When it comes to a conservation
initiative as it relates to urban or rural planning, a conservation initiative
that comes to mind in urban planning is the incorporation of conservation projects
within urban development for the preservation of (specialized) species.
Without a doubt, development,
whether for transportation, commercial or residential purposes, is responsible
for habitat fragmentation. One would think that fragmentation wouldn’t affect a
species much, or at all, but fragmentation actually affects species much more
than anticipated. Sometimes the fragmentation does result in the species
adaptability to its new surroundings; but other times, the fragmentation leads
to the decreased population, and even possible extinction, of a species due to
its specialized environment being tampered with. Studies in the Netherlands
have proven both the former and the latter.
The studies in the
Netherlands created artificial habitat in business areas in which large butterfly
species populations were found to be present. Habitat patches promoting butterfly
influx were developed as part of the business’ landscape—either as a part of
the external “garden” scenery or as part of the roof structure. Opinions of the
people that used or lived in the development were also a part of the study. The
results found that the artificial habitat patches, created to supplement the
habitat that was fragmented, positively affected the species population.
Furthermore, even though individuals were most concerned about the visual
appearance of the business being affected, the conservation project(s) were fully
supported. This study proved that with
proper management and allocation of land resources, conservation and
development can co-exist hand-in-hand. Yet studies have not just been limited
to the creation of habitat patches for species conservation.
Other studies have
involved the examination of commercial (i.e. logging) and transportation
activities (e.g. creation of roadways) to determine how to minimize impacts on non-human
species habitat and their populations. Although they too have found negative
impacts on species and their habitats, the overall objective of the results was
to relate to the reader the methods in which minimal impact can be made by
having a collaborative development that benefits both the non-human species and
people. So again, conservation and development can co-exist hand-in-hand. It is
just a matter of collaborative efforts being applied to regional planning
projects.
Of possible interest to
the reader:
Fu, Wei, Liu, Shiliang, Dong, Shikui. (2010) Landscape
pattern changes under the disturbance of road networks. Procedia
Environmental Sciences, 2, 859–86.
Girvetz, Evan H., Thorne, James H., Berry, Alison M., Jaeger,
Jochen A.G. (2008) Integration of landscape fragmentation analysis into
regional planning:A statewide multi-scale case study from California, USA. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 86, 205–218.
Kareiva, Peter. (2008) Roads and ecology
TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution, 16
(8), 430.
Kareiva, Peter. (2008) Integrating the
Natural and the Social Sciences. TRENDS
in Ecology & Evolution, 16 (8), 430.
Pywell,
R.F., Warman, E.A., Sparks, T.H., Greatorex-Davies, J.N., Walker, K.J., Meek,
W.R., Carvell, C., Petit, S., Firbank, L.G. (2004) Assessing
habitat quality for butterflies on intensively managed arable farmland. Biological Conservation,
118, 313–325.
Smallidge, Peter J., Leopold, Donald J. (1997)
Vegetation management for the maintenance and conservation of butterfly
habitats in temperate human-dominated landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 38, 259-280.
Snep, Robert P.H., WallisDeVries,
Michiel, Opdam, Paul. (2011) Conservation Where People Work. Landscape and Urban Planning, 103, 94-101.
Snep; Robert, Van Ireland, Ekko, Opdam,
Paul. Enhancing biodiversity at business sites: What are the options, and which
of these do stakeholders prefer? Enhancing Biodiversity Landscape and Urban Planning, 91, 26-35.
No comments:
Post a Comment