The DOI matches its Crossref record; 108 of the 108 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
THE HUMAN FOOTPRINT IN THE WEST: A LARGE‐SCALE ANALYSIS OF ANTHROPOGENIC IMPACTS
Abstract
Anthropogenic features such as urbanization, roads, and power lines, are increasing in western United States landscapes in response to rapidly growing human populations. However, their spatial effects have not been evaluated. Our goal was to model the human footprint across the western United States. We first delineated the actual area occupied by anthropogenic features, the physical effect area. Next, we developed the human footprint model based on the ecological effect area, the zone influenced by features beyond their physical presence, by combining seven input models: three models quantified top‐down anthropogenic influences of synanthropic predators (avian predators, domestic dog and cat presence risk), and four models quantified bottom‐up anthropogenic influences on habitat (invasion of exotic plants, human‐caused fires, energy extraction, and anthropogenic wildland fragmentation). Using independent bird population data, we found bird abundance of four synanthropic species to correlate positively with human footprint intensity and negatively for three of the six species influenced by habitat fragmentation. We then evaluated the extent of the human footprint in relation to terrestrial (ecoregions) and aquatic systems (major rivers and lakes), regional management and conservation status, physical environment, and temporal changes in human actions. The physical effect area of anthropogenic features covered 13% of the western United States with agricultural land (9.8%) being most dominant. High‐intensity human footprint areas (class 8–10) overlapped highly productive low‐elevation private landholdings and covered 7% of the western United States compared to 48% for low‐intensity areas (class 1–3), which were confined to low‐productivity high‐elevation federal landholdings. Areas within 1 km of rivers were more affected by the human footprint compared to lakes. Percentage human population growth was higher in low‐intensity human footprint areas. The disproportional regional effects of the human footprint on landscapes in the western United States create a challenge to management of ecosystems and wildlife populations. Using footprint models, managers can plan land use actions, develop restoration scenarios, and identify areas of high conservation value at local landscapes within a regional context. Moreover, human footprint models serve as a tool to stratify landscapes for studies investigating floral and faunal response to human disturbance intensity gradients.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Human domination of Earth’s ecosystems
Vitousek, P. M., Mooney, H. A., Lubchenco, J., & Melillo, J. M. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.277.5325.494 · Cited by 9,086
Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems
Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S., Foley, J. A., Folke, C., & Walker, B. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35098000 · Cited by 7,510
Sources, Sinks, and Population Regulation
Pulliam, H. R. (1988) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/284880 · Cited by 5,367
Biological Invasions by Exotic Grasses, the Grass/Fire Cycle, and Global Change
D'Antonio, C. M., & Vitousek, P. M. (1992) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.es.23.110192.000431 · Cited by 3,399
Landscape Ecology: The Effect Of Pattern On Process
Turner, M. G. (1989) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.20.1.171 · Cited by 3,273
Quantifying Threats to Imperiled Species in the United States
Wilcove, D. S., Rothstein, D., Dubow, J., Phillips, A., & Losos, E. (1998) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1313420 · Cited by 3,097
Ecological Resilience—In Theory and Application
Gunderson, L. H. (2000) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.425 · Cited by 2,751
The Human Footprint and the Last of the Wild
SANDERSON, E. W., JAITEH, M., LEVY, M. A., REDFORD, K. H., WANNEBO, A. V., & WOOLMER, G. (2002) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0891:thfatl]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 2,469
ROADS AND THEIR MAJOR ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Forman, R. T. T., & Alexander, L. E. (1998) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.207 · Cited by 2,364
(1996) · American Scientist · Cited by 2,038
Cited by
Kennedy, C. M., Oakleaf, J. R., Theobald, D. M., Baruch‐Mordo, S., & Kiesecker, J. (2019) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.14549 · Cited by 722
Quantifying the human influence on fire ignition across the western USA
Fusco, E. J., Abatzoglou, J. T., Balch, J. K., Finn, J. T., & Bradley, B. A. (2016) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1002/eap.1395 · Cited by 97
BURDETT, C. L., CROOKS, K. R., THEOBALD, D. M., WILSON, K. R., BOYDSTON, E. E., LYREN, L. M., FISHER, R. N., VICKERS, T. W., MORRISON, S. A., & BOYCE, W. M. (2010) · Ecosphere · doi:10.1890/es10-00005.1 · Cited by 89
Bui, T.-V. D., Marzluff, J. M., & Bedrosian, B. (2010) · The Condor · doi:10.1525/cond.2010.090132 · Cited by 73
Sanderson, E. W. (2013) · Biodiversity Monitoring and Conservation · doi:10.1002/9781118490747.ch9 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Leu, M., Hanser, S. E., & Knick, S. T.
- Venue
- Ecological Applications
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-07
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1119-1139
- ISSN
- 1051-0761 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-5582
- OpenAlex
- W2136208313
- Cited by
- 334
- References
- 108
- FWCI
- 13.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: THE HUMAN FOOTPRINT IN THE WEST: A LARGE‐SCALE ANALYSIS OF ANTHROPOGENIC IMPACTS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/07-0480.1
- The paper
- Leu, M., Hanser, S. E., & Knick, S. T. (2008). THE HUMAN FOOTPRINT IN THE WEST: A LARGE‐SCALE ANALYSIS OF ANTHROPOGENIC IMPACTS. Ecological Applications. https://doi.org/10.1890/07-0480.1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.