LAUSR

Abstract Using habitat mitigation to minimize or offset negative impacts of land use change on biodiversity is increasingly common and widespread. For example, where natural disturbance is undesirable (e.g., wildfire in oil and gas fields), mechanical approaches are frequently used to replace natural disturbance and improve habitat for particular species. However, the consequences of such actions for diverse animal assemblages have gone largely unexamined. To assess whether mitigation targeting single species can emulate natural processes and improve habitat for multiple species, we investigated the short-term response of birds and mammals to mechanical tree reduction and natural wildfire in a landscape altered by energy development. We found that no mammal species responded positively to mitigation for energy development in our study region. In contrast, four mammal species were positively associated with fire, and only a single species responded negatively. Similarly, only a single species of bird responded positively to mitigation. Fire had a positive effect on the density of three bird species and a negative effect on six bird species. We show that habitat mitigation intended to emulate natural disturbances and mitigate the negative effects of energy development has mixed but largely negative short-term consequences for birds and mammals. To sustain biodiversity in places undergoing rapid land use change, mitigation should explicitly measure both intended and unintended effects on diverse taxa.