Road Ecology in an Urbanising World

Jones, Darryl; Bekker, Hans; Ree, Rodney van der

doi:10.1002/9781118568170.ch48

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, mitigation measures against WVC have been directed at wildlife, the engineering of roads especially verges, and various forms of warning about risk from general signage to contemporary warnings of greater immediacy [ 6 , 15 ]. Ultimately two parties come into play in a WVC.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The effect of roads on wildlife has evolved into the discipline of ‘road ecology’ [ 5 ]. There have been significant advances in identifying collision hotspots, the causes of wildlife vehicle collisions (WVC), and the ways in which these can be ameliorated, from the perspectives of both wildlife biologists and road engineers [ 6 , 7 ]. Animal movement patterns, density and road conditions are key determinants of WVC [ 8 ], however, driver behaviour, exposure and attitudes are also important and can strongly influence collision likelihood [ 9 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contradiction and Complacency Shape Attitudes towards the Toll of Roads on Wildlife

Ramp

Wilson

Croft

2016

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryMitigating the toll of roads on wildlife can become difficult when awareness and exposure does not result in willingness to change driving behaviour. Using a self-reporting questionnaire, we found that while most drivers view wildlife vehicle collisions as a serious issue, increasing exposure to collisions decreased this attitude and it did not translate into willingness to adopt additional mitigation strategies. In addition, despite most respondents stating they routinely drive slower when collision risk is high (at dusk and dawn), our assessment of driving trends via traffic speeds suggested this sentiment was not generally adhered to. We suggest that competing priorities and complacency when risk to people is low may adversely affect willingness to prevent collisions.AbstractMost people in the world now live in cities. Urbanisation simultaneously isolates people from nature and contributes to biodiversity decline. As cities expand, suburban development and the road infrastructure to support them widens their impact on wildlife. Even so, urban communities, especially those on the peri-urban fringe, endeavour to support biodiversity through wildlife friendly gardens, green spaces and corridors, and conservation estates. On one hand, many who live on city fringes do so because they enjoy proximity to nature, however, the ever increasing intrusion of roads leads to conflict with wildlife. Trauma (usually fatal) to wildlife and (usually emotional and financial) to people ensues. Exposure to this trauma, therefore, should inform attitudes towards wildlife vehicle collisions (WVC) and be linked to willingness to reduce risk of further WVC. While there is good anecdotal evidence for this response, competing priorities and better understanding of the likelihood of human injury or fatalities, as opposed to wildlife fatalities, may confound this trend. In this paper we sought to explore this relationship with a quantitative study of driver behaviour and attitudes to WVC from a cohort of residents and visitors who drive through a peri-urban reserve (Royal National Park) on the outskirts of Sydney, Australia. We distributed a self-reporting questionnaire and received responses from 105 local residents and 51 visitors to small townships accessed by roads through the national park. We sought the respondents’ exposure to WVC, their evasive actions in an impending WVC, their attitudes to wildlife fatalities, their strategies to reduce the risk of WVC, and their willingness to adopt new ameliorative measures. The results were partitioned by driver demographics and residency. Residents were generally well informed about mitigation strategies but exposure led to a decrease in viewing WVC as very serious. In addition, despite most respondents stating they routinely drive slower when collision risk is high (at dusk and dawn), our assessment of driving trends via traffic speeds suggested this sentiment was not generally adhered to. Thus we unveil some of the complexities in tackling driver’s willingness to act on reduc...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contradiction and Complacency Shape Attitudes towards the Toll of Roads on Wildlife

Ramp

Wilson

Croft

2016

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cross-disciplinary approaches and local stakeholder engagement have shown to be crucial for implementation and long-term success of conservation actions (e.g., Jones et al, 2015;White, 2015). In this regard it is encouraging news for conservation and a testament to the hard work of researchers who conserve their local habitats, that for 78% of the 23 papers (N = 18), the first author resides in the country of research, and an even higher percent (82%, 112 of the 136) of the total number of authors reside in-country.…”

Section: Geography Of Bridge Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A new window into canopy bridges as a mitigation strategy for arboreal mammals

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does wildlife crossing infrastructure work? A case study of three canopy-bridge designs and exclusion fencing from Moreton Bay Regional Council, Queensland

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although fauna crossing structures have been installed throughout the world, most studies have been of underpasses and overpasses. Canopy-bridges, however, have received much less attention. In addition, although exclusion fencing is used extensively, its effectiveness has rarely been assessed. Since 2015, Moreton Bay Regional Council (MBRC), in southern Queensland, Australia, has installed various mitigation structures at 21 sites. This study compared the use of different designs of canopy-bridge and assessed the effectiveness of exclusion fencing via camera monitoring and roadkill records. A total of 3151 detections of five arboreal species were made on the canopy-bridges at an average of 0.51 crossings per day for both rope cages and rope ladders and 0.64 on rope cages and 0.77 on rope ladders when a poorly used bridge of each type was excluded. A single aluminium ladder had 33 crossings (0.15 crossings per day) but was available for only a short time. Roadkill rates of all species declined by 84% at sites with underpasses and fencing compared to 93% at sites without, but only 39% at control sites. This may be due to the canopy-bridges or the addition of complementary infrastructure, such as signage, pavement stencilling and driver awareness.

show abstract

Road Ecology in an Urbanising World

Cited by 5 publications

References 8 publications

Contradiction and Complacency Shape Attitudes towards the Toll of Roads on Wildlife

Contradiction and Complacency Shape Attitudes towards the Toll of Roads on Wildlife

A new window into canopy bridges as a mitigation strategy for arboreal mammals

Does wildlife crossing infrastructure work? A case study of three canopy-bridge designs and exclusion fencing from Moreton Bay Regional Council, Queensland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About