Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS

13.2.5 Live-trapping Based on the daytime roost and habitat searches, certain roost sites and foraging areas were selected for mist-netting and harp trapping (Figure 13-5). Mist-netting and harp-trapping have been performed in March 2012, August 2012, October 2012, February 2013 and March 2013 to date at localities displayed on Figure 13-7. These capture and release studies were done under the permission of Wendy White’s and Kate MacEwan’s KZN Ezemvelo Wildlife permit. All bats captured were and will be removed safely from the nets, put into black handling bags and hung safely in a tree for later processing. At the end of the trapping session, bags were and will be weighed with and without the bat with a hanging scale to determine the mass of the bats, the forearm length of the bats were and will be measured and the bats were and will be photographed. All bats were and will be released at the point of capture and the release call of each bat recorded with an EM3 on release.

Figure 13-5: Scenes from mist-netting at the Richards Bay WEF Site

13.2.6 Chance observations Owing to the fact that the field team have spent many hours on site, chance species observations are made, through either audible calls or fly-bys. This data is also important in that some species may be difficult to catch in nets or their roosts may not have been found.

Natural Scientific Services CC 38 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS

Figure 13-6: Most Commonly Used Transect Routes at Richards Bay WEF

39 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS

Figure 13-7: Bat trapping sites at Richards Bay WEF

40 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS 13.3. Data Analysis Acoustic monitoring produces huge amounts of data, hundreds of Gigabytes of ultrasonic call data. This call data was recorded by the SM2BAT as .WAC files onto four 32 GB SD cards for each detector. At the end of the monitoring period, NSS transferred the data onto a Terabyte Hard Drive for analysis and storage.

The .WAC files were converted, using Wildlife Acoustics’ WAC2WAV programme to both .WAV files and Zero Crossing (.ZC) files for analysis in the following two ultrasound analysis software programmes:  BatSound Pro by Pettersson. This software allows for the detailed analysis of .WAV sound files. It provides call peak frequency, call duration, bandwidth, etc. In order to convert and scrub the .WAC files produced by the SM2 to .WAV files suitable for BatSound Pro, the Wildlife Acoustics WAC2WAV conversion software was used.  AnalookW Version 3.8s by Titley Electronics used for analysing large quantities of .ZC files.

A bat call consists of a series of ultrasonic sound pulses, with each species calling at a different sound frequency. Pulses within a bat call can also vary in their sound frequency and characteristics, although this variation is within a certain range associated with a certain bat species. Certain call parameters are used to identify a bat species from its echolocation call. These include pulse length, pulse bandwidth, pulse interval and pulse dominant frequency, of which peak frequency is the most commonly used. When a bat is approaching a prey insect, it will increase the rate of its echolocation pulses dramatically, and each pulse becomes shorter until it is difficult to distinguish the pulses with standard instrumentation. This method of increasing its echolocation resolution while homing in on its prey is referred to as a feeding buzz. Some examples of bat call pulses are displayed in Appendix A of this report.

Bat Activity levels can either be measured by the number of bat pulses analysed using the AnalookW Scan function or Bat Activity can also be calculated in the following way:

Activity Index = Bat passes / unit time ** Bat Pass = a sequence of ≥1 echolocation calls where the duration of each pulse is ≥2 ms. Single call fragments do not apply, only completed single pulses. Where there is a gap between pulses of >500ms in one file, this then represents a new bat pass.

As the nightly recording schedule varied over the life of the project, due to NSS finding the optimal schedule in terms of acoustic settings, power sustainability and SD card capacity, NSS has analysed the data according to both bat passes / hour and then adjusted this to bat passes / date1 according to the number of hours recording time in the night and the number of night time hours from sunset to sunrise. Bat passes were divided by the number of recording hours, then multiplied by the number of hours in the evening.

The aim of the monitoring is to determine bat presence or absence, activity patterns and the risk levels to bats. In order to do this static detectors were deployed that produced huge quantities of data that took many hours of data analysis time. The aim, was not to do a detailed thesis on the call structure of specific species, therefore, grouping bats according to their call structure and risk levels seems more

1 date = one 24 hour date, i.e. from 00h00 to 24h00 on the same date, corrected for all gaps in recording during the 12-month study Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 41 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS appropriate, can save a tremendous amount of time and reduces the risk of making identification errors. The SA guidelines have put together a risk level table for different bat families and genera (Table 13-2).

Table 13-2: The likelihood of the risk of fatalities affecting bats, based on broad ecological features, excluding migratory behaviour (Sowler & Stoffberg, 2011). Family / Genus Relative Status Likely risk of impact from wind turbine blades (direct collision/barotrauma) Pteropodidae Common – restricted distributions Medium – High Some species known to move large distances Molossidae Common – widespread Species fly high enough to come into contact with turbine blades. High

Emballonuridae Common – restricted distributions High Species fly high enough to come into contact with turbine blades Rhinolophidae Species with restricted distributions Low Hipposideridae Species with restricted distributions Low Nycteridae Common – widespread and restricted distributions Low Miniopteridae Common – widespread and restricted distributions Medium – High Some species known to move large distances Vespertilionidae Common – widespread and restricted distributions Pipistrellus Species with wide or restricted distributions Medium Hypsugo Wide, but sparse distribution Low Nycticeinops Common throughout restricted distribution Medium Pipistrellus Species with wide or restricted distributions Medium – High Kerivoula Species with wide but sparse distributions Low Scotoecus Sparse distributions Medium – High Cistugo Restricted distributions – species endemic to Southern Africa or Low South Africa Laephotis Species with restricted distributions Low Glauconycteris Species with restricted distributions Medium – High Myotis Species with wide or restricted distributions; some species may Medium – High move large distances Scotophilus Some with widespread or restricted distributions Medium – High Eptesicus Wide, but sparse distribution Medium

NSS proposes the following groups to used for the data analysis:

a. Species Group A: Bats that echolocate with calls having frequencies ranging from 10 to 32 kHz with a narrow bandwidth and intermediate to long duration. These bats are mostly all at a high risk of fatality due to wind turbines. Examples of species within this group includes: i. The Molossidae Family – Chaerephon pumilus (Little free-tailed bat), Mops condylurus (Angolan free-tailed bat), Otomops martiensseni (Large-eared giant mastiff bat) and Tadarida aegyptiaca (Egyptian free-tailed bat), ii. The Emballonuridae Family - Taphozous mauritianus (Mauritian tomb bat)

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 42 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS b. Species Group B: Bats that echolocate with calls having frequencies ranging from 29 to 72 kHz with a narrow to intermediate bandwidth and intermediate duration. These bats are mostly all at a medium to high risk of fatality due to wind turbines. Examples of species within this group includes: a. Pipistrellus capensis (Cape serotine) b. Scotophilus dinganii (Yellow-bellied house bat) c. Eptesicus hottentotus (Long-tailed serotine) d. Hypsugo anchietae (Anchietae’s pipistrelle)2 e. Pipstrellus hesperidus (Dusky pipistrelle) f. Pipistrellus nana (Banana)

c. Species Group C: Bats of the families Miniopteridae and Vespertilionidae that echolocate with calls having frequencies ranging from 40 to 75 kHz with a narrow to broad bandwidth and short duration. These bats are mostly all at a medium to high risk of fatality due to wind turbines AND several of these bats are of conservation importance (CI). Where species of CI are suspected, these calls must be analysed more carefully and mist-netting must be done so their presence or absence can be confirmed. Examples of species within this group includes: a. Miniopterus natalensis (Natal long-fingered bat) b. Miniopterus fraterculus (Lesser long-fingered bat) c. Myotis tricolor (Temminck's myotis)

d. Species Group D: Bats of the Rhinolophidae and Hipposideridae families with echolocation frequencies between 34 to 200 kHz. These bats are mostly all at a low risk of fatality due to wind turbines AND several of these bats are of conservation importance (CI). Where species of CI are suspected, these calls must be analysed more carefully and mist-netting must be done so their presence or absence can be confirmed. Examples of species within this group includes: i. Cleotis percirvali (Percival's short-eared trident bat) ii. Hipposideros caffer (Sundevall's leaf-nosed bat) iii. Rhinolophus clivosus (Geoffroy's horseshoe bat)

e. Species Group E: Bats, excluding those of the Rhinolophidae and Hipposideridae families that echolocate with calls having peak frequencies ranging from 85 to 160 kHz. These bats are mostly all at a low risk of fatality due to wind turbines. Examples of species within this group includes: i. Kerivoula lanosa (Lesser woolly bat) ii. Nycteris thebaica (Egyptian slit-faced bat)

The output of the above was bat activity lists and graphs according to the various groups, but a confirmed and suspected species list was also generated.

