Wildlife Corridors in Nepal: Lifelines for Biodiversity Conservation

 

                                                                                                                                   (AI Generated Image)

Nepal, though small in size, is globally recognized for its exceptional biodiversity. The country encompasses a wide range of ecosystems—from the lowland tropical forests of the Terai to the alpine regions of the Himalayas—supporting over 118 types of ecosystems and more than 6,500 species of flowering plants (MoFE, 2018). It is home to 12 national parks, one wildlife reserve, one hunting reserve, and six conservation areas, collectively covering around 23.39% of the total land area (DNPWC, 2023). These protected areas harbor iconic and endangered species such as the Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris), Asian elephant (Elephas maximus), one-horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis), red panda (Ailurus fulgens), and snow leopard (Panthera uncia) (Jnawali et al., 2011). Despite this rich natural heritage, increasing anthropogenic pressures have led to habitat fragmentation, threatening the survival of wide-ranging species that require large, connected landscapes.

To address this challenge, the concept of wildlife corridors has gained importance in Nepal’s conservation strategy. Wildlife corridors are stretches of natural or semi-natural habitat that connect fragmented patches of forests, enabling the free movement of animals between core habitats such as national parks and conservation areas (Thapa et al., 2021). These corridors are essential for sustaining viable populations by facilitating dispersal, seasonal migration, and genetic exchange. Without such connectivity, isolated populations are at greater risk of inbreeding, reduced adaptability, and local extinction. In Nepal, the establishment of functional corridors, particularly within the Terai Arc Landscape (TAL), has become a central focus for ensuring long-term biodiversity conservation and minimizing human-wildlife conflict (Acharya et al., 2016).

The Ecological Significance of Wildlife Corridors:

Wildlife corridors play a crucial role in maintaining the ecological integrity of fragmented landscapes by enabling gene flow between otherwise isolated populations. This connectivity prevents genetic bottlenecks and helps sustain healthy, resilient wildlife populations over time (Thapa et al., 2021). In Nepal, wide-ranging species like the Bengal tiger and Asian elephant require large territories that often exceed the boundaries of individual protected areas. Corridors such as the Barandabhar and Khata corridors have been identified as critical genetic linkages that facilitate movement between Chitwan National Park, Bardia National Park, and transboundary areas in India (Lamichhane et al., 2018). Without such corridors, species are confined to isolated habitats, increasing the risk of inbreeding and reducing long-term survival prospects. Beyond genetic benefits, corridors are essential for supporting species migration, especially in response to seasonal and ecological needs. Many animals migrate between habitats to access food, water, breeding sites, or refuge from human disturbance and climatic extremes. For instance, elephants use corridors like the Basanta and Laljhadi-Mohana to move between Nepal and India in search of resources and mates (Paudel et al., 2019). These movements are not only vital for individual species’ survival but also for ecosystem health, as migratory animals contribute to seed dispersal, nutrient cycling, and ecological balance. In a country like Nepal, where forest patches are increasingly surrounded by human settlements, corridors serve as ecological highways that support biodiversity while also mitigating human-wildlife conflict.

 Major Wildlife Corridors in Nepal:

1. Terai Arc Landscape (TAL) Connecting Forests from Parsa to Shuklaphanta

The Terai Arc Landscape (TAL) in Nepal forms part of a vast transboundary conservation area extending about 700 km from the Bagmati River in eastern Nepal to the Yamuna River in India, covering ~24,710 km² on the Nepali side and roughly 5 million hectares. TAL connects six major protected areas in Nepal (Parsa, Chitwan, Banke, Bardia, Shuklaphanta, and the Krishnasar Conservation Area) through a network of eight critical corridors and two strategic “bottlenecks”. These corridors, such as Barandabhar and Shikaribas, have been restored and monitored for wildlife use, especially by apex species like tigers, elephants, and rhinos. A landmark WWF report shows that corridors including Shikaribas, Barandabhar, Kamdi, Khata, Karnali, Basanta, Laljhadi‑Mohana, and Brahmadev now functionally connect the landscape evidenced by tiger dispersal, moderate genetic diversity (approximately 61%), and multi-species. Ecological restoration projects (supported by Hariyo Ban, IUCN-KfW, and GEF/UNDP) have enhanced habitat connectivity, while inclusive community engagement in buffer zones underpins long-term corridor health.

