Wildlife corridor explained

A wildlife corridor, also known as a habitat corridor, or green corridor,^[1] is an designated area that connects wildlife populations that have been separated by human activities or structures, such as development, roads, or land clearings. These corridors enable movement of individuals between populations, which helps to prevent negative effects of inbreeding and reduced genetic diversity, often caused by genetic drift, that can occur in isolated populations.^[2] Additionally, corridors support the re-establishment of populations that may have been reduced or wiped out due to random events like fires or disease. They can also mitigate some of the severe impacts of habitat fragmentation,^[3] a result of urbanization that divides habitat areas and restricts animal movement. Habitat fragmentation from human development poses an increasing threat to biodiversity, and habitat corridors help to reduce its harmful effects. Corridors aside from their benefit to vulnerable wildlife populations can conflict with communities surrounding them when human-wildlife conflicts are involved.^[4] In other communities the benefits of wildlife corridors to wildlife conservation are used and managed by indigenous communities.^[5]

Purpose

Habitat corridors can be considered a management tool in areas where the destruction of a natural habitats has severely impacted native species, whether due to human development or natural disasters. When land is fragmented, wildlife populations may become unstable or isolated from larger populations.^[6] These management tools are used by ecologists, biologists, indigenous tribes, and other concerned parties that oversee wildlife populations. Corridors help reconnect these fragmented populations and reduce negative population fluctuations by supporting these key aspects that stabilize populations:^[7]

• Colonization: Animals can move and occupy new areas when food sources or other natural resources are scarce in their primary habitat.
• Migration: Species that relocate seasonally can do so more safely and effectively without interference from human development barriers.
• Interbreeding: Animals can find new mates in neighboring regions, increasing genetic diversity.
• Tribes: Indigenous groups use wildlife corridors as an effective management strategy to sustain their physical and spiritual needs.^[5]

Daniel Rosenberg et al.^[8] were among the first to define the concept of wildlife corridors, developing a model that emphasized the corridors' role in facilitating movement unrestricted by the end of native vegetation or intermediate target patches of habitat.^[9]

Wildlife corridors also have significant indirect effects on plant populations by increasing pollen and seed dispersal through animals movement, of various species between isolated habitat patches.^[10] Corridors must be large enough to support minimum critical populations, reduce migration barriers, and maximize connectivity between populations.^[11]

Wildlife corridors may also include aquatic habitats often referred to as riparian ribbons,^[12]) and are typically found in the form of rivers and streams. Terrestrial corridors take the form of wooded strips connecting forested areas or an urban hedgerows.

Users

Most species can be categorized into one of two groups: passage users and corridor dwellers.

Passage users occupy corridors for brief periods. These animals use corridors for such events as seasonal migration, juvenile dispersal or moving between different parts of a large home range. Large herbivores, medium to large carnivores, and migratory species are typical passage users.

Corridor dwellers, on the other hand, can occupy a corridor for several years. Species such as plants, reptiles, amphibians, birds, insects, and small mammals may spend their entire lives in linear habitats. In such cases, the corridor must provide enough resources to support such species.

Types

Habitat corridors can be categorized based on their width, with wider corridors generally supporting greater wildlife use.^[13] However, the overall effectiveness of a corridor depends more on its design that its width. The following are three main categories of corridor widths:

• Regional – (> wide); connect major ecological gradients such as migratory pathways.
• Sub-regional – (> wide); connect larger vegetated landscape features such as ridge lines and valley floors.
• Local – (some <); connect remnant patches of gullies, wetlands, ridge lines, etc.

Habitat corridors can also be classified based on their continuity. Continuous corridors are uninterrupted strips of habitat,, while "stepping stone" corridors consist of small, separate patches of suitable habitat. However, stepping-stone corridors are more vulnerable to edge effects, which can reduce their effectiveness.

Corridors can also take the form of wildlife crossings, such an underpasses or overpasses that allow animals to cross man-made structures like roads, helping to reduce human-wildlife conflict, such as roadkill. Observations that underpasses tend to be more than overpasses as many animals are too timid to cross over a bridge in front of traffic and prefer the cover of an underpass.^[14]

Monitoring use

Researchers use mark-recapture techniques and hair snares to assess genetic flow and observe how wildlife utilizes corridors.^[15] Marking and recapturing animals helps track individual movement.^[16]

Genetic testing is also used to evaluate migration and mating patterns. By analyzing gene flow within a population, researchers can better understand the long- term role of corridors in migration and genetic diversity.

Design

Wildlife corridors are most effective when designed with the ecology of their target species in mind. Factors such as seasonal movement, avoidance behavior, dispersal patterns, and specific habitat requirements must also be considered.^[17]

Corridors are more successful when they include some degree of randomness or asymmetry and are oriented perpendicular to habitat patches.^[18] However, they are vulnerable to edge effects; habitat quality along the edge of a habitat fragment is often much lower than in core habitat areas.

While wildlife corridors are essential for large species that require expensive ranges; they are also crucial for smaller animals and plants, acting as ecological connectors to move between isolated habitat fragments. ^[19] Additionally wildlife corridors are designed to reduce human-wildlife conflicts.^{[20] [21]}

Examples

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, with fences present on either side to help guide animals.^[22]

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 played a role in the frequency of usage.^[23]

In South Carolina, five remnant areas of land were monitored; one was put in the center with the other four 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 seed dispersal through bird droppings was noted to be the dispersal method with the largest increase within the corridor-connected patch of land.^[24]

In Florida June 2021, the Florida Wildlife Corridor act was passed, securing a statewide network of nearly 18 million acres of connected ecosystems.^[25] Starting from the Alabama state line, through the Florida panhandle and all the way to the Florida Keys. Containing state parks, national forests, and wildlife management areas supporting wildlife and human occupation.

The 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 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.^[26]

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.^{[27] [28]}

Major wildlife corridors

• The Paséo Pantera (also known as the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor or Paséo del Jaguar)^[29]
• The Eastern Himalayan Corridor^[30]
• China-Russia Tiger Corridor^[31]
• Tandai Tiger Corridor^[32]
• The European Green Belt^[33]
• 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.^[34]
• The Ecologische hoofdstructuur is a network of corridors and habitats created for wildlife in the Netherlands^[35]
• The long Kanha-Pench elevated corridor on NH 44.^[36]
• Two elephant passes and two minor bridges on NH 54 in Assam’s Lumding Reserve Forest.^{[37] [38]}
• Three elephant underpasses, each with of vertical clearance on NH 72 and NH 58 in Uttarakhand, India.^[39]
• Terai Arc Landscapes, Lower Himalayan Region.^[40]

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.^{[41] [42]}

Due to space constraints, buffers are not usually implemented. 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 native populations.^[43]

See also

• 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

• December 1998 . Do Habitat Corridors Provide Connectivity? . Conservation Biology . 12 . 6 . 1241–1252 . 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.98036.x. 1998ConBi..12.1241B . 16770640 . Beier . Paul . Noss . Reed F. .
• 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.^[44]
• 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.
• 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 . 10.1016/S0169-2046(97)80002-3 . 1997LUrbP..37..163F . 10214/4617 . free .
• 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 . 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.015002467.x . 2001ConBi..15..467M . 84520743 .
• Roach, J. 2006. First Evidence that Wildlife Corridors Boost Biodiversity, Study Says. National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C.^[45]
• Rosenberg . D.K. . Noon . B.R. . Meslow . E.C. . 1997 . Biological Corridors: Form, Function, and Efficacy . BioScience . 47 . 10. 667–687 . 10.2307/1313208 . 1313208 . free .
• Simberloff . D. . Farr . J.A. . Cox . J. . Mehlman . D.W. . 1992 . Movement Corridors: Conservation Bargains or Poor Investments? . Conservation Biology . 6 . 4. 492–504 . 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.06040493.x . 1992ConBi...6..493S .
• 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 . 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10051359.x . 1996ConBi..10.1359S .
• 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 . 10.1073/pnas.202242699 . 12239344 . 130561 . 2002PNAS...9912923T . free .

External links

• 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

Notes and References

1. Web site: dead. Planning Portal – Glossary: G . https://web.archive.org/web/20081201180024/https://www.planningportal.gov.uk/england/professionals/en/1115310689250.html. 1 December 2008.
2. Web site: University of Michigan Dearborn Library Catalog - Database Authentication Screen . 2024-10-04 . wizard.umd.umich.edu . 10.1111/mec.14806.
3. Web site: Bond, M.. 2003. Principles of Wildlife Corridor Design. Center for Biological Diversity. Biologivaldiversity.org. 2015-08-11. 6 June 2022. https://web.archive.org/web/20220606143617/https://biologicaldiversity.org/publications/papers/wild-corridors.pdf. live.
4. Matejcek . Astrid . Verne . Julia . 2021-08-01 . Restoration-as-development? Contesting Aspirational Politics Regarding the Restoration of Wildlife Corridors in the Kilombero Valley, Tanzania . The European Journal of Development Research . en . 33 . 4 . 1022–1043 . 10.1057/s41287-021-00403-2 . 1743-9728. free .
5. News: Fallon . Cait . Aug 23, 2021 . "Tribal Wildlife Corridors Act Bolsters Wildlife Conservation on Tribal Lands" . October 26, 2024 . National Wildlife Federation.
6. Beier . Paul . Majka . Daniel R. . Spencer . Wayne D. . August 2008 . "Forks in the Road: Choices in Procedures for Designing Wildland Linkages" . . en . 22 . 4 . 836–851 . 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00942.x . 0888-8892.
7. Barbosa . Soraia . Mestre . Frederico . White . Thomas A. . Paupério . Joana . Alves . Paulo C. . Searle . Jeremy B. . September 2018 . "Integrative approaches to guide conservation decisions: Using genomics to define conservation units and functional corridors" . . en . 27 . 17 . 3452–3465 . 10.1111/mec.14806 . 0962-1083.
8. Rosenberg . Daniel K. . Noon . Barry R. . Meslow . E. Charles . Towards a definition of wildlife corridor . Integrating People and Wildlife for a Sustainable Future . 1995 . 436–9 . 14 September 2018 . 31 March 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20220331220816/https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/3662 . live .
9. Web site: dead. 2020-08-13. https://web.archive.org/web/20200813015552/https://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/documents/Conceptual%20Background/What%20is%20a%20Landscape/What%20is%20a%20Landscape.htm. What is a landscape?.
10. Tewksbury . Joshua . October 1, 2002 . Corridors affect plants, animals, and their interactions in fragmented landscapes . . 99 . 20 . 12923–6 . 2002PNAS...9912923T . 10.1073/pnas.202242699 . 130561 . 12239344 . free.
11. Allison M. Fleury. Robert D. Brown . 1997 . A framework for the design of wildlife conservation corridors With specific application to southwestern Ontario . . en . . 37 . 3–4 . 163–186 . 10.1016/S0169-2046(97)80002-3 . 1997LUrbP..37..163F . 2022-10-28 . free . 10214/4617 . 28 October 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221028095343/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169204697800023 . live .
12. Web site: Repayment" . "Debt . 2021-08-30 . The Riparian Ribbon . 2023-05-20 . ArcGIS StoryMaps . en-us . 20 May 2023 . https://web.archive.org/web/20230520234641/https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/537a6541676241b1979ad54dfcc65763 . live .
13. 1993 . Wildlife, forest, and forestry. Principles of managing forests for biological diversity . . 63 . 3 . 271 . 10.1016/0006-3207(93)90732-g . 0006-3207.
14. Sandra J. Ng. Jim W. Dole. Raymond M. Sauvajot . Seth P.D Riley . Thomas J. Valone . 2004 . Use of highway undercrossings by wildlife in southern California . Biological Conservation . 115 . 3 . 499–507 . 10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00166-6 . 2004BCons.115..499N . 2022-10-31 . 31 October 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221031100008/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320703001666 . live .
15. Dixon . Jeremy D. . Oli . Madan K. . Wooten . Michael C. . Eason . Thomas H. . McCown . J. Walter . Paetkau . David . 2006 . Effectiveness of a Regional Corridor in Connecting Two Florida Black Bear Populations . Conservation Biology . 20 . 1 . 155–162 . 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00292.x . 3591161 . 16909668 . 2006ConBi..20..155D . 15106420 . 0888-8892 . 19 May 2023 . 19 May 2023 . https://web.archive.org/web/20230519234334/https://www.jstor.org/stable/3591161 . live .
16. Mech . Stephen G. . Hallett . James G. . April 2001 . Evaluating the Effectiveness of Corridors: a Genetic Approach . Conservation Biology . en . 15 . 2 . 467–474 . 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.015002467.x . 2001ConBi..15..467M . 84520743 . 0888-8892 . 4 April 2022 . 13 August 2023 . https://web.archive.org/web/20230813182628/https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.015002467.x . live .
17. Newmark . William D. . 1993 . The Role and Design of Wildlife Corridors with Examples from Tanzania . Ambio . 22 . 8 . 500–504 . 4314138 . 0044-7447 . 19 May 2023 . 19 May 2023 . https://web.archive.org/web/20230519234333/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4314138 . live .
18. Web site: Designing wildlife corridors . 4 August 2015 . Sciencedaily.com . 2 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221102042737/https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081020135221.htm . live .
19. Web site: Julieta Benitez-Malvido. Víctor Arroyo-Rodríguez . 2008 . Habitat fragmentation, edge effects and biological corridors in tropical ecosystems . 2022-11-02.
20. Maulana . Rheza . 2023-04-01 . Architecture for Wildlife: The Possible Solution to Human-Wildlife Conflicts in Indonesia . IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science . 1169 . 1 . 012046 . 10.1088/1755-1315/1169/1/012046. free . 2023E&ES.1169a2046M .
21. Huijser . Marcel P. . Fairbank . Elizabeth R. . Camel-Means . Whisper . Graham . Jonathan . Watson . Vicki . Basting . Pat . Becker . Dale . 2016-05-01 . Effectiveness of short sections of wildlife fencing and crossing structures along highways in reducing wildlife–vehicle collisions and providing safe crossing opportunities for large mammals . Biological Conservation . 197 . 61–68 . 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.02.002 . 0006-3207.
22. Web site: Dickie . Gloria . Gloria Dickie . 2022-07-22 . As Banff's famed wildlife overpasses turn 20, the world looks to Canada for conservation inspiration . 2024-02-26 . Canadian Geographic . en-US.
23. Ng . Sandra J . Dole . Jim W . Sauvajot . Raymond M . Riley . Seth P.D . Valone . Thomas J . 2003-03-20 . Use of highway undercrossings by wildlife in southern California . Biological Conservation . en . 115 . 3 . 499–507 . 10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00166-6. 2004BCons.115..499N .
24. Web site: Susan Milius . 2002-10-22 . Insects, pollen, seeds travel wildlife corridors . 4 November 2022 . Science News . 4 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221104061201/https://www.sciencenews.org/article/insects-pollen-seeds-travel-wildlife-corridors . live .
25. Web site: Realm . Visual . About The Corridor . 2024-11-13 . Florida Wildlife Corridor Foundation . en-US.
26. Jon Aars. Rolf A. Ims . The Effect of Habitat Corridors on Rates of Transfer and Interbreeding Between Vole Demes . Ecology . 1999-07-01 . 80 . 5 . 1648 . 10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1648:TEOHCO]2.0.CO;2 . 0012-9658 . 2022-11-04 . en . 4 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221104063040/https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080%5B1648:TEOHCO%5D2.0.CO;2 . live .
27. Shepherd, B. J. Whittington . 2006. Response of wolves to corridor restoration and human use management. Ecology and Society . 11 . 2. 10.5751/ES-01813-110201 . free.
28. Daniel K. Rosenberg. Barry R. Noon . E. Charles Meslow. Biological Corridors: Form, Function, and Efficacy. BioScience. 47. 10 . November 1997. 677–687. 1313208. 10.2307/1313208. free.
29. Web site: Paseo Pantera Project . 2022-11-09 . en . 9 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221109084435/http://www.afn.org/~wcsfl/pp.htm . live .
30. Web site: Map of Nepal. https://web.archive.org/web/20230412132445/https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/img/original/ecoregion.jpg . 2023-04-12 .
31. Web site: New corridor links Amur tiger habitats in Russia and China . 2022-11-09 . WWF . en . 9 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221109084430/https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?206504/New-corridor-links-Amur-tiger-habitats-in-Russia-and-China . live .
32. Web site: Panthera. Panthera.org. 4 August 2015. 22 November 2011. https://web.archive.org/web/20111122022348/http://www.panthera.org/programs/tiger/tiger-corridor-initiative. dead.
33. Web site: European Green Belt Initiative . 2022-11-09 . en . 11 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221111100540/https://www.europeangreenbelt.org/ . live .
34. Web site: 2012-05-02 . Siju-Rewak Corridor . 2022-11-09 . CONSERVATION CORRIDOR . en . 9 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221109084439/https://conservationcorridor.org/digests/2012/05/siju-rewak-corridor/ . live .
35. [:nl:Ecologische hoofdstructuur|Ecologische Hoofdstructuur]
36. News: Gandhi. Divya. 2019-09-07. A wild, wild road. en-IN. The Hindu. 2020-09-17. 0971-751X. 9 November 2022. https://web.archive.org/web/20221109084439/https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/energy-and-environment/a-wild-wild-road/article29360610.ece. live.
37. Web site: 2020-02-25. Why This Elevated Stretch On National Highway 44 Is A Hit With Animals In Pench Tiger Reserve. 2020-09-17. India Infra Hub. en-US. 9 November 2022. https://web.archive.org/web/20221109084438/https://indiainfrahub.com/2020/main-featured/why-this-elevated-stretch-on-national-highway-44-is-a-hit-with-animals-in-pench-tiger-reserve/. live.
38. Book: Singh A.P.. Singh A.K.. Mishra D.K.. Bora P.. Sharma A.. Ensuring safe access to wildlife in Lumding Reserve Forest, Assam, India, Mitigating the impacts of up-gradation of Doboka-Silchar National Highway (NH54E). WWF-India. 2010. 17 September 2020. 15 December 2021. https://web.archive.org/web/20211215230504/http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/ensuring_safe_access_to_wildlife_in_lumding_reserve_forest.pdf. live.
39. Web site: SHIVANI AZAD . 2019-01-18 . Elephant underpass in Rajaji hanging for 9 yrs, NGT orders NHAI to deposit Rs 2 cr . . 2022-11-09 . en . 9 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221109095320/https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/dehradun/elephant-underpass-in-rajaji-hanging-for-9-yrs-ngt-orders-nhai-to-deposit-rs-2-cr/articleshow/67593263.cms . live .
40. Web site: Chauhan. Priya. 2021-04-01. 26 Important Wildlife Corridors Providing Safe Passage to Species. en-IN. Planet Custodian. 2021-04-23. 23 April 2021. https://web.archive.org/web/20210423070609/https://www.planetcustodian.com/important-wildlife-corridors-world/12788/. live.
41. Web site: Fran . Elephant corridors in Botswana to protect the herds . 4 August 2015 . Your African Safari . 4 November 2022 . https://web.archive.org/web/20221104094947/https://www.yourafricansafari.com/articles/new-way-to-protect-africas-elephant-herds/ . live .
42. Green . Siân E. . Davidson . Zeke . Kaaria . Timothy . Doncaster . C. Patrick . December 2018 . Do wildlife corridors link or extend habitat? Insights from elephant use of a Kenyan wildlife corridor . African Journal of Ecology . en . 56 . 4 . 860–871 . 10.1111/aje.12541 . free . 2018AfJEc..56..860G .
43. Beier . Paul . Noss . Reed F. . December 1998 . Do Habitat Corridors Provide Connectivity? . Conservation Biology . en . 12 . 6 . 1241–1252 . 10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.98036.x . 1998ConBi..12.1241B . 16770640 . 14 May 2022 . 13 August 2023 . https://web.archive.org/web/20230813182628/https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.98036.x . live .
44. Web site: Northfield Habitat Corridors . De-chant.com . 2015-08-11 . 3 August 2007 . https://web.archive.org/web/20070803055449/http://www.de-chant.com/tim/nhc/index.html . live .
45. Web site: First Evidence That Wildlife Corridors Boost Biodiversity, Study Says . News.nationalgeographic.com . 2010-10-28 . 2015-08-11 . 21 February 2015 . https://web.archive.org/web/20150221040127/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/09/060901-plant-corridors.html . dead .