Lakeshore Vegetation Effects on Avian and Anuran Populations

Henning, Bridget M.; Remsburg, Alysa J.

doi:10.1674/0003-0031-161.1.123

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fortunately a variety of actions are available to property owners to mitigate the impact of development, such as selectively planting native vegetation or allowing remnant natural vegetation to grow in the near-shore zone * Corresponding author: amato@wisc.edu of their property and the littoral zone along it. The benefits of more natural shorelines may include increased plant diversity (Elias and Meyer 2003), reduced algae (Rosenberger et al 2008), higher numbers of animals such as frogs and native birds (Lindsay et al 2002, Woodford and Meyer 2003, Henning and Remsburg 2009, as well as larger and more abundant fish populations (Radomski andGoeman 2001, Helmus andSass 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenge of self-enhancement bias for educational programs designed to encourage natural shorelines

Amato

Shaw

Haack

2012

Lake and Reservoir Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenge of self-enhancement bias for educational programs designed to encourage natural shorelines

Amato

Shaw

Haack

2012

Lake and Reservoir Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Furthermore, shoreline development has resulted in changes to littoral habitats (the nearshore waters that are shallow enough to allow plant growth) such as decreases in native plant and large woody habitat abundance due to direct human removal and increases in the number of docks (Radomski et al, 2010). This degradation of riparian and littoral habitat has resulted in declines in abundance of fish (Helmus & Sass 2008), birds (Lindsay et al, 2002;Newbrey et al, 2005), and amphibians (Henning & Remsburg, 2009;Woodford & Meyer, 2003) that rely on these habitats throughout their lives. The increased runoff of nutrients from developed shorelines has also contributed to reduced water quality in lakes through eutrophication (Garrison & Wakeman, 2000;N€ urnberg & LaZerte, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lakefront Property Owners' Willingness to Accept Easements for Conservation of Water Quality and Habitat

Nohner

Lupi

Taylor

2018

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lakes provide valuable ecosystem services such as food, drinking water, and recreation, but shoreline development can degrade riparian habitats and lake ecosystems. Easement contracts for specific property rights can encourage conservation practices for enhanced water quality, fish habitat, and wildlife habitat, yet little is known about the easement market. We surveyed inland lake shoreline property owners in Michigan to assess supply of two conservation easements (in riparian and in littoral zones) and identified property and property owner characteristics influencing potential enrollment. Respondents were significantly less likely to enroll in littoral easements if they indicated there was social pressure for manicured lawns and more likely to enroll if they had more formal education, shoreline frontage, naturally occurring riparian plants, ecological knowledge, or if the lake shoreline was more developed. Enrollment in easements in the riparian zone was significantly less likely if property owners indicated social pressure for manicured lawns, but more likely if they had more formal education, naturally occurring riparian plants, or shoreline frontage. When payments were low (<$1,000 yr−1), marginal gains in enrollment were relatively high. Some respondents may enroll in littoral (29.8% ± 2.2; mean ± SE) and riparian (24.4% ± 2.1) easements even without payment. Estimated mean willingness to accept values were $1,365 yr−1 (littoral) and $7,298 yr−1 (riparian). Targeting high‐probability property owners with large shoreline frontages, more formal education, and high riparian plant coverages and conducting education to increase ecological knowledge and change social norms could increase conservation outcomes for water quality and habitat.

show abstract

“…The heterogeneity of vegetation offer suitable loafing, foraging, nesting and refuge site that protect them from predators and harsh weather. Henning and Remsburg (2009) reported that higher avian richness may occur in wetland dominated by a wide array of aquatic vegetation and rich in food resources. Cunningham et al (2008) and Barrett et al (2003) illustrated that diversity of vegetation such as blocks of woodlands and scattered trees has an important interaction on bird species richness and diversity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Effects of Aquatic Vegetation Composition on Waterbird Distribution and Richness in Natural Freshwater Lake of Malaysia

Hassen-Aboushiba¹

2015

AJLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aquatic vegetation structure and composition is a major driven factor which plays a significant role in waterbird foraging sites and habitat selection. Assessing the effects of aquatic vegetation composition on the distribution and richness of waterbird in a freshwater lake is a useful tool to understand the habitat requirement and preference of waterbird species for future better conservation and management. A total of 19 aquatic plants was recorded in the Paya Indah lake using 10 X 10 m quadrant method. Eleocharis variegata (13.0%), E. dulcis (12.0%), Scirpus mucronatus (11.0%), and Fimbristylis globulosa (10.0%) were the most dominant aquatic plants which cover around 46.0% of the lake area. Likewise, a total of 1492 bird individuals represnting 24 waterbird species and 8 families was recorded through direct observation using 10X50 binocular. Porphyrio porphyrio (17.02%), Amaurornis phoenicurus (15.82%), and Ardea purpurea (8.31%) were three most common waterbird species in the study area. In contrast, three waterbird species, namely Hydrophasianus chirurgus (0.8%), Tachybaptus ruficollis (0.6%), and Gallirallus striatus (0.54%) were the rarest i.e., recorded only a few individuals. Pearson's Correlation Coefficient test illustrated that aquatic vegetation species have strong positive correlationship (i.e., r = 0.9259, P > 0.05) with waterbird species distribution and richness in the lake area. This showed that higher waterbird richness could be due to the diversity of aquatic vegetation species composition. Overall, the finding of this study highlighted that Paya Indah Lake is rich in aquatic vegetation structure and composition that had attracted a wide array of waterbird to perform various activities such as food, water, habitat and reproduce.

show abstract

Lakeshore Vegetation Effects on Avian and Anuran Populations

Cited by 11 publications

References 39 publications

The challenge of self-enhancement bias for educational programs designed to encourage natural shorelines

The challenge of self-enhancement bias for educational programs designed to encourage natural shorelines

Lakefront Property Owners' Willingness to Accept Easements for Conservation of Water Quality and Habitat

Assessing the Effects of Aquatic Vegetation Composition on Waterbird Distribution and Richness in Natural Freshwater Lake of Malaysia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About