Wildlife corridor

A wildlife corridor, habitat corridor, or green corridor

Habitat corridors can be considered a management tool in places where the destruction of a natural area has greatly affected native species, whether it's 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:

• Colonization—animals are able to move and occupy new areas when food sources or other natural resources are lacking in their core habitat.
• Migration—species that relocate seasonally can do so more safely and effectively when it does not interfere with human development barriers.
• Interbreeding—animals can find new mates in neighboring regions, increasing genetic diversity
  .

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

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

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:

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

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

Monitoring use

This section's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (March 2008) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Researchers can use mark-recapture techniques and hair snares in order to evaluate genetic flow to observe how a corridor is being used.^[12] Marking and recapturing animals is more useful when keeping a close eye on individual movement.^[13] However, tagging does not give any insight into whether the migrating individuals are successfully breeding with other populations.^{[citation needed]}

Genetic techniques can be more effective when evaluating migration and mating patterns. By looking at a population's gene flow, researchers can understand the genetic consequences of corridors using information about the migration patterns of a population over time.^[13]

Design

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

In Alberta, Canada, overpasses have been constructed to keep animals off the Trans-Canada Highway, which passes through Banff National Park. The tops of the bridges are planted with trees and native grasses, and fences are present on either side to help guide animals.^[18]

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 the frequency of usage.^[19]

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. Plant seeds dispersal through bird droppings was noted to be the dispersal method with the largest increase within the corridor-connected patch of land.^[20]

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.^[21]

In 2001, a

wolf corridor was restored through a golf course in Jasper National Park, Alberta, which successfully altered wildlife behavior and showed frequent use by the wolf population.^[22][23]

• The Paséo Pantera (also known as the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor or Paséo del Jaguar)^[24]
• The Eastern Himalayan Corridor^[25]
• China-Russia Tiger Corridor^[26]
• Tandai Tiger Corridor^[27]
• The European Green Belt^[28]
• 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 Siju Wildlife Sanctuary 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]
• The Ecologische hoofdstructuur is a network of corridors and habitats created for wildlife in the Netherlands^[30]
• The 16 kilometres (9.9 mi) long Kanha-Pench elevated corridor on NH 44.^[31]
• Two elephant passes and two minor bridges on
  NH 54 in Assam’s Lumding Reserve Forest.^[32][33]
• Three elephant underpasses, each with 6 metres (20 ft) of vertical clearance on
  NH 72 and NH 58 in Uttarakhand, India.^[34]
• Terai Arc Landscapes, Lower Himalayan Region.^[35]

Evaluation

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.

• Aquatic organism passage
• Biolink zones
• Emerald network
• Habitat conservation
• Habitat destruction
• Landscape connectivity
• Marine Protected Area
• Natura 2000
• The Pollinator Pathway
• Roadkill
• Gary Tabor, wildlife corridor conservationist
• Tugay
• Wildlife crossing
• Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative

Further reading

• Beier, Paul; Noss, Reed F. (December 1998). "Do Habitat Corridors Provide Connectivity?". Conservation Biology. 12 (6): 1241–1252.
  S2CID 16770640
  .
• 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.
  hdl:10214/4617
  .
• 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.
  S2CID 84520743
  .
• 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). "Biological Corridors: Form, Function, and Efficacy". BioScience. 47 (10): 667–687.
  JSTOR 1313208
  .
• Simberloff, D.; Farr, J.A.; Cox, J.; Mehlman, D.W. (1992). "Movement Corridors: Conservation Bargains or Poor Investments?". Conservation Biology. 6 (4): 492–504.
  doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.06040493.x
  .
• 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.
  doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10051359.x
  .
• 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). "Corridors Affect Plants, Animals, and Their Interactions in Fragmented Landscapes". PNAS. 99 (20): 12923–12926.
  PMID 12239344
  .

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Wildlife corridors.

• Defragmentation in Belgium (Flanders) - Connecting nature, connecting people. Accessed: 22 January 2009
• Wildlife Corridors Project Regeneration
• 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