Ungulates and trains - Factors influencing flight responses and detectability.

Wildlife-train collisions can have deleterious effects on local wildlife populations and come with high socio-economic costs, such as damages, delays, and psychological distress. In this study, we explored two major components of wildlife-train collisions: the response of wildlife to oncoming trains and the detection of wildlife by drivers. Using dashboard cameras, we explored the flight response of roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) and moose (Alces alces) to oncoming trains and explored which factors, such as lighting and physical obstructions, affect their detection by drivers. In a majority of cases, roe deer and moose fled from an oncoming train, at an average flight initiation distance (FID) of 78 m and 79 m respectively. Warning horns had unexpected influences on flight behaviour. While roe deer initiated flight, on average, 44 m further away from the train when warned, they usually fled towards the tracks, in the direction of danger. FID of moose, however, was unaffected by the use of a warning horn. As train speed increased, moose had a lower FID, but roe deer FID did not change. Finally, detection of wildlife was obstructed by the presence of vegetation and uneven terrain in the rail-side verge, which could increase the risk of collisions. Our results indicate the need for early detection and warning of wildlife to reduce the risk of collisions. We propose that detection systems should include thermal cameras to allow detection behind vegetation and in the dark, and warning systems should use cues early to warn of oncoming trains and allow wildlife to escape the railway corridor safely.

COVID-19 related travel restrictions prevented numerous wildlife deaths on roads: A comparative analysis of results from 11 countries.

Millions of wild animals are killed annually on roads worldwide. During spring 2020, the volume of road traffic was reduced globally as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. We gathered data on wildlife-vehicle collisions (WVC) from Czechia, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Israel, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and for Scotland and England within the United Kingdom. In all studied countries WVC statistics tend to be dominated by large mammals (various deer species and wild boar), while information on smaller mammals as well as birds are less well recorded. The expected number of WVC for 2020 was predicted on the basis of 2015-2019 WVC time series representing expected WVC numbers under normal traffic conditions. Then, the forecasted and reported WVC data were compared. The results indicate varying levels of WVC decrease between countries during the COVID-19 related traffic flow reduction (CRTR). While no significant change was determined in Sweden, where the state-wide response to COVID-19 was the least intensive, a decrease as marked as 37.4% was identified in Estonia. The greatest WVC decrease, more than 40%, was determined during the first weeks of CRTR for Estonia, Spain, Israel, and Czechia. Measures taken during spring 2020 allowed the survival of large numbers of wild animals which would have been killed under normal traffic conditions. The significant effects of even just a few weeks of reduced traffic, help to highlight the negative impacts of roads on wildlife mortality and the need to boost global efforts of wildlife conservation, including systematic gathering of roadkill data.

Ungulate use of non-wildlife underpasses.

Wildlife crossing structures can provide safe passage for wildlife across transportation corridors, and can help mitigate the effects of highways and exclusion fencing on wildlife. Due to their costs, wildlife crossing structures are usually installed sparsely and at strategic locations along transportation networks. Alternatively, non-wildlife underpasses (i.e. conventional underpasses for human and domestic animal use) are usually abundant along major infrastructure corridors and could potentially provide safe crossing opportunities for wildlife. To investigate this, we monitored the use of 40 non-wildlife underpasses by roe deer (Capreolus capreolus), and moose (Alces alces) in south-central Sweden. We found that roe deer and moose use non-wildlife underpasses, and prefer underpasses that are at least 11.5 m wide and 5 m tall. Furthermore, roe deer used structures that had little human co-use and were in locations where the forest cover differed on both sides of the highway. In most cases, roe deer and moose were detected within 50 m of the underpass more than they were detected crossing under them. This suggests that animals often approach underpasses without crossing under them, however modifications to underpass design may improve non-wildlife underpass use. We recommend non-wildlife underpasses at gravel and minor roads, particularly those with little human co-use and with variable forest cover on both sides of the highway, be built wider than 11.5 m and taller than 5 m.

Inducing fear using acoustic stimuli-A behavioral experiment on moose (Alces alces) in Sweden.

Prey species may display anti-predatory behavior, i.e., flight, increased vigilance, and decreased feeding, in response to the true presence of a predator or to the implied presence of a predator through, e.g., acoustic cues. In this study, we investigated the anti-predatory reactions of moose (Alces alces) to acoustic stimuli related to hunting, at saltlick stones, a known attractant. In before-during-after-control-impact experiments, we compared the behavioral responses of individuals to: (i) two hunting-related acoustic stimuli-hunting dog barking and human speaking; (ii) nonpredatory acoustic stimuli-bird sounds and; and (iii) no acoustic stimulus (control). We asked: (1) How does the probability of moose leaving the site differ depending on the stimulus they are exposed to?; (2) What affect do the acoustic stimuli have on the amount of time moose spend vigilant, feeding, or away from the site?; and (3) What affect do the stimuli have on the time between events at a site? We found that when exposed to the human stimulus, moose left the sites in 75% of the events, which was significantly more often compared to the dog (39%), bird (24%), or silent (11%) events. If moose did not leave the site, they spent more time vigilant, and less time feeding, particularly when exposed to a dog or human stimulus. Furthermore, moose spent the most time away from the site and took the longest to visit the site again after a human stimulus. Moose were also more likely to leave the site when exposed to the bird stimulus than during silent controls. Those that remained spent more time vigilant, but their behaviors returned to baseline after the bird stimulus ended. These findings suggest that acoustic stimuli can be used to modify the behavior of moose; however, reactions towards presumably threatening and nonthreatening stimuli were not as distinct as we had expected.