bird richness and abundance as affected by social-ecological characteristics in an urban ...

70 Pages·2015·1.99 MB·English

ABSTRACT
BIRD RICHNESS AND ABUNDANCE AS AFFECTED BY
SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS IN
AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT
Several studies have shown that products of urban development have an
impact on the behavior and ecology of animals. Urban bird communities have
been shown to have greater densities, but often lower diversity compared to their
surrounding wildlands, however the underlying drivers behind this difference are
not fully understood. This study focuses on three ecological factors mirrored in the
natural environment: ambient (urban) noise, greenscapes (city parks), and
wetscapes (groundwater recharging basins), as well as a fourth socioeconomic
factor: property value. Within a GIS framework, we analyzed bird species richness
(total number of species) and abundance (total number of birds) in the Fresno-
Clovis Metropolitan Area (FCMA) to test how each of these are influenced by the
socio-economic and environmental attributes in both the local and landscape
levels.
Local-level factors were shown to be initial key components in determining
bird species richness and abundance, followed by landscape-level features.
Further, property value was found to be a key component when comparing
alternative multivariate models. Urban ecological research as well as policy and
planning must take more multi-level, multivariate, landscape-based, and taxon
specific approaches to understand and better manage urban spaces to maximize
biodiversity.
Pedro Garcia
December 2015

BIRD RICHNESS AND ABUNDANCE AS AFFECTED BY
SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS IN
AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT

by
Pedro Garcia

A thesis
submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Biology
in the College of Science and Mathematics
California State University, Fresno
December 2015
APPROVED
For the Department of Biology:

We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student
meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the
university and the student's graduate degree program for the
awarding of the master's degree.

Pedro Garcia
Thesis Author

Madhusudan Katti (Chair) Biology

John V.H. Constable Biology

Xiaoming Yang Geo-spatial Information Center

For the University Graduate Committee:

Dean, Division of Graduate Studies
AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION
OF MASTER’S THESIS

X I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in part or in
its entirety without further authorization from me, on the
condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction
absorbs the cost and provides proper acknowledgment of
authorship.

Permission to reproduce this thesis in part or in its entirety must
be obtained from me.

Signature of thesis author:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank the CSU, College of Science and Mathematics, Fresno
Graduate Studies department, Department of Biology, and the Associated Students
Inc. (ASI) for their financial support. Thank you to my committee members: Dr.
John Constable, and Dr. Xiaoming Yang for their constant support and advice in
developing this project and my advisor Dr. Madhusudan Katti for his knowledge
on the subjects of urban ecology and animal behavior, as well as his
encouragement and guidance. I would also like to thank my fellow graduate
students Brad Schleder, Jordan Anderson, Seth Reid, and Jenny Phillips for
helping develop our Lab of Reconciliation Ecology and to Stephanie Slonka and
Chris Hensley for continuing to lead in the research. Thank you to Cindy Hua for
helping with transportation to survey sites, and for moral support throughout the
program. Lastly, I am deeply indebted to my parents Pedro Garcia Campos and
Carmen Hernandez Bustos, my mentors Anne Spohnhauer and Mark DiMaggio,
Fresno State C.A.M.P., and Danzantes Yoztaltepetl for their love, guidance, and
support.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................. vii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................... viii
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1
ULTRA-FACES ................................................................................................ 2
Recharge California .......................................................................................... 4
RATIONALE ........................................................................................................... 7
Bird Population Dynamics ................................................................................ 7
Urban Noise ...................................................................................................... 8
Property Value .................................................................................................. 9
Greenscapes ..................................................................................................... 10
Wetscapes ........................................................................................................ 11
Research Approach and Key Questions .......................................................... 13
METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 17
Study Area ....................................................................................................... 17
Data Management ........................................................................................... 17
Site Selection ................................................................................................... 19
Bird Surveys .................................................................................................... 19
Local-Level Factors ........................................................................................ 22
Landscape-Level Features ............................................................................... 24
Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 25
RESULTS ............................................................................................................... 27
Final Site Selection ......................................................................................... 27
Local-Level Variable Selection....................................................................... 27
vi vi
Page
Local-Level Analysis ...................................................................................... 27
Landscape-Level Analysis .............................................................................. 31
Multi-Level Analysis ...................................................................................... 33
DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................... 37
Local-Level ..................................................................................................... 37
Landscape-Level ............................................................................................. 40
Multi-Level ..................................................................................................... 41
Implications and Future Research ................................................................... 43
LITERATURE CITED ........................................................................................... 46
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ 52
APPENDIX A: FRESNO BIRD COUNT DATA COLLECTION FORMS ......... 53
APPENDIX B: LIST OF BIRD SPECIES COUNTED IN THE FCMA .............. 57
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. July 2015 water supplier conservation compliance data and July 2014
R-GPCD for the cities of Fresno and Clovis (California Water Boards
2015). ......................................................................................................... 6
Table 2. Data Coverage and Zestimate Accuracy table of Fresno County for
the years 2013 and 2014........................................................................... 24
Table 3. Least squares regression analysis of residuals between local-level
dependent variables and both dependent variables for the years 2013
and 2014. Bold P-values showed a significant relationship at P < 0.05
level. ......................................................................................................... 30
Table 4. Relative performance of alternative models with landscape-level
distance metric variables predicting bird species richness. ..................... 31
Table 5. Relative performance of alternative models with landscape-level
distance metric variables predicting bird abundance. .............................. 32
Table 6. Relative performance of alternative models with landscape-level
percentage buffer variables predicting bird species richness. .................. 33
Table 7. Relative performance of alternative models with landscape-level
percentage buffer variables predicting bird abundance. .......................... 34
Table 8. Relative performance of alternative models in a multi-level analysis
predicting bird species richness. .............................................................. 35
Table 9. Multivariate drivers of bird species richness, positive (+), negative (-
),2013 whole model: R2 = 0.373, R2 (adj) = 0.328, F = 8.317, p =
(3,45)
0.0002; whole model 2014: R2 = 0.054, R2 (adj) = 0.032, F =
(1,44)
2.474, p = 0.123. ...................................................................................... 35
Table 10. Relative performance of alternative models in a multi-level analysis
predicting bird abundance. ....................................................................... 36
Table 11. Multivariate drivers of bird abundance, positive (+), negative (-),
whole model 2013: R2 = 0.332, R2 (adj) = 0.249, F = 3.978, p =
(5,45)
0.0051; whole model 2014: R2 = 0.185, R2 (adj) = 0.166, F =
(1,44)
9.757, p = 0.0032. .................................................................................... 36
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Fig. 1. ULTRA-FACES model outlining the relationship between
Socioeconomic/Political Factors, Disturbance Regimes, and
Ecological factors (Katti 2009). ................................................................ 3
Fig. 2. Model showing the relationship between socioeconomic/political
factors, disturbance regimes, and ecological factors. Institutional and
individual factors as well as the disturbance regime are interrelated
so multivariate analyses are needed to determine the relationship of
each independent variable (greenscape, wetscape, property value,
and urban noise) on the dependent variables (bird species richness
and abundance). ........................................................................................ 3
Fig. 3. Map showing the categorization of the four independent variables into
two spatial scales that have been shown to effect bird distribution in
urban environments: Local-level factors and Landscape-level
features. ..................................................................................................... 4
Fig. 4. Graph showing State of California water supplier conservation
standard compliance for July 2015 (California Water Boards 2015). ...... 6
Fig. 5. Chart showing flow of water through the FCMA. Fresno has
contractual rights to 180,000 acre feet of water per year, but used
120,000 acre feet in 2013 due to lack of facilities needed for water
capture and treatment (Recharge Fresno 2015). Groundwater gets
replenished an average of 60,000 acre feet per year, percolating from
recharge basin storage (Central Valley Water Awareness Committee
2015) and annual precipitation (Weather DB 2015). .............................. 12
Fig. 6. Graph showing the over-pumping of groundwater in the FCMA,
resulting in a decrease of ~100 feet within the last 80 years (Fresno
Metropolitan Flood Control District 2007). ............................................ 13
Fig. 7. Map showing the FCMA and all 460 FBC sites. ........................................ 18
Fig. 8. Original 74 ULTRA-FACES sample sites based on median household
income levels (Reid 2011). ..................................................................... 20
Fig. 9. Map showing location of ULTRA-FACES sites, park, and recharge
basins within the FCMA, as well as the neighboring San Joaquin
River. ....................................................................................................... 21
Fig. 10. A representative 20m radius buffer in which property value was
assessed. .................................................................................................. 23