13.3.1 Relative Abundance Index

2 Identification of bat species through call analysis alone can be a limiting factor, as there is much overlap between different species, and bat calls can vary depending on what the bat is doing. For Richards Bay, the biggest uncertainty lies between Hypsugo anchieta and Miniopterus natalensis. These calls are very similar, but only a positive identification could be given to some of the Group C calls as being M. natalensis. Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 43 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS A relative abundance index was also calculated; this is not the actual numbers of bats but compensates for any potential overestimation in activity. Bat activity, as calculated above has the potential to be considered an “overestimation” of individual bat abundance, because multiple call sequences can belong to the same bat within a set time interval. Therefore, the assumption was made that no more than one actual bat passed the microphone per species group per minute, i.e. no more than 10 bat passes per species group occurred per 10 minute interval, thereby reducing the bat activity slightly. However, in the same way that total bat passes/ 10 minutes can be an overestimation, relative abundance calculations can underestimate. Thus, relative abundance in this case is simply meant to indicate the lower range estimate of bat activity on site per date.

13.3.2 Weather and Bat Activity All results were graphically correlated with weather patterns over the monitoring period, in order to determine if there were any obvious trends and to assist with impact predications and mitigation recommendations. In addition, a generalised linear model was performed for the bottom microphone at RB1, as this was the station operation for the longest period.

13.4. Impact Assessment A standard quantitative impact assessment methodology was applied, as described in Section 16.

13.5. Study Limitations As can be expected with a long-term scientific study over a large study area, with equipment being actively and passively used out doors for long periods, and performing methodologies new to South Africa, some limitations were experienced. The Richards Bay site has posed the most challenges in terms of bat monitoring of any of the 13 sites where NSS has completed 12 month monitoring.

13.5.1 Weather Most WEF sites are fairly remote in their locality. Hence, trips have to be planned in advance to arrange travel, accommodation, land access etc. As such, sometimes weather conditions on site are not always ideal for equipment set-up, transect monitoring, mist-netting etc.

To compensate for this, NSS has trained and commissioned a local team based in the Durban surrounds to attend regular site visits. Even so, the Durban based team have experienced extreme rainfall and slippery roads over the last two trips in September, October 2012 and January making transect surveys difficult (Figure 13-8). Some routes had to be detoured during these times.

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 44 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS

Figure 13-8: Bad Weather Conditions Causing Limitations on Site

13.5.2 Fire The burning of sugar cane is common practise by farmers, planned and unplanned burns can disrupt fieldwork and be a threat to the safety of the team and equipment. Burning in August 2012 caused disruptions to the team and meant transects were not possible.

13.5.3 Security This has been the biggest limiting factor to this study. Crime at the Richards Bay site has proven to be the worst of any of the sites NSS is monitoring. It has resulted in the complete theft of one monitoring station, the vandalism of another and has affected where monitoring stations are erected and what set- up is used. As such, stations RB5 and RB6 have been set-up at secure localities and in a unique way, so as to deter criminals. All external batteries and solar panels have been removed and the detectors were placed at the top of the 10m masts with 4 internal Duracell batteries. These batteries only last up to 2 weeks. Therefore, on monthly trips, data is only recorded for 2 weeks of every month.

13.5.4 Mechanical fault It appears that there was some fault at the lower RB1 mast microphone towards the end of Summer 2013, as data was not recorded for the last month of monitoring. This was unexpected, as everything on the detector tested fine.

13.5.5 Human Error One of the field assistants did not adequately check the lower microphone at RB4 at the end of February 2013. He was actually dishonest with NSS regarding this and will not be used for fieldwork again.

13.5.6 Dangerous Climbing Conditions The weather logger on RB4 has been placed on the climbing ladder immediately above the anti-climb door. Hence, climbing over this logger box is dangerous and difficult and not all the NSS climbers can manoeuvre this. As at the beginning of May 2013, this box still remained in the same place.

13.5.7 Monitoring Periods Despite the limitations described above, NSS has far exceeded the minimum 15 – 25% monitoring of the total bat activity season, as was required by Sowler & Stoffberg (2012). All seasons and most habitats

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 45 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS have been covered by the monitoring. The total monitoring microphone nights represents 74% of the total possible time for recording. Figure 13-9 below is a visual representation of the static monitoring periods at each microphone. Explanations for the gaps are provided in Table 13-3.

13.5.8 Detector settings and microphones Being one of the first monitoring projects on the East Coast of South Africa, NSS had to experiment with various detector settings that would be optimal for the Richards Bay site, in terms of recording accuracy, battery and card capacity. Once the best fit was identified, we kept to that for the entire 12 months, so as to have the data comparable throughout the monitoring period, to be able to pick seasonal variations if any. The settings that worked best did involve short intervals in monitoring in the middle of the night. Whilst this is a limitation to be discussed, we do believe the peak activity times were captured continuously and the nightly patterns recorded did confirm this.

With all projects in South Africa, using SM2BAT detectors, the bird damage and weathering of microphones needs to be carefully monitored and microphone wear and tear can be considered a limitation. This is a problem that the bat fraternity are addressing.

13.5.9 Call Analysis Identification of bat species through call analysis alone can be a limiting factor, as there is much overlap between different species, and bat calls can vary depending on what the bat is doing. For Richards Bay, the biggest uncertainty lies between Hypsugo anchieta and Miniopterus natalensis. These calls are very similar, but only a positive identification could be given to some of the Group C calls as being M. natalensis. However, due to the high likelihood of H. anchietae being on site, due to distribution and habitat, NSS highly suspects that a few of the calls categorised as Group C bats, were in fact H. anchietae. Richards Bay WEF Monitoring Station Recording Periods

RB1 (Top) RB1 (Bottom) RB2 RB3 RB4A(Top) RB4B(Bottom) RB5 RB6 Transects Recording Recording Periods

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 46 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS Figure 13-9: Monitoring Periods per Bat Detector

Table 13-3: Monitoring Station Status Monitoring Station Monitoring Period Description RB1(bottom) Installed on 27/04/2012. Continuous monitoring until 25 December 2012, where NSS suspects that the violent storm on Christmas Day caused some electrical disturbance to the SM2. Unfortunately, one of the young fieldworkers on the January 2013 did not recognise this on the box at height and the fault was only fully discovered and rectified in mid February 2012. The data analysis revealed that there was some fault at the lower RB1 mast microphone towards the end of Summer/ early Autumn 2013, as data was not recorded for the last month of monitoring, despite all test on site in March reflecting normal operations and the data prior to that having no problems. This will be fully investigated at the end of May 2013 and rectified. RB1(top) Same as for RB1(bottom) RB2 Installed on 19 July 2012 and vandalised on 14 September 2012. RB2 decommissioned on 4 October 2012 . RB3 Installed on 19 July 2012 and stolen mid-August 2012. RB3 decommissioned in mid-September 2012.. RB4(bottom) Installed on 4 December 2012. No problems up until February 2013. One of the field assistants did not adequately check the lower microphone at RB4 at the end of February 2013. He was actually dishonest with NSS regarding this and will not be used for fieldwork again. However problems with the lower channel of the bat detector persisted through April 2013, despite checks at the end of March looking good. The box was fully taken down at the end of April and repaired. RB4(top) Installed on 4 December 2012 and has run consistently since. RB5 Installed on 4 December 2012. Because this station is being powered by internal batteries, the batteries do not last for the entire month prior to the field team returning to site, hence small gaps occur. The gaps in summer and early Autumn 2013 resulted in larger gaps, possible owing to higher activity levels. RB6 Installed on 4 December 2012. Because this station is being powered by internal batteries, the batteries do not last for the entire month prior to the field team returning to site, hence small gaps occur. The gaps in summer and early Autumn 2013 resulted in larger gaps, possible owing to higher activity levels.

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 47 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS 14. RESULTS 14.1. Likelihood of Occurrence - Desktop Purely based on recorded and modelled distributions (Friedman and Daly, 2004 and Monadjem et al., 2010), 36 bats, presented in Table 14-1 below, have the potential to occur at Richards Bay, but vary in their Likelihood of Occurrence (LoO). There are 22 highly likely, 8 moderately likely and 6 unlikely but possible.

Table 14-1: Potential Bats for Richards Bay CONSERVATION STATUS FAMILY SPECIES COMMON NAME LoO National Global EMBALLONURIDAE Taphozous mauritianus Mauritian tomb bat High LC LC HIPPOSIDERIDAE Cloeotis percivali Percival's short-eared trident bat High CR LC HIPPOSIDERIDAE Hipposideros caffer Sundevall's leaf-nosed bat High DD LC MINIOPTERIDAE Miniopterus natalensis Natal long-fingered bat High NT LC MOLOSSIDAE Chaerephon pumilus Little free-tailed bat High LC LC MOLOSSIDAE Mops condylurus Angolan free-tailed bat High LC LC NYCTERIDAE Nycteris hispida Hairy slit-faced bat High NT LC NYCTERIDAE Nycteris thebaica Egyptian slit-faced bat High LC LC PTEROPODIDAE Epomophorus wahlbergi Wahlberg's epauletted fruit bat High LC LC PTEROPODIDAE Rousettus aegyptiacus Egyptian Rousette High LC LC RHINOLOPHIDAE Rhinolophus darlingi Darling's horseshoe bat High NT LC RHINOLOPHIDAE Rhinolophus simulator Bushveld horseshoe bat High LC LC RHINOLOPHIDAE Rhinolophus swinnyi Swinny's horseshoe bat High EN LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Glauconycteris variegata Butterfly bat High NT LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Hypsugo anchietae Anchieta's pipistrelle High NT LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Nycticeinops schlieffenii Schlieffen's twilight bat High LC LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus capensis Cape serotine bat High LC LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus hesperidus Dusky pipistrelle High LC LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus nana Banana bat High LC LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus zuluensis Zulu serotine High LC LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Scotophilus dinganii Yellow-bellied house bat High LC LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Scotophilus viridis Green house bat High LC LC MOLOSSIDAE Tadarida aegyptiaca Egyptian free-tailed bat Moderate LC LC RHINOLOPHIDAE Rhinolophus clivosus Geoffroy's horseshoe bat Moderate NT LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Eptesicus hottentotus Long-tailed serotine Moderate NT LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Kerivoula argentata Damara woolly bat Moderate EN LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Kerivoula lanosa Lesser woolly bat Moderate NT LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Myotis tricolor Temminck's myotis Moderate NT LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus rendalli Rendall's serotine Moderate CR LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Scotoecus albofuscus Thomas's house bat Moderate V DD MINIOPTERIDAE Miniopterus fraterculus Lesser long-fingered bat Low NT LC MOLOSSIDAE Otomops martiensseni Large-eared mastiff bat Low V NT PTEROPODIDAE Epomophorus crypturus Peters's epauletted fruit bat Low DD LC RHINOLOPHIDAE Rhinolophus blasii Blasius's horseshoe bat Low V LC RHINOLOPHIDAE Rhinolophus capensis Cape horseshoe bat Low NT LC VESPERTILIONIDAE Myotis welwitschii Welwitsch's myotis Low NT LC *Legend: CR (Critically Endangered); DD (Data Deficient); EN (Endangered); LC (Least Concern); NE ( Near Endemic); NT (Near Threatened); V (Vulnerable)

14.2. Confirmed Bat Species To date, NSS has confirmed the presence of 19 bat species and suspect from call and capture data another 3 species utilizing the Richards Bay WEF site, these have been listed with habitat and behaviour in Table 14-2 below. Seven (7) are Nationally Conservation Important3 species, with one, Otomops martiensseni, being a Vulnerable and NEMA: Biodiversity Act, 2004: Threatened and Protected Species (TOPS) listed species in South Africa is also globally Near Threatened. Screen clips of most calls can be found in Appendix A. Photographs of some bat species encountered during the monitoring are in Figure 14-1.

3 Refer to the Glossary at the beginning of the report for the definition of Conservation Important Species Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 48 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS Table 14-2: Confirmed Bat Species at the Richards Bay WEF site Species Group Risk Levels Activity Index (AI) = (Sowler & STATUS STATUS HABITAT SUMMARY Confirmed/ Mean Bat passes/ Stoffberg, FAMILY: SPECIES: COMMON NAME: (int): (nat): (Monadjem et al. 2010) Suspected/ date 2012) Confirmed through Estimated population of MEDIUM- Forest/forest edge habitats, visual observation up to approximately 54 HIGH riparian forest; extensive wooded at tree roosts and individuals utilizing the PTEROPODIDAE Epomophorous wahlbergi Wahlberg's epauletted fruit bat LC LC gardens in peri-urban areas. social calls site Savanna woodland and riparian Confirmed through Species Group D AI = LOW locations; avoids open areas; visual observation 0.006-0.01 forages around thickets and well- in roosts and developed undergrowth through call HIPPOSIDERIDAE Hipposideros caffer Sundevall's leaf-nosed bat LC DD vegetation. analysis. Savanna woodland; riparian forest Confirmed through Species Group D LOW RHINOLOPHIDAE Rhinolophus simulator Bushveld horseshoe bat LC LC along wooded drainage lines. call analysis. AI = 0.006-0.01 Savanna woodlands, open Estimated population of HIGH habitats, avoids closed forest Confirmed through up to approximately 6 interior; absent from arid observation on individuals utilizing the EMBALLONURIDAE Taphozous mauritianus Mauritian tomb bat LC LC savannas of the Kalahari. building roosts site Confirmed through Estimated population of LOW Savanna and Karoo biomes; avoids observation in up to approximately 20 open open grasslands; forages low culvert roosts and a individuals utilizing the NYCTERIDAE Nycteris thebaica Egyptian slit-faced bat LC LC above the ground. single net capture. site Confirmed through Species Group A HIGH Open-air forager. Wide range capture out of AI = 184-309 habitats. Narrow crevices in rock house roosts and faces, caves, houses and tree through call MOLOSSIDAE Chaerephon pumilus Little free-tailed bat LC LC hollows analysis. Confirmed through Species Group A HIGH Open-air forager. Wide range of capture out of AI = 184-309 habitats. Narrow crevices in rock house roosts and faces, caves, houses and tree through call MOLOSSIDAE Mops condylurus Angolan free-tailed bat LC LC hollows analysis. Confirmed flying For the month of April HIGH over from call 2013, 1 or 2 bat passes Open-air forager. Roosts in analysis from April were recorded on some residential, agricultural and 2013 onwards at nights, making the natural areas. Isolated records for mainly RB5, with a AI = 0.6 the greater Durban area and other few passes at RB1 MOLOSSIDAE Otomops martiensseni Large-eared giant mastiff bat NT V* Africa countries top mic and RB6**

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 49 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS Forages over desert, semi-arid Species Group A HIGH scrub, savannah, grassland and Confirmed through AI = 184-309 MOLOSSIDAE Tadarida aegyptiaca Egyptian free-tailed bat LC LC agricultural land. Avoids forests. call analysis. Montane grasslands of SA Confirmed through Species Group C MEDIUM- MINIOPTERIDAE Miniopterus fraterculus Lesser long-fingered bat LC NT escarpment; cave dependent. call analysis. AI = 39-62 HIGH Temperate or subtropical species; Species Group C MEDIUM- savannas and grasslands; cave- Confirmed through AI = 39-62 HIGH MINIOPTERIDAE Miniopterus natalensis Natal long-fingered bat LC NT dependent. call analysis. Rocky outcrops, miombo Species Group B MEDIUM woodland in gorges and granitic Confirmed through AI = 65-104 VESPERTILIONIDAE Eptesicus hottentotus Long-tailed serotine LC LC hills. call analysis. Suspected near the Species Group B LOW woodland AI = 65-104 vegetation, but the Wooded locations; riparian call structure is very vegetation/forest in savannah and similar to M. VESPERTILIONIDAE Hypsugo anchietae Anchieta's pipistrelle LC NT woodland, near water. natalensis Clutter-edge forager associated Confirmed through Species Group C MEDIUM- VESPERTILIONIDAE Myotis tricolor Temminck’s myotis LC NT with caves call analysis. AI = 39-62 HIGH Paramontane, Woodland-forest Species Group C MEDIUM mosaic vegetation. Banana leaves, Confirmed through AI = 39-62 VESPERTILIONIDAE Myotis Welwitschii Welwitsch's myotis LC NT caves. call analysis. Confirmed through Species Group B MEDIUM- capture out of AI = 65-104 HIGH Arid semi-desert to montane house and banana grassland, forests and savanna. leaf roosts and Less abundant in low-lying hot through call VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus capensis Cape serotine bat LC LC savannas. analysis. Confirmed through Species Group B MEDIUM capture out of AI = 65-104 Clutter-edge forager associated banana tree roosts with well-wooded vegetation and and through call VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus nana Banana bat LC LC roosts in unfurled banana leaves. analysis. Woodland savannah, riparian Species Group B MEDIUM VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus zuluensis Zulu serotine bat LC LC habitats. Suspected AI = 65-104 Suspected through Species Group B LOW a possible capture AI = 65-104 Low-lying savannas, wooded areas and release call but VESPERTILIONIDAE Nycticeinops schlieffeni Schlieffen's twilight bat LC LC along rivers and drainage lines. not confirmed Well-wooded locations, especially Confirmed through Species Group B MEDIUM VESPERTILIONIDAE Pipistrellus hesperidus Dusky pipistrelle LC LC near water sources. capture AI = 65-104

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 50 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS Tree presence throughout Species Group B MEDIUM- savannah biome, avoids open AI = 65-104 HIGH habitats like grassland and karoo Confirmed through VESPERTILIONIDAE Scotophilus dinganii Yellow-bellied house bat LC LC scrub. call analysis. Confirmed through Species Group B MEDIUM- Low-lying, hot savannas; avoids capture and call AI = 65-104 HIGH VESPERTILIONIDAE Scotophilus viridis Green house bat LC LC open habitats like grasslands. analysis. * NEMA: Biodiversity Act, 2004: Threatened and Protected Species (TOPS) listed species **During the ongoing monitoring beyond the prescribed and reported 12 months, roost searches around RB5 will focus on Otomops martiensseni due to that station having the majority of such calls

T. mauritianus H. caffer H. caffer C. pumilus

E. wahlbergi N. nana S. viridis P. hesperidus Figure 14-1: Photographic evidence of some of the bats recorded at the Richards Bay WEF site

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 51 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS 14.3. Foraging and Roosting Habitat Surveys 14.3.1 Foraging Habitats The local natural and transformed vegetation where bats forage are shown in Figure 2-1. Bats were recorded foraging across all landscapes – natural bush, riparian fringes and wetlands and above sugarcane. Transects conducted during the monitoring period have also confirmed bat activity over all habitats, including agricultural lands. The transects can be seen in Appendix B. the importance of bats in controlling sugarcane insect pests is discussed in Section 10 above.

14.3.2 Roosting Habitats For the Richards Bay WEF, various bat roost habitats were present. Roosting habitats included buildings (suitable roofs and cracks in buildings), trees (large densely leaved trees for fruit bats, banana trees for certain Vesper bats, and crevices in any tree for crevice dweller), water towers, culverts, artificial bat houses, etc. A map of the discovered and confirmed bats roosts for Richards Bay WEF is shown in Figure 14-3. This does not exclude other roosts from being discovered at a later stage. Also, many bats, especially tree-dwelling bats change their roosts regularly. Many bat species utilize two roosts during a 24 hour cycle – a day roost where they sleep/ torpor for all sunrise hours, and a night roost, which they use to rest in between foraging flights or to stop to eat large insect prey. Photographic evidence of some of the bat roosts discovered at the Richards Bay WEF site, are shown in Figure 14-2.

Regular tree day roost for fruit bats N. thebaica in a road culvert day roost

C. pumilus roost Concrete water tower

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 52 Pre-construction Bat Monitoring Impact Report - NSS

P. hesperidus roosts N. nana roost

Bat House put up under bat exit Bat smudges at the entrance exit of a roof roost Figure 14-2: Photographic evidence of some of the bat roosts at the Richards Bay WEF site

Richards Bay Wind Energy Facility 53