Premium
An adaptive plan for prioritizing road sections for fencing to reduce animal mortality
Author(s) -
Spanowicz Ariel G.,
Teixeira Fernanda Zimmermann,
Jaeger Jochen A. G.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
conservation biology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.2
H-Index - 222
eISSN - 1523-1739
pISSN - 0888-8892
DOI - 10.1111/cobi.13502
Subject(s) - fencing , fence (mathematics) , wildlife , geography , biodiversity , scale (ratio) , environmental resource management , ecology , environmental science , cartography , computer science , biology , engineering , structural engineering , parallel computing
Abstract Mortality of animals on roads is a critical threat to many wildlife populations and is poised to increase strongly because of ongoing and planned road construction. If these new roads cannot be avoided, effective mitigation measures will be necessary to stop biodiversity decline. Fencing along roads effectively reduces roadkill and is often used in combination with wildlife passages. Because fencing the entire road is not always possible due to financial constraints, high‐frequency roadkill areas are often identified to inform the placement of fencing. We devised an adaptive fence‐implementation plan to prioritize road sections for fencing. In this framework, areas along roads of high, moderate, and low levels of animal mortality (respectively, roadkill hotspots, warmspots, and coldspots) are identified at multiple scales (i.e., in circles of different diameters [200–2000 m] in which mortality frequency is measured). Fence deployment is based on the relationship between the amount of fencing being added to the road, starting with the strongest roadkill hotspots, and potential reduction in road mortality (displayed in mortality‐reduction graphs). We applied our approach to empirical and simulated spatial patterns of wildlife–vehicle collisions. The scale used for analysis affected the number and spatial extent of roadkill hot‐, warm‐, and coldspots. At fine scales (e.g., 200 m), more hotspots were identified than at coarse scales (e.g., 2000 m), but combined the fine‐scale hotspots covered less road and less fencing was needed to reduce road mortality. However, many short fences may be less effective in practice due to a fence‐end effect (i.e., animals moving around the fence more easily), resulting in a trade‐off between few long and many short fences, which we call the FLOMS (few‐long‐or‐many‐short) fences trade‐off. Thresholds in the mortality‐reduction graphs occurred for some roadkill patterns, but not for others. Thresholds may be useful to consider when determining road‐mitigation targets. The existence of thresholds at multiple scales and the FLOMS trade‐off have important implications for biodiversity conservation.