URBAN: Development of a Citizen Science Biomonitoring Program Based in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

References

• Au, J., Bagchi, P., Chen, B., Martinez, R., Dudley, S. A., & Sorger, G. J. (2000). Methodology for public monitoring of total coliforms, Escherichia coli and toxicity in waterways by Canadian high school students. Journal of Environmental Management, 58, 213–230. doi: 10.1006/jema.2000.0323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhattacharjee, Y. (2005). Citizen scientists supplement work of Cornell researchers. Science, 308, 1402–1403. doi: 10.1126/science.308.5727.1402
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bird Studies Canada. (2012). The Marsh Monitoring Program – 17 years and still evolving. The Marsh Monitor, No. 18, Spring 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Bois, S. T., Silander, J. A., & Mehrhoff, L. J. (2011). Invasive plant atlas of New England: The role of citizens in the science of invasive alien species detection. BioScience, 61, 763–770. doi: 10.1525/bio.2011.61.10.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonney, R., Cooper, C., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenburg, K., & Shirk, J. (2009). Citizen science: A developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. BioScience, 59, 977–984. doi: 10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brossard, D., Lewenstein, B., & Bonney, R. (2005). Scientific knowledge and attitude change: The impact of a citizen science project. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1099–1121. doi: 10.1080/09500690500069483
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chow-Fraser, P. (2006). Development of the Water Quality Index (WQI) to assess basin-wide land-use alteration on coastal marshes of the Laurentian Great Lakes. In T. P. Simon & P. M. Stewart (Eds.), Coastal wetland of the Laurentian Great Lakes: Health, habitat and indicators (pp. 137–167). Bloomington, IN: Authorhouse.
   Google Scholar
• Chow-Fraser, P., Croft, M., & Midwood, J. (2006). A guide to identify aquatic plants in Great Lakes coastal marshes. Hamilton, ON: Department of Biology, McMaster University.
   Google Scholar
• Chow-Fraser, P., Croft, M., Midwood, J., & Cvetkovic, M. (2011). The Volunteer Aquatic Plant Survey (VAPS) protocol to monitor health of Great Lakes coastal marshes. Hamilton, ON: Department of Biology, McMaster University.
   Google Scholar
• Crall, A. W., Newman, G. J., Jarnevich, C. S., Stohlgren, T. J., Waller, D. M., & Graham, J. (2010). Improving and integrating data on invasive species collected by citizen scientists. Biological Invasions, 12, 3419–3428. doi: 10.1007/s10530-010-9740-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crewe, T. L., & Timmermans, S. T. A. (2005). Assessing biological integrity of great lakes coastal wetlands using marsh bird and amphibian communities (Project # WETLAND3-EPA-01 Technical Report). Marsh Monitoring Program, Bird Studies Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Croft, M. V., & Chow-Fraser, P. (2007). Use and development of the wetland macrophyte index to detect degree of water-quality impairment in Great Lakes coastal marshes. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 33 (Special Issue 3), 172–197. doi: 10.3394/0380-1330(2007)33[172:UADOTW]2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croft, M. V., & Chow-Fraser, P. (2009). Non random sampling and its role in habitat conservation: A comparison of three wetland macrophyte sampling protocols. Biodiversity Conservation, 18, 2283–2306. doi: 10.1007/s10531-009-9588-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danielsen, F., Burgess, N. D., & Balmford, A. (2005). Monitoring matters: Examining the potential of locally-bases approaches. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 2507–2542. doi: 10.1007/s10531-005-8375-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeLuca, W. V., Studds, C. E., Rockwood, L. L., & Marra, P. P. (2004). Influence of land use on the integrity of marsh bird communities of Chesapeake Bay, USA. Wetlands, 24, 837–847. doi: 10.1672/0277-5212(2004)024[0837:IOLUOT]2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eden, S. (1996). Public participation in environmental policy: Considering scientific, counter-scientific, and non-scientific contributions. Public Understanding of Science, 5, 183–204. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/5/3/001
   Google Scholar
• Einsiedel, E. (1992). Framing science and technology in the Canadian press. Public Understanding of Science, 1, 89–101. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/1/1/011
   Google Scholar
• Environment Canada and Ontario Ministry of the Environment. (2011). Hamilton harbour: Area of concern status of beneficial use impairments. September 2010. Queen's Printer for Ontario.
   Google Scholar
• Faanes, C. A., & Bystrak, D. (1981). The role of observer bias in the North American breeding bird survey. Studies in Avian Biology, 6, 353–359.
   Google Scholar
• Fore, L. S., Paulsen, K., & O'Laughlin, K. (2001). Assessing the performance of volunteers in monitoring streams. Freshwater Biology, 46, 109–123. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2001.00640.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gage, M. S., Spivak, A., & Paradise, C. J. (2004). Effects of land use and disturbance on benthic insects in headwater streams draining small watersheds north of Charlotte, NC. Southeastern Naturalist, 3, 345–358. doi: 10.1656/1528-7092(2004)003[0345:EOLUAD]2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Genet, K. S., & Sargent, L. G. (2003). Evaluation of methods and data quality from a volunteer-based amphibian call survey. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 31, 703–714.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, F. C. (2009). Biocriteria for small southern-Ontario agricultural streams: The least-disturbed reference condition (M.Sc. thesis). Trent University, Peterborough, ON.
   Google Scholar
• Kendall, W. L., Peterjohn, B. G., & Sauer, J. R. (1996). First-time observer effects in the North American breeding bird survey. Auk, 113, 823–829. doi: 10.2307/4088860
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaren, M. A., & Cadman, M. D. (1999). Can novice volunteers provide credible data for bird surveys requiring song identification? Journal of Field Ornithology, 70, 481–490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royal Society. (1985). Public understanding of science. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Sauer, J. R., Peterjohn, B. G., & Link, W. A. (1994). Observer differences in the North American breeding bird survey. Auk, 111, 50–62. doi: 10.2307/4088504
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharpe, A., & Conrad, C. (2006). Community based ecological monitoring in Nova Scotia: Challenges and opportunities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 113, 395–409. doi: 10.1007/s10661-005-9091-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shirose, L. J., Bishop, C. A., Green, D. M., MacDonald, C. J., Brooks, R. J., & Helferty, N. J. (1997). Validation tests of an amphibian call count survey technique in Ontario, Canada. Herpetologica, 53, 312–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvertown, J. (2009). A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 24, 467–471. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2009.03.017
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitelaw, G., Vaughan, H., Craig, B., & Atkinson, D. (2003). Establishing the Canadian community monitoring network. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 88, 409–418. doi: 10.1023/A:1025545813057
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar