Long Term Progress in Riparian Restoration with Concurrent Avian Declines in the Southern San Francisco Bay Area (CA)

References

1. 1. Anderson, M.J.,
   2. K.E. Ellingsen and
   3. B.H. McArdle

   . 2006. Multivariate dispersion as a measure of beta diversity. Ecology Letters 9:683–693.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 1. Anderson, M. and
   2. J. Santana-Garcon

   . 2015. Measures of precision for dissimilarity based multivariate analysis of ecological communities. Ecology Letters 18:66–73.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
3. 1. Barker, R.J.,
   2. K.P. Burnham and
   3. G.C. White

   . 2004. Encounter history modeling of joint mark recapture, tag-resighting and tagrecovery data under temporary emigration. Statistica Sinica 1037–1055.
4. 1. Barton, G.G. and
   2. B.K. Sandercock

   . 2017. Long-term changes in the seasonal timing of landbird migration on the Pacific Flyway. The Condor: Ornithological Applications 120:30–46.

   OpenUrl
5. 1. Batisteli, A.F.,
   2. M.O. Tanaka and
   3. A.L.T. Seavy

   . 2018. Bird functional traits respond to forest structure in riparian areas undergoing active restoration. Diversity 10:90–105.

   OpenUrl
6. 1. Benjamini, Y. and
   2. Y. Hochberg

   . 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 57:289–300.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 1. Bernhardt, E.S.,
   2. E.B. Sudduth,
   3. M.A. Palmer,
   4. J.D. Allan,
   5. J.L. Meyer,
   6. G. Alexander, et al.

   2007. Restoring rivers one reach at a time: Results from a survey of U.S. River Restoration Practitioners. Restoration Ecology 15:482–493.

   OpenUrl
8. 1. Bird, T.,
   2. J. Lyon,
   3. S. Nicol,
   4. M. McCarthy and
   5. R. Barker

   . 2014. Estimating population size in the presence of temporary migration using a joint analysis of telemetry and capture–recapture data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 5:615–625.

   OpenUrl
9. 1. Capon, S.J.,
   2. L.E. Chambers,
   3. R. MacNally,
   4. R.J. Naiman,
   5. P. Davies,
   6. N. Marshall, et al.

   2013. Riparian ecosystems in the 21st century: hotspots for climate change adaptation? Ecosystems 16:359–381.

   OpenUrlCrossRef
10. 1. Carignan, V. and
    2. M.A. Villard

    . 2002. Selecting indicator species to monitor ecological integrity: A review. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 78:45–61.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 1. Chao, A.,
    2. R.L. Chazdon,
    3. R.K. Colwell and
    4. T.J. Shen

    . 2004. A new statistical approach for assessing similarity of species composition with incidence and abundance data. Ecology Letters 8:148–159.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
12. 1. Dufour, S.,
    2. N. Barsoum,
    3. E. Muller and
    4. H. Piégay

    . 2007. Effects of channel confinement on pioneer woody vegetation structure, composition and diversity along the River Drôme (SE France). Earth Surface Processes and Landforms (Special Issue: Wood in World Rivers) 32:1244–1256.

    OpenUrl
13. 1. Dybala, K.E.,
    2. V. Matzek,
    3. T. Gardali and
    4. N.E. Seavy

    . 2019. Carbon sequestration in riparian forests: A global synthesis and metaanalysis. Global Change Biology 25:57–67.

    OpenUrl
14. 1. Dybala, K.E.,
    2. A. Engilis,
    3. J.A. Trochet,
    4. I.E. Engilis and
    5. M.L. Truan

    . 2018. Evaluating riparian restoration success: Long-Term responses of the breeding bird community in California’s Lower Putah Creek watershed. Ecological Restoration 36:76–85.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
15. 1. Feld, C.K.,
    2. S. Birk,
    3. D.C. Bradley,
    4. D. Hering,
    5. J. Kail,
    6. A. Marzin,
    7. A. Melcher,
    8. D. Nemitz,
    9. M.L. Pedersen,
    10. F. Pletterbauer,
    11. D. Pont,
    12. P.F.M. Verdonschot and
    13. N. Friberg

    . 2011. From natural to degraded rivers and back again: A test of restoration ecology theory and practice. Advances in Ecological Research 44:119–209.

    OpenUrl
16. 1. Fjeldså, J.

    1991. The conservation of biological diversity: Using birds to set priorities. Pages 157–175 in Environmental Concerns, Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
17. 1. Fox, J.,
    2. S. Weisberg and
    3. B. Price

    . 2020. Car: Companion to Applied Regression. R package vers 3.0–13.
18. 1. Follstad Shah, J.J.,
    2. C.N. Dahm,
    3. S.P. Gloss and
    4. E.S. Bernhardt

    . 2007. River and riparian restoration in the Southwest: Results of the National River Restoration Science Synthesis Project. Restoration Ecology 15:550–562.

    OpenUrl
19. 1. Fremier, A.K.,
    2. M. Kiparsky,
    3. S. Gmur,
    4. J. Aycrigg,
    5. R.K. Craig,
    6. L.K. Svancara, et al.

    2015. A riparian conservation network for ecological resilience. Biological Conservation 191:29–37.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
20. 1. Gardali, T.,
    2. A.L. Holmes,
    3. S.L. Small,
    4. N. Nur,
    5. G.R. Geupel and
    6. G.H. Golet

    . 2006. Abundance patterns of landbirds in restored and remnant riparian forests on the Sacramento River, California, USA. Restoration Ecology 14:391–403.

    OpenUrl
21. 1. González, E.,
    2. A.A. Sher,
    3. E. Tabacchi,
    4. A. Masip and
    5. M. Poulin

    . 2015. Restoration of riparian vegetation: A global review of implementation and evaluation approaches in the international, peer-reviewed literature. Journal of Environmental Management 158:85–94.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
22. 1. Gornish, E.S.,
    2. M.S. Lennox,
    3. D. Lewis,
    4. K.W. Tate and
    5. R.D. Jackson

    . 2017. Comparing herbaceous plant communities in active and passive riparian restoration. PloS One 12(4):e0176338.

    OpenUrl
23. 1. Gorta, S.B.,
    2. J.A. Smith,
    3. J.D. Everett,
    4. R.T. Kingsford,
    5. W.K. Cornwell,
    6. I.M. Suthers, et al.

    2019. Pelagic citizen science data reveal declines of seabirds off south-eastern Australia. Biological Conservation 235:226–235.

    OpenUrl
24. 1. Griggs, F.T.

    2009. California Riparian Habitat Restoration Handbook. River Partners.
25. 1. Heppler, J.A.

    2017. Green dreams, toxic legacies: Toward a digital political ecology of Silicon Valley. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing 11:68–85.

    OpenUrl
26. 1. Harris, S.H. and
    2. M.G. Betts

    . 2021. Bird abundance is highly dynamic across succession in early seral tree plantations. Forest Ecology and Management 483:118902.

    OpenUrl
27. 1. Hennig, C.

    2020. fpc: Flexible Procedures for Clustering. R package version 2.2–9. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=fpc.
28. 1. Hong, Z. and
    2. M. Wu

    . 2015. Measuring overlap-rate in a hierarchical approach for determining the number of clusters. Journal of Software Engineering 9:179–187.

    OpenUrl
29. 1. Huntley, B.,
    2. Y.C. Collingham,
    3. S.G. Willis and
    4. R.E. Green

    . 2008. Potential impacts of climatic change on European breeding birds. PloS One 3(1).
30. 1. Jaramillo, A.,
    2. S.E. Hudson,
    3. C.M. Strong and
    4. W.D. Padley

    . 2003. Coyote Creek Field Station Ten-Year Report, 1987–1996. Milpitas, CA: San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory.
31. Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc. 1993. Management and Monitoring Manual for Coyote Creek: Reaches 1B, 2A, and 2B: An Integrated Approach to Flood Control and Habitat Management.
32. 1. Justice, C.,
    2. S.M. White,
    3. D.A. McCullough,
    4. D.S. Graves and
    5. M.R. Blanchard

    . 2017. Can stream and riparian restoration offset climate change impacts to salmon populations? Journal of Environmental Management 188:212–227.

    OpenUrl
33. 1. Kondolf, G.M.,
    2. S. Anderson,
    3. R. Lave,
    4. L. Pagano,
    5. A. Merenlender and
    6. E.S. Bernhardt

    . 2007. Two decades of river restoration in California: What can we learn? Restoration Ecology 15:516–523.

    OpenUrl
34. 1. Kristensen, P.B.,
    2. E.A. Kristensen,
    3. T. Riis,
    4. A.J. Baisner,
    5. S.E. Larsen,
    6. P.F.M. Verdonschot and
    7. A. Baattrup-Pedersen

    . 2013. Riparian forest as a management tool for moderating future thermal conditions of lowland temperate streams. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions 10:6081–6106.

    OpenUrl
35. 1. Lind, L.,
    2. E.M. Hasselquist and
    3. H. Laudon

    . 2019. Towards ecologically functional riparian zones: A meta-analysis to develop guidelines for protecting ecosystem functions and biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Journal of Environmental Management 249, 109391.

    OpenUrl
36. 1. Mangiofico, S.

    2020. Rcompanion: Functions to support extension education program evaluation. R package version 2.3.26.
37. 1. Matzek, V.,
    2. J. Stella and
    3. P. Ropion

    . 2018. Development of a carbon calculator tool for riparian forest restoration. Applied Vegetation Science 21:584–594.

    OpenUrl
38. 1. McClain, C.D.,
    2. K.D. Holl and
    3. D.M. Wood

    . 2011. Successional models as guides for restoration of riparian forest understory. Restoration Ecology 19:280–289.

    OpenUrl
39. 1. Minnich, R.A.

    2007. Climate, paleoclimate, and paleovegetation. Pages 43–70 in M. Barbour (ed) Terrestrial vegetation of California. California Scholarship Online. doi:10.1525/california/9780520249554.003.0002.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
40. 1. Møller, A.P.,
    2. D. Rubolini and
    3. E. Lehikoinen

    . 2008. Populations of migratory bird species that did not show a phenological response to climate change are declining. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105:16195–16200.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
41. 1. Nakamura, M., and
    2. T. Ohgushi

    . 2004. Species composition and life histories of shelter-building caterpillars on Salix miyabeana. Entomological Science 7:99–104.

    OpenUrl
42. 1. Northrup, J.M.,
    2. J.W. Rivers,
    3. Z. Yang and
    4. M.G. Betts

    . 2019. Synergistic effects of climate and land-use change influence broad-scale avian population declines. Global Change Biology 25:1561–1575.

    OpenUrl
43. 1. Okamoto A.

    2015. Flood Control 2.0: Looking to the zone where the creeks meet the Bay to guide our response to extreme storms and sea level rise. Bay Nature 15:44–48.

    OpenUrl
44. 1. Oksanen, J.,
    2. G.L. Simpson,
    3. F.G. Blanchet,
    4. R. Kindt,
    5. P. Legendre,
    6. P.R. Minchin, et al.

    2020. Vegan: Community ecology package. R package version 2.5–7.
45. 1. Reilly, M.L.,
    2. M.W. Tobler,
    3. D.L. Sonderegger and
    4. P. Beier

    . 2017. Spatial and temporal response of wildlife to recreational activities in the San Francisco Bay ecoregion. Biological Conservation 207:117–126.

    OpenUrl
46. RHJV (Riparian Habitat Joint Venture). 2004. The Riparian Bird Conservation Plan: A strategy for reversing the decline of riparian associated birds in California. Version 2.0. California Partners in Flight, Petaluma, CA.
47. 1. Rockwell, S.M. and
    2. J.L. Stephens

    . 2018. Habitat selection of riparian birds at restoration sites along the Trinity River, California. Restoration Ecology 26:767–777.

    OpenUrl
48. 1. Rosamund, K.,
    2. S. Goded,
    3. A. Soultan,
    4. R. Kaplan,
    5. A. Glass,
    6. D. Kim and
    7. N. Arcilla

    . 2020. Not singing in the rain: Linking migratory songbird declines with increasing precipitation and brood parasitism vulnerability. Frontiers in Ecological Evolution 8:362.

    OpenUrl
49. 1. Rosenberg, K.V.,
    2. A.M. Dokter,
    3. P.J. Blancher,
    4. J.R. Sauer,
    5. A.C. Smith,
    6. P.A. Smith, et al.

    2019. Decline of the North American avifauna. Science 366:120–124.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
50. 1. Rottenborn, S.C.

    1999. Predicting the impacts of urbanization on riparian bird communities. Biological Conservation 88:289–299.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
51. 1. Raphael, M.G.,
    2. M.L. Morrison and
    3. M.P. Yoder-Williams

    . 1987. Breeding bird populations during twenty-five years of postfire succession in the Sierra Nevada. The Condor 89:614–626.

    OpenUrl
52. 1. Ruiz-Jaén, M.C. and
    2. T.M. Aide

    . 2005a. Restoration success: How is it being measured? Restoration Ecology 13:569–577.

    OpenUrl
53. 1. Ruiz-Jaén, M.C. and
    2. T.M. Aide

    . 2005b. Vegetation structure, species diversity, and ecosystem processes as measures of restoration success. Forest Ecology and Management 218:159–173.

    OpenUrl
54. 1. Runge, C.A.,
    2. J.E. Watson,
    3. S.H. Butchart,
    4. J.O. Hanson,
    5. H.P. Possingham and
    6. R.A. Fuller

    . 2015. Protected areas and global conservation of migratory birds. Science 350:1255–1258.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
55. 1. Seavy, N.E.,
    2. T. Gardali,
    3. G.H. Golet,
    4. F.T. Griggs,
    5. C.A. Howell,
    6. R. Kelsey, et al.

    2009. Why climate change makes riparian restoration more important than ever: Recommendations for practice and research. Ecological Restoration 27:330–338.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
56. 1. Shafroth, P.B.,
    2. K.J. Schlatter,
    3. M. Gomez-Sapiens,
    4. E. Lundgren,
    5. M.R. Grabau,
    6. J. Ramírez-Hernández, et al.

    2017. A large-scale environmental flow experiment for riparian restoration in the Colorado River Delta. Ecological Engineering 106:645–660.

    OpenUrlCrossRef
57. 1. Stanley, J. and
    2. L. Silva

    . 1986. Coyote Creek Pilot Revegetation Project. Harvey and Stanley Associates. File No. 182–06.
58. 1. Suding, K.N.

    2011. Toward an era of restoration in ecology: Successes, failures, and opportunities ahead. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 42.
59. 1. Tattoni, D.J. and
    2. LaBarbera K.

    2022. Capture height biases for birds in mist-nets vary by taxon, season, and foraging guild in northern California. Journal of Field Ornithology 93:1.

    OpenUrl
60. 1. Trowbridge, W.

    2007. The role of stochasticity and priority effects in floodplain restoration. Ecological Applications 17:1312–1324.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
61. 1. Voelkl, B.

    2019. Multiple testing: Correcting for alpha error inflation with false discovery rate (FDR) or family-wise error rate. Animal Behaviour 155:173–177.

    OpenUrl
62. 1. Wortley, L.,
    2. J.M. Hero and
    3. M. Howes

    . 2013. Evaluating ecological restoration success: A review of the literature. Restoration Ecology 21:537–543.

    OpenUrl