Global exposure of carnivores to roads

Ceia-Hasse, Ana; Borda‐de‐Água, Luís; Grilo, Clara; Pereira, Henrique M.

doi:10.1111/geb.12564

Cited by 92 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We expect the benefit of access management to cascade beyond grizzly bears to other wildlife negatively affected by roads (Benítez‐lópez et al., ; Ceia‐Hasse et al., ; Fahrig & Rytwinski, ). Many species are negatively affected by roads (Fahrig & Rytwinski, ); African lions ( Panthera leo ), wild dogs ( Lycaon pictus ), cats ( Felidae sp.)…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even for these species, despite their charismatic status and high conservation risk, dedicated habitat restoration and mortality reduction is required for long‐term persistence (Stephens, ). Mitigating the negative effect of roads on such species may require species‐specific road density thresholds (Ceia‐Hasse et al., ), which will vary by life history and susceptibility to road mortality and disturbance. Nevertheless, we expect the reduction of road densities and human access in high‐quality habitat to have positive results for wildlife.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Wilderness across the globe is being lost (Watson, Shanahan, Marco, Sanderson, & Mackey, ) with wildlife incurring a high demographic cost (Benítez‐lópez, Alkemade, & Verweij, ; Fahrig & Rytwinski, ). Increasing human–carnivore overlap as humans gain access into the remaining wilderness is elevating the cumulative pressures on carnivore populations (Ceia‐Hasse, Borda‐de‐Agua, Grilo, & Pereira, ); however, large‐scale carnivore recolonisation and human–carnivore coexistence are possible in human‐dominated landscapes when targeted conservation efforts relieve human pressures on carnivores (Chapron, Kaczensky, & Linnell, ). A landscape of global human–carnivore coexistence will require an understanding of the factors limiting carnivore populations and robust management actions to mitigate these factors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of habitat quality and access management on the density of a recovering grizzly bear population

Lamb

Mowat

Reid

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract1. Human activities have dramatic effects on the distribution and abundance of wildlife. Increased road densities and human presence in wilderness areas have elevated human-caused mortality of grizzly bears and reduced bears' use. Management agencies frequently attempt to reduce human-caused mortality by managing road density and thus human access, but the effectiveness of these actions is rarely assessed.2. We combined systematic, DNA-based mark-recapture techniques with spatially explicit capture-recapture models to estimate population size of a threatened grizzly bear population (Kettle-Granby), following management actions to recover this population. We tested the effects of habitat and road density on grizzly bear population density. We tested both a linear and threshold-based road density metric and investigated the effect of current access management (closing roads to the public).3. We documented an c. 50% increase in bear density since 1997 suggesting increased landscape and species conservation from management agencies played a significant role in that increase. However, bear density was lower where road densities exceeded 0.6 km/km 2 and higher where motorised vehicle access had been restricted. The highest bear densities were in areas with large tracts of few or no roads and high habitat quality. Access management bolstered bear density in small areas by 27%. Synthesis and applications.Our spatially explicit capture-recapture analysis demonstrates that population recovery is possible in a multi-use landscape when management actions target priority areas. We suggest that road density is a useful surrogate for the negative effects of human land use on grizzly bear populations, but spatial configuration of roads must still be considered. Reducing roads will increase grizzly bear density, but restricting vehicle access can also achieve this goal. We demonstrate that a policy target of reducing human access by managing road density below 0.6 km/km 2 , while ensuring areas of high habitat quality have no roads, is a reasonable compromise between the need for road access and population recovery goals. Targeting closures to areas of highest habitat quality would benefit grizzly bear population recovery the most.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of habitat quality and access management on the density of a recovering grizzly bear population

Lamb

Mowat

Reid

et al. 2018

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…4). Modelling approaches may also be useful to explore the demographic and genetic consequences of barrier effects induced by railways, and to disentangle barrier from mortality effects (Borda-deÁgua et al 2011(Borda-deÁgua et al , 2014Ceia-Hasse et al 2017). …”

Section: Railways Travel Towards Environmental Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s Next? Railway Ecology in the 21st Century

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predicting is very difficult, especially about the future, attributed to Niels Bohr.Abstract As societies realise the importance of maintaining biodiversity and, accordingly, acknowledge the need for monitoring, minimizing and compensating the impacts of socioeconomic activities, including transportation, more scientists will be called to address these societal challenges. Railway Ecology is emerging in this context as a relatively new field to identify and provide solutions to the specific environmental problems associated with the building and operation of railways, particularly their impacts on wildlife. This is an interdisciplinary field that uses and draws methods from other disciplines, ranging from ecology and genetics, to statistics and computer simulations. Here, we summarize the guidelines to address railway-related biodiversity conservation problems as they were identified in the several chapters of this book, and recommend lines for future research.

show abstract

“…The influence of humans on large carnivore populations is a worldwide conservation concern. The number of terrestrial mammalian carnivores threatened by exposure to roads in particular is increasing across the globe, with Asia and North America being hotspots for species at risk (Ceia‐Hasse, Borda‐de‐Agua, Grilo & Pereira, ). Humans can also have indirect effects on ecosystems by influencing carnivore distribution and abundance (also including wolves', Canis lupus , Figure ), which in turn can induce changes in prey distribution, herbivory, and vegetation (Ripple et al, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional response of wolves to human development across boreal North America

Muhly

Johnson

Hebblewhite

et al. 2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The influence of humans on large carnivores, including wolves, is a worldwide conservation concern. In addition, human‐caused changes in carnivore density and distribution might have impacts on prey and, indirectly, on vegetation. We therefore tested wolf responses to infrastructure related to natural resource development (i.e., human footprint). Location Our study provides one of the most extensive assessments of how predators like wolves select habitat in response to various degrees of footprint across boreal ecosystems encompassing over a million square kilometers of Canada. Methods We deployed GPS‐collars on 172 wolves, monitored movements and used a generalized functional response (GFR) model of resource selection. A functional response in habitat selection occurs when selection varies as a function of the availability of that habitat. GFRs can clarify how human‐induced habitat changes are influencing wildlife across large, diverse landscapes. Results Wolves displayed a functional response to footprint. Wolves were more likely to select forest harvest cutblocks in regions with higher cutblock density (i.e., a positive functional response to high‐quality habitats for ungulate prey) and to select for higher road density in regions where road density was high (i.e., a positive functional response to human‐created travel routes). Wolves were more likely to use cutblocks in habitats with low road densities, and more likely to use roads in habitats with low cutblock densities, except in winter when wolves were more likely to use roads regardless of cutblock density. Main conclusions These interactions suggest that wolves trade‐off among human‐impacted habitats, and adaptively switch from using roads to facilitate movement (while also risking encounters with humans), to using cutblocks that may have higher ungulate densities. We recommend that conservation managers consider the contextual and interacting effects of footprints when assessing impacts on carnivores. These effects likely have indirect impacts on ecosystems too, including on prey species.

show abstract

Global exposure of carnivores to roads

Cited by 92 publications

References 37 publications

Effects of habitat quality and access management on the density of a recovering grizzly bear population

Effects of habitat quality and access management on the density of a recovering grizzly bear population

What’s Next? Railway Ecology in the 21st Century

Functional response of wolves to human development across boreal North America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About