Hawaiian Hoary 2015. 10. 5.¢  Hawaiian Hoary Bat Acoustic and Thermal IR Monitoring Project for Tree

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Text of Hawaiian Hoary 2015. 10. 5.¢  Hawaiian Hoary Bat Acoustic and Thermal IR Monitoring...

  • Hawaiian Hoary Bat 

    Acoustic and Thermal IR Monitoring Project for Tree Removal at Nehelani on  Schofield Barracks 17‐29 June 2015 

    Data prepared by C. Pinzari, for OANRP, July 2015 

    Survey Goals 

    Establish whether or not Hawaiian Hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) are roosting with pups on four  trees that are required to be removed for a construction project.  The trees to be removed are (1)  Mango (Mangifera indica), (1) Coconut palm (Cocos nucifera) and (2) Chinese Banyans (Ficus  microcarpa)  If bats present, discuss with regulatory agency possible mitigation measures to continue  project or postpone removal of trees until pupping season is completed. 

    Survey Map 

    Figure 1. Map of the Nehelani construction project site which received bat acoustic survey.  Green dots indicate location of the two acoustic detectors at the site. 

    Appendix 4-1 Bat Report Results

    Map removed to protect rare resources. Available upon request

  • Survey Methods 

    Acoustic surveys for bats were conducted from 17‐29 June 2015 at the proposed tree cutting site for a  total of 12 nights. Two SM2Bat+ ultrasonic “bat detector” (Wildlife Acoustics) were placed about 80  meters apart, on either end of the row of trees proposed to be removed (Figure 1).    

    Bat detectors were set to record bat echolocation calls or “pulses” from dusk until dawn, and a bat  “event” was triggered, recorded as a sound file, and logged for each pass a flying bat made by the  microphone of a detector during the night. The number of bat events and number of echolocation  pulses within an event can be used to confirm bat presence and describe bat activity levels. Bat events  can also contain information on foraging activity, by the presence of characteristic echolocation pulses  that form a “feeding buzz”. Files collected during the recordings were scanned and filtered for bat  presence using the program Kaleidoscope (version 1.1.22, Wildlife Acoustics) and visually inspected by  sound and sight to confirm and count bat echolocation pulses. Foraging activity was also noted in call  events containing feeding buzzes. Bat detectability (p), signifying presence or absence of the species for  each survey was calculated using the program Presence (version 6.2, J.E. Hines, USGS).  These acoustic  surveys can detect whether bats are actively using the area within the range of the detectors with any  frequency.  The effective range of these detectors is upwards of about 50 m (C. Pinzari pers. comm.)  A  high detection rate could indicate the presence of a roost tree within the detection range.  Whereby  further surveys with a thermal imager would be required. 

    Visual surveys for bats were conducted on 29 June 2015, the day of the scheduled tree removal.  A Fluke  Ti400 thermal imager was employed to scan the tree for any roosting bats as well to confirm no  presence.  Scanning commenced from about 05:40 and completed around 07:00 from the ground  scanning from different angles and locations around the two trees.  An aerial bucket was also on site as  an extra resource to scan higher in the tree. 

    Results and Discussion 

    Survey results show no measure of bat detectability at this location during the acoustic survey period.   No bats were recorded passing through or utilizing the site during this time.  The visual thermal IR  survey detected no bats at all.  Multiple species of birds were observed with the thermal IR, with visual  confirmation, in and around the area. It was determined that there would be ‘No Effect’ to bats if the  trees were removed.  

    Recommendations 

    Continue to utilize acoustical surveys to determine bat presence in these small well defined areas with  low numbers of trees.  Bat detectors can be placed within 40 meters of each other so that there is  overlap in effective detection distance.  If a bat is using the area around the detector frequently it is  expected that there would be more activity, more passes, longer files, more than 1 per night, or more  than 1 night.  If bat activity is higher in a specific area then the thermal IR should be used to verify bat  roosting. 

