Give Wildlife Room to Move

Delegates gathering in Yerevan for the UN biodiversity conference face a task that extends far beyond drawing boundaries around valuable places. The COP17 host website published its opening report on 19 October 2026. The gathering provides a timely reason to examine an established conservation challenge: wildlife needs space between protected areas, as well as space within them. A reserve can protect important habitat while leaving the journeys essential to its inhabitants dangerously exposed.

齐聚埃里温参加联合国生物多样性大会的代表们，面临的任务远不止给重要地区划定边界。COP17东道国网站于2026年10月19日发布了开幕报道。这次聚会为审视一个长期存在的保护难题提供了契机：野生动物既需要保护区内部的空间，也需要保护区之间的空间。一个保护区可以守护重要栖息地，却仍可能让其中生物赖以生存的往返旅程暴露在危险之中。

Animals move for different reasons. Some undertake seasonal migration; others travel shorter distances to feed, find mates or reach breeding sites. Young animals may leave the places where they were born. These movements connect populations and allow genetic exchange. As environmental conditions change, access to other suitable areas can also help species adapt. The Convention on Migratory Species highlighted these connections when announcing IUCN conservation guidelines in July 2020. Protecting movement is therefore part of protecting the conditions that allow populations to persist.

动物移动的原因各不相同。有些进行季节性迁徙，有些则在较短距离内移动，以觅食、寻找配偶或到达繁殖地。幼年动物可能离开出生地。这些移动连接不同种群，使基因交流成为可能。随着环境条件变化，能够到达其他适宜区域，也可以帮助物种适应变化。《保护野生动物迁徙物种公约》在2020年7月宣布IUCN保护指南发布时，强调了这些联系。因此，保护移动过程，也是保护让种群得以延续的条件。

An ecological corridor helps maintain or restore connections between habitats. It need not resemble a narrow, straight passage. Depending on the species and landscape, connections can involve a broad natural area or a series of suitable habitat patches. IUCN's guidance treats corridors as components of larger ecological networks, alongside protected areas and other conserved places. This changes the planning question. Instead of examining each reserve separately, planners consider how a whole landscape supports movement and natural processes.

生态廊道有助于维持或恢复栖息地之间的联系。它不一定像一条狭窄笔直的通道。视物种和景观而定，这种连接可以是一片宽广的自然区域，也可以是一系列适宜的栖息地斑块。IUCN的指南将廊道与保护区及其他受保护地区一起，视为更大生态网络的组成部分。这改变了规划时提出的问题。规划者不再单独审视每个保护区，而是考虑整个景观如何支持移动和自然过程。

Consider a hypothetical landscape containing two protected forests separated by farmland and a busy road. Drawing a green line between the forests would identify an ambition, but would not establish a usable route. A project might need to retain vegetation, restore damaged habitat or provide a safe road crossing. Its design would depend on which animals it was intended to help. A connection suitable for one species cannot simply be assumed to work for every other species sharing the landscape.

设想一个假设性的景观：两片受保护森林之间隔着农田和一条繁忙道路。在森林之间画一条绿线，只能标明一个愿望，并不能建立一条可用的路线。项目可能需要保留植被、修复受损栖息地，或提供安全的道路穿越设施。具体设计取决于它打算帮助哪些动物。适合某个物种的连接，不能直接被认定为也适合生活在同一景观中的所有其他物种。

There is a useful distinction here between a connection that appears on a map and one that functions in practice. In the hypothetical forest project, managers could monitor whether the intended animals actually use the route. They could investigate where movement stops and whether conditions change across seasons. These observations would inform later adjustments. The reasoning is straightforward: the existence of a designated corridor is evidence of a management decision; evidence that wildlife benefits requires additional investigation. Naming the route does not complete the work.

这里有一个有用的区分：地图上存在连接，与连接在实际中发挥作用，是两回事。在这个假设的森林项目中，管理者可以监测目标动物是否真正使用这条路线。他们可以调查移动在哪里中断，以及不同季节的条件是否发生变化。这些观察可以为后续调整提供依据。其道理很直接：一条已划定廊道的存在，证明有人作出了管理决定；要证明野生动物从中受益，则需要进一步调查。给路线命名，并不意味着工作已经完成。

This emphasis on connections is already present in international policy. Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework calls for conserving at least 30 per cent of terrestrial and inland water areas, and of marine and coastal areas, by 2030. It also specifies effective management, ecological representation and well-connected systems. The percentage is consequently only one part of the commitment. Selecting additional areas without considering their ecological relationships could leave important conservation needs unresolved. The framework was adopted in 2022; these requirements are not new decisions announced at COP17.

国际政策已经体现了对连接的重视。《昆明—蒙特利尔全球生物多样性框架》的目标3要求，到2030年保护至少30%的陆地和内陆水域，以及至少30%的海洋和沿海区域。它还明确要求有效管理、生态代表性和连接良好的系统。因此，这个百分比只是承诺的一部分。如果在增加保护区域时不考虑它们之间的生态关系，重要的保护需求仍可能得不到解决。该框架于2022年通过；这些要求并非COP17刚刚宣布的新决定。

People also belong in the planning process. Target 3 recognises the rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities, while the CBD's guidance stresses participation and fair sharing of costs and benefits. A proposed corridor could cross land where people live or work. In our hypothetical example, discussions might concern farming access, maintenance responsibilities and who pays for changes. These are possible planning questions, not reported details of an actual project. Addressing them would help turn a conservation proposal into an arrangement that people can understand and sustain.

人也应当参与规划过程。目标3承认原住民和当地社区的权利，而CBD的指导说明强调参与，以及公平分担成本、分享收益。拟建廊道可能穿过人们生活或工作的土地。在我们的假设例子中，讨论可能涉及农业通行、维护责任，以及谁来承担调整费用。这些只是可能出现的规划问题，并非某个实际项目已报道的细节。处理这些问题，有助于把保护提案转变为人们能够理解并长期维持的安排。

A small-scale illustration comes from Scotland. NatureScot describes the Bowser family's work at Argaty as restoring and reconnecting farm habitats while improving waterways. Such work shows why attention cannot stop at the edge of a protected site. For policymakers discussing biodiversity in Yerevan, the practical challenge continues across the intervening landscape: identify the connections that matter, establish workable responsibilities and check their ecological results. The spaces between protected places deserve a place in conservation budgets and decisions.

苏格兰提供了一个小规模的例子。NatureScot介绍，鲍泽一家在阿加蒂的工作包括修复并重新连接农场栖息地，同时改善水道。这类工作说明，关注不能止于受保护地点的边缘。对于在埃里温讨论生物多样性的政策制定者而言，实际挑战延伸到了中间的景观：识别重要连接，确立可行的责任安排，并检查其生态成效。保护地之间的空间，理应在保护预算和决策中占有一席之地。