introduction to_0013 ba… · web viewthe eastern red bat was the most frequently recorded species...

UM-CIRE TASK ORDER_0013U.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEYNATURAL RESOURCE PROGRAM, MULTIPLE INSTALLATIONS

U.S. AIR FORCEBAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY

NATURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM, MULTIPLE INSTALLATIONS

2016-2018Andrews AFB, Arnold AFB, Barksdale AFB, BM Goldwater Range, Beale AFB, Brandywine RS, Camp Bullis, Cape Cod AFS, Charleston AFB, Columbus AFB, Creech AFB, Dare CR, Davidsonville TS, Davis Monthan AFB, Edwards AFB, Fort Dix, Fort Eustis, Fort Sam Houston, Fourth Cliff, Goodfellow AFB, Grand Bay Range, Hanscom AFB, Holloman AFB, Keesler AFB, Kirtland AFB, Lackland AFB , Lakehurst NAC, Langley AFB, Laughlin AFB, Lincoln Receiver, Luke AFB, Maxwell/Gunter AFB, McGuire AFB, Moody AFB, NWS Charleston, Nellis AFB, New Boston AFS, North AF AF, Poinsett ECR, Randolph AFB, Robins AFB, Sagamore Hill, Seymour Johnson AFB, Shaw AFB, Stockbridge TS, Travis AFB, Westover ARB.

U.S. AIR FORCEBAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY

NATURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM, MULTIPLE INSTALLATIONS

UM-CIRE TASK ORDER_0013U.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEYNATURAL RESOURCE PROGRAM, MULTIPLE INSTALLATIONS

U.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY – AFCE5O979317

CIRE ADMINISTRATIONDr. F. Richard Hauer, Director

[email protected]

Kate Hohenstein John T. WillsProgram Manager Assistant Director of Finance and Contracts

406-243-2617 [email protected] [email protected]

To cite this report: U.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY, NATURAL RESOURCE PROGRAM (Project # AFCE50979317). This project has been completed through the Center for Integrated Research on the Environment, University of Montana under the direction of PI F. Richard Hauer, Ph.D., in conjunction with Tetra Tech, Inc., Nathan A. Schwab, M.S. at 47 Air Force Bases: To Provide Surveys of Proposed and Recently Listed Species under the Endangered Species Act on: Andrews AFB, Arnold AFB, Barksdale AFB, BM Goldwater Range, Beale AFB, Brandywine RS, Camp Bullis, Cape Cod AFS, Charleston AFB, Columbus AFB, Creech AFB, Dare CR, Davidsonville TS, Davis Monthan AFB, Edwards AFB, Fort Dix, Fort Eustis, Fort Sam Houston, Fourth Cliff, Goodfellow AFB, Grand Bay Range, Hanscom AFB, Holloman AFB, Keesler AFB, Kirtland AFB, Lackland AFB , Lakehurst NAC, Langley AFB, Laughlin AFB, Lincoln Receiver, Luke AFB, Maxwell/Gunter AFB, McGuire AFB, Moody AFB, NWS Charleston, Nellis AFB, New Boston AFS, North AF AF, Poinsett ECR, Randolph AFB, Robins AFB, Sagamore Hill, Seymour Johnson AFB, Shaw AFB, Stockbridge TS, Travis AFB, Westover ARB. This Final Report UM-CIRE_0013 (2018) is in compliance with the Northwestern Division, Omaha District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Cooperative Agreement W9128F-14-2-0002.

Cooperative Agreement between the US Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division, Omaha District and the University of Montana-Center for Integrated Research on the Environment to Collect, Analyze, and Apply Resource Data to Implement Land Rehabilitation and Maintenance for Optimal Management of Public Lands under Control of the Department of Defense.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except through explicit, written permission by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division, Omaha District, 1616 Capitol Avenue Suite 365, Omaha, NE 68102-4901.

Readers should be aware that Internet Web sites offered as citations and/or sources for further information may have changed or disappeared between the time this was written and when it is read.

AGREEMENT NUMBER: W9128F-14-2-0002, UM-CIRE Task Order_0013AFCE50979317 – U.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY, NATURAL RESOURCE PROGRAMBeginning Date: 21 July 2016


End Date: 20 January 2019NATURAL RESOURCE PROGRAM, MULTIPLE

INSTALLATIONSU.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY

PROJECT AFCE50979317

Prepared for:

Ms. Kali Evans, PMP US Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division, Omaha District

Submitted to:

Ms. Kirsten ChristophersonNatural Resources Lead

Environmental Management DirectorateAir Force Civil Engineer Center

550 Hickam AveTravis AFB, CA 94535

Ms. Angelia BinderNatural Resources Lead

Air Force Civil Engineer Center114 Thompson St., B586Langley AFB, VA 23665

Mr. Zachary RiggNatural Resources Media Manager

Environmental Management DirectorateOperations Division, Midwest Branch, Offutt Section

106 Peacekeeper Drive Suite 2N3Offutt AFB, NE 68113

In Fulfillment of Work Conducted Under Cooperative Agreement between

US Army Corps of Engineers, Northwestern Division, Omaha District andUniversity of Montana-Center for Integrated Research on the Environment

USACE/OMAHA - UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT W9128F-14-2-0002

This report should be cited as follows:


Schwab, Nathan A. (2018). Tetra Tech, Inc. “U.S. Air Force Bat Acoustic Survey, Natural Resource Program (Project AFCE5O979317),” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Remediation Branch, Northwestern Division, Omaha District.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The purpose of CIRE Task Order_0013 (AFCE5O979317) is to conduct surveys at each of 47 Air Force installations to determine the presence of bat species using acoustic monitoring. The University of Montana-Center for Integrated Research on the Environment (CIRE) worked with bat expert Nathan Schwab of Tetra Tech, Inc., to analyze and report on the data collected at Air Force bases in Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia.

CIRE and Tetra Tech completed the acoustic surveys in fall of 2017, complying with all applicable environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Surveys sampled 21,044 detector-nights (cumulative number of nights surveyed by all detectors) over the course of 169 calendar nights between March 28 and September 12, 2017. Acoustic detectors recorded a total of 5,873,160 bat passes that were identified to the species level. We manually confirmed a total of 28 distinct species across all 47 installations.

Of the 18 installations with the potential for NLEB to occur, we documented the presence of the NLEB at seven installations. Installations with confirmed NLEB activity include Fort Dix, Lakehurst Naval Air Center, McGuire Air Force Base, Sagamore Hill, New Boston Air Force Station, Fort Eustis, and Dare County Range.

iU.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY – AFCE5O979317

Table of Contents1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Regulatory Framework.............................................................................................................................................1

2.1 Federal Protection..................................................................................................................................................1

2.2 State Protection........................................................................................................................................................4

2.3 Bat Habitat for Federally-Listed Species.......................................................................................................5

2.3.1 Gray Bat............................................................................................................................................................. 5

2.3.2 Indiana Bat....................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.3.3 Northern Long-eared Bat...........................................................................................................................5

3.0 Methods............................................................................................................................................................................ 6

3.1 Acoustic Detectors..................................................................................................................................................6

3.2 Data Quality Assurance and Control...............................................................................................................7

3.3 Data Analysis.............................................................................................................................................................7

4.0 Results...............................................................................................................................................................................8

4.1 Andrews Air Force Base....................................................................................................................................11

4.2 Arnold Air Force Base.........................................................................................................................................12

4.3 Barksdale Air Force Base..................................................................................................................................14

4.4 Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range...........................................................................................................15

4.5 Beale Air Force Base............................................................................................................................................17

4.6 Brandywine Receiver Station..........................................................................................................................18

4.7 Camp Bullis..............................................................................................................................................................19

4.8 Cape Cod Air Force Station...............................................................................................................................21

4.9 Charleston Air Force Base................................................................................................................................22

4.10 Columbus Air Force Base..................................................................................................................................23

4.11 Creech Air Force Base.........................................................................................................................................25

4.12 Dare County Range..............................................................................................................................................26

4.13 Davidsonville Transmitter Site.......................................................................................................................27

4.14 Davis-Monthan Air Force Base.......................................................................................................................29

4.15 Edwards Air Force Base....................................................................................................................................30

4.16 Fort Dix..................................................................................................................................................................... 32

4.17 Fort Eustis................................................................................................................................................................33

iiU.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY – AFCE5O979317

4.18 Fort Sam Houston.................................................................................................................................................34

4.19 Fourth Cliff...............................................................................................................................................................35

4.20 Goodfellow Air Force Base...............................................................................................................................37

4.21 Grand Bay Range...................................................................................................................................................38

4.22 Hanscom Air Force Base....................................................................................................................................39

4.23 Holloman Air Force Base...................................................................................................................................40

4.24 Keesler Air Force Base.......................................................................................................................................42

4.25 Kirtland Air Force Base......................................................................................................................................43

4.26 Lackland Air Force Base....................................................................................................................................44

4.27 Lakehurst Naval Air Center..............................................................................................................................45

4.28 Langley Air Force Base.......................................................................................................................................47

4.29 Laughlin Air Force Base.....................................................................................................................................48

4.30 Lincoln Receiver....................................................................................................................................................49

4.31 Luke Air Force Base.............................................................................................................................................51

4.32 Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base.....................................................................................................................52

4.33 McGuire Air Force Base.....................................................................................................................................53

4.34 Moody Air Force Base.........................................................................................................................................55

4.35 Naval Weapons Station Charleston..............................................................................................................56

4.36 Nellis Air Force Base...........................................................................................................................................57

4.37 New Boston Air Force Station.........................................................................................................................59

4.38 North Air Force Auxiliary Field......................................................................................................................60

4.39 Poinsett Electronic Combat Range................................................................................................................61

4.40 Randolph Air Force Base...................................................................................................................................62

4.41 Robins Air Force Base.........................................................................................................................................64

4.42 Sagamore Hill.........................................................................................................................................................65

4.43 Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base..................................................................................................................66

4.44 Shaw Air Force Base............................................................................................................................................67

4.45 Stockbridge Test Site..........................................................................................................................................69

4.46 Travis Air Force Base..........................................................................................................................................70

4.47 Westover Air Reserve Base..............................................................................................................................71

5.0 Discussion.....................................................................................................................................................................72

iiiU.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY – AFCE5O979317

5.1 Federal Threatened and Endangered Species.........................................................................................73

5.1.1 Gray Bat...........................................................................................................................................................73

5.1.2 Indiana Bat.....................................................................................................................................................73

5.1.3 Northern Long-eared Bat........................................................................................................................74

5.2 Other Bat Species..................................................................................................................................................74

6.0 Conclusion....................................................................................................................................................................75

7.0 Literature Cited..........................................................................................................................................................75

List of TablesTable 1. Likelihood of Occurrence for Threatened and Endangered Bat Species..........................................2Table 2. Bat Activity Summary for All Installations.....................................................................................................9Table 3. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Andrews Air Force Base..................................12Table 4. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Andrews Air Force Base.......................................................................................................................12Table 5. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Arnold Air Force Base......................................13Table 6. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Arnold Air Force Base...........................................................................................................................13Table 7. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Barksdale Air Force Base................................14Table 8. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Barksdale Air Force Base.....................................................................................................................15Table 9. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range.........16Table 10. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range..............................................................................................16Table 11. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Beale Air Force Base......................................17Table 12. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Beale Air Force Base..............................................................................................................................18Table 13. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Brandywine Receiver Station....................19Table 14. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Brandywine Receiver Station............................................................................................................19Table 15. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Camp Bullis........................................................20Table 16. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Camp Bullis................................................................................................................................................20Table 17. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Cape Cod Air Force Station.........................21Table 18. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Cape Cod Air Force Station.................................................................................................................22Table 19. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Charleston Air Force Base...........................22Table 20. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Charleston Air Force Base...................................................................................................................23Table 21. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Columbus Air Force Base.............................24

ivU.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY – AFCE5O979317

Table 22. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Columbus Air Force Base.....................................................................................................................24

Table 23. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Creech Air Force Base...................................25Table 24. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Creech Air Force Base...........................................................................................................................25Table 25. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Dare County Range.........................................26Table 26. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Dare County Range.................................................................................................................................27Table 27. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Davidson Transmitter Site..........................28Table 28. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Davidson Transmitter Site..................................................................................................................28Table 29. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base..................29Table 30. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base..........................................................................................................30Table 31. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Edwards Air Force Base...............................31Table 32. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Edwards Air Force Base.......................................................................................................................31Table 33. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Fort Dix Air Force Base.................................32Table 34. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Fort Dix Air Force Base.........................................................................................................................32Table 35. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Fort Eustis..........................................................33Table 36. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Fort Eustis..................................................................................................................................................34Table 37. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Fort Sam Houston...........................................35Table 38. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Fort Sam Houston...................................................................................................................................35Table 39. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Fourth Cliff.........................................................36Table 40. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Fourth Cliff.................................................................................................................................................36Table 41. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Goodfellow Air Force Base..........................37Table 42. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Goodfellow Air Force Base..................................................................................................................37Table 43. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Grand Bay Range.............................................38Table 44. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Grand Bay Range.....................................................................................................................................38Table 45. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Hanscom Air Force Base..............................39Table 46. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Hanscom Air Force Base......................................................................................................................40Table 47. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Holloman Air Force Base.............................41Table 48. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Holloman Air Force Base.....................................................................................................................41Table 49. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Keesler Air Force Base..................................42

vU.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY – AFCE5O979317

Table 50. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Keesler Air Force Base..........................................................................................................................42

Table 51. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Kirtland Air Force Base.................................43Table 52. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Kirtland Air Force Base........................................................................................................................44Table 53. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Lackland Air Force Base...............................45Table 54. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Lackland Air Force Base.......................................................................................................................45Table 55. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Lakehurst Naval Air Center........................46Table 56. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Lakehurst Naval Air Center................................................................................................................46Table 57. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Creech Air Force Base...................................47Table 58. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Langley Air Force Base.........................................................................................................................48Table 59. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Laughlin Air Force Base................................49Table 60. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Laughlin Air Force Base.......................................................................................................................49Table 61. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Lincoln Receiver..............................................50Table 62. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Lincoln Receiver......................................................................................................................................50Table 63. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Luke Air Force Base.......................................51Table 64. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Luke Air Force Base...............................................................................................................................52Table 65. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base...............53Table 66. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base.......................................................................................................53Table 67. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at McGuire Air Force Base................................54Table 68. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, McGuire Air Force Base........................................................................................................................54Table 69. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Moody Air Force Base...................................55Table 70. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Moody Air Force Base...........................................................................................................................55Table 71. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Naval Weapons Station Charleston.........56Table 72. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Naval Weapons Station Charleston.................................................................................................57Table 73. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Nellis Air Force Base......................................57Table 74. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Nellis Air Force Base..............................................................................................................................58Table 75. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at New Boston Air Force Station....................59Table 76. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, New Boston Air Force Station............................................................................................................59Table 77. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at North Air Force Auxiliary Field.................60

viU.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY – AFCE5O979317

Table 78. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, North Air Force Auxiliary Field.........................................................................................................61

