School of the Environment, Washington State University, P.O. Box 642812, Pullman, WA, 99164-2812, U.S.A.
College of Law, University of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Dr. MS 2321, Moscow, ID, 83844-2321, U.S.A.
Conserv Biol. 2020 Aug;34(4):943-955. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13484. Epub 2020 Mar 23.
Wildlife corridors aim to promote species' persistence by connecting habitat patches across fragmented landscapes. Their implementation is limited by patterns of land ownership and complicated by differences in the jurisdictional and regulatory authorities under which lands are managed. Terrestrial corridor conservation requires coordination across jurisdictions and sectors subject to site-specific overlapping sources of legal authority. Mapping spatial patterns of legal authority concurrent with habitat condition can illustrate opportunities to build or leverage capacity for connectivity conservation. Streamside areas provide pragmatic opportunities to leverage existing policy mechanisms for riverine and terrestrial habitat connectivity across boundaries. Conservation planners and practitioners can make use of these opportunities by harmonizing actions for multiple conservation outcomes. We formulated an integrative, data-driven method for mapping multiple sources of legal authority weighted by capacity for coordinating terrestrial habitat conservation along streams. We generated a map of capacity to coordinate streamside corridor protections across a wildlife habitat gap to demonstrate this approach. We combined values representing coordination capacity and naturalness to generate an integrated legal-ecological resistance map for connectivity modeling. We then computed least-cost corridors across the integrated map, masking the terrestrial landscape to focus on streamside areas. Streamside least-cost corridors in the integrated, local-scale model diverged (∼25 km) from national-scale least-cost corridors based on naturalness. Spatial categories comparing legal- and naturalness-based resistance values by stream reach highlighted potential locations for building or leveraging existing capacity through spatial coordination of policy mechanisms or restoration actions. Agencies or nongovernmental organizations intending to restore or maintain habitat connectivity across fragmented landscapes can use this approach to inform spatial prioritization and build coordination capacity. Article impact statement: Combined mapping of legal authority and habitat condition reveals capacity to coordinate actions along streams for clean water and wildlife.
野生动物走廊旨在通过连接破碎景观中的栖息地斑块来促进物种的生存。然而，其实施受到土地所有权模式的限制，并因土地管理所涉及的管辖和监管机构的差异而变得复杂。陆地走廊的保护需要协调各管辖范围和部门，这些范围和部门受到具体地点重叠的法律权威来源的影响。绘制与栖息地状况并存的法律权威的空间模式，可以说明建立或利用连通性保护能力的机会。河岸地区为利用现有的河流和陆地栖息地连通性政策机制提供了切实可行的机会，跨越边界。保护规划者和实践者可以通过协调多个保护结果的行动来利用这些机会。我们制定了一种综合的、数据驱动的方法，用于绘制多个法律权威源的地图，并根据协调陆地栖息地保护的能力对其进行加权，这些权威源沿溪流分布。我们生成了一张地图，展示了在野生动物栖息地缺口处协调河岸走廊保护的能力，以展示这种方法。我们结合了代表协调能力和自然性的值，生成了一个综合的法律生态阻力图，用于连通性建模。然后，我们在综合地图上计算了最便捷的走廊，屏蔽了陆地景观，专注于河岸地区。在综合的局部尺度模型中，河岸最便捷走廊与基于自然性的全国尺度最便捷走廊之间存在分歧（约 25 公里）。通过比较各溪流段的法律和自然阻力值的空间类别，突出了通过政策机制或恢复行动的空间协调来建立或利用现有能力的潜在位置。有意在破碎景观中恢复或维持栖息地连通性的机构或非政府组织可以使用这种方法来提供空间优先级排序并建立协调能力。文章的影响声明：法律权威和栖息地状况的综合绘图揭示了沿溪流协调行动的能力，以实现清洁水和野生动物的目标。
