Influence of land use on the integrity of marsh bird communities of Chesapeake Bay, USA

Abstract

The landscape within the Chesapeake Bay watershed has been and continues to be impacted by human modifications. Understanding if such anthropogenic disturbances influence organisms that are dependent upon estuarine wetlands remains unclear. We developed an index of marsh bird community integrity (IMBCI) to evaluate marsh bird communities and wetland condition. During the 2002 and 2003 summers, we detected 30 bird species at 219 point count locations distributed among 96 wetlands. IMBCI scores for each wetland were used to determine whether wetland habitat characteristics and urban/suburban development, agriculture, and forest at three different spatial scales (watershed, 1000-m buffer, and 500-m buffer) influenced marsh bird community integrity. We found no relationship between IMBCI scores and wetland habitat characteristics, implying that marsh bird community integrity is not related to any single plant community. Nonparametric changepoint analysis indicated that marsh bird community integrity was significantly reduced when the amount of urban/suburban development within 500 m and 1000m of the marsh exceeded 14% and 25%, respectively. There was no effect of urban/suburban development on IMBCI scores at the watershed scale. The results of our study demonstrate that marsh bird community integrity shows a threshold response to urban/suburban development at local scales. IMBCI scores, combined with the identification of a land-use threshold, can be easy to interpret and may help communicate complex ecological data to natural resource managers and conservation planners.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Literature Cited

  1. Angermeier, P. L. and J. R. Karr. 1986. Applying an index of biotic integrity based on stream-fish communities: considerations in sampling and interpretation. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 6:418–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Blair, R. B. 1996. Land use and species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecological Applications 6:506–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bradford, D. F., S. E. Franson, G. R. Miller, A. C. Neale, G. E. Canterbury, and D. T. Heggem. 1998. Bird species assemblages as indicators of biotic integrity in Great Basin rangeland. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 49:1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bryce, S. A., R. M. Hughes, and P. R. Kaufmann. 2002. Development of a bird integrity index: using bird assemblages as indicators of riparian condition. Environmental Management 30:294–310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Burger, J., J. Shisler, and F. H. Lesser. 1982. Avian utilization of six salt marshes in New Jersey. Biological Conservation 23:187–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Burton, T. M., D. G. Uzarski, J. P. Gathman, J. A. Genet, B. E. Keas, and C. A. Stricker. 1999. Development of a preliminary invertebrate index of biotic integrity for Lake Huron costal wetlands. Wetlands 19:869–882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Canterbury, G. E., T. E. Martin, D. R. Petit, L. J. Petit, and D. F. Bradford. 2000. Bird communities and habitat as ecological indicators of forest condition in regional monitoring. Conservation Biology 14:544–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chase, M. K., W. B. Kristan III, A. J. Lynam, M. V. Price, and J. T. Rotenberry. 2000. Single species as indicators o species richness and composition in California coastal sage scrub birds and small mammals. Conservation Biology 14:474–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cohen, J. E., C. Small, A. Mellinger, J. Gallup, and J. Sachs. 1997. Estimates of coastal populations. Science 278:1211–1212.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Craig, R. J. and K. G. Beal. 1992. The influence of habitat variables on marsh bird communities of the Connecticut River estuary. Wilson Bulletin 104:295–311.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Croonquist, M. J. and R. P. Brooks. 1991. Use of avian and mammalian guilds as indicators of cumulative impacts in riparian wetland areas. Environmental Monitoring 15:701–714.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Culliton, T. J., M. A. Warren, T. R. Goodspeed, D. G. Remer, C. M. Blackwell, and J. J. McDonough, III. 1990. 50 Years of Population Change along the Nation’s Coasts 1960–2010. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Rockville, MD, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dauer, D. M., J. A. Ranasinghe, and S. B. Weisberg. 2000. Relationsships between benthic community condition, water quality, sediment quality, nutrient loads, and land use patterns in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 23:80–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Edgar, G. J., N. S. Barrett, D. J. Graddon, and P. R. Last. 2000. The conservation significance of estuaries: A classification of Tasmanian estuaries using ecological, physical and demographic attributes as a case study. Biological Conservation 92:282–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Elliot, L., D. Stokes, and L. Stokes. 1997. Stokes Field Guide to Bird Songs. Time Warner AudioBooks, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Faaborg, J., M. Brittingham, T. Donovan, and J. Blake. 1995. Habitat fragmentation in the temperate zone. p. 357–380. In T. E. Martin and D. Finch (eds.) Ecology and Management of Neotropical Migratory Birds: a Synthesis and Review of Critical Issues. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Findlay, C. S. and J. Houlahan. 1997. Anthropogenic correlates of species richness in southeastern Ontario wetlands. Conservation Biology 11:1000–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Findlay, C. S. and J. Bourdages. 2000. Response time of wetland biodiversity to road constuction on adjacent lands. Conservation Biology 14:86–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Freemark, K. and B. Collins. 1992. Landscape ecology of birds breeding in temperate forest fragments. p. 443–454. In J. M. Hagan III and D. W. Johnston, (eds.) Ecology and Conservation of Neotropical Migrant Landbirds. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Gibbs, J. P. and S. M. Melvin. 1993. Call-response surveys for monitoring breeding waterbirds. Journal of Wildlife Management 57: 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Haukos, D. A., H. Z. Sun, D. B. Webster, and L. M. Smith. 1998. Sample size, power, and Analytical considerations for vertical structure data from profile boards in wetland vegetation. Wetlands 18:203–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Horn, D. J. and R. J. Fletcher, Jr. 2000. Detecting area sensitivity: A comment on previous studies. American Midland Naturalist 144:28–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Johnson, D. H. 2001. Habitat fragmentation effects on birds in grasslands and wetlands: A critique of our knowledge. Great Plains Research 11:211–231.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Jongman, R. G. H., C. J. F. Ter Braak, and O. F. R. Van Tongeren, (eds.). 1995. Data Analysis in Community and Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Karr, J. R. 1991. Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecological Applications 1:66–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. King, R. S. and C. J. Richardson. 2003. Integrating bioassessment and ecological risk assessment: an approach to developing numerical water-quality criteria. Environmental Management 31: 795–809.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kushlan, J. A. 1979. Design and management of continental wildlife reserves: Lessons from the Everglades. Biological Conservation 15:281–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Landres, P. B., J. Verner, J. W. Thomas. 1988. Ecological uses of vertabrate indicator species: A critique. Conservation Biology 2: 316–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Leps, J. and V. Hadincova. 1992. How reliable are our vegetation analysis? Journal of Vegetation. Science 3:119–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Limburg, K. E. and R. E. Schmidt. 1990. Patterns of fish spawning in Hudson River tributaries: response to an urban gradient? Ecology 71:1238–1245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lippson, A. J. and R. L. Lippson. 1997. Life in the Chesapeake Bay. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore, MD, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Miller, S. G., R. L. Knight, and C. K. Miller. 1998. Influence of recreational trails on breeding bird communities. Ecological Applications 8:162–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Nichols, J. D., J. E. Hines, J. R. Sauer, F. W. Fallon, J. E. Fallon, and P. J. Heglund. 2000. A double-observer approach for estimating detection probability and abundance from point counts. The Auk 117:393–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Nordstrom, K. F. and C. T. Roman (eds.) 1996. Estuarine Shores. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester, England.

