Rescaling the Human Footprint: A tool for conservation planning at an ecoregional scale

Woolmer, Gillian; Trombulak, Stephen C.; Ray, Justina C.; Doran, Patrick J.; Anderson, Mark; Baldwin, Robert F.; Morgan, Alexis; Sanderson, Eric W.

doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.04.005

Cited by 142 publications

(147 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

139

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Woolmer et al (2008) rescaled the human footprint methodology of the Sanderson et al (2002) for the area of approximately 300,000 km 2 of the Northern Appalachian ecoregion. They used ten datasets compiled from several sources: population density, dwelling density, urban areas, roads, rail, land cover, large dams, watersheds, mine sites, utility corridors for the electrical power infrastructure.…”

Section: Measuring and Mapping Wilderness-a Brief Review Of Metrics Amentioning

confidence: 99%

European Wilderness in a Time of Farmland Abandonment

Ceauşu

Carver²,

Verburg

et al. 2015

Rewilding European Landscapes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Measuring and Mapping Wilderness-a Brief Review Of Metrics Amentioning

confidence: 99%

European Wilderness in a Time of Farmland Abandonment

Ceauşu

Carver²,

Verburg

et al. 2015

Rewilding European Landscapes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The refinement of these zoning plans would greatly benefit from more detailed estimates of the imprint of infrastructure on wildlife populations. Human footprint models combine spatial data regarding human activities with assessments of their effects to estimate their overall impact (11)(12)(13). The burgeoning availability of detailed geospatial layers of infrastructure contrasts with the lack of quantification of their effects, which still relies on expert knowledge and is mostly based on single species or local studies (14).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing large-scale wildlife responses to human infrastructure development

Torres

Jaeger

Alonso

2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

181

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Habitat loss and deterioration represent the main threats to wildlife species, and are closely linked to the expansion of roads and human settlements. Unfortunately, large-scale effects of these structures remain generally overlooked. Here, we analyzed the European transportation infrastructure network and found that 50% of the continent is within 1.5 km of transportation infrastructure. We present a method for assessing the impacts from infrastructure on wildlife, based on functional response curves describing density reductions in birds and mammals (e.g., road-effect zones), and apply it to Spain as a case study. The imprint of infrastructure extends over most of the country (55.5% in the case of birds and 97.9% for mammals), with moderate declines predicted for birds (22.6% of individuals) and severe declines predicted for mammals (46.6%). Despite certain limitations, we suggest the approach proposed is widely applicable to the evaluation of effects of planned infrastructure developments under multiple scenarios, and propose an internationally coordinated strategy to update and improve it in the future.anthropogenic development | birds | Europe | mammals | road-effect zone

show abstract

“…Recent estimates suggest that approximately 20% of global terrestrial ecosystems have minimal human impact (Sanderson et al 2002a;Woolmer et al 2008). While we have traditionally relied upon protected areas for biodiversity conservation, global protected areas coverage are 4.06% for marine environments and 14.36% for terrestrial ecosystems (WDPA 2008).…”

Section: Protecting Sensitive Species Where People Live and Workmentioning

confidence: 99%