CANCELLED - Human drivers and human consequences of wildlife in the city

Background/Question/Methods

Urban development results in the removal, alteration and fragmentation of natural vegetation and other environmental features, which have negatively impacted many wildlife species. With the loss of large tracts of intact forests, deserts, grasslands and other wildlands, and the demise of specific habitat features including early successional habitat and native plants, many specialist species filter out from urban ecosystems. As a result, some argue that urbanization has a homogenizing effect on wildlife communities. However, these general patterns belie a high degree of variability in urban biodiversity patterns. With a focus on vertebrate and invertebrate species that contribute to urban fauna (hereafter 'wildlife'), we review how wildlife species have responded to altered conditions of the urban environment, with a focus on the environmental features and species traits that filter wildlife communities from the regional scale to the city scale. We propose a new framework for assessing how built structures, species interactions and socio-cultural factors further influence the local species pool. Within this context, we assess the ecosystem services and disservices provided by urban wildlife, how management decisions are shaped by attitudes and exposure to wildlife, and how these decisions then feed back to the local species pool.

Results/Conclusions

The potential wildlife species occupying a particular city is first determined from the regional species pool, which is primarily dictated by climate and latitude. Species traits such as diet and body size, and specific environmental features including urban form and land use, filter the regional pool to the urban species pool. Species interactions (e.g., predator-prey dynamics), the built structure (e.g., roads and buildings), and socio-cultural factors (e.g. income and attitudes) further filter which species persist into the local species pool. Overarching each of these hierarchical layers are governance structures (i.e., institutions, social norms and municipalities) that interact at various levels and degrees with the factors shaping the urban and local species pool. People have regular contact with wildlife species and experience ecosystem services and disservices at the local species pool level. These interactions further affect attitudes towards local wildlife, which subsequently shape management decisions to either encourage or discourage certain species, which ultimately feed back into influencing the local species pool. By understanding why some animals are better able to persist in human modified landscapes than others, land managers, city planners, private homeowners and other stakeholders can make better informed decisions when managing properties that also conserve and promote wildlife.