BirdLife International Global Survey on the Status of Urban Bird Conservation

8/10/2019 BirdLife International Global Survey on the Status of Urban Bird Conservation

1/177

BirdLife International

global survey on the statusof urban bird conservation

Fergus, R., Louwe Kooijmans, J., Kwak, R.


2/177

BirdLife International global survey on the status of urban bird conservation

Page 1

PEREGRINE FALCON(FALCO PEREGRINUS ) IN THE PORT OFAMSTERDAM. PHOTO:W ILLLEURS


3/177


Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE ....................................................................................................................................... 4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................ 5 BIRDLIFE INTERNATIONAL GROUP ON URBAN BIRDS ............................................................... 6

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 8

2. WHAT IS URBAN? ........................................................................................................... 11

3. URBAN BIRDS ................................................................................................................. 13

4. RED LIST .......................................................................................................................... 19

5. NON-NATIVE SPECIES ..................................................................................................... 21

6. NUISANCE BIRD SPECIES ................................................................................................ 23

7. ICONIC URBAN BIRD SPECIES ......................................................................................... 25

8. URBAN IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS AND HABITAT RESERVES ........................................ 27

9. URBAN MIGRATION MONITORING STATIONS .............................................................. 30

10. URBAN BIRD MONITORING ........................................................................................... 31

11. AWARENESS ................................................................................................................... 35

12. GARDEN BIRD COUNTS .................................................................................................. 39

13. BIRD FRIENDLY GARDENING .......................................................................................... 41

14. ADVICE ON CITY PLANNING .......................................................................................... 43

15. CONSERVATION OF URBAN BIRD SPECIES .................................................................... 45

16. BEST PRACTICES AND GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE ............................................................... 47

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................... 58

A. COUNTRY PROFILES AND SURVEY RESPONSES ............................................................ 59

B. RESPONSES FROM INDEPENDENT AUDUBON CHAPTERS (USA) ................................. 159

C. LOCAL URBAN REDLIST SPECIES BY CONTINENT ......................................................... 163

D. ENGLISH AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF BIRD SPECIES MENTIONED .............................. 165

Recommended Citation:Fergus, R., Louwe Kooijmans, J., Kwak, R.,

BirdLife International Global Survey on the Status of Urban Bird Conservation,BirdLife International, Cambridge, 2013


4/177


Page 3

BARN OWL (T YTO ALBA ) THE MOST WIDE SPREAD URBAN BIRD. PHOTO: PAULHOBSON


5/177


Page 4

PREFACE

Across the world more than 50% of all people already live in towns and cities, and this is apercentage that is growing rapidly. By 2050 it is anticipated that more than 70% for people will beurban-dwellers. For BirdLife, this means that our members and prospective supporters willincreasingly be town and city-based. Urbanisation that disconnects people from wild nature is acause of increasing concern to the conservation community, and there is growing evidence thataccess to wildlife can have a significant impact on our health and well-being. People's concerns aredifferent everywhere around globe, but we all share a same first experience with nature close to ourhome. From the outset, I have been a keen supporter of the BirdLife International Group on UrbanBirds (BIG UB) and I would like to congratulate all the Partners that have contributed to this survey.This report is a first global overview of what BirdLife partners do for the conservation of birds inurban areas. Through our work on species of concern and, of course, important bird areas (IBAs) inurban areas, I see lots of opportunities to engage people, particularly young people, in birdconservation. Biodiverse green spaces in towns and cities can make a huge difference to people,and people can help ensure these areas continue to exit. How we manage the landscape around us;whether it is a forest, a meadow, a simple city street or town garden, influences the wildlife itsupports. And cities and towns that are fit for birds, are surely going to be fit for us as well.

Marco Lambertini, Chief Executive of BirdLife International


6/177


Page 5

COMMON STARLING(STURNUS VULGARIS ) PHOTO: JIP LOUWE KOOIJMANS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSMany thanks to the founding members of the BirdLife International Group on Urban Birds (BIGUB) whooutlined areas of interest and established an organizational agenda at the initial 2009 organizingmeeting in Leiden, NL: Fahrul Amama, Birgit Brenninkmeijer, Claire Cazier, Marco Dinetti, GeorgeEshiamwata, John Fanshawe, Rob Fergus, Katie Higgens, Iordan Hristov, Astrid Leoni, Jip Louwe

Kooijmans, Robert Kwak, Rosabel Miro, Darren Moorcraft, Martijn Overbeeke, Holly Parsons, DianPrihanggalasari, Henny sembiring, Sergey Sklyarenko, Don Geoff Tabaranza, Ishana Thapa, ManonWilmering, Fred Wouters.

Our greatest thanks to those who provided responses to this BIGUB survey: Ruth Akagu, Fahrul Amama,Amir Balaban, Richard E. Barrett, Dave Bengston, Mary Ellen Bittorf, Dieudonne Bizimana, MikeBlackbird, Andrs Bosso, Linda Brinker, Wayne Buchholtz, Greg Butcher, Sarah Campbell, AgustinCarriquiry, Jim Clark, Eric Clough, Bradley Cornell, John Cortes, Jennifer Coulson, Patricia Cruse, JeanDaly, Mark Delwiche, Dabby Ding, Craig Dockrill, Shannon Dougherty, Joel Dunnette, Jeff Ebright,Jaanus Elts, Virginia Escandell, Jacqueline Evans, Claudia Feltrup-Azafzaf, Mary Ford, Laurie Foss,Michael F. Garbo, John Gerwin, Lois Gundrum, Anuradha Gupta,Jurij Hanel, Harvey, Seiji Hayama,Iordan Hristov, Bubba Hubbard, Richard Ingram, Sreyya Isfendiyaroglu, Shannon Kennedy, Marianne

Korosy, Jip Louwe Kooijmans, Mark W. Larson, Robert Lee, Diane Lembck, Judy Liddell, Travis Longcore,Patric Lorg, Jacque Lowery, Gerry Luginbuhl, Haley Main, Nancy Manning, Mark Martell, Bill Miller,Rosabel Miro, Ireneusz Mirowski, Alvaro Moiss, Keddy Mooketsa, Cristina Morales, Ron Morris, WernerMller, Tiwonge I Mzumara, Kroly Nagy, Mercy Ndalila, Serge Nsengimana, Michael Opige, ClairiePapazoglou, Holly Parsons, Gregory Pasztor, Glenn Phillips, Helen Pugh, Aalbert Rebergen, Ernst Retief,Enas F. Sakkijha, Mudhafar A. Salim, Elina Sarantou, Kabelo Senyatso, Loren H. Smith, Adrian Soria,Nancy Streiffert, Elchin Sultanov, Don Geoff Tabaranza, Ishana Thapa, Meelis Uustal, Wim Van denBossche, Metodija Velevski, Zdenek Vermouzek, Donald Ware, Bob Wasilewski, Kerrie Wilcox,Magdalena Zadrg.

Last but not least special thanks to BirdLife officials, Beverly Childs, John Fanshawe, Hazell Thompson.


7/177


Page 6

BIRDLIFE INTERNATIONAL GROUP ON URBAN BIRDSThe Netherlands is one of the most urban nations on earth, and Vogelbescherming Nederland / BirdlifeNetherlands early recognized that urban settlements are important habitats for both birds and people, andthat cities are where most people are likely to be recruited in support of bird preservation. Since severalother BirdLife partners were also working on urban bird issues and involving the public in bird protection intheir urban daily living space, Vogelbescherming Nederland initiated efforts to bring these partners togetheras a working group on Urban Birds within BirdLife International. The BirdLife Group on Urban Birds (BIG UB)works to increase BirdLifes expertise, influence on policies, public profile and fundraising opportunities in thefield of the urban environment as a habitat for birds and people, by focusing on synergy between partnersby exchange of knowledge, experience and practical tools for conservation as well as communication. Grouporganizing began with informal discussions at Urbio 2008 (Erfurt 2008) and the BirdLife World Conference inArgentina (Buenos Aires 2008), and the group formally convened for the first time a year later in Leiden, TheNetherlands (6-7 November 2009).

TOP 5 ACTION LISTBIG UB members identified the following Top 5 action list for the group:

1) Compile a list of current activities and best practices for publication in an official BirdLife paper onurban bird conservation.

2) Utilize the BirdLife paper to create a framework for BirdLife urban bird conservationrecommendations for rollout and discussion at a BirdLife Global Meeting.

3) Identify gaps in knowledge and education needed for conservation or birds in urban areas4) Create a list of Important Bird Areas & threatened birds in urban areas5) Convene an international conference on urban bird conservation to include a second BIG UB meeting

A BIG UB steering committee formed to further these actions and the work of the group.

