User:Icteridae/Bird–skyscraper collisions/Bibliography

Bibliography

• Peter et al. (2014) estimates that 365 to 988 million birds are killed annually in the United States due to collisions with buildings with over half of these mortalities resulting from collisions with high-rises. Moreover, certain species are more susceptible to colliding, and five species are of particular concern due to their declining populations. Overall, buildings are the second largest anthropogenic threat to wild birds, directly behind feral cats. This reference provides a great overview for the issue at hand, using a systematic analysis of multiple data sources including unpublished datasets and peer-reviewed literature. I will incorporate a thorough overview of statistics relevant to the issue of collisions in North America, providing a breakdown of different species vulnerabilities and effects of building types, among other variables.
• Daniel (2009) analyzed different methods of making windows "collision-proof" for wild birds, utilizing UV-absorbing and UV-reflecting window films of different patterns. Tested methods of deterring bird collisions were one-way films, ceramic frit glass, uniformly spaced decals or other objects, and non-reflective sheet glass. Additionally, 25% of bird window collisions are undetectable without continuous monitoring, revealing that data revolving around this issue may be skewed. I want to incorporate the findings of this study to describe recommendations and solutions for the issue of bird-window collisions. Providing a better understanding of why this is a difficult problem to detect would also be valuable.
• Blevins et al. (2013) analyzed the spatial variety in mortality of window collisions, taking into account factors such as window area of the building and habitat features surrounding the building. Given the data collected, they found that the most-supported model revealed effects of season, development, and distance to vegetative lots on bird mortality. Further, collisions are higher in conditions where there is lower levels of development and higher area of windows, and when the victim bird is a juvenile. This study will be a useful addition for citing different factors that may be influencing window collisions (rather than just the appearance of the windows), also bringing awareness to the fact that the spatial location of buildings may be part of the issue. These findings will also be used to suggest recommendations for lessening the number of bird collision victims.
• Klem (2015) is thorough in describing legal measures and commercial products which have arisen to combat this issue. The paper highlights why we as humans should care about reducing this hazard for birds, and discusses short-term and long-term solutions. I thought utilizing this article would be great to delve into the politics of the issue a little bit, and explain why humans may have a moral obligation to mitigate this issue. Further, it can add information to a section that will discuss the pros and cons of different collision mitigation strategies from a human perspective.
• Evans and Lesley (1996) discusses how light is another factor influencing collisions, acting as a trap for many nocturnal migrants and making them even more vulnerable to flying into buildings. They provide data collected from a volunteer group in Toronto to provide a better scope of how many birds are killed or injured by nocturnal building collisions during their migratory routes. A staggering result from this study also mentioned how one building in Chicago causes 1,478 bird casualties annually, and over 20,697 deaths over the course of 14 years. This chapter is helpful for introducing how anthropogenic light emissions add to the threat of building collisions for birds, particularly in the migration season, which is a key part of the issue. It also introduces how citizen science is often used to assess the safety of certain cities/buildings for birds, which is another topic I would like to cover.