Can the effect of tall structures on birds be isolated from other aspects of development?

Walters, K.; Kosciuch, Karl L.; Jones, Jason

doi:10.1002/wsb.394

Cited by 26 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lesser prairie‐chicken avoidance of powerlines may be a result of neophobia, or an extreme fear or dislike for something new (Walters et al ). Lesser prairie‐chickens evolved in prairie landscapes that were mostly devoid of tall natural structures such as trees, as a consequence of limited rainfall and fire.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lesser prairie‐chicken space use in relation to anthropogenic structures

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Southern Great Plains has been altered by conversion of native grassland to row‐crop agriculture, which is considered the primary cause of declining lesser prairie‐chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) populations. However, recent analyses indicate that direct loss of grassland has slowed while lesser prairie‐chicken populations continue to decline, suggesting that remaining grasslands potentially suffer from degradation by various land uses (e.g., increased anthropogenic disturbance). Understanding the spatial ecology of lesser prairie‐chickens relative to anthropogenic structures is important for conservation planning, habitat management, and infrastructure mitigation. We investigated effects of proximity to anthropogenic structures on home range and nest placement (second‐order selection) and within home range space use (third‐order selection) of radio‐marked lesser prairie‐chickens (n = 285) at 2 scales of selection using resource utilization functions and resource selection functions. We collected data from birds marked in the Mixed‐Grass Prairie and Short‐Grass Prairie ecoregions of Kansas, USA, from 15 March 2013 to 14 March 2016. Home range placement did not vary by region or season, and lesser prairie‐chickens placed home ranges farther from powerlines and roads than would be expected at random. As distance increased from 0 to 3 km away from roads and powerlines, the relative probability of home range placement increased 1.66 and 1.54 times, respectively. Distance to powerline was the single most consistent variable negatively affecting nest placement. As the distance from powerline increased from 0 to 3 km, the relative probability of nest placement increased 2.19 times. Distance to oil well did not influence placement of home ranges or nests. When pooled across regions, lesser prairie‐chickens exhibited behavioral avoidance of powerlines, roads, and oil wells within their home range. Lesser prairie‐chickens, on average, used space at greater intensities within their home range farther from wells, powerlines, and roads than available. Across breeding season phases, we found no evidence of increased behavioral avoidance of anthropogenic structures during the nesting or brooding phases compared to the lekking or post‐breeding phases. Within home range space use during the brooding phase was not related to powerlines, wells, or roads. Our results indicate that avoidance of anthropogenic structures may result in functional habitat loss and continued fragmentation of remaining grassland habitat. Reduction or elimination of anthropogenic development in quality lesser prairie‐chicken habitat and concentrating new development in already altered areas that are avoided by lesser prairie‐chickens and no longer considered available habitat may reduce continued habitat degradation throughout the species’ range and aid in population persistence. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lesser prairie‐chicken space use in relation to anthropogenic structures

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reason why migratory soaring birds avoid wind turbines is still unclear. The fact that birds are displaced far beyond the areas occupied by the physical infrastructure of wind-power plants could be a consequence of neophobia, as turbines do not belong to their natural environment (Walters, Kosciuch, & Jones, 2014), but it could also be a consequence of earlier negative experiences, such as birds being caught in the airflow around turbines, or even witnessing fatalities of conspecifics. In addition, the functioning of wind turbines disturbs local airflow regimes (e.g., Magnusson & Smedman, 1999;Sorensen et al, 2015), which may compromise uplift generation.…”

Section: Close To Turbines Far From Turbinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wind turbines cause functional habitat loss for migratory soaring birds

Marques

Santos

Hanssen

et al. 2019

Journal of Animal Ecology

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Wind energy production has expanded to meet climate change mitigation goals, but negative impacts of wind turbines have been reported on wildlife. Soaring birds are among the most affected groups with alarming fatality rates by collision with wind turbines and an escalating occupation of their migratory corridors. These birds have been described as changing their flight trajectories to avoid wind turbines, but this behaviour may lead to functional habitat loss, as suitable soaring areas in the proximity of wind turbines will likely be underused. 2. We modelled the displacement effect of wind turbines on black kites (Milvus migrans) tracked by GPS. We also evaluated the impact of this effect at the scale of the landscape by estimating how much suitable soaring area was lost to wind turbines. 3. We used state-of-the-art tracking devices to monitor the movements of 130 black kites in an area populated by wind turbines, at the migratory bottleneck of the Strait of Gibraltar. Landscape use by birds was mapped from GPS data using dynamic Brownian bridge movement models, and generalized additive mixed modelling was used to estimate the effect of wind turbine proximity on bird use while accounting for orographic and thermal uplift availability. 4. We found that areas up to approximately 674 m away from the turbines were less used than expected given their uplift potential. Within that distance threshold, bird use decreased with the proximity to wind turbines. We estimated that the footprint of wind turbines affected 3%-14% of the areas suitable for soaring in our study area.

show abstract

“…The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) maintains that because prairie grouse evolved in habitats with little vertical structure, placement of tall man‐made structures (e.g., wind turbines) in occupied grouse habitats may result in a decrease in habitat suitability (USFWS ). However, most studies on breeding grouse have not isolated structure height from other potentially influencing factors, such as the occurrence of roads, other structures, and cultivation (Walters et al ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Greater sage‐grouse habitat selection, survival, and wind energy infrastructure

LeBeau

Johnson

Holloran³

et al. 2017

J Wildl Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing concern for environmental sustainability, the demand for domestic energy, and an impetus on reducing dependence on fossil fuels have led to substantial investment in renewable energies including wind energy over the last 2 decades. Increases in wind energy development are especially noticeable in prairie habitats with high wind capacity. This has raised concerns over effects on grouse species including greater sage‐grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). We monitored 346 female greater sage‐grouse via telemetry from 2009 to 2014 in southeastern Wyoming, within a control area and an area influenced by a wind energy development to estimate the potential effects of wind energy infrastructure on greater sage‐grouse habitat selection and demography. We developed resource selection functions by comparing habitats used to habitats available relative to the wind energy development during the nesting, brood‐rearing, and summer periods. In addition, we used survival models to estimate the variability in nest, brood, and female survival relative to the wind energy development. The relative probability of greater sage‐grouse selecting brood‐rearing and summer habitats decreased as percentage of surface disturbance associated with the facility infrastructure increased. We did not, however, detect a negative effect of the wind energy facility on nest site selection or on nest, brood‐rearing, or female survival during the study. Future wind energy developments should consider the potential effects of wind energy development on sage‐grouse habitat selection patterns and survival parameters ≤1.20 km from any occupied sage‐grouse nesting, brood‐rearing, or summer habitats. © 2017 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Can the effect of tall structures on birds be isolated from other aspects of development?

Cited by 26 publications

References 32 publications

Lesser prairie‐chicken space use in relation to anthropogenic structures

Lesser prairie‐chicken space use in relation to anthropogenic structures

Wind turbines cause functional habitat loss for migratory soaring birds

Greater sage‐grouse habitat selection, survival, and wind energy infrastructure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About