MEMBERS OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE: Robert Kwak, Vogelbescherming Nederland, moderator George Eshiamwata, BirdLife Africa Partnership Secretariat. John Fanshawe, BirdLife International Secretariat. Jip Louwe Kooijmans, Vogelbescherming Nederland Rosabel Miro, Panama Audubon Society. Darren Moorcroft, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Holly Parsons, Birds Australia. Sergey Sklyarenko, Association for the Conservation of Biodiversity of Kazakhstan. Rob Fergus, external expert


8/177


Page 7

HOUSE SPARROW(PASSER DOMESTICUS ) PHOTO: MARTINHIERCK


9/177


Page 8

1. INTRODUCTIONIn order to begin addressing their Top 5 Action List, BirdLife International Group on Urban Birds (BIG UB)members compiled a list of survey questions in 2010. In June 2011 the BirdLife International office inCambridge sent the survey to all BirdLife partners and affiliates. Partners and affiliates were asked tofill out the survey online via SurveyMonkey.

By the end of August 2011, 49 of 125 BirdLife country partners had responded to the survey (see Map1.1 and Table 1.1). These included:

18 [39%, n=46] from Europe,2 [18%, n=11] from the Middle East,10 [41%, n=24] from Africa,6 [35%, n=17] from Asia,4 [50%, n=8] from the Pacific,9 [47%, n=19] from the Americas In addition, responses were received from 47 local chapters of the National Audubon Society (10%,n=460) the U.S. BirdLife partner (see Appendix B).

Map 1.1 2011 BirdLife International Group on Urban Birds Survey Respondents


10/177


Page 9

Table 1 .1 Respondents 2011 BIG UB Survey

Country BirdLife PartnerArgentina Aves ArgentiansAustralia Birds Australia

Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Ornithological SocietyBelgium Natuurpunt (branch of BirdLife Belgium)Botswana BirdLife BotswanaBulgaria Bulgarian Society for the Protection of birds / BirdLife BulgariaBurundi Association Burundaise pour la protection des Oiseaux-ABOCanada Bird Studies CanadaCook Islands Te Ipukarea SocietyCyprus BirdLife CyprusCzech Republic Czech Society for OrnithologyEcuador Aves y ConservacionEl Salvador SalvaNATURAEstonia Estonian Ornithological SocietyFalklands/Malvinas Falklands ConservationGibraltar Gibraltar Ornithological & Natural History SocietyGreece Hellenic Ornithological SocietyHungary Hungarian Ornithological and Nature Conservation Society (MME)Indonesia Burung IndonesiaIraq Nature IraqIsrael Society for conservation of nature in Israel SPNIJapan Wild Bird Society of JapanJordan The Royal Society for the Conservation of NatureKenya Nature KenyaLiberia Society for the Conservation of Nature of Liberia(SCNL)Luxembourg LNVL - BirdLife LuxembourgMacedonia Macedonian Ecological SocietyMalawi Wildlife and Environmental Society of MalawiThe Netherlands Vogelbescherming Nederland / BirdLife NetherlandsNepal Bird Conservation NepalNew Zealand Forest & BirdNigeria Nigerian Conservation FoundationPalau Palau Conservation SocietyPanama Sociedad Audubon de PanamParaguay Asociacin Guyra ParaguayPhilippines Haribon Foundation for the Conservation of Natural ResourcesPoland Oglnopolskie Towarzystwo Ochrony Ptakw (OTOP)Rwanda ACNR(Association pour la Conservation de la Nature au Rwanda)Singapore Nature Society (Singapore)Slovenia DOPPS - Birdlife SloveniaSouth Africa BirdLife South AfricsaSpain SEO/BirdLifeSwitzerland SVS/BirdLife Switzerland

Taiwan Chinese Wild Bird FederationTunisia Association "Les Amis des Oiseaux" (AAO)Turkey Doga DernegiUganda Nature UgandaUnited States National AudubonUruguay Aves Uruguay


11/177


Page 10

BIG UB survey responses came from BirdLife country partners representing nations with a wide range ofpopulations. Partners from the smallest countries responding were Palau with 20,796 inhabitants andGibraltar with 28,000 inhabitants. The largest countries represented in the survey were the United Stateswith 308 million inhabitant at a density of 31.9/km and Nigeria with 150 million inhabitants at adensity of 161.5/km.

Population densities of responding country partners also varied greatly. The highest densities reportedare from the city states of Singapore (7,315/k) and Gibraltar (4,672.3/km), the third and fifth densestpopulations in the world. More moderate but still densely populated countries such as Taiwan(638.5/km) and the Netherlands (401.4/km) were also represented, as were countries with very lowpopulation densities including the Falklands (0.3/km), Australia (2.7/km), and Canada 3.4/km).

Accelerating rates of urbanization around the world underscore the growing importance of conservationin cities. Since 2007 over 50% of the world population is found in cities. Responses to the BIG UB surveygenerally reflected this high percentage of urbanism. Only seven of the 49 countries reported urbanpopulation percentages lower than the world average of 50% (Table 1.2).

Table 1.2 Countries Reporting Urban Populations Below 50%

Country Percent Urban PopulationRwanda 16.9%Nepal 19%Luxembourg 30%Kenya 42%Slovenia 44%Nigeria 48.7%Philippines 48%

Most countries reported urban percentages between 60-90%. Since urban population percentages areavailable for most countries, some respondents provided very accurate governmental statistics (eg.Jordans 82.6% from their department of statistics, end of 2010) and Australia reporting 68.4% in majorcities and 29.2% in regional centers. Other respondents did not reference official statistics, but providedestimates or educated guesses.

The highest urban percentages reported in the BIG UB survey came from Uruguay (92%) and Gibraltar(95%). However, reported percentages are not strictly comparable, as they are influenced by widelyvarying local definitions of urban (see next section on definitions of urban).

While the subject of urban bird conservation might appear to be of more interest to partners in countrieswith high urban populations, interest and programming in urban bird programs were reported bypartners from across the urbanization spectrum. Also perhaps surprisingly, some countries with high urbanpopulations reported very little by way of urban bird conservation programming.

This report summarizes and provides an initial review of the responses to the 2011 BIG UB survey.Responses to each survey question are summarized in sections 2-15 and complete survey responses fromeach country partner are also provided (Appendix A).

This report uses the follows the taxonomy, common names, and scientific names as published in BirdLifeChecklist Version 5. Scientific names for all species mentioned in the text are included in Appendix D.


12/177


Page 11

2. WHAT IS URBAN?One of the challenges in discussing or studying urban bird conservation across the globe is the lack of auniversally accepted definition of urban. This is hardly a problem restricted to ecologists orconservationists; even the United Nations adopts a vague definition of urban settlements as those definedas such by various national statistical agencies (see box). When asked to clarify their definition of urban

areas, most BirdLife partners responded with a general definition referring to cities and towns.Some partners provided broad qualitative descriptions of urban areas, such as

Nepal: High settlement areas in metropolitan and sub -metropolitan cities consisting ofmunicipalities, very less agricultural areas.

Iraq: Areas that are used permanently or frequently by people. Nigeria: An area characterized by higher population density and vast human features in

comparison to areas surrounding, it means an area of continuous development may be cities,towns or conurbations.

17 partners referred to local official definitions of urban areas, including: Botswana: Adopted statutory definition, which is more political, rather based on human

population; these are towns managed by central and not local government. Czech Republic: Official list of towns and cities. Taiwan: Municipalities.

11 partners provided a more quantitative definition of urban areas based on the number of inhabitantsin a settlement. Most definitions required the presence of at least 1000 inhabitants to qualify as urban,for example Estonia defined urban areas as compact settlements with a high population density andtotal population of at least 1000 people. Only Uruguay, with a minimum threshold of 500, definedurban areas as settlements with fewer than 1000 inhabitants. Other partners cited higher minimumpopulation requirements for a settlement to qualify as urban:

Slovenia 2,000 Philippines 2,000 United States 2,500 Japan 4,000 Jordan 5,000

Only the Philippines provided a clear urban definition that involved measurements of population density:(1) cities and municipalities with at least 1,000 persons/sq km; (2) central districts of municipalities andcities with at least 500 persons per sq km; (3) barangay (smallest political unit) with at least 1,000inhabitants and primary occupation is non-fishing.

In providing answers to this survey, Poland limited its definition to include only big cities with over200,000 inhabitants.

While most urban definitions are based on population criteria, urban ecologists seek to identify urbanareas based on measures of landscape features. While individual researchers often create their owncriteria for determining what is or is not urban, these definitions often involve a gradient of landscapesbased on how much of it is dominated by pavement or built structures and ornamental vegetation (Box1.2). Interestingly, no survey responses relied upon specific ecological criteria, and only a few describedspecific landscape features. Burundi mentioned modern and complex infrastructure, while Panamadescribed urban areas as a reas with road, electricity, water and sewage systems, with public services(schools, hospitals, police station, etc.) and private services (banks, supermarkets, shops, etc.)


13/177


Page 12

Without a universal definition of urban areas, the BIG UB survey responses are not strictly comparablefrom country to country, however they are illustrative of a wide diversity of perspectives and approachesto dealing with birds in variously defined urban areas.

Box 1.1 United Nations Definitions of Urban

a) Urban. Settlements or localities defined as "urban" by national statistical agencies.b) Urbanization. The process of transition from a rural to a more urban society. Statistically,

urbanization reflects an increasing proportion of the population living in settlements defined asurban, primarily through net rural to urban migration. The level of urbanization is the percentage ofthe total population living in towns and cities while the rate of urbanization is the rate at which itgrows.

c) Urban growth. The increase in the number of people who live in towns and cities, measured either inrelative or absolute terms.

d) Natural increase. The difference between the number of births and number of deaths in a givenpopulation.

e) The urban transition. The passage from a predominantly rural to a predominantly urban society.

State of world population: Unleashing the potential of urban growth . New York, NY: The United NationsFree Peoples Association; 2007.

Box 1.2 Ecological definitions of urban landscapes

(based on Marzluff, Bowman, and Donnely, A historical perspective on urban bird research: trends,terms,and approaches, in Avian Ecology and Conservation in an Urbanizing World, Klewer, 2001)

Landscape Percent Built BuildingDensity

Residential HumanDensity

Additional Description

Urban >50 >10/ha >10/ha Mostly covered with buildings

Suburban 30-50 2.5-10/ha >10/ha Single-family housing and yards

Exurban 5-20


14/177


Page 13

3. URBAN BIRDSBirdLife partnerswere asked to determine the number of species with city or other urban areas as primehabitat and to provide a list of those species, as well as the basis for this list (science based versuseducated guess). As with the definition of urban, the criteria for determining what is an urban bird, orwhat constituted prime habitat, varied widely.

Countries reported the number of urban bird totals ranging from 2 species to 300 clearly representingdifferent interpretations of the question as well as differing views of what constitutes an urban bird. Mostresponses listed only the most urban-dwelling birds (those which primarily use cities as opposed to otherlandscapes), while a few partners emphasized the long list of birds that are found across a wide rangeof habitats within their urban areas.

Despite the different approaches to delineating urban bird species, this survey provides an instructiveoverview of urban birds on each continent. The survey responses also illustrate how little studied urbanbirds are in most countries--only a few partners were able to quantify their responses based on scientificstudies, with most having to rely on expert opinion. (see Table 3.1).

Table 3.1 Urban Bird Species Determinations Based on Expert Opinion vs. Scientific Research Continent Expert Science - % Expert %ScienceEurope 8 2 8 [44% n=18] [11%]Africa 6 1 3 [60% n=10] [10%]Asia 2 2 2 [33% n=6] [33%]Pacific 4 0 0 [0% n=4] [0%]America 3 2 3 [33% n=9] [22%]Middle East 1 0 1 [0% n=2] [0%]

2450%7

15%

1735%

Expert Opinion vs.Scientific Research

Expert Opinion

ScienceNo Response

BIRDS AND PEOPLE. HOUSE SPARROW(PASSER DOMESTICUS ) PHOTO: MARTINHIERCK


15/177


Page 14

EUROPE34 urban bird species were mentioned by more than one country in Europe:

House Sparrow (15) Common Swift (15) Eurasian Collared-dove (15)

Rock Pigeon (10) Northern House-martin (10) Eurasian Jackdaw (9) Barn Swallow (7) Barn Owl (6) Eurasian Blackbird (5) Common Kestrel (4) Black-billed Magpie (4) European Greenfinch (4) European Goldfinch (3) Rose-ringed Parakeet (4) Black Redstart (4) Peregrine Falcon (4) Hooded Crow (3) Rook (3) Little Owl (3) White Stork (3) Laughing Dove (3) White Wagtail (3) Great Tit (2) Lesser Kestrel (2) Yellow-legged Gull (2) Spotted Flycatcher (2) Common Starling (2) Pallid Swift (2) Alpine Swift (2) Carrion Crow (2) Common Redstart (2) European Serin (2) Common Myna (2) Crested Lark (2)

MIDDLE EASTAs befits its geographic location, urban birds in the Middle East represents a mixture of European,African, and global species. 24 urban bird species were reported in the Middle East:

Eurasian Collared-dove House Sparrow Laughing Dove Rock Pigeon Common Starling (in winter) White Wagtail (in winter) Barn Swallow

Barn Owl Himalayan Bulbul


16/177


Page 15

White-throated Kingfisher Syrian Woodpecker Red -rumped Swallow Northern House-martin White-spectacled Bulbul

Eurasian Blackbird Graceful Prinia Great Tit Palestine Sunbird Eurasian Jay Hooded Crow House Crow European Greenfinch Common Kestrel Rose-ringed Parakeet

ASIASeven species were listed by two or more countries:

Eurasian Tree Sparrow (2) Little Swift (3) Barn Swallow (2) Cattle Egret (2) Jungle Crow (2) Rock Pigeon (2) Black Kite (2)

AFRICASeven species were mentioned by more than one country:

Common Bulbul (3) House Sparrow (3) Pied Crow (2) House Crow (2) Northern House-martin (2) Laughing Dove (2) Speckled Pigeon (2)

PACIFICOnly two countries provided a list of species in this section, which included 24 species:

House Sparrow (introduced) Micronesian Myzomela Chestnut-breasted Mannikin Palau Scops-owl Palau Swiftlet Micronesian Starling Collared Kingfisher Pacific Reef Heron Red Junglefowl (feral) Pacific Golden Plover

Bristle-thighed Curlew


17/177


Page 16

Wandering Tattler White Tern Cook Islands Fruit Dove Common Myna

AMERICASSix species were mentioned by more than one country:

House Sparrow (2) Monk Parakeet (2) Rock Pigeon (2) Chimney Swift (2) Rufous-bellied Thrush (2) Grey-breasted Martin (2)

27 species were mentioned on more than one continent (Table 3.2), with the Barn Owl and HouseSparrow appearing on all continents.


18/177


Page 17

Table 3.2 Most Widespread Urban Birds

Africa Asia MiddleEast Europe Pacific America ALL

Barn Owl 6HouseSparrow 6

Rock Pigeon 4

LaughingDove 4

EurasianCollared-dove

4

Rose-ringedParakeet 4

PeregrineFalcon 3

CommonMyna 3

White-spectacledBulbulNorthernHouse-martin 3

Barn Swallow 4Black-crownedNight-heron

3

WhiteWagtail 3

Cattle Egret ? 3Common

Starling3

House Crow 3CommonKestrel 3

Common Swift 2Great Tit 2Hooded Crow 2Alpine Swift 2Pallid Swift 2Black Kite 2EuropeanGreenfinch 2

Eurasian

Blackbird2

Little Egret 2White Stork 2CanadaGoose 2

Introduced by man introduced by man, but partlynative Native


19/177


Page 18

CHIMNEY SWIFT(CHAETURA PELAGICA ). STRIKINGLY HOUSE BREEDING BIRD SPECIES ARE UNDER PRESSUREPHOTO: S.D.K. MASLOWSKI


20/177


Page 19

4. RED LISTBirdLife countries named as urban birds 16 species on the IUCN world red list (Table 4.1). It is not clear ifall these birds are using the urban habitat as a breeding habitat or if these birds primarily occur in cities.None of those are European species, while Europe is the most urbanized continent.

In addition to IUCN red list species, many local red-listed species and birds of lower concern on a globalscale are also listed urban birds. Respondents mentioned 40 species considered to be on local red lists(see Appendix C). Strikingly house breeding birds are under pressure, such as Chimney Swift in theAmericas and Northern House-martin in Europe. Peregrine Falcon is locally red listed on three continents.

In some cases, cities can provide habitat for introduced populations of birds that are red-listed in theirnative habitats. One example is the Java Sparrow, a globally red listed species that has a successfulintroduced population in the Philippines.

In other cases, birds red-listed in part of their range can even become a pest or nuisance species whenintroduced elsewhere. The most remarkable example of this is the House Sparrow. Red-listed in someparts of Europe and Australia , it is at the same time considered a pest species in most parts of the worldwhere it is introduced by man.

Local red lists may have different criteria. If no birds where mentioned as red-listed, this clearly does notmean that there are no endangered species present. In some cases, as indicated in the honest responsefrom Argentina, BirdLife organizations have yet to fully assess possible urban habitat use by red-listedspecies.

Species IUCNStatus Continent Countries Remarks

1 Chinese Egret EN Asia Philippines Non breeding visitor

2 Philippine Duck VU Asia Philippines Endemic

3 Hooded Vulture EN Africa Uganda, Nigeria

4 Grey Crowned-crane VU Africa Nigeria National bird

5 Bristle-thighed Curlew VU Pacific Cook islands Non breeding visitor

6 Bush Thick-knee NT Pacific Australia Partly urban

7 Chinese Crested Tern CR Asia Philippines 1 record, Non breedingvisitor

8 Cook Islands Fruit Dove VU Pacific Cook islands Only on two islandsRarotonga and Atiu

9 Superb Parrot VU Pacific Australia Partly urban

10 Grey Parrot NT Africa Nigeria

12 Chimney Swift NT Americas USA Highly urban

13 Regent Honeyeater EN Pacific Australia Partly urban

14 Papyrus Gonolek NT Africa Nigeria

15 Papyrus Yellow Warbler VU Africa Nigeria

16 Java Sparrow VU Asia Philippines Introduced


21/177


Page 20

Responses represented a wide range of approaches to classifying birds as urban or to inclusion on localred lists.

PHILIPPINESHere the responses included very rare birds that have occurred infrequently in urban areas, as well as anintroduced bird of global conservation concern:

Chinese Crested Tern migrant; recorded in Manila Bay 1905 Chinese Egret migrant; frequently recorded in coastal areas near built-up areas such as Manila

Bay. Java Sparrow introduced; has established small populations built-up areas and surrounding

agricultural areas such as Metro Manila Philippine Duck endemic; a population of at least 80 individuals have taken up residence in the

coastal lagoons of the Las Pinas Paranaque Critical Habitat & Ecotourism Area in Manila Bay.

PACIFICIn the Cook islands, eight species were listed as urban red list species, representing birds of primarily

local conservation concern, as the global status for most of these species is of Least Concern: Bristle-thighed Curlew (Vulnerable) Cook Islands Fruit Dove (Vulnerable) Pacific Reef Heron (Least Concern) Red Junglefowl (Least Concern) Pacific Golden Plover (Least Concern) Wandering Tattler (Least Concern) White Tern (Least Concern) Common Myna (Least Concern)

USAThe Chimney Swift (Near Threatened) was the only urban Red List species mentioned by Audubon.However, local Audubon chapters reported three additional Red List species (see Appendix B). Manyother IUCN, federal, or state listed endangered or threatened species occur in urban areas, and theremay be a wide variety of interpretations to this questions based on judgment calls of where the "cut-off"should be on the continuum of how commonly a given species (particularly a migratory species) isencountered in urban areas. For instance, Willow Flycatchers and Yellow-billed Cuckoos arent usuallyconsidered primarily urban species, but they were listed as urban Red List species in Central New Mexicobecause they occur in riparian areas within the Greater Albuquerque area.

In New York, the Peregrine Falcon is listed by the state as Endangered, reflecting the history of thisspecies during the last 50 years more than its current population levels, which are healthy. PeregrineFalcons were extirpated in the eastern half of the United States and suffered severe population declinesaround the world after World War II due to the use of the pesticide DDT. The species was successfullyrestored in New York and elsewhere in much of its former habitat in the United States, and the federalgovernment removed the Peregrine Falcon from its list of endangered and threatened species in 1999.New York state authorities have opted to continue listing it as endangered in consideration of its postWWII decline and the tremendous effort involved in restoring it.


22/177


Page 21

5. NON-NATIVE SPECIESUrban ecologists have long noted that urban avifaunas are often characterized by exotic species thatare able to use built structures for nesting sites or take advantage of foraging and shelter opportunitiesafforded by exotic vegetation. BirdLife partners were able to list over 50 species of exotic species intheir cities, which reflect both introduced species as well as invasive range expanders: like Eurasian

Collared-dove and Laughing Dove in Asia and Europe or the Great-tailed Grackle in the Americas. 12of these species are listed as exotic or invasive species on several continents (see Table 5.1).

Table 5.1 Exotic & range expanding birds mentioned on more than 1 continent around the worldNumber of countries where each species is listed as exotic or range expanding in the survey.

Africa Asia Middle East Europe Pacific Americas ExoticContinents RockPigeon

2 21 2 4

Rose-ringedParakeet

1 25 1 4

1CommonMyna 2

22 2 4

CommonStarling 1 2 2 3

HouseSparrow 4 3 4 3

HouseCrow 2 1 3

CanadaGoose 1 2

EuropeanGreenfinch 2 1 2

Mallard 1 2 2EuropeanGoldfinch 2 1 2

EurasianCollared-dove 1

1

1 1

LaughingDove 1

21

Exotic Range Expander Native Partial Native

Remarkably, despite their near ubiquity in large cities around the globe, relatively few countries includedmention of feral Rock Pigeon. Additional information would be required to explain this glaringinconsistency. Perhaps since genuine wild Rock Pigeons were native to Eurasia, their locally feraldescendants are not considered exotic, or maybe pigeons are so common that theyre not even noticedanymore. Exotic species are often overlooked by birders more interested in native species, as well as byconservationists focused on native habitats. For instance, in the Americas, despite their presence sinceColonial times, tallies of Rock Pigeons were not included in Audubons annual Christmas Bird Count until1973.

Island states and countries reported the most exotic species, including Taiwan (21 species), New Zealand(17 species, and Australia (12 species) (see Table 5.2). Island avifaunas are at particular risk fromcompetition with exotic species, and urban areas may serve as a source population for these invasivecompetitors to continually threaten more intact rural habitats.


23/177


Page 22

Table 5.2 Exotic Urban Species on Islands

Taiwan New Zealand Australia

White-vented MynaCommon MynaJungle MynaVinous-breasted StarlingAsian Glossy StarlingBlack-collared StarlingWhite-throated MuniaAfrican Sacred IbisIndian PeafowlCommon PheasantBlue MagpieWhite-rumped Shama

Zebra DoveVillage WeaverPin-tailed WhydahChestnut-tailed StarlingAzure-winged MagpieOrange-cheeked WaxbillCommon WaxbillBlack-throated Laughingthrush

House SparrowCommon StarlingCommon MynaAustralian MagpieEuropean GreenfinchYellowhammerEuropean GoldfinchEurasian ChaffinchCommon RedpollEurasian BlackbirdSong ThrushHedge Accentor

Eastern RosellaSpotted Dove (local)African Collared-dove (local)MallardCanada Goose.

Common StarlingCommon MynaHouse SparrowEurasian BlackbirdEuropean GoldfinchRed-whiskered BulbulSpotted DoveRock PigeonMallardHouse CrowRose-ringed Parakeet


24/177


Page 23

6. NUISANCE BIRD SPECIESIn urban areas, where large human and bird populations come into contact, there are often conflicts whenbirds become a nuisance. When asked to list pest or nuisance bird species, most categorized speciescame from six bird families:

doves and pigeons starlings and mynas corvids gulls weavers parrots

In most parts of the world, urban pest species are mostly exotic birds, especially Eurasian introductions,such as feral Rock Pigeon, Common Myna, Common Starling and House Sparrow. In Australia severalnative parrots including Sulphur-crested Cockatoo, Galah, Rainbow Lorikeet, and Long-billed Corella arelisted as pest species locally, while these birds are admired for their beauty in most other parts of theworld.

Strikingly some birds are mentioned as a pest in one country while declining or even red listed in others.These include the Eurasian Jackdaw listed as a nuisance in Estonia, while near threatened in the CzechRepublic and Slovenia, as well as the House Sparrow which is considered a pest in Uruguay and Israel,though near threatened in the Netherlands and Luxembourg.

Additional nuisance or pest species include several species of cowbirds in the Americas, which threatensome native songbirds with their brood-parasitism. In Israel, Cattle Egrets are also listed as a nuisance.


25/177


Page 24

FERALROCK PIGEONS (COLUMBA LIVIA ) LIVE IN ALMOST ALL CITIES AROUND THE WORLD PHOTO: JIP LOUWE KOOIJMANS


26/177


Page 25

7. ICONIC URBAN BIRD SPECIESBirdLife partners were asked to list any iconic urban birds in their country. Partners listed 38 species asiconic or potentially iconic urban species (see Table 7.1). Responses varied based on two differentinterpretations of what defined an iconic bird some countries listed species that are most typical ofurban habitats, regardless of their conservation status; other countries listed species that can serve as a

charismatic flagship species that the public can relate to as a conservation symbol.Table 7.1 Iconic Urban Bird Species

Barn OwlBarn SwallowChimney SwiftCommon BulbulCommon KestrelCommon MynaCommon SwiftEurasian Tree SparrowGrey FantailGreat-tailed GrackleGrey GerygoneHouse BuntingHouse CrowHouse SparrowJapanese White-eyeLaughing DoveLesser KestrelLight-vented BulbulNorthern Grey-headed SparrowNorthern House-Martin

Oriental Magpie-robinPalestine SunbirdPallid SwiftPiapiacPied CrowPowerful OwlRock PigeonRufous-bellied ThrushSpanish SparrowSpeckled PigeonSplendid FairywrenSpotted PardaloteStriated PardaloteSuperb FairywrenTropical MockingbirdTuiWhite StorkWhite-spectacled BulbulWhite WagtailWood Thrush

In Europe and the Middle East, House Sparrow and Common Swift were the most frequently mentionediconic urban birds. Only Hungary mentioned more charismatic flagship species such as the White Storkand Barn Swallow.

Four partners (and three independent local Audubon groups) mentioned Rock Pigeons as iconic urbanbirds. While these usually exotic urban species are not targets for urban conservation efforts, as perhapsthe most visible urban bird in many areas, they do provide a possible starting point for public discussionsabout urban bird conservation. As noted in 2006 by Robert Dunnet al. in The Pigeon Paradox(Conservation Biology 20(6): 1814-1816), conservation of all species and ecosystems may depend onhow well city dwellers can connect to pigeons and other urban species.

Thrushes may serve as iconic urban birds in many parts of the world. Rufous-bellied Thrush was mentionedin Argentina, the Wood Thrush was mentioned in the USA, while independent Audubon groups mentionedthe American Robin. While the Eurasian Blackbird was not listed by any European partners, they mightalso serve as a highly visible urban bird across its European range, as it shares a similar popularity withother thrushes due to their rich song and habit of living close to human dwellings without usuallyprovoking a nuisance response from its human neighbors.

Bulbuls are another highly visible urban bird that may serve as a focus of public attention. Israel andNigeria each listed a bulbul species as an iconic urban bird.

Swifts are another iconic urban bird. Survey respondents listed Chimney Swift, Common Swift, and Pallid

Swifts as iconic urban birds. Since these aerial feeders nest on buildings, and may be declining in someareas, they represent birds that require conservation action in urban areas.


27/177


Page 26

Almost any bird can serve as a focus for conservation action in urban areas, as indicated by the numberof species listed as iconic urban birds across the United States by local chapters of Audubon (seeAppendix B). These range from typical desert species like the Greater Roadrunner in New Mexico, tocoastal species such as Brown Pelican in San Diego.

SUPERBFAIRYWREN(MALURUS CYANEUS, ICONIC AUSTRALIANGARDEN BIRD PHOTO: DAVE W ATTS


28/177


Page 27

8. URBAN IMPORTANT BIRD AREAS AND HABITAT RESERVESCities are often located in the most fertile regions of a landscape including low elevations near waterwith fertile soils and high biodiversity that attracted the first human settlers to the area. Large remaininghabitats in these cities may qualify as Important Bird Areas or be otherwise protected as parkland oropen space by local authorities. 21 BirdLife partners have designated over 100 IBAs within urban areas.

Map 8.1 BirdLife Partners with Urban IBAs

Table 8.1 BirdLife Partners with Urban IBAsContinent Yes No -Europe 5 11 2 [28% n=18]Africa 5 4 1 [50% n=10]Asia 3 2 1 [50% n=6]Pacific 2 2 0 [50% n=4]America 5 2 2 [56% n=9]Middle East 1 1 0 [50% n=2]

Canada reported perhaps the highest number of urban IBAs (


29/177


Page 28

In addition to listing urban IBAs, partners were asked about official urban reserves and other significanthabitat areas within cities. These questions also generated discussion about definitions and requests forclarification, but 18 partners provided information about additional city reserves or habitats in theircountry (see Table 8.2).

Map 8.2 BirdLife Partners Reporting City Reserves or Additional Urban Habitat Reserves

Table 8.2 BirdLife Partners Reporting City Reserves or Additional Urban Habitat ReservesContinent Yes No -Europe 7 2 9 [37% n=18]Africa 5 1 4 [50% n=10]Asia 3 0 3 [50% n=6]Pacific 2 1 1 [50% n=4]America 6 1 2 [67% n=9]Middle East 0 0 2 [0% n=2]

Some respondents focused on officially declared urban reserves; South Africa has official city reservesthat are defined by national, provincial, and local legislation. Others like the Czech Republic noted alack of official criteria for designating official reserves, but cited the presence of large parks which areforest enclaves within municipalities. Tunisia likewise mentioned that there are no official city reserves inTunisia, only urban parks as well as four major wetlands in and around cities and towns.

Many countries noted habitat value of numerous parks within cities, such as Karori (Zealandia) inWellington, New Zealand. Australia referred to an extensive collection of national parks, state forests,conservation reserves in or adjacent to urban areas.

1841%

511%

2148%

Countries With AdditionalUrban Reserves

ReservesNo ReservesNo Response


30/177


Page 29

Box 8.1 Example urban IBAs Aves Argentinas

Argentina has a well developed program of urban reserves in Buenos Aires, with detailed criteria for inclusion in thereserve network. Reserves are selected according to the following criteria:

1. Found within the urban grid, or no further than 10 km (or within 30 minutes traveling distance)(MCBA et al. 1999) from a city or group of settlements with a combined population of at least50,000 inhabitants;

2. Of small or medium size (covering from 5 to 5,000 ha);3. Native habitats (essentially similar to the original habitats of the region) must be present in at least 40

percent of the land;4. Objectives of the area must be aimed at the conservation of native ecosystems, and generating

opportunities for environmental education, research, and/or recreation within nature;5. One or more of the following uses must be permitted in the area: Public access for recreation and/or

tourism; Environmental education and interpretation; Formal education at any level; Scientific researchrelated to the reserves ecosystems; Management of ecosystems or species aimed at their conservation.

Reference: MCBA (Municipalidad de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires), et al. 1999. Informe de DiagnsticoAmbiental. Plan Urbano Ambiental. MCBA, Buenos Aires

While the Buenos Aires reserves provide an excellent example of size, habitat, location, and land usecriteria for use in delineating urban reserves, they point to the need for local rather than global criteriafor reserve designation. For example, If the Buenos Aires criteria were used in a small country like theNetherlands, all IBAs in the country would qualify as urban reserves, including the world heritageWaddensea.

URBANIBA FOR W HITE-COLLAREDSEEDEATER(SPOROPHILA TORQUEOLA ) IN T EXAS, USA

PHOTO: JIP LOUWE KOOIJMANS


31/177


Page 30

9. URBAN MIGRATION MONITORING STATIONSHundreds of bird species migrate through most large cities where urban populations can provide a readysupply of volunteers who can assist with migration monitoring. Eleven BirdLife partners reported that theyconduct migration monitoring at a total of 26 urban migration posts or monitoring stations (Table 9.1).

Table 9.1 Urban Migration Monitoring StationsCountry StationBelgium --Poland Stacja Badania Wdrwek Ptakw (Bird Migration Research Station) Israel Jerusalem Bird ObservatoryTurkey amlca Hills , Saryer Hills , Princess Islands, Poyraz HillMalawi --Nigeria Hadejia, NguruTunisia TN009 Lake Tunis, TN010 Sebkhet Sedjoumi, TN014 Lagune de Korba,

TN027 Salines de ThynaSingapore Sungei Bulon Wetland Reserve for waders, 6 additional hawk watchesCanada McGill Bird Observatory (Ste. Anne-de-Belevue), Tommy Thompson Park Bird

Research Station (Toronto), Inglewood Bird Banding Station (Calgary)Panama Ancon HillParaguay Office of BirdLife Paraguay and Guyra Paraguay

Africa and Asia reported the most migration monitoring stations (Table 9.2). Singapore reported the moststations (7), while Turkey and Tunisia each reported four stations.

Table 9.2 BirdLife Partners with Urban Migration Monitoring StationsContinent Yes No -Europe 4 12 2 [22% n=18]Africa 3 6 1 [30% n=10]Asia 1 4 1 [16% n=6]Pacific 0 4 0 [0% n=4]America 3 4 2 [33% n=9]Middle East 0 2 0 [0% n=2]

While very few countries currently operate migration monitoring stations, these are often spectacularsites featuring world-class migration spectacles, such as amlca Hills in Istanbul and Ancon Hill inPanama. At Ancon Hill, where the Panama Audubon Society has been counting migrant raptors fromOctober 1 to November 18 each year since 2004, 1.7 million raptors were counted migrating overPanama City in 2010.

Migration posts are often ideal locations to provide outreach and educational opportunities. At theJerusalem Bird Observatory, a one acre site located between the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) and theSupreme Court, volunteers and staff hosted more than 1400 visitors and banded more than 2,000 birdsin 1998.

1123%

3265%

612%

Urban Migration MonitoringStations

StationNo Station

No Response


32/177


Page 31

10. URBAN BIRD MONITORING

As monitoring is essential for conservation efforts, BirdLife partners were asked about monitoringprograms to census breeding or wintering birds in urban areas. Less than 1/3 of responding BirdLifepartners monitor for breeding or wintering birds in urban areas.

14 (29%, n=49) BirdLife partners report that they census urban breeding birds (See Map 10.1).

Map 10.1 Urban Breeding Bird Census

Table 10.1 Conducts Monitoring Census for Urban Breeding BirdsContinent Yes No -Europe 7 10 1 [37% n=18]Africa 2 7 1 [20% n=10]Asia 2 2 2 [33% n=6]Pacific 1 3 0 [25% n=4]America 2 5 2 [22% n=9]

Middle East 0 2 0 [0% n=2]

1429%

2959%

612%

Urban Breeding Bird Census

CensusNo CensusNo Response


33/177


Page 32

European partners reported the most breeding urban bird censusing efforts, with urban breedingcensuses reported by Belgium, Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, andTurkey. Elsewhere, breeding urban bird censuses were reported by Malawi, Uganda, Singapore, Taiwan,Palau, Canada, and Paraguay.

In the United States, Audubon did not report a nationwide urban breeding bird census, though twoindependent Audubon chapters did report conducting an urban breeding bird census (see Appendix B).

14 BirdLife partners reported that they census urban wintering birds (see Map 10.2 and Table 10.2).

Map 10.2 Urban Wintering Bird Census

Table 10.2 Conducts Monitoring Census for Urban Wintering BirdsContinent Yes No -Europe 8 8 2 [44% n=18]Africa 1 8 1 [10% n=10]Asia 3 2 1 [50% n=6]Pacific 0 4 0 [0% n=4]America 2 5 2 [22% n=9]Middle East 0 2 0 [0% n=2]

Once again, Europe reported the most efforts in this area, with winter urban bird censuses conducted inBelgium, Estonia, Gibraltar, Hungary, Israel, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, and Poland. Outside ofEurope, winter urban bird censuses were reported from Malawi, Nepal, Singapore, Taiwan, Canada,and Paraguay.

1429%

2959%

612%

Urban Wintering Bird Census

Census

No Census

No Response


34/177


Page 33

While the United States did not report conducting a winter census for urban birds, six Audubon chaptersreported wintering bird surveys(see Appendix B) and Audubons 113 year old Christmas Bird Countincludes hundreds of annual winter counts conducted in and around most major American cities.

Even fewer BirdLife partners publish a report on the state of urban birds. Only eight partners, 13% of

the BIG UB survey respondents, were publishing such a report as of 2011 (Table 10.3).

Table 10.3 Produces Report on State of Urban BirdsContinent Yes No -Europe 3 12 3 [11% n=18]Africa 3 6 1 [30% n=10]Asia 2 3 1 [33% n=6]Pacific 0 4 0 [0% n=4]America 0 7 2 [0% n=9]Middle east 0 2 0 [0% n=2]

Belgium, Gibraltar, Kenya, Malawi, The Netherlands, Singapore, Taiwan, and Uganda were the onlypartners reporting a state of urban birds publication. No such reports were compiled by BirdLife partnersin the Pacific, Americas, or Middle East.

The lack of urban bird monitoring in most countries is perhaps the biggest gap in knowledge needed toadequately address bird conservation in urban areas. Ironically, while most people (and potentialmonitoring volunteers) live, bird monitoring is often the weakest, with only 1/3 of countries reporting amonitoring scheme for urban birds. In addition to mere baseline occurrence data, little is known ofpopulation dynamics of urban birds. Monitoring schemes for birds in urban areas provide an opportunityto greatly expand our understanding of urban bird ecology, as well as provide opportunities to enlist thepublic in research and conservation activities.

816%

3470%

714%

Report on Stateof Urban Birds

Report

No Report

No Response


35/177


Page 34

COVERS OF THEDUTCHSTATE OF THE URBAN BIRDS2009 AND 2013,AS PUBLISHED BY V OGELBESCHERMINGNEDERLAND


36/177


Page 35

11. AWARENESSBirdLife partners employ a wide variety of practices aimed at promoting awareness of urban birds andurban bird conservation issues. Among the most common of these practices are the printing of popularbrochures on urban birds, technical fact sheets on urban birds, and conducting bird fairs or birdingfestivals in cities.

POPULAR BROCHURES19 country partners (39%) publish brochures on urban birds (see Table 11.1).

Map 11.1 BirdLife Partners with Popular Brochures on Urban Birds

Table 11.1 BirdLife Partners with Popular Brochures on UrbanBirdsContinent Yes No - PercentEurope 7 9 2 [39% n=18]Africa 1 8 1 [10% n=10]Asia 4 1 1 [67% n=6]Pacific 2 2 0 [50% n=4]America 5 2 2 [44% n=9]Middle East 0 2 0 [0% n=2]

1939%

2449%

612%

Produces Popular Brochureson Urban Birds

BrochuresNo BrochuresNo Response


37/177


Page 36

TECHNICAL FACT SHEETS18 country partners (37%) publish technical fact sheets on urban birds (see Table 11.2).

Map 11.2 BirdLife Partners with Technical Fact Sheets on Urban Birds

Table 11.2 BirdLife Partners Technical Fact Sheets on UrbanBirdsContinent Yes No - PercentEurope 8 8 2 [44% n=18]Africa 3 6 1 [30% n=10]Asia 2 3 1 [33% n=6]Pacific 1 3 0 [25% n=4]America 4 3 2 [44% n=9]Middle East 0 2 0 [0% n=2]

37%

51%

12%

Produces Technical FactSheets on Urban Birds

Fact Sheets

No Fact Sheets

No Response


38/177


Page 37

BIRD FAIRS15 country partners (31%) host bird fairs or birding festivals in urban areas to promote awarenessof urban birds (see Table 11.3). Fairs may target a general urban audience, or may focus on schoolchildren. Panama holds a festival for school children each year, as does Botswana, which annuallycelebrates World Migratory Bird Day with about 500 school children from Gaborone and

surrounding villages.Map 11.3 BirdLife Partners Hosting Bird Fairs

Table 11.3 BirdLife Partners Hosting Bird FairsContinent Yes No - PercentEurope 7 8 3 [39% n=18]Africa 5 3 2 [50% n=10]Asia 2 3 1 [33% n=6]Pacific 0 4 0 [0% n=4]America 1 5 3 [11% n=9]Middle East 0 1 1 [0% n=2]

European countries hosted the most bird fairs (7), while Africa led with the highest percentage of partnercountries hosting fairs (50%). In the Americas, only Argentina hosts a fair. In the United States, Audubondoes not host a fair, but eight local Audubon chapters did report hosting a bird fair or birding festival.

ADDITIONAL OUTREACH AND AWARENESS PROGRAMSBirdLife partners employ a wide range of additional outreach and awareness programs targeted at

urban birds. The Netherlands has published a book on urban bird conservation and hosts a biannualconference on urban birds. Several partners including Uganda and Singapore provide public talks

1531%

2449%

1020%

Hosts a Bird Fair

Bird Fair

No Bird Fair

No Response


39/177


Page 38

and presentations on urban birds. Kenya conducts an urban bird walk every Wednesday, birdbanding at the National Museum every Tuesday, as well as a monthly potluck in Nairobi. Australiahosts a webcam trained on a White-bellied Sea-Eagle nest in a nature reserve along the ParramataRiver in suburban Sydney Olympic Park.


40/177


Page 39

12. GARDEN BIRD COUNTS13 BirdLife partners (27%, n=49) reported that they conduct some form of a garden bird count. Gardenbird counts were reported from all regions except the Middle East. There are additional garden birdcounts held around the world by partners that did not participate in the survey (eg. UK, France; Finland,Germany, and many more).

Map 12.1 BirdLife Partners Conducting Garden Bird Counts

Table 12.1 Garden Bird CountsContinent Yes No - PercentEurope 7 9 2 [39% n=18]Africa 1 8 1 [10% n=10]Asia 1 4 1 [17% n=6]Pacific 2 2 0 [50% n=4]America 2 5 2 [22% n=9]Middle East 0 2 0 [0% n=2]

The United States reported the earliest count, the Great Backyard Bird Count initiated in 1997. Belgiumand Nepal reported the next oldest counts, starting in 2000. Additional counts come online each year,with three counts commencing in 2010 (Malawi, New Zealand, and Estonia).

Garden bird counts draw a lot of attention from local and national media as well as a wide range ofparticipants among the general public that become possible new members for BirdLife partners. TheUnited States reports over 40,000 participants in its Great Backyard Bird Count and Australia reportsover 11,000 participants in its Birds in Backyards program. The Netherlands reports perhaps the

greatest participation per capita, with 30,000 participants out of a total population of 16.5 millionpeople.

1327%

3061%

612%

Garden Bird Survey

Garden SurveyNo Garden Survey

No Response


41/177


Page 40

Garden bird counts incorporate a wide range of count protocols involving effort, timing, and plot size.Most counts are conducted annually, though Australias count takes place year -round, with participantsreporting the highest count of each species seen during each week. Timed counts may be range from fiveminutes (Estonia) to one hour (Germany). In temperate climates, counts are generally conducted in thenon-breeding season (local winter) such as February in the United States and July in New Zealand. Manycounts are conducted over the course of a scheduled weekend, to take advantage of participantavailability outside of the work week. Census plot sizes for participants range from point counts, togarden-wide counts, to larger count circles.


42/177


Page 41

13. BIRD FRIENDLY GARDENINGGardens provide a network of potential bird habitat through many urban centers, and provide a sitewhere individuals can take direct action to help native birds. By encouraging city residents to take actionto help birds in their own yards and gardens, BirdLife partners teach people that their daily actions canhave a positive environmental influence, and can help them learn how their personal places are tied into

the larger environment. Providing habitat for birds in bird-friendly yards and gardens is one of the mostpopular urban bird conservation activities worldwide, and 28 BirdLife partners (57%, n=49) reportedsupporting bird friendly gardening programs.

Map 13.1 BirdLife Partners Supporting Bird Friendly Gardening

Table 13.1 Providing Support for Bird Friendly GardeningContinent Yes No -Europe 13 3 2 [67% n=18]Africa 5 4 1 [50% n=10]Asia 1 4 1 [17% n=6]Pacific 2 2 0 [50% n=4]

America 5 1 3 [44% n=9]Middle East 1 0 1 [50% n=2]

Support for bird-friendly gardening was highest in Europe), but was consistently high in all regionsexcept Asia (see Table 14.1). Among the many activities and resources provided in support of birdgardening, Vogelbescherming Nederland takes advantage of the Dutch public interest in garden birdsby offering to send interested residents a 16 page brochure and an interactive website with tips on howto attract birds to their garden.

2755%

1531%

714%

Support Bird FriendlyGardening

SupportDo Not Support

No Response


43/177


Page 42

In the United States, Audubon has promoted residential bird gardens and sanctuaries since the early1900s, and created an Audubon At Home program in 2001 to provide additional resources andguidance to urban, suburban, and exurban homeowners. Audubon At Home materials include posters withguidance on how to create bird-friendly residential yards, apartment balconies, and schoolyards, as wellas fact sheets and online resources with guidance on how to provide food, shelter, and nestingopportunities for iconic birds that need the most help in each part of the urban to rural continuum acrossall regions of the United States. In addition to the national efforts, ten local Audubon chapters and onestate Audubon office also reported supporting bird-friendly gardening (see Appendix B).

In Asia, only the Philippines reported supporting bird friendly gardening. Bird-friendly gardening maybe another avenue for Asian BirdLife partners to explore, and the possibilities for establishing bird-friendly gardens in Asian cultures would appear to be a welcome topic of research.

GARDEN BIRDSROBIN (PETROICA AUSTRALIS ), T UI (PROSTHEMADERA NOVAESEELANDIAE ) AND BELLBIRD(ANTHORNIS MELANURA ), AS UNIQUE SELLING POINTS FOR REAL ESTATE INNEW ZEALAND


44/177


Page 43

14. ADVICE ON CITY PLANNING28 BirdLife country partners (57%, n-49) indicated that they provide advice on city planning, and thisfunction was provided in all regions except the Middle East.

Map 14.1 BirdLife Partners Providing Advice on City Planning

Table 14.1 Providing Advice on City Planning

Continent Yes No -Europe 12 4 2 [66% n=18]Africa 5 4 1 [50% n=10]Asia 3 2 1 [50% n=6]Pacific 3 1 0 [75% n=4]America 5 1 3 [55% n=9]Middle East 0 2 0 [0% n=2]

While partners were not asked to provide details on their city planning work, partners are engaged in awide range of activities in this area. In Europe, the Netherlands Society for the Protection of Birds (VBN)holds a City Bird Conference every two years to facilitate communication with city planners and othersengaged in creating urban habitats. In New Zealand, Forest & Branch has more than 50 branchesworking on projects across the country, including city planning. The Wellington Branch specifically seeks toinfluence urban planning and policy by providing comments on formal planning documents prepared byWellingtons regional and city councils, as well as initiating discussions with local officials as needed. Inthe United States, the National Audubon Society focuses on national issues, and did not report providingadvice on city planning, but eight local Audubon chapters (47%, n=17) and one state Audubon officeindicated that they do provide this function. In San Diego, California the local Audubon chapter hascreated a guidebook for local homeowner associations interested in creating community-scaledconservation in planned communities.


45/177


Page 44

LITTLE RINGED PLOVER(CHARADRIUS DUBIUS ) ON ITS NEST . CITY PLANNING VERSUS BIRD CONSERVATION PHOTO: RSPB


46/177


Page 45

15. CONSERVATION OF URBAN BIRD SPECIESPreventing the extinction and improving the conservation status of individual bird species are principalaims of BirdLife. 15 BirdLife country partners (31%, n=49) reported working on the conservation ofindividual urban bird species. Conservation programs targeting individual bird urban bird species weremost widespread in Europe, with eight countries reporting such efforts.

Map 15.1 BirdLife Partners Reporting Conservation Targeting Individual Urban Bird Species

Table 15.1 Conservation of Individual Urban Bird SpeciesContinent Yes No -Europe 8 6 4 [44% n=18]Africa 2 7 1 [20% n=10]Asia 2 3 1 [33% n=6]Pacific 0 4 0 [0% n=4]America 3 3 3 [33% n=9]Middle East 0 1 1 [0% n=2]

Conservation efforts targeting individual urban bird species were most commonly reported In Europe,

and the most frequently targeted species were Common Swift (5 countries), Peregrine Falcon (3countries), Northern House-Martin (2 countries) and Barn Owl (2 countries). Other species mentionedinclude Lesser Kestrel in Israel and White Stork, an iconic bird species, in Bulgaria. In The Netherlands,Vogelbescherming Nederland is working with House Sparrow, Barn Swallow, , Sand Martin, and gardenbirds in general. Work in the Czech Republic is focused on Common Swift, with those efforts alsobenefiting Eurasian Jackdaw as a welcome byproduct.

In Africa, Tunisia also reported efforts to aid Common Swift, as well as Pallid Swift, Northern House-martin, and Barn Swallow. Uganda is working with Hooded Vulture, Marabou Stork, and Grey Crowned-crane.

Nepal and Singapore report work with urban species including nest box installation for House Sparrows

and Oriental Magpie-robin in Nepal, and efforts to support Purple Swamphen, Common Moorhen, LesserWhistling-duck, White-browed Crake, and Little Grebe in Singapore.


47/177


Page 46

In the United States, Audubon did not report any efforts to help individual urban bird species, thoughfour chapters reported conservation measures on specific urban birds. Two Audubon chapters aresupporting Purple Martin colonies, while San Diego Audubon is focusing its efforts on protecting fivethreatened and endangered local subspecies and coastal bird populations (see Appendix B).

While many partners are working to protect local rarities, five bird species are the focus of efforts on

more than one continent (see Table 15.2). Three are the beneficiaries of efforts in Europe and Africa,while Peregrine Falcon attracts efforts in Europe and America and House Sparrows are the subject ofattention across Eurasia.

Table 15.2 Urban Species with Conservation Measures on More Than One Continent

Africa Asia MiddleEast Europe Pacific Americas

House Sparrow

Nepal NT NLNT LuxNL

Barn Swallow

Tunisia NT NLNT LuxNL

Northern House-

Martin Tunisia

NT NLNT LuxNT ChecVU BB NL

Common Swift

Tunisia NT LuxBChec

IsrNL

Peregrine Falcon

Taiwan

NT NLPolBLuxNL

NTNY USAUSA

Red listed Country Other country with conservation effort


48/177


Page 47

16. BEST PRACTICES AND GAPS IN KNOWLEDGEOne of the purposes of this study was to collect data on current urban bird conservation practices inorder to begin compiling a summary of best practices as well as gaps in knowledge among BirdLifePartners. This survey highlights many innovative and effective urban bird programs around the globe, aswell as significant differences among BirdLife entities in attention to urban birds and habitats.

In many cases, existant BirdLife member or partner programs can serve as model programs. In othercases, best practices are extrapolated from results of current ecological, sociological, and other studies.

Gaps in knowledge include variations in how these topics are approached in different countries, as wellas differences between our current understanding of issues related to urban bird conservation andcurrent levels of engagement with these issues within various BirdLife organizations.

In this concluding section, current and potential best practices are outlined for each of the survey topics,as well as significant gaps in knowledge revealed by the survey questions. This is followed by finalremarks on the future and prospects for urban bird conservation.

DEFINITIONS OF URBAN

Most BirdLife countries do not have a well-defined criteria for identifying urban habitats. Fortunately,work in this area is progressing, and definitions from urban and landscape ecology studies may provideproductive frameworks for identifying and working in these areas.

Best Practices Gaps in Knowledge

Define urban areas based on ecologicalfactors, rather than measures of humanpopulation (cf. Marzluff et al. 2001)

Identify range of urban and urbanizinghabitats along a rural-to-urban gradient.

Need to better define and quantify extent of urbanhabitats in most countries.

URBAN BIRDSBirdLife partners and affiliates vary widely in their approach to defining urban birds. More attention towhich birds are using cities may reveal additional conservation needs and opportunities in urban areas


Identify those birds which primarily occupycities, have significant populations withinurban habitats, or which may be found atleast occasionally in cities.

Categorize bird species responses to various

urban habitats eg. urban exploiters, urbanadapters, urban avoiders.

Need better definitions of urban birds birds whichprimarily occupy cities vs. all birds that may befound at least occasionally in cities.


49/177


Page 48

RED LIST BIRD SPECIESMany IUCN or locally red-listed criteria species are found in cities, or may be harmed by increasingurbanization. A more thorough review of urban red-listed birds may reveal additional conservationneeds and opportunities in urban areas.


Identify IUCN and locally red-listed speciesthat are found primarily in cities, or which arefound at least occasionally in cities.

How many IUCN red-listed birds are found primarilyin cities?

How many IUCN red-listed species are found atleast occasionally in cities?

How many locally red-listed pecies are foundprimarily or at least occasionally in cities?

What role do urban areas play in harboring orcreating threats for red-listed birds?

How many red-listed birds are thriving inexpatriated urban populations outside their natural

range?

NON-NATIVE BIRD SPECIESBirdlife partners and affiliates report many non-native bird species in their cities. Many of these birdsreceive scant notice, and do not figure predominantly in urban bird conservation planning or educationalefforts.


Identify and track non-native bird species inurban environments.

How many non-native bird species are established ineach urban area?

What criteria are being used to determine if a non-native bird population is established?

What cultural factors lead to the continued releaseor interest in non-native birds?

What impacts do non-native birds have on localnative bird populations in cities?

PEST OR NUISANCE SPECIESBirdLife partners and affiliates report a variety of responses to birds identified as pest or nuisancespecies. Closer examination of the cultural, economic, and other social environment may reveal additionalconservation needs and opportunities, as well as opportunities for bird-related education in cities.


Identify species considered to be nuisancespecies as well as the cultural, economic, andother social factors that influence how thosespecies are viewed and responded to withinlocal cultures.

What cultural factors contribute to a bird beingconsidered a pest or nuisance?

What efforts are being taken to control nuisancebird species in different regions and cultures?

What challenges do nuisance species pose to birdconservation efforts?

How can the bird pest control industry contribute tomanagement of urban bird populations in eachcountry?


50/177


Page 49

ICON BIRDSProminent and attractive urban bird species can capture the imagination of city dwellers and serve asflagship species for urban conservation efforts, as well as provide a gateway for urbanites to becomemore involved in bird conservation and other environmental activities.

Best Practices Gaps in Knowledge Identify charismatic urban bird species that

can serve as a flagship species for birdconservation and habitat efforts in cities.

Promote the conservation of these iconic birdspecies in ecologically and culturallyappropriate urban settings.

How can charismatic flagship bird species be usedto promote habitat creation and restoration effortsin cities?

URBAN IBAS & RESERV ESBirdLife partners and affiliates report many Important Bird Areas within or adjacent to urban areas,though there is a wide array of approaches to identifying IBAs as urban. The establishment of IBAs in oradjacent to urban areas creates opportunities for urban dwellers to more easily become involved in IBAmanagement and support, and can serve as a gateway to involvement with more distant or regionallandscape and habitat conservation efforts.


Establish criteria for identification of IBAs asurban IBAs.

Establish affinity of friends groups to conductbird monitoring and conservation efforts inurban IBAs.

Link work in urban IBAs to efforts in moredistant rural IBAs.

Use urban IBAs to attract a wider urbanaudience to bird conservation.Urban IBA efforts revealed In this report:Africa

AAO, BirdLife Botswana, BirdLife South Africa, Nature Kenya, Nature Uganda, Nigerian

Conservation Foundation, WECMAmericas

Asociacin Guyra Paraguay, Aves Argentinas,Aves Uruguay, Bird Studies Canada, NationalAudubon Society, Sociedad Audubon Panama

Asia

HaribonEurope

Czech Society for Ornithology, Doga Dernegi,DOPPS, Estionian Ornithological Society, NME,OTOP, SEO

Middle East

The Royal Society for Conservation of Nature(Jordan)

Pacific

Birds Australia, Forest & Bird, Palau

Conservation society

How to determine if an IBA is an urban IBA location within matrix of urban habitats or proximityto urban habitats?

How many urban IBAs are already established? How can urban IBAs serve as flagship efforts

leading to urban renewal, as well as additional birdconservation efforts in rural areas?


51/177


Page 50

T OOLS ON MIGRATION MONITORING STATION: BINOCULARS, COUNTER, COUNT FORM, CLOCK, FIELD GUIDE PHOTO: JIP LOUWE KOOIJMANS

MIGRATION POSTSFew BirdLife partners or affiliates report conducting migration studies from bird observatories or othermigration monitoring posts in cities, though these efforts can create additional opportunities to engagecity dwellers in bird monitoring and conservation, and to educate urbanites about bird migration andother aspects of bird ecology and conservation.

Best Practices Gaps in KnowledgeBirdLife organizations with urban migration postsas identified in this report:Africa

AAO, Nigerian Conservation Foundation,WECM

Americas

Asociacin Guyra Paraguay, Bird StudiesCanada, Sociedad Audubon Panama

Asia

Nature Society (Singapore)

Europe

Doga Dernegi, Gibraltar Ornithological& Natural History Society, OTOP, SPNI

How do migratory birds use different urban landscapesfor navigation or as stopover sites?

What impact do urban landscapes and hazards haveon migratory birds?


52/177


Page 51

URBAN BIRD MONITORING [BREEDING & WINTER]BirdLife organizations report a wide variety of urban bird monitoring in both breeding and non-breeding seasons. In order to sustain bird populations in urban and urbanizing landscapes, increasedmonitoring will be needed. Bird monitoring provides an opportunity to collect needed data, as well asengage urban dwellers in meaningful conservation activities.


Determine what types of information areneeded to best monitor and sustain urban birdpopulations.

Within appropriate social and fundingparameters, create monitoring schemes tocollect needed data.

Use data to adapt management of urbanhabitats for birds as needed.

Engage the public in collecting data andcelebrating the results of monitoring.

BirdLife organizations with urban birdmonitoring programs as indicated in this report:

Africa

Nature Uganda, WECM

Americas

Asociacin Guyra Paraguay, Bird StudiesCanada

Asia

Bird Conservation Nepal, Chinese Wild BirdFederation (Taiwan), Nature Society(Singapore)

Europe

Czech society for Ornithology, Doga Dernegi,Estonian Onrithological Society, LNVL,Natuurpunt, NME, SPNI, VogelbeschermingNederland

Pacific

Palau Conservation Society

What types of monitoring are needed to bestsupport urban bird conservation efforts?

How can the public be most effectively engaged inassisting with bird monitoring efforts?

Are there additional ways to better fund or conductbird monitoring?

How can bird monitoring better engage the public inurban bird conservation awareness and activities?

How can the results of monitoring be used to informthe public about bird conservation and to celebrate

positive results of management?


53/177


Page 52

GREAT TIT(PARUS MAJOR ) A TYPICAL GARDEN BIRD IN LARGE PARTS OFEUROPE ANDASIA

PHOTO: JIP LOUWE KOOIJMANS

AWARENESSBirdLife organizations report a wide array of awareness activities in urban areas, including bird fairs,printed brochures and technical reports, and other online or broadcast media efforts. BirdLife partnersand affiliates can take advantage of social media and other emerging technologies, as well astraditional media, to promote awareness and conservation of birds in urban areas.

Bird fairs in urban areas can promoteconservation of urban birds, andengage urban dwellers in theappreciation and conservation of localbirds.

Popular brochures and technical factsheets can educate citizens and provideassistance to local officials and cityplanners.

How can bird fairs best promote local birdconservation and engage city dwellers inconservation efforts?

What types of popular brochures ortechnical fact sheets best engage andinform urban residents and local officials?

What other media outlets (television,internet, etc.) can be utilized to promotebird conservation and awareness in urbanareas?

GARDEN BIRDS COUNTSA growing number of BirdLife organizations are conducting garden bird counts or similar citizen-scienceurban bird surveys. In addition to the efforts reported in this survey, there are additional examples(especially in western Europe--such as RSPB, LPO & NABU) of garden bird counts from BirdLife partnersthat did not respond to the survey. Current counts reflect a wide variety of methodologies and protocol,which can be adapted to local cultures and conditions.


54/177


Page 53


Conduct an annual (or ongoing) count of birdsin gardens and other urban spaces.

Use counts as a way to engage additionalaudiences in bird awareness and conservation.

Use count results to inform conservationplanning and additional outreach activities incities and beyond.

BirdLife organizations with garden bird counts asindicated in this report:

Africa

WECM

Americas

Bird Studies Canada, National Audubon

SocietyAsia

Bird Conservation Nepal

Europe

DOPPS, Estonian Ornithological Society, LNVL,Natuurpunt, OTOP, VogelbeschermingNederland

Middle East

Nature IraqPacific

Birds Australia, Forest & Bird

How can citizen science efforts best engage urbandwellers in collecting bird data from their yards andgardens?

What are the operational and data limitations ofthese efforts?

How can garden bird count results be used to informconservation planning in cities and beyond?


55/177


Page 54

BIRD FRIENDLY GARDENINGMany BirdLife organizations support bird-friendly gardening practices. Partners and affiliates mayconsider providing recommendations for private bird habitat creation in a full range of available urbanhabitats (see Audubon At Home poster series and Neighborhood Bird Conservation handbook).

Best Practices Gaps in Knowledge Create programs and resources to support

target bird species and conservation goals ineach type of urban landscape or land usetype across the urban gradient.

BirdLife organizations supporting bird-friendly gardeningas indicated in this report:

Africa

AAO, BirdLife South Africa, Nature Kenya,Nature Uganda, WECM

Americas

Aves Argentinas, Aves Uruguay, Bird StudiesCanada, Falkland Conservation, NationalAudubon Society

Asia

Haribon

Europe

Azerbaijan Ornithological Society, BirdLifeCyprus, Czech society for Ornithology, DogaDernegi, DOPPS, Gibraltar Ornitholog

BirdLife International Global Survey on the Status of Urban Bird Conservation

Documents

Transcript of BirdLife International Global Survey on the Status of Urban Bird Conservation