When we think of injuring nature, it is easy to point an accusing finger at mining companies and their strip mines or timber barons and their clear-cuts. But could something as mellow as backcountry skiing or a Thoreauvian walk in the woods cause harm, too?
More and more studies over the last 15 years have found that when we visit the great outdoors, we have much more of an effect than we realize. Even seemingly low-impact activities like hiking, cross-country skiing and bird-watching often affect wildlife, from bighorn sheep to wolves, birds, amphibians and tiny invertebrates, and in subtle ways.
Impacts from outdoor recreation and tourism are the fourth-leading reason that species are listed by the federal government as threatened or endangered, behind threats from nonnative species, urban growth and agriculture.
[snip]
You’d be surprised by the ripples left by a day-hiker’s ramble through the woods. In 2008 Sarah Reed, an associate conservation scientist at the Wildlife Conservation Society, and her colleagues found fivefold declines in detections of bobcats, coyotes and other midsize carnivores in protected areas in California that allowed quiet recreation activities like hiking, compared with protected areas that prohibited those activities.
“That is the kind of difference that you don’t see often in ecological studies,” Dr. Reed said. Dogs, a frequent villain, weren’t the issue for these carnivores; people were, according to her research.
Birds get ruffled, too. Researchers who studied trails around Boulder, Colo., found that populations of several species of songbirds, including pygmy nuthatches and Western meadowlarks, were lowest near trails. “There’s something about the presence of humans and their pets when they go on hikes that causes a bit of a ‘death zone’ of 100 meters on either side of a trail,” said Prof. Rick Knight of Colorado State University. Running, canoeing, cycling and similar activities negatively affected birds in nearly 90 percent of 69 studies that researchers reviewed in 2011. Reductions were seen in the number of nests built, eggs laid and chicks hatched or fledged.
In Connecticut, wood turtles, labeled a “species of special concern” in the state, vanished from one wildlife preserve over 10 years after the area was opened to activities like hiking, researchers found.
[snip]
The uncomfortable fact is, we’re all complicit. In a not-yet-published review of 218 studies about recreation’s impacts on wildlife, researchers found more evidence of impacts by hikers, backcountry skiers and their like than by the gas-powered contingent.
[snip]
A century ago, nature had elbow room. Now, there’s a lot less of it, while recreational activities and nature tourism are growing in most parks, wilderness areas and other protected areas around the world.
[snip]
Conflicts with nature are a result. Still, scientists insist they don’t want to lock people out of nature. Spending time on a mountainside, or hip-deep in a trout stream, is tonic for brain and body. Research bears this out. And people who recreate outdoors are among nature’s most ardent constituents. Without them, “our landscapes would erode even faster than they are now,” said Dr. Heinemeyer, the wolverine researcher.
The challenge is to find a nuanced balance between enjoying nature and protecting it, recognizing that recreation does not necessarily complement conservation or preservation.
[snip]
And in the case of future parks and protected areas, we need to carefully consider the goals for such places and how recreation fits in or doesn’t, because once it is allowed, it is tough to restrict. “Whether or not to allow public access is probably the most important decision that gets made,” Dr. Reed said.
Of course not all wildlife is the same. Some species flee; others habituate. Some populations might be healthy enough to withstand disturbance; others, too fragile. We now know recreation is having impacts in ways that we hadn’t imagined. We must plan accordingly.
In London, where the comings and goings of avoiders, adapters and exploiters have been tallied for more than a century, bird diversity has steadily climbed as the city has diversified its land base and improved its health with greener parks, bluer water and cleaner air. In 1900, 25 kinds of bird were known to inhabit the 40 square kilometres of open land that lay within the 25-mile radius managed by the City of London Corporation. In 1975, there were 40 species in this area, including 20 of those present in 1900. In 2012, 60 species called it home. The heterogeneous mix of lands in and around cities begets diversity, as different, albeit tolerant, birds capitalise on the variety of foods and nesting locations that are found close together. Reptiles and amphibians have fared less well – natterjack toads, for example, became extinct in London the 1960s, and poisonous adders and common toads continue to decline.
[snip]
My enthusiasm for wilderness remains intact, but it’s become part of a broader conservation ethic that places equal value on nearby nature. Wondering and learning from our urban ecosystem teaches us to value nature in its broadest sense. In our cities and backyards, we experience how natural processes pay economic, spiritual and biological dividends. Noticing the responses of animals and plants to our actions provides a glimpse into the creative power of natural selection. As our appreciation for nature and the ecological and evolutionary processes that shape it grows from direct experience, our gardens work symbiotically with wilderness to inform our land ethic and conserve the full range of life.
1. Do not covet your neighbour’s lawn. Devoting less space to mowed and cultivated lawn and more space to diverse plantings encourages bird diversity. Turf, meanwhile, is an ecological disaster that demands our time and energy, requires fertilisers and herbicides, and causes us to waste more petrol than you might imagine.
2. Keep your cat indoors. Free-ranging cats kill one in 10 wild birds, and billions of small mammals. Indoor cats also live longer and less stressful lives than those roaming our neighbourhoods.
