Kocek |

Secretive Marshbird Occurrence and Abundance in Urban

Salt Marshes of New York City, NY

Final Report to the Edna Bailey Sussman Foundation

by

Alison Kocek, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and

Forestry

INTRODUCTION

The northeast Atlantic Coast of the United States has the world’s largest expanse of tidal salt marsh (Greenberg et al. 2006) which provides critical habitat for fish and wildlife, sediment and nutrient cycling services, and buffering of upland areas from storms (Odum 1969, Daiber 1986, Brown et al. 2002, Koch and Gobler 2009). However, as urbanization has become a prevailing landscape-altering human activity along our nation’s coast, tidal salt marshes have become imperiled ecosystems that are disappearing at an alarming rate (Dahl 1990; Noss et al. 1995; Tiner 1984). This issue is compounded as global climate change induced sea level rise engulfs coastal fringes that contain remnant salt marshes (Bayard and Elphick 2011).

Tidal salt marshes in New York are found primarily along the coast of Long Island and in the lower Hudson River. Due to centuries of human development, much of the original coastal marshland has been degraded or converted into anthropogenic structures, especially in the New York City area. Tidal marsh obligate birds, those that can only nest in tidal marshes, are a good indicator of the health of these marsh systems. The objective of this study is to calculate indices of secretive marshbird occurrence and diversity in marshes throughout New York City and to detail these relationships between secretive marshbird occurrence and diversity throughout NYC and marsh-border urbanization as a function of landscape-level characteristics.

METHODS

Study AreaData collection took place throughout the New York City area and western

Nassau County on Long Island, NY. These sites included several restored salt marshes owned by New York City Parks in Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island, and The Bronx. Natural and restored marshes in Jamaica Bay within the Gateway National Recreation Area and natural salt marshes in Oceanside, NY managed by the Town of Hempstead (Figure 1, Table 1).

Kocek | 2

Figure 1. Map of 2014 study sites for the SUNY secretive marsh bird survey. Sparrow icons next to site names indicate that nesting sparrows were known to occur.

Kocek |

Table 1. Study sites and their abbreviations.

Site

Site Abbreviatio

n SiteSite

AbbreviationSawmill Creek NE SAW1 Rockaway Community Park ROCSawmill Creek N-central SAW2 Idlewild IDSawmill Creek NW SAW3 Alley Pond N APP1Sawmill Creek SW SAW4 Alley Pond S APP2Sawmill Creek SE SAW5 Pugsley Creek PUGMarine Park MAP Pelham Bay Park S PEL1Four Sparrow Marsh FSM Pelham Bay Park NW PEL2West Pond WEP Pelham Bay Park NE PEL3Big Egg Marsh BEM Marine Nature Study Area OMNJoCo Marsh E JOC1 Lido Beach Passive Nature Area LIPJoCo Marsh W JOC2

Broadcast Call SurveysA combination of passive and broadcast survey techniques designed by the

Standardized North American Marsh Bird Monitoring Protocol (Conway and Droege 2006; Conway and Nadeau 2006) were used to detect the suite of the salt marsh bird community. Call types used during the survey included: black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis), least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis), sora (Porzana carolina), Virginia rail (Rallus limicola), clapper rail (Rallus longirostris), American bittern (Botaurus lentiginosus), and common moorhen (Gallinula chloropus). The broadcast itself included an initial 5 minutes of silence followed by the various call types of each species played intermittently throughout a 1 minute time period for each species, totaling in a 13 minute survey window.

Priority species for this survey included all of the species mentioned above whose calls were broadcasted. Secondary species of importance included tidal marsh sparrows (saltmarsh sparrow (Ammodramus caudacutus), Nelson’s sparrow (Ammodramus nelsoni) and seaside sparrow (Ammodramus maritimus)), willet (Tringa semipalmata) and American black duck (Anas rubripes). All avian species mentioned above as well as others associated with marshes or observed within the marsh were recorded when either observed by sight or by call. The distance band from the observer in which each individual bird occurred (0-50m, 50-100m and >100m) was also recorded and each individual was only counted once throughout the entire survey, even if its location changed.

As per the regional salt marsh bird study, three call-broadcast surveys were conducted at each sampling point (once in mid-late May, mid-late June, and mid-late July). Surveys were conducted in the mornings during the breeding season and began 30 min prior to sunrise and completed within three hours after sunrise (Conway 2008).

Vegetation Survey

Kocek |

25-70 points were randomly selected within each study marsh dependent on the total area of the marsh. The vegetation structure immediately surrounding the point (1m2) was surveyed using a point square. Percent cover by all vegetation species, water, bare ground and wrack were recorded as well as the heights of the vegetation at the centers of each of the sides of the frame and the center point of the frame.

AnalysisData analysis is being carried out using a variety of statistical tools. Vegetation

analysis was performed using Multi Response Permutation Procedure (MRPP) of within- versus among-group dissimilarities in R. The percent cover of all vegetation species along with bare ground, water and wrack were used in this analysis. Marsh complexes within 500m of one another were considered 1 site even if this complex contains multiple broadcast survey points (i.e. SAW1-5, PEL 1-3). Thus only 12 sites were considered for this analysis as 8 points were lost due to combination into marsh complexes and Rockaway Community Park was not included in this vegetation study due to its overall extremely small marsh area.

Species occurrence data will be added to a region wide database for occupancy estimates to be more accurately predicted using Bayesian statistics in ArcGIS. Species abundance in relation to landscape level characteristics, including percent urban border (which will be obtained using ArcGIS and the 2006 National Land-Cover Database), will be performed using negative binomial regression in R.

RESULTS

Species OccurrenceA total of 71 species were detected throughout 21 sites sampled, however no more

than 25 species were observed during any one survey (Figure 2). There does not appear to be any regional or time related trends to species abundance in NYC however further analysis is required to confirm this.

The number of individuals observed at each site during each survey also did not appear to have a trend related to time of season (Figure 3). However, regionally, sites in Staten Island, Brooklyn and Queens appear to have a similar abundance of individuals, while Bronx and SW Nassau County sites appear to have an overall higher abundance of individuals. Additional analysis is required to confirm this trend.

Preliminary results of mean abundance of primary and secondary priority species is provided in Figure 4. Of the primary species, only clapper rail were detected while 4 of 5 secondary species (saltmarsh sparrow, seaside sparrow, willet and American black duck) were observed. Clapper rail, willet and saltmarsh sparrow were most common (each having been detected at 9 locations), while American black ducks were less prevalent (detected at 6 sites) and seaside sparrows were fairly rarely observed (detected at 2 sites).

Kocek | 5

Figure 2. Number of avian species detected at 21 sites in New York City and SW Nassau County during three survey time periods (May, June and July) in 2014. The mean of these 3 surveys is also provided.

Kocek | 6

Figure 3. Number of individuals detected at 21 sites in New York City and SW Nassau County during three survey time periods (May, June and July) in 2014. The mean of these three surveys is also provided.

Kocek | 7

Figure 4. Mean individuals of primary (clapper rail) and secondary (saltmarsh sparrow, seaside sparrow, willet and black duck) priority species detected at 21 sites in New York City and SW Nassau County in 2014. Counts were averaged over three survey time periods (May, June and July 2014).

Kocek |

Vegetation

Vegetation data is under continued analysis. The most common species found at the 12 study sites include smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), saltmeadow cordgrass (Spartina patens), seashore saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), bigleaf marsh-elder (Iva frutescens), common reed (Phragmites australis, an invasive species), blackgrass (Juncus gerardii), and glasswort (Salcornia sp.). The results for the comparisons of the most common cover types (S. alterniflora, S. patens, D. spicata, and bare ground) are found in Figure 5. These cover types represent >90% of the total marsh cover found at each site except Big Egg Marsh which the remaining total is composed of mainly J. gerardii. The results indicate that many sites have a very different cover make-up and this make-up often varies even among region, except in SW Nassau County which has natural, unrestored sites. Continued analysis for species specific vegetation relationships is ongoing.

