Abstract
To monitor the extent and impact of human disturbances on landscapes and wildlife, managers often estimate zones of influence. Traditionally, zones of influence have been defined with constant width buffers around a disturbance; however, the importance of incorporating variation in landscape contexts and species responses is increasingly recognized. One way to better develop and apply these zones of influence is to understand the mechanisms of animal response to disturbance by examining their sensory detection. We explored the role of perception in wildlife responses to disturbances using a case study with grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) and roads in Alberta, Canada. Our objectives were, first, to model viewsheds and soundscapes around roads and, second, to determine the effect of road perception on grizzly bear movement patterns and build context-specific zones of influence for grizzly bears around roads. Results indicate that zones of influence varied widely between the standard buffer approach and our novel approach based on animal perception. In addition, response distances of bears to roads were greater in areas where roads were perceptible than areas where roads were imperceptible. Estimating a perceptual zone of influence allows managers to prioritize areas for mitigating human disturbances. Our methods may be applied to new disturbances, areas, and species. We recommend measures of perception be used to create more biologically and geographically relevant zones of influence for wildlife.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aben J, Pellikka P, Travis JMJ (2018) A call for viewshed ecology: advancing our understanding of the ecology of information through viewshed analysis. Methods Ecol Evol 9:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12902
Alonso JC, Álvarez-Martínez JM, Palacín C (2012) Leks in ground-displaying birds: hotspots or safe places? Behav Ecol 23:491–501. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arr215
Aspbury AS, Gibson RM (2004) Long-range visibility of greater sage grouse leks: a GIS-based analysis. Anim Behav 67:1127–1132. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANBEHAV.2003.06.021
Avgar T, Deardon R, Fryxell JM (2013) An empirically parameterized individual based model of animal movement, perception, and memory. Ecol Model 251:158–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.12.002
Babish G (2000) Geostatistics without tears: a practical guide to geostatistics, variograms, and kriging, 4.60. Environment Canada, Regina
Benítez-López A, Alkemade R, Verweij PA (2010) The impacts of roads and other infrastructure on mammal and bird populations: a meta-analysis. Biol Conserv 143:1307–1316
Boarman WI, Sazaki M (2006) A highway’s road-effect zone for desert tortoises (Gopherus agassizii). J Arid Environ 65:94–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2005.06.020
Bolton DK, Coops NC, Hermosilla T, Wulder MA, White JC, Ferster CJ (2019) Uncovering regional variability in disturbance trends between parks and greater park ecosystems across Canada (1985–2015). Sci Rep 9:1323. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-37265-4
Boulanger J, Stenhouse G (2014) The impact of roads on the demography of grizzly bears in Alberta. PLoS One 9:e115535. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115535
Boulanger J, Poole KG, Gunn A, Wierzchowski J (2012) Estimating the zone of influence of industrial developments on wildlife: a migratory caribou Rangifer tarandus groenlandicus and diamond mine case study. Wildlife Biol 18:164–179. https://doi.org/10.2981/11-045
Brown CL, Hardy AR, Barber JR, Fristrup KM, Crooks KR, Angeloni LM (2012) The effect of human activities and their associated noise on ungulate behavior. PLoS One 7:e40505. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0040505
Buchanan CB, Beck JL, Bills TE, Miller SN (2014) Seasonal resource selection and distributional response by elk to development of a natural gas field. Rangel Ecol Manag 67:369–379. https://doi.org/10.2111/REM-D-13-00136.1
Burton AC, Huggard D, Bayne EM, Schieck J, Sólymos P, Muhly T, Farr D, Boutin S (2014) A framework for adaptive monitoring of the cumulative effects of human footprint on biodiversity. Environ Monit Assess 186:3605–3617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-014-3643-7
Camp RJ, Sinton DT, Knight RL (1997) Viewsheds: a complementary management approach to buffer zones. Wildl Soc Bull 25:612–615
Cattet MRL, Christison K, Caulkett NA, Stenhouse GB (2013) Physiologic responses of grizzly bears to different methods of capture. J Wildl Dis 39:649–654. https://doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-39.3.649
CEAA (2012) Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency - Policy and Guidance - Cumulative Effects Assessment Practitioners’ Guide. https://www.ceaa.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=43952694-1&offset=7&toc=hide. Accessed 14 Aug 2019
Clevenger AP, Wierzchowski J (2006) Maintaining and restoring connectivity in landscapes fragmented by roads. In: Crooks KR, Sanjayan M (eds) Connectivity conservation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 502–535
Coffin AW (2007) From roadkill to road ecology: a review of the ecological effects of roads. J Transp Geogr 15:396–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTRANGEO.2006.11.006
Coops NC, Tompaski P, Nijland W, Rickbeil GJM, Nielsen SE, Bater CW, Stadt JJ (2016) A forest structure habitat index based on airborne laser scanning data. Ecol Indic 67:346–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2016.02.057
Cristescu B, Stenhouse GB, Symbaluk M et al (2016) Wildlife habitat selection on landscapes with industrial disturbance. Environ Conserv 43:327–336. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892916000217
Davies AB, Tambling CJ, Kerley GIH, Asner GP (2016) Effects of vegetation structure on the location of lion kill sites in African thicket. PLoS One 11:e0149098. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149098
Fagan WF, Gurarie E, Bewick S, Howard A, Cantrell RS, Cosner C (2017) Perceptual ranges, information gathering, and foraging success in dynamic landscapes. Am Nat 189:474–489. https://doi.org/10.1086/691099
Festa-Bianchet M (2010) Status of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) in Alberta: update 2010, Edmonton, AB
Fisher P (1994) Probable and fuzzy models of the viewshed operation. Innov GIS 1:161–175. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203481851-23
Forman RTT, Deblinger RD (2000) The ecological road-effect zone of a Massachusetts (U.S.A.) suburban highway. Conserv Biol 14:36–46. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.99088.x
Frid A, Dill L (2002) Human-caused disturbance stimuli as a form of predation risk. Ecol Soc 6:. doi: https://doi.org/10.5751/es-00404-060111
Gnieser CH (2000) Ecological consequences of recreation on subarctic-Alpine tundra: experimental assessment and predictive modeling as planning tools for sustainable visitor management in protected areas. University of Calgary
Graham K, Stenhouse GB (2014) Home range, movements and denning chronology of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) in west-central Alberta. Can Field-Naturalist 128:223–234
Graham K, Boulanger J, Duval J, Stenhouse G (2010) Spatial and temporal use of roads by grizzly bears in west-central Alberta. Ursus 21:43–56. https://doi.org/10.2192/09GR010.1
Harrison RT, Clark RN, Stankey GH (1980) Predicting impact of noise on recreationists. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service
Hermosilla T, Wulder MA, White JC, Coops NC, Hobart GW, Campbell LB (2016) Mass data processing of time series Landsat imagery: pixels to data products for forest monitoring. Int J Digit Earth 9:1035–1054. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2016.1187673
Hermosilla T, Wulder MA, White JC, Coops NC, Hobart GW (2017) Updating Landsat time series of surface-reflectance composites and forest change products with new observations. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 63:104–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAG.2017.07.013
Hermosilla T, Wulder MA, White JC, Coops NC, Hobart GW (2018) Disturbance-informed annual land cover classification maps of Canada’s forested ecosystems for a 29-year Landsat time series. Can J Remote Sens 44:67–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/07038992.2018.1437719
Jung J, Olsen MJ, Hurwitz DS, Kashani AG, Buker K (2018) 3D virtual intersection sight distance analysis using lidar data. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 86:563–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.12.004
Kalansuriya CM, Pannila AS, Sonnadara DUJ (2009) Effect of roadside vegetation on the reduction of traffic noise levels. Proc Tech Sess 25:1–6
Kearney SP, Coops NC, Sethi S, Stenhouse GB (2020) Maintaining accurate, current, rural road network data: an extraction and updating routine using RapidEye, participatory GIS and deep learning. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 87:102031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2019.102031
Kelly SM (2013) A model for predicting highway noise using a geographic information system: interstate 73 in Guilford County, North Carolina. University of North Carolina
Keyel AC, Reed SE (2017) Sound mapping tools: an ArcGIS toolbox for modeling the propagation of sounds in a wildland setting. Fort Collins
Kite RO, Nelson TA, Stenhouse GB, Darimont C (2016) A movement-driven approach to quantifying grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) near-road movement patterns in west-central Alberta, Canada. Biol Conserv 195:24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.12.020
Lawson RR, Fogarty DT, Loss SR (2019) Use of visual and olfactory sensory cues by an apex predator in deciduous forests. Can J Zool 97:488–494. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjz-2018-0134
Libal NS (2011) Thermoregulation, risk, and den stability influence grizzly bear den-site selection. Mississippi State University
Llobera M (2003) Extending GIS-based visual analysis: the concept of visualscapes. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 17:25–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/713811741
Loarie SR, Tambling CJ, Asner GP (2013) Lion hunting behaviour and vegetation structure in an African savanna. Anim Behav 85:899–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.01.018
Matlack GR (1994) Vegetation dynamics of the forest edge—trends in space and successional time. J Ecol 82:113. https://doi.org/10.2307/2261391
Mattson DJ, Knight RR, Blanchard BM (1987) The effects of developments and primary roads on grizzly bear habitat use in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Bears Their Biol Manag 7:259. https://doi.org/10.2307/3872633
McClure CJW, Ware HE, Carlisle JD, Barber JR (2017) Noise from a phantom road experiment alters the age structure of a community of migrating birds. Anim Conserv 20:164–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12302
McDermid GJ, Franklin SE, LeDrew EF (2005) Remote sensing for large-area habitat mapping. Prog Phys Geogr 29:449–474
Mclellan BN, Shackleton DM (1973) Immediate reactions of grizzly bears to human activities. Wildl Soc Bull 17:269–274. https://doi.org/10.5565/PUBLMAT
Medinas D, Ribeiro V, Marques JT, Silva B, Barbosa AM, Rebelo H, Mira A (2019) Road effects on bat activity depend on surrounding habitat type. Sci Total Environ 660:340–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.01.032
Montgomery RA, Roloff GJ, Millspaugh JJ (2012) Importance of visibility when evaluating animal response to roads. Wildlife Biol 18:393–405. https://doi.org/10.2981/11-123
Morales JM, Haydon DT, Frair J, Holsinger KE, Fryxell JM (2004) Extracting more out of relocation data: building movement models as mixtures of random walks. Ecology 85:2436–2445. https://doi.org/10.1890/03-0269
Murgoitio JJ, Shrestha R, Glenn NF, Spaete LP (2013) Improved visibility calculations with tree trunk obstruction modeling from aerial lidar. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 27:1865–1883. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2013.767460
National Research Council (2005) Assessing and managing the ecological impacts of paved roads. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
Ndaimani H, Murwira A, Kativu S (2013) Comparing terrain and vegetation-based visibility for explaining sable flight behaviour in a Southern African savanna. Geocarto Int 28:130–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2012.677481
Nielsen SE, Boyce MS, Stenhouse GB (2004) Grizzly bears and forestry: I. Selection of clearcuts by grizzly bears in west-central Alberta, Canada. For Ecol Manag 199:51–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FORECO.2004.04.014
Northrup JM, Pitt J, Muhly TB, Stenhouse GB, Musiani M, Boyce MS (2012) Vehicle traffic shapes grizzly bear behaviour on a multiple-use landscape. J Appl Ecol 49:1159–1167. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02180.x
Oldershaw K (2001) The influence of timber harvest activities on visual hiding cover for grizzly bears: Kananaskis Country, Alberta. University of Calgary
Ordiz A, Støen O-G, Delibes M, Swenson JE (2011) Predators or prey? Spatio-temporal discrimination of human-derived risk by brown bears. Oecologia 166:59–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-011-1920-5
Ow LF, Ghosh S (2017) Urban cities and road traffic noise: reduction through vegetation. Appl Acoust 120:15–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APACOUST.2017.01.007
Penteriani V, Vicente López-Bao J, Bettega C et al (2016) Consequences of brown bear viewing tourism: a review. Biol Conserv 206:169–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.12.035
Polfus JL, Hebblewhite M, Heinemeyer K (2011) Identifying indirect habitat loss and avoidance of human infrastructure by northern mountain woodland caribou. Biol Conserv 144:2637–2646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.07.023
Proctor MF, McLellan BN, Stenhouse GB et al (2020) Effects of roads and motorized human access on grizzly bear populations in British Columbia and Alberta, Canada. Ursus 2019(30e2):16–39. https://doi.org/10.2192/ursus-d-18-00016.2
R Core Team (2019) R: a language and environment for statistical computing
Reed SE, Boggs JL, Mann JP (2012) A GIS tool for modeling anthropogenic noise propagation in natural ecosystems. Environ Model Softw 37:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.04.012
Roever CL, Boyce MS, Stenhouse G (2008) Grizzly bears and forestry. II: grizzly bear habitat selection and conflicts with road placement. For Ecol Manag 256:1262–1269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2008.06.006
Roever CL, Boyce MS, Stenhouse GB (2010) Grizzly bear movements relative to roads: application of step selection functions. Ecography (Cop) 33:1113–1122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06077.x
Schwartz CC, Miller SD, Haroldson MA (2003) Grizzly bear. In: Feldhamer GA, Thompson BC, Chapman JA (eds) Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and conservation. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, pp 556–586
Shanley CS, Pyare S (2011) Evaluating the road-effect zone on wildlife distribution in a rural landscape. Ecosphere 2:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES10-00093.1
Shannon G, McKenna MF, Angeloni LM et al (2016) A synthesis of two decades of research documenting the effects of noise on wildlife. Biol Rev 91:982–1005. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12207
Skov-Petersen H, Snizek B (2007) To see or not to see: assessment of probabilistic visibility. 10th Agil Int Conf Geogr Inf Sci 1–12
Stenhouse GB, Boulanger J, Efford M, et al. (2015) Estimates of grizzly bear population size and density for the 2014 Alberta Yellowhead Population Unit (BMA 3) and South Jasper National Park
Tablado Z, Jenni L (2017) Determinants of uncertainty in wildlife responses to human disturbance. Biol Rev 92:216–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12224
Torres A, Jaeger JAG, Alonso JC (2016) Assessing large-scale wildlife responses to human infrastructure development 113:. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1522488113
Turner MG, Gardner RH (2015) Landscape ecology in theory and practice, 2nd edn. Springer, New York
Vors LS, Schaffer JA, Pond BA et al (2007) Woodland Caribou extirpation and anthropogenic landscape disturbance in Ontario. J Wildl Manag 71:1249–1256. https://doi.org/10.2193/2006-263
Ware HE, McClure CJW, Carlisle JD, Barber JR (2015) A phantom road experiment reveals traffic noise is an invisible source of habitat degradation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112:12105–12109. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1504710112
Whittington J, Low P, Hunt B (2019) Temporal road closures improve habitat quality for wildlife. Sci Rep 9:3772. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40581-y
Wilson SF (2016) Managing zone-of-influence effects of oil and gas activities on terrestrial wildlife and habitats in British Columbia. J Ecosyst Manag 16
Wood G (2000) Is what you see what you get? Post-development auditing of methods used for predicting the zone of visual influence in EIA. Environ Impact Assess Rev 20:537–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(00)00055-X
Acknowledgements
We thank fRI Research located in Hinton, Alberta, for all their support in collecting bear GPS collar data and the many biologists involved in collecting and compiling field data. We also thank the many partners who supported the project over many years and thus allowed long-term datasets. Sean Kearney provided guidance in the shaping of the project. Additional thanks to Sean Kearney, Piotr Tompalski, and Maegan Poblacion for their help with programming and/or figure creation.
Funding
This research was supported by the Grizzly-PAW project (NSERC File: CRDPJ 486175 – 15, Grantee: N.C. Coops, FRM, UBC), in collaboration with fRI Research and FRIAA, Alberta Newsprint Company, Canfor, Cenovus, Repsol, Seven Generations Energy, Shell Canada, TransCanada Pipelines, Teck Resources, West Fraser, Westmoreland Coal, and Weyerhauser. More information can be found at http://paw.forestry.ubc.ca/.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Road Ecology
Guest Editor: Marcello D’Amico
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Parsons, B.M., Coops, N.C., Stenhouse, G.B. et al. Building a perceptual zone of influence for wildlife: delineating the effects of roads on grizzly bear movement. Eur J Wildl Res 66, 53 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-020-01390-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-020-01390-1