2. Corridors Between Chitwan–Parsa–Valmiki, Bardia–Banke–Katarniaghat, etc.

Chitwan–Parsa–Valmiki Complex: This international corridor is recognized as a Level I Tiger Conservation Unit and spans ~3,669 km². Camera trapping recorded ~141 tigers, 700 rhinos, and over 50 elephants in this core area, with significant tiger movement across the Nepal-India border. Genetic studies indicate around 40% of tigers in Parsa originated from Chitwan, highlighting the corridor’s pivotal connectivity role.

 Bardia–Banke–Katarniaghat Corridor: This ecosystem bridge enables tiger dispersal from Banke and Bardia into India’s Katarniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary via the Khata corridor. Initiatives such as buffer zone forest planning and sustainable forest management in the Banke-Bardia complex have supported corridor.

 Shuklaphanta–Dudhwa/Laljhadi–Mohana Corridors: These link Nepal’s Shuklaphanta and adjoining Indian reserves like Dudhwa and Valmiki. Camera traps confirm seasonal migration of elephants and rhinos through these corridors, although agriculture and infrastructure encroachment pose increasing threats.

3. Transboundary Corridors: Essential for Tigers and Elephants:

Studies emphasize that the survival and expansion of apex species across South Asia hinge on transboundary connectivity between Nepal and India. Mechanistic mapping using least-cost path and circuit theory models, supported by camera-trap and genetic data, confirms connectivity between Valmiki–Parsa–Chitwan corridors and tiger reserves. Continued investments in bi-national initiatives, such as the Integrated Tiger Habitat Conservation Programme (ITHCP Phases I & II), are critical for sustaining these corridors and reducing human–wildlife conflicts.

 Challenges Facing Wildlife Corridors:

During a field study conducted across multiple Terai regions including corridors such as Barandabhar, Khata, Basanta, and Laljhadi-Mohana researcher documented numerous emerging threats to the ecological functionality of wildlife corridors in Nepal. One of the most pressing concerns is human encroachment and rapid land-use change. In many buffer zone areas, previously forested corridors are being converted into settlements or farmland, severely limiting wildlife movement. They observed that unregulated expansion of agriculture, sand mining, and the cultivation of cash crops (like banana and sugarcane) within corridor boundaries are fragmenting habitats and pushing wildlife closer to human settlements heightening the risk of human-wildlife conflict. Another major challenge is infrastructure development, particularly roads, and hydropower installations. For example, the East-West Highway, which cuts across several key corridors such as Barandabhar and Kamdi, has become a significant barrier to animal movement. Field notes include evidence of wildlife fatalities on roads and increased nighttime elephant crossings near the Khata corridor due to traffic pressure. Despite their ecological significance, most wildlife corridors lack formal legal protection unlike national parks and reserves. This absence of legal status often leads to weak management, poor coordination among local governments, and inadequate funding for community conservation efforts. While some corridors are managed under the guidance of community forest user groups (CFUGs), these groups often lack the technical capacity and long-term incentives to ensure sustainable habitat connectivity. Human-wildlife conflict has intensified in many corridor zones, particularly in areas where elephants and tigers move through farmlands and residential areas. Researchers recorded frequent instances of crop raiding, livestock depredation, and local backlash in buffer communities bordering Bardia and Shuklaphanta. These issues are further compounded by lack of integrated corridor management plans and insufficient cross-border cooperation with Indian authorities in transboundary zones like Valmiki-Chitwan and Dudhwa-Shuklaphanta. Overall, the sustainability of Nepal’s corridor network remains at risk unless immediate attention is given to enforcing land-use zoning, integrating wildlife-friendly infrastructure, and legally recognizing corridors as conservation units.

 Conservation Efforts and Progress

Nepal has made remarkable progress in corridor conservation through a multi-level approach involving government policy, grassroots engagement, and international collaboration. Major initiatives include:

 Terai Arc Landscape (TAL) Program:

·Initiated in 2001 by the Government of Nepal in collaboration with WWF and the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC).

·Aims to maintain and restore functional connectivity between 14 protected areas across Nepal and India.

·Includes habitat restoration, corridor delineation, and community-based conservation. Between 2009 and 2021, over 2.5 million trees were planted in key corridors and 1,500+ ha of degraded forest restored under the Hariyo Ban Program (WWF Nepal, 2021).

Community Forestry Initiatives:

·Nepal’s globally acclaimed Community Forestry Program covers over 2.9 million hectares and involves 22,000+ Community Forest User Groups (CFUGs).

·In TAL corridors, CFUGs play a crucial role in habitat protection, fire control, and corridor monitoring. Wildlife conservation is integrated with local livelihoods through eco-tourism, NTFPs (Non-Timber Forest Products), and payments for ecosystem services (PES).

