Myotis Lucifugus)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FRAMEWORK FOR RECONCILIATION: ADAPTING AN URBAN PARK TO WELCOME LITTLE BROWN BATS (MYOTIS LUCIFUGUS) by MEGAN N. TURNER (Under the Direction of Eric MacDonald) ABSTRACT This thesis explores Michael Rosenzweig’s concept of reconciliation ecology to advocate for including native wildlife as stakeholders in urban design to activate public spaces for conservation. The thesis begins with a brief review of biodiversity conservation within conservation biology, a field focused on species needs, and landscape architecture, a profession driven to improve the human environment. Guided by a select review of existing frameworks for conservation design, and a synthesis of urban wildlife habitat program guidelines, the thesis proposes a preliminary framework for reconciliation ecology site design that includes species within site programming. The framework identifies opportunities for habitat within existing landscape types, with their embedded cultural values, based on the life cycle habitat requirements of wildlife species. Projective design then applies the framework to a public park in Burlington, Vermont, for a focal species, the little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus). The selected site responds to Rosenzweig’s call to include species in habitats where humans “live, work and play.” INDEX WORDS: reconciliation ecology, little brown bat, urban design, biodiversity, Vermont FRAMEWORK FOR RECONCILIATION: ADAPTING AN URBAN PARK TO WELCOME LITTLE BROWN BATS (MYOTIS LUCIFUGUS) by MEGAN N. TURNER BA, University of Wisconsin, 2006 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ATHENS, GEORGIA 2017 © 2017 Megan N. Turner All Rights Reserved FRAMEWORK FOR RECONCILIATION: DESIGNING AN URBAN PARK TO WELCOME LITTLE BROWN BATS (MYOTIS LUCIFUGUS) by MEGAN N. TURNER Major Professor: Eric MacDonald Committee: Jon Calabria Rosanna Rivero John Paul White Electronic Version Approved: Suzanne Barbour Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia August 2017 DEDICATION Every city has some testimony to perception, intelligence and art, there are oases of concern and creation. …. We need nature as much in the city as in the countryside. In order to endure we must maintain the bounty of that great cornucopia which is our inheritance. Ian McHarg This thesis is dedicated to the Spirit and beings who shape oases in daylight and moon glow; the dedicated individuals who steward them; and all those who appreciate them, most especially, my dearest Madeleine, Elsa, Torunn and Pete. My oasis is in you. Thank you for believing in me and for the great adventure. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis is submitted with gratitude to my very smart and talented thesis committee, especially Dr. Eric MacDonald, who supplied great positivity and encouragement that kept me going. To Cari Goetcheus, I am grateful for your guidance and friendship. To my long-suffering family - the weight is lifted. Thank you for helping me carry it. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. ix LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................x CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................1 Problems of the Anthropocene.....................................................................1 Current Methods for Resolving Problems of Urbanization .........................6 Reconciliation Ecology as Approach to Urban Design .............................11 Landscape Architects as Reconciliation Designers ...................................13 Research Questions and Objectives ...........................................................15 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................18 Urbanization Effects on Biodiversity .........................................................18 Review of Conservation Biology Principles and Approaches ...................29 Reconciliation Ecology Defined and Examples ........................................45 Biodiversity Conservation in Landscape Architecture ..............................61 Social and Cultural Considerations in Urban Wildlife Design ..................76 Framework Review and Design as an Interdisciplinary Conservation Approach ....................................................................................................92 Overview of Bat Biology and Conservation Status .................................103 vi Threats to and From Bat Species .............................................................106 Little Brown Bat Life History ..................................................................120 Opportunities for Improving Urban Bat Habitat ......................................130 Conclusion ...............................................................................................137 3 METHODS ....................................................................................................141 Definitions................................................................................................141 Description of Methods............................................................................142 Delimitations ............................................................................................152 Limitations ...............................................................................................153 4 SCHMANSKA PARK RECONCILIATION FOR LITTLE BROWN BATS .........................................................................154 Reconciliation Typologies .......................................................................154 Preliminary Framework for Reconciliation Design .................................157 Project Area Overview .............................................................................175 Schmanska Park Reconciliation ...............................................................176 Conclusion ...............................................................................................199 5 RECONCILIATION DESIGN DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS ............200 Discussion of Framework Demonstration ...............................................200 Conclusion ...............................................................................................203 LITERATURE CITED ........................................................................................209 vii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 2.1: Urban Ecology Principles for Urban Animals/Wildlife ...................................xx Table 2.2: Five Themes for Conservation Biology Literacy .............................................36 Table 2.3: Landscape Ecology Principles and “Rules of Thumb”.....................................46 Table 2.4: Win-Win Ecology Examples of Successful Reconciliation ..............................52 Table 2.5: Categorization of Reviewed Habitat Certification Programs ...........................61 Table 2.6: Biodiversity Literature Search Results from Landscape Journal.....................61 Table 2.7: Conservation Frameworks for Site Selection or Design...................................61 Table 2.8: Design Guidance for Three Key Bat Habitat Requirements with Tree Types and Vermont Species Added ................................................................................127 viii LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 2.1: Nassauer and Opdam Process: Pattern: Design Diagram ..............................31 Figure 4.2: Proposed Framework for Reconciliation Ecology Design ..............................78 Figure 4.3:SWOT Analysis Explanatory Chart ...............................................................110 Figure 4.4: Proposed Reconciliation Ecology Habitat SWOT ........................................148 Figure 4.5: Schmanska Park Existing Conditions Plan ...................................................195 Figure 4.6: Schmanska Park Rock Outcrop .....................................................................197 Figure 4.7: Turf Slope Erosion, Schmanksa Park ............................................................199 Figure 4.8: Schmanska Park Conserved Land Context ...................................................200 Figure 4.9: Schmanska Park 600 m Buffer Context ........................................................201 Figure 4.10: Schmanska Little Brown Bat SWOT Analysis ...........................................205 Figure 4.11: Schmanska Park Reconciliation Plans ........................................................205 Figure 4.12: Proposed Roost ............................................................................................205 Figure 4.13: Proposed Maple Row Shade Garden ...........................................................205 Figure 4.14: Concept Sketch for Gated Artificial Cave Maintenance Entry along Grove Street ....................................................................................................................205 Figure 4.15: Proposed Monitoring Bench ........................................................................20x Figure 4.16: Proposed Informational Kiosk .....................................................................20x ix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Humans now dominate 90-95% of the terrestrial earth for