Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Uncovering the potential for exurban properties and small working farms in the Midwestern United States to provide food and refuge for pollinators

  • Published:
Urban Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Creating or restoring habitat is a well-established approach to improve pollinator populations. Rural and exurban properties might constitute a straightforward opportunity to convert land to native plants that are beneficial to pollinators given that, in Ohio, these parcels typically contain substantial lawn cover. The purpose of this study is to gauge the public’s acceptance of planting native plants on low-density rural properties. Out of 7557 properties in Butler County, Ohio (U.S.A.), that had at least ¼ acre lawn, were between 1 and 20 acres, and had a dwelling, 200 were randomly selected to receive a survey; half via the drop-off pick-up method and half via mail (for a combined 58% response rate). Pollinator beneficial plants of differing appearance, management, and pollinator service were shown in the questionnaire: Echinacea purpurea, Monarda fistulosa, Asclepias syriaca, and wildflower prairie (multiple species). Respondents were significantly less likely to be willing to plant Asclepias syriaca compared to the other plants shown. If all respondents planted what they said they would consider planting in the more accepted plants, these potentially new plantings would cover 5.4% of the 146.2 km2 devoted to these rural and exurban parcels in the county. However, that proportion decreases to 1% if we only take into account those that said they would make those changes within the year. We discuss what we see as challenges and opportunities to increase pollinator plantings on exurban properties and small working farms in the Midwest. We also describe implications for voluntary habitat restoration on these private lands.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The unidentified survey results are available upon request to the primary author.

References

  • Adamson NL, Borders B, Cruz J, Jordan SF, Gill K, Hopwood J, Lee-Mäder D, Minnerath A, Vaughan M (2017) Pollinator plants Great Lakes region. Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. Serial Number 17–047. https://xerces.org/sites/default/files/2018-05/17-047_03_XercesSoc_Pollinator-Plants_Great-Lakes-Region_web-4page.pdf

  • Baker AM, Potter DA (2020) Invasive paper wasp turns urban pollinator gardens into ecological traps for monarch butterfly larvae. Nat Sci Rep 10(1):1–7

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67(1):1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borders B, Lee-Mäder E (2014) Milkweeds: A Conservation Practioner’s Guide. 146pp. The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Portland, OR

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown MJF, Paxton RJ (2009) The conservation of bees: a global perspective. Apidologie. 40(3):410–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burr A, Hall DM, Schaeg N (2018) The perfect lawn: exploring neighborhood socio-cultural drivers for insect pollinator habitat. Urban Ecosyst 21(6):1123–1137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavender-Bares J, Padullés Cubino J, Pearse WD, Hobbie SE, Lange AJ, Knapp S, Nelson KC (2020) Horticultural availability and homeowner preferences drive plant diversity and composition in urban yards. Ecol Appl 30(4):e02082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen W, Jim C (2008) Assessment and valuation of the ecosystem services provided by urban forests, 53–83 in (Eds Carreiro, M.M., Song, Y.C., and J. Wu), Ecology, Planning and Management of Urban Forests: International Perspectives, Springer, New York 456 pp

  • Chowdhury R, Larson K, Grove M, Polsky C, Cook E, Onsted J, Ogden L. (2011) A multi-scalar approach to theorizing socio-ecological dynamics of urban residential landscapes. Cities and the Environment (CATE) 4(1):6. https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cate/vol4/iss1/6

  • Conway TM (2016) Tending their urban forest: residents’ motivations for tree planting and removal. Urban For Urban Green 17:23–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook EM, Hall SJ, Larson KL (2012) Residential landscapes as social-ecological systems: a synthesis of multi-scalar interactions between people and their home environment. Urban Ecosyst 15(1):19–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Core Team R (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria URL https://www.R-project.org/

    Google Scholar 

  • Derby Lewis AD, Bouman MJ, Winter A, Hasle E, Stotz D, Johnston MK, Czarnecki C (2019) Does nature need cities? Pollinators reveal a role for cities in wildlife conservation. Front Ecol Evol 7:220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2014) Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method (Fourth ed.). John Wiley, Hoboken, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth D (2015) Ohio trees for bees. The Ohio State University extension. ENT-71. Retrieved 06-28-2019, https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/ent-71

  • Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An {R} companion to applied regression, Second Edition. Sage, Thousand Oaks CA URL: http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion

    Google Scholar 

  • Garbuzov M, Fensome KA, Ratnieks FL (2015) Public approval plus more wildlife: twin benefits of reduced mowing of amenity grass in a suburban public park in Saltdean, UK. Insect Conserv Divers 8(2):107–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garibaldi LA, Steffan-Dewenter I, Kremen C, Morales JM, Bommarco R, Cunningham SA, Klein AM (2011) Stability of pollination services decreases with isolation from natural areas despite honey-bee visits. Ecol Lett 14(10):1062–1072

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gels JA, Held DW, Potter DA (2002) Hazards of insecticides to the bumble bees Bombus impatiens (Hymenoptera: Apidae) foraging on flowering white clover in turf. J Econ Entomol 95(4):722–728

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glass GV, Peckham PD, Sanders JR (1972) Consequences of failure to meet assumptions underlying the fixed effects analyses of variance and covariance. Rev Educ Res 42(3):237–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo T, Morgenroth J, Conway T (2019) To plant, remove, or retain: Understanding property owner decisions about trees during redevelopment. Landsc Urban Plan 190:103601

  • Hall DM, Camilo GR, Tonietto RK, Ollerton J, Ahrné K, Arduser M et al (2017) The city as a refuge for insect pollinators. Conserv Biol 31(1):24–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harrell FE Jr, with contributions from Charles Dupont and many others (2020) Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous. R package version 4.4-0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Hmisc

  • Hope RM (2013) Rmisc: Rmisc: Ryan miscellaneous. R package version 1.5. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Rmisc

  • Hope D, Gries C, Zhu WX, Fagan WF, Redman CL, Grimm NB, Nelson AL, Martin C, Kinzig A. (2003) Socioeconomics drive urban plant diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:8788–8792. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1537557100

  • Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biom J 50(3):346–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • IPBES (2016) The assessment report of the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services on pollinators, pollination and food production. In: Potts SG, Imperatriz-Fonseca VL and Ngo HT (eds), Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Bonn, p 552. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3402856

  • Johnston MK, Hasle EM, Klinger KR, Lambruschi MP, Derby Lewis A, Stotz DF, Winter AM, Bouman MJ, Redlinski I (2019) Estimating milkweed abundance in metropolitan areas under existing and user-defined scenarios. Front Ecol Evol 7:210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal D, Williams KJ, Williams NS (2012) Plant traits link people’s plant preferences to the composition of their gardens. Landsc Urban Plan 105(1–2):34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick JB, Davison A, Daniels GD (2012) Resident attitudes towards trees influence the planting and removal of different types of trees in eastern Australian cities. Landsc Urban Plan 107(2):147–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen RHB (2017) lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. J Stat Softw 82(13):1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen L, Harlan SL (2006) Desert dreamscapes: residential landscape preference and behavior. Landsc Urban Plan 78(1):85–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson JL, Redmond CT, Potter DA (2013) Assessing insecticide hazard to bumble bees foraging on flowering weeds in treated lawns. PLoS One 8(6):e66375

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Larson JL, Kesheimer AJ, Potter DA (2014) Pollinator assemblages on dandelions and white clover in urban and suburban lawns. J Insect Conserv 18:863–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerman SB, Contosta AR, Milam J, Bang C (2018) To mow or to mow less: Lawn mowing frequency affects bee abundance and diversity in suburban yards. Biol Conserv 221:160–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindemann-Matthies P, Junge X, Matthies D (2010) The influence of plant diversity on people’s perception and aesthetic appreciation of grassland vegetation. Biol Conserv 143(1):195–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke DH, Roy Chowdhury R, Grove JM, Martin DG, Goldman E, Rogan J, Groffman P (2018) Social norms, yard care, and the difference between front and back yard management: examining the landscape mullets concept on urban residential lands. Soc Nat Resour 31(10):1169–1188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowenstein DM, Minor ES (2016) Diversity in flowering plants and their characteristics: integrating humans as a driver of urban floral resources. Urban Ecosyst 19(4):1735–1748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludman SW, Boyle RJ (2015) Stinging insect allergy: current perspectives on venom immunotherapy. J Asthma Allergy 8:75

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Mach BM, Potter DA (2018) Quantifying bee assemblages and attractiveness of flowering woody landscape plants for urban pollinator conservation. PLoS One 13(12):e0208428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • MacIvor JS, Cabral JM, Packer L (2014) Pollen specialization by solitary bees in an urban landscape. Urban Ecosyst 17(1):139–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minor E, Belaire JA, Davis A, Franco M, Lin M (2016) Socioeconomics and neighbor mimicry drive yard and neighborhood vegetation patterns, 56–74. In: Francis RA, Millington JDA, Chadwick MA (eds) . Urban Landscape Ecology: Science, Policy and Practice, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Monarch Joint Venture (n.d.). Partnering across the U.S. to conserve the monarch migration. Retrieved 06-28-2019, https://monarchjointventure.org/images/uploads/documents/MonarchMisconceptions.pdf

  • Nassauer JI, Wang Z, Dayrell E (2009) What will the neighbors think? Cultural norms and ecological design. Landsc Urban Plan 92(3–4):282–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nassauer JI, Cooper DA, Marshall LL, Currie WS, Hutchins M, Brown DG (2014) Parcel size related to household behaviors affecting carbon storage in exurban residential landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 129:55–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielson L, Smith CL (2005) Influences on residential yard care and water quality: Tualatin watershed, Oregon. JAWRA J Am Water Resour Assoc 41:93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ollerton J, Winfree R, Tarrant S (2011) How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos 120(3):321–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padullés Cubino J, Avolio ML, Wheeler MM, Larson KL, Hobbie SE, Cavender-Bares J et al (2020) Linking yard plant diversity to homeowners’ landscaping priorities across the US. Landsc Urban Plan 196:103730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pincetl S (2010) From the sanitary city to the sustainable city: challenges to institutionalizing biogenic (nature’s services) infrastructure. Local Environ 15(1):43–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polsky C, Grove JM, Knudson C, Groffman PM, Bettez N, Cavender-Bares J et al (2014) Assessing the homogenization of urban land management with an application to US residential lawn care. Proc Natl Acad Sci PNAS 111(12):4432–4437

