Wildlife need connected habitats to move across the landscape to meet foraging needs, reproduce and establish new territories. Increasingly, habitat areas are lost due to conversion to alternative uses such as agriculture or urban development and being carved into pieces by roads and other transportation infrastructure. Roads are considered a major contributor to habitat fragmentation particularly as they are long, linear features prevalent throughout the landscape. The potential barriers species encounter and interact with on the landscape, such as roads or fences, could be permeable to some species and a near complete barrier to others. This creates a challenge when conservation professionals work on methods to plan for enhancing and preserving connectivity across the landscape.
While roads can present weak to complete barriers to wildlife, depending on the animal and traffic volume, mitigations such as under-crossings and green bridges on highways at least partially increase the permeability of the landscape to some of these species. The few studies evaluating the effectiveness of these structures for at least three years typically focused on a single species. Here, we monitored the crossing structure under Boeckman Road, in Wilsonville Oregon, for wildlife activity across summer seasons for ten years, since construction of the road and subsequent opening to traffic. This long-term multi-species dataset, which includes monitoring when the road was closed to traffic has provided a unique opportunity. Wildlife activity was collected using sand track pads monitored during summer seasons from 2009 to 2018. Wildlife activity showed a significant community level response from year to year and species-specific responses to year, vegetation change, disturbance, detection area, and previous experimental additions of artificial light. Black-tailed deer showed a significant negative association with disturbance, i.e. the presence of traffic and construction activity. Average annual detections of coyote, bullfrog, cottontail rabbit, and eastern gray squirrel demonstrate a dramatic but not significant response to the road closure period. In addition, it appears that the transition between species with preferences for lower canopy cover, and those preferring greater canopy cover, co-occurs with the road closure period, particularly in 2013. This is also the year that invasive plant management activities (mowing and spraying) stopped. Long-term studies such as this one can help researchers and managers design monitoring programs to best account for variable responses over time by documenting changes in use and working to identify covariates and interactive effects that may be driving those changes. Managers working on projects where vegetation disturbance or restoration is being conducted next to crossing structures may decide to delay monitoring until vegetation communities and/or habituation responses have had time to stabilize, avoiding erroneous conclusions about structure use.
Roads create barriers to animal movement through collisions and habitat fragmentation. Investigators have attempted to use traffic volume, the number of vehicles passing a point on a road segment, to predict effects to wildlife populations approximately linearly and along taxonomic lines; however, taxonomic groupings cannot provide sound predictions because closely related species often respond differently. We assess the role of wildlife behavioral responses to traffic volume as a tool to predict barrier effects from vehicle-caused mortality and avoidance, to provide an early warning system that recognizes traffic volume as a trigger for mitigation, and to better interpret roadkill data. We propose four categories of behavioral response based on the perceived danger to traffic: Nonresponders, Pausers, Speeders, and Avoiders. Nonresponders attempt to cross highways regardless of traffic volume. Pausers stop in the face of danger so have a low probability of successful crossing when traffic volume increases. Hence, highway barrier effects are primarily due to mortality for Nonresponders and Pausers at high traffic volumes. Speeders run away from danger but are unable to do so successfully as traffic volume increases. At moderate to high volume, Speeders are repelled by traffic danger. Avoiders face lower mortality than other categories because they begin to avoid traffic at relatively low traffic volumes. Hence, avoidance causes barrier effects more than mortality for Speeders and Avoiders even at relatively moderate traffic volumes. By considering a species’ risk-avoidance response to traffic, managers can make more appropriate and timely decisions to mitigate effects before populations decline or become locally extinct.
Barriers to animal movement can isolate populations, impacting their genetic diversity, susceptibility to disease, and access to resources. Barriers to movement may be caused by artificial light, but few studies have experimentally investigated the effects of artificial light on movement for a suite of terrestrial vertebrates. Therefore, we studied the effect of ecological light pollution on animal usage of a bridge under-road passage structure. (Abstract shortened by ProQuest.)
|Advisor:||Rivera, Catherine E. de|
|Commitee:||Eppley, Sarah, Lafrenz, Martin, Taylor-Rodriguez, Daniel|
|School:||Portland State University|
|School Location:||United States -- Oregon|
|Source:||DAI-B 80/08(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Wildlife Conservation, Ecology|
|Keywords:||Artificial light impacts, Habitat connectivity, Road ecology, Surrogate species, Wildlife communities, Wildlife conservation|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be