Occasional Papers Museum of Texas Tech University Number 221 19 May 2003 Habitat Use by Birds and Mammals along the Urban South Platte River in Denver, Colorado Cher} A, Jones, Ronald D. Beane, and Elizabeth A. Dickerson Introduction Fewer studies of vertebrates have been conducted in urban areas than on sites in more natural conditions. One urban area that has received little scientific atten¬ tion is the stretch of the South Platte River passing through Denver, Denver County, Colorado, The South Platte played a key role in American history because it is located in the arid shortgrass steppe of the western United States. In this steppe characterized by extremes in temperature and precipitation, the South Platte has have long provided water, shelter, food, and travel corridors for people and for wildlife. The South Platte rivershed covers more than 8,878 km^ (23,000 mi^), of which 79% is in Colorado (U.S. EPA, 1999), Ute, Comanche, Arapaho, and Cheyenne used this watershed long before the arrival of settlers from Mexico and the United States. The first Euro¬ pean settlements included fur^trading posts and forts (U.S. EPA, 1999), The earliest known European-Mexi- can settlement in the Denver area was the short-lived Mexican Diggings, established in 1857. Modem Den¬ ver grew from the small towns of Saint Charles and Auraria, founded in 1858 near the confluence of the South Platte and Cherry Creek (Jones and Forrest, 1973; Noel, 1980; Kirkpatrick, 1998), Anthropogenic changes accompanying European settlement included the construction of canals, producing a system that presently delivers water to 29 cities and towns, 120 ditch companies, 60 reservoir companies, and 620,000 acres of irrigated farmland (U.S, EPA, 1999). As in most cities, water also provided avenues for transpor¬ tation and waste disposal, leading to the establishment of railyards and industry along the river. Floods have occurred periodically, including major events in Den¬ ver in 1864 and 1965 (Meister, 1965; Brenneman, 1973; Jones and Forrest, 1973; U.S. EPA, 1999; Chapman, 2001). Human and economic losses result¬ ing from these floods led to the establishment of res¬ ervoirs such as Chatfield (H. E. Kingery, pers. comm., 2001} and water-management projects, which have greatly altered the water flow and biotic communities of the South Platte (Johnson, 1994). 2 Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University Denver County lies within the Front Range of Colorado, an area in which the human population has expanded from 2,694,000 in 1990 to 3,512,779 in 2000 (Colorado State Demographer, 2000 Census, www.dlg.oeni2.state.co.us\ Approximately 16 km of the South Platte pass through modem Denver, where it remains a center of activity, serving as a major fo¬ cus of economic and residential development. Addi¬ tionally, the river and its associated urban parks are important recreational resources for bikers, walkers, kayakers, and others (e.g,, Muntz and Wuth, 1983; Hekkers, 1987; Cooper etak, 1990; Kirkpatrick, 1998; Moorhead, 1992), In recognition of the river’s importance to local residents and wildlife, Mayor William McNichols cre¬ ated the Platte River Development Commission in the late 1970s (Chapman, 2001), Mayor Wellington Webb assembled the South Platte River Working Group in 1994 to address improvements to the urban corridor as a major issue during his tenure (Mayor’s South Platte River Commission, 1995; Instream Issues Task Force, 1996; City and County of Denver, 2000). Subsequent improvements of recreational trails (40 km, or 25 miles, along the Platte, Cherry Creek, Bear Creek, Highline Canal, and Sand Creek) resulted in one of the best greenway systems in the United States (Shuster, 1996; Anonymous, 1998; U,S. EPA, 1999). Clean-up pro¬ grams, economic development, and other activities received public recognition in various publications (e.g., Miller, 1996; Anonymous, 1997, 1998; Walker, 1997; Brovsky, 1999), the 1997 American Rivers Gold Medal for Urban River Partnership, and the 1999 National Wildlife Federation Conservation Achievement Award (Alston, 1999). However, most resource analyses of the urban corridor have concentrated on fish, hydrology, and water quality (Instream Issues Task Force, 1996; Kimbrough and Litke, 1996). Some surveys of wild¬ life have been conducted within the metropolitan area, but the most detailed studies of birds and mammals associated with the South Platte River have been con¬ ducted in rural Colorado (Mitchell, 1972; Fitzgerald, 1978; Olson and Knopf, 1988). Thus the potential of the urban South Platte as wildlife habitat has remained largely unexplored. Some of the surveys along the urban South Platte include Audubon bird counts and the Urban Denver Christmas Bird Count conducted since 1988 (H. E. Kingery, pers. comm., 1999). On 1 January 2000, for the 1999-2000 Christmas Bird Count period, 56 spe¬ cies and 8,896 individuals were recorded along the river. Of that total, 25% were Canada geese and 25% were starlings (Kingery, 2000; please see Appendix A for taxa reported in our study), and three new species (the ruddy duck [Oxyurajamaicensis^, mew gull [Larus canus], and red-shouldered hawk [Buteo lineatus]) were added. Thompson (1994) monitored wildlife on a 16-acre wetland-mitigation area adjacent to the river. Thirty-four avian species were reported, 70% of which were red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus), bam swallows (Hiruudo rustica), black-billed mag¬ pies (Pica pica), common grackles (Quiscalus quiscula), mallards (Anas platyrhynchos), starlings, and Canada geese. Several short-term, local surveys of mammals also were conducted. Brittan (1992) briefly surveyed small mammals in South Platte Park, capturing deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) and meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Erickson (1982) docu¬ mented 11 species of mammals along the South Platte Greenway: the eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus Jloridanus), fox squirrel (Sciurus niger), American beaver (Castor canadensis), western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis), Norway rat (Rattus norvegiciis), house mouse (Mus musculus), meadow vole (M. pennsylvanicus), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonicus sic\ domestic dog (Canis), and domestic cat (Fells). Grimes and Beane (1984) assessed dam¬ age caused by beavers. Thompson (1994) caught house mice, western harvest mice, meadow voles, and fox squirrels in 240 trapnights (house mice represented 83% of the individuals captured), and also saw cot¬ tontails, muskrats, and beavers. The purpose of our study was to document the presence and habitat use of birds and mammals in the first year-round, systematic survey of the South Platte urban corridor. We assessed how avian and mamma¬ lian species composition differed among different plant communities and compared the faunas with those re- Jones et al,—Habitat use by Birds and Mammals along the South Platte River 3 ported from other urban sites in the Denver area. We selected six permanent study areas in order to estab¬ lish benchmarks for long-term study, to facilitate re¬ peatable surveys in the future, and to allow establish¬ ment of ‘^living laboratories” where citizens can learn about riparian ecology. Results will allow optimi 2 ation of human use of the nver while minimizing negative impacts on wildlife. Materials and Methods Major plant communities along the Platte consist primarily of cottonwood {Populus deltoides)^ elms {Ulmus americanus and U, pumilus), native grasses (including areas reseeded to native species), exotic grasses (mostly Kentucky bluegrass, Poa pratensis), weeds, and “other,” all in patches of various sizes (Instream Issues Task Force, 1996). General predic¬ tions can be made regarding the importance of some of these communities to wildlife (e.g., Bottorff, 1974). We chose not to sample the fauna in proportion to the representation of the various plant communities, which are being changed tlirough restoration and other ac¬ tivities. It was difficult to find sites sufficiently large and continuous for sampling, due to the fragmentation of both native and non-native vegetation resulting from channelization, bank stabilization with riprap, and other extensive alterations. We chose six sites (Figure 1) so as to have two transects per site, with each site repre¬ senting one of six community types (mesic, restored mesic, riparian woodland, non-native grassland, semi- native grassland, and urban pond): Mesic community type, Riverside Cemetery: Our study site in mesic lowland is located downhill from a 145-acre cemetery that was established in 1876 (Kirkpatrick, 1998); the opposite bank is occupied by industry. The study site, partially coinciding with that used by Thompson (1994), is dominated by sandbar willow {Salix exigua), smooth brome (Bromus mermis), and sanddropseed (Sporobolus cryptandrus). Various trees include hawthorn {Crataegus erythropoda), Siberian elm, and cottonwoods. Most of the herbaceous vegetation is the result of a wetland restoration project conducted in 1993 (Thompson, 1994), Figure 1. The six study sites along the urban South Platte River in Denver County, Colorado. Map by Adiian Kxopp. Restored mesic community type, Elitch Gardens: Kirkpatrick, 1998). The community includes sandbar This site is an urban park adjacent to Six Flags Elitch willow, mustards {Brassica sp.), and dandelions (Tarax- Gardens Amusement Park, upstream of where Auraria acum officinale), dominated by smooth brome (B. was founded in 1858 (Jones and Forrest, 1973; inermis) and other grasses. Saplings {Populus and 4 Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University Ulmus) were planted at this site; there are no large trees, unlike the mesic community at Riverside Cem¬ etery. Riparian woodland community type, Grant-Fron¬ tier Park: An urban park (primarily planted to P. pratensis)y a residential area, and industrial sites sur¬ round this small woodland. Most trees represent Sibe¬ rian elm, with other conspicuous species including American elm, box elder {Acer negundo)^ wild rose {Rosa woodsii), and snowberry {Symphoriocarpus occidentalis). The site is steeply sloped and thickly covered with grass, primarily Bromus; fallen logs, branches, and human litter also provide groundcoven Non-native grassland community type, Johnson Habitat Park: This six-acre park, surrounded by in¬ dustry, was formerly a city dump “slated to become an outdoor classroom amidst a number of restored natural environments” (Shoemaker, 1981:5). We con¬ ducted our research on an area including native blue grama {Bouteloua gracilis) but dominated by non-na¬ tive cheatgrass, crested wheatgrass {Agropyron cristatum), difhise knapweed (Centaurea diffusa), and white sweetclover (Melilotus alba). This field includes five small junipers {Juniperus cf scopulorum) and vir¬ tually no vertical structure other than these trees; the field was mowed at least twice during our study. Semi-native grassland community type, Over¬ land Pond: This site is surrounded by an urban park and a golf driving range (Shoemaker 1981; Kirkpatrick, 1998). Two ponds were developed from an old gravel quarry, and the surrounding area was replanted with indigenous species such as rabbitbrush {Chrysothamnus nauseosus) in 1986. The plant community includes cheatgrass, blue grama, smooth brome, mullein (Verbascum thapsus), goldenpea {Thermopsis rhombifolia), sandbar willow, Siberian elm, and blue spruce {Picea pungens). Transects were located in grassland above the edge of the steep river escarp¬ ment, above the upper edge of the riparian woodland. Urban pond, Globe Pond: Globe Pond is located near the northern county limit of Denver in the com¬ munity of Globeville. Dominant vegetation includes cottonwoods {Populus), Siberian elm, cattails {Typha), cheatgrass {Bromus tectorum), and weedy forbs such as Kochia scoparia, Cirsium, and pigweed {Amaranthus spp.). This was tlie most insular of our sites, with construction occurring outside of two of its bound¬ aries during our study. We used a combination of live-traps, scent sta¬ tions, and transects to document the presence of as many birds and mammals as possible. We conducted sweep surveys of birds on each site following recom¬ mendations by Dawson (1981) and Ryder (1986). Per¬ manent 300-meter line transects were established and marked with a permanent stake and geo-referenced using a global positioning system (GPS). All observers were experienced in identifying birds by both sight and sound. One person (Beane) walked the transect counting and identifying all birds observed or heard within 50 meters of the line. Two other observers con¬ ducted a sweep transect over each study area and counted all birds observed. Data were standardized by recording number of birds observed per linear transect and the amount of time per unit area. Surveys were conducted bimonthly over a 12-month period in 1998- 99 (August, October, December, February, April, and June). Counts were conducted in the first five hours following sumise. Each survey consisted of two counts on two consecutive days, with the order of the survey reversed on the second day. We live-trapped small mammals using 7.5 x 7.5 X 22.5 cm (3”x3”x9”) Sherman traps at 10 pace inter¬ vals, set in two transects per site with 15 traps per transect. We opened traps and baited them with oatmeal and peanut butter at or near sunset and checked traps at sunrise. We used Monel ear tags on rats and marked mice by toe-clipping (Nietfeld et ah, 1996). We re¬ corded identification, sex, and weight, with additional comments regarding reproductive condition. Traps were run for three consecutive nights in each of seven months (July, September, and November 1998, and January, March, May, and July 1999). Trapping effort was measured in trapnights (i.e., as the number of traps opened per night). Two Hav-a-hart traps also were employed at selected sites where the cover of vegetation sufficed to camouflage the traps. One scent station was set up on open sand at each site to detect the presence of larger mammals. Each station consisted of a Im^ area of clear sand with predator scent left as bait in the middle of the sand. Stations were set up in the morning and checked 24 hours later. Jones et al.— Habitat use by Birds and Mammals along the South Platte River 5 Results,—Scientific names of vertebrates we identified are listed in Appendix A. We documented 65 species of birds (Table 1), including both migrants (such as the homed grebe, lesser yellowlegs, solitary sandpiper, western sandpiper) and winter residents (conunon goldeneye, herring gull, ring-billed gull, tree sparrow). The hooded merganser breeds in Colorado (Kingery, 1999) but was a winter resident on the South Platte. Of the 65 species, nine accounted for nearly 20% or more of the observations during each sam¬ pling season (Table 2), Trapping effort totaled 1,890 trapnights consist¬ ing of 315 trapnights per site. The use of Sherman traps documented the presence of five species of ro¬ dents (i?, me.galotis^ P. maniculatus, M. pennsylvanicus^ R. norvegicus, and M, musculus). Animal sightings, scat, and tracks at scent stations revealed the presence of ten additional species (Table 3). Magpies (P. pica) were the only non-target cap¬ tures in Sherman and Hav-a-hart traps. There were very few recaptures. Three incidental mortalities (ro¬ dents) were prepared as vouchers and deposited in the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. Discussion.—The elimination of native short- grass steppe and the establishment of various plant communities presumably changed the composition of Table 1 . Birds documented at Elitch ^ (E), Globe Pond (G), Grant Frontier (GR), Johnson Habitat Park (J), Overland Pond (O), and Riverside (R). Non-native species are marked with an asterisk. E G GR j OR (restored mesic) (urban pond) (riparian) (disturbed grassland) (semi-native grassland) (mesic) Honied grebe X Pied-billed grebe X X American white pelican X DoublC'Ciested cormorant X X X X Great blue heron X X Black-crowned night-heron X X X Green-backed heron Domestic goose X Canada goose X X X X Gadwall X X X American wigeon X X Mallard X X X X Blue-winged teal X Northern shoveler X X X Green-winged teal X X X Common goldeneye X X Hooded merganser X Cooper's hawk Swainson’shawk X Red-tailed hawk American kestrel X X American coot X X X Killdeer X X X American avocet X Common snipe Lesser yellowlegs Solitary sandpiper X Western sandpiper X Herring gull X X X Ring-billed gull X X X X Rock dove X X X X Mourning dove X X X Great homed owl X Belted kingfisher X X X X Downy woodpecker X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 6 Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University Table 1. (cont.) E G GR J 0 R (restored mesic) (urban pond) (riparian) (disturbed grassland) (semi-native grassland) (mesic) Northern flicker X X X X X Western wood-pewee X X Say's phoebe X Loggerhead shrike X Plumbeous vireo X Black-biiled magpie X X X X X American crow X X X X X Common raven X X X X Cliff swallow X X X X X Bam swallow X X X X X X Black-capped chickadee X X X X X House wren X American robin X X X X X X Gray catbird X European starling* X X X X X X Yellow warbler X X X Yellow-rumped warbler X Lark sparrow X X X Song sparrow X X X X X White-crowned sparrow X X X Dark-eyed junco X X X X Red-winged blackbird X X X X X X Brewer’s blackbird X X X Common grackle X X X X X X Bullock’s oriole X House finch X X X X X X American goldfinch X American tree sparrow X X House Sparrow* X X X X X X Number of species/site: 23 46 37 32 34 41 the fauna along the South Platte, In rural Weld County, Colorado, Fitzgerald (1978) documented 109 species of birds and 24 species of mammals along the South Platte River, including prairie falcons {Falco mexicanus), homed larks {Eremophila alpestrisT Ord's kangaroo rats {Dipodomys ordii\ spotted ground squir¬ rels {Spermophiius spilosoma), and other taxa associ¬ ated with shortgrass steppe. We did not find these spe¬ cies or such large numbers of species. We found the fewest mammals on the non-native grassland and the fewest birds on the restored mesic site, both of which lack mature elms and cottonwoods (Tables 1,3). The greatest number of species occurred on two sites with vegetation providing well-developed vertical structure (Globe Pond and the lowland mesic site at Riverside Cemetery). We saw birds primarily on the river or in trees along riverbanks, and the species listed are typical of riparian communities. For example, birds such as the common goldeneye are typical of open water, whereas the green heron prefers riparian woods (Andrews and Righter, 1992). This region of the South Platte sup¬ ports large numbers of ducks in winter; for example, for the 1999-2000 Christmas Bird Count period, 16 species of ducks were recorded, comprising 36,4% of the count results (H. E. Kingery, pers. comm., 2000), We detected all of the 13 avian species known to breed in lowland riparian ecosystems in Colorado (Preston and Kingery, 1998), except for western and eastern kingbirds {Tyrantius verticalis and T. tyrannus) and blue grosbeak (Guiraca caeruiea). Of the 13 spe¬ cies found at all 6 sites (Table 1), the mallard, double- Jones et al.-™- Habitat use by Birds and Mammals along the South Platte Rwer 1 ■13 s: o § to -Cl o Q N t'3 U] o o O ca 'S.O C ^ CJ ro (N ■I O c iZ H (N X (j c u, V I ^ o c: ^ « oi U ro O H oo e « 9- ^ £ fM 3 vi LU 3 o I ■9 ^ M OO Ct ro a * (N u o X I tf' Ml tr> e ^ O ^ o CjJ) \0 o o O iS U r-> O c i ^ E U o 9> ^ 6C (V] s ffj O u ^ ?3 ^ ■I 62 C -D X -a «£ °2. ^ o ^ o hJ ^ X ^ n! o 1> Cl, 3 ^ — oi O ;> CL^ o fn =3 so tU (N — rt 'l- > 3- S < to 6's -JB O I o 3 s? C/1 -§ Cl ^3 cu s I I ^J a; ■§ I <1 X -£2 C (3 til 1 & I CU .> 1-1 c: c § -as (j (j o c o o in S Ss 5s ^ g ^ ^ c =; c c - o o ^ E S S -S ™ - fflKjXOOOjD Cl oddtTjoo (J Bj -E .E 3 C C 2 rt ca a d ES c 3 3 O J3 J3 y M oa H X cai -S' O ^ Qi ^ Cl Cl "Cl iSi c Cil B at Cl *i2 a S I iu -2J ^ II O ■ M X X X t* S i> ~ 3 2 tfl e c c ^ E 2 y ' '■ 4X := * ^ 2 o >, II o OM<5QSUZXQUQdUC>Q i ^ X S 3 OD >.T 3 E L O O o - " - Number of species detected; Number of captures of rodents: 8 Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University crested cormorant, belted kingfisher, and red'winged blackbird also indicate the presence of water. The re¬ maining ten (Canada goose, ring-billed gull, rock dove, bam swallow, American robin, European starling, com¬ mon grackle, house finch, and house sparrow) are widespread birds common to urban areas (e.g,, Loeffler, 1990, Kingery, 1998b; Colorado NDIS, 2000). The rock dove, European starling, and house sparrow are exotics introduced into the United States in the 1 and 19‘^ centuries; they now comprise up to 95% of some urban bird communities during winter (Adams, 1994). The dominant birds also were primarily urban- adapted species (Table 2). Six of the nine dominant species (Canada goose, mallard, ring-billed gull, Euro¬ pean starling, common grackle, and house finch) are common urban birds, whereas the remaining three are migrant waterfowl (green-winged teal, gadwall, and white pelican). Most observations of these waterfowl were recorded in spring, late winter, or fall. Canada geese and ring-billed gulls were the most common wintering species at all sites, whereas the most com¬ mon summer species at four of the six sites was the common grackle (Table 2), Raptors are important indicators of ecosystem heal til and especially popular among bird-watchers. A great homed owl. Cooper’s hawks, Swainson’s hawks, and red-tailed hawks all were present, and all are un¬ common sights in Denver (Colorado NDIS, 2000). The American kestrel was the most widely-reported raptor (Table 1), Its apparent success along the South Platte River might be attributed to its small size (it maintains the smallest territories of all Colorado hawks) and versatile diet (Winn, 1998), The mammalian community was similar to that reported for other local urban areas. Two cottontails (5. audubonii and S. floridanus) are fairly common, but difficult to identify without a specimen in hand (Fitzgerald et al., 1994; Colorado NDIS, 2000). We detected deer sign at only one site (Table 3); whitetails (O. virginianus) are more closely associated with ri¬ parian regions than mule deer (O. hemionus), but both species are fairly common (Colorado NDIS, 2000). Of the native rodents encountered, the American bea¬ ver and western harvest mouse are considered fairly common, the deer mouse abundant, and the meadow vole and muskrat common in Denver (Colorado NDIS, 2000). Western harvest mice occur in wetlands, weedy or grassy areas, and riparian woodlands throughout eastern Colorado (Fitzgerald et ah, 1994). The deer mouse is the most ubiquitous of North American ro¬ dents, using a wide variety of habitats and adapting particularly well to disturbance (e.g., Fitzgerald et al., 1994; Handley, 1999). Meadow voles prefer mesic areas but tolerate patchy habitats and edges well (e.g.. Harper et al., 1993; Fitzgerald et al., 1994). Beaver and muskrat occur throughout Colorado where there are permanent bodies of water (Fitzgerald et al., 1994). We expected to find the three widespread, non¬ native rodents observed (Table 3). Fox squirrels were introduced in several places in Colorado and have be¬ come common watchable wildlife in Denver and many other cities (e.g., Loeffler, 1990; Adams, 1994; Flyger, 1999). The Old World Norway rat and house mouse are cosmopolitan. The only site at which we did not capture Mus was the disturbed grassland, which lacked significant ground cover. Raccoons were documented at four locations, but probably occur at all sites. They are very common in both urban and riparian areas and appear to be in¬ creasing in numbers in this region (Fitzgerald et al., 1994; VanDruff et al., 1996). The most common wild carnivore was the red fox, the most widely distributed wild carnivore in the world (Sei dens ticker, 1999). We detected the coyote at only one site, but it is common in Denver (Table 3). We saw domestic dogs at all six sites, and at least some of these dogs were living in dens and appeared to be feral. We found evidence of house cats at two locations. Domestic dogs and cats both have been implicated in the decline and disap¬ pearance of native species, although their impacts on wildlife have been poorly studied (Atkinson, 1989; Adams, 1994; Clarke and Pacin, 2002). No animals were captured in transects on the disturbed, non-native grassland, which reflected the lack of vertical structure due to frequent mowing. This site also had the lowest species richness. The greatest numbers of rodent captures occurred in the two mesic areas (Table 3). Harvest mice were the most frequently- captured rodents in true mesic lowland. Mus musculus was the only mouse caught in the restored mesic com¬ munity until 9 July 1999, when three meadow voles Jones et al.— Habitat use by Birds and Mammals along the South Platte River 9 were trapped. The presence of voles might indicate community succession following restoration efforts less than three years old, or might indicate a change in interspecific competition; interactions between Mws and native species should be examined. Meadow voles, house mice, deer mice, Norway rats, and western harvest mice have been reported from elsewhere in the metropolitan area (Jones, 1997; ERO Resources, 1998), The presence of additional species at other nearby urban sites suggested that the South Platte mammalian fauna was somewhat depauperate. Both the prairie vole (M. ochrogaster) and the Mexi¬ can wood rat {Neotoma mexicana) have been reported from elsewhere in Denver County (Beane and Powell, 1997; Jones, 1997). The absence of Zapus was of special note. Its presence along the urban South Platte was documented by a capture in “waist-high forbs over moist ground” (Erickson, 1982) at a site that is now the location of a children’s museum and urban park lacking the original multi-stratum plant community. The only subspecies of jumping mouse (Z. hudsonius preblei) occurring in the area was listed as federally threatened (U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1998), Most records are from moist riparian areas with thick herbaceous vegetation (Jones, 1999, and citations therein). Its absence along the urban South Platte indicated the lack of extensive native vegetation along this stretch of river. Urban river corridors are popular locales for rec¬ reation, including watching wildlife. In Colorado, out¬ door activities are considered tremendously important, as evidenced by recent surveys regarding preferences regarding wildlife viewing (Manfredo et al., 1991) and use of nature trails (Cuciti, 2002), and by large num¬ bers of volunteers assisting in projects such as the breeding bird atlas (Kingeiy, 1998a) and bat surveys (Navo et al., 2001). In the Denver metropolitan area, the history of the Rocky Mountain Arsenal and other sites demonstrates the high level of public interest in natural history, although local governments strongly support economic growth and development (Jones and Preston, 2000). The lowland riparian ecosystem of¬ fers unique opportunities for public education, in spite of representing only about 3% of Colorado’s area. This ecosystem supports a relatively high number of mam¬ malian species, more native birds than the shortgrass steppe, and is one of the most threatened of western ecosystems (Cooperrider, 1989; Fitzgerald et al., 1994; Ohmart, 1994; Preston and Kingery, 1998; Fleischner, 1999). Additionally, riparian corridors are thought to serve as avenues of dispersal, particularly for species from the east, although the historic influence on dis¬ persal remains unknown (e.g., Fitzgerald et al., 1994; Kingery, 1998b). Other positive values connected with the presence of urban plants and animals include aes¬ thetic, environmental (e.g., services such as clean water and noise abatement), economic, psychologi¬ cal, and sociological benefits (Adams and Dove, 1989; Loeffler, 1990; Moorhead, 1992; Schwarz, 1993; Botkin and Beveridge, 1997; Werner, 1999). We make the following recommendations for management of urban areas, particularly those in riparian zones: Maintenance and Management The appearance of most urban recreational ar¬ eas is maintained in a manner considered appropriate by most citizens. For example, in 1999, efforts to maintain the aesthetic appearance of the South Platte corridor included the equivalent of 9.5 miles of tree trimming and 199 miles of trash and debris pickup and removal (Urbonas, 1999). However, litter in the form of fallen trees and branches should be left for species known to respond positively to vertical structure (Douglass and Reinert, 1982; Getz, 19S5; Sears and Anderson, 1991; Adams, 1994; VanDruffetal., 1996). Stable rodent populations also are key determinants in the distribution of very popular raptors (e.g., Preston and Beane, 1996). Considerations for public safety must be balanced with the needs of wildlife. Education might help modify current aesthetic values. Special efforts should be made to manage for wildlife on less disturbed areas than on more frequently visited sites. Traffic noise negatively affects densities of breeding birds (Reijnenet al., 1997). Starlings and other less-desired generalists adapt better to human disturbance than do specialists (Hallock, 1989; Sears and Anderson, 1991; VanDruff et al., 1996). Many species are impacted directly and indirectly by roads (Trombulak and Frissell, 2000). The restoration of native vegetation should con¬ tinue for both aesthetic and biological reasons. Botkin and Beveridge (1997) offered recommendations for ID Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University managing for the best mix of urban vegetation types related to water use, and it has been reported that na¬ tive birds in the Rocky Mountain region use native trees more than non-native birds (Sears and Ander¬ son, 1991). Put in place a mechanism, such as a long-term management plan, to ensure that long-term restoration efforts survive changes in politics and personnel. For example, on one of our sites, the restoration of xeric plants has not resulted in establishment of a xeric eco¬ system because of how the park was managed subse¬ quently. Education Institutions managing parks should mandate on¬ going educational efforts, including on-site signage and addresses of pertinent websites such as those of Ballenger (1996a, 1996b), to ensure that the public has ready access to up-to-date information. The widespread distribution of alien species re¬ quires that these organisms be of special importance in education and research. Herein we have treated non¬ natives as ‘exotics’. However, Hasp el and Calhoon (1991:27) stated that the study of urban cats , .is the study of a species in a unique ecosystem, one in which it has been reproductively successful for thousands of years.” Such intriguing ideas should be investigated for development of research and educational program¬ ming. How do invasive species interact with native wildlife in urban areas? In any case, exotics need to be included in any educational programming. Projects such as the development of the South Platte Greenway provide opportunities to provide par¬ ticipation by local residents. Including residents in plan¬ ning and incoiporating information about local culture and history will promote alliances between city plan¬ ners, environmentalists, and advocates of social jus¬ tice (Chapman, 2001), Research Encourage additional research and peer-reviewed publications regarding urban areas. Many valuable data lie buried in ‘gray literature’, as in the report by Th¬ ompson (1994) and other reports cited in this paper. Various projects have been conducted regarding envi¬ ronmental quality (for example, see Kimbrough and Litke, 1996; Saldiva and Bdhm, 1998) but more eco¬ logical work needs to be done regarding the ecology unique to cities. People in urban ecosystems can weaken or enhance the natural forces affecting eco¬ systems (Pickett and McDonnell, 1993; Collins et al., 2000). Such human-induced effects in Colorado in¬ clude the expansion of house sparrow populations to elevations exceeding 3,000 m or 10,000 ft (Kaempfer, 1998). Some popular articles have treated ecological subjects (e,g., Kerlinger, 1999; Jones, 2000), and vari¬ ous examples of technical publications regarding ur¬ ban ecology include those by Hallock (1989), Hiebert (1990), Groom (1993), Lajeunesse et al. (1997), Reijnen et al. (1997), Fernandez-Juricic (2000), and Grinder and Krausman (2001). However, results of a recent survey demonstrated that very few papers in ecological journals dealt with urban biology (Collins et al., 2000). The relative paucity of ecological research in urban areas counters widespread needs for biological input in urban planning (Murphy, 1988; Botkin and Beveridge, 1997; Babbitt, 1999) and is being partially addressed through establishment of the US Long-Term Ecological Research network (Parlange, 1998; Gnmm et al., 2000). The South Platte is one of those urban sites providing a unique opportunity in the study of biological events that differ, or occur on a different time scale, than those in less impacted areas. We know that dramatic changes in floras and faunas have oc¬ curred since European settlement. In most cities, we lack data regarding the flora and fauna present before urban development. However, surveys such as ours provide baseline data and the opportunity to document alterations in bird and mammal communities as future changes occur along urban river corridors and other urban sites. Acknowledgments We thank volunteers L. M. Carpenter, J, Harting, and C. Stucheli, and an anonymous reviewer. A. Kropp provided the map, R. Brune shared unpublished veg¬ etation data, H. E, Kingery assisted with bird records, and B. Chadwick served as our liaison with the city. This project was supported by the Mayor’s South Platte River Commission and by the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. Jones et al.-— Habitat use by Birds and Mammals along the South Platte River 11 Literature Cited Adams, L. W. 1994. Urban wildlife habitats; a landscape perspective. Wildlife Habitats Volume 3, Univer¬ sity of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 186 pp. Adams, L, W., and L. E. Dove. 1989. Wildlife reserves and corridors in the urban environment: a guide to ecological landscape planning and resource con¬ servation. National Institute for Urban Wildlife, Shepherdstown, West Virginia, 91 pp. Alston, M. 1999. Denver’s South Platte River Corridor: projects progress towards a vision, lots left to do, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Com¬ munity Based Environmental Protection Summer 1999 News, www.epa.gov/reEionQ8 . Andrews, R., and R. Righter, 1992. Colorado birds: a refer¬ ence to their distribution and habitat. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, Colorado, 442 pp. Anonymous. 1997, International chorus day Sunday, May 4, 1997, Colorado Urban Wildlife Partnership Newsletter. Anonymous. 1998. Green way vision saves river and gen¬ erates investment. Urban Parks Institute, ww w.pps .org/ urbanparks . Atkinson, L 1989. Introduced animals and extinctions. Pages 54-75, in Conservation for the twenty-first century (D. Western and M. C. Pearl, eds.). Wild¬ life Conservation International, New York, New York, 365 pp. Babbitt, B, 1999. Noah’s mandate and the birth of urban bioplanning. Conservation Biology, 13:677-678. Ballenger, L. 1996a. Mus musculus. www.ummz.umich .edu . Ballenger, L. 1996^?. Rattus norvegicus. www.ummz.umich. edu . Beane, R. D., and M, Powell. 1997. Preble’s meadow jump¬ ing mouse presence/absence surveys, Bluff Lake Natural Area, Denver County, Colorado. Unpub¬ lished report prepared for Stapleton Development Corporation, Denver, Colorado. Botkin, D. B., and C. E, Beveridge. 1997. Cities as environ¬ ments, Urban Ecosystems, 1:3-19. Bottorff, R. L, 1974, Cottonwood habitat for birds in Colo¬ rado. American Birds, 28:975-979. Brenneman, B. 1973. Miracle on Cherry Creek: an informal history of the birth and re-birth of a neighbor¬ hood. World Press Inc., Denver, Colorado, 130 pp. Brittan, M. 1992. South Platte Park small mammal research. Unpublished report. South Platte Park, 6 pp. Brovksy, C. 1999. New life comes to central Platte. The Denver Post August 1, Bl, B7. Chapman, G 2001. The intersection of environmental plan¬ ning and social justice: Denver’s Platte River Greenway. Master in City Planning Thesis, Mas¬ sachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. City and County of Denver, Office of the Mayor. 2000. South Platte River urban watershed restoration program. Briefing document. Clarke, A. L,, and T, Pacin. 2002. Domestic cat ‘‘colonies” in natural areas: a growing exotic species threat. Natural Areas Journal, 22:154-159. Collins, J. P., A. Kinzing, N. B. Grimm, W. F, Fagan, D. Hope, J, Wu, and E, T, Boner, 2000. A new urban ecology. American Scientist, 88:416-425. Colorado Natural Diversity Information Source. 2000. www.nds.nrel.colostate.edu . Cooper, A., A. Armstrong, and C. Kampert. 1990. The WildWatch book. Denver Museum of Natural History in cooperation with Roberts Rinehart Publishers, Niwot, Colorado, 90 pp. C 0 op erri d er, A. 19 89. C on serv ati on of bi o 1 ogical diversi ty in the west. Pages 3-9 in Issues and technology on the management of impacted wildlife: proceed¬ ings of a national symposium, Glen wood Springs, Colorado. (P. R. Davis, J. C. Emerick, D. M. Finch, S. Q. Foster, J. W. Monarch, S, Rush, O. Thome II, and J. Todd, eds), Thome Ecological Institute, Boulder, Colorado, 213 pp. Cuciti, P. 2002. Results of Colorado statewide public sur¬ vey on attitudes toward trails. www.americantrails.org . Dawson, D. G. 1981. Experimental design when counting birds. Pages 392-398 in Studies in avian biology no. 6, (C. J. Ralph and M. S. Scott, eds.). Cooper Ornithological Society, 630 pp. Douglass, N. J., and H. K. Reinert. 1982. The utilization of fallen logs as runways by small mammals. Pro¬ ceedings of the Pennsylvania Academy of Sci¬ ence, 56:162-164. Erickson, D. L. 1982, Survey of plant and mammal life along the Denver Platte River Green way. Unpub¬ lished report, funded by the Denver Audubon Society. 12 Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University ERO Resources Coiporation. 1998. Preble’s meadow j ump- ing mouse trapping survey results for Cherry Creek at Monaco Street, Denver County, Colo¬ rado. Unpublished report prepared for Nolte and Associates, by ERO Resources Corporation, 1842 Clarkson Street, Denver, Colorado. Femandez-Juricic, E. 2000. Avifauna! use of wooded streets in an urban landscape. Conservation Biology, 14:513-521. Fitzgerald, J. P. 1978, Vertebrate associations in plant com¬ munities along the South Platte River in north¬ eastern Colorado, Pages 73-88 in Lowland river and stream habitat in Colorado: a symposium (W. D, Graul and S. J. Bissell, technical coordinators), Colorado Chapter of the Wildlife Society and Colorado Audubon Council, Greeley, Colorado, 195 pp. Fitzgerald, J. R, C. A. Meaney, and D. M. Armstrong, 1994. Mammals of Colorado, Denver Museum of Natu¬ ral History and University Press of Colorado, Niwot, Colorado, 467 pp. Fleischner, T. L. 1999. Keeping the cows off: conserving riparian areas in the American west. Pages 64-65, in Terrestrial ecosystems of North America: a conservation assessment (T, H. Ricketts, E, Dinerstein, D. M. Olson, C. J. Loucks, W. Eichbaum, D, DellaSala, K. Kavanagh, P. Hedao, R T, Hurley, K. M. Kamey, R, Abell, and S. Walters, eds.), Island Press, Washington, D. C., 485 pp. Flygcr, V. 1999. Eastern fox squirrel Sciunts niger. Pages 456-458 in The Smithsonian book of North Ameri¬ can mammals (D. E. Wilson and S. Ruff, eds.), Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., 750 pp. Getz, L. L. 1985. Habitats. Pages 286-309 in Biology of New World Microtus (R. H. Tamarin, ed.), Ameri¬ can Society of Mammalogists Special Publica¬ tion No. 8, 893 pp. Grimes, M. D., and R. D. Beane. 1984. The effect of beaver on the South Platte River. Unpublished report submitted to the Platte River Greenway Founda¬ tion, 1666 S. University Blvd., Denver, Colorado, 15 pp. Gnmm, N. B., J. M. Grove, S. T. A, Pickett, and C. L. Redman. 2000. Integrated approaches to long-term stud¬ ies of urban ecological systems. BioScience, 50:571-584. Grinder, M. I., and P. R. Krausman. 2001, Home range, habi¬ tat use, and nocturnal activity of coyotes in an urban environment. Journal of Wildlife Manage¬ ment, 65:887-898. Groom, D. W. 1993. Magpie Pica pica predation on black¬ bird Turdus merula nests in urban areas. Bird Study, 40:55-62. Hallock, D. 1989. Wildlife trends on the urban-rural fringe. Pages 17-22, in Issues and technology on the management of impacted wildlife; proceedings of a national symposium, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. (P. R. Davis, J. C. Emerick,D. M, Finch, S. Q. Foster, J. W. Monarch, S. Rush, 0. Thome 11, and J. Todd, eds.), Thome Ecological Insti¬ tute, Boulder, Colorado, 213 pp. Handley, C. O,, Jr. 1999. Deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus. Pages 575-577, in The Smithsonian book of North American mammals (D. E. Wilson and $. Ruff, eds.), Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C,, 750 pp. Harper, S. J,, E, K. Bollinger, and G. W, Barrett, 1993. Ef¬ fects of habitat patch shape on population dy¬ namics of meadow voles {Microtus pennsylvanicus). Journal of Mammalogy, 74:1045-1055. Haspel, C., and R. E. Calhoon. 1991. Ecology and behav¬ ior of free-ranging cats in Brooklyn, New York. Pages 27-30 in Wildlife conservation in metro¬ politan environments (L. W. Adams and D. L. Leedy, eds.), National Institute for Urban Wild¬ life, Columbia, Maryland, 264 pp. Hekkers, J., editor. 1987. Wild in the streets: Denver area wildlife adjusts to urban living. Colorado Divi¬ sion of Wildlife, Publication DOW-M-1-2-S7, Denver, Colorado, 19 pp. Hiebert, R. D. 1990. An ecological restoration model: ap¬ plication to razed residential sites. Natural Areas Journal, 10:181-186. In stream Issues Task Force. 1996. South Platte River Cor¬ ridor Project: instream issues report, 92 pp. Johnson, W. C. 1994. Woodland expansions in the Platte River, Nebraska: patterns and causes. Ecologi¬ cal Monographs, 64:45-84. Jones, A. L. 1997, Presence/absence surveys for Preble’s meadow jumping mouse: Sand Creek—Havana and Peoria crossings. Unpublished report pre¬ pared for Stapleton Development Corporation by MDQ Inc., 820 Santa Fe Drive, Denver, Colorado. Jones, C. A. 1999. Zapus kudsonius in southern Colorado. Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech Uni¬ versity, 191:1-7. Jones, C. A. 2000, A river runs through it. Museum Quar¬ terly, Denver Museum of Nature and Science, 9(2): 2-5. Jones et al.— Habitat use by Birds and Mammals along the South Platte River 13 Jones, C. A., and C, R. Prestori, 2000. The role of the bald eagle as a flagship species for the Rocky Moun¬ tain Arsenal: from Superfurd Site to wildlife ref¬ uge. Pages 165-171 in Reflections of a naturalist: papers honoring Professor Eugene D, Fleharty. (J. R. Choate, ed.), Fort Hays Studies, Fort Hays State University, Special Issue 1, 241 pp. Jones, W. C., and K. Forrest. 1973. Denver: a pictorial history from frontier camp to queen city of the plains. Pruett Publishing Company, Boulder, Colo¬ rado, 336 pp, Kaempfer, B. 1998. House sparrow Passer domes ficus. Pages 542-543 in Colorado breeding bird atlas (H. E. Kingery, cd.), Colorado Bird Atlas Partner¬ ship and Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, Colorado, 636 pp. Kerlinger, P. 1999, Nesting in Gotham, Natural History, June 1999: 24-26, Kimbrough, R. A., and D, W, Litke. 1996. Pesticides in streams draining agricultural and urban areas in Colorado. Environmental Science and Technol¬ ogy, 30:908-916. tCingery, H. E., editor. 1998rj. Colorado breeding bird atlas. Colorado Bird Atlas Partnership and Colorado Division of Wildlife, Denver, Colorado, 636 pp. Kingery, H, E. 1998Z?. Post-settlement changes to Colo¬ rado habitats. Pages 33-35 in Colorado breeding bird atlas (H. E. Kingery, ed.), Colorado Bird At¬ las Partnership and Colorado Division of Wild¬ life, Denver, Colorado, 636 pp. Kingery, H. E. 1999, Hooded merganser breeding in Colo¬ rado, Journal of the Colorado Field Ornitholo¬ gists. 33:180-182 Kingery, H. E. (count leader). 2000, Denver urban Christ¬ mas bird count. The Lark Bunting 35(2):5-12. Kirkpatrick, T. 1998. The South Platte River Green way Trail: the trail user’s guide. Trails ‘N Tales Pub¬ lishing Co., Englewood, Colorado, 82 pp. Lajeunesse, D,, G. Domon, A. Cogliastro, and A. Bouchard. 1997. Monitoring recreational use in urban natu¬ ral areas. Natural Areas Journal, 17:366-379. Loeffler, C. 1990. Taking a look at urban wildlife. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Publication DOW-M-13-88. Colorado Springs, Colorado, 42 pp. Manfredo, M. J., A. Bright, and M. Stephenson. 1991. Public preferences for non-consumptive wildlife recreation in the Denver area. Final report, sub¬ mitted to the Colorado Division of Wildlife, Den¬ ver, Colorado, 73 pp. Mayor’s South Platte River Commission. 1995. Great Out¬ doors Colorado Legacy Grant Concept Paper, 12 pp. Meisler, G. E. 1965, Trajectory of a tragedy: Denver area flood, June 16‘‘'-17'^, 1965. Hotchkiss Inc., Den¬ ver, Colorado, 30 pp. Miller, J. 1996. Urbanization and bird communities in ri¬ parian areas. Urban Wildlife Newsletter 25:2-3. Mitchell, R. S. 1972. Small rodents of the floodplain of the South Platte River at the proposed Narrows Res¬ ervoir site. M. A, thesis, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado, 50 pp. Moorhead, C. A. 1992, Colorado’s backyard wildlife: a natural history, ecology, and action guide to Front Range urban wildlife. Roberts Rinehart Publishers, Niwot, Colorado, 133 pp. Muntz, G, and A. Wuth. 1983. A path through time: a guide to the Platte River Greenway, Jendc-Hagan Book Corporation, Frederick, Colorado. Murphy, D. D. 1988. Challenges to biological diversity in urban areas. Pages 71-76 in Biodiversity (E. O. Wilson, cd.), National Academy Press, Washing¬ ton, D. C., 519 pp. Navo, K. W., T. E. Ingersoll, L. R. Bonewcll, and N. LaMantia-Olson. 2001. Bats/Inactive Mines Project, 2001 mine evaluations summary report. Submitted to Great Outdoors Colorado, 7 pp. Nietfeld, M. T, N. W. Barrett, and N, Si Ivy. 1996. Wildlife marking techniques. Pages 140-168 in Research and management techniques for wildlife and habi¬ tats (T, A. Bookhout, ed.), The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, 740 pp. Noel, T. J. 1980. Denver: Rocky Mountain gold. Continen¬ tal Heritage Press, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 256 pp. Ohmart, R. D. 1994. The effects of human-induced changes on the avifauna of western nparian habitats. Stud¬ ies in Avian Biology, 15:273-285. Olson, T. E., and F. L. Knopf. 1988. Patterns of relative diversity with in riparian small mammal communi¬ ties, Platte River watershed, Colorado. Pages 379-386 in Management of amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals in North America; proceed¬ ings of the symposium (R. C. Szaro, K. E. Severson, and D. R. Patton, technical coordina¬ tors), U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Ser¬ vice General Technical Report RM-166, 458 pp. Parlangc, M. 1998. The city as ecosystem. BioScience, 48:581-585. 14 Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University Pickett, S. T A., and M, J. McDonnell. 1993, Humans as components of ecosystems: a synthesis. Pages 310-316 in Humans as components of ecosys¬ tems: the ecology of subtle human effects and populated areas (M. J. McDonnell and S, T. A. Pickett, eds.), Springer-Vcrlag, New York, New York, 364 pp, Preston, C. R., and R, D. Beane. 1996. Occurrence and distribution of diurnal raptors in relation to hu¬ man activity and other factors at Rocky Moun¬ tain Arsenal, Colorado. Pages 365-375 In Rap¬ tors in human landscapes: adaptations to built and cultivated environments (D. M. Bird, D. E. Varland, and J. J. Negro, eds.), Academic Press, San Diego, California, 396 pp. Preston, C. R., and H. E. Kingery, 1998. The Colorado environment. Pages 21-32 in Colorado breeding bird atlas (H. E. Kingery, ed.), Colorado Bird At¬ las Partnership and Colorado Division of Wild¬ life, Denver, Colorado, 636 pp, Reijnen, R., R, Foppen, and G Vccnbaas. 1997. Distur¬ bance by traffic of breeding birds: evaluation of the effect and considerations in planning and managing road corridors. Biodiversity and Con¬ servation, 6:567-581. Ryder, R. A. 1986. Songbirds, Pages 291-312 in Inventory and monitoring of wildlife habitat (A. Y. Cooperrider, R. J. Boyd, and H. R. Stuart, eds.), U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Man¬ agement Service Center, Denver, Colorado, 858 pp. Saldiva, P. H, N., and G M, Bohm. 1998. Animal indicators of adverse effects associated with air pollution. Ecosystem Health, 4:230-235. Schwarz, L. LaB. 1993. Green ways: a guide to planning, design, and development. The Conservation Fund, Island Press, Washington, D.C., 351 pp. Sears, A. R., and S. H. Anderson, 1991, Correlations be¬ tween birds and vegetation in Cheyenne, Wyo¬ ming. Pages 75-80 in Wildlife conservation in metropolitan environments (L, W, Adams and D, L. Leedy, eds.), National Institute for Urban Wild¬ life, Columbia, Maryland, 264 pp. Seidensticker, J. 1999, Red fox Vulpes vulpes. Pages 150- 152 in The Smithsonian book of North American mammals (D. E. Wilson and S. Ruff, eds.), Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., 750 pp. Shoemaker, J. 1981. Returning the Platte to the people: a story of a unique committee, the Platte River Development Committee. The Greenway Foun¬ dation and Tumbleweed Press, Westminster, Colorado, 118 pp. Shuster, E, 1996. The Platte River Greenway: the forgotten Nile of North America. American Trails Resources and Library, www, outdo or link.com/ amtrail s . Thompson, R. W. 1994, 1993 wildlife monitoring report: Riverside and Windsor Gardens Wetlands Fairlake Project. Unpublished report prepared for Fairwind Associates by Western Resource De¬ velopment, Denver, Colorado, 52 pp, Tromulak, S. C., and C. A. Frissell. 2000. Review of eco¬ logical effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation Biology, 14:18-30. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. The South Platte River in Colorado. EPA 908-F- 98-002, Region 8 8EPR-EP. www.en a, gov/re gion 8 . United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Final rule to list the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse as a threatened species. Federal Register 63, 92:1-28. Urbonas,B. 1999.SouthPlatteRiverprogramnotes, Flood Hazard News 29(1), unpaginated, www.udfcd.org . VanDruff, L, W., E. G Bolen, and G. J. San Julian. 1996. Management of urban wildlife. Pages 507-530 in Research and management techniques for wild¬ life and habitats (T. A. Bookhout, ed,). The Wild¬ life Society, Bethesda, Maryland, 740 pp. Walken J. 1997. Helpers green up S, Platte parks. The Den¬ ver Post May 4, 2B. Werner, P. 1999. Why biotope mapping in populated ar¬ eas? Deinsea, 5:9-26. Winn, R. 1998. American kestrel. Pages 126-127 in Colo¬ rado breeding bird atlas (H. E. Kingery, ed.), Colo¬ rado Bird Atlas Partnership and Colorado Divi¬ sion of Wildlife, Denver, Colorado, 636 pp. Jones et al.— Habitat use by Birds and Mammals along the South Platte River 15 Appendix A Scientific and vernacular names of birds and mammals reported in this study. Non-native species are marked with an asterisk. Birds Homed grebe Pied-billed grebe American white pelican Double-crested comiorant Great blue heron Black-crowned night-heron Green-backed heron Domestic goose Canada goose Gad wall American wigeon Mallard Blue-winged teal Northern shoveler Green-winged teal Common goldeneye Hooded merganser Cooper's hawk Swainson’s hawk Red-tailed hawk American kestrel American coot Killdeer American avocet Common snipe Lesser yellowlegs Solitary sandpiper Western sandpiper Herring gull Ring-billed gull Rock dove Mourning dove Great horned owl Belted kingfisher Downy woodpecker Northern flicker Western wood-pewee Say’s phoebe Loggerhead shrike Plumbeous vireo Black-billed magpie Podiceps auritus Podilymbus podiceps Pelecanus erythrorhynchos Phalacrocorox auritus Ardea hewdias Nycticorax nycticorax Butorldes striatus A user anseP Brant a canadensis Anas strepera Anas americana Anas pla tyrhyn chos Anas discors Anas clypeaia A nas crecca Bucephala cl an gu la Lophodytes cucuUatus Aceipiter cooperli Buieo swainsoni Buieo jamaicensis Faico sparverius Fulica americana Charadrius vociferus Recurvirostra americana Gaiiinago gallinago Tringa Jlavipes Tringa soliiaria Calidrus mauri Larus argentatus Larus delawarensis Columba livia* Zenaida macroura Bubo virginianus Ceryle alcyon Picoides pubescens Colaptes auratus Contopus sordidulus Sayornis say a Lanius ludovicianus Vireo solUarius Pica p ica American crow Common raven Cliff swallow Bam swallow Black-capped chickadee House wren American robin Gray catbird European starling Yellow warbler Yellow-rumped warbler Lark sparrow Song sparrow White-crowned sparrow D ark-eyed j unco Red-winged blackbird Brewer’s blackbird Common grackle Bullock’s oriole House finch American goldfinch American tree sparrow House sparrow Cottontail Eastern fox squinrei American beaver Western harvest mouse Deer mouse Meadow vole Common muskrat Norway rat House mouse Dog Coyote Red fox Common raccoon Cat Deer Corvus brachyrhynchos Corvus corax Peirochelidon pyrrhonota Hirundo rustic a Poeciie atricapillus Troglodytes aedon Turdus migratorlus Dumetella carolinensis Sturnus vulgaris* Dendroica petechia Dendroica coronal a Chondestes grammacus Melospiza melodia Zonotrichla leucophrys Junco hyemalis Agelaius phoeniceus Eupkagus cyanocephalus Quiscalus quiscula Icterus bullockii Carpodacus mexicanus Carduelis trislis Spizella arborea Passer domestlcus* Sylvilagus Sciurus niger Castor canadensis Reithrodontomys megalotis Peromyscus maniculatus Microtus pennsyivanicus Ondatra zibethicus Rattus norvegicus* Mus musculus* Canis familiaris* Canis latrans Vulpes vulpes Procyon lotor Felis catus" Odocoileus Mammals 16 Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University Addresses of authors: CheriA. Jones Curator of Mammalogy Department of Zoology Denver Museum of Nature and Science 2001 Colorado Blvd. Denver, CO 80210 cjones@,dmns.org Ronald D. Beane Research Associate Department of Zoology Denver Museum of Nature and Science 2001 Colorado Blvd. Denver, CO 80210 rdbeane@emaiLmsn.com Elszabeth a. Dickerson Department of Zoology Denver Museum of Nature a}jd Science 2001 Colorado Blvd. Denver CO 80210 Beth.Dickerson@.rfdoe,gov Current address: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Rocky Flats c/o Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge Building 121 Commerce City, CO 80022 Publications of the Museum of Texas Tech University Institutional subscriptions are available through the Museum of Texas Tech University, attn: NSRL Publications Secretary, Box 43191, Lubbock, TX 79409-3191. Individuals may also purchase separate num¬ bers of the Occasional Papers directly from the Museum of Texas Tech University. ISSN 0149-175X Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409-3191