Backyard Biomes: Is Anyone There? Improving Public Awareness of Urban Wildlife Activity
Wildlife are increasingly being found in urban habitats, and likely rely on some resources in suburban household yards, which exposes them to the effects of yard management and human and pet activities. We compared the relationships between these potential disturbances and benefits to the number of...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-03-01
|
| Series: | Diversity |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/14/4/263 |
| _version_ | 1827620975260205056 |
|---|---|
| author | Loren L. Fardell Chris R. Pavey Chris R. Dickman |
| author_facet | Loren L. Fardell Chris R. Pavey Chris R. Dickman |
| author_sort | Loren L. Fardell |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Wildlife are increasingly being found in urban habitats, and likely rely on some resources in suburban household yards, which exposes them to the effects of yard management and human and pet activities. We compared the relationships between these potential disturbances and benefits to the number of different types of wildlife sighted by householders, using written surveys. Owing to the inability of many household respondents to identify animals to the species or genus level, each different ‘type’ of animal individually listed was counted to generate the total number of types of wildlife observed by each household. We found that relatively more types of wildlife were observed by residents whose yards provided ease of faunal access under or through fences, had reduced pesticide use, increased levels of anthropogenic noise, and increased presence of pets in yards. The latter two associations likely relate to the increased opportunities to observe wildlife in yards that each creates. We also investigated the use of yards by wildlife and domestic pets in open compared to more vegetated habitats by day and night, using motion-sensor cameras. All animals observed were compared to the activity of introduced brown and black rats (<i>Rattus norvegicus</i>, <i>R. rattus</i>), owing to their wild origins but long commensal history with humans. Camera images indicated that animals’ natural activity periods were maintained in yards. Brown antechinuses (<i>Antechinus stuartii</i>), northern brown bandicoots (<i>Isoodon macrourus</i>), domestic cats (<i>Felis catus</i>) and native birds (species as listed below) each preferred sheltered or vegetated habitats over open habitats, when compared to the introduced rats that showed little habitat preference. However, unlike the other species, the native birds used open areas more than vegetated or sheltered areas when compared within their group only. The common brushtail possum (<i>Trichosurus vulpecula</i>) was observed to use open areas comparatively more than the introduced rats, but used vegetated or sheltered habitats more when compared to self only. The domestic dog (<i>Canis familiaris</i>) and red fox (<i>Vulpes vulpes</i>) used open areas more than vegetated or sheltered areas, when compared to the introduced rats, and against themselves. This indicated a level of coping with urban stressors by the native animals, but with a reliance on more vegetated habitats to allow for natural stress-relieving behaviours of escape or hiding. Here, we offer insights into how each of these findings may be used to help educate and motivate increased household responsibility for urban wildlife conservation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T10:56:25Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8e26ddc1450d46a6bb7dd5386ba93dc9 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1424-2818 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T10:56:25Z |
| publishDate | 2022-03-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Diversity |
| spelling | doaj.art-8e26ddc1450d46a6bb7dd5386ba93dc92023-12-01T01:36:45ZengMDPI AGDiversity1424-28182022-03-0114426310.3390/d14040263Backyard Biomes: Is Anyone There? Improving Public Awareness of Urban Wildlife ActivityLoren L. Fardell0Chris R. Pavey1Chris R. Dickman2School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, AustraliaCSIRO Land and Water, Winnellie, NT 0822, AustraliaSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2006, AustraliaWildlife are increasingly being found in urban habitats, and likely rely on some resources in suburban household yards, which exposes them to the effects of yard management and human and pet activities. We compared the relationships between these potential disturbances and benefits to the number of different types of wildlife sighted by householders, using written surveys. Owing to the inability of many household respondents to identify animals to the species or genus level, each different ‘type’ of animal individually listed was counted to generate the total number of types of wildlife observed by each household. We found that relatively more types of wildlife were observed by residents whose yards provided ease of faunal access under or through fences, had reduced pesticide use, increased levels of anthropogenic noise, and increased presence of pets in yards. The latter two associations likely relate to the increased opportunities to observe wildlife in yards that each creates. We also investigated the use of yards by wildlife and domestic pets in open compared to more vegetated habitats by day and night, using motion-sensor cameras. All animals observed were compared to the activity of introduced brown and black rats (<i>Rattus norvegicus</i>, <i>R. rattus</i>), owing to their wild origins but long commensal history with humans. Camera images indicated that animals’ natural activity periods were maintained in yards. Brown antechinuses (<i>Antechinus stuartii</i>), northern brown bandicoots (<i>Isoodon macrourus</i>), domestic cats (<i>Felis catus</i>) and native birds (species as listed below) each preferred sheltered or vegetated habitats over open habitats, when compared to the introduced rats that showed little habitat preference. However, unlike the other species, the native birds used open areas more than vegetated or sheltered areas when compared within their group only. The common brushtail possum (<i>Trichosurus vulpecula</i>) was observed to use open areas comparatively more than the introduced rats, but used vegetated or sheltered habitats more when compared to self only. The domestic dog (<i>Canis familiaris</i>) and red fox (<i>Vulpes vulpes</i>) used open areas more than vegetated or sheltered areas, when compared to the introduced rats, and against themselves. This indicated a level of coping with urban stressors by the native animals, but with a reliance on more vegetated habitats to allow for natural stress-relieving behaviours of escape or hiding. Here, we offer insights into how each of these findings may be used to help educate and motivate increased household responsibility for urban wildlife conservation.https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/14/4/263wildlife-friendly gardeningurban wildlife biodiversityurban conservation managementsocial ecologyhousehold yard |
| spellingShingle | Loren L. Fardell Chris R. Pavey Chris R. Dickman Backyard Biomes: Is Anyone There? Improving Public Awareness of Urban Wildlife Activity Diversity wildlife-friendly gardening urban wildlife biodiversity urban conservation management social ecology household yard |
| title | Backyard Biomes: Is Anyone There? Improving Public Awareness of Urban Wildlife Activity |
| title_full | Backyard Biomes: Is Anyone There? Improving Public Awareness of Urban Wildlife Activity |
| title_fullStr | Backyard Biomes: Is Anyone There? Improving Public Awareness of Urban Wildlife Activity |
| title_full_unstemmed | Backyard Biomes: Is Anyone There? Improving Public Awareness of Urban Wildlife Activity |
| title_short | Backyard Biomes: Is Anyone There? Improving Public Awareness of Urban Wildlife Activity |
| title_sort | backyard biomes is anyone there improving public awareness of urban wildlife activity |
| topic | wildlife-friendly gardening urban wildlife biodiversity urban conservation management social ecology household yard |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/14/4/263 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lorenlfardell backyardbiomesisanyonethereimprovingpublicawarenessofurbanwildlifeactivity AT chrisrpavey backyardbiomesisanyonethereimprovingpublicawarenessofurbanwildlifeactivity AT chrisrdickman backyardbiomesisanyonethereimprovingpublicawarenessofurbanwildlifeactivity |