Behavioral responses of terrestrial mammals to COVID-19 lockdowns

DATA AND MATERIALS AVAILABILITY : The full dataset used in the final analyses (33) and associated code (34) are available at Dryad. A subset of the spatial coordinate datasets is available at Zenodo (35). Certain datasets of spatial coordinates will be available only through requests made to the authors due to conservation and Indigenous sovereignty concerns (see table S1 for more information on data use restrictions and contact information for data requests). These sensitive data will be made available upon request to qualified researchers for research purposes, provided that the data use will not threaten the study populations, such as by distribution or publication of the coordinates or detailed maps. Some datasets, such as those overseen by government agencies, have additional legal restrictions on data sharing, and researchers may need to formally apply for data access. Collaborations with data holders are generally encouraged, and in cases where data are held by Indigenous groups or institutions from regions that are under-represented in the global science community, collaboration may be required to ensure inclusion.COVID-19 lockdowns in early 2020 reduced human mobility, providing an opportunity to disentangle its effects on animals from those of landscape modifications. Using GPS data, we compared movements and road avoidance of 2300 terrestrial mammals (43 species) during the lockdowns to the same period in 2019. Individual responses were variable with no change in average movements or road avoidance behavior, likely due to variable lockdown conditions. However, under strict lockdowns 10-day 95th percentile displacements increased by 73%, suggesting increased landscape permeability. Animals’ 1-hour 95th percentile displacements declined by 12% and animals were 36% closer to roads in areas of high human footprint, indicating reduced avoidance during lockdowns. Overall, lockdowns rapidly altered some spatial behaviors, highlighting variable but substantial impacts of human mobility on wildlife worldwide.The Radboud Excellence Initiative, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, the National Science Foundation, Serbian Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development, Dutch Research Council NWO program “Advanced Instrumentation for Wildlife Protection”, Fondation Segré, RZSS, IPE, Greensboro Science Center, Houston Zoo, Jacksonville Zoo and Gardens, Nashville Zoo, Naples Zoo, Reid Park Zoo, Miller Park, WWF, ZCOG, Zoo Miami, Zoo Miami Foundation, Beauval Nature, Greenville Zoo, Riverbanks zoo and garden, SAC Zoo, La Passarelle Conservation, Parc Animalier d’Auvergne, Disney Conservation Fund, Fresno Chaffee zoo, Play for nature, North Florida Wildlife Center, Abilene Zoo, a Liber Ero Fellowship, the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation, Teck Coal, and the Grand Teton Association. The collection of Norwegian moose data was funded by the Norwegian Environment Agency, the German Ministry of Education and Research via the SPACES II project ORYCS, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Wyoming Game and Fish Commission, Bureau of Land Management, Muley Fanatic Foundation (including Southwest, Kemmerer, Upper Green, and Blue Ridge Chapters), Boone and Crockett Club, Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resources Trust, Knobloch Family Foundation, Wyoming Animal Damage Management Board, Wyoming Governor’s Big Game License Coalition, Bowhunters of Wyoming, Wyoming Outfitters and Guides Association, Pope and Young Club, US Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Wyoming Wild Sheep Foundation, Wild Sheep Foundation, Wyoming Wildlife/Livestock Disease Research Partnership, the US National Science Foundation [IOS-1656642 and IOS-1656527, the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness, and by a GRUPIN research grant from the Regional Government of Asturias, Sigrid Rausing Trust, Batubay Özkan, Barbara Watkins, NSERC Discovery Grant, the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration act under Pittman-Robertson project, the State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport of the Czech Republic, the Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic, Rufford Foundation, an American Society of Mammalogists African Graduate Student Research Fund, the German Science Foundation, the Israeli Science Foundation, the BSF-NSF, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food and Slovenian Research Agency (CRP V1-1626), the Aage V. Jensen Naturfond (project: Kronvildt - viden, værdier og værktøjer), the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy, National Centre for Research and Development in Poland, the Slovenian Research Agency, the David Shepherd Wildlife Foundation, Disney Conservation Fund, Whitley Fund for Nature, Acton Family Giving, Zoo Basel, Columbus, Bioparc de Doué-la-Fontaine, Zoo Dresden, Zoo Idaho, Kolmården Zoo, Korkeasaari Zoo, La Passarelle, Zoo New England, Tierpark Berlin, Tulsa Zoo, the Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Government of Mongolia, the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration act and the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, the National Science Foundation, Parks Canada, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Alberta Environment and Parks, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Safari Club International and Alberta Conservation Association, the Consejo Nacional de Ciencias y Tecnología (CONACYT) of Paraguay, the Norwegian Environment Agency and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, EU funded Interreg SI-HR 410 Carnivora Dinarica project, Paklenica and Plitvice Lakes National Parks, UK Wolf Conservation Trust, EURONATUR and Bernd Thies Foundation, the Messerli Foundation in Switzerland and WWF Germany, the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, NASA Ecological Forecasting Program, the Ecotone Telemetry company, the French National Research Agency, LANDTHIRST, grant REPOS awarded by the i-Site MUSE thanks to the “Investissements d’avenir” program, the ANR Mov-It project, the USDA Hatch Act Formula Funding, the Fondation Segre and North American and European Zoos listed at http://www.giantanteater.org/, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, the Yellowstone Forever and the National Park Service, Missouri Department of Conservation, Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Grant, and State University of New York, various donors to the Botswana Predator Conservation Program, data from collared caribou in the Northwest Territories were made available through funds from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories. The European Research Council Horizon2020, the British Ecological Society, the Paul Jones Family Trust, and the Lord Kelvin Adam Smith fund, the Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute and Tanzania National Parks. The Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapahoe Fish and Game Department and the Wyoming State Veterinary Laboratory, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Kodiak Brown Bear Trust, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Koniag Native Corporation, Old Harbor Native Corporation, Afognak Native Corporation, Ouzinkie Native Corporation, Natives of Kodiak Native Corporation and the State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, and the Slovenia Hunters Association and Slovenia Forest Service. F.C. was partly supported by the Resident Visiting Researcher Fellowship, IMéRA/Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille. This work was partially funded by the Center of Advanced Systems Understanding (CASUS), which is financed by Germany’s Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and by the Saxon Ministry for Science, Culture and Tourism (SMWK) with tax funds on the basis of the budget approved by the Saxon State Parliament. This article is a contribution of the COVID-19 Bio-Logging Initiative, which is funded in part by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (GBMF9881) and the National Geographic Society.https://www.science.org/journal/sciencehj2023Mammal Research InstituteZoology and Entomolog

Border Security Fencing and Wildlife:The End of the Transboundary Paradigm in Eurasia?

The ongoing refugee crisis in Europe has seen many countries rush to construct border security fencing to divert or control the flow of people. This follows a trend of border fence construction across Eurasia during the post-9/11 era. This development has gone largely unnoticed by conservation biologists during an era in which, ironically, transboundary cooperation has emerged as a conservation paradigm. These fences represent a major threat to wildlife because they can cause mortality, obstruct access to seasonally important resources, and reduce effective population size. We summarise the extent of the issue and propose concrete mitigation measures

The role of human-related risk in breeding site selection by wolves

Large carnivores can be found in different scenarios of cohabitation with humans. Behavioral adaptations to minimize risk from humans are expected to be exacerbated where large carnivores are most vulnerable, such as at breeding sites. Using wolves as a model species, along with data from 26 study areas across the species' worldwide range, we performed a meta-analysis to assess the role of humans in breeding site selection by a large carnivore. Some of the patterns previously observed at the local scale become extrapolatable to the entire species range provided that important sources of variation are taken into account. Generally, wolves minimised the risk of exposure at breeding sites by avoiding human-made structures, selecting shelter from vegetation and avoiding agricultural lands. Our results suggest a scaled hierarchical habitat selection process across selection orders by which wolves compensate higher exposure risk to humans within their territories via a stronger selection at breeding sites. Dissimilar patterns between continents suggest that adaptations to cope with human-associated risks are modulated by the history of coexistence and persecution. Although many large carnivores persisting in human-dominated landscapes do not require large-scale habitat preservation, habitat selection at levels below occupancy and territory should be regarded in management and conservation strategies aiming to preserve these species in such contexts. In this case, we recommend providing shelter from human interference at least in small portions of land in order to fulfill the requirements of the species to locate their breeding sites.We are in debt with all the administrative, logistical and funding support from the Picos de Europa National Park and the Regional Government of Galicia (Spain), the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (SEV-2012-0262), the Government of the Northwest Territories and the University of Northern British Columbia (Canada), the U.S.A. National Park Service, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, the U.S.A. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service, the Wisconsin Departments of Natural Resources and Transportation, the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, the Government of India, the Regional Government of Maharastra (India), the Progetto Lupo Piemonte (Italy), the European Union, the Slovenian Ministry of Agriculture and Environment (LIFE08/NAT/SLO/000244), and the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program (partnership: USFWS, AGFD, WMAT, USDA Forest Service, and the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services–Wildlife Services, and several participating counties). JVLB was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (JCI-2012-13066). MK was supported by Slovenian Research Agency (ARRS, P4-0059)

Border Security Fencing and Wildlife: The End of the Transboundary Paradigm in Eurasia? - Fig 1

<p>A: A border security fence being constructed along the border between Slovenia (SLO) and Croatia (HR) separates all three large carnivore (LC) species in Slovenia from the core population areas in the Dinaric Mountains, impacting their long-term viability, severing the Natura 2000 network, and decreasing the potential for natural recolonization of the Alps. B: The expected effect of the fence on brown bears. Points are individual bears, genetically sampled from bear mortalities between 2003 and 2013 (<i>N</i> = 1,414), which we genotyped using 20 polymorphic microsatellite loci. Lines showing full siblings or parent–offspring relations between individuals demonstrate that the border between both countries, where the fence is now being constructed, had, up until now, no effect on movement and gene flow in this bear population. The Trio ML method (Wang 2007) was used to estimate relatedness. Lines show <i>r</i> > 0.45. Darker lines are assignments only for bears sampled in 2012 and 2013 (<i>N</i> = 296). C,D: GPS telemetry tracks of lynx (C, <i>N</i> = 11) and wolves (D, <i>N</i> = 28) show that these animals had no problems crossing the border before construction of the fence, and even had home ranges that straddled the border.</p

Extent of border security fencing along national borders in Europe and Central Asia.

<p>Extent of border security fencing along national borders in Europe and Central Asia.</p

Summary of extent of border fencing across Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia, and the species of large mammals that this fencing can potentially have the largest impacts upon.

<p>Separation between primary and secondary impacts is based on our perception of their ability to cross fences. Full details of the specific borders are provided in the Supporting Information, but it is important to note that there is considerable uncertainty over the length of fencing on some borders.</p