·In the Khata Corridor, community forests were instrumental in maintaining tiger and elephant movement, reducing illegal logging, and increasing forest cover by over 30% in a decade (Yadav et al., 2020).

Transboundary Conservation with India:

·Regular joint tiger monitoring exercises (e.g., Chitwan–Valmiki and Shuklaphanta–Dudhwa) coordinated between Nepal’s DNPWC and India’s NTCA.

·Transboundary Elephant Corridors like Jhapa and Kanchanpur regions have been jointly prioritized for protection due to frequent elephant movements.

·These collaborations help harmonize anti-poaching patrols, share data (e.g., camera trap exchange), and synchronize wildlife census.

·Under SAWEN (South Asia Wildlife Enforcement Network), Nepal also cooperates on transboundary wildlife crime enforcement.

Wildlife-Friendly Infrastructure:

·Nepal is pioneering the development of wildlife underpasses, overpasses, and fencing in key corridors to reduce wildlife mortality on roads.

·In Parsa National Park, a dedicated underpass along the East-West Highway has reduced roadkill incidents by nearly 70%.

·In Barandabhar Corridor, the government is planning overpasses and noise barriers as part of highway expansion projects, incorporating findings from tiger movement studies (Lamichhane et al., 2019).

National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP):

·Adopted in 2014, Nepal’s NBSAP (2014–2020) commits to maintaining ecological connectivity by conserving and restoring wildlife corridors.

·Sets national targets aligned with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), including Target 11 (protected areas and connectivity) and Target 12 (prevent species extinction).

·Recognizes the role of local participation, Indigenous knowledge, and equitable benefit sharing in sustainable corridor management.

 The Way Forward: Recommendations to the Government of Nepal:

Based on extensive field research and observations across various Terai regions, I recommend that the Government of Nepal formally recognize and legally protect wildlife corridors within forest and land-use planning frameworks. Unlike national parks, these corridors currently lack clear legal status, which leaves them vulnerable to human encroachment and fragmentation. Integrating corridor boundaries into the Forest Act and Land Use Policy with strict regulations is essential to safeguard these critical habitats. Additionally, sustainable infrastructure development must be prioritized, ensuring that highways, railways, and hydropower projects include wildlife-friendly designs such as eco-bridges, underpasses, and overpasses to reduce wildlife mortality and maintain connectivity. Environmental Impact Assessments should explicitly evaluate the impacts on corridors before approving any projects. Strengthening scientific research and monitoring is also vital; therefore, the government should support long-term wildlife population studies, genetic research, and GIS-based habitat connectivity mapping, fostering data-sharing platforms to improve collaboration among conservationists and policymakers. Furthermore, local communities residing near corridors are key stakeholders and should be empowered through capacity-building, technical support, and benefit-sharing programs such as eco-tourism revenues. This will enhance community participation and reduce human-wildlife conflicts. Finally, corridor conservation must be mainstreamed into national development planning, requiring inter-ministerial coordination to balance socio-economic growth with biodiversity protection. Such an integrated approach will ensure sustainable landscape management, securing Nepal’s rich biodiversity for future generations.

 

References:

Acharya, K. P., Paudel, P. K., Jnawali, S. R., Neupane, P. R., & Köhl, M. (2016). Can forest fragmentation and configuration work as indicators of human–wildlife conflict? Evidence from human death and injury by wildlife attacks in Nepal. Ecological Indicators, 72, 661–670.

DNPWC (Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation). (2023). Annual Report 2022/23. Government of Nepal, Ministry of Forests and Environment.

Jnawali, S. R., Baral, H. S., Lee, S., Acharya, K. P., Upadhyay, G. P., Pandey, M., ... & Amin, R. (2011). The Status of Nepal’s Mammals: The National Red List Series. Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation.

Lamichhane, B. R., Persoon, G. A., Leirs, H., Poudyal, L. P., Subedi, N., Pokheral, C. P., ... & de Iongh, H. H. (2018). Spatio-temporal patterns of attacks on human and domestic animals by large mammals in Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Wildlife Research, 45(6), 512–519.

MoFE (Ministry of Forests and Environment). (2018). National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan 2014–2020. Government of Nepal.

Paudel, P. K., Baral, H. S., & Heinen, J. T. (2019). Conservation challenges in a small transboundary conservation landscape: The case of Shuklaphanta National Park, Nepal. Tropical Conservation Science, 12, 1–12.

Thapa, R., Wikramanayake, E., Jnawali, S. R., Malla, S., & Lamichhane, B. R. (2021). Landscape connectivity for large mammals in Nepal: Opportunities and challenges. PLOS ONE, 16(9), e0257555.