Landscape Ecology

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 159–168 | Cite as

Accessible habitat: an improved measure of the effects of habitat loss and roads on wildlife populations

  • Felix Eigenbrod
  • Stephen J. Hecnar
  • Lenore Fahrig
Research Article


Habitat loss is known to be the main cause of the current global decline in biodiversity, and roads are thought to affect the persistence of many species by restricting movement between habitat patches. However, measuring the effects of roads and habitat loss separately means that the configuration of habitat relative to roads is not considered. We present a new measure of the combined effects of roads and habitat amount: accessible habitat. We define accessible habitat as the amount of habitat that can be reached from a focal habitat patch without crossing a road, and make available a GIS tool to calculate accessible habitat. We hypothesize that accessible habitat will be the best predictor of the effects of habitat loss and roads for any species for which roads are a major barrier to movement. We conducted a case study of the utility of the accessible habitat concept using a data set of anuran species richness from 27 ponds near a motorway. We defined habitat as forest in this example. We found that accessible habitat was not only a better predictor of species richness than total habitat in the landscape or distance to the motorway, but also that by failing to consider accessible habitat we would have incorrectly concluded that there was no effect of habitat amount on species richness.


Habitat fragmentation Accessible habitat Road ecology Ontario Amphibians Species richness Habitat loss GIS Barriers Deforestation 



This study would not have been possible without the co-operation of many private landowners. We would also like to thank Kristen Keyes and Alison Callahan for their help in the field, many volunteers (especially Katy Heady, Wes von Papineau, Paul Sokoloff and Anne and Dean Keyes) for their help with the fieldwork and with logistic support, and the members of the GLEL for their helpful comments on the manuscript. Funding was provided through a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Doctoral Scholarship and Carleton University scholarships to Felix Eigenbrod, and NSERC Discovery Grants to Stephen J. Hecnar and Lenore Fahrig.


  1. Andren H (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat––a review. Oikos 71:355–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aresco MJ (2005) The effect of sex-specific terrestrial movements and roads on the sex ratio of freshwater turtles. Biol Conserv 123:37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhattacharya M, Primack RB, Gerwein J (2003) Are roads and railroads barriers to bumblebee movement in a temperate suburban conservation area? Biol Conserv 109:37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bishop CA, Petit KE, Gartshore ME et al (1997) Extensive monitoring of anuran populations using call counts and road transects in Ontario (1992 to 1993). In: Green DM (ed) Amphibians in decline: Canadian studies of a global problem. Herpetological conservation, vol 1. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, St Louis USA, pp 149–160Google Scholar
  5. Carr LW, Fahrig L (2001) Effect of road traffic on two amphibian species of differing vagility. Conserv Biol 15:1071–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clarke GP, White PCL, Harris S (1998) Effects of roads on badger Meles meles populations in south-west England. Biol Conserv 86:117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. deMaynadier PG, Hunter ML (1999) Forest canopy closure and juvenile emigration by pool-breeding amphibians in Maine. J Wildlife Manag 63:441–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. deMaynadier PG, Hunter ML (2000) Road effects on amphibian movements in a forested landscape. Nat Areas J 20:56–65Google Scholar
  9. de Solla SR, Shirose LJ, Fernie KJ et al (2005) Effect of sampling effort and species detectability on volunteer based anuran monitoring programs. Biol Conserv 121:585–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Epps CW, Palsboll PJ, Wehausen JD et al (2005) Highways block gene flow and cause a rapid decline in genetic diversity of desert bighorn sheep. Ecol Lett 8:1029–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:487–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fahrig L, Pedlar JH, Pope SE et al (1995) Effect of road traffic on amphibian density. Biol Conserv 73:177–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Findlay CS, Lenton J, Zheng LG (2001) Land-use correlates of anuran community richness and composition in southeastern Ontario wetlands. Ecoscience 8:336–343Google Scholar
  14. Forman RTT, Alexander LE (1998) Roads and their major ecological effects. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 29:207–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Forman RTT, Deblinger RD (2000) The ecological road-effect zone of a Massachusetts (USA) suburban highway. Conserv Biol 14:36–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fox J (2002) An R and S-Plus companion to applied regression. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  17. Fox J (2006) Car: Companion to applied regression. R package version 1.1–0. Available from (Accessed March 2007)
  18. Gagné SA, Fahrig L (2007) Effect of landscape context on anuran communities in breeding ponds in the National Capital Region, Canada. Landsc Ecol 22:205–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guerry AD, Hunter ML (2002) Amphibian distributions in a landscape of forests and agriculture: and examination of landscape composition and configuration. Cons Biol 2002:745–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gutzwiller KJ, Barrow WC (2003) Influences of roads and development on bird communities in protected Chihuahuan Desert landscapes. Biol Conserv 113:225–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harding JH (1997) Amphibians and reptiles of the Great Lakes region. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Hecnar SJ, M’Closkey RT (1998) Species richness patterns of amphibians in southwestern Ontario ponds. J Biogeog 25:763–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hels T, Buchwald E (2001) The effect of road kills on amphibian populations. Biol Conserv 99:331–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Herrmann HL, Babbitt KJ, Baber MJ et al (2005) Effects of landscape characteristics on amphibian distribution in a forest-dominated landscape. Biol Conserv 123:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Houlahan JE, Findlay CS (2003) The effects of adjacent land use on wetland amphibian species richness and community composition. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 60:1078–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Johnson WC, Collinge SK (2004) Landscape effects on black-tailed prairie dog colonies. Biol Conserv 115:487–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Keller I, Largiader CR (2003) Recent habitat fragmentation caused by major roads leads to reduction of gene flow and loss of genetic variability in ground beetles. Proc Royal Soc London B Biol Sci 270:417–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Knutson MG, Richardson WB, Reineke DM et al (2004) Agricultural ponds support amphibian populations. Ecol Apps 14:669–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Knutson MG, Sauer JR, Olsen DA et al. (1999) Effects of landscape composition and wetland fragmentation on frog and toad abundance and species richness in Iowa and Wisconsin, USA. Conserv Biol 13:1437–1446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kuehn R, Hindenlang KE, Holzgang O et al (2007) Genetic effect of transportation infrastructure on roe deer populations (Capreolus capreolus). J Hered 98:13–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Laan R, Verboom B (1990) Effects of pool size and isolation on amphibian communities. Biol Conserv 54:251–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lesbarreres D, Primmer CR, Lode T et al (2006) The effects of 20 years of highway presence on the genetic structure of Rana dalmatina populations. Ecoscience 13:531–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mace RD, Waller JS, Manley TL et al (1996) Relationships among grizzly bears, roads and habitat in the Swan Mountains, Montana. J App Ecol 33:1395–1404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mader HJ (1984) Animal habitat isolation by roads and agricultural fields. Biol Conserv 29:81–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Marchand MN, Litvaitis JA (2004) Effects of habitat features and landscape composition on the population structure of a common aquatic turtle in a region undergoing rapid development. Conserv Biol 18:758–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ontario Ministry of Transportation (2003) Provincial highways traffic volumes 1988–2003. Engineering standards branch, traffic office, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  37. Oxley DJ, Fenton MB, Carmody GR (1974) Effects of roads on populations of small mammals. J App Ecol 11:51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Petranka JW, Smith CK, Scott AF (2004) Identifying the minimal demographic unit for monitoring pond-breeding amphibians. Ecol Apps 14:1065–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Price JS, Marks DR, Howe RW et al (2004) The importance of spatial scale for conservation and assessment of anuran populations in coastal wetlands in the western Great Lakes, USA. Landsc Ecol 20:441–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. R Development Core Team (2005) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available from (Accessed March 2007)
  41. Reh W, Seitz A (1990) The influence of land use on the genetic structure of populations of the common frog Rana temporaria. Biol Conserv 54:239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Riley SPD, Pollinger JP, Sauvajot RM et al (2006) A southern California freeway is a physical and social barrier to gene flow in carnivores. Mol Ecol 15:1733–1741PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shine R, Lemaster M, Wall M et al (2004) Why did the snake cross the road? Effects of roads on movement and location of mates by garter snakes (Thamnophis sirtalis parietalis). Ecol Soc 9: [online]
  44. Skelly DK, Werner EE, Cortwright SA (1999) Long-term distributional dynamics of a Michigan amphibian assemblage. Ecol 80:2326–2337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Steen DA, Gibbs JP (2004) Effects of roads on the structure of freshwater turtle populations. Conserv Biol 18:1143–1148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Swihart RK, Slade NA (1984) Road crossing in Sigmodon hispidus and Microtus ochrogaster. J Mammal 65:357–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Todd BD, Winne CT (2006) Ontogenetic and interspecific variation in timing of movement and responses to climatic factors during migrations by pond-breeding amphibians. Can J Zool 84:715–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Trombulak SC, Frissell CA (2000) Review of the ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Conserv Biol 14:18–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Van Gelder JJ (1973) A quantitative approach to the mortality resulting from traffic in a population of Bufo bufo L. Oecologia 13:93–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vos CC, Chardon JP (1998) Effects of habitat fragmentation and road density on the distribution pattern of the moor frog Rana arvalis. J Appl Ecol 35:44–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wilbur HM (1980) Complex life-cycles. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 11:67–93Google Scholar
  52. Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Felix Eigenbrod
    • 1
  • Stephen J. Hecnar
    • 2
  • Lenore Fahrig
    • 1
  1. 1.Geomatics and Landscape Ecology Research Laboratory (GLEL), Department of BiologyCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Department of BiologyLakehead UniversityThunder BayCanada

Personalised recommendations