  • Hawaiian Hoary Bat 

    Thermal IR Monitoring Project for Tree Removal at Vought Street on Wheeler  Army Airfield 25 June 2015 

    Data prepared by C. Pinzari, for OANRP, June 2015 

    Survey Goals 

    Establish whether or not Hawaiian Hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) are roosting with pups on two  Coconut palm trees (Cocos nucifera) that are required to be trimmed for safety reasons. The trees were  not trimmed prior to the pupping season so they still contained falling coconuts directly over residences.  If bats present, discuss with regulatory agency possible mitigation measures to continue project or  postpone removal of trees until pupping season is completed. 

    Survey Map 

    Figure 1. Map of the Vought Avenue project site which received bat acoustic surveys. Green dots  indicate location of the trees to be trimmed at the site. 

    Map removed to protect rare resources. Available upon request

  • Survey Methods 

    Visual surveys for bats were conducted on 25 June 2015, the day of the scheduled tree trimming.  A  Fluke Ti400 thermal imager was employed to scan the tree for any roosting bats as well to confirm no  presence.  Scanning commenced at about 05:50 (#824 Vought Avenue.) and completed around 07:00  (#762 Vought Avenue) from the ground scanning from different angles and locations around the two  trees. 

    Results and Discussion 

    The visual thermal IR survey detected no bats at all.  Multiple species of birds were observed with the  thermal IR, with visual confirmation, in and around the area.  It was determined that there would be ‘No  Effect’ to bats if the trees were removed.  

    Recommendations 

    Work with DPW to better monitor the contractors work so that trees that need trimming are not missed  prior to the pupping season.   

  • Hawaiian Hoary Bat

    Acoustic Monitoring Project for Tree Removal at Maili Street on Schofield Barracks 01-14 July 2015

    Data prepared by C. Pinzari, for OANRP, July 2015

    Survey Goals

    Establish whether or not Hawaiian Hoary bats (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) are roosting with pups on two trees that are required to be removed for a construction project. The trees to be removed are (1) Kukui nut (Aleurites moluccanus) and (1) Eucalyptus spp. If bats are present, discuss with regulatory agency possible mitigation measures to continue project or postpone removal of trees until pupping season is completed.

    Survey Map

    Figure 1. Map of the Maili Street project site which received bat acoustic survey. Green dots indicate location of the two trees to be removed at the site.

    Map removed to protect rare resources. Available upon request

  • Survey Methods

    Acoustic surveys for bats were conducted from 01-14 July 2015 at the proposed tree cutting site for a total of 13 nights. One SM2Bat+ ultrasonic “bat detector” (Wildlife Acoustics) was placed between the two trees proposed to be removed (Figure 1). The trees are only about 5 meters apart.

    Bat detectors were set to record bat echolocation calls or “pulses” from dusk until dawn, wherein each bat “event” is triggered, recorded as a sound file, and logged for each pass a flying bat makes by the microphone of a detector during the night. The number of bat events and number of echolocation pulses within an event can be used to confirm bat presence and describe bat activity levels. Bat events can also contain information on foraging activity, by the presence of characteristic echolocation pulses that form a “feeding buzz”. Files collected during the recordings were scanned and filtered for bat presence using the program Kaleidoscope (version 1.1.22, Wildlife Acoustics) and visually inspected by sound and sight to confirm and count bat echolocation pulses. Foraging activity was also noted in call events containing feeding buzzes. Bat detectability (p), signifying presence or absence of the species for each survey was calculated using the program Presence (version 6.2, J.E. Hines, USGS). These acoustic surveys can detect whether bats are actively using the area within the range of the detectors with any frequency. The effective range of these detectors is upwards of about 50 m (C. Pinzari pers. comm.) A high detection rate could indicate the presence of a roost tree within the detection range. Whereby further surveys with a thermal imager would be required.

    Results and Discussion

    Survey results show an extremely low measure of bat detectability at this location during the acoustic surv