    Google Scholar 

  35. O’Connell, T. J., L. E. Jackson, and R. P. Brooks. 1998. A bird community index of biotic integrity for the Mid-Atlantic Highlands. Environmental Monitoring Assessment 51:145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. O’Connell, T. J., L. E. Jackson, and R. P. Brooks. 2000. Bird guilds as indicators of ecological condition in the central Appalachians. Ecological Applications 10:1706–1721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Odum, E. P. 1971. Fundamentals of Ecology. 3rd edition. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Paul, M. J. and J. L. Meyer. 2001. Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32:333–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Pendergast, J. R. and B. C. Eversham. 1997. Species richness covariance in higher taxa: empirical tests of the biodiversity indicator concept. Ecography 20:210–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Pennings, S. C., V. D. Wall, D. J. Moore, M. Pattanayek, T. L. Buck, and J. J. Alberts. 2001. Assessing salt marsh health: a test of the utility of five potential indicators. Wetlands 22:405–414.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Pettersson, R. P., J. P. Ball, K. Renhorn, P. Esseen, and K. Sjoberg. 1995. Invertabrate communities in boreal forest canopies as influenced by forestry and lichens with implications for passerine birds. Biological Conservation 74:57–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Poole, A., and F. Gill. 1999. The Birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Poulin, B., G. Lefebvre, and A. Mauchamp. 2002. Habitat requirements of passerines and reedbed management in souther France. Biological Conservation 107:315–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Price, P. W. 1984. Communities of specialists: vacant niches in ecological and evolutionary time. p. 510–523. In D. R. Strong Jr., D. Simberloff, L. G. Abele, and A. B. Thistle, (eds.) Ecological Communities, Conceptual Issues and the Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Qian, S. S., R. S. King, and C. J. Richardson. 2003. Two statistical methods for the detection of environmental thresholds. Ecological Modelling 166:87–97.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Reinert, S. E. and M. J. Mello. 1995. Avian community structure and habitat use in a southern New England estuary. Wetlands 15: 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Ribic, C. A., S. J. Lewis, S. Melvin, J. Bart, and B. Peterjohn. 1999. Proceedings from the marsh bird monitoring workshop. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, National Wildlife Visitor Center, Laurel, MD, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Riffell, S. K., B. E. Keas, and T. M. Burton. 2001. Area and habitat relationships in Great Lakes coastal wet meadows. Wetlands 21: 492–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rodewald, A. D. and R. H. Yahner. 2001. Influence of landscape composition on avian community structure and associated mechanisms. Ecology 82:3493–3504.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Schimmel, S. C., S. J. Benyi, and C. J. Strobel. 1999. An assessment of the ecological condition of Long Island Sound, 1990–1993. environmental Monitoring and Assessment 56:27–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Small, M. F. and M. L. Hunter. 1988. Forest fragmentation and avian nest predation in forested landscapes. Oecologia 76:62–64.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Tardif, B. and J-L. DesGranges. 1998. Correspondance between bird and plant hotspots of the St. Lawrence River and the influence of scale on their location. Biological Conservation 84:53–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Tiner, R. W. and D. G. Burke. 1995. Wetlands of Maryland. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Region 5, Hadley, MA and Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD. Cooperative publication 1-193.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Wang, L., J. Lyons, P. Kanehl, and R. Gatti. 1997. Influences of watershed land use on habitat quality and biotic integrity in Wisconsin streams. Fisheries 22:6–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Watts, B. D. 1993. Effects of marsh size on incidence rates and avian community organization within the lower Chesapeake Bay (Final report). Center for Conservation Biology, College of William and Mary: 1–54.

  56. Weisberg, S. B., J. A. Ranasingh, D. M. Dauer, L. C. Schaffner, R. J. Diaz, and J. B. Frithsen. 1997. An estuarine benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 20:149–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Weller, M. W. 1995. Use of two waterbird guilds as evaluation tools for the Kissimmee River restoration. Restoration Ecology 3:211–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Whited, D., S. Galatowitsch, J. R. Tester, K. Schik, R. Lehtinen, and J. Husveth. 2000. The importance of local and regional factors in predicting effective conservation planning strategies for wetland bird communities in agricultural and urban landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 49:49–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wilcox, D. A., J. E. Meeker, P. L. Hudson, B. J. Armitage, M. G. Black, and D. G. Uzarski. 2002. Hydrologic variability and the application of index of biotic integrity metrics to wetlands: a Great Lakes evaluation. Wetlands 22:588–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Yasukawa, K. and W. A. Searcy. 1995. Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus). p. 1–28. In A. Poole and F. Gill (eds.) The Birds of North America, No. 184. The Birds of North America Inc., Philadelphia, PA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William V. DeLuca.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

DeLuca, W.V., Studds, C.E., Rockwood, L.L. et al. Influence of land use on the integrity of marsh bird communities of Chesapeake Bay, USA. Wetlands 24, 837–847 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2004)024[0837:IOLUOT]2.0.CO;2

Download citation

Key Words

  • threshold response
  • specialist
  • generalist
  • index of marsh bird community integrity
  • estuarine wetlands
  • Chesapeake Bay