Conservation of wildlife populations: factoring in incremental disturbance
Abstract Progressive anthropogenic disturbance can alter ecosystem organization potentially causing shifts from one stable state to another. This potential for ecosystem shifts must be considered when establishing targets and objectives for conservation. We ask whether a predator–prey system respons...
| Published in: | Ecology and Evolution |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3015 https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1002%2Fece3.3015 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/ece3.3015 |
| Summary: | Abstract Progressive anthropogenic disturbance can alter ecosystem organization potentially causing shifts from one stable state to another. This potential for ecosystem shifts must be considered when establishing targets and objectives for conservation. We ask whether a predator–prey system response to incremental anthropogenic disturbance might shift along a disturbance gradient and, if it does, whether any disturbance thresholds are evident for this system. Development of linear corridors in forested areas increases wolf predation effectiveness, while high density of development provides a safe‐haven for their prey. If wolves limit moose population growth, then wolves and moose should respond inversely to land cover disturbance. Using general linear model analysis, we test how the rate of change in moose ( Alces alces ) density and wolf ( Canis lupus ) harvest density are influenced by the rate of change in land cover and proportion of land cover disturbed within a 300,000 km 2 area in the boreal forest of Alberta, Canada. Using logistic regression, we test how the direction of change in moose density is influenced by measures of land cover change. In response to incremental land cover disturbance, moose declines occurred where <43% of land cover was disturbed; in such landscapes, there were high rates of increase in linear disturbance and wolf density increased. By contrast, moose increases occurred where >43% of land cover was disturbed and wolf density declined. Wolves and moose appeared to respond inversely to incremental disturbance with the balance between moose decline and wolf increase shifting at about 43% of land cover disturbed. Conservation decisions require quantification of disturbance rates and their relationships to predator–prey systems because ecosystem responses to anthropogenic disturbance shift across disturbance gradients. |
|---|