Drivers and Consequences of Alternative Landscape Futures on Wildlife Distributions in New England, United States

Pearman-Gillman, Schuyler; Duveneck, Matthew J.; Murdoch, James D.; Donovan, Therese M.

doi:10.3389/fevo.2020.00164

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, all scenarios projected a decline in the spatial distribution for most species. The results highlighted uncertainty around species' futures in the New England region and raised questions about species vulnerability and resistance to future change [34].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We used maps of species probability of occurrence under recent conditions (2010) [62] and scenario simulated occurrence maps for the year 2060 [34] to evaluate changes in species occurrence probability under alternative future conditions. These maps were based on species distribution models (SDMs) developed by Pearman-Gillman et al [62].…”

Section: Objective 1-map Species Distribution Changementioning

confidence: 99%

“… Distribution change was projected for nine wildlife species between current (2010) conditions and each of the NELFP scenarios: A) Business-As-Usual, B) Connected Communities, C) Yankee Cosmopolitan, D) Go It Alone, and E) Growing Global. Maps display changes in species probability of occurrence, derived from simulated distribution maps for 2010 and 2060 (see [ 34 , 62 ] for more details). …”

Section: Supporting Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These scenarios provide spatial projections of climate, forest structure and composition, development, and agriculture, making them well suited for spatially explicit assessments of wildlife futures. A previous study by Pearman-Gillman et al [34] evaluated future distributions of harvested species under the NELFP scenarios and found Map of the New England region where wildlife species resistance to change was studied. The New England study region encompasses six states-Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont-and over 57,000 protected area parcels [28].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These scenarios provide spatial projections of climate, forest structure and composition, development, and agriculture, making them well suited for spatially explicit assessments of wildlife futures. A previous study by Pearman-Gillman et al [ 34 ] evaluated future distributions of harvested species under the NELFP scenarios and found that predicted distribution patterns varied considerably among the scenarios. However, all scenarios projected a decline in the spatial distribution for most species.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Wildlife resistance and protection in a changing New England landscape

Pearman-Gillman¹,

Duveneck²,

Murdoch³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapid changes in climate and land use threaten the persistence of wildlife species. Understanding where species are likely to occur now and in the future can help identify areas that are resistant to change over time and guide conservation planning. We estimated changes in species distribution patterns and spatial resistance in five future scenarios for the New England region of the northeastern United States. We present scenario-specific distribution change maps for nine harvested wildlife species, identifying regions of increasing, decreasing, or stable habitat suitability within each scenario. Next, we isolated areas where species occurrence probability is high (p > 0.7) and resistant to change across all future scenarios. Resistance was also evaluated relative to current land protection to identify patterns in and out of Protected Areas (PAs). Generally, species distributions declined in area over the 50year assessment period (2010-2060), with the greatest average declines occurring for moose (-40.9%) and wild turkey (-22.1%). Species resistance varied considerably across the region, with coyote demonstrating the highest average regional resistance (91.81% of the region) and moose demonstrating the lowest (0.76% of the region). At the state level, average focal species resistance was highest in Maine (the largest state) and lowest in Massachusetts. Many of the focal species showed high overlap in resistance and land protection. Coyote, white-tailed deer, and black bear had the highest probability of resistance, given protection, while moose and wild turkey had the highest probability of protection, given resistance. Overall, relatively small portions of New England-ranging between 0.25% and 21.12%-were both protected and resistant for the focal species. Our results provide estimates of resistance that can inform conservation planning for commonly harvested species that are important ecologically, economically, and culturally to the region. Expanding protected area coverage to include resistant areas may provide longer term benefits to these species.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Objective 1-map Species Distribution Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Supporting Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These scenarios provide spatial projections of climate, forest structure and composition, development, and agriculture, making them well suited for spatially explicit assessments of wildlife futures. A previous study by Pearman-Gillman et al [ 34 ] evaluated future distributions of harvested species under the NELFP scenarios and found that predicted distribution patterns varied considerably among the scenarios. However, all scenarios projected a decline in the spatial distribution for most species.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Wildlife resistance and protection in a changing New England landscape

Pearman-Gillman¹,

Duveneck²,

Murdoch³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Modeling the Impacts of Climate Change on Ecosystem Services in Boreal Forests

Hof

Lundström

Duveneck

2023

Advances in Global Change Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the increasing effects of climate change, a rapid development of effective approaches and tools are needed to maintain forest biodiversity and ecosystem functions. The response, or lack thereof, of forest managers to climate change and its impacts on ecosystem services will have broad ramifications. Here we give an overview of approaches used to predict impacts of climate change and management scenarios for a range of ecosystem services provided by the boreal forest, including timber supply, carbon sequestration, bioenergy provision, and habitat for wildlife and biodiversity. We provide examples of research in the field and summarize the outstanding challenges.

show abstract

The Geopolitics of Place: Framing Avenues for Activism

Locke

2023

Cultural Studies and Transdisciplinarity in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drivers and Consequences of Alternative Landscape Futures on Wildlife Distributions in New England, United States

Cited by 12 publications

References 76 publications

Wildlife resistance and protection in a changing New England landscape

Wildlife resistance and protection in a changing New England landscape

Modeling the Impacts of Climate Change on Ecosystem Services in Boreal Forests

The Geopolitics of Place: Framing Avenues for Activism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About