I think one dilemma of nature preservation is that people with environmental concerns are concentrated in cities, because people are generally living in a higher density in cities.
This leads to protection areas being near to cities. They're usually small and hinder development. Mind that I specially mean protected zones for the sake of nature not as a recreation ground. Most rural places get no protection at all and people are more often seduced to harm much more nature for little own gain.
> Oslo’s “bee highway” aims to give the insects a safe passage through the city, lined with relays providing food and shelter – the first such system in the world, according to the organisers.
This reads like the bees are going somewhere? Like they are stopping off to feed on their way somewhere?
AFAIK bees have about a 3km forage radius from their hives - when the find food they bring it back to the hive.
I think the idea here is unbroken corridors of habitat through the city and suburbs. The highway metaphor only goes so far: no one thinks insects in quite the same way as freight trucks, but insects and wildlife have thrived for millions of years in continuous habitat, which we suddenly in the last 100 years have broken into tiny little chunks with huge barriers between them: mechanical, chemical, electromagnetic, etc. The result: extinction, and we are to blame.
If we are smart, we will build these corridors everywhere, and link them to large wilderness parks.
