for the black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa), skylark (Alauda arvensis), and garganey (Anas querquedula) (Waterman et al. 2002). There was also evidence that
successful bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nests were farther away from
highways and railways than unsuccessful ones (Mundahl et al. 2013).
Certain bird species seem to ignore railway disturbances. For example, brants
(Branta asp.) seem to disregard the trains passing 50 m away (Owens 1977).
Likewise, although Waterman et al. (2002) found a negative effect on the density of
birds on railways in general, they did not find differences in bird density between
quiet and busy railways. Indeed, there is evidence that bird species tolerate the
railway disturbance due to the attractiveness of numerous railway-related features.
Species whose predators show negative responses to train disturbance may also
benefit from the railway vicinity (Rytwinski and Fahrig 2012). Railway verges may
create edge effects that can increase biodiversity. In fact, special microclimates—
thanks to different temperatures or insolation and new habitat availability along the
edges—can enhance habitat heterogeneity in homogeneous landscapes (Delgado
et al. 2007). In turn, these new habitats may improve resting and foraging opportunities for some bird species (Morelli et al. 2014). Also, railways can be a useful
source for gastroliths’ digestive purposes, and a source of sand bathing locations
used by birds to clean the feathers. Ghosh et al. (2010) showed that apparently due to
the food availability, house sparrows (Passer domesticus) adapted to loud noise
(between 35 and 95 dB), being undisturbed by passing trains at the railway station
study site. Equally, Li et al. (2010) observed the abundance and richness of seven
ground-dwelling bird species, namely the Tibetan ground tit (Pseudopodoces
humilis), Tibetan lark (Melanocorypha maxima), horned lark (Eremophila alpestris), white-winged snowfinch (Montifringillla nivalis), plain-backed snowfinch (M.
blandfordi), white-rumped snowfinch (M. taczanowskii), and rufous-necked snowfinch (M. ruficollis). They found greater numbers of individuals of these species near
the Qinghai-Tibet railway (less than 300 m) than farther away (from 300 to
1,200 m), probably due to verges provide nesting sites and foraging opportunities.
The non-continuous nature of the noise near railways due to the intermittent flow of
train traffic may constitute the main reason that some birds ignore the railway. This was
hypothesized by Wiacek et al. (2015) to explain the greater abundance of the breeding
community of woodland birds near a busy railway line in Poland when they assessed the
effect of noise at three different distances from the track (30, 280, and 530 m). Species
with low frequency calls, such as the wood pigeon (Columba palumbus) and common
cuckoo (Cuculus canorus), also occurred in large numbers near railways. Other bird
species also seem to ignore the railway disturbance. For example, more than 90% of bald
eagle nests were built near human infrastructures, including railways that had more than
1,000 railcars going by each day (Mundahl et al. 2013).
6 Railway Disturbances on Wildlife: Types, Effects, and Mitigation …
87
successful bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nests were farther away from
highways and railways than unsuccessful ones (Mundahl et al. 2013).
Certain bird species seem to ignore railway disturbances. For example, brants
(Branta asp.) seem to disregard the trains passing 50 m away (Owens 1977).
Likewise, although Waterman et al. (2002) found a negative effect on the density of
birds on railways in general, they did not find differences in bird density between
quiet and busy railways. Indeed, there is evidence that bird species tolerate the
railway disturbance due to the attractiveness of numerous railway-related features.
Species whose predators show negative responses to train disturbance may also
benefit from the railway vicinity (Rytwinski and Fahrig 2012). Railway verges may
create edge effects that can increase biodiversity. In fact, special microclimates—
thanks to different temperatures or insolation and new habitat availability along the
edges—can enhance habitat heterogeneity in homogeneous landscapes (Delgado
et al. 2007). In turn, these new habitats may improve resting and foraging opportunities for some bird species (Morelli et al. 2014). Also, railways can be a useful
source for gastroliths’ digestive purposes, and a source of sand bathing locations
used by birds to clean the feathers. Ghosh et al. (2010) showed that apparently due to
the food availability, house sparrows (Passer domesticus) adapted to loud noise
(between 35 and 95 dB), being undisturbed by passing trains at the railway station
study site. Equally, Li et al. (2010) observed the abundance and richness of seven
ground-dwelling bird species, namely the Tibetan ground tit (Pseudopodoces
humilis), Tibetan lark (Melanocorypha maxima), horned lark (Eremophila alpestris), white-winged snowfinch (Montifringillla nivalis), plain-backed snowfinch (M.
blandfordi), white-rumped snowfinch (M. taczanowskii), and rufous-necked snowfinch (M. ruficollis). They found greater numbers of individuals of these species near
the Qinghai-Tibet railway (less than 300 m) than farther away (from 300 to
1,200 m), probably due to verges provide nesting sites and foraging opportunities.
The non-continuous nature of the noise near railways due to the intermittent flow of
train traffic may constitute the main reason that some birds ignore the railway. This was
hypothesized by Wiacek et al. (2015) to explain the greater abundance of the breeding
community of woodland birds near a busy railway line in Poland when they assessed the
effect of noise at three different distances from the track (30, 280, and 530 m). Species
with low frequency calls, such as the wood pigeon (Columba palumbus) and common
cuckoo (Cuculus canorus), also occurred in large numbers near railways. Other bird
species also seem to ignore the railway disturbance. For example, more than 90% of bald
eagle nests were built near human infrastructures, including railways that had more than
1,000 railcars going by each day (Mundahl et al. 2013).
6 Railway Disturbances on Wildlife: Types, Effects, and Mitigation …
87