3. Make your windows more visible to birds. After death by cat, collision is the leading cause of preventable death among urban birds. Stickers that reflect ultraviolet light (which birds can see) offer homeowners an unobtrusive way to reduce collisions.
4. Do not light the night sky. Birds, especially those that migrate at night, are attracted to the light of buildings. Many die colliding with towers, wires, windows and walls. Turning off lights saves money, power and bird lives.
5. Provide food and nest boxes. By doing so, you can bolster overwinter survival and reproduction, and discover a world of diversity just beyond your windows.
6. Do not kill native predators. Native predators cull the weak and overabundant, and reduce non-native predators that are more dangerous to birds. Celebrate their actions as a sign of a healthy ecosystem.
7. Foster diversity of habitats within cities and the natural distinction among cities. When we resist homogenisation, by respecting regional differences and cultivating distinct neighbourhoods within cities, we support bird diversity. Rather than supporting the same few exploiters, unique cities foster distinctive assemblages of native adapters.
8. Create safe passage across roads and highways. A resilient ecosystem needs more than birds. Wildlife tunnels and bridges can make crossing roads less deadly for those that must crawl. Leaving spaces near highways unmowed can save eggs and nestlings.
9. Ensure functional connections between land and water. Many birds, mammals, amphibians, reptiles and insects require access to both land and water. Diverse native vegetation around waterways also provides a natural filter than helps keep our water safe.
10. Enjoy and bond with nature where you live and work. Nurturing wildlife within human environments develops environmental ethics. We become better stewards of the planet when the natural world is a valued part of everyday life.
Human-wildlife interactions in urban areas, both positive and negative, often involve people and birds. We assess the economic value placed on interactions with common native songbirds in two different urban areas (Berlin, Germany and Seattle, Washington, USA) by combining a revealed preference (recalled expenditures on bird feed) and a stated preference approach (determining willingness to pay for conservation or reduction of birds). Residents in both cities purchase bird food, engage in a range of bird-supporting activities and are generally willing to pay a small amount for native songbird conservation. Demographic, cultural and socio-economic factors, as well as specific attitudes towards birds and general attitudes about conservation were found to influence these decisions. This study presents the first attempt at estimating the economic value of enjoying common native urban songbirds and estimates the lower bound to be about 120 million USD/year in Seattle and 70 million USD/year in Berlin.Another item from within the paper.
On the whole, our results suggest that a sizeable economic value is derived by urban populations from the presence of common, native, “backyard” songbirds. Furthermore, these birds can provide several indirect ecological services for humans such as seed dispersal (e.g., Hougner et al. 2006) and reducing insect pests (e.g., Heyman and Gunnarsson 2011), which if the value were to be estimated, would increase our estimates.
“Ten years ago, it was rare to see coyotes, but they have really exploded on the scene here,” said Capt. Richard Conkin of the Stamford Police Department. He said that starting in March, the animals seemed to become more aggressive. One resident had to fight a “small, scrappy coyote” off with a snow shovel. Another watched as the same coyote chased her shepherd mix to her front door, which she slammed on the animal seconds after her dog made it safely into the house.Regrettably, common sense is not always in plentiful supply.
Particularly vulnerable are dogs and cats whose owners have installed invisible electric fences, designed to keep the animals from wandering. They trap the pets in while allowing predators unfettered access to the yard.
[snip]
Coyotes, which as long as 75 years ago moved into the eastern United States from the West, are viewed by naturalists as a beneficial part of the ecosystem, because they keep rodents in check. They have been sighted in all 21 counties of New Jersey and every town in Connecticut.
They are now so well established — New York State has an estimated 14,500 breeding pairs — that any effort to reduce the population would be fruitless, officials say.
“They are an intelligent animal and quickly learn how to survive in their environment, whether that’s the Bronx or Clinton County,” said Gordon R. Batcheller, the chief wildlife biologist for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. “They are a permanent presence in New York.”
Throughout the region, animal control officers and private trappers work with homeowners and state wildlife officials to capture and euthanize problem or nuisance coyotes. That includes a coyote seen lurking around an elementary school, for example, or one that has preyed on pets in a particular neighborhood.
State officials generally do not allow such coyotes to be relocated because that would merely transfer the problem to another area.
Mostly, the message from wildlife officials is that residents in coyote country need to adapt. “Just like you keep an eye on your kid in the backyard, you keep an eye on your dog,” said Larry Hajna, a spokesman for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. “It’s not modifying your lifestyle; it’s just common sense.”
Tips for peaceful coexistence with coyotes include keeping dogs on leashes, feeding pets only indoors, hazing coyotes (shouting, waving one’s harms) to prevent their comfort with humans and reporting any bold or aggressive behavior.
And coyotes themselves are not always the root of the problem. Two years ago, Mr. Horton offered his services pro bono when one was loitering outside his children’s elementary school in Hawthorne, N.Y. It turned out a neighborhood woman was feeding it.
“We found pork chops on the snow,” he recalled. “This lady lived right across from the school field, and she was feeding the coyote. Her response was that she felt bad because she saw the coyote all by itself.”
