Affiliation:
1. Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University Mississippi State MS 39762 USA
2. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services National Wildlife Research Center Mississippi State MS 39762 USA
3. Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources 1 Sportsman's Lane Frankfort KY 40601 USA
Abstract
AbstractRaptor nests on human‐built structures represent a significant source of conflict, as they can result in bird mortality, fires, or power outages due to falling nest materials or animals connecting with energized conductors. Power companies typically try to mitigate these conflicts to avoid service disruptions. Performing mitigation measures across all potentially problematic power infrastructure is generally not a practical solution given logistical, time, or budgetary constraints. Therefore, there is a need for quantitative, landscape‐scale tools to identify conflict risk and prioritize mitigation. We examined the influence of habitat and transmission infrastructure distribution on the potential risk of osprey (Pandion haliaetus) nesting‐infrastructure conflict in the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) power service area within Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Virginia, USA, using osprey nesting and conflict records from 1990–2020. We modeled risk using a 3‐stage approach, which intersected a nesting habitat suitability model and density of infrastructure to evaluate the potential risk of conflict. Habitat suitability was greater on or near open water and closer to developed areas. Transmission line density was low (0.14 ± 0.29 lines/km2) and heterogenous across the service area with more lines within urban centers and near power facilities. Integrating habitat suitability and transmission infrastructure information revealed that very low and low‐risk areas comprised 99% of the service area. Less than 1% comprised 1,113.7 km2 of moderate and 82.2 km2 of high or very high risk, mostly concentrated along major rivers and lakes, and around urban centers. Risk was more prevalent in the northeastern portion of the service area. This work presents a top‐down approach to mitigating osprey–power infrastructure conflict, which allows for the prioritization of mitigation actions and can facilitate long‐term coexistence with this protected species.
Funder
Tennessee Valley Authority
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Reference75 articles.
1. A review of bird deaths on barbed‐wire fences;Allen T. G.;Wilson Bulletin,1990
2. Assessing the accuracy of species distribution models: prevalence, kappa and the true skill statistic (TSS)
3. Ensemble forecasting of species distributions
4. Avian Power Line Interaction Committee.2006.Suggested practices for avian protection on power lines: the state of the art in 2006. Edison Electric Institute Avian Power Line Interaction Committee and the California Energy Commission Washington D.C. and Sacramento California USA.
5. Avian Power Line Interaction Committee.2012.Reducing avian collisions with power lines: the state of the art in 2012.Edison Electric Institute and Avian Power Line Interaction Committee Washington D.C. USA.