Advertisement

Urban Ecosystems

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 1427–1446 | Cite as

Window collisions by migratory bird species: urban geographical patterns and habitat associations

  • Marine Cusa
  • Donald A. Jackson
  • Michael Mesure
Article

Abstract

Bird collisions with buildings are an increasing concern and yet understanding the factors contributing to collisions at the species level remains largely unknown. This gap in our knowledge of species-specific strike patterns hinders the development of accurate estimates for the impact of death-by-collision on bird populations and impedes on our ability to minimize its effects. Our study offers the first examination of the impact of environmental variables on bird-window collisions at the species level. The Fatal Light Awareness Program Canada collected bird-window collision data in three distinct regions of Toronto, Canada during the migratory season of the years 2009 and 2010. Our results indicated that building percent window cover, exposed habitat cover, and cover of built structures significantly affect bird-window collisions. Multivariate analyses showed that the bird species that collided with buildings surrounded by a high level of urban greenery are species that typically occur in forested habitats and are foliage gleaners. In contrast, species that collided with buildings surrounded by a higher level of urbanization are species that typically occur in open woodland and are ground foragers. These results suggest that the composition of bird species colliding with buildings across various regions of the Greater Toronto Area is influenced by the local bird species community composition, by the configuration of the surrounding landscape, and by the levels of greenery around the buildings.

Keywords

Migratory birds Window collisions Bird strike Geographic distribution Toronto 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project would not have been possible without the help of members from the Fatal Light Awareness Program. We are particularly grateful to the volunteers of FLAP Canada who gathered the bird collision data used in this project. We would like to thank Robin Poot from Airborne Sensing Corporation and Bob Gaspirc from the Geospatial Competency Centre of the city of Toronto who provided the infrared aerial images. We are thankful for funding provided by an NSERC Discovery Grant to D.A. Jackson. We thank two anonymous reviewers for valuable feedback.

Supplementary material

11252_2015_459_Fig6_ESM.gif (665 kb)
Fig. 1

Regression plots for additional building façade variables and BWC. The relationship with Percent glass is significant with r2 = 0.36, p < 0.001 and rτ = 0.43, p < 0.001. Relationship with Façade length and Façade surface area are not significant with r2 = -0.012, p = 0.933 and rτ = 0.01, p = 0.882; and r2 = -0.01, p = 0.750 and rτ = -0.07, p = 0.378 respectively. (GIF 664 kb)

11252_2015_459_MOESM1_ESM.tif (5.2 mb)
(TIFF 5307 kb)
11252_2015_459_Fig7_ESM.gif (600 kb)
Fig. 2

Regression plots for additional building variables and BWC. The relationship with Percent glass is significant with r2 = 0.70, p < 0.001 and rτ = 0.65, p < 0.001. Relationship with building height and building top surface area are not significant with r2 = 0.008, p = 0.279 and rτ = -0.10, p = 0.452; and r2 = 0.02, p = 0.245 and rτ = 0.14, p = 0.317 respectively. (GIF 600 kb)

11252_2015_459_MOESM2_ESM.tif (5.2 mb)
(TIFF 5307 kb)

References

  1. Balogh AL, Ryder TB, Marra PP (2011) Population demography of Gray Catbirds in the suburban matrix: sources, sinks and domestic cats. J Ornithol 152:717–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banks RC (1976) Reflective plate glass—a hazard to migrating birds. Bioscience 26:414Google Scholar
  3. Bayne S, Rawson-Clark E (2012) Factors influencing the annual risk of bird–window collisions at residential structures in Alberta, Canada. Wildl Res 39:583–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beissinger SR, Osborne DR (1982) Effects of urbanization on avian community organization. Condor 84:75–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bishop CA, Brogan JM (2013) Estimates of avian mortality attributed to vehicle collisions in Canada. Avian Conserv Ecol 8:2Google Scholar
  6. Blair RB (1996) Land use and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecol Appl 6:506–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blair R (2004) The effects of urban sprawl on birds at multiple levels of biological organization. Ecol Soc 9:2Google Scholar
  8. Blancher P (2013) Estimated number of birds killed by house cats (Felis catus) in Canada. Avian Conserv Ecol 8:3Google Scholar
  9. Borden WC, Lockhart OM, Jones AW, Lyons MS (2010) Seasonal, taxonomic, and local habitat components of bird-window collisions on an urban university campus in Cleveland, OH. Ohio J Sci 110:44–52Google Scholar
  10. Calvert AM, Bishop CA, Elliot RD, Krebs EA, Kydd TM, Machtans CS, Robertson GJ (2013) A synthesis of human-related avian mortality in Canada. Avian Conserv Ecol 8:11Google Scholar
  11. Chase JF, Walsh JJ (2006) Urban effects on native avifauna: a review. Landsc Urban Plan 74:46–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clergeau P, Savard JPL, Mennechez G, Falardeau G (1998) Bird abundance and diversity along an urban–rural gradient: a comparative study between two citites on different continents. Condor 100:413–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clergeau P, Jokimäki J, Snep R (2006) Using hierarchical levels for urban ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 21:660–661CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Crawford RL (1981) Bird kills at a lighted man-made structure: often on nights close to a full moon. Am Bird 35:913–914Google Scholar
  15. Diehl RH, Larkin RP, Black JE (2003) Radar observations of bird migration over the Great Lakes. Auk 120:278–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dunn EH (1993) Bird mortality from striking residential windows in winter (mortalidad de aves ocasionada por choques con ventanas durante el invierno). J Field Ornithol 65:302–309Google Scholar
  17. Edgar DR, Kershaw GP (1994) The density and diversity of the bird populations in three residential communities in Edmonton, Alberta. Can Field Nat 108:156–161Google Scholar
  18. Evans KL, Newson SE, Gaston KJ (2009) Habitat influences on urban avian assemblages. Ibis 151:19–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Flather C, Sauer J (1996) Using landscape ecology to test hypotheses about large-scale abundance patterns in migratory birds. Ecology 77:28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fontana S, Sattler T, Bontadina F, Moretti M (2011) How to manage the urban green to improve bird diversity and community structure. Landsc Urban Plan 101:278–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fuller RA, Irvine KN, Devine-Wright P, Warren PH, Gaston KJ (2007) Psychological benefits of green space increase with biodiversity. Biol Lett 3:390–394PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Gauthreaux SA (1980) Animal migration, orientation, and navigation. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Gauthreaux SA, Belser CG (2006) Effect of artificial night lighting on migrating birds. In: Rich C, Longcore T (eds) Ecological consequences of artificial night lightning. Island Press, Washington, pp 67–93Google Scholar
  24. Gelb Y, Delacretaz N (2009) Windows and vegetation: primary factors in Manhattan bird collisions. Northeast Nat 16:455–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hager SB, Craig ME (2014) Bird-window collisions in the summer breeding season. Peer J 2:e460PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Hager SB, Trudell H, Mckay KJ, Crandall SM, Mayer L (2008) Bird density and mortality at windows. Wilson J Ornithol 120:550–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hager SB, Cosentino BJ, McKay KJ, Monson C, Zuurdeeg W, Belvins B (2013) Window area and development drive spatial variation in bird-window collisions in an urban landscape. PLoS ONE 8(1):e53371PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Herbert AD (1970) Spatial disorientation in birds. Wilson Bull 82:400–419Google Scholar
  29. Jackson DA (1997) Compositional data in community ecology: the paradigm or peril of proportions? Ecology 78:929–940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jackson DA, Harvey HH (1989) Biogeographic associations in fish assemblages: local versus regional processes. Ecology 70:1472–1484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kalinowski RS, Johnson MD (2010) Influence of suburban habitat on a wintering bird community in coastal northern California. Condor 112:274–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Klem D (1989) Bird-window collisions. Wilson Bull 101:606–620Google Scholar
  33. Klem D (1990a) Collisions between birds and windows: mortality and prevention. J Field Ornithol 61:120–128Google Scholar
  34. Klem D (1990b) Bird Injuries, cause of death, and recuperation from collisions with windows (Heridas, Causas de Muerte y Restablecimiento de Aves que Chocan con Ventanas). J of Field Ornithol 61:115–119Google Scholar
  35. Klem D, Farmer CJ, Delacretaz N, Gelb Y, Saenger P (2009) Architectural and landscape risk factors associated with bird-glass collisions in an urban environment. Wilson J Ornithol 121:126–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lancaster RK, Rees WE (1979) Bird communities and the structure of urban habitats. Can J Zool 57:2358–2368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lepczyk CA, Mertig AG, Liu J (2003) Landowners and cat predation across rural-to-urban landscapes. Biol Conserv 115:191–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Longcore T, Smith PA (2013) On avian mortality associated with human activities. Avian Conserv Ecol 8:1Google Scholar
  39. Longcore T, Rich C, Mineau P, MacDonald B, Bert DG, Sullivan LM, Mutrie E, Gauthreaux Jr.SA, Avery ML, Crawford RL, Manville II AM, Travis ER, Drake D (2012) An estimate of avian mortality at communication towers in the United States and Canada. PLoS ONE 7(4) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034025
  40. Loss SR, Will T, Marra PP (2012) Direct human-caused mortality of birds: Improving quantification of magnitude and assessment of population impact. Front Ecol Environ 10:357–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Loss SR, Will T, Loss SS, Marra PP (2014) Bird-building collisions in the United States: estimates of annual mortality and species vulnerability. Condor: Ornithol Appl 116:8–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. MacGregor-Fors I, Schondube JE (2011) Gray vs. green urbanization: relative importance of urban features for urban bird communities. Basic Appl Ecol 12:372–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Machtans CS, Wedeles CHR, Bayne EM (2013) A first estimate for Canada of the number of birds killed by colliding with building windows. Avian Conserv Ecol 8:6Google Scholar
  44. Martin GR (2011) Understanding bird collisions with man-made objects: a sensory ecology approach. Ibis 153:239–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Melles S, Glenn S, Martin K (2003) Urban bird diversity and landscape complexity: species-environment associations along a multiscale habitat gradient. Conserv Ecol 7:5Google Scholar
  46. Minor E, Urban D (2010) Forest bird communities across a gradient of urban development. Urban Ecosyst 13:51–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moore FR, Gauthreaux SA, Kerlinger P, Simons TR (1995) Habitat requirements during migration: important link in conservation. In: Martin TE, Finch DM (eds) Ecology and management of neotropical migratory birds: a synthesis and review of critical issues. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 121–144Google Scholar
  48. Mumme RL, Schoech SJ, Woolfenden GE, Fitzpatrick JW (2000) Life and death in the fast lane: demographic consequences of road mortality in the Florida Scrub-Jay. Conserv Biol 14:501–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nenadic O, Greenacre M (2007) Correspondence analysis in R, with two- and three-dimensional graphics: the ca package. J Stat Softw 20:1–13Google Scholar
  50. Newton I (2008) The migration ecology of birds. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Dougan & Associates and North–south Environmental (2009) Migratory Birds of Toronto. Report for City of TorontoGoogle Scholar
  52. Ogden LJE (1996) Collision course: The hazards of lighted structures and windows to migrating birds. University of Nebraska – Lincoln. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/flap/3/
  53. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, Legendre P, Minchin PR, O’Hara RB, Simpson GL, Solymos P, Stevens MHH, Wagner H (2013) vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.0-10. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
  54. Pennington DN, Hansel J, Blair RB (2008) The conservation value of urban riparian areas for landbirds during spring migration: land cover, scale, and vegetation effects. Biol Conserv 141:1235–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Petit DR (2000) Habitat use by landbirds along nearctic-neotropical migration routes: implications for conservation of stopover habitats. Stud Avian Biol 20:15–33Google Scholar
  56. R Core Team (2013) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/
  57. Riffell SK, Keas BE, Burton TM (2003) Birds in North American Great Lakes coastal wet meadows: is landscape context important? Landsc Ecol 18:95–111Google Scholar
  58. Robertson BA, Hutto RL (2006) A framework for understanding ecological traps and an evaluation of existing evidence. Ecology 87:1075–1085CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Robinson SK, Hoover JP (2011) Does forest fragmentation and loss generate sources, sinks, and ecological traps in migratory songbirds? In: Liu J, Hull V, Morzillo AT, Wiens JA (eds) Sources, sinks and sustainability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; New York, pp 423–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sattler T, Borcard D, Arlettaz R, Bontadina F, Legendre P, Obrist MK, Moretti M (2010) Spider, bee, and bird communities in cities are shaped by environmental control and high stochasticity. Ecology 91:3343–3353CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Schaub M, Kéry M, Korner P, Korner-Nievergelt F (2011) A critique of ‘Collision mortality has no discernable effect on population trends of North American Birds’. PLoS ONE 6:e24708, Comments (Online) URL: http://www.plosone.org/annotation/listThread.action?root=9659 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Seewagen CL, Slayton EJ (2008) Mass changes of migratory landbirds during stopovers in a New York City park. Wilson J Ornithol 120:296–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stracey CM (2011) Resolving the urban nest predator paradox: the role of alternative foods for nest predators. Biol Conserv 144:1543–1550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stracey CM, Robinson SK (2012a) Is an urban-positive species, the Northern Mockingbird, more productive in urban landscapes? J Avian Biol 43:50–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Stracey CM, Robinson SK (2012b) Are urban habitats ecological traps for native songbird? Season-long productivity, apparent survival, and site fidelity in urban and rural habitats. J Avian Biol 42:50–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Stratford JA, Robinson WD (2005) Distribution of Neotropical migratory birds across an urbanizing landscape. Urban Ecosyst 8:59–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Suarez-Rubio M, Thomlinson JR (2009) Landscape and patch-level factors influence bird communities in an urbanized tropical island. Biol Conserv 142:1311–1321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Verheijen FJ (1958) The mechanism of trapping effect of artificial light sources upon animals. Ar Néerl de Z 13:1–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Verheijen FJ (1981) Bird kills at tall lighted structures in the USA in the period 1935–1973 and kills at a Dutch lighthouse in the period 1924–1928 show similar lunar periodicity. Ardea 69:199–203Google Scholar
  70. Vries S, Verheij RA, Groenewegen PP, Spreeuwenberg P (2003) Natural environments – healthy environments? An exploratory analysis of the relationship between green space and health. Environ Plan 35:1717–1731CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marine Cusa
    • 1
  • Donald A. Jackson
    • 1
  • Michael Mesure
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Fatal Light Awareness Program Canada (FLAP Canada)TorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations