By Jennie LaRoche, 2012 BHI Conservancy Intern

1. Jennie
LaRoche
Education
Intern

2. Research
Ques+ons
— Do
the
tides,
beach
location,
severity
of
beach
erosion,
and
amount
of
human
disturbances
affect
the
number
of
birds
present
on
the
beach
and
the
species
richness
and
diversity
of
the
shorebirds?

3. Why
research
these
ques+ons?
— The
groins
and
beach
renourishment
are
important
ecological
issues
for
the
Bald
Head
Island
community.
This
research
will
provide
information
on
the
shorebird
populations,
particularly
for
the
groins
area
and
how
it
compares
to
untouched
beaches
and
busy
beaches
of
the
Island.
— The
coasts
are
very
important
and
fragile
ecosystems.
Coastal
environments
provide
many
services
to
the
greater
public
and
as
such
their
health
is
of
utmost
importance.
Birds
are
important
indicators
of
the
health
of
ecosystems.
— Habitat
loss
and
degradation
seem
to
continue
to
be
drivers
of
shorebird
declines
(Agardy
et
al
2005).
With
this
loss
of
habitat,
those
shorebird
populations
become
“concentrated
at
fewer
sites,
increasing
the
risk
of
catastrophic
nesting
failures.”
(Grippo
et
al
2007).
— Global
tourism
has
been
identified
as
one
of
the
most
profitable
industries.
By
determining
the
characteristics
that
appear
to
be
correlated
with
high
bird
species
diversity
and
populations
we
can
strive
to
keep
the
healthy
beaches
intact
as
much
as
possible.

4. Shorebird
Study
— 13
observation
dates
— Recorded
time,
weather,
beach
ID,
erosion
level,
human
disturbance
level,
bird
numbers
and
species,
and
water
quality
data
— From
my
data
I
determined
the
total
number
of
species
present
(species
richness)
and
the
species
diversity
index
— I
ran
single
factor
ANOVAs
to
determine
whether
or
not
there
was
a
significant
difference
in
the
mean
total
number
of
birds,
species
richness,
and
species
diversity
between
the
different
dependent
(test)
variables.

5. Tides
— 3
classifications
of
tides
— High/out
–
When
the
tide
was
on
its
way
out
— Low/in
–
When
the
tide
was
on
its
way
in
— Out/low/in
–
When
the
sampling
time
included
the
low
tide
**
High
tide
was
too
high
to
be
able
to
use
the
UTV
and
record
observations
in
a
reasonable
amount
of
time

6. Results:
Tides
SUMMARY
Groups
Count
Average
High/out
15
169.2667
Out/low/in
6
87.83333
Low/in
18
86.27778
Anova:
Single
Factor:
Total
Number
of
Birds
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
62990.21
2
31495.11
3.534767
0.039663
3.259446
Within
Groups
320763.4
36
8910.094
Total
383753.6
38
— The
number
of
birds
sighted
differs
significantly
(p
=
0.0397)
between
the
tides,
but
this
test
is
unable
to
tell
us
between
which
tides
this
significance
occurred.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
high/out
out/low/in
low/in
169.27
87.83
86.28
Average
Number
of
Birds

7. Results:
Tides
Anova:
Single
Factor:
Species
Richness
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
9.15812
2
4.57906
0.839862
0.440054
3.259446
Within
Groups
196.2778
36
5.45216
Total
205.4359
38
— The
Simpson’s
diversity
index
for
the
different
tides
did
not
differ
significantly
(p=0.141).
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
0.035187
2
0.017593
2.069769
0.140975
3.259446
Within
Groups
0.306008
36
0.0085
Total
0.341195
38
Anova:
Single
Factor:
Simpson’s
Diversity
Index
— The
species
richness
for
the
different
tides
did
not
differ
significantly
(p=0.44).

8. Beach
Loca+on
— 3
beach
locations
were
chosen
based
on
physical
characteristics
— 1
–
East
Beach:
little
human
disturbance,
less
erosion,
a
type
of
control
(most
‘natural’)
— 2
–
Point:
high
human
disturbance,
‘medium’
erosion
— 3
–
Groins:
‘medium’
human
disturbance,
high
erosion

9. Results:
Beach
Loca+on
SUMMARY
Groups
Count
Average
Beach
1
13
210
Beach
2
13
103.1538
Beach
3
13
42.15385
Anova:
Single
Factor:
Total
Number
of
Birds
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
187674.2
2
93837.1
17.22841
5.63E-­‐06
3.259446
Within
Groups
196079.4
36
5446.65
Total
383753.6
38
— The
mean
number
of
birds
sighted
differs
significantly
(p
=
5.63e-­‐6)
between
the
beach
locations,
but
this
test
is
unable
to
tell
us
between
which
beaches
this
significance
occurred.
0
50
100
150
200
250
1
2
3
210
103.15
42.15
Average
Number
of
Birds

10. Results:
Beach
Loca+on
Anova:
Single
Factor
Species
Richness
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
64.97436
2
32.48718
8.326396
0.001066
3.259446
Within
Groups
140.4615
36
3.901709
Total
205.4359
38
Anova:
Single
Factor
Simpson's
Diversity
Index
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
0.033463
2
0.016732
1.957336
0.155976
3.259446
Within
Groups
0.307732
36
0.008548
Total
0.341195
38
— The
Simpson’s
diversity
index
at
the
different
beach
locations
did
not
differ
significantly
(p=0.156).
— The
species
richness
of
birds
sighted
differs
significantly
(p
=
0.0011)
between
the
beach
locations,
but
this
test
is
unable
to
tell
us
between
which
beaches
this
significance
occurred.
0
2
4
6
8
10
1
2
3
9.23
6.38
6.62
Average
Species
Richness

11. Erosion
— Separated
into
3
categories
depending
on
level/
intensity
of
erosion
— 1
–
little
erosion,
slight
in
comparison
to
other
levels
(East
beach)
— 2
–
‘medium’
erosion
(Point)
— 3
–
High
level
of
erosion
(Groins)
**
Erosion
was
paired
with
beach
location
since
large
changes
in
level
of
erosion
did
not
occur
in
the
few
weeks
my
study
was
conducted.

12. Results:
Erosion
SUMMARY
Groups
Count
Average
1
13
210
2
13
103.1538
3
13
42.15385
Anova:
Single
Factor:
Total
Number
of
Birds
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
187674.2
2
93837.1
17.22841
5.63E-­‐06
3.259446
Within
Groups
196079.4
36
5446.65
Total
383753.6
38
— The
mean
number
of
birds
sighted
differs
significantly
(p
=
5.63e-­‐6)
between
erosion
levels,
but
this
test
is
unable
to
tell
us
between
which
erosion
levels
this
significance
occurred.
0
50
100
150
200
250
1
2
3
210
103.15
42.15
Average
Number
of
Birds

13. Results:
Erosion
Anova:
Single
Factor
Species
Richness
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
64.97436
2
32.48718
8.326396
0.001066
3.259446
Within
Groups
140.4615
36
3.901709
Total
205.4359
38
Anova:
Single
Factor
Simpson's
Diversity
Index
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
0.033463
2
0.016732
1.957336
0.155976
3.259446
Within
Groups
0.307732
36
0.008548
Total
0.341195
38
— The
Simpson’s
diversity
index
for
different
levels
of
erosion
did
not
differ
significantly
(p=0.156).
— The
species
richness
of
birds
sighted
differs
significantly
(p
=
0.0011)
between
the
erosion
levels,
but
this
test
is
unable
to
tell
us
between
which
levels
this
significance
occurred.
0
2
4
6
8
10
1
2
3
9.23
6.38
6.62
Average
Species
Richness

14. Human
Disturbances
— 3
levels
of
human
disturbances
— 1
–
little/no
humans
,
no
buildings/houses
— 2
–
‘medium’
level
of
human
activity,
houses/
buildings
present
— 3
–
high
level
of
disturbance,
houses/buildings
present
**
This
varied
day
to
day,
time
of
day
often
played
a
large
role
in
the
differences
seen
between
days
at
the
same
beach

15. Results:
Human
Disturbances
SUMMARY
Groups
Count
Average
1
19
155.7895
2
11
44.72727
3
9
129.6667
Anova:
Single
Factor
Total
Number
of
Birds
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
87408.25
2
43704.13
5.309172
0.009537
3.259446
Within
Groups
296345.3
36
8231.815
Total
383753.6
38
— The
mean
number
of
birds
sighted
differs
significantly
(p
=
0.0095)
between
the
different
levels
of
human
disturbance,
but
this
test
is
unable
to
tell
us
between
which
levels
this
significance
occurred.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1
2
3
155.79
44.73
129.67
Average
Number
of
Birds

16. Results:
Human
Disturbances
Anova:
Single
Factor
Species
Richness
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
30.56296
2
15.28148
3.145903
0.05506
3.259446
Within
Groups
174.8729
36
4.857582
Total
205.4359
38
— The
species
richness
for
the
different
disturbance
levels
did
not
differ
significantly
(p=0.055).
Anova:
Single
Factor
Simpson's
Diversity
Index
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
SS
df
MS
F
P-­‐value
F
crit
Between
Groups
0.035414
2
0.017707
2.084674
0.139104
3.259446
Within
Groups
0.305781
36
0.008494
Total
0.341195
38
— The
Simpson’s
diversity
index
for
the
different
disturbance
levels
did
not
differ
significantly
(p=0.139).

17. Discussion:
Limita+ons
and
Future
Studies
— Limitations
— Small
sample
size
— Confined
to
low
tide
so
I
could
get
around
the
beaches
— Large
flocks
of
birds
sometimes
difficult
to
get
an
exact
count
— UTV
in
high
demand
— Future
Studies
— Time
of
day
— Water
Quality
— Bird
Behavior
— Interacting
affects
of
multiple
dependent
variables
— Individual
Species:
are
certain
species
better
to
focus
on,
can
they
tell
us
specific
things
about
the
health
of
the
environment?
— More
sampling
sites
(smaller
sections
of
beach)

18. Acknowledgements
— Bald
Head
Island
Conservancy
— Staff
— Board
of
Directors
— Fellow
Interns
— The
Public

19. Literature
Cited
— Agardy,T.,
J.
Alder,
P.
Dayton,
S.
Curran,
A.
Kitchingman,
M.
Wilson,
A.
Catenazzi,
J.
Testrepo,
C.
Birkeland,
S.
Blaber,
S.
Saifullah,
G.
Branch,
D.
Boersma,
S.
Nixon,
P.
Dugan,
N.
Davidson,
C.
Vorosmarty.
2005.
Ecosystems
and
Human
Well-­‐Being:
Current
State
and
Trends.
Millennium
Assessment
Report
Series:
Global
Assessment
Reports.
Washington,
DC:
Island
Press,
513–549.
— Grippo,
M.,
S.
Cooper,
A.
Massey.
2007.
Effect
of
beach
replenishment
projects
on
waterbird
and
shorebird
communities.
Journal
of
Coastal
Research
(23),
5,
1088-­‐1096.
— “Groins”.
An
Educator’s
Guide
to
Folly
Beach,
South
Carolina.
<
http://oceanica.cofc.edu/an%20educator'sl%20guide%20to%20folly%20beach/guide/process3.htm>.
accessed
June
15,
2012.
— Leonard,
L.,
T.
Clayton,
O.
Pilkey.
1990.
An
analysis
of
replenished
beach
design
parameters
on
U.S.
east
coast
barrier
islands.
Journal
of
Coastal
Research,
6,
15-­‐36.
— Recher,
H.
F.
1966.
Some
aspects
of
the
ecology
of
migrant
shorebirds.
Ecological
Society
of
America
(47),
3,
393-­‐407.
— U.S.
NABCI
Committee.
2000.
The
north
American
bird
conservation
initiative
in
the
united
states:
a
vision
of
American
bird
conservation.
U.S.
North
American
Bird
Conservation
Initiative,
Washington,
D.C.

20. Ques+ons?