IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0101565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Refining Estimates of Bird Collision and Electrocution Mortality at Power Lines in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Scott R Loss
  • Tom Will
  • Peter P Marra

Abstract

Collisions and electrocutions at power lines are thought to kill large numbers of birds in the United States annually. However, existing estimates of mortality are either speculative (for electrocution) or based on extrapolation of results from one study to all U.S. power lines (for collision). Because national-scale estimates of mortality and comparisons among threats are likely to be used for prioritizing policy and management strategies and for identifying major research needs, these estimates should be based on systematic and transparent assessment of rigorously collected data. We conducted a quantitative review that incorporated data from 14 studies meeting our inclusion criteria to estimate that between 12 and 64 million birds are killed each year at U.S. power lines, with between 8 and 57 million birds killed by collision and between 0.9 and 11.6 million birds killed by electrocution. Sensitivity analyses indicate that the majority of uncertainty in our estimates arises from variation in mortality rates across studies; this variation is due in part to the small sample of rigorously conducted studies that can be used to estimate mortality. Little information is available to quantify species-specific vulnerability to mortality at power lines; the available literature over-represents particular bird groups and habitats, and most studies only sample and present data for one or a few species. Furthermore, additional research is needed to clarify whether, to what degree, and in what regions populations of different bird species are affected by power line-related mortality. Nonetheless, our data-driven analysis suggests that the amount of bird mortality at U.S. power lines is substantial and that conservation management and policy is necessary to reduce this mortality.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott R Loss & Tom Will & Peter P Marra, 2014. "Refining Estimates of Bird Collision and Electrocution Mortality at Power Lines in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-10, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0101565
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0101565
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0101565
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0101565&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0101565?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. PĂ©ron, Guillaume, 2018. "Process-based vs. ad-hoc methods to estimate mortality using carcass surveys data: A review and a note about evidence complacency," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 384(C), pages 111-118.
    2. Ezra Hadad & Piotr Zduniak & Reuven Yosef, 2022. "Sustaining Increasing Wintering Raptor Populations in Central Israel: A 38 Years Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-14, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0101565. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.