Landscape Ecology

, 26:1281 | Cite as

Anthropogenic noise exposure in protected natural areas: estimating the scale of ecological consequences

  • Jesse R. BarberEmail author
  • Chris L. Burdett
  • Sarah E. Reed
  • Katy A. Warner
  • Charlotte Formichella
  • Kevin R. Crooks
  • Dave M. Theobald
  • Kurt M. Fristrup
Research Article


The extensive literature documenting the ecological effects of roads has repeatedly implicated noise as one of the causal factors. Recent studies of wildlife responses to noise have decisively identified changes in animal behaviors and spatial distributions that are caused by noise. Collectively, this research suggests that spatial extent and intensity of potential noise impacts to wildlife can be studied by mapping noise sources and modeling the propagation of noise across landscapes. Here we present models of energy extraction, aircraft overflight and roadway noise as examples of spatially extensive sources and to present tools available for landscape scale investigations. We focus these efforts in US National Parks (Mesa Verde, Grand Teton and Glacier) to highlight that ecological noise pollution is not a threat restricted to developed areas and that many protected natural areas experience significant noise loads. As a heuristic tool for understanding past and future noise pollution we forecast community noise utilizing a spatially-explicit land-use change model that depicts the intensity of human development at sub-county resolution. For road noise, we transform effect distances from two studies into sound levels to begin a discussion of noise thresholds for wildlife. The spatial scale of noise exposure is far larger than any protected area, and no site in the continental US is free form noise. The design of observational and experimental studies of noise effects should be informed by knowledge of regional noise exposure patterns.


Anthropogenic noise Wildlife Acoustical fragmentation Acoustic modeling Soundscape 



We thank Brian Pijanowski for the invitation to contribute to this special issue, two anonymous reviewers for their insight and our colleagues in the Natural Sounds and Night Skies Division of the National Park Service for discussion and continued efforts to protect sensory resources.

Supplementary material

Supplementary material 1 (WMV 6903 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (WMV 8622 kb)

10980_2011_9646_MOESM3_ESM.docx (11 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 10 kb)
10980_2011_9646_MOESM4_ESM.docx (338 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (DOCX 337 kb)


  1. Barber JR, Crooks C, Fristrup K (2010) The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms. Trends Ecol Evol 25:180–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bayne EM, Habib L, Boutin S (2008) Impacts of chronic anthropogenic noise from energy-sector activity on abundance of songbirds in the boreal forest. Conserv Biol 22:1186–1193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benítez-López A, Alkemade R, Verweij PA (2010) The impacts of roads and other infrastructure on mammal and bird populations: a meta-analysis. Biol Conserv 143:1307–1316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bermúdez-Cuamatzin E, Ríos-Chelén AA, Gil D, Garcia CM (2011) Experimental evidence for real-time song frequency shift in response to urban noise in a passerine bird. Biol Lett 23:36–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bierwagen B, Theobald DM, Pyke CR, Choate A, Groth AP, Thomas JV, Morefield P (2010) National housing and impervious surface scenarios for integrated climate impact assessments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107(49):20887–20892PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blickley JL, Patricelli GL (2011) Impacts of anthropogenic noise on wildlife: research priorities for the development of standards and mitigation. J Int Wildl Law Policy (in press)Google Scholar
  7. Blickley JL, Blackwood D, Paticelli GL (2011) Experimental evidence for avoidance of chronic noise exposure by greater sage-grouse. Conserv Biol (in review)Google Scholar
  8. Chan AAY-H, Giraldo-Perez P, Smith S, Blumstein DT (2010) Anthropogenic noise affects risk assessment and attention: the distracted prey hypothesis. Biol Lett 6:458–461PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark CW, Ellison WT, Southall BL, Hatch L, Van Parijs SM, Frankel A, Ponirakis D (2009) Acoustic masking in marine ecosystems: intuitions, analysis, and implication. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 395:201–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dumyahn SL, Pijanowski BC (2011) Beyond noise mitigation: managing soundscapes as common-pool resources. Landscape Ecol (published online 4 August 2011)Google Scholar
  11. Dunn RR, Gavin MC, Sanchez MC, Solomon JN (2006) The pigeon paradox: dependence of global conservation on urban nature. Conserv Biol 6:1814–1816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Efroymson RA, Sutter GW (2001) Ecological risk assessment framework for low-altitude aircraft overflights: estimating effects on wildlife. Risk Anal 21:263–274PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eigenbrod F, Hecnar SJ, Fahrig L (2009) Quantifying the road-effect zone: threshold effects of a motorway on anuran populations in Ontario, Canada. Ecol Soc 14(1):24Google Scholar
  14. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), USA (1974a) Population distribution of the United States as a function of outdoor noise level. Report 550/9-74-009Google Scholar
  15. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), USA (1974b) Information on levels of environmental noise requisite to protect public health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. Report 550/9-74-004Google Scholar
  16. ESRI (2009) ArcGIS 9.3.1. ESRI (Environmental Systems Research Institute), RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  17. Fahrig L, Rytwinski T (2009) Effects of roads on animal abundance: an empirical review and synthesis. Ecol Soc 14:21. Google Scholar
  18. Fang C, Ling D (2003) Investigation of the noise reduction provided by tree belts. Landsc Urban Plan 63:187–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Federal Interagency Committee on Noise, USA (1992) Federal agency review of selected airport noise analysis issuesGoogle Scholar
  20. Forman RTT (2000) Estimate of the area affected ecologically by the road system in the United States. Conserv Biol 14:31–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Forman RTT, Reineking B, Hersperger AM (2002) Road traffic and nearby grassland bird patterns in a suburbanizing landscape. Environ Manage 29:782–800PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Francis CD, Ortega CP, Cruz A (2009) Noise pollution changes avian communities and species interactions. Curr Biol 19:1415–1419PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Francis CD, Paritsis J, Ortega CP, Cruz A (2011) Landscape patterns of avian habitat use and nest success are affected by chronic gas well compressor noise. Landscape Ecol (published online 3 May 2011)Google Scholar
  24. Goodwin SE, Shriver G (2011) Effects of traffic noise on occupancy patterns of forest birds. Conserv Biol 25:406–411PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gross K, Pasinelli G, Kunc HP (2010) Behavioral plasticity allows short-term adjustment to a novel environment. Am Nat 176:456–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Habib L, Bayne EM, Boutin S (2007) Chronic industrial noise affects pairing success and age structure of ovenbirds Seiurus aurocapilla. J Appl Ecol 44:176–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Halfwerk W, Holleman LJM, Lesselis CM, Slabbekoorn H (2011) Negative impact of traffic noise on avian reproductive success. J Appl Ecol 48:210–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kaliski K, Duncan E (2008, December) Propagation modeling parameters for wind power projects. Sound Vib, pp 12–15Google Scholar
  29. Kaliski K, Duncan E, Cowan J (2007, September) Community and regional noise mapping in the United States. Sound Vib, pp 14–17Google Scholar
  30. Kerth G, Melber M (2009) Species-specific barrier effects of a motorway on the habitat use of two threatened forest-living bat species. Biol Conserv 142:270–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kidd G, Mason CR, Richards VM, Gallun FJ, Durlach NI (2008) Informational masking. In: Yost WA, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds) Auditory perception of sound sources. Springer, New York, pp 143–190Google Scholar
  32. Leu M, Hanser SE, Knick ST (2008) The human footprint in the west: a large-scale analysis of anthropogenic impacts. Ecol Appl 18:1119–1139PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lynch E, Joyce D, Fristrup K (2011) An assessment of noise audibility and sound levels in U.S. National Parks. Landscape Ecol. doi: 10.1007/s10980-011-9643-x
  34. Mcdonald RI, Forman RTT, Kareiva P, Neugarten R, Salzer D, Fisher J (2009) Urban effects, distance, and protected areas in an urbanizing world. Landsc Urban Plan 93:63–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mennitt DJ, Fristrup K (2011) Methods and accuracy of obtaining calibrated sound pressure levels from consumer digital audio recorders. Appl Acoust (in review)Google Scholar
  36. Nemeth E, Brumm H (2010) Birds and anthropogenic noise: are urban songs adaptive? Am Nat 176:467–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nowacek DP, Thorne LH, Johnston DW, Tyack PL (2007) Responses of cetaceans to anthropogenic noise. Mamm Rev 37:81–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. O’Neill RV, DeAngelis DL, Waide JB, Allen TFH (1986) A hierarchical concept of ecosystems. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  39. Ortega CP, Francis CD (2011) Effects of gas well compressor noise on ability to detect birds during surveys in the rattlesnake canyon habitat management area, San Juan County, New Mexico. Ornithol Monographs (in press)Google Scholar
  40. Pater LL, Grubb TG, Delaney DK (2009) Recommendations for improved assessment of noise impacts of wildlife. J Wildl Manag 73:788–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Patricelli GL, Blickley JL (2006) Avian communication in urban noise: causes and consequences of vocal adjustment. Auk 123:639–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Payne R, Webb D (1971) Orientation by means of long range acoustic signaling in baleen whales. Ann NY Acad Sci 188:110–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pijanowski BC, Farina A, Gage SH, Dumyahn SL, Krause BL (2011) What is soundscape ecology? An introduction and overview of an emerging new science. Landscape Ecol (published online 1 May 2011)Google Scholar
  44. Reed SE, Boggs JL, Mann JP (2011) SPreAD-GIS: a tool for modeling anthropogenic noise propagation in natural ecosystems. Ecography (in review)Google Scholar
  45. Reijnen R, Foppen R (1995) The effects of car traffic on breeding bird populations in woodland. III. Reduction of density in relation to the proximity of main roads. J Appl Ecol 32:187–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Reijnen R, Foppen R (2006) Impact of road traffic on breeding bird populations. In: Davenport J, Davenport JL (eds) The ecology of transportation: managing mobility for the environment. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 255–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reijnen R, Foppen R, Meeuwsen H (1996) The effects of traffic on the density of breeding birds in Dutch agricultural grasslands. Biol Conserv 75:255–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Reijnen R, Foppen R, Veenbaas G (1997) Disturbance by traffic as a threat to breeding birds: evaluation of the effect and considerations in planning and managing road corridors. Biodivers Conserv 6:567–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reindt FE (2003) The impact of roads on birds: does song frequency play a role in determining susceptibility to noise pollution? J Ornithol 144:295–306Google Scholar
  50. Riitters KH, Wickham JD (2003) How far to the nearest road? Front Ecol Environ 1:125–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ripmeester EAP, Mulder M, Slabbekoorn H (2010) Habitat-dependent acoustic divergence affects playback response in urban and forest populations of the European blackbird. Behav Ecol 21:876–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Roedenbeck IA, Fahrig L, Findlay CS, Houlahan JE, Jaeger JAG, Klar N, Kramer-Schadt S, van der Grift EA (2007) The Rauischholzhausen agenda for road ecology. Ecol Soc 12:11. Google Scholar
  53. Rossing TD (ed) (2007) Springer handbook of acoustics. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  54. Schaub A, Ostwald J, Siemers BM (2008) Foraging bats avoid noise. J Exp Biol 211:3174–3180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shafer CL (1999) US national park buffer zones: historical, scientific, social and legal aspects. Environ Manage 23:49–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Siemers BM, Schaub A (2010) Hunting at the highway: traffic noise reduces foraging efficiency in acoustic predators. Proc R Soc B (published online 17 Nov 2010)Google Scholar
  57. Slabbekoorn H, Peet M (2003) Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424:267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Slabbekoorn H, Ripmeester EAP (2008) Birdsong and anthropogenic noise: implications and applications for conservation. Mol Ecol 17:72–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. St. Clair CC (2003) Comparative permeability of roads, rivers, and meadows to songbirds in Banff National Park. Conserv Biol 17:1151–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stewart CM, Russel WA, Luz GA (1999) Can population density be used to determine ambient noise levels? (Abstract). J Acoust Soc Am 105:942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Summers PD, Cunnington GM, Fahrig L (2011) Are the negative effects of roads on breeding birds caused by traffic noise. J Appl Ecol (published online 19 July 2011)Google Scholar
  62. Theobald DM (2005) Landscape patterns of exurban growth in the USA from 1980 to 2020. Ecol Soc 10:1.
  63. Wade AA, Theobald DM (2009) Residential development encroachment on US protected areas. Conserv Biol 24:151–161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Warren PS, Katti M, Ermann M, Brazel A (2006) Urban bioacoustics: it’s not just noise. Anim Behav 71:491–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Weilgart LS (2007) The impacts of anthropogenic ocean noise on cetaceans and implications for management. Can J Zool 85:1091–1116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. World Health Organization (1999) Guidelines for community noise. WHO, GenevaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jesse R. Barber
    • 1
    Email author
  • Chris L. Burdett
    • 2
  • Sarah E. Reed
    • 2
  • Katy A. Warner
    • 3
  • Charlotte Formichella
    • 3
  • Kevin R. Crooks
    • 2
  • Dave M. Theobald
    • 2
  • Kurt M. Fristrup
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesBoise State UniversityBoiseUSA
  2. 2.Department of Fish, Wildlife and Conservation BiologyColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  3. 3.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  4. 4.Natural Sounds and Night Skies DivisionNational Park ServiceFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations