species from ecological communities. The growth of the human population, combined with advances in harvesting technologies, has led to more intense and efficient exploitation of the environment. This has resulted in the depletion of large vertebrates from ecological communities, creating what has been termed "empty forest". Defaunation differs from extinction; it includes both the disappearance of species and declines in abundance. Defaunation effects were first implied at the Symposium of Plant-Animal Interactions at the University of Campinas, Brazil in 1988 in the context of Neotropical forests. Since then, the term has gained broader usage in conservation biology as a global phenomenon.

Population fragmentation

Population fragmentation is a form of population segregation. It is often caused by habitat fragmentation.

Road ecology is the study of the ecological effects of roads and highways. These effects may include local effects, such as on noise, water pollution, habitat destruction/disturbance and local air quality; and wider effects such as habitat fragmentation, ecosystem degradation, and climate change from vehicle emissions.

Elected officials in Jackson, Wyoming, have added a proposal to the November 2019 ballot for a special-purpose excise tax to fund wildlife crossings. If the ballot initiative passes, it will fund proposed wildlife crossings in accordance with the Teton County Wildlife Crossing Master Plan.

References

  1. Archived 1 December 2008 at the Wayback Machine
  2. Bond, M. (2003). "Principles of Wildlife Corridor Design. Center for Biological Diversity" (PDF). Biologivaldiversity.org. Retrieved 11 August 2015.
  3. Lenore Fahrig (28 November 2003). "Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Biodiversity". Annual Reviews. 34: 487–515. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419.
  4. Rosenberg, Daniel K.; Noon, Barry R.; Meslow, E. Charles (1995). "Towards a definition of wildlife corridor". Integrating People and Wildlife for a Sustainable Future. Proceedings of the First International Wildlife Congress: 436–9. Retrieved 14 September 2018.
  5. Tewksbury, Joshua (1 October 2002). "Corridors affect plants, animals, and their interactions in fragmented landscapes". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 99 (20): 12923–6. Bibcode:2002PNAS...9912923T. doi:10.1073/pnas.202242699. PMC   130561 . PMID   12239344.
  6. "Designing wildlife corridors". Sciencedaily.com. Retrieved 4 August 2015.
  7. Shepherd, B; J. Whittington (2006). "Response of wolves to corridor restoration and human use management". Ecology and Society. 11 (2). doi: 10.5751/ES-01813-110201 .
  8. Daniel K. Rosenberg; Barry R. Noon; E. Charles Meslow (November 1997). "Biological Corridors: Form, Function, and Efficacy". BioScience. 47 (10): 677–687. doi: 10.2307/1313208 . JSTOR   1313208.
  9. Fran. "Elephant corridors in Botswana to protect the herds". Your African Safari. Retrieved 4 August 2015.
  10. "Elephants Without Borders Living with elephants". Elephantswithourborders.org. Retrieved 4 August 2015.
  11. "Panthera". Panthera.org. Retrieved 4 August 2015.
  12. Ecologische Hoofdstructuur
  13. Gandhi, Divya (7 September 2019). "A wild, wild road". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 17 September 2020.
  14. Staff, India Infra Hub (25 February 2020). "Why This Elevated Stretch On National Highway 44 Is A Hit With Animals In Pench Tiger Reserve". India Infra Hub. Retrieved 17 September 2020.
  15. Singh A.P., Singh A.K., Mishra D.K., Bora P.,Sharma A., (2010). Ensuring safe access to wildlife in Lumding Reserve Forest, Assam, India, Mitigating the impacts of up-gradation of Doboka-Silchar National Highway (NH54E) (PDF). WWF-India.CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  16. "Northfield Habitat Corridors". De-chant.com. Retrieved 11 August 2015.
  17. "First Evidence That Wildlife Corridors Boost Biodiversity, Study Says". News.nationalgeographic.com. 28 October 2010. Retrieved 11 August 2015.