Advertisement

Urban Ecosystems

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 285–291 | Cite as

Coexistence between Nearctic-Neotropical migratory shorebirds and humans on urban beaches of the Southern Hemisphere: a current conservation challenge in developing countries

  • César CestariEmail author
Article

Abstract

The arrival of migratory shorebirds on beaches in urban communities in developing countries is a current challenge for the protection of these migrant birds. Nearctic-Neotropical migrants rely on roosting and feeding sites during their stopover on wintering sites in the Southern Hemisphere to acquire sufficient energy to complete their migratory cycles. On the other hand, cities in the Southern Hemisphere are growing rapidly, which results in increasing competition for space between humans and birds, such as for use in beach habitats. In the present study, I analyze the probability for occurrence for Nearctic-Neotropical migratory birds relative to the number of people in southeastern Brazil, the most populated region of South America. The frequency of occurrence of migrants, their distance of tolerance to people and the number of people were recorded in sample areas (circle plots with 20 m radius) on a 9 km stretch of urban beaches from November to February from 2009 to 2013. The probability of occurrence of Nearctic birds decreased as the number of people increased. When the number of people exceeded 20, the probability of occurrence of birds was almost zero. Furthermore, more than 95 % of birds moved off when people were within 16 m of reach. These results are discussed in the context of conservation actions since no management plan has been developed for migrant shorebirds that use urban beaches as stopover or wintering sites in developing countries.

Keywords

Adaptive management Charadriidae Conservation Migration Scolopacidae South America 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I’m grateful for comments of two anonymous reviewers. Helpful suggestions were provided by Bette Loiselle and Alex Jahn. This research was supported by National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (grant 140625/2009-7).

References

  1. Antas PTZ (1984) Migration of Nearctic shorebirds (Charadriidae and Scolopacidae) in Brasil: flyways and their different seasonal use. Wader Stud Group Bull 39:52–56Google Scholar
  2. Barbieri E, Mendonça JT (2006) Distribution and abundance of Charadriidae at Ilha Comprida, São Paulo State, Brazil. J Coast Res 21:1–10Google Scholar
  3. Burger J (1981) The effect of human activity on birds at a coastal bay. Biol Conserv 21:231–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burger J (1993) Shorebird squeeze. Nat Hist 102:8–12Google Scholar
  5. Burger J, Gochfeld M (1991) Human influence and diurnal and nocturnal foraging of sanderlings (Calidris alba). Condor 93:259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burger J, Niles LJ (2012) Shorebirds and stakeholders: effects of beach closure and human activities on shorebirds at a New Jersey coastal beach. Urban Ecosyst 5:50–62Google Scholar
  7. Burger J, Jeitner C, Clark K, Niles LJ (2004) The effects of human activities on migrant shorebirds: successful adaptive management. Environ Conserv 31:283–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burton NHK, Rehfisch MM, Clark NA, Dodd SG (2006) Impacts of sudden winter habitat loss on the body condition and survival of Redshank Tringa totanus. J Appl Ecol 43:464–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cestari C (2008) O uso de praias arenosas com diferentes concentrações humanas por espécies de aves limícolas (Charadriidae e Scolopacidae) neárticas no sudeste do Brasil. Biota Neotrop 8:83–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cestari C (2009) Heterospecific sociality of birds on beaches from southeastern Brazil. Zoologia 26:594–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cestari C (2011) Foraging behavior of Hudsonian Godwit Limosa haemastica (Charadriiformes, Scolopacidae) in human-disturbed and undisturbed occasions in the Atlantic coast of Brazil. Rev Bras Ornitol 19:535–538Google Scholar
  12. Gill JA (2007) Approaches to measuring the effects of human disturbances on birds. Ibis 149(Suppl 1):9–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. IBGE (2014) Diretoria de Pesquisas do Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatísticas. Coordenação de população e indicadores populacionais. http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/estimativa2012/estimativa_tcu.shtm. Accessed 23 Apr 2014
  14. Malik K (2013) Human development report. The rise of the South: human progress in a diverse world. United Nations Development Programme. http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2013/download/. Accessed 20 Sept 2013
  15. Morrison RIG (2004) Declines in wintering populations of red knots in southern South America. Condor 106:60–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pfister C, Harrington BA, Lavine M (1992) The impact of human disturbance on shorebirds at a migration staging area. Biol Conserv 60:115–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Skagen KS (2006) Migration stopovers and the conservation of Arctic-breeding Calidridine sandpipers. Auk 123:313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sutherland WJ (2007) Future directions in disturbance research. Ibis 149(Suppl 1):120–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tarifa JR (2004) Unidades climáticas dos maciços litorâneos da Juréia-Itatins. In: Marques OAV, Duleba W (eds) Estação Ecológica Juréia-Itatins: ambiente físico, flora e fauna. Holos Press, Ribeirão Preto, pp 42–50Google Scholar
  20. Thomas K, Kvitek RG, Bretz C (2003) Effects of human activity on the foraging behavior of the sanderlings Calidris alba. Biol Conserv 109:67–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Valente RM, Silva JMC, Straube FC, Nascimento JLX (2011) Conservação de aves migratórias Neárticas no Brasil. Conservação Internacional, BelémGoogle Scholar
  22. Vooren CM, Chiaradia A (1990) Seasonal abundance and behavior of coastal birds on Cassino beach, Brazil. Ornitol Neotrop 1:9–22Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de ZoologiaUniversidade Estadual Paulista “Julio de Mesquita Filho” (Unesp)Rio ClaroBrazil

Personalised recommendations