North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, United States; Department of Forestry & Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, United States
Tavis Forrester
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Gekeler Lane, United States; Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Front Royal, United State
Megan C Baker-Whatton
The Nature Conservancy, Fairfax Drive Arlington, Virginia
William J McShea
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Front Royal, United State
Christopher T Rota
Division of Forestry and Natural Resources, Wildlife and Fisheries Resources Program, West Virginia University, Morgantown, United States
Stephanie G Schuttler
North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, United States
Joshua J Millspaugh
Wildlife Biology Program, Department of Ecosystem and Conservation Sciences, College of Forestry and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, United States
Roland Kays
North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences, Raleigh, United States; Department of Forestry & Environmental Resources, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, United States
Developed areas are thought to have low species diversity, low animal abundance, few native predators, and thus low resilience and ecological function. Working with citizen scientist volunteers to survey mammals at 1427 sites across two development gradients (wild-rural-exurban-suburban-urban) and four plot types (large forests, small forest fragments, open areas and residential yards) in the eastern US, we show that developed areas actually had significantly higher or statistically similar mammalian occupancy, relative abundance, richness and diversity compared to wild areas. However, although some animals can thrive in suburbia, conservation of wild areas and preservation of green space within cities are needed to protect sensitive species and to give all species the chance to adapt and persist in the Anthropocene.
