Linear infrastructure drives habitat conversion and forest fragmentation associated with Marcellus shale gas development in a forested landscape

Abstract

Large, continuous forest provides critical habitat for some species of forest dependent wildlife. The rapid expansion of shale gas development within the northern Appalachians results in direct loss of such habitat at well sites, pipelines, and access roads; however the resulting habitat fragmentation surrounding such areas may be of greater importance. Previous research has suggested that infrastructure supporting gas development is the driver for habitat loss, but knowledge of what specific infrastructure affects habitat is limited by a lack of spatial tracking of infrastructure development in different land uses. We used high-resolution aerial imagery, land cover data, and well point data to quantify shale gas development across four time periods (2010, 2012, 2014, 2016), including: the number of wells permitted, drilled, and producing gas (a measure of pipeline development); land use change; and forest fragmentation on both private and public land. As of April 2016, the majority of shale gas development was located on private land (74% of constructed well pads); however, the number of wells drilled per pad was lower on private compared to public land (3.5 and 5.4, respectively). Loss of core forest was more than double on private than public land (4.3 and 2.0%, respectively), which likely results from better management practices implemented on public land. Pipelines were by far the largest contributor to the fragmentation of core forest due to shale gas development. Forecasting future land use change resulting from gas development suggests that the greatest loss of core forest will occur with pads constructed farthest from pre-existing pipelines (new pipelines must be built to connect pads) and in areas with greater amounts of core forest. To reduce future fragmentation, our results suggest new pads should be placed near pre-existing pipelines and methods to consolidate pipelines with other infrastructure should be used. Without these mitigation practices, we will continue to lose core forest as a result of new pipelines and infrastructure particularly on private land.

Quantifying methane emissions from natural gas production in north-eastern Pennsylvania

“…In PA, information on the location of a gathering pipeline elsewhere is only available where a gathering line crosses a stream or river. To account for gathering pipelines in the remainder of the state, a GIS model was created using Bradford County pipelines maps in addition to previously generated pipeline maps of Lycoming County (Langlois et al, 2017). A typical pattern was simulated, connecting pipelines between unconventional wells throughout the state (Fig.…”

Soil pH influences patterns of plant community composition after restoration with native‐based seed mixes

“…A disproportionate amount of that development will occur in the north‐central Appalachians across the states of Pennsylvania and West Virginia (Feijoo et al ). Transmission lines represent a significant portion of the shale oil and gas footprint (Langlois et al ), creating linear corridors of grass and shrublands across a landscape matrix that, in the eastern United States, is comprised predominantly of core, relatively undisturbed forest to a mix of forest, arable fields, and riparian buffers. Wildlife sensitive to forest fragmentation in the eastern United States will likely be affected by shale gas infrastructure (Kiviat ; Brittingham et al ).…”

Remote Sensing of Forest Structural Changes Due to the Recent Boom of Unconventional Shale Gas Extraction Activities in Appalachian Ohio

“…The forest image objects with more than 80% of their border connecting to non-forest were defined as patch forests, the forest image objects that were 100 meters away from any other landcover types were defined as core forests, the forest image objects within 100 m of outside non-forest landcover types were defined as forest edges, and the forest image objects within 100 m of inside non-forest landcover types were defined as perforated forests. These parameters were determined because of their extensive use in relevant habitat fragmentation studies [8]. After the classification of forest structure, the area statistics and percentage changes of each forest component were derived to analyze the change pattern of the forest structure, especially the areal loss of core forest.…”

“…The access roads commonly have a gravel surface and the landcover immediately adjacent to the access roads is changed. A buffer zone is determined with a width of 20 to 50 m along each pipeline between well pads, known as pipeline right-of-way (ROW) corridors [7,8]. Trees in pipeline ROW corridors are cut and cleared for the safety of the gathering pipelines.…”