Informing Conservation Management About Structural Versus Functional Connectivity: A Case-Study of Cross River Gorillas

Connectivity among subpopulations is vital for the persistence of small and fragmented populations. For management interventions to be effective conservation planners have to make the critical distinction between structural connectivity (based on landscape structure) and functional connectivity (which considers both landscape structure and organism-specific behavioral attributes) which can differ considerably within a given context. We assessed spatial and temporal changes in structural and functional connectivity of the Cross River gorilla Gorilla gorilla diehli (CRG) population in a 12,000km(2) landscape in the Nigeria-Cameroon border region over a 23-year period, comparing two periods: 19872000 and 2000-2010. Despite substantial forest connections between occupied areas, genetic evidence shows that only limited dispersal occurs among CRG subpopulations. We used remotely sensed land-cover data and simulated human pressure (using a spatially explicit agent-based model) to assess human impact on connectivity of the CRG population. We calculated cost-weighted distances between areas occupied by gorillas as measures of connectivity (structural based on land-cover only, functional based on both land-cover and simulated human pressure). Whereas structural connectivity decreased by 5% over the 23-year period, functional connectivity decreased by 11%, with both decreasing more during the latter compared to the earlier period. Our results highlight the increasing threat of isolation of CRG subpopulations due to human disturbance, and provide insight into how increasing human influence may lead to functional isolation of wildlife populations despite habitat continuity, a pressing and common issue in tropical Africa often not accounted for when deciding management interventions. In addition to quantifying threats to connectivity, our study provides crucial evidence for management authorities to identify actions that are more likely to be effective for conservation of species in human-dominated landscapes. Our approach can be easily applied to other species, regions, and scales. (C) 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.