Loading…
Urban Domestic Gardens (IV): The Extent of the Resource and its Associated Features
Domestic ('private') gardens constitute a substantial proportion of 'green space' in urban areas and hence are of potential significance for the maintenance of biodiversity in such areas. However, the size and nature of this resource and its associated features are poorly known....
Saved in:
Published in: | Biodiversity and conservation 2005-12, Vol.14 (14), p.3327-3349 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-89e000137b6265bfb313dd57ff585b73215270ed8b1ada65a9530227a463a43a3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-89e000137b6265bfb313dd57ff585b73215270ed8b1ada65a9530227a463a43a3 |
container_end_page | 3349 |
container_issue | 14 |
container_start_page | 3327 |
container_title | Biodiversity and conservation |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | Gaston, Kevin J Warren, Philip H Thompson, Ken Smith, Richard M |
description | Domestic ('private') gardens constitute a substantial proportion of 'green space' in urban areas and hence are of potential significance for the maintenance of biodiversity in such areas. However, the size and nature of this resource and its associated features are poorly known. In this study, we provide the first detailed audit, using domestic gardens in the city of Sheffield as a model study system. Domestic gardens, the mean area of which was 151 m^sup 2^, cover approximately 33 km^sup 2^ or 23% of the predominantly urban area of the city. The smaller gardens contribute disproportionately to this total because, although individually they add little, they are large in number. Conversely, the regions of the city with proportionately more garden area contribute most to the total garden area of the city, although such regions are limited in number. Based on the findings of a telephone based survey, 14.4% of dwellings with gardens were estimated to have ponds, 26% to have nest-boxes, 29% to have compost heaps, 48% to hold trees more than 3 m tall, and 14% of dwellings were estimated to be home to one or more cats. Whilst the absolute frequency of these features is low to moderate, by extrapolation they nonetheless yield estimates for domestic gardens in Sheffield of a total of 25,200 ponds, 45,500 nest boxes, 50,750 compost heaps, 360,000 trees, and a population of 52,000 domestic cats. These results are considered in the context of the role of gardens in urban areas as habitats for wildlife and the implications for housing policy.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10531-004-9513-9 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_19273828</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>14767420</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-89e000137b6265bfb313dd57ff585b73215270ed8b1ada65a9530227a463a43a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkcFKAzEQhoMoWKsP4C14ED1EZ5JNsuut1FYLBUFbryG7m8Ut7W5NUtC3N6WevHgaBr4Z_p-PkEuEOwTQ9wFBCmQAGSskClYckQFKzVmhEY7JAAoFTCDKU3IWwgrSjVQ4IG9LX9qOPvYbF2Jb0Sfra9cFejN7v32giw9HJ1_RdZH2DY1pe3Wh3_nKUdvVtI2BjkLoq9ZGV9Ops3HnXTgnJ41dB3fxO4dkOZ0sxs9s_vI0G4_mrMoAIssLl2Kg0KXiSpZNKVDUtdRNI3NZasFRcg2uzku0tVXSFlIA59pmSthMWDEk14e_W99_7lJ-s2lD5dZr27l-FwwWXIuc5_-DmVY645DAqz_gKrXtUgmjJeZSiWwP4QGqfB-Cd43Z-nZj_bdBMHsZ5iDDJBlmL8MU4gdggnmL</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>751856340</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Urban Domestic Gardens (IV): The Extent of the Resource and its Associated Features</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Gaston, Kevin J ; Warren, Philip H ; Thompson, Ken ; Smith, Richard M</creator><creatorcontrib>Gaston, Kevin J ; Warren, Philip H ; Thompson, Ken ; Smith, Richard M</creatorcontrib><description>Domestic ('private') gardens constitute a substantial proportion of 'green space' in urban areas and hence are of potential significance for the maintenance of biodiversity in such areas. However, the size and nature of this resource and its associated features are poorly known. In this study, we provide the first detailed audit, using domestic gardens in the city of Sheffield as a model study system. Domestic gardens, the mean area of which was 151 m^sup 2^, cover approximately 33 km^sup 2^ or 23% of the predominantly urban area of the city. The smaller gardens contribute disproportionately to this total because, although individually they add little, they are large in number. Conversely, the regions of the city with proportionately more garden area contribute most to the total garden area of the city, although such regions are limited in number. Based on the findings of a telephone based survey, 14.4% of dwellings with gardens were estimated to have ponds, 26% to have nest-boxes, 29% to have compost heaps, 48% to hold trees more than 3 m tall, and 14% of dwellings were estimated to be home to one or more cats. Whilst the absolute frequency of these features is low to moderate, by extrapolation they nonetheless yield estimates for domestic gardens in Sheffield of a total of 25,200 ponds, 45,500 nest boxes, 50,750 compost heaps, 360,000 trees, and a population of 52,000 domestic cats. These results are considered in the context of the role of gardens in urban areas as habitats for wildlife and the implications for housing policy.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-3115</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-9710</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10531-004-9513-9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Nature B.V</publisher><subject>Composts ; Domestic animals ; Gardens & gardening ; Green infrastructure ; Housing policy ; Ponds ; Urban areas ; Wildlife habitats</subject><ispartof>Biodiversity and conservation, 2005-12, Vol.14 (14), p.3327-3349</ispartof><rights>Springer 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-89e000137b6265bfb313dd57ff585b73215270ed8b1ada65a9530227a463a43a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-89e000137b6265bfb313dd57ff585b73215270ed8b1ada65a9530227a463a43a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gaston, Kevin J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warren, Philip H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Ken</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Richard M</creatorcontrib><title>Urban Domestic Gardens (IV): The Extent of the Resource and its Associated Features</title><title>Biodiversity and conservation</title><description>Domestic ('private') gardens constitute a substantial proportion of 'green space' in urban areas and hence are of potential significance for the maintenance of biodiversity in such areas. However, the size and nature of this resource and its associated features are poorly known. In this study, we provide the first detailed audit, using domestic gardens in the city of Sheffield as a model study system. Domestic gardens, the mean area of which was 151 m^sup 2^, cover approximately 33 km^sup 2^ or 23% of the predominantly urban area of the city. The smaller gardens contribute disproportionately to this total because, although individually they add little, they are large in number. Conversely, the regions of the city with proportionately more garden area contribute most to the total garden area of the city, although such regions are limited in number. Based on the findings of a telephone based survey, 14.4% of dwellings with gardens were estimated to have ponds, 26% to have nest-boxes, 29% to have compost heaps, 48% to hold trees more than 3 m tall, and 14% of dwellings were estimated to be home to one or more cats. Whilst the absolute frequency of these features is low to moderate, by extrapolation they nonetheless yield estimates for domestic gardens in Sheffield of a total of 25,200 ponds, 45,500 nest boxes, 50,750 compost heaps, 360,000 trees, and a population of 52,000 domestic cats. These results are considered in the context of the role of gardens in urban areas as habitats for wildlife and the implications for housing policy.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><subject>Composts</subject><subject>Domestic animals</subject><subject>Gardens & gardening</subject><subject>Green infrastructure</subject><subject>Housing policy</subject><subject>Ponds</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Wildlife habitats</subject><issn>0960-3115</issn><issn>1572-9710</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkcFKAzEQhoMoWKsP4C14ED1EZ5JNsuut1FYLBUFbryG7m8Ut7W5NUtC3N6WevHgaBr4Z_p-PkEuEOwTQ9wFBCmQAGSskClYckQFKzVmhEY7JAAoFTCDKU3IWwgrSjVQ4IG9LX9qOPvYbF2Jb0Sfra9cFejN7v32giw9HJ1_RdZH2DY1pe3Wh3_nKUdvVtI2BjkLoq9ZGV9Ops3HnXTgnJ41dB3fxO4dkOZ0sxs9s_vI0G4_mrMoAIssLl2Kg0KXiSpZNKVDUtdRNI3NZasFRcg2uzku0tVXSFlIA59pmSthMWDEk14e_W99_7lJ-s2lD5dZr27l-FwwWXIuc5_-DmVY645DAqz_gKrXtUgmjJeZSiWwP4QGqfB-Cd43Z-nZj_bdBMHsZ5iDDJBlmL8MU4gdggnmL</recordid><startdate>20051201</startdate><enddate>20051201</enddate><creator>Gaston, Kevin J</creator><creator>Warren, Philip H</creator><creator>Thompson, Ken</creator><creator>Smith, Richard M</creator><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20051201</creationdate><title>Urban Domestic Gardens (IV): The Extent of the Resource and its Associated Features</title><author>Gaston, Kevin J ; Warren, Philip H ; Thompson, Ken ; Smith, Richard M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-89e000137b6265bfb313dd57ff585b73215270ed8b1ada65a9530227a463a43a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Composts</topic><topic>Domestic animals</topic><topic>Gardens & gardening</topic><topic>Green infrastructure</topic><topic>Housing policy</topic><topic>Ponds</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Wildlife habitats</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gaston, Kevin J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warren, Philip H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, Ken</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Smith, Richard M</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Biodiversity and conservation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gaston, Kevin J</au><au>Warren, Philip H</au><au>Thompson, Ken</au><au>Smith, Richard M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Urban Domestic Gardens (IV): The Extent of the Resource and its Associated Features</atitle><jtitle>Biodiversity and conservation</jtitle><date>2005-12-01</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>14</issue><spage>3327</spage><epage>3349</epage><pages>3327-3349</pages><issn>0960-3115</issn><eissn>1572-9710</eissn><abstract>Domestic ('private') gardens constitute a substantial proportion of 'green space' in urban areas and hence are of potential significance for the maintenance of biodiversity in such areas. However, the size and nature of this resource and its associated features are poorly known. In this study, we provide the first detailed audit, using domestic gardens in the city of Sheffield as a model study system. Domestic gardens, the mean area of which was 151 m^sup 2^, cover approximately 33 km^sup 2^ or 23% of the predominantly urban area of the city. The smaller gardens contribute disproportionately to this total because, although individually they add little, they are large in number. Conversely, the regions of the city with proportionately more garden area contribute most to the total garden area of the city, although such regions are limited in number. Based on the findings of a telephone based survey, 14.4% of dwellings with gardens were estimated to have ponds, 26% to have nest-boxes, 29% to have compost heaps, 48% to hold trees more than 3 m tall, and 14% of dwellings were estimated to be home to one or more cats. Whilst the absolute frequency of these features is low to moderate, by extrapolation they nonetheless yield estimates for domestic gardens in Sheffield of a total of 25,200 ponds, 45,500 nest boxes, 50,750 compost heaps, 360,000 trees, and a population of 52,000 domestic cats. These results are considered in the context of the role of gardens in urban areas as habitats for wildlife and the implications for housing policy.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Nature B.V</pub><doi>10.1007/s10531-004-9513-9</doi><tpages>23</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0960-3115 |
ispartof | Biodiversity and conservation, 2005-12, Vol.14 (14), p.3327-3349 |
issn | 0960-3115 1572-9710 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_19273828 |
source | Springer Nature |
subjects | Composts Domestic animals Gardens & gardening Green infrastructure Housing policy Ponds Urban areas Wildlife habitats |
title | Urban Domestic Gardens (IV): The Extent of the Resource and its Associated Features |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T00%3A52%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Urban%20Domestic%20Gardens%20(IV):%20The%20Extent%20of%20the%20Resource%20and%20its%20Associated%20Features&rft.jtitle=Biodiversity%20and%20conservation&rft.au=Gaston,%20Kevin%20J&rft.date=2005-12-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=14&rft.spage=3327&rft.epage=3349&rft.pages=3327-3349&rft.issn=0960-3115&rft.eissn=1572-9710&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10531-004-9513-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E14767420%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-89e000137b6265bfb313dd57ff585b73215270ed8b1ada65a9530227a463a43a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=751856340&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |