Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 28, 2025

Watershed Planning within a Quantitative Scenario Analysis Framework
Published on: July 24, 2016
Mapping legal authority for terrestrial conservation corridors along streams
Amanda T Stahl1, Alexander K Fremier1, Barbara A Cosens2
1School of the Environment, Washington State University, P.O. Box 642812, Pullman, WA, 99164-2812, U.S.A.
Abstract:
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.
More Related Videos
11:53Spatial Multiobjective Optimization of Agricultural Conservation Practices using a SWAT Model and an Evolutionary Algorithm
Published on: December 9, 2012
12:26Integrating Remote Sensing with Species Distribution Models; Mapping Tamarisk Invasions Using the Software for Assisted Habitat Modeling SAHM
Published on: October 11, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Design Example: Alignment of a Road Line Using GIS
Design Example: Analyzing Capacity Contours for Flood Risk Assessment
Habitat Fragmentation
What is Conservation Biology?
Design Example: Design of an Irrigation Channel
Types of Surveys