Laserfiche WebLink
RELATIONSHIPS OF BIRDS, LIZARDS, AND NOCTURNAL RODENTS TO THEIR HABITAT IN TUCSON, ARIZONA <br />RESULTS <br />Land Cover Associations <br />Native vegetation (combined lower and upper <br />Sonoran, and mesquite bosque cover types) was <br />the most common land cover type encountered in <br />the census plots, and comprised almost 42% of all <br />land sampled (Table 1). This does not represent <br />the actual amount of native land cover remaining <br />in Tucson, because the study area boundary <br />extended beyond the developed areas. The <br />amount of native vegetation per plot ranged from <br />0 to 99.5% of total ground cover. Over 28% of <br />this land was upper Sonoran habitat, of which 2% <br />was visibly thinned or degraded by human <br />activity. Another 12.3% was lower Sonoran <br />vegetation, with 1% thinned or degraded by <br />human activity. Less than 0.1% of all native land <br />cover sampled was classified as visibly thickened <br />or enhanced by human activity. One percent of <br />all native vegetation cover sampled was mesquite <br />bosque. Paved or graded land comprised 18.3% of <br />all land sampled, and ranged from 0 to 62.2% of <br />the total ground cover within census plots. <br />Yards that I classified as urban open were the <br />most common urban land cover type, comprising <br />23.8% of all land sampled. The range of values in <br />the plots for urban open areas was from 0 to <br />80.0%. Most urban open land was predominantly <br />non-native vegetation (16.4%), whereas only 3% <br />was predominantly native, and 4.5% was a <br />mixture of both native and non-native vegetation. <br />Both urban treed areas (containing > 60% tree <br />canopy closure) and urban savannahs (30-60% <br />canopy closure) were rare, comprising only 0.4% <br />and 1.3% respectively of the total area sampled. <br />The average number of houses/ha was 3.3 <br />(1.3/ac), and houses covered an average of 8.0% of <br />all land within plots. Number of houses ranged <br />from 0 to 19.8 per ha (7.9/ac) and covered a range <br />from 0 to 43.7 % of the land within plots. <br />Apartment buildings and small businesses covered <br />an average of 1.5% of land in plots, ranging from <br />0-28.6% of land cover measured. Undisturbed <br />washes comprised an average of 3.9%, and <br />disturbed washes comprised an average of 0.3% of <br />all land cover. The percent of ground covered by <br />undisturbed washes ranged from 0-65%, disturbed <br />wash cover ranged from 0-17.9%. <br />Distance of census plots from mainland areas <br />ranged from 0-10.7 km and averaged 3.3 km. The <br />distance from > 1 ha undeveloped patches of land <br />ranged from 0-2.8 km and averaged only 291 m. <br />The distance of points from undisturbed riparian <br />zones averaged 925 m and ranged from 0-5.0 km. <br />Sampling plots contained an average of 3 distinct <br />land cover types each, and ranged from only 1 <br />type to 6 distinct types present. Several of the <br />habitat descriptors were inter-correlated (Table 2). <br />Wildlife Data Results <br />Breeding Birds. Fifty-eight species of birds <br />known to breed within the study area were <br />detected during spring censuring (Appendix A). <br />The most abundant species were the house <br />sparrow (Passer domesticus, n = 2,031), mourning <br />dove (Zenaida macroura, n = 996), and house <br />finch (Carpodacus mexicanus, n = 848). The most <br />wide-spread species were the mourning dove, <br />house finch, and cactus wren (Campylorhynchus <br />brunneicapillus), which occurred in 315, 315, and <br />259 of the 334 total plots, respectively. Species <br />richness at each census plot ranged from 4-18, <br />with a mean of 11.8 ± 0.15 (SE). Total number <br />of individuals per plot ranged from 5.5-68, and <br />averaged 24.9 ± 0.42. Four species of non-native <br />birds were detected during censuring, house <br />sparrow, European starling (Sturnus vulgris), rock <br />dove (Columba livia), and Inca dove (Columbina <br />inca). I included the Inca dove in the non-native <br />bird group because it is a relatively recent arrival <br />(circa 1870) into the Tucson area, and has a <br />history of close association with urbanization in <br />both Arizona and throughout its original range in <br />Mexico. <br />Wintering Birds. Forty-two species of birds <br />were encountered during the winter census period <br />(Appendix B). Three wintering species were <br />encountered that were not encountered during <br />breeding season censuring: black-chinned sparrow <br />(Spizella atrogularis), ruby-crowned kinglet <br />(Regulus calendula), and black-throated gray <br />warbler (Dendroica nigrescens). The most <br />abundant species encountered were the same as <br />those in the breeding season censuses; the house <br />sparrow (n = 1,227), mourning dove (n = 1,217), <br />and the house finch (n = 385). The same 3 <br />species were also the most wide-spread; mourning <br />doves were present in 183 plots, house sparrows <br />were present in 164 plots, and house finches were <br />present in 123 of the 306 plots that were visited. <br />Species richness ranged from 0-11, with a mean of <br />4.5 ± 0.14. Total number of individuals per plot <br />ranged from 0-132, with a mean of 15.3 ± 1.10. <br />Four non-native species were detected during <br />winter censuring, house sparrows, European <br />starlings, rock doves, and Inca doves. <br />STEPHEN S. GERMAINE 1995 ARIZONA GAME fr FISH DEPARTMENT, TECH. REP. 20 13 <br />