Habitat Connectivity

An RCIS requires the inclusion of habitat connectivity in its assessment of conservation needs and provides incentives for integrating connectivity into RCIS plans.

A satellite image showing a wildlife crossing bridge over a wide, busy freeway. — Liberty Canyon Crossing Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossing, the planned 165’ wide by 200” long overpass would connect the mountain lion population and other wildlife in the Santa Monica Mountains.

Highway overpass in California Truck driving on overpass on Ronald Reagan Freeway. © Ian Shive

Habitat Fragmentation and Connectivity Needs

Throughout California, highways, infrastructure and development bisect crucial wildlife and fish migration routes and fragment habitats, placing species at risk. Each year, vehicle collisions with thousands of wildlife on highways and roads, impact human road safety and contribute to decreased wildlife population genetic resilience. Wildlife connectivity projects have the potential for outsized conservation benefits beyond the immediate crossing footprint, potentially connecting orders of magnitude of more acres than those of the immediate project footprint.

The RCIS program recognizes habitat fragmentation as an important stressor impacting California wildlife and the need for increased habitat connectivity. An RCIS requires the inclusion of habitat connectivity in its assessment of conservation needs and encourages implementation of wildlife connectivity projects. Project proponents have the availability to receive credits through development of MCAs via implementing RCIS actions that address connectivity issues.

California policy supporting habitat connectivity

Improving habitat connectivity and removing barriers to wildlife and species movement have been a recent focus of the California legislature, which has passed notable laws to identify barriers and incentivize actions to improve permeability. The California Safe Roads and Wildlife Protection Act (AB 2344) requires the California Department of Transportation to identify terrestrial and aquatic barriers to wildlife movement, and requires these barriers be removed or mitigated for when designing and implementing future transportation projects. This is a potential avenue through which future connectivity projects can be identified and implemented. The California Fish and Wildlife Code for Wildlife Connectivity Actions Mitigation (SB 790) provides pathways for mitigation credits through an MCA and the mitigation banking program.

Several statewide resources are available that describe current connectivity corridors: California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project, ACE Terrestrial Connectivity, Fish Passage Assessment Database, and The Nature Conservancy’s Omniscape Connectivity Explorer for California and the Omniscape Web map.

Other regional, fine-scale analyses are also available, such as: Critical Linkages: Bay Area and Beyond, A Linkage Network for the California Deserts, A Wildland Network for the South Coast Ecoregion, and A Conservation Design for the Central Coast of California and the Evaluation of Mountain Lion as an Umbrella Species.

A mountain lion cub captured on camera roaming in the dark. — **Mountain Lion Cub** You can identify a mountain lion cub because of their camouflaging spots and rings around their tails that fade as they mature. © John Stuelpnagel

Planning for Connectivity through the RCIS Program

All three components of the RCIS Program feature habitat connectivity and wildlife corridors as an important conservation concern, with the RCIS providing the planning context through the connectivity goals, objectives and actions for specific species and habitats, and the MCA providing an implementation opportunity to create mitigation credits and generate revenue for connectivity and conservation actions.

An RCA features habitat connectivity values as an important element of the RCA. An RCA is required to identify and summarize existing analyses related to connectivity in the RCA geography, including existing protected areas and intact lands, wildlife movement corridors, barriers to wildlife movement and fish passage and large landscape blocks that provide habitat connectivity or could provide habitat connectivity.

The RCA also includes climate vulnerability analyses (including factors that may contribute to climate resilience such as connectivity corridors that facilitate species movement as species ranges and habitats may shift in response to climate change), and landscape-scale climate resilience (including landscapes that may remain stable in a changing climate).

An RCIS has several sections where habitat connectivity must be included and/or considered:

Habitat linkages between intact habitat blocks within and adjacent to the RCIS area must be described
Habitat connectivity must be included as a conservation element
When selecting focal species, wide-ranging species that represent wildlife and habitat connectivity should be included

The Habitat Connectivity conservation element can include descriptions of terrestrial and aquatic connectivity, as well as where barriers to connectivity exist within the RCIS area.

The RCIS proponent conservation needs (i.e., specific species mitigation credits) can guide the development of connectivity actions. Connectivity should be incorporated into specific actions for focal natural community and species conservation elements that address projected changes to suitable habitat due to climate change stressors.

Wildlife Corridor Wildlife corridor for both plants and animals. These are critical to connect habitat that has been segmented by human infrastructure. © TNC

Advance Mitigation Pathways

The RCIS Program and SB790 (passed in 2021) create opportunities to incentivize habitat connectivity actions that improve wildlife and species connectivity. Infrastructure agencies, conservation entities and others can create connectivity credits by investing projects that improve connectivity, which can be used to mitigate impacts to connectivity or sell to others to generate revenue.

Advance mitigation could help reduce potential mitigation requirements by avoiding temporal loss, and can contribute to funding construction costs by selling mitigation credits. The two advance mitigation pathways for connectivity projects are through an MCA and Bank as described in the SB 790 (CAM) Guidelines and MCA Guidelines. These two pathways for connectivity projects are covered in detail under the MCA tab “Connectivity.”