Action

Action Synopsis: Bat Conservation About Actions

Retain residual tree patches in logged areas

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    20%
  • Certainty
    25%
  • Harms
    0%

Source countries

Key messages

  • Two studies evaluated the effects of retaining residual tree patches in logged areas on bat populations. The two studies were in Canada.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

  • Abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in Canada found no difference in bat activity (relative abundance) along the edges of residual tree patches and the edges of clearcut blocks. One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that the activity of smaller bat species was higher along the edge of residual tree patches than in the centre of clearcut blocks, but the activity of larger bat species did not differ.

USAGE (0 STUDIES)  

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, site comparison study in 2000 at nine sites in an experimental forest in Alberta Canada (Hogberg et al 2002) found that the edges of residual tree patches had higher activity of smaller bat species than the centre of open clearcut blocks, but the activity of larger bat species did not differ. More bat passes of smaller bat species (calls detected at 45 kHz) were recorded along the edges of residual tree patches (average 4 bat passes/hour) and forest edges (5 bat passes/hour) than in the centre of open clearcut blocks (2 bat passes/hour). A similar number of passes of larger bat species (calls detected at 25 kHz) were recorded along residual tree patch edges, forest edges and in the centre of clearcut blocks (data not reported). Residual tree patches were oval (60 x 90 m). At each of nine clearcut blocks (8–10 ha, 1–2 years old), three locations were sampled (forest edge, residual patch edge, centre of clearcut block). Each of three locations within nine clearcut blocks was sampled for 15 minutes 2–3 times in a randomized order during one night in June–July 2000.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A replicated, site comparison study in 2000 of six sites in logged forest in central British Columbia, Canada (Swystun et al 2001) found that the edges of residual tree patches had similar bat activity to clearcut forest edges. Overall bat activity along residual tree patch edges (49 total bat passes) did not differ significantly to that along clearcut forest edges (110 bat passes). Six residual tree patches (0.5–2 ha) were sampled in six clearcut blocks (105–180 ha, <5 years old) in logged forest (dominated by lodgepole pine Pinus contorta). At each of six sites, bat activity was recorded with bat detectors simultaneously along residual tree patch edges and clearcut edges for one night in July–August 2000.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2019) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

 

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Bat Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bat Conservation
What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation assesses the research looking at whether interventions are beneficial or not. It is based on summarised evidence in synopses, on topics such as amphibians, bats, biodiversity in European farmland, and control of freshwater invasive species. More are available and in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
Our Journal: Conservation Evidence

Our Journal:
Conservation Evidence

A unique, free to publish open-access journal publishing research and case studies that measure the effects of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 16

Special issues: Amphibian special issue

Go to the Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust