Strengths: [2 max]
a. Southern corridor will increase habitats/access to additional resources for local wildlife;
b. Corridor would allow gene mixing between different populations of wide-ranging animals thereby increasing genetic diversity of these populations / corridors help increase gene flow increasing genetic diversity;
c. Corridor allows for safe migration of species / corridor would allow migration of species threatened by climate change (avoiding possible extinctions);
d. Corridor may help to reduce human-animal conflicts;
e. The corridor may raise awareness in the local community/population and broaden/improve their involvement in conservation efforts;
Weaknesses: [2 max]
f. Corridor (shape) would have a high edge effect / corridor may increase risk to species traveling between reserve areas due to predators/poachers / the shape of the corridor may make it more difficult to manage/secure against poaching;
g. Corridor may increase spread of diseases/invasive species;
h. Southern corridor may force local people off their land and create friction/resentment towards conservation efforts;
Conclusion [1 max] needs to be balanced considering both sides of the argument for credit and makes a clear value judgement e.g.:
While there may be issues with edge effect and potential poaching along the corridor, overall the connection of the smaller reserve in Mindo Nambillo to the larger reserve will be effective due to increased habitat and genetic mixing.
While the corridor increases habitat and improves genetic mixing, the problems posed by local opposition due to land confiscations and the spread of invasive species and diseases outweighs the benefits, making the corridor ineffective for wildlife conservation.
Note to examiners: Conclusion is not mandatory, and 3 marks can be achieved through consideration of both strengths and weaknesses.
Marking guidance:
