The effects of electric power lines on the breeding ecology of greater sage-grouse
The effects of electric power lines on the breeding ecology of greater sage-grouse
复制标题
电力线路对鼠尾草繁殖生态的影响
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0209968
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Rick J. Baxter
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Michel T. Kohl;T. Messmer;B. Crabb;M. Guttery;D. Dahlgren;R. Larsen;Shandra N. Frey;Sherry Liguori;Rick J. Baxter
人为基础设施可以通过直接死亡和/或迁移行为对野生动物产生负面影响。一些类粉防己（松鸡属）物种特别容易受到高大的人为结构的影响，因为它们是在没有垂直结构的生态系统中进化的。在北美西部，电力传输和配电线路（电力线路）发生在蒿属（Artemisia spp.）在大的鼠尾草松鸡（Centrocercus urophasianus;鼠尾草松鸡）的范围内的风景。美国鱼类和野生动物管理局建议在leks附近使用缓冲区，以减轻电力线对圣松鸡的潜在影响。然而，由于缺乏数据，各州和联邦机构之间推荐的缓冲距离不一致。为了解决这个问题，我们评估了1998年至2013年犹他州，爱达荷州东南部和怀俄明州西南部的电力线对鼠尾草松鸡繁殖生态的影响。总的来说，输电线对列克趋势的负面影响分别达到2.7公里和2.8公里。死电源线不影响沥滤持久性。雌性圣松鸡避免传输线在筑巢和育雏季节的距离可达1.1和0.8公里，分别。巢和育雏成功的负面影响传输线的距离分别为2.6和1.1公里。分布线没有出现影响鼠尾草松鸡栖息地选择或生殖适合度。我们的分析证明了山艾树覆盖在减轻潜在的电力线影响的价值。管理人员可以通过将新输电线路置于现有的人为走廊和/或在距离活跃列克至少2.8公里的地方设置缓冲区，最大限度地减少新输电线路的影响。鉴于我们观察到的不确定性，在我们的分析，圣松鸡响应配电线路，再加上他们的作用，直接向个人消费者提供电力服务，我们建议，这些电力线路的缓冲区应考虑在个案的基础上。微选址，以避免重要的栖息地和栖息地开垦可能会减少新的电力线建设的潜在影响。
Anthropogenic infrastructure can negatively affect wildlife through direct mortality and/or displacement behaviors. Some tetranoids (grouse spp.) species are particularly vulnerable to tall anthropogenic structures because they evolved in ecosystems void of vertical structures. In western North America, electric power transmission and distribution lines (power lines) occur in sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) landscapes within the range of the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; sage-grouse). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recommended using buffer zones near leks to mitigate the potential impacts of power lines on sage-grouse. However, recommended buffer distances are inconsistent across state and federal agencies because data are lacking. To address this, we evaluated the effects of power lines on sage-grouse breeding ecology within Utah, portions of southeastern Idaho, and southwestern Wyoming from 1998–2013. Overall, power lines negatively affected lek trends up to a distance of 2.7 and 2.8 km, respectively. Power lines died not affect lek persistence. Female sage-grouse avoided transmission lines during the nesting and brooding seasons at distances up to 1.1 and 0.8 km, respectively. Nest and brood success were negatively affected by transmission lines up to distances of 2.6 and 1.1 km, respectively. Distribution lines did not appear to affect sage-grouse habitat selection or reproductive fitness. Our analyses demonstrated the value of sagebrush cover in mitigating potential power line impacts. Managers can minimize the effects of new transmission power lines by placing them in existing anthropogenic corridors and/or incorporating buffers at least 2.8 km from active leks. Given the uncertainty we observed in our analyses regarding sage-grouse response to distribution lines coupled with their role in providing electric power service directly to individual consumers, we recommend that buffers for these power lines be considered on a case-by-case basis. Micrositing to avoid important habitats and habitat reclamation may reduce the potential impacts of new power line construction.