Action

Action Synopsis: Bat Conservation About Actions

Retain forested corridors in logged areas

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    55%
  • Certainty
    40%
  • Harms
    0%

Source countries

Key messages

  • Three studies evaluated the effects of retaining forested corridors in logged areas on bat populations. The three studies were in the USA.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

  • Abundance (1 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that bat activity (relative abundance) was significantly higher along the edges of forested corridors than in corridor interiors or in adjacent logged stands, which had similar activity levels.

BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES)  

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, site comparison study in 2003–2006 of 27 radio-tracked Seminole bats Lasiurus seminolus in loblolly pine Pinus taeda plantations in South Carolina, USA (Hein et al. 2008) found that forested corridors had more Seminole bat roosts than logged mid-rotation tree stands or mature forest. More male and female Seminole bat roosts were in forested corridors (male bats: 25 roosts, 61%; female bats: 31 roosts, 63%) than in logged mid-rotation stands (male bats: 14 roosts, 34%; female bats: 14 roosts, 29%) or mature forest (male bats: 2 roosts, 5%; female bats: 4 roosts, 8%). Distance to the nearest forested corridor was also negatively related to roost site selection (data reported as statistical model results). The study area (41,365 ha) was intensively managed for pine production. Mid-rotation logged stands were 12–22 years old. Forested corridors (100–200 m wide) consisted of mature pine (>23 years old) and/or mixed hardwood (>50 years old). Bats were caught with mist nets at nine ponds in open habitat from May–August in 2003–2006. Twenty-seven adult Seminole bats (10 males, 17 females) were tracked to 90 day roosts in the canopy of live pine trees.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A replicated, site comparison study in 2003–2006 of 53 radio-tracked evening bats Nycticeius humeralis in loblolly pine Pinus taeda plantations in South Carolina, USA (Hein et al. 2009) found that forested corridors had more male but fewer female evening bat roosts than logged mid-rotation tree stands. More male but fewer female evening bat roosts were in forested corridors (male: 12 roosts, 39%; female: eight roosts, 18%) than in logged mid-rotation stands (male: six roosts, 19%; female: nine roosts, 21%). The greatest number of roosts were in mature forest (male: 13 roosts, 42%; female: 27 roosts, 61%). Distance to the nearest forested corridor was negatively related to roost site selection in male bats but not females (data reported as statistical model results). The study area (41,365 ha) was intensively managed for pine production. Mid-rotation logged stands were 12–22 years old. Forested corridors (100–200 m wide) consisted of mature pine (>23 years old) and/or mixed hardwood (>50 years old). Bats were caught with mist nets at nine ponds in open habitat from May–August in 2003–2006. Fifty-three adult evening bats (26 males, 27 females) were tracked to 75 day roosts in trees.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A replicated, paired sites study in 2004–2005 in 32 pairs of forested corridors and logged loblolly pine Pinus taeda stands in South Carolina, USA (Hein et al. 2009) found that forested corridor edges had higher overall bat activity than corridor interiors or adjacent logged tree stands. Higher bat activity was recorded along forested corridor edges (54 bat passes/detector/night) than in corridor interiors (7 bat passes/detector/night) or in adjacent logged stands (12 bat passes/detector/night). Six bat species were recorded in total (see original paper for data for individual species). The study area (41,365 ha) was intensively managed for pine production. Thirty-two forested corridors (100–200 m wide) were paired with adjacent logged stands of a similar age. At each of 32 pairs of sites, bat activity was simultaneously recorded with five bat detectors (one on each corridor edge, one in the corridor interior, and two in adjacent logged stands) from two full consecutive nights in June–August 2004 or 2005.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2019) Bat Conservation. Pages 67-140 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, N. Ockendon, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2019. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

 

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Bat Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bat Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust