Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T02:32:04.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

15 - The Effects of Shale Gas Development on Forest Landscapes and Ecosystems in the Appalachian Basin

from Part III - Case Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2022

By
Margaret C. Brittingham  and
Patrick J. Drohan
Edited by
John Stolz ,
Daniel Bain  and
Michael Griffin
John Stolz
Affiliation:
Duquesne University, Pittsburgh
Daniel Bain
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Michael Griffin
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University, Pennsylvania
Get access

Summary

The extensive forests of the Appalachian basin have high ecological value providing critical ecosystem services as well as important habitat for vulnerable species. The Marcellus and Utica shale plays underlay much of this ecosystem, and the overlap between core forest habitat and the shale plays results in an ecosystem that is at high vulnerability to disturbance. We summarize the current extent of development and the documented and predicted effects on the Appalachian forest ecosystem. Development fragments forest habitat and results in loss of core forest primarily as a result of linear infrastructure such as pipelines and roads. USG is associated with higher levels of noise and other disturbance, increased spread of invasive plants and increased risk of contamination to surface water. Future planning and policies should be designed to protect the health and integrity of the core forests of the Appalachian basin by implementing practices to minimize fragmentation, the spread of invasive plants, noise pollution and degradation of water quality and aquatic resources as well as refining techniques for minimizing the overall footprint and implementing site reclamation.

Keywords

Appalachian basinforest fragmentationinvasive speciespipelines
Type
Chapter
Information
Environmental Impacts from the Development of Unconventional Oil and Gas Reserves , pp. 363 - 385
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdalla, C. (2009). Water Withdrawals for Development of Marcellus Shale Gas in Pennsylvania. Penn State Extension. https://extension.psu.edu/water-withdrawals-for-development-of-marcellus-shale-gas-in-pennsylvania. Accessed August 24, 2020.Google Scholar
Abramzon, S, Samaras, C, Curtright, A, Litovitz, A, and Burger, N. (2014). Estimating the consumptive use costs of shale natural gas extraction on Pennsylvania roadways. Journal of Infrastructure Systems. 20(3).Google Scholar
Akob, DM, Mumford, AC, Orem, W, Engle, MA, Klinges, JG, Kent, DB, and Cozzarelli, IM. (2016). Wastewater disposal from unconventional oil and gas development degrades stream quality at a West Virginia injection facility. Environmental Science & Technology. 50(11): 5517–5525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
AMJV (Appalachian Mountains Joint Venture. (2020). Priority landbirds. http://amjv.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/AMJV-Priority-Species.pdf. Accessed July 1, 2020.Google Scholar
Anderson, MG, Clark, M, and Sheldon, AO. (2012). Resilient sites for terrestrial conservation in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region. The Nature Conservancy, Eastern Conservation Science. 289.Google Scholar
Barlow, KM. (2019). Restoring Plant Communities for Multiple Ecosystem Functions after Natural Resource Development. PhD Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Barlow, KM, Mortensen, DA, and Drohan, PJ. (2020). Soil pH influences patterns of plant community composition after restoration with native‐based seed mixes. Restoration Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13141Google Scholar
Barlow, KM, Mortensen, DA, Drohan, PJ, and Averill, KM. (2017). Unconventional gas development facilitates plant invasions. Journal of Environmental Management. 202: 208–216.Google Scholar
Barton, EP, Pabian, SE, and Brittingham, MC. (2016). Bird community response to Marcellus shale gas development. Journal of Wildlife Management. 80(7): 1301–1313.Google Scholar
Bayne, EM, Habib, L, and Boutin, S. (2008). Impacts of chronic anthropogenic noise from energy-sector activity on abundance of songbirds in the boreal forest. Conservation Biology. 22(5): 1186–1193.Google Scholar
