Bat boxes are not a silver bullet conservation tool

Griffiths, Stephen R.; Bender, Robert H.; Godinho, Lisa N.; Lentini, Pia E.; Lumsden, Linda F.; Robert, Kylie A.

doi:10.1111/mam.12097

Cited by 44 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a growing body of evidence questioning the general efficacy of traditional timber or plywood nest boxes as a conservation tool for communities of hollow-dependent fauna in disturbed landscapes [4,21,25,71,110]. Combined with the preliminary evidence of the uptake and use of chainsaw hollows by wildlife [31,37,38], this provides a positive impetus for collaboration between policy makers, conservation practitioners, the arboriculture industry, and managers of biodiversity offset programs, to empirically test the effectiveness of mechanically creating artificial hollows to provide well-insulated permanent structures within trees for hollow-dependent fauna.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, better-insulated nest boxes may still be used predominantly by common, abundant species. For example, long-term monitoring of bat boxes in Melbourne, Australia has shown that, despite the provision of boxes constructed from materials with a range of insulative properties (ranging from 12 mm plywood to 90 mm pine), box use was dominated by one widespread, urban-adapted species, Gould's wattled bat Chalinolobus gouldii (Gray, 1841) [71]. Further research is required to investigate whether there is a link between the thermal profiles in nest boxes (compared to tree hollows) deployed in disturbed landscapes and their disproportionate level of use by widespread, highly adaptable species of birds [29,93,94] and mammals [21,71,95,96].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, long-term monitoring of bat boxes in Melbourne, Australia has shown that, despite the provision of boxes constructed from materials with a range of insulative properties (ranging from 12 mm plywood to 90 mm pine), box use was dominated by one widespread, urban-adapted species, Gould's wattled bat Chalinolobus gouldii (Gray, 1841) [71]. Further research is required to investigate whether there is a link between the thermal profiles in nest boxes (compared to tree hollows) deployed in disturbed landscapes and their disproportionate level of use by widespread, highly adaptable species of birds [29,93,94] and mammals [21,71,95,96]. Field-based studies examining rates of occupation of chainsaw hollows and log hollows by target species versus undesirable exotic species would be of great interest, particularly in urban and peri-urban landscapes where nest box programs are often undertaken by land managers and conservation-focused community groups [4,97].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…comm.). The boxes are used by a range of native fauna, including arboreal mammals (sugar glider Petaurus breviceps Waterhouse, 1839, common ringtail possum Pseudocheirus peregrinus (Boddaert, 1785), common brushtail possum Trichosurus vulpecula (Kerr, 1792)), insectivorous bats (Gould's wattled bat Chalinolobus gouldii (Gray, 1841), white-striped free-tailed bat Austronomus australis (Gray, 1839) [71]), hollow-nesting birds (musk lorikeet Glossopsitta concinna (Shaw, 1791), rainbow lorikeet Trichoglossus moluccanus (Gmelin, 1788), Australian wood duck Chenonetta jubata (Latham, 1801), striated pardalote Pardalotus striatus (Gmelin, 1789)), plus the introduced common myna Acridotheres tristis (Linnaeus, 1766) (G. Parras, pers. comm.).…”

Section: Study Sitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Chainsaw-Carved Cavities Better Mimic the Thermal Properties of Natural Tree Hollows than Nest Boxes and Log Hollows

Griffiths

Lentini

Semmens

et al. 2018

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The creation of supplementary habitats that effectively mimic the physical and thermal characteristics of natural tree hollows should be a key priority for landscape restoration and biodiversity offset programs. Here, we compare the thermal profiles of natural tree hollows with three types of artificial hollows designed for small marsupial gliders and tree-roosting insectivorous bats: (1) 'chainsaw hollows' carved directly into the trunks and branches of live trees, (2) 'log hollows', and (3) plywood nest boxes. Chainsaw hollows had thermal profiles that were similar to natural tree hollows: they were consistently warmer than ambient conditions at night, while remaining cooler than ambient during the day. In contrast, glider and bat boxes had the opposite pattern of heating and cooling, being slightly cooler than ambient at night and substantially hotter during the day. Glider log hollows had greater variation in internal temperatures compared to natural hollows and chainsaw hollows, but fluctuated less than glider boxes. Our results provide the first empirical evidence that artificial hollows carved directly into live trees can produce thermally stable supplementary habitats that could potentially buffer hollow-dependent fauna from weather extremes; whereas, poorly insulated plywood nest boxes produce lower-quality thermal environments. Together these findings provide positive impetus for stakeholders involved in conservation management and biodiversity offset programs to consider trialing chainsaw hollows in situations where target fauna require well-insulated supplementary habitats.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Sitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Chainsaw-Carved Cavities Better Mimic the Thermal Properties of Natural Tree Hollows than Nest Boxes and Log Hollows

Griffiths

Lentini

Semmens

et al. 2018

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Occupancy of these bat boxes can be affected by canopy cover, box design, level of human disturbance, and adequate solar exposure (White, 2004, Rueegger et al, 2018. Moreover, not all species are likely to use bat boxes at equal frequencies (Griffiths et al, 2017). However, little attention has been given to more recent methods for either more affordable bat species identification or monitoring of deployed bat boxes using non-invasive smartphone technology.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Smartphones as a Non-Invasive Surveying Tool to Monitor Bats

Blackburn¹,

Unger²

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bats are important keystone species which provide ecosystem services by consuming a variety of insects and agricultural pests. Many native bat species are currently threatened with either habitat loss or emerging infectious diseases, including White Nose Syndrome. Therefore, there is a need to develop survey approaches which increase accessibility to citizen scientists and researchers alike to monitor populations, such as with emerging, affordable smartphone enabled technologies. We assessed the efficacy of a smartphone enabled handheld bat detector (Wildlife Acoustics Echo Meter Touch 2) to record and identify echolocation calls of common bat species on a seminatural area of Wingate Campus, a small university in the Charlotte metropolitan area, North Carolina. We further utilized smartphone technology to record seasonal internal temperature and luminosity fluctuations within deployed bat boxes using HOBO thermo-loggers. Lastly, we used a smartphone enabled WIFI endoscope inspection camera to periodically check occupancy of bat boxes. We identified five species of bats, from 55 recordings during Spring and Fall of 2018 (4/2/2018 to 10/28/2018), including the big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), Mexican free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis), silver haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), and northern yellow bat (Lasiurus intermedius) at our study site. Temperature and luminosity of bat boxes varied depending on location (full or partial sun), while the endoscope allowed for non-invasive monitoring of bat boxes, of which none were found to be occupied. The purpose of this study is to use smartphone enabled technology as a non-invasive surveying tool for identification and monitoring of bats.

show abstract

What makes a good bat box? How box occupancy depends on box characteristics and landscape‐level variables

Pschonny

Leidinger

Leitl³

et al. 2022

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bat populations are in steep decline and presently, 16% of all species are classified as ‘threatened’. One main driver identified for this decline is the loss of natural roosting opportunities, caused by the removal of natural habitats. Installation of bat boxes is one solution to compensate for the lack of natural roosting opportunities. Current recommendations for box design emphasize low maintenance costs and are rarely based on empirical evidence. We investigated occupancy of 13,634 bat boxes in northern Bavaria, Germany. In our study, boxes differed in type, age and mounting height, as well as in maximum community age, that is the length of time a group of boxes had been installed in a particular place, the size of box groups and the distance to the next box in the surrounding area, that is box isolation. Our results showed that box occupancy depended on box type and bat species. As a case study, we analysed the two most common species found within the investigated boxes, Pipistrellus pipistrellus and Myotis nattereri, in more detail. Both species showed preference to a voluminous box that had a narrow entrance (‘Gable box’ 14 mm). For P. pipistrellus, only box type affected occupancy, whereas for M. nattereri, the relationship between box type and box age was important. Older boxes and boxes in areas with higher maximum community age of boxes showed higher box occupancy by bats. Box occupancy decreased with the distance between adjacent box groups (‘box isolation’). High mounting height showed a tendency for increased box occupancy, but the effect was only weakly significant. Because of the species‐specific responses in our study, we suggest installing a combination of different box types, including at least one box type with a narrow entrance (14 mm). Boxes should be placed as box groups of three to four boxes, and there should be short distances between adjacent box groups. We also recommend installing new box groups close to areas of high maximum community age of boxes.

show abstract

Bat boxes are not a silver bullet conservation tool

Cited by 44 publications

References 13 publications

Chainsaw-Carved Cavities Better Mimic the Thermal Properties of Natural Tree Hollows than Nest Boxes and Log Hollows

Chainsaw-Carved Cavities Better Mimic the Thermal Properties of Natural Tree Hollows than Nest Boxes and Log Hollows

Smartphones as a Non-Invasive Surveying Tool to Monitor Bats

What makes a good bat box? How box occupancy depends on box characteristics and landscape‐level variables

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About