If you build it, will they come? A comparative landscape analysis of ocelot roadkill locations and crossing structures

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 17; no. 5; p. e0267630
• Main Authors: Blackburn, AnnMarie, Veals, Amanda M, Tewes, Michael E, Wester, David B, Young, Jr, John H, DeYoung, Randy W, Perotto-Baldivieso, Humberto L
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 03.05.2022; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Animal populations; Animals; Animals, Wild; Biology and Life Sciences; Collisions; Communication; Conservation; Ecology and Environmental Sciences; Endangered & extinct species; Engineering and Technology; Evaluation; Felidae; Grasslands; Habitats; Humans; Leopardus pardalis; Mitigation; Mortality; Open data; People and places; Population studies; Populations; Provinces; Road construction; Roads; Roads & highways; Spatial distribution; Texas - epidemiology; Transportation planning; Wildlife; Texas; United States; Rio Grande Valley; United States > US
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267630

Wildlife-vehicle collisions can have a substantial influence on the mortality rates of many wildlife populations. Crossing structures are designed to mitigate the impact of road mortality by allowing safe passage of wildlife above or below roads, and connect to suitable areas on both sides of the road. Ocelots (Leopardus pardalis) are a federally endangered felid in the United States, with remnant populations of <80 individuals remaining in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of South Texas. Vehicle collisions are the greatest known source of mortality for ocelots in Texas. Crossing structures designed for ocelot use have been implemented throughout South Texas since the 1990s, however, ocelots rarely use them. We compared landscape characteristics between ocelot crossing structures and ocelot-vehicle collision sites. We quantified the spatial distribution of woody and herbaceous cover types surrounding ocelot crossing structures (n = 56) and ocelot-vehicle collision sites (n = 26) at multiple spatial extents and compared landscape metrics between these location types. The landscape surrounding ocelot crossing structures had 17-22% more open herbaceous cover >1,050 m from the road, and 1.2-5.8 ha larger herbaceous patches >450 m from the road compared to ocelot-vehicle collision sites. Additionally, many crossing structures installed during the 1990's are situated >100 km away from an extant ocelot population. Results from this study can guide conservation planners to place future road crossing structures in areas more likely to be used by ocelots. Our results also emphasize that reliable scientific data must be used for effective mitigation efforts. In the absence of data, post-installation assessments can improve the placement of future structures.