Brand, AB, Wiewel, ANM. and Grant, EHC. (2014). Potential reduction in terrestrial salamander ranges associated with Marcellus shale development. Biological Conservation. 180: 233–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brittingham, MC, Barton, E, Fronk, N, Bishop, J, Sullivam, K, and Morreale, S. (2014a). Forest birds, reptiles and amphibians – Quantifying Marcellus shale associated effects on habitat and communities. Final report to the Pennsylvania Game Commission State Wildlife grants Program, Agreement # 4000015961 231048.Google Scholar
Brittingham, MC, Maloney, KO, Farag, AM, Harper, DD, and Bowen, ZH. (2014b). Ecological risks of shale oil and gas development to wildlife, aquatic resources and their habitats. Environmental Science & Technology. 48(19): 11034–11047.Google Scholar
Burger, J. (2002). Restoration, stewardship, environmental health, and policy: Understanding stakeholders’ perceptions. Environmental Management. 30(5): 631–640.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burgos, WD, Castillo-Meza, L, Tasker, TL, Geeza, TJ, Drohan, PJ, Liu, XF, Landis, JD, Blotevogel, J, McLaughlin, M, Borch, T, and Warner, NR. (2017). Watershed-scale impacts from surface water disposal of oil and gas wastewater in Western Pennsylvania. Environmental Science & Technology. 51(15): 8851–8860.Google Scholar
Burton, GA, Basu, N, Ellis, BR, Kapo, KE, Entrekin, S, and Nadelhoffer, K. (2014). Hydraulic “Fracking”: Are Surface Water Impacts An Ecological Concern? Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 33(8): 1679–1689.Google Scholar
Buxton, RT, McKenna, MF, Mennitt, D, Fristrup, K, Crooks, K, Angeloni, L, and Wittemyer, G. (2017). Noise pollution is pervasive in US protected areas. Science. 356(6337): 531–533.Google Scholar
Chornesky, EA et al. (2005). Science priorities for reducing the threat of invasive species to sustainable forestry. Bioscience. 55(4): 335–348.Google Scholar
Clark, BK, Clark, BS, Johnson, LA, and Haynie, MT. (2001). Influence of roads on movements of small mammals. Southwestern Naturalist. 46(3): 338–344.Google Scholar
Cooper, J, Stamford, L, and Azapagic, A. (2018). Social sustainability assessment of shale gas in the UK. Sustainable Production and Consumption. 14: 1–20.Google Scholar
Crawford, JA and Semlitsch, RD. (2007). Estimation of core terrestrial habitat for stream-breeding salamanders and delineation of riparian buffers for protection of biodiversity. Conservation Biology. 21(1): 152–158.Google Scholar
Davic, RD and Welsh, HH. (2004). On the ecological roles of salamanders. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics. 35: 405–434.Google Scholar
DCNR. (2018). Shale gas monitoring report. PA Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. http://elibrary.dcnr.pa.gov/GetDocument?docId=1743759&DocName=37999 DCNR Shale Gas Report 2018 Interactive.pdf. Accessed July 13, 2020.Google Scholar
DiCaglio, J, Barlow, KM, and Johnson, JS. (2018). Rhetorical Recommendations Built on Ecological Experience: A Reassessment of the Challenge of Environmental Communication. Environmental Communication. 12(4): 438–450.Google Scholar
Dillon, M. (2011). Water scarcity and hydraulic fracturing in Pennsylvania: examining Pennsylvania water law and water shortage issues presented by natural gas operations in the Marcellus shale. Temple Law Review. 84: 201.Google Scholar
Drohan, PJ and Brittingham, M. (2012). Topographic and soil constraints to shale-gas development in the Northcentral Appalachians. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 76(5): 1696–1706.Google Scholar
Drohan, PJ, Brittingham, M, Bishop, J, and Yoder, K. (2012). Early trends in landcover change and forest fragmentation due to shale-gas development in Pennsylvania: A potential outcome for the Northcentral Appalachians. Environmental Management. 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drohan, PJ, Sitch, K, Barlow, KM, and Gamble, B. (2020). Unconventional shale gas site reclamation approaches: soil physical, soil chemical and plant composition outcomes. Environmental Management, in review.Google Scholar
Ehrenfeld, JG. (2000). Defining the limits of restoration: The need for realistic goals. Restoration Ecology. 8(1): 2–9.Google Scholar
Entrekin, S, Evans-White, M, Johnson, B, and Hagenbuch, E. (2011). Rapid expansion of natural gas development poses a threat to surface waters. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 9(9): 503–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Entrekin, SA, Maloney, KO, Kapo, KE, Walters, AW, Evans-White, MA, and Klemow, KM. (2015). Stream vulnerability to widespread and emergent stressors: A focus on unconventional oil and gas. Plos One. 10(9).Google Scholar
Evans, JS and Kiesecker, JM. (2014). Shale gas, wind and water: Assessing the potential cumulative impacts of Energy development on ecosystem services within the Marcellus Play. Plos One. 9(2).Google Scholar
Faaborg, J, Brittingham, M, Donovan, T, and Blake, J. (1995). Habitat fragmentation in the temperate zone. Ecology and Management of Neotropical Migratory Birds. Oxford University Press, pp. 357–380.Google Scholar
Fahrig, L and Rytwinski, T. (2009). Effects of Roads on Animal Abundance: an Empirical Review and Synthesis. Ecology and Society. 14(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farwell, LS, Wood, PB, Brown, DJ, and Sheehan, J. (2019). Proximity to unconventional shale gas infrastructure alters breeding bird abundance and distribution. Condor. 121(3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farwell, LS, Wood, PB, Dettmers, R, and Brittingham, MC. (2020). Threshold responses of songbirds to forest loss and fragmentation across the Marcellus-Utica shale gas region of central Appalachia, USA. Landscape Ecology. 35(6): 1353–1370.Google Scholar
Farwell, LS, Wood, PB, Sheehan, J, and George, GA. (2016). Shale gas development effects on the songbird community in a central Appalachian forest. Biological Conservation. 201: 78–91.Google Scholar
Finewood, MH and Stroup, LJ. (2012). Fracking and the neoliberalization of the hydro‐social cycle in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale. Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education. 147(1): 72–79.Google Scholar
Forman, RTT and Alexander, LE. (1998). Roads and their major ecological effects. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 29: 207–231.Google Scholar
Francis, CD and Barber, JR. (2013). A framework for understanding noise impacts on wildlife: An urgent conservation priority. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 11(6): 305–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, C, Paritsis, J, Ortega, C, and Cruz, A. (2011). Landscape patterns of avian habitat use and nest success are affected by chronic gas well compressor noise. Landscape Ecology. 26(9): 1269–1280.Google Scholar
Frantz, MW, Wood, PB, Sheehan, J, and George, G. (2018). Demographic response of Louisiana Waterthrush, a stream obligate songbird of conservation concern, to shale gas development. Condor. 120(2): 265–282.Google Scholar
Fredericksen, TS. (1998). Impacts of logging and development on Central Appalachian forests. Natural Areas Journal. 18(2): 175–178.Google Scholar
Frick, WF et al. (2010). An emerging disease causes regional population collapse of a common North American bat species. Science. 329(5992): 679–682.Google Scholar
Goodrich, LJ, Crocoll, ST, and Senner, SE. (2020). Broad-winged Hawk (Buteo platypterus), version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi-org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.2173/bow.brwhaw.01.Google Scholar
Habib, L, Bayne, EM, and Boutin, S. (2007). Chronic industrial noise affects pairing success and age structure of ovenbirds Seiurus aurocapilla. Journal of Applied Ecology. 44(1): 176–184.Google Scholar
He, C, Zhang, T, and Vidic, RD. (2013). Use of abandoned mine drainage for the development of unconventional gas resources. Disruptive Science and Technology. 1(4): 169–176.Google Scholar
Heilman, GE, Strittholt, JR, Slosser, NC, and Dellasala, DA. (2002). Forest fragmentation of the conterminous United States: Assessing forest intactness through road density and spatial characteristics. Bioscience. 52(5): 411–422.Google Scholar
Hein, CD. (2012). Potential Impacts of Shale Gas Development on Bat Populations in the Northeastern United States. An unpublished report submitted to the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, Bristol, Pennsylvania by Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas. www.delawareriverkeeper.org/sites/default/files/resources/Reports/Impacts_of_Shale_Gas_Development_on_Bats.pdf (Accessed July 9, 2020).Google Scholar
Hill, LAL, Czolowski, ED, DiGiulio, D, and Shonkoff, SBC. (2019). Temporal and spatial trends of conventional and unconventional oil and gas waste management in Pennsylvania, 1991–2017. Science of the Total Environment. 674: 623–636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hobbs, RJ. (2007). Setting effective and realistic restoration goals: Key directions for research. Restoration Ecology. 15(2): 354–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbs, RJ, Higgs, E, and Harris, JA. (2009). Novel ecosystems: Implications for conservation and restoration. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 24(11): 599–605.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jacquet, JB et al. (2018). A decade of Marcellus Shale: Impacts to people, policy, and culture from 2008 to 2018 in the Greater Mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Extractive Industries and Society: An International Journal. 5(4): 596–609.Google Scholar
Johnson, DL, Ambrose, SH, Bassett, TJ, Bowen, ML, Crummey, DE, Isaacson, JS, and Johnson, DN. (1997). Meanings of environmental terms. Journal of Environmental Quality. 26(3): 581–589.Google Scholar
Johnson, N, Gagnolet, T, Ralls, R, and Stevens, J. (2011). Natural Gas Pipelines: Excerpt from Report 2 of the Pennsylvania Energy Impacts Assessment. The Nature Conservancy.Google Scholar
Kellison, TB, Bunds, KS, Casper, JM, and Newman, JI. (2017). Public parks usage near hydraulic fracturing operations. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism-Research Planning and Management. 18: 75–80.Google Scholar
Kiviat, E. (2013). Risks to biodiversity from hydraulic fracturing for natural gas in the Marcellus and Utica shalesI In Schlesinger, WH and Ostfeld, RS (eds.) Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1–14.Google Scholar
Kondash, A and Vengosh, A. (2015). Water footprint of hydraulic fracturing. Environmental Science & Technology Letters. 2(10): 276–-280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozak, KH. (2017). What Drives Variation in Plethodontid Salamander Species Richness over Space and Time? Herpetologica. 73(3): 220–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlois, LA. (2017). Effects of Marcellus Shale Gas Infrastructure on Forest Fragmentation and Bird Communities in Northcentral Pennsylvania. PhD Thesis. The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Langlois, LA, Drohan, PJ, and Brittingham, MC. (2017). Linear infrastructure drives habitat conversion and forest fragmentation associated with Marcellus shale gas development in a forested landscape. Journal of Environmental Management. 197: 167–176.Google Scholar
Latta, SC, Marshall, LC, Frantz, MW, and Toms, JD. (2015). Evidence from two shale regions that a riparian songbird accumulates metals associated with hydraulic fracturing. Ecosphere. 6(9).Google Scholar
Lauer, NE, Harkness, JS, and Vengosh, A. (2016). Brine spills associated with unconventional oil development in North Dakota. Environmental Science & Technology. 50(10): 5389–5397.Google Scholar
Leonard, ML, Horn, AG, Oswald, KN, and McIntyre, E. (2015). Effect of ambient noise on parent-offspring interactions in tree swallows. Animal Behaviour. 109: 1–7.Google Scholar
Lydeard, C et al. (2004). The global decline of nonmarine mollusks. Bioscience. 54(4): 321–330.Google Scholar
Macdonald, SE, Landhausser, SM, Skousen, J, Franklin, J, Frouz, J, Hall, S, Jacobs, DF, and Quideau, S. (2015). Forest restoration following surface mining disturbance: challenges and solutions. New Forests. 46(5–6): 703–732.Google Scholar
Mack, RN, Simberloff, D, Mark Lonsdale, W, Evans, H, Clout, M, and Bazzaz, FA. (2000). Biotic invasions: Causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecological Applications. 10(3): 689–710.Google Scholar
Maloney, KO, Young, JA, Faulkner, SP, Hailegiorgis, A, Slonecker, ET, and Milheim, LE. (2018). A detailed risk assessment of shale gas development on headwater streams in the Pennsylvania portion of the Upper Susquehanna River Basin, USA. Science of the Total Environment. 610: 154–166.Google Scholar
Maloney, KO and Yoxtheimer, DA. (2012). Production and disposal of waste materials from gas and oil extraction from the Marcellus shale play in Pennsylvania. Environmental Practice. 14(04): 278–287.Google Scholar
Marcellus Shale Coalition. (2015). Pipeline and Midstream Facilities: Getting Natural Gas to Market Safely. https://marcelluscoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Midstream-and-Pipeline-Fact-Sheet_12.16.15.pdf. Accessed August 21, 2020.Google Scholar
Marquis, RJ and Whelan, CJ (1994). Insectivorous birds increase growth of white oak through consumption of leaf-chewing insects. Ecology. 75(7): 2007–2014.Google Scholar
Marsh, D, Milam, G, Gorham, N, and Beckman, N. (2005). Forest roads as partial barriers to terrestrial salamander movement. Conservation Biology. 19(6): 2004–2008.Google Scholar
MCOR (Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research). (2020 ). Tri-state unconventional shale wells drilled by year (PA,OH, WV). http://www.marcellus.psu.edu/resources/images/tristate-wells-2019.jpg. Accessed July 20. 2020.Google Scholar
Merriam, ER et al. (2018). Brook trout distributional response to unconventional oil and gas development: Landscape context matters. Science of the Total Environment. 628–629, 338–349.Google Scholar
Merriam, G, Kozakiewicz, M, Tsuchiya, E, and Hawley, K. (1989). Barriers as boundaries for metapopulations and demes of Peromyscus leucopus in farm landscapes. Landscape Ecology. 2(4): 227–235.Google Scholar
Miller, AJ and Zegre, N. (2016). Landscape-scale disturbance: Insights into the complexity of catchment hydrology in the mountaintop removal mining region of the eastern United States. Land. 522; doi:10.3390/land5030022.Google Scholar
Miller, JR and Bestelmeyer, BT. (2017). What the novel ecosystem concept provides: A reply to Kattan et al. Restoration Ecology. 25(4): 488–490.Google Scholar
Milt, AW, Gagnolet, T, and Armsworth, PR. (2016). Synergies and tradeoffs among environmental impacts under conservation planning of shale gas surface infrastructure. Environmental Management. 57(1): 21–30.Google Scholar
Mortensen, D, Rauschert, E, Nord, A, and Jones, B. (2009). Forest roads facilitate the spread of invasive plants. Invasive Plant Science and Management. 2(3): 191–199.Google Scholar
Northrup, J and Wittemyer, G. (2013). Characterising the impacts of emerging energy development on wildlife, with an eye towards mitigation. Ecology Letters. 16(1): 112–125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nyffeler, M, Sekercioglu, CH, and Whelan, CJ. (2018). Insectivorous birds consume an estimated 400–500 million tons of prey annually. Science of Nature. 105(7–8).Google Scholar
O’Connell, TJ, Jackson, LE, and Brooks, RP. (2000). Bird guilds as indicators of ecological condition in the central Appalachians. Ecological Applications. 10(6): 1706–1721.Google Scholar
Pearce, DW. (2001). The economic value of forest ecosystems. Ecosystem Health. 7(4): 284–296.Google Scholar
Perry, SL. (2012). Development, land use, and collective trauma: The Marcellus Shale gas boom in rural Pennsylvania. Culture, Agriculture, Food & Environment. 34(1): 81–92.Google Scholar
Poole, A and Hudgins, A. (2014). “I care more about this place, because I fought for it”: Exploring the political ecology of fracking in an ethnographic field school. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences. 4(1): 37–46.Google Scholar
Rauschert, ESJ, Mortensen, DA, and Bloser, SM. (2017). Human-mediated dispersal via rural road maintenance can move invasive propagules. Biological Invasions. 19(7) 2047–2058.Google Scholar
Rew, LJ, Brummer, TJ, Pollnac, FW, Larson, CD, Taylor, KT, Taper, ML, Fleming, JD, and Balbach, HE. (2018). Hitching a ride: Seed accrual rates on different types of vehicles. Journal of Environmental Management. 206: 547–555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, S, Thompson, F, Donovan, T, Whitehead, D, and Faaborg, J. (1995). Regional forest fragmentation and the nesting success of migratory birds. Science. 267(5206): 1987–1990.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, KV et al. (2019). Decline of the North American avifauna. Science. 366(6461); 120.Google Scholar
Rowland, SM, Prescott, CE, Grayston, SJ, Quideau, SA, and Bradfield, GE. (2009). Recreating a Functioning Forest Soil in Reclaimed Oil Sands in Northern Alberta: An Approach for Measuring Success in Ecological Restoration. Journal of Environmental Quality. 38(4): 1580–1590.Google Scholar
Schmid, K and Yoxtheimer, D. (2015). Wastewater recycling and reuse trends in Pennsylvania shale gas wells. AAPG Environmental Geosciences. 22(4): pp. 115–125.Google Scholar
Shen, KG. (2015). Defining Critical Forest Habitat for Area-Sensitive Forest Songbirds in Pennsylvania. MS Hood College.Google Scholar
Slonecker, E, Milheim, L, Roig-Silva, C, Malizia, A, Marr, D, and Fisher, G. (2012). Landscape Consequences of Natural Gas Extraction in Bradford and Washington Counties, Pennsylvania, 2004–2010. U.S. Geological survey open file report 2012–1154.Google Scholar
Slonecker, ET, Milheim, LE, Roig-Silva, CM, Malizia, AR, and Gillenwater, BH. (2013). Landscape Consequences of Natural Gas Extraction in Fayette and Lycoming Counties, Pennsylvania, 2004–2010. U.S. Geological survey open file report 2013–1119.Google Scholar
Souther, S, Tingley, MW, Popescu, VD, Hayman, DTS, Ryan, ME, Graves, TA, Hartl, B, and Terrell, K. (2014). Biotic impacts of energy development from shale: Research priorities and knowledge gaps. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 12(6): 330–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squires, JR, Reynolds, RT, Orta, J, and Marks, JS. (2020). Northern Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis), version 1.0. In Billerman, SM (ed.) Birds of the World. Cornell Lab of Ornithology. https://doiorg.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.2173/bow.norgos.01.Google Scholar
Tarrant, MA and Cordell, HK. (2002). Amenity values of public and private forests: examining the value–attitude relationship. Environmental Management. 30(5): 0692–0703.Google Scholar
Tarrant, MA, Cordell, HK, and Green, GT. (2003). PVF: A scale to measure public values of forests. Journal of Forestry. 101(6): 24–30.Google Scholar
Tasker, TL et al. (2018). Environmental and Human Health Impacts of Spreading Oil and Gas Wastewater on Roads. Environmental Science & Technology. 52(12): 7081–7091.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomas, EH, Brittingham, MC, and Stoleson, SH. (2014). Conventional oil and gas development alters forest songbird communities. Journal of Wildlife Management. 78(2): 293–306.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Energy. (2009). Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: A Primer. Washington, DC. www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/03/f0/ShaleGasPrimer_Online_4-2009.pdf.Google Scholar
Vining, J, Tyler, E, and Kweon, BS. (2000). Public values, opinions, and emotions in restoration controversies. Restoring nature: Perspectives from the social sciences and humanities, pp. 143–161.Google Scholar
Walters, JR. (1998). The ecological basis of avian sensitivity to habitat fragmentation In Marzlaff, JM and Sallabanks, R (eds.) Avian Conservation: Research and Management. Island Press, pp. 181–192.Google Scholar
Warren, ML and Pardew, MG. (1998). Road crossings as barriers to small-stream fish movement. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 127(4): 637–644.Google Scholar
Weltman-Fahs, M and Taylor, JM. (2013). Hydraulic fracturing and brook trout habitat in the Marcellus Shale region: Potential impacts and research needs. Fisheries. 38(1): 4–15.Google Scholar
Whelan, CJ, Sekercioglu, CH, and Wenny, DG. (2015). Why birds matter: From economic ornithology to ecosystem services. Journal of Ornithology. 156: S227–S238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, DP., Avery, JD., Gabrielson, TB. and Brittingham, MC. (2021). Experimental playback of natural gas compressor noise reduces incubation time and hatching success in two secondary cavity-nesting bird species. Ornithological Applications. 123(1): 1–11.Google Scholar
Wilson, JM and VanBriesen, JM. (2013). Source Water Changes and Energy Extraction Activities in the Monongahela River, 2009–2012. Environmental Science & Technology, 47(21): 12575–12582.Google Scholar
Wilson, JM and VanBriesen, JM. (2021). Water usage and management. In Stolz, JF, Griffin, WM, and Bain, DJ (eds.) Environmental Impacts from the Development of Unconventional Oil and Gas Reserves. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Wood, PB, Frantz, MW, and Becker, DA. (2016). Louisiana Waterthrush and Benthic Macroinvertebrate Response to Shale Gas Development. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management. 7(2): 423–433.Google Scholar
Zipper, CE, Burger, JA, McGrath, JM, Rodrigue, JA, and Holtzman, GI. (2011). Forest Restoration Potentials of Coal-Mined Lands in the Eastern United States. Journal of Environmental Quality. 40(5): 1567–1577.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×