Conservation on International Boundaries: The Impact of Security Barriers on Selected Terrestrial Mammals in Four Protected Areas in Arizona, USA: e93679

Several thousand terrestrial protected areas (PAs) lie on international boundaries. Because international boundaries can be focal points for trade, illegal activity and development, such PAs can be vulnerable to a range of anthropogenic threats. There is an increasing trend towards the erection of i...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2014-04, Vol.9 (4)
Hauptverfasser: McCallum, Jamie W, Rowcliffe, J Marcus, Cuthill, Innes C
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 4
container_start_page
container_title PloS one
container_volume 9
creator McCallum, Jamie W
Rowcliffe, J Marcus
Cuthill, Innes C
description Several thousand terrestrial protected areas (PAs) lie on international boundaries. Because international boundaries can be focal points for trade, illegal activity and development, such PAs can be vulnerable to a range of anthropogenic threats. There is an increasing trend towards the erection of international boundary infrastructure (including fences, barriers and ditches) in many parts of the world, which may reduce the risk of these anthropogenic threats to some PAs. However this may restrict home range and access to resources for some native species. We sought to understand the impacts of these two different types of threat by using camera traps to measure the activity level of humans, native and invasive mammals in four US PAs on the Mexican international boundary. Comparisons were made between treatment areas with barriers and those without. Results showed that puma and coati were more likely to appear in treatment areas without barriers, whereas humans were not observed more frequently in one treatment area over another. The suggestion is that the intermittent fencing present in this part of the world does affect some native species, but does not necessarily restrict the movement of humans (including illegal migrants), who may negatively impact native species.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0093679
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1524412171</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1524412171</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_15244121713</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVjs9KAzEQxoMgWP-8gYc5erBrsml33d62xdIehMJuzyVsp5iSTdZJIuib-Lam1RcQBoaZ-b7ffIzdC54JWYqno4tklckGZzHjvJJFWV2wkahkPi5yLq_YtfdHzqfyuShG7HvhrEf6UEE7C6nWNmACnEZlYO6i3SvS6GfQviGs-0F1AdwBGuwi6fAJc0XpTv5kbtBgF3APLRKhD6QT41X1vTIetIVlCgcbcuFXVROq874m_ZX-PcK2qWeA59C37PKQbHj312_Yw_KlXazGA7n3mOC7XvsOjVEWXfQ7Mc0nE5GLUsh_SH8ADL1jrg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1524412171</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Conservation on International Boundaries: The Impact of Security Barriers on Selected Terrestrial Mammals in Four Protected Areas in Arizona, USA: e93679</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><creator>McCallum, Jamie W ; Rowcliffe, J Marcus ; Cuthill, Innes C</creator><creatorcontrib>McCallum, Jamie W ; Rowcliffe, J Marcus ; Cuthill, Innes C</creatorcontrib><description>Several thousand terrestrial protected areas (PAs) lie on international boundaries. Because international boundaries can be focal points for trade, illegal activity and development, such PAs can be vulnerable to a range of anthropogenic threats. There is an increasing trend towards the erection of international boundary infrastructure (including fences, barriers and ditches) in many parts of the world, which may reduce the risk of these anthropogenic threats to some PAs. However this may restrict home range and access to resources for some native species. We sought to understand the impacts of these two different types of threat by using camera traps to measure the activity level of humans, native and invasive mammals in four US PAs on the Mexican international boundary. Comparisons were made between treatment areas with barriers and those without. Results showed that puma and coati were more likely to appear in treatment areas without barriers, whereas humans were not observed more frequently in one treatment area over another. The suggestion is that the intermittent fencing present in this part of the world does affect some native species, but does not necessarily restrict the movement of humans (including illegal migrants), who may negatively impact native species.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093679</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>PloS one, 2014-04, Vol.9 (4)</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>McCallum, Jamie W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rowcliffe, J Marcus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cuthill, Innes C</creatorcontrib><title>Conservation on International Boundaries: The Impact of Security Barriers on Selected Terrestrial Mammals in Four Protected Areas in Arizona, USA: e93679</title><title>PloS one</title><description>Several thousand terrestrial protected areas (PAs) lie on international boundaries. Because international boundaries can be focal points for trade, illegal activity and development, such PAs can be vulnerable to a range of anthropogenic threats. There is an increasing trend towards the erection of international boundary infrastructure (including fences, barriers and ditches) in many parts of the world, which may reduce the risk of these anthropogenic threats to some PAs. However this may restrict home range and access to resources for some native species. We sought to understand the impacts of these two different types of threat by using camera traps to measure the activity level of humans, native and invasive mammals in four US PAs on the Mexican international boundary. Comparisons were made between treatment areas with barriers and those without. Results showed that puma and coati were more likely to appear in treatment areas without barriers, whereas humans were not observed more frequently in one treatment area over another. The suggestion is that the intermittent fencing present in this part of the world does affect some native species, but does not necessarily restrict the movement of humans (including illegal migrants), who may negatively impact native species.</description><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqVjs9KAzEQxoMgWP-8gYc5erBrsml33d62xdIehMJuzyVsp5iSTdZJIuib-Lam1RcQBoaZ-b7ffIzdC54JWYqno4tklckGZzHjvJJFWV2wkahkPi5yLq_YtfdHzqfyuShG7HvhrEf6UEE7C6nWNmACnEZlYO6i3SvS6GfQviGs-0F1AdwBGuwi6fAJc0XpTv5kbtBgF3APLRKhD6QT41X1vTIetIVlCgcbcuFXVROq874m_ZX-PcK2qWeA59C37PKQbHj312_Yw_KlXazGA7n3mOC7XvsOjVEWXfQ7Mc0nE5GLUsh_SH8ADL1jrg</recordid><startdate>20140401</startdate><enddate>20140401</enddate><creator>McCallum, Jamie W</creator><creator>Rowcliffe, J Marcus</creator><creator>Cuthill, Innes C</creator><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140401</creationdate><title>Conservation on International Boundaries: The Impact of Security Barriers on Selected Terrestrial Mammals in Four Protected Areas in Arizona, USA: e93679</title><author>McCallum, Jamie W ; Rowcliffe, J Marcus ; Cuthill, Innes C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_miscellaneous_15244121713</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McCallum, Jamie W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rowcliffe, J Marcus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cuthill, Innes C</creatorcontrib><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McCallum, Jamie W</au><au>Rowcliffe, J Marcus</au><au>Cuthill, Innes C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Conservation on International Boundaries: The Impact of Security Barriers on Selected Terrestrial Mammals in Four Protected Areas in Arizona, USA: e93679</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><date>2014-04-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>4</issue><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Several thousand terrestrial protected areas (PAs) lie on international boundaries. Because international boundaries can be focal points for trade, illegal activity and development, such PAs can be vulnerable to a range of anthropogenic threats. There is an increasing trend towards the erection of international boundary infrastructure (including fences, barriers and ditches) in many parts of the world, which may reduce the risk of these anthropogenic threats to some PAs. However this may restrict home range and access to resources for some native species. We sought to understand the impacts of these two different types of threat by using camera traps to measure the activity level of humans, native and invasive mammals in four US PAs on the Mexican international boundary. Comparisons were made between treatment areas with barriers and those without. Results showed that puma and coati were more likely to appear in treatment areas without barriers, whereas humans were not observed more frequently in one treatment area over another. The suggestion is that the intermittent fencing present in this part of the world does affect some native species, but does not necessarily restrict the movement of humans (including illegal migrants), who may negatively impact native species.</abstract><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0093679</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2014-04, Vol.9 (4)
issn 1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1524412171
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
title Conservation on International Boundaries: The Impact of Security Barriers on Selected Terrestrial Mammals in Four Protected Areas in Arizona, USA: e93679
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T14%3A13%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Conservation%20on%20International%20Boundaries:%20The%20Impact%20of%20Security%20Barriers%20on%20Selected%20Terrestrial%20Mammals%20in%20Four%20Protected%20Areas%20in%20Arizona,%20USA:%20e93679&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=McCallum,%20Jamie%20W&rft.date=2014-04-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=4&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0093679&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E1524412171%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1524412171&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true