Dear friends and colleagues,
 
We are pleased to notify you of our recent publication in Marine Ecology 
Progress Series. The short essay is a contribution to the forthcoming theme 
section 'Acoustics in marine ecology' 
(http://www.int-res.com/journals/meps/theme-sections/forthcoming-theme-sections/),
 but has broader application to impact assessment and research beyond acoustics 
and including terrestrial ecology. The pre-press abstract is available at 
http://www.int-res.com/prepress/m07979.html or you can request the full PDF 
from either of us.
 
This paper is dedicated to our dearly missed co-author, the late Dr. Amy 
Samuels.
 
Kind regards,
 
Lars ([email protected]) and Simon ([email protected])
 
----------

Bejder, L., Samuels, A., Whitehead, H., Finn, H. and Allen, S. (2009). Impact 
assessment research: use and misuse of habituation, sensitisation and tolerance 
in describing wildlife responses to anthropogenic stimuli. Marine Ecology 
Progress Series. doi: 10.3354/meps07979

ABSTRACT: Studies on the effects of anthropogenic activity on wildlife aim to 
provide a sound scientific basis for management. However, misinterpretation of 
the theoretical basis for these studies can jeopardise this objective and lead 
to management outcomes that are detrimental to the wildlife they are intended 
to protect. Misapplication of the terms 'habituation', 'sensitisation' and 
'tolerance' in impact studies, for example, can lead to fundamental 
misinterpretations of research findings. Habituation is often used incorrectly 
to refer to any form of moderation in wildlife response to human disturbance, 
rather than to describe a progressive reduction in response to stimuli that are 
perceived as neither aversive nor beneficial. This misinterpretation, when 
coupled with the widely held assumption that habituation has a positive or 
neutral outcome for animals, can lead to inappropriate decisions about the 
threats human interactions pose to wildlife. We review the conceptual framework 
for the use of habituation, sensitisation and tolerance, and provide a set of 
principles for their appropriate application in studies of behavioural 
responses to anthropogenic stimuli. We describe how cases of presumed 
habituation or sensitisation may actually represent differences in the 
tolerance levels of wildlife to anthropogenic activity. This distinction is 
vital because impact studies must address (1) the various mechanisms by which 
differing tolerance levels can occur; and (2) the range of explanations for 
habituation and sensitisation-type responses. We show that only one mechanism 
leads to true behavioural habituation (or sensitisation), while a range of 
mechanisms can lead to changes in tolerance. 

KEY WORDS: Habituation · Sensitisation · Tolerance · Human disturbance · 
Wildlife management · Conservation · Impact assessment

----------
 
Simon Allen
Research Fellow, Murdoch University Cetacean Research Unit
Centre for Fish and Fisheries Research
School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology
Murdoch University
South St., Murdoch
Western Australia 6150
 
mob: +61(0) 416 083 653
ph: +61(0)8 9360 2823
fax: +61(0)8 9360 6303
email: [email protected] 
web: http://www.cffr.murdoch.edu.au/mucru/simon_allen.html
_______________________________________________
MARMAM mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/marmam

Reply via email to