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Potts SG, Biesmeijer JC, Kremen C, Neumann P, Schweigerand O, Kunin WE (2010) Global Pollinator Declines: Trends, Impacts and Drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 25(6):345–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2010.01.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ramer H, Nelson KC, Spivak M, Watkins E, Wolfin J, Pulscher M (2019) Exploring park visitor perceptions of ‘flowering bee lawns’ in neighborhood parks in Minneapolis, MN, US. Landsc Urban Plan 189:117–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins P (2007) Lawn people: how grasses, weeds, and chemicals make us who we are. Temple University Press, Philadelphia

  • Robinson DT (2012) Land-cover fragmentation and configuration of ownership parcels in an exurban landscape. Urban Ecosyst 15(1):53–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sisser JM, Nelson KC, Larson KL, Ogden LA, Polsky C, Chowdhury RR (2016) Lawn enforcement: how municipal policies and neighborhood norms influence homeowner residential landscape management. Landsc Urban Plan 150:16–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southon GE, Jorgensen A, Dunnett N, Hoyle H, Evans KL (2017) Biodiverse perennial meadows have aesthetic value and increase residents’ perceptions of site quality in urban green-space. Landsc Urban Plan 158:105–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spivak M, Mader E, Vaughan M, Euliss NH (2011) The plight of the bees. Environ Sci Technol 45(1):34–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • The Bee and Butterfly Habitat Fund. (n.d.) Retrieved 07-03-2019, https://beeandbutterflyfund.org/

  • Thogmartin WE, López-Hoffman L, Rohweder J, Diffendorfer J, Drum R, Semmens D et al (2017) Restoring monarch butterfly habitat in the Midwestern US:‘all hands on deck’. Environ Res Lett 12(7):074005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2011. Plants poisonous to livestock in the Western States. By K.E. Panter, M.H. Ralphs, J.A. Pfister, D.R. Gardner, B.L. Stegelmeier, S.T. Lee, K.D. Welch, B.T. Green, T.Z. Davis, and D. Cook. Washington: Government Printing Office. (United States Department of Agriculture Bulletin no. 415)

  • USDA, NRCS. (2019) The PLANTS database (retrieved 01-21-2019, http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA

  • Visscher RS, Nassauer JI, Brown DG, Currie WS, Parker DC (2014) Exurban residential household behaviors and values: influence of parcel size and neighbors on carbon storage potential. Landsc Urban Plan 132:37–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visscher RS, Nassauer JI, Marshall LL (2016) Homeowner preferences for wooded front yards and backyards: implications for carbon storage. Landsc Urban Plan 146:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westerhold CM, Wortman S, Todd K, Golick D (2018) Knowledge of pollinator conservation and associated plant recommendations in the horticultural retail industry. HortTechnology 28(4):529–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickham H (2009) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer, New York

  • Wilson JS, Forister ML, Carril OM (2017) Interest exceeds understanding in public support of bee conservation. Front Ecol Environ 15(8):460–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the NSF’s REU Site: “The Ecology of Human-Dominated Landscapes” (DBI-1460518), as well as Miami University College of Arts and Sciences funds. Alec Iruri-Tucker contributed to data collection and entry and was funded through this REU. Thank you to Dr. Ann Rypstra, Dr. Michelle Boone, and Janine Batdorf for feedback on the survey questions and design. We greatly appreciate Debra White for her assistance in printing address labels and checking survey packets. The authors also wish to extend our gratitude to Zoey Scancarello for classifying if the patches were in the front/side/backyards, as well as Dr. Emily Minor for feedback on earlier versions of this manuscript. Lastly, we also wish to thank the residents of Butler County, OH who consented to participate in this project and took time out of their busy lives to answer the survey questions.

Funding

This research was supported by the NSF’s REU Site: “The Ecology of Human-Dominated Landscapes” (DBI-1460518), as well as Miami University College of Arts and Sciences funds.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, Miami University, Oxford, OH, USA

    Amélie Davis

  2. Institute for the Environment and Sustainability, Miami University, 250 South Patterson Avenue, Miami University, Oxford, OH, 45056, USA

    Amélie Davis, Olivia Herron & Sarah Dumyahn

Authors
  1. Amélie Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olivia Herron
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sarah Dumyahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by Olivia Herron, and Alec Iruri-Tucker. Data analysis was performed by Amélie Davis. The introduction was written by Olivia Herron and Amélie Davis; the rest of the manuscript was written by Amélie Davis. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amélie Davis.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest/competing interests

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Code availability

The R code is available upon request to the primary author.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 36 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Davis, A., Herron, O. & Dumyahn, S. Uncovering the potential for exurban properties and small working farms in the Midwestern United States to provide food and refuge for pollinators. Urban Ecosyst 24, 1047–1060 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01094-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-021-01094-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation