Two Environmental Factors That Influence Usage of Bat Houses in Managed Forests of Southwest Oregon

Dillingham, Colin P.; Cross, Stephen P.; Dillingham, Peter W.

doi:10.2307/3536718

Cited by 14 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kiser and Kiser () reported a 20% occupancy rate on trees, whereas White () found no use of roosts mounted on trees. In contrast, several studies have shown high occupancy rates for roosts attached to trees (61%, Dillingham et al ; 90%, Siders ). A high occupancy rate of 85% was found for roosts placed on snags (Chambers et al ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Eight studies placed multiple roosts on single trees in each cardinal direction (Table ), but only 2 reported the direction(s) used most often. Dillingham et al () found that south‐ and east‐facing boxes were selected and Horncastle et al (, ) found north‐facing roosts were avoided. Horncastle et al (, ) found higher rates of occupancy in boxes facing south and west in 2004.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Thinking outside the box: A review of artificial roosts for bats

Mering

Chambers

2014

Wildl. Soc. Bull.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial roosts designed to attract bats have been used to increase populations, aid seed dispersal, and control insects. More important from a conservation perspective, artificial roosts provide habitat where natural roosts have been lost. Although artificial roosts have been widely used, much of the information on species that use artificial roosts, roost design, and placement is anecdotal and poorly reported. We reviewed the existing literature on artificial roosts to summarize current research and inform research and management decisions. From 47 publications and reports, we identified 48 types of structures used by 59 species. Roosts were constructed from wood (66.7%), concrete (8.3%), or other materials (25.0%) and varied in size and shape from small-volume wood boxes (0.002 m 3 ) to large (6 m tall) free-standing structures. Variables most often considered in the context of attracting bats were aspect, substrate, and mount location; few studies measured height or microclimate. Colonization rates ranged from 7% to 100%. Bats commonly used structures as solitary (21 species) or social (breeding or maternity; 21 species) roosts. Most species documented to use artificial roosts are vespertilionids (73%), have the International Union for Conservation of Nature's designation of least concern (93%), and roost in tree cavities or buildings. Three species are designated as endangered (Myotis sodalis) or near threatened (M. bechsteinii, M. dasycneme). Artificial roosts should be constructed and installed to mimic natural roosts, emphasize requirements of target species, and exclude non-target species. Monitoring species composition and identifying effects of roost density will help determine conservation impacts of artificial roosts. Ó 2014 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking outside the box: A review of artificial roosts for bats

Mering

Chambers

2014

Wildl. Soc. Bull.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…None of the vegetation characteristics we measured influenced selection for roosts, perhaps because our sites were recently thinned with similar canopy cover (resin: 59 ± 5%, wood: 58 ± 5%) and basal area (resin: 19 ± 2 m 2 /ha, wood: 22 ± 2 m 2 /ha). In other studies, open canopy cover was associated with roost use perhaps because differences in sun exposure affected microclimate (Brittingham and Williams 2000, Dillingham et al 2003, White 2004) but the lack of variation in our study may have limited our ability to detect effects of canopy cover.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…Within clusters of resin roosts, bats used east‐ and south‐facing resin roosts where average temperatures were higher, suggesting that bats selected warmer roosts. Bats used south‐ and east‐facing roosts more often than north or west aspects in an array of vegetation types and climates (Brittingham and Williams 2000, Dillingham et al 2003, Flaquer et al 2006). However, Horncastle et al (2008) found bats used different aspects during different years.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial roosts for tree‐roosting bats in northern Arizona

Mering

Chambers

2012

Wildlife Society Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bats use large (69 cm mean diameter) ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) snags for maternity roosts in northern Arizona. Anthropogenic causes have altered forest structure, decreasing density of large snags. To examine use of artificial roosts for bats in these forests, we selected 26 sites and 2 treatments (clustered, single) using 1 type of roost (resin or wood) per site. At each site, we installed 4 roosts on ponderosa pine trees with a cluster of 3 roosts (south-, east-, or west-facing; <20 m apart) and a single roost (south-facing) 250-350 m away. We checked roosts every 2 weeks for use (guano or bats) and monitored internal temperatures every 2 hours from May through September in 2009 and 2010. Bats used 52% of roosts (19 roosts in 2009, 49 in 2010) at least once and colonized resin roosts sooner than wood roosts. Sites with clustered resin roosts were used more than single roosts. Bats used south-and east-facing resin roosts more and these had warmer average temperatures than west-facing roosts. We captured 47 bats of 5 species using artificial roosts. We only captured male bats from roosts in 2009, juveniles and females were also captured in 2010 but no maternity roosts were documented. We recommend that resin roosts placed in clusters on live trees be used to supplement natural roosts in ponderosa pine forests. Because use increased with time we suspect artificial roosts may be used for several years before establishment of maternity colonies. Artificial roosts require annual maintenance (e.g., waterproofing) to maintain function and can be expensive to install and maintain. ß

show abstract

“…There is some overseas evidence to suggest that, in areas where natural roosts are limited in number, bat uptake of roost boxes may be higher (Smith & Agnew 2002;Ciechanowski 2005). Roost boxes may also be more effective when placed near the roosts they aim to replace (White 2004) and when their aspect orientation is considered in relation to sunlight (Dillingham et al 2003). However, they should be considered only a temporary solution for areas undergoing restoration and that currently have few suitable roost trees.…”

Section: Artificial Roost Boxesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Roads and wildlife: the need for evidence-based decisions; New Zealand bats as a case study

Jones¹,

Borkin²,

Smith³

2019

NZJE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Roads and associated land transport activities can affect a wide range of indigenous terrestrial vertebrate species. National legislation, particularly the Resource Management Act 1991, requires that developers 'avoid, remedy or mitigate' the adverse environmental effects of their activities. How these effects are identified and managed in New Zealand varies because regulators and land transport contractors deal with these issues on a case-by-case basis. In recent years, the effects of new road projects on long-tailed bats (Chalinolobus tuberculatus) have been receiving attention. In this review, we summarise evidence on likely road infrastructure impacts on bat populations and the efficacy of mitigation approaches, used both internationally and in New Zealand. Our findings indicate that most mitigation methods have little, if any, scientific evidence of their effectiveness. We recommend that such evidence is essential to guide investment in mitigating road effects on bats in New Zealand. Given that such evidence is rare, future investment should be guided by an adaptive management framework that is justified by strong, inferential, evidence-based logic, and accompanied by robust, appropriately designed monitoring planned, in advance, to allow an objective assessment of a method's effectiveness in mitigating an impact. Because such monitoring may be beyond what a single development project can realistically achieve, we suggest the development of a collaborative funding model for supporting the testing and development of mitigation methods. This work is likely to have a significant influence on the future planning and design of road infrastructure projects to minimise the impacts on bats and, more generally, on any native wildlife populations under threat from infrastructure development.

show abstract

Two Environmental Factors That Influence Usage of Bat Houses in Managed Forests of Southwest Oregon

Cited by 14 publications

References 8 publications

Thinking outside the box: A review of artificial roosts for bats

Thinking outside the box: A review of artificial roosts for bats

Artificial roosts for tree‐roosting bats in northern Arizona

Roads and wildlife: the need for evidence-based decisions; New Zealand bats as a case study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About