Kocek | 9

Figure 5. Multivariate median proportion foliar ground cover of random vegetation points at demographic and control sites, 2014. Proportion cover by water, wrack, I. frutescens, P. australis, J. gerardii, Salicornia sp. and other species also used in analysis but not included. S. alterniflora, S. patens, D. spicata, bare ground comprise >90% of foliar ground cover at all sites except BEM. Foliar ground cover not represented at BEM comprised mainly of J. gerardii (MRPP, Pearson Type III Statistic: -31.10, P < 0.001, Bonferroni Correction alpha level = 6.41E-4).

Kocek |

FUTURE WORK

Broadcast call survey data and vegetation data has been added to a regional

database and regional occupancy and density data for each of the primary and secondary

species are ongoing using a Bayesian framework. Relationships between species

occurrence and density will be examined in relation to many landscape level variables

including vegetation make-up, weather variables, tide heights, percent urban border, total

marsh area, marsh perimeter, percent high marsh, nearby road density, open water,

latitude, geomorphic setting, and other covariates. Trends for New York will be an

important addition to this dataset as well as important standalone data due to the extreme

urbanization of the area and fragmentation of existing marshes.

Continued broadcast call survey and vegetation data collection should occur in

order to gain an understanding of species continued occupancy, seasonal trends, and

marsh level changes. Much restoration is ongoing in NYC, especially post-Hurricane

Sandy. Examining these marshes pre- and post-restoration will provide a baseline for

how various restoration methods succeed or fail at creating marsh habitat preferred by the

secretive marsh bird community.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work would not have been possible without the Edna Bailey Sussman

Foundation for this valuable funding, the New York City Parks and Recreation

Department for providing housing and allowing me to work in Parks marshes, as well as

the Gateway National Recreation Area, and the Town of Hempstead for allowing access

to their marshes. The Foundation will be recognized in all presentations and publications

that result from this research.

Kocek |

LITERATURE CITED

Bayard, T. S., and C. S. Elphick. 2011. Planning for sea-level rise: quantifying patterns of Saltmarsh Sparrow (Ammodramus caudacutus) nest flooding under current sea-level conditions. The Auk, 128(2), 393-403.

Brown, S. C., B. A. Harrington, K. C. Parsons, and E. P. Mallory. 2002. Waterbird use of northern Atlantic wetlands protected under the North American wetlands conservation act. Waterbirds, 25: 106-114.

Conway, C.J., and C.P. Nadeau. 2006. Development and field testing of survey methods for a continental marsh bird monitoring program in North America. Wildlife research report #2005-11. USGS Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Unit, Tucson, Arizona.

Conway, C.J., and S. Droege. 2006. A unified strategy for monitoring changes in abundance of birds associated with North American tidal marshes. Studies in Avian Biology 282-297.

Conway, C.J. 2008. Standardized North American marsh bird monitoring protocols. Tucson, AZ, USA.

Dahl, T. E. 1990. Wetland losses in the United States: 1780s to 1980s. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, USA.

Daiber, F.C. 1986. Conservation of tidal marshes. New York: Van Norstrand Reinhold.

Greenberg, R., J. E. Maldonado, S. Droege, and M. V. McDonald. (2006). Tidal marshes: a global perspective on the evolution and conservation of their terrestrial vertebrates. BioScience, 56(8), 675-685.

Koch, F., and C. J. Gobler. 2009. The effects of tidal export from salt marsh ditches on estuarine water quality and plankton communities. Estuaries and Coasts, 32: 261-275.

Noss, R. F., LaRoe, E. T., and Scott, J. M., (1995). Endangered ecosystems of the United States: A preliminary assessment of loss and degradation. US National Biological Service.

Odum, E. P. 1969. Strategy of ecosystem development. Science, 164: 262-270.

Tiner, R. W. 1984. Wetlands of the United States: current status and recent trends. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, Washington, DC, USA.