Exotic monk parakeets (Myiopsitta monachus) in New Jersey: nest site selection, rebuilding following removal, and their urban wildlife appeal
Understanding how birds exist in highly urban cities is important to maintaining biodiversity within these environments, and exotic species pose a unique opportunity to examine adaptation. The non-native monk parakeet ( Myiopsitta monachus ) nests mainly in cities in the United States, and in some p...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Urban ecosystems 2009-06, Vol.12 (2), p.185-196 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 196 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 185 |
container_title | Urban ecosystems |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | Burger, J. Gochfeld, M. |
description | Understanding how birds exist in highly urban cities is important to maintaining biodiversity within these environments, and exotic species pose a unique opportunity to examine adaptation. The non-native monk parakeet (
Myiopsitta monachus
) nests mainly in cities in the United States, and in some places, is considered a nuisance by utility companies. Monk parakeets nest communally (many nests in one nest structure) and colonially (many nest structures in one area). We studied monk parakeets in urban New Jersey to determine where they nested, if nest sites were similar among parakeets nesting in trees and utility poles, and if they rebuilt following removal. Of the 51 nest structures we studied, 37% were on utility poles, 8% were on a man-made gazebo, and the rest were in trees. Nest structures located on poles were located closer to the ground, had fewer nest holes, and the distance to nearest tree was greater than for tree nest structures. The pole nest structures were closer to the top of the “canopy” or structure, and were always located on or around the pole rather than out on one of the cross beams. The nest structures were similar in size and shape whether they were located on poles, other man-made objects, or in trees. Thus monk parakeets built similar nest structures, and located them about the same distance from the ground and from houses whether they were in utility poles or in trees, leading to the conclusion that poles provide suitable sites for them. The parakeets persisted in nesting on the utility poles and another man-made gazebo despite being removed over several years, and despite the presence of other nearby unused trees. After parakeet nest structures were removed from poles by the utility company, most birds began rebuilding within the day. The persistence, despite persecution, of the monk parakeet on poles, and the fact that poles provide attractive and secure support for nest structures, suggest that they will continue to do so. Managers must either learn to live with the parakeets, redesign the utility pole structure to be less appealing to the birds, provide them with alternative nest sites on the utility poles or nearby, or continue to forcibly remove them. Local support for the parakeets, and their potential to serve as urban icons, have resulted in New Jersey’s utility company working with local enthusiasts and scientists to ensure the birds are not harmed during nest removal. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11252-009-0094-y |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20635922</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1895951431</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c261y-a57e85e4d0c7fcfeb8bb00501241acd489509d90bd0c083e348ca33c3f7c78d83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1q3TAQhU1oIGnaB-hOZBEaiJuRZNlydyGkfyTtpl0LWR4nSnQlR7Jz64foO1fmBgqFLIYZmO8cZjhF8Y7CBwrQnCdKmWAlQLtWVS57xSEVDS9pXbFXeQbJS0mFOChep3QPkFVSHhZ_rn6HyRqyCf6BjDrqB8Qpkfc3iw1jstOk15U2d3M6JdaT77gl3zAmXD4Sj2kimUGS0KGZbPBnJGI3W9dbf0uG4FzYrlPETXjS7oxo35PpDm0kc-y0J9uMOjsg0eOI2r0p9gftEr597kfFr09XPy-_lNc_Pn-9vLguDavpUmrRoBRY9WCawQzYya4DEEBZRbXpK9kKaPsWugzkv5FX0mjODR8a08he8qPiZOc7xvA45zfUxiaDzmmPYU6KQc1Fy1gGj_8D78Mcfb5NMVbLqga-utEdZGJIKeKgxmg3Oi6KglrTUbt0VE5mrUotWcN2mpRZf4vxn_HLor_7K5UT</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>226846038</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Exotic monk parakeets (Myiopsitta monachus) in New Jersey: nest site selection, rebuilding following removal, and their urban wildlife appeal</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Burger, J. ; Gochfeld, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Burger, J. ; Gochfeld, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Understanding how birds exist in highly urban cities is important to maintaining biodiversity within these environments, and exotic species pose a unique opportunity to examine adaptation. The non-native monk parakeet (
Myiopsitta monachus
) nests mainly in cities in the United States, and in some places, is considered a nuisance by utility companies. Monk parakeets nest communally (many nests in one nest structure) and colonially (many nest structures in one area). We studied monk parakeets in urban New Jersey to determine where they nested, if nest sites were similar among parakeets nesting in trees and utility poles, and if they rebuilt following removal. Of the 51 nest structures we studied, 37% were on utility poles, 8% were on a man-made gazebo, and the rest were in trees. Nest structures located on poles were located closer to the ground, had fewer nest holes, and the distance to nearest tree was greater than for tree nest structures. The pole nest structures were closer to the top of the “canopy” or structure, and were always located on or around the pole rather than out on one of the cross beams. The nest structures were similar in size and shape whether they were located on poles, other man-made objects, or in trees. Thus monk parakeets built similar nest structures, and located them about the same distance from the ground and from houses whether they were in utility poles or in trees, leading to the conclusion that poles provide suitable sites for them. The parakeets persisted in nesting on the utility poles and another man-made gazebo despite being removed over several years, and despite the presence of other nearby unused trees. After parakeet nest structures were removed from poles by the utility company, most birds began rebuilding within the day. The persistence, despite persecution, of the monk parakeet on poles, and the fact that poles provide attractive and secure support for nest structures, suggest that they will continue to do so. Managers must either learn to live with the parakeets, redesign the utility pole structure to be less appealing to the birds, provide them with alternative nest sites on the utility poles or nearby, or continue to forcibly remove them. Local support for the parakeets, and their potential to serve as urban icons, have resulted in New Jersey’s utility company working with local enthusiasts and scientists to ensure the birds are not harmed during nest removal.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1083-8155</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1642</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11252-009-0094-y</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adaptation ; Biodiversity ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Birds ; Ecology ; Environmental Management ; Environmental monitoring ; Introduced species ; Life Sciences ; Myiopsitta monachus ; Nature Conservation ; Nesting ; Nests ; Public utilities ; Site selection ; Studies ; Trees ; Urban areas ; Urban Ecology ; Wildlife</subject><ispartof>Urban ecosystems, 2009-06, Vol.12 (2), p.185-196</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c261y-a57e85e4d0c7fcfeb8bb00501241acd489509d90bd0c083e348ca33c3f7c78d83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c261y-a57e85e4d0c7fcfeb8bb00501241acd489509d90bd0c083e348ca33c3f7c78d83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11252-009-0094-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11252-009-0094-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27925,27926,41489,42558,51320</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Burger, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gochfeld, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Exotic monk parakeets (Myiopsitta monachus) in New Jersey: nest site selection, rebuilding following removal, and their urban wildlife appeal</title><title>Urban ecosystems</title><addtitle>Urban Ecosyst</addtitle><description>Understanding how birds exist in highly urban cities is important to maintaining biodiversity within these environments, and exotic species pose a unique opportunity to examine adaptation. The non-native monk parakeet (
Myiopsitta monachus
) nests mainly in cities in the United States, and in some places, is considered a nuisance by utility companies. Monk parakeets nest communally (many nests in one nest structure) and colonially (many nest structures in one area). We studied monk parakeets in urban New Jersey to determine where they nested, if nest sites were similar among parakeets nesting in trees and utility poles, and if they rebuilt following removal. Of the 51 nest structures we studied, 37% were on utility poles, 8% were on a man-made gazebo, and the rest were in trees. Nest structures located on poles were located closer to the ground, had fewer nest holes, and the distance to nearest tree was greater than for tree nest structures. The pole nest structures were closer to the top of the “canopy” or structure, and were always located on or around the pole rather than out on one of the cross beams. The nest structures were similar in size and shape whether they were located on poles, other man-made objects, or in trees. Thus monk parakeets built similar nest structures, and located them about the same distance from the ground and from houses whether they were in utility poles or in trees, leading to the conclusion that poles provide suitable sites for them. The parakeets persisted in nesting on the utility poles and another man-made gazebo despite being removed over several years, and despite the presence of other nearby unused trees. After parakeet nest structures were removed from poles by the utility company, most birds began rebuilding within the day. The persistence, despite persecution, of the monk parakeet on poles, and the fact that poles provide attractive and secure support for nest structures, suggest that they will continue to do so. Managers must either learn to live with the parakeets, redesign the utility pole structure to be less appealing to the birds, provide them with alternative nest sites on the utility poles or nearby, or continue to forcibly remove them. Local support for the parakeets, and their potential to serve as urban icons, have resulted in New Jersey’s utility company working with local enthusiasts and scientists to ensure the birds are not harmed during nest removal.</description><subject>Adaptation</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Environmental Management</subject><subject>Environmental monitoring</subject><subject>Introduced species</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Myiopsitta monachus</subject><subject>Nature Conservation</subject><subject>Nesting</subject><subject>Nests</subject><subject>Public utilities</subject><subject>Site selection</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Trees</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Urban Ecology</subject><subject>Wildlife</subject><issn>1083-8155</issn><issn>1573-1642</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc1q3TAQhU1oIGnaB-hOZBEaiJuRZNlydyGkfyTtpl0LWR4nSnQlR7Jz64foO1fmBgqFLIYZmO8cZjhF8Y7CBwrQnCdKmWAlQLtWVS57xSEVDS9pXbFXeQbJS0mFOChep3QPkFVSHhZ_rn6HyRqyCf6BjDrqB8Qpkfc3iw1jstOk15U2d3M6JdaT77gl3zAmXD4Sj2kimUGS0KGZbPBnJGI3W9dbf0uG4FzYrlPETXjS7oxo35PpDm0kc-y0J9uMOjsg0eOI2r0p9gftEr597kfFr09XPy-_lNc_Pn-9vLguDavpUmrRoBRY9WCawQzYya4DEEBZRbXpK9kKaPsWugzkv5FX0mjODR8a08he8qPiZOc7xvA45zfUxiaDzmmPYU6KQc1Fy1gGj_8D78Mcfb5NMVbLqga-utEdZGJIKeKgxmg3Oi6KglrTUbt0VE5mrUotWcN2mpRZf4vxn_HLor_7K5UT</recordid><startdate>200906</startdate><enddate>200906</enddate><creator>Burger, J.</creator><creator>Gochfeld, M.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200906</creationdate><title>Exotic monk parakeets (Myiopsitta monachus) in New Jersey: nest site selection, rebuilding following removal, and their urban wildlife appeal</title><author>Burger, J. ; Gochfeld, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c261y-a57e85e4d0c7fcfeb8bb00501241acd489509d90bd0c083e348ca33c3f7c78d83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adaptation</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Environmental Management</topic><topic>Environmental monitoring</topic><topic>Introduced species</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Myiopsitta monachus</topic><topic>Nature Conservation</topic><topic>Nesting</topic><topic>Nests</topic><topic>Public utilities</topic><topic>Site selection</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Trees</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Urban Ecology</topic><topic>Wildlife</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Burger, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gochfeld, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Access via ABI/INFORM (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Urban ecosystems</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Burger, J.</au><au>Gochfeld, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Exotic monk parakeets (Myiopsitta monachus) in New Jersey: nest site selection, rebuilding following removal, and their urban wildlife appeal</atitle><jtitle>Urban ecosystems</jtitle><stitle>Urban Ecosyst</stitle><date>2009-06</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>185</spage><epage>196</epage><pages>185-196</pages><issn>1083-8155</issn><eissn>1573-1642</eissn><abstract>Understanding how birds exist in highly urban cities is important to maintaining biodiversity within these environments, and exotic species pose a unique opportunity to examine adaptation. The non-native monk parakeet (
Myiopsitta monachus
) nests mainly in cities in the United States, and in some places, is considered a nuisance by utility companies. Monk parakeets nest communally (many nests in one nest structure) and colonially (many nest structures in one area). We studied monk parakeets in urban New Jersey to determine where they nested, if nest sites were similar among parakeets nesting in trees and utility poles, and if they rebuilt following removal. Of the 51 nest structures we studied, 37% were on utility poles, 8% were on a man-made gazebo, and the rest were in trees. Nest structures located on poles were located closer to the ground, had fewer nest holes, and the distance to nearest tree was greater than for tree nest structures. The pole nest structures were closer to the top of the “canopy” or structure, and were always located on or around the pole rather than out on one of the cross beams. The nest structures were similar in size and shape whether they were located on poles, other man-made objects, or in trees. Thus monk parakeets built similar nest structures, and located them about the same distance from the ground and from houses whether they were in utility poles or in trees, leading to the conclusion that poles provide suitable sites for them. The parakeets persisted in nesting on the utility poles and another man-made gazebo despite being removed over several years, and despite the presence of other nearby unused trees. After parakeet nest structures were removed from poles by the utility company, most birds began rebuilding within the day. The persistence, despite persecution, of the monk parakeet on poles, and the fact that poles provide attractive and secure support for nest structures, suggest that they will continue to do so. Managers must either learn to live with the parakeets, redesign the utility pole structure to be less appealing to the birds, provide them with alternative nest sites on the utility poles or nearby, or continue to forcibly remove them. Local support for the parakeets, and their potential to serve as urban icons, have resulted in New Jersey’s utility company working with local enthusiasts and scientists to ensure the birds are not harmed during nest removal.</abstract><cop>Boston</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><doi>10.1007/s11252-009-0094-y</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1083-8155 |
ispartof | Urban ecosystems, 2009-06, Vol.12 (2), p.185-196 |
issn | 1083-8155 1573-1642 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_20635922 |
source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Adaptation Biodiversity Biomedical and Life Sciences Birds Ecology Environmental Management Environmental monitoring Introduced species Life Sciences Myiopsitta monachus Nature Conservation Nesting Nests Public utilities Site selection Studies Trees Urban areas Urban Ecology Wildlife |
title | Exotic monk parakeets (Myiopsitta monachus) in New Jersey: nest site selection, rebuilding following removal, and their urban wildlife appeal |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-18T15%3A08%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Exotic%20monk%20parakeets%20(Myiopsitta%20monachus)%20in%20New%20Jersey:%20nest%20site%20selection,%20rebuilding%20following%20removal,%20and%20their%20urban%20wildlife%20appeal&rft.jtitle=Urban%20ecosystems&rft.au=Burger,%20J.&rft.date=2009-06&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=185&rft.epage=196&rft.pages=185-196&rft.issn=1083-8155&rft.eissn=1573-1642&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11252-009-0094-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1895951431%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=226846038&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |