A recent study indicates that existing techniques for planning and assessing wildlife corridors might not effectively protect wildlife. It proposes that Best Management Practices should adopt a more intelligent and comprehensive approach when analyzing these corridors. Researchers evaluated various wildlife corridor designs using data on black bear movements in Florida, discovering significantly different outcomes, with none of the models successfully capturing all the black bear movements.
As human populations and developments grow, preserving undeveloped land for wildlife travel becomes crucial for their long-term survival. However, a study from the University of Maryland has found that current methods for creating and assessing wildlife corridors might not be sufficient for protecting these animals. The study recommends that Best Management Practices should incorporate more sophisticated and comprehensive analyses of corridors. Researchers examined different designs of wildlife corridors using black bear movement data from Florida and found that each design produced markedly different results; none succeeded in capturing the full range of black bear movements. Their findings also varied considerably based on the evaluation methods employed. This highlights the complexity of the challenges involved, suggesting there isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution. The specific objectives of a corridor, which can differ widely, will directly influence which strategies should be used to meet conservation goals.
The study was published in September in the journal Landscape Ecology.
“If we don’t design these corridors correctly, our conservation efforts could be in vain, leading to increased conflicts between humans and wildlife,” stated Jennifer Mullinax, an associate professor at UMD’s Department of Environmental Science and Technology and the study’s senior author. “Black bear populations in Florida were previously endangered, but they are recovering and expanding, highlighting the need for improved methods, as proper implementation takes time. For endangered species, we could build corridors that fail to protect them.”
Establishing corridors often entails government agencies, local communities, or non-profits purchasing and safeguarding valuable land, or collaborating with developers to conserve areas that might be at risk of development. The lands selected for protection are frequently based on scientific models that consider animal movements and landscape characteristics. However, the requirements of various species in diverse locations can be complicated, and not all corridors serve the same purpose—some may need to facilitate access to new habitats for growing populations, while others may focus on linking separated populations to enhance genetic diversity.
Moreover, maintaining these wildlife corridors can be costly, and it remains unclear how different design strategies impact their success or how to assess their effectiveness for specific aims.
Mullinax and her team utilized three mathematical models to devise theoretical wildlife corridors for Florida black bears and compared them to tracking data to understand how these bears navigate their environment. They also examined their modeled corridors in relation to the existing Florida Wildlife Corridor, a designated network of conservation lands meant to benefit multiple species across the state.
To create potential corridors, the team synthesized information regarding bear habitats and their likely distribution, alongside landscape features and the relative ease or difficulty for bears to traverse these environments. The study illustrated the challenges of defining “easy movement” and applying it to formulate corridor parameters—traveling through open fields and roadways may be easier physically for bears than moving through dense forests, though those aren’t the ideal areas for bears to roam. While urban settings may present more obstacles for bears, some will navigate through towns to access food sources, such as local dumpsters. Mullinax and her colleagues crafted three different methods to delineate “difficult movement,” generating three grid maps of Florida with varying levels of landscape “resistance.”
The team employed a program named Circuitscape to merge their resistance grids with bear habitat data, producing maps that illustrate the most likely pathways of bear movement in Florida. These maps can be visualized as guides showing various bear “routes” and “highways” that indicate probable traffic.
They overlaid these maps with GPS tracking data from 30 bears, each closely monitored over time. The findings were inconsistent; how well a corridor performed was contingent on specific bear behaviors.
For instance, the corridor that overlapped the least with bear movements and registered the lowest evaluations was unique in that it included the travel pattern of a distinctly independent bear.
“This is what we refer to as a dispersal movement, where an individual seeks a new home,” Mullinax clarified. “If one bear undertakes this journey, others might follow suit, allowing animals to establish territories. We aim to capture such movements, but the top-performing models completely missed this unique bear’s path.”
Furthermore, strategies that may benefit certain species might not be suitable for all. Although the Florida Wildlife Corridor is categorized as a multi-species corridor, it supported fewer bears per square kilometer than the bear-specific corridors the team developed.
The study calls into question the common belief that any wildlife corridor is better than having none. While Mullinax acknowledges that any conservation effort may be preferable to inaction, this research emphasizes an urgent need for further studies and enhanced resources to ensure that investments in wildlife corridors are effective, especially in the face of diminishing habitats and climate change.
