310
Views
8
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Quantifying, comparing, and contrasting forest change pattern from shale gas infrastructure development in the British Columbia’s shale gas plays

ORCID Icon, & ORCID Icon
Pages 114-128 | Received 13 May 2019, Accepted 21 Jul 2019, Published online: 07 Aug 2019

References

  • Abrahams LS, Griffin WM, Matthews HS. 2015. Assessment of policies to reduce core forest fragmentation from Marcellus shale development in Pennsylvania. Ecol Ind. 52:153–160.
  • Adams C, Janicki E, Balogun A. 2016. Summary of shale gas activity in Northeast British Columbia; in oil and gas reports. Victoria (BC): British Columbia Ministry of Natural Gas Development; p. 1–39.
  • Anderson JR. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data. Washington (DC): US Government Printing Office.
  • Armenteras D, Gast F, Villareal H. 2003. Andean forest fragmentation and the representativeness of protected natural areas in the eastern Andes, Colombia. Biol Conserv. 113(2):245–256.
  • Badiou P, Baldwin R, Carlson M, Darveau M, Drapeau P, Gaston K, Jacobs J, Kerr J, Levin S, Manseau M, et al. 2013. Conserving the world’s last great forest is possible: here’s how. International Boreal conservation science panel report. Jul. 2013. International Boreal Conservation Science Panel (IBCSP), 1-22. Canada and USA.
  • Baihly JD, Altman RM, Malpani R, Luo F 2010. Shale gas production decline trend comparison over time and basins. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition; Sept 19-22; Florence, Italy.
  • Barth JM. 2013. The economic impact of shale gas development on state and local economies: benefits, costs, and uncertainties. N Sol. 23(1):85–101.
  • Brasier K, Filteau M, Mclaughlin D, Jacquet J, Stedman R, Kelsey T, Goetz S. 2011. Residents’ perceptions of community and environmental impacts from development of natural gas in the Marcellus shale: a comparison of Pennsylvania and New York cases. J Rural Soc Sci. 26(1):32–61.
  • Braun T, Hanus S. 2005. Forest fragmentation -effects of oil and gas activities on Alberta Forests. BUEC 663 - natural resources and energy capstone. Edmonton (Alberta): The University of Alberta.
  • Brinck K, Fischer R, Groeneveld J, Lehmann S, Dantas De Paula M, Pütz S, Sexton JO, Song D, Huth A. 2017. High resolution analysis of tropical forest fragmentation and its impact on the global carbon cycle. Nat Comm. 8:14855.
  • British Columbia Oil and Gas Commission (BCOGC). 2014. Oil and Gas Land Use in Northeast British Columbia. Report 2014. Victoria British Columbia
  • British Columbia Oil and Gas Commission (BCOGC). 2015. British Columbia’s Oil and Gas Reserves and Production Report. Report for 2015. [accessed 2015 Dec]. Victoria British Columbia.
  • British Columbia Oil and Gas Commission (BCOGC). 2017. British Columbia’s Oil and Gas Reserves and Production Report. Report for 2016. [accessed 2017]. Victoria British Columbia.
  • Brittingham MC, Maloney KO, Farag AM, Harper DD, Bowen ZH. 2014. Ecological risks of shale oil and gas development to wildlife, aquatic resources and their habitats. Environ Sci Tech. 48(19):11034–11047.
  • Christopherson S, Rightor N. 2012. How shale gas extraction affects drilling localities: lessons for regional and city policy makers. J T C Manag. 2(4):1–20.
  • Considine T, Watson R, Entler R, Sparks J. 2009 Jul 24. An emerging giant: prospects and economic impacts of developing the Marcellus shale natural gas play. The Pennsylvania State University, Dept. of Energy and Mineral Engineering. University Park, Pennsylvania
  • Copeland HE, Pocewicz A, Kiesecker JM 2011. Geography of energy development in western North America: potential impacts on terrestrial ecosystems. In Energy development and wildlife conservation in Western North America; Island Press, Washington, DC. p. 7–22
  • Donnelly S, Cobbinah I, Oduro Appiah J. 2017. Comparing land change from shale gas infrastructure development in neighboring Utica and Marcellus regions, 2006–2015. J L U Sci. 12(5):338–350.
  • Drohan PJ, Brittingham M, Bishop J, 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. Environ Manag. 49(5):1061–1075.
  • Erdozain M, Freeman EC, Ouellet Dallaire C, Teichert S, Nelson HW, Creed IF. 2019. Demand for provisioning ecosystem services as a driver of change in the Canadian boreal zone. Environ. Rev. 27(2): 166–184.
  • Forestry Innovation Investment. 2017. British Columbia’s Boreal Region. Available at http://www.naturallywood.com/resources/british-columbias-boreal-region (accessed 2017 May 10
  • Grushecky ST, Wang J 2013. The impact of natural gas development on forest operations in West Virginia. Council on Forest Engineering Annual Meeting; July 7-10; Missoula, Montana, USA.
  • Jalbert K, Willow A, Casagrande D, Paladino S, editors. 2017. ExtrACTION: impacts, engagements, and alternative futures. Routledge. New York.
  • Jaspal R, Turner A, Nerlich B. 2014. Fracking on youtube: exploring risks, benefits and human values. Environ Values. 23(5):501–527.
  • Johnson EA, Miyanishi K. 2012. The boreal forest as a cultural landscape. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1249(1):151–165.
  • Kinnaman TC. 2011. The economic impact of shale gas extraction: A review of existing studies. Ecol Econ. 70(7):1243–1249.
  • Klaiber AH, Gopalakrishnan S, Hasan S. 2017. Missing the forest for the trees: balancing shale exploration and conservation goals through policy. Conserv Lett. 10(1):153–159.
  • Leclerc E, Wiersma YF. 2017. Assessing post-industrial land cover change at the pine point mine, NWT, Canada using multi-temporal Landsat analysis and landscape metrics. Environ Monit Ass. 189(4):185.
  • Lutz BD, Lewis AN, Doyle MW. 2013. Generation, transport, and disposal of wastewater associated with Marcellus Shale gas development. W Res R. 49(2):647–656.
  • McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Ene E. 2012. FRAGSTATS v4: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical and continuous maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. University of Massachusetts Amherst. [accessed 2018 March 10]. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html
  • McGarigal K, Marks BJ. 1995. FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. Gen Tech Rep. 351:122. PNW-GTR-351. Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.
  • Muehlenbachs L, Spiller E, Timmins C 2012. Shale gas development and property values: differences across drinking water sources. NBER Working Paper. 18390.
  • Nagendra H, Munroe DK, Southworth J. 2004. From pattern to process: landscape fragmentation and the analysis of land use/land cover change. Agri, Ecos Environ. 101(2–3):111–115.
  • Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). 2016. British Columbia’s Shale and Tight Resources. A product of the Energy and Mines Ministers’ Conference. [accessed 2017 May 19]. Available at http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/sources/shale-tight-resources/17692#a5
  • Olofsson P, Foody GM, Herold M, Stehman SV, Woodcock CE, Wulder MA. 2014. Good practices for estimating area and assessing accuracy of land change. R Sen Environ. 148:42–57.
  • Paolini L, Grings F, Sobrino J, Jiménez MJ, Karszenbaum H. 2006. Radiometric correction effects in Landsat multi‐date/multi‐sensor change detection studies. Int J R Sen. 27(:4):685–704.
  • Pătru-Stupariu I, Stupariu M-S, Tudor CA, Grădinaru SR, Gavrilidis A, Kienast F, Hersperger AM. 2015. Landscape fragmentation in Romania’s Southern Carpathians: testing a European assessment with local data. Landsc Urb Plan. 143:1–8.
  • Peres CA, Gardner TA, Barlow J, Zuanon J, Michalski F, Lees AC, Vieira ICG, Moreira FMS, Feeley KJ. 2010. Biodiversity conservation in human-modified Amazonian forest landscapes. Biol Conserv. 143(10):2314–2327.
  • Pfeifer M, Lefebvre V, Peres CA, Banks-Leite C, Wearn OR, Marsh CJ, Butchart SHM, Arroyo-Rodríguez V, Barlow J, Cerezo A, et al. 2017. Creation of forest edges has a global impact on forest vertebrates. Nature. 551(7679):187–191.
  • Preston TM, Kim K. 2016. Land cover changes associated with recent energy development in the Williston Basin; Northern Great Plains, USA. Sci Total Environ. 566–567:1511–1518.
  • Racicot A, Babin-Roussel V, Dauphinais J-F, Joly J-S, Noël P, Lavoie C. 2014. A framework to predict the impacts of shale gas infrastructures on the forest fragmentation of an agroforest region. Environ Manag. 53(5):1023–1033.
  • Rahm BG, Bates JT, Bertoia LR, Galford AE, Yoxtheimer DA, Riha SJ. 2013. Wastewater management and Marcellus Shale gas development: trends, drivers, and planning implications. J Environ Manag. 120:105–113.
  • Rivard C, Lavoie D, Lefebvre R, Séjourné S, Lamontagne C, Duchesne M. 2014. An overview of Canadian shale gas production and environmental concerns. Int J Coal Geol. 126:64–76.
  • Rogan J, Wright TM, Cardille J, Pearsall H, Ogneva-Himmelberger Y, Riemann R, Riitters K, Partington K. 2016. Forest fragmentation in Massachusetts, USA: a town-level assessment using Morphological spatial pattern analysis and affinity propagation. GISci R Sen. 53(4):506–519. doi:10.1080/15481603.2016.1141448.
  • Slonecker E, Milheim L, Roig-Silva C, Malizia A Landscape 2013. Consequences of Natural Gas Extraction in Allegheny and Susquehanna Counties, Pennsylvania, 2004-2010. Reston (VA): Department of the Interior/United States Geological Survey Open-File Report;1025.
  • Stephenson MH. 2015. Shale gas in North America and Europe. Ener Sci Eng. 4(1):4–13.
  • Sutton RP, Cox SA, Barree RD 2010. Shale gas plays. A performance perspective. Paper Society of Petroleum Engineers SPE 138447 Tight Gas Completions Conference; Nov 2 –3; San Antonio, Texas, USA.
  • Thomas M, Pidgeon N, Evensen D, Partridge T, Hasell A, Enders C, Herr Harthorn B, Bradshaw M. 2017. Public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing for shale gas and oil in the United States and Canada. Wiley Interdiscip Rev. 8(3):e450. doi:10.1002/wcc.450.
  • Turner BL, Moss RH, Skole DL 1993. Relating land use and global land-cover change. International geosphere-biosphere programme, Stockholm. Report, 24/Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change Programme, Report 5. Barcelona.
  • Turner BL, Skole D, Sanderson S, Fischer G, Fresco L, Leemans R 1995. Land-use and land-cover change science/research plan. The international geosphere-biosphere programme: a study of global change (IGBP) of the international council of scientific unions (ICSU) and the human dimensions of global environmental change programme (HDP) of the international social science council (ISSC). Report. Stockholm and Geneva.
  • Vengosh A, Jackson RB, Warner N, Darrah TH, Kondash AA. 2014. Critical review of the risks to water resources from unconventional shale gas development and hydraulic fracturing in the United States. Environ Sci Tech. 48(15):8334–8348.
  • Vidic RD, Brantley SL, Vandenbossche JM, Yoxtheimer D, Abad JD. 2013. Impact of shale gas development on regional water quality. Science. 340(6134):1235009.
  • Vogt P, Riitters KH, Estreguil C, Kozak J, Wade TG, Wickham JD. 2007. Mapping spatial patterns with morphological image processing. Landsc Ecol. 22(2):171–177.
  • White JC, Wulder MA, Hobart GW, Luther JE, Hermosilla T, Griffiths P, Coops NC, Hall RJ, Hostert P, et al. 2014. Pixel-based image compositing for large-area dense time series applications and science. Can J R Sen. 40(3):192–212.
  • Willow A. 2016. Energy, environment, ethnography: documenting cumulative effects in Northeastern British Columbia. Pract Anthrop. 38(3):20–21.
  • Wilson S, Demars C, Wilson SA. 2015. Bayesian approach to characterizing habitat use by, and impacts of anthropogenic features on, woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Northeast British Columbia. Cana Wild Biol Manag. 4(2):107–118.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.