DOCSLIB.ORG

Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Forest Service Assessments for Five General Technical Report NC-260 Technical Guide Forest Bat Species in the 2006 Eastern United States Front Cover: Illustrations by Fiona Reid, Ontario, Canada ©. Species from top: Pipistrellus subflavus, Myotis leibii, Myotis austroriparius, Myotis septentrionalis, Nycticeius humeralis. United States Department of Agriculture Conservation Forest Service Assessments for Five General Technical Report NC-260 Technical Guide Forest Bat Species in the 2006 Eastern United States Edited by Frank R. Thompson, III Thompson, Frank R., III, ed. 2006. Conservation assessments for five forest bat species in the Eastern United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-260. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station. 82 p. Assesses the status, distribution, conservation, and management considerations for five Regional Forester Sensitive Species of forest bats on national forests in the Eastern United States: eastern pipistrelle, evening bat, southeastern myotis, eastern small-footed myotis, and northern long-eared bat. Includes information on the taxonomy, description, life history, habitat distribution, status, and population biology of each species. KEY WORDS: conservation status, habitat use, life history, Myotis austroriparius (southeastern myotis), Myotis leibii (eastern small-footed myotis), Myotis septentrionalis (northern long-eared bat), Pipistrellus subflavus (eastern pipistrelle), Nycticeius humeralis (evening bat), Region 9, USDA Forest Service Disclaimer The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Contents Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Conservation Assessment: Myotis austroriparius Eastern United States (Southeastern Myotis) in the Eastern United States Frank R. Thompson, III, Editor.....................................1 Sybill Amelon, Mark Yates, and Craig Pullins ...........43 Status and Conservation of Five Forest Bat Species in the Conservation Assessment: Myotis leibii (Eastern Small- Eastern United States: Issues and Concerns Footed Myotis) in the Eastern United States Sybill Amelon ...............................................................3 Sybill Amelon and Dirk Burhans ................................57 Conservation Assessment: Pipistrellus subflavus (Eastern Conservation Assessment: Myotis septentrionalis (Northern Pipistrelle) in the Eastern United States Long-Eared Bat) in the Eastern United States Sybill Amelon .............................................................11 Sybill Amelon and Dirk Burhans ................................69 Conservation Assessment: Nycticeius humeralis (Evening Bat) in the Eastern United States Sybill Amelon and Dirk Burhans ................................31 Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States i ii Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States Frank R. Thompson, III, Editor1 information on other States within the range of each of the five species. Because of recent advances in technology and the increased focus on bat conservation, several new studies related Preface to the five focal species have been completed or are in progress. The assessment is organized into six chapters. The first The primary goals of this assessment are to consolidate and chapter provides some general background information synthesize existing information on the status, distribution, on forest bats and summarizes information needs for the conservation, and management considerations for five species conservation of the five species addressed in the assessment. of forest bats on national forests in Region 9: Pipistrellus Because of a lack of demographic information on any of these subflavus (eastern pipistrelle), Nycticeius humeralis (evening populations to assess viability, research needs and priorities bat), Myotis austroriparius (southeastern myotis), M. leibii are included in the background section from the perspective (eastern small-footed myotis), and M. septentrionalis (northern of theoretical constructs and approaches to obtaining the long-eared bat). These species are listed as Regional Forester additional information needed to assess conservation and Sensitive Species on one or more forests of the Eastern Region. management for these species. The five subsequent chapters The regional forester listing affords protection for a species on cover taxonomy, description, life history, habitat distribution, the national forests for which it is listed. The forest’s goal is to status, and population biology of each species. protect and improve the species’ habitat where management This assessment was prepared at the request of Region 9 practices warrant consideration of special habitat needs and to of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. ensure that it does not become threatened or endangered. The assessment highlights information needs of national forests A review of the status, biology, and management but should also be of interest to anyone in bat conservation. of M. leibii was previously completed for the George Each chapter generally follows the format of other conservation Washington and Jefferson National Forests in Region 8 assessments for species in Region 9 of the USDA Forest (Erdle and Hobson 2001). A 1999 report produced by Bat Service. Manuscripts were prepared by the authors, submitted Conservation International (Bat Conservation International to the editor, and reviewed by individuals with bat biology and 1999) summarizes information about forest bats, provides an conservation expertise in a blind, peer-review process overseen overview of knowledge about relationships between forest by the editor. bats and forest management practices, identifies practices for This conservation assessment consolidates and synthesizes enhancing bat habitat, provides information on key limiting existing information for five species of forest bats. It does factors for Indiana bats (M. sodalis), presents information not represent a management decision by the USDA Forest on the North American Bat Conservation Plan, and includes Service. Although authors and reviewers used the best scientific excerpts from the land management plans of many national information available and consulted subject experts to prepare forests. In the current assessment, authors incorporated recent this document, it is expected that new information will arise. information from research activities that occurred in subsequent In the spirit of continuous learning and adaptive management, years and summarized information on biology, natural history, readers who have information that may help conserve the and habitat necessary to address conservation issues for the subject taxon, are encouraged to contact the Eastern Region of five species. This assessment focuses on the national forests the USDA Forest Service Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive and States represented in the Eastern Region. It also includes Species Program at 310 Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, WI, 53203. 1 Project leader, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, Columbia, MO. Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States Acknowledgments References I thank the authors for their contributions; Fiona Reid for Bat Conservation International. 1999. Bats in eastern illustrations of the species; Bat Conservation International woodlands. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture and Keith Geluso for distribution maps; Susan Loeb, Richard Forest Service; U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish Clawson, and Tommy Parker for their review of the assessment; & Wildlife Service; National Council for Air and Stream the North Central Research Station Communications Group for Improvement. 56 p. http://www.batcon.org. assistance with the production of the publication; and Region 9 and the Shawnee National Forest for their support of the Erdle, S.Y.; Hobson, C.S. 2001. Current status and conservation project. strategy for the eastern small-footed myotis (Myotis leibii). Tech. Rep. 00-19. Reston, VA: Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural Heritage. 17 p. Conservation Assessments for Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States Status and Conservation of Five Forest Bat Species in the Eastern United States: Issues and Concerns Sybill Amelon1 endangered (Myotis sodalis, M. grisescens, Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus, and C. t. ingens); at least another eight Bats
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bat Conservation 2021
    Bat Conservation Global evidence for the effects of interventions 2021 Edition Anna Berthinussen, Olivia C. Richardson & John D. Altringham Conservation Evidence Series Synopses 2 © 2021 William J. Sutherland This document should be cited as: Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2021) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Cover image: Leucistic lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros hibernating in a former water mill, Wales, UK. Credit: Thomas Kitching Digital material and resources associated with this synopsis are available at https://www.conservationevidence.com/ 3 Contents Advisory Board.................................................................................... 11 About the authors ............................................................................... 12 Acknowledgements ............................................................................. 13 1. About this book ........................................................... 14 1.1 The Conservation Evidence project ................................................................................. 14 1.2 The purpose of Conservation Evidence synopses ............................................................ 14 1.3 Who this synopsis is for ................................................................................................... 15 1.4 Background .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bat Echolocation Research a Handbook for Planning and Conducting Acoustic Studies Second Edition
    Bat Echolocation Research A handbook for planning and conducting acoustic studies Second Edition Erin E. Fraser, Alexander Silvis, R. Mark Brigham, and Zenon J. Czenze EDITORS Bat Echolocation Research A handbook for planning and conducting acoustic studies Second Edition Editors Erin E. Fraser, Alexander Silvis, R. Mark Brigham, and Zenon J. Czenze Citation Fraser et al., eds. 2020. Bat Echolocation Research: A handbook for planning and conducting acoustic studies. Second Edition. Bat Conservation International. Austin, Texas, USA. Tucson, Arizona 2020 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License ii Table of Contents Table of Figures ....................................................................................................................................................................... vi Table of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................................ vii Contributing Authors .......................................................................................................................................................... viii Dedication…… .......................................................................................................................................................................... xi Foreword…….. ..........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 33245 02 Inside Front Cover
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by KnowledgeBank at OSU 186 BATS OF RAVENNA VOL. 106 Bats of Ravenna Training and Logistics Site, Portage and Trumbull Counties, Ohio1 VIRGIL BRACK, JR.2 AND JASON A. DUFFEY, Center for North American Bat Research and Conservation, Department of Ecology and Organismal Biology, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN 47089; Environmental Solutions & Innovations, Inc., 781 Neeb Road, Cincinnati, OH 45233 ABSTRACT. Six species of bats (n = 272) were caught at Ravenna Training and Logistics Site during summer 2004: 122 big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus), 100 little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus), 26 red bats (Lasiurus borealis), 19 northern myotis (Myotis septentrionalis), three hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus), and two eastern pipistrelles (Pipistrellus subflavus). Catch was 9.7 bats/net site (SD = 10.2) and 2.4 bats/net night (SD = 2.6). No bats were captured at two net sites and only one bat was caught at one site; the largest captures were 33, 36, and 37 individuals. Five of six species were caught at two sites, 2.7 (SD = 1.4) species were caught per net site, and MacArthur’s diversity index was 2.88. Evidence of reproduction was obtained for all species. Chi-square tests indicated no difference in catch of males and reproductive females in any species or all species combined. Evidence was found of two maternity colonies each of big brown bats and little brown myotis. Capture of big brown bats (X2 = 53.738; P <0.001), little brown myotis (X2 = 21.900; P <0.001), and all species combined (X2 = 49.066; P <0.001) was greatest 1 – 2 hours after sunset.
    [Show full text]
  • Bat Distribution in the Forested Region of Northwestern California
    BAT DISTRIBUTION IN THE FORESTED REGION OF NORTHWESTERN CALIFORNIA Prepared by: Prepared for: Elizabeth D. Pierson, Ph.D. California Department of Fish and Game William E. Rainey, Ph.D. Wildlife Management Division 2556 Hilgard Avenue Non Game Bird and Mammal Section Berkeley, CA 9470 1416 Ninth Street (510) 845-5313 Sacramento, CA 95814 (510) 548-8528 FAX [email protected] Contract #FG-5123-WM November 2007 Pierson and Rainey – Forest Bats of Northwestern California 2 Pierson and Rainey – Forest Bats of Northwestern California 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Bat surveys were conducted in 1997 in the forested regions of northwestern California. Based on museum and literature records, seventeen species were known to occur in this region. All seventeen were identified during this study: fourteen by capture and release, and three by acoustic detection only (Euderma maculatum, Eumops perotis, and Lasiurus blossevillii). Mist-netting was conducted at nineteen sites in a six county area. There were marked differences among sites both in the number of individuals captured per unit effort and the number of species encountered. The five most frequently encountered species in net captures were: Myotis yumanensis, Lasionycteris noctivagans, Myotis lucifugus, Eptesicus fuscus, and Myotis californicus; the five least common were Pipistrellus hesperus, Myotis volans, Lasiurus cinereus, Myotis ciliolabrum, and Tadarida brasiliensis. Twelve species were confirmed as having reproductive populations in the study area. Sampling sites were assigned to a habitat class: young growth (YG), multi-age stand (MA), old growth (OG), and rock dominated (RK). There was a significant response to habitat class for the number of bats captured, and a trend towards differences for number of species detected.
    [Show full text]
  • New Records of Northern Bats (Eptesicus Nilssonii)
    23 Nyctalus (N.F.), Berlin 19 (2018), Heft 1, S. 23-27 New records of Northern bats ( Eptesicus nilssonii ) in boreal clear cuts emphasize the value of green-tree retention for conservation 1HXH1DFKZHLVHGHU1RUGÁHGHUPDXV Eptesicus nilssonii ) unterstreichen den Erhalt von Einzelbäumen auf borealen Kahlschlägen Von SIMON T HORN , Rauhenebrach, SEBASTIAN S EIBOLD , Freising, OSMO HEIKKALA , MATTI KOIVULA , PARVATHY VENUGOPAL , JARI KOUKI (alle Joensuu) Abstract ,QFUHDVLQJ PDQDJHPHQW LQWHQVLÀFDWLRQ RI IRUHVWV ZRUOGZL - et al. 2005). For example, increasingly intensive de has decreased biodiversity across multiple taxonomical forest management has altered forest biodiversity groups. To limit these losses conservationists promote green- across multiple taxonomical groups ( PAILLET et al. WUHHUHWHQWLRQLQFRPELQDWLRQZLWKSUHVFULEHGÀUHVLQERUHDO forests. We evaluated the potential value of retention trees on 2010). To limit these losses various retention ap- prescribed-burned clear cuttings for bats, an important target proaches have been proposed ( LINDENMAYER et al. WD[RQLQQDWXUHFRQVHUYDWLRQ%HQHDWKORRVHEDUNRIÀUHNLOOHG 2012). In case of boreal forests across the north ern retention trees we found two adult male individuals of Epte- sicus nilssonii roosting in less than two meters’ height. This hemisphere retention approaches are increasing- ÀQGLQJXQGHUOLQHVWKHLPSRUWDQFHRIWUHHUHWHQWLRQRQFOHDU O\FRPPRQO\FRPELQHGZLWKSUHVFULEHGÀUHRI cuttings for nature conservation in boreal forests. varying severity to mimic natural-disturbance dynamics ( GRANSTRÖM 2001; RYAN et al. 2013). Keywords 6XFKDFRPELQDWLRQ\LHOGVVLJQLÀFDQWLPSDFWLQ conservation of rare saproxylic beetles ( HYVÄ - conservation, forest management, Eptesicus nilssonii , pre- VFULEHGÀUHV)LQODQG RINEN et al. 2006), birds and small mammals (FONTAINE & KENNEDY 2012). Hence, variable Zusammenfassung retention has become a common conservation measure at clear cuts in Fennoscandia since the Durch eine Intensivierung der Waldbewirtschaftung sind die mid-1990’s ( GUSTAFSSON et al. 2010).
    [Show full text]
  • NORTHERN LONG-EARED BAT INTERIM CONFERENCE and PLANNING GUIDANCE USFWS Regions 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6
    US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE NORTHERN LONG-EARED BAT INTERIM CONFERENCE AND PLANNING GUIDANCE USFWS Regions 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6 January 6, 2014 NORTHERN LONG-EARED BAT INTERIM CONFERENCE AND PLANNING GUIDANCE On October 2, 2013, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) proposed the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis; NLEB) for listing as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The purpose of this document is to address the immediate information needs for section 7 conferences and conservation planning for the NLEB should it be listed. Please consider the following: • The information and guidance in this document should not be considered final because the FWS is still making a listing decision for NLEB. • This document provides the FWS’ current suggestions and recommendations for NLEB- consideration in project planning. This document should not be considered mandatory, unless where stated by regulation (i.e., conference requirements). • Much of the support and documentation (e.g., citations) for this document is contained in the attached appendices. It is important to note that, due to the preliminary nature of the state of knowledge of the NLEB, the approaches and information contained within this guidance and appendices may change as we gain additional information on the NLEB and its habitat. Species Overview This section provides a brief overview of the NLEB ecology and threats. Please reference the listing proposal or the FWS website for further information. This information may be found at: http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nlba/index.html. We recommend that project proponents or their representatives coordinate with the appropriate FWS Field Office to more clearly define the range and suitable habitat for their particular state/region as some differences in state/regional suitability criteria may be warranted.
    [Show full text]
  • Nine Species of Bats, Each Relying on Specific Summer and Winter Habitats
    Species Guide to Vermont Bats • Vermont has nine species of bats, each relying on specific summer and winter habitats. • Six species hibernate in caves and mines during the winter (cave bats). • During the summer, two species primarily roost in structures (house bats), • And four roost in trees and rocky outcrops (forest bats). • Three species migrate south to warmer climates for the winter and roost in trees during the summer (migratory bats). • This guide is designed to help familiarize you with the physical characteristics of each species. • Bats should only be handled by trained professionals with gloves. • For more information, contact a bat biologist at the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department or go to www.vtfishandwildlife.com Vermont’s Nine Species of Bats Cave Bats Migratory Tree Bats Eastern small-footed bat Silver-haired bat State Threatened Big brown bat Northern long-eared bat Indiana bat Federally Threatened State Endangered J Chenger Federally and State J Kiser Endangered J Kiser Hoary bat Little brown bat Tri-colored bat Eastern red bat State State Endangered Endangered Bat Anatomy Dr. J. Scott Altenbach http://jhupressblog.com House Bats Big brown bat Little brown bat These are the two bat species that are most commonly found in Vermont buildings. The little brown bat is state endangered, so care must be used to safely exclude unwanted bats from buildings. Follow the best management practices found at www.vtfishandwildlife.com/wildlife_bats.cfm House Bats Big brown bat, Eptesicus fuscus Big thick muzzle Weight 13-25 g Total Length (with Tail) 106 – 127 mm Long silky Wingspan 32 – 35 cm fur Forearm 45 – 48 mm Description • Long, glossy brown fur • Belly paler than back • Black wings • Big thick muzzle • Keeled calcar Similar Species Little brown bat is much Commonly found in houses smaller & lacks keeled calcar.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats a Symposium
    Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-eared Bats A Symposium y Edited b Susan C. Loeb, Michael J. Lacki, and Darren A. Miller U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Research Station General Technical Report SRS-145 DISCLAIMER The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service. Papers published in these proceedings were submitted by authors in electronic media. Some editing was done to ensure a consistent format. Authors are responsible for content and accuracy of their individual papers and the quality of illustrative materials. Cover photos: Large photo: Craig W. Stihler; small left photo: Joseph S. Johnson; small middle photo: Craig W. Stihler; small right photo: Matthew J. Clement. December 2011 Southern Research Station 200 W.T. Weaver Blvd. Asheville, NC 28804 Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-eared Bats: A Symposium Athens, Georgia March 9–10, 2010 Edited by: Susan C. Loeb U.S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Research Station Michael J. Lacki University of Kentucky Darren A. Miller Weyerhaeuser NR Company Sponsored by: Forest Service Bat Conservation International National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources Offield Family Foundation ContEntS Preface . v Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats: An Introduction . 1 Susan C. Loeb, Michael J. Lacki, and Darren A. Miller Distribution and Status of Eastern Big-eared Bats (Corynorhinus Spp .) . 13 Mylea L. Bayless, Mary Kay Clark, Richard C. Stark, Barbara S.
    [Show full text]
  • Keen's Long-Eared Myotis
    COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Keen’s Long-eared Bat Myotis keenii in Canada DATA DEFICIENT 2003 COSEWIC COSEPAC COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF COMITÉ SUR LA SITUATION ENDANGERED WILDLIFE DES ESPÈCES EN PÉRIL IN CANADA AU CANADA COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC 2003. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on Keen’s long-eared bat Myotis keenii in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 35 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm) Previous report: Balcombe, J.P. 1988. COSEWIC status report on Keen’s long-eared bat Myotis keenii in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 11 pp. Production note: COSEWIC acknowledges Douglas W. Burles and David W. Nagorsen for writing the update status report on Keen’s long-eared bat Myotis keenii in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada, overseen and edited by M. Brock Fenton, COSEWIC Terrestrial Mammals Specialist Subcommittee Co-chair. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: (819) 997-4991 / (819) 953-3215 Fax: (819) 994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Ếgalement disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur le chauve-souris de Keen (Myotis keenii) au Canada – Mise à jour. Cover illustration: Keen’s long-eared bat — Illustration by Michael Harmes, from Bats of British Columbia by D.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Corynorhinus Townsendii): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Townsend’s Big-eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project October 25, 2006 Jeffery C. Gruver1 and Douglas A. Keinath2 with life cycle model by Dave McDonald3 and Takeshi Ise3 1Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada 2Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Old Biochemistry Bldg, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY 82070 3Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, P.O. Box 3166, Laramie, WY 82071 Peer Review Administered by Society for Conservation Biology Gruver, J.C. and D.A. Keinath (2006, October 25). Townsend’s Big-eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http:// www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/townsendsbigearedbat.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the modeling expertise of Dr. Dave McDonald and Takeshi Ise, who constructed the life-cycle analysis. Additional thanks are extended to the staff of the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for technical assistance with GIS and general support. Finally, we extend sincere thanks to Gary Patton for his editorial guidance and patience. AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES Jeff Gruver, formerly with the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, is currently a Ph.D. candidate in the Biological Sciences program at the University of Calgary where he is investigating the physiological ecology of bats in northern arid climates. He has been involved in bat research for over 8 years in the Pacific Northwest, the Rocky Mountains, and the Badlands of southern Alberta. He earned a B.S. in Economics (1993) from Penn State University and an M.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Assessment for Little Brown Myotis
    Species Status Assessment Class: Mammalia Family: Vespertilionidae Scientific Name: Myotis lucifugus Common Name: Little brown myotis Species synopsis: The little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus), formerly called the “little brown bat,” has long been considered one of the most common and widespread bat species in North America. Its distribution spans from the southern limits of boreal forest habitat in southern Alaska and the southern half of Canada throughout most of the contiguous United States, excluding the southern Great Plains and the southeast area of California. In the southwestern part of the historic range, a formerly considered subspecies identified as Myotis lucifugus occultus, is now considered a distinct species, Myotis occultus (Piaggio et al. 2002, Wilson and Reeder 2005). Available literature indicates that the northeastern U.S. constitutes the core range for this species, and that population substantially decreases both southward and westward from that core range (Davis et al. 1965, Humphrey and Cope 1970). New York was the first state affected by white-nose syndrome (WNS), a disease characterized by the presence of an unusual fungal infection and aberrant behavior in hibernating bats. The pre-WNS population was viable and did not face imminent risk of extinction. However, a once stable outlook quickly reversed with the appearance of WNS in 2006, which dramatically altered the population balance and has substantially impaired the ability of the species to adapt to other cumulative threats against a rapidly declining baseline. In January 2012, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) biologists estimated that at least 5.7 million to 6.7 million bats had died from WNS (USFWS 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Statement
    Appendix M Biological Assessment BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT FOR PROJECT ICEBREAKER Lake Erie and City of Cleveland Cuyahoga County, Ohio TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................... ii TABLES ............................................................................................................................................ iv FIGURES .......................................................................................................................................... iv COMMONLY USED ACRONYMS and ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................... v 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ................................................................ 1 1.2 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................................. 2 1.2.1 Federal Action .................................................................................................................... 2 1.2.2 LEEDCo’s Action ............................................................................................................... 2 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 DESCRIPTION OF MAJOR
    [Show full text]