Keep up to date

Keep up to date with the latest posts David's Bat Blog on Facebook

Showing posts with label mammal society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mammal society. Show all posts

Monday, 7 April 2008

"Untold riches" of swarming bats...

I am officially conferenced out, having spent the last three days in York for the
Mammal Society Conference. It was definitely worth going: I'm buzzing with thoughts about Irish hares, Beaver management in Bavaria, small mammal survey trials and much else besides. It's a little disappointing that there were no papers on bats, but that was more than made up for by Professor John Altringham's Cranbrook lecture.

John's team from Leeds University have carried out a large and complex study of bat swarming behaviour at caves in the Yorkshire Dales and the North Yorkshire Moors. Autumn swarming is a behaviour which is increasingly seen as an important part of the annual cycle of bats, especially Myotis and Long-eared species. Bats gather at hibernation sites, usually caves and mines, to check out the site, to help young bats find it and for courtship and mating. Swarming is typified by chasing behaviour late into the night, often peaking three or four hours after sunset and takes place during August to October.

They looked at Natterer's Bats (Myotis nattereri) and, by ringing bats at known summer maternity roosts and then harp trapping at swarming sites, were able to demonstrate that bats wer flying up to 60km to a swarming site. They were also able to demonstrate that huge numbers of bats were using these sites: up to 400 per night, with considerable turnover between nights. Furthermore, by comparing data year on year they were able to demonstrate high fidelity: bats tend to return to the same site each year. The conservation implications are huge: these sites can provide a key part of the lifecycle of very large numbers of bats, from a wide geographical area.

What struck a chord with me was the fact than John described the importance of these sites and went on to mention that it was then usual to find only a handful of hibernating bats within the caves, as many were not visible. In other words, some of the hibernation sites we survey in the Scotland could be swarming sites for similarly large numbers of bats. Not for nothing was one of John's conclusions the possibility of "untold riches" for bat-workers.



This tiny hole, high in the hills in South-west Scotland, gives access to a tunnel over half a kilometre long, which contained 9 Natterer's Bats and 1 Daubenton's. Could this be a swarming site on a similar scale to the ones in the Yorkshire Dales?

Another intriguing part of the lecture related to a study in which John's team compared the numbers of hibernating bats to the physical features of a cave or mine. They found that the size of entrance was irrelevant ("if you can get in, they will"), as was the altitude, the orientation of the entrance and the habitat nearby. What makes a good hibernaculum is large spaces inside, a reasonable depth, some cover near the entrance and not too wet. This struck a chord with me, as we've done several surveys in the past winter of a limestone mine, which seemed to have all the right features of a hibernaculum, but we never found any bats. John's conclusion was "the more water, the fewer bats", which seems to fit.

I must finish by plugging the Mammal Society's new edition of "The Mammals of the British Isles". It's not cheap (and you may need to reinforce your bookshelf to take the weight), but it is worth every penny. If you buy a copy via the Mammal Society website, all ofthe profit will go to the society.

John Altringham's Leeds University web-page: http://www.fbs.leeds.ac.uk/staff/profile.php?

The Mammal Society: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/mammal/

My website: plecotus.co.uk

Monday, 3 March 2008

The Versatile Bat Detector

The most basic tool of the trade for a bat worker must be the heterodyne bat detector: the pocket-caculator look-alike that allows us to listen in to the sounds made by bats. Not only does it help us find bats, it often allows us to identify them to genus or species, to tell when they are feeding and to hear their social calls. It would be easy to be satisfied with that little lot, but the humble detector has other uses too.


Being pedantic, "bat detector" is the wrong name for the machine, as it implies that all you will hear on it are bats. This may stem from our tendency to talk about ultrasound as though it were something special and magical. In reality, ultrasound is simply sound above about 20kHz in frequency. The only thing that sets it apart from sounds below that frequency is the fact that one rather arrogant species with an abysmally poor hearing range can't hear it!


Many everyday things produce ultrasound: pouring water creates a loud noise around 40kHz. The standard test of whether a detector is switched on is to rub your fingers together in front of the microphone, a sound which is much louder around 45kHz than it is at frequencies within our hearing range. "Dry", rustling sounds tend to be much louder at higher frequencies: when our alsatian jumped into a huge pile of dead leaves behind me whilst I was using a detector with headphones, I though I was going to be deaf for life...


Bats aren't the only species which produce ultrasound. A common summer hedgerow sound is the high-pitched, furious squeaking of squabbling shrews. The lowest frequency of that call fall just withing our hearing range (older people may struggle to hear it at all), but on a bat detector tuned to about 20-40kHz they are very clear. In 2005 I and some colleagues from the BATML project were conducting a series of surveys along the towpath of the Union Canal. We kept hearing shrew sounds from one particular place by the water's edge. It was noticeable because these calls were extremely loud and unexpected. When you've had cause to swear loudly at something, it sticks in your mind! The Mammal Society were running their nationwide Water Shrew (Neomys fodiens) survey at the time, so I placed some tubes, baited with casters (blowfly pupae) and sure enough, the scats left in them were confirmed as having been left by a Water Shrew. This was particularly nice as it was the first record of this species from the Lothians for almost 20 years.


Another branch of natural history in which bat detectors are increasingly finding a place is in the study of Orthoptera: grasshoppers and crickets. It is possible to accurately identify them to species by listening to their sounds. Although many can be heard with the naked ear, they are clearer and louder when heard on a bat detector. Unlike bat (or shrew) calls, these sounds have no frequency variation, as they are stridulations, rather than calls, i.e. the sounds are made by rubbing legs together. Identification is made by listening to the rhythm of the sounds. As the insects tend to stay in one place whilst stridulating you can use the detector as a direction-finder to home in on them.


There's a good introduction to Orthoptera id using a bat detector on the web-site of the Environmental Records Centre for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly (ERCCIS), along with a lot of other useful resources: http://www.erccis.co.uk/species/orthopteraaudio.htm


The Mammal Society's water shrew survey page: http://www.abdn.ac.uk/mammal/water_shrew_survey.shtml


The Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) website has a guide to choosing a bat detector. The models mentioned are mostly out of date now, but the technical advice is very sound: http://www.bats.org.uk/helpline/documents/Whichbatdetector.pdf


For what it's worth, I rate Bat-Box detectors as the best. They have the ideal balance of cost, effectiveness and sturdiness in the field. They're slightly cheaper if you buy direct: http://www.batbox.com/


My website: plecotus.co.uk