Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Individual study: Use of modified water sources by bats in a managed pine landscape

Published source details

Vindigni M.A., Morris A.D., Miller D.A. & Kalcounis-Rueppell M.C. (2009) Use of modified water sources by bats in a managed pine landscape. Forest Ecology and Management, 258, 2056-2061


This study is summarised as evidence for the intervention(s) shown on the right. The icon shows which synopsis it is relevant to.

Create artificial water sources Bat Conservation

A replicated, controlled, site comparison study in 2006–2007 of 15 artificial water sources within a plantation and three natural wetland sites in North Carolina, USA (Vindigni et al. 2009) found that artificial water sources of two types had higher bat activity than natural wetland sites. Bat activity was higher at heliponds (201 bat passes/site/night) and drainage ditches (ditch interior: 61 bat passes/site/night; ditch edge: 60 bat passes/site/night) than at natural wetland sites (21 bat passes/site/night). Seven bat species were recorded (see original paper for data for individual species). Heliponds were small ponds (12 m x 24 m x 2.5 m deep) used by helicopters for the suppression of forest fires. Drainage ditches (1–2.5 m wide and 0.6–1.2 m deep) were positioned every 80–100 m within and along the edge of tree stands. The natural wetland (350 ha) was adjacent to the plantation. On each of 116 nights in June–July 2006 and 2007, bat activity was sampled simultaneously with bat detectors at two of four sites rotated in a random order (five heliponds, five ditch interiors, five ditch edges, three natural wetlands).

(Summarised by Anna Berthinussen)