Table 79. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Poinsett Electronic Combat Range..........61Table 80. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Poinsett Electronic Combat Range..................................................................................................62Table 81. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Randolph Air Force Base..............................63Table 82. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Randolph Air Force Base.....................................................................................................................63Table 83. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Robins Air Force Base...................................64Table 84. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Robins Air Force Base...........................................................................................................................64Table 85. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Sagamore Hill....................................................65Table 86. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Sagamore Hill............................................................................................................................................66Table 87. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base.............67Table 88. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Seymore-Johnson Air Force Base.....................................................................................................67Table 89. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Shaw Air Force Base......................................68Table 90. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Shaw Air Force Base..............................................................................................................................68Table 91. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Stockbridge Test Site.....................................69Table 92. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Stockbridge Test Site.............................................................................................................................69Table 93. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Travis Air Force Base.....................................70Table 94. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Travis Air Force Base............................................................................................................................71Table 95. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Westover Air Reserve Base.........................72Table 96. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector

Station, Westover Air Reserve Base.................................................................................................................72

List of AppendicesAppendix A. Figures

Appendix B. State Status of Bat Species by Region

Appendix C. Site Photographs

Appendix D. Geographic Coordinates for all Detector Locations

Appendix E. Bat Species Included in Acoustic Analysis at Each Installation

Appendix F. Species Diversity by Survey Location

1U.S. AIR FORCE BAT ACOUSTIC SURVEY – AFCE5O979317

1.0 Introduction

The Air Force Civil Engineer Center, Operations Division (AFCEC/CZO) assists the environmental programs at Air Force installations to ensure military mission activities are conducted in compliance with all applicable environmental laws, regulations, and policies. The AFCEC/CZO requested assistance to facilitate conservation compliance for bat species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by assessing the presence of bat species at military installations.

The University of Montana and Tetra Tech, Inc. (Tetra Tech) performed passive acoustic monitoring surveys to examine the presence of northern long-eared bats (NLEB, Myotis septentrionalis) and other bat species at 47 United States Air Force installations across the United States from late March to September of 2017. The installations surveyed for this project spanned 18 states (Table 1, Appendix A). This report provides background information on the habitats used by listed bat species, a summary of federal and state protections for bats, and complete results of the 2017 acoustic surveys.

2.0 Regulatory Framework

2.1 Federal Protection

Of the 45 species of bats known to occur in the continental United States, seven species are currently federally listed as threatened or endangered and subsequently protected under the ESA (USFWS 2017a). Based on the known or expected distributions of these species from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), three threatened or endangered bat species potentially occur within the boundaries of the Air Force installations included in this survey. These species include the gray bat (Myotis grisescens; endangered), Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis; endangered), and NLEB (threatened). Thirty-five of the 47 installations included in this survey have the potential to harbor at least one of these species (Table 1).

The lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris yerbabuenae) was officially de-listed on May 18, 2018 (83 FR 17093). The lesser long-nosed bat population was less than 500 when it was listed as endangered in 1988, and has since increased to over 200,000 bats (USFWS 2017b). A USFWS species status assessment concluded that the threats to the species have been eliminated or reduced and the population has recovered enough that it no longer meets the definition of an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act.

The level of federal protection among these three listed species varies based on their ESA designations. The gray bat and Indiana bat are listed as endangered, so purposeful take1 and

1 “Purposeful take is when the reason for the activity or action is to conduct some form of take. For instance, conducting a research project that includes collecting and putting bands on bats is a form of purposeful take. Intentionally killing or harming bats is also purposeful take and is prohibited” (USFWS 2016a).


incidental take2 of these species are prohibited throughout their range; however, incidental take may be allowed with a permit from USFWS. The NLEB is listed as threatened with a Section 4(d) rule. The intent of the 4(d) rule is to provide USFWS flexibility in implementing the ESA by modifying regulations necessary to provide for the conservation of a threatened species while not overburdening federal and state agencies, private landowners, and others with blanket regulations that do not further the conservation of the species. USFWS released the final 4(d) rule on January 14, 2016, determining that white-nose syndrome (WNS) is the primary threat to NLEB, and that regulating other sources of mortality or harm, such as from habitat loss, will not effectively conserve this species (USFWS 2016a).

The final 4(d) rule prohibits all purposeful take within the range of NLEB except: removal of NLEB from human structures, defense of human health (disease monitoring), or removal of hazardous trees for the protection of human life and property. All take incidental to otherwise lawful activities is allowed outside of the WNS Zone designated by USFWS. The WNS Zone includes all counties affected by WNS and an additional 150-mile buffer around these counties (USFWS 2016b).

For areas within the WNS Zone, incidental take is prohibited only if it 1) occurs within a hibernaculum, 2) consists of tree removal activities within a quarter-mile of a known hibernaculum at any time of the year or, 3) occurs within 150 feet of a known, occupied maternity roost tree from June 1 through July 31 (USFWS 2016a). All installations with a potential for NLEB occurrence are located within the current WNS Zone, and therefore incidental take is prohibited, as described in the previous sentence (Table 1). The USFWS database and WNS Zone Map is updated on a monthly basis (USFWS 2016b).

Table 1. Likelihood of Occurrence for Threatened and Endangered Bat Species

Installation StateLikelihood of Occurrence

Gray bat Indiana bat NLEB

Andrews Air Force Base MD NA Low Moderate

Arnold Air Force Base TN High High High

Barksdale Air Force Base LA NA NA High

Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range AZ NA NA NA

Beale Air Force Base CA NA NA NA

Brandywine Receiver Station MD NA Low Moderate

Camp Bullis TX NA NA NA

Cape Cod Air Force Station MA NA NA Moderate

Charleston Air Force Base SC NA NA Low

Columbus Air Force Base MS Low Low Low

Creech Air Force Base NV NA NA NA

Dare County Range NC Low Low High

2 “Incidental take is defined by the Endangered Species Act as take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of the carrying out of an otherwise lawful activity. For example, harvesting trees can kill bats that are roosting in the trees, but the purpose of the activity is not to kill bats” (USFWS 2016a).




Davidsonville Transmitter Site MD NA Low Moderate

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base AZ NA NA NA

Edwards Air Force Base CA NA NA NA

Fort Dix NJ NA Low Moderate

Fort Eustis VA Low Low Moderate

Fort Sam Houston TX NA NA NA

Fourth Cliff MA NA NA Moderate

Goodfellow Air Force Base TX NA NA NA

Grand Bay Range GA Low Low Low

Hanscom Air Force Base MA NA NA Moderate

Holloman Air Force Base NM NA NA NA

Keesler Air Force Base MS Low Low Low

Kirtland Air Force Base NM NA NA NA

Lackland Air Force Base TX NA NA NA

Lakehurst Naval Air Center NJ NA Low Moderate

Langley Air Force Base VA Low Low Moderate

Laughlin Air Force Base TX NA NA NA

Lincoln Receiver CA NA NA NA

Luke Air Force Base AZ NA NA NA

Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base AL Low Low Low

McGuire Air Force Base NJ NA Low Moderate

Moody Air Force Base GA Low Low Low

Naval Weapons Station Charleston SC NA NA Low

Nellis Air Force Base NV NA NA NA

New Boston Air Force Station NH NA NA Moderate

North Air Force Auxiliary Field SC NA NA Low

Poinsett Electronic Combat Range SC NA NA Low

Randolph Air Force Base TX NA NA NA

Robins Air Force Base GA Low Low Low

Sagamore Hill MA NA NA Moderate

Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base NC Low Low Low

Shaw Air Force Base SC NA NA Low

Stockbridge Test Site NY NA Low Moderate




Travis Air Force Base CA NA NA NA

Westover Air Reserve Base MA NA NA Moderate

1. Likelihood of Occurrence: High = Suitable habitat, species range overlaps with the Project Area, and known occurrences within and/or near the Project Area. Moderate = Species known to occur in habitat similar to the Project Area, species’ range overlaps with Project Area, and known occurrences near the Project Area. Low = Marginally suitable habitat in the Project Area, species’ range does not overlap with the Project Area, no known occurrences within and/or near the Project Area, and/or known as migratory species during spring and fall migration. NA = No record of this species in the state.

2.2 State Protection

The protection and regulation of bat species not listed under the federal ESA is typically at the discretion of state wildlife agencies. All of the states covered in this survey, except Alabama, maintain a state endangered or threatened species list. Most state-threatened or endangered species lists mimic the federal list for bats.

In the five northeastern states surveyed, the federally listed Indiana bat was listed as state endangered in all states within its range, and NLEB was listed as state-endangered or threatened in all except New Jersey (Appendix B). Additionally, the eastern small footed bat (Myotis leibii), little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus), and tri-colored bat (Perimyotis subflavus) were all listed as endangered in Massachusetts, Maryland, and New Hampshire. New Hampshire, New York, and Maryland have designated certain bat species as species of special concern.

In the six southeastern states surveyed, the gray bat, Indiana bat, Virginia big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus), and Ozark big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii ingens) state listings match the federal listing for all states within their range except for Alabama, which has no state list and designates species as a species of conservation concern (Appendix B). Although recently listed at the federal level, the NLEB is only listed as threatened in South Carolina and Virginia, despite all southeastern states being within its range. Additionally, the little brown bat and the tri-colored bat (currently proposed for federal listing) are listed as endangered in Virginia. Rafinesque’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus rafinesquii) is state-listed as endangered in South Carolina and Virginia, and designated as threatened in North Carolina.

In the five southwestern states surveyed, the Mexican long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris nivalis) is federally listed as endangered. Texas is the only state within the range of the Mexican long-nosed bat, which does list it as endangered (Appendix B). The lesser long-nosed bat is designated as state-threatened in New Mexico; but not in Arizona, which is also within its range.

Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas have additional bat species listed as threatened and endangered. The Mexican long-tongued bat (Choeronycteris Mexicana) is listed as endangered in New Mexico and threatened in Arizona. The southern long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae) is listed as endangered in Arizona. Rafinesque’s big-eared bat and southern yellow bat (Lasiurus ega) are listed as threatened in Texas. The western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus) is listed as threatened in New


Mexico. Finally, the spotted bat (Euderma maculatum) is listed as threatened in New Mexico and Texas, and Arizona has four additional bat species that are candidates for state listing (Appendix B). Townsend’s big-eared bat was also a candidate for state listing in California, receiving full protection for over three years, before its rejection in 2016. Although California and Nevada do not have any bat species state-designated as endangered or threatened, they have extensive lists of bat species designated as species of concern.

2.3 Bat Habitat for Federally-Listed Species

2.3.1 Gray Bat

This species primarily uses caves year-round, with preferences for different cave types during certain periods of the year (Tuttle 1979). Gray bats are known to forage parallel to streams, over water, and within forests during the summer months (LaVal et al. 1977; Caire et al. 1989). Suitable summer habitat includes caves located close to rivers and streams, but some individuals may travel up to 22 miles to foraging locations (Tuttle and Kennedy 2005). Winter habitat (hibernacula) includes caves that are deep and vertical (Tuttle 1979). Rarely, the species may use non-cave roost sites like storm sewers (Hays and Bingman 1964), and summer maternity and bachelor colonies sometimes form in dams (Pers. Comm. S. Allen, Arnold AFB). Hibernation occurs from the beginning of October to late March, and the breeding season occurs from September to October (Tuttle 1976). The species is known to migrate between 10 and 271 miles between summer maternity sites and winter hibernacula locations (Tuttle and Kennedy 2005).

2.3.2 Indiana Bat

Indiana bats primarily use floodplain and riparian forests for roosting and foraging (Humphrey et al. 1977). Other suitable summer habitats include upland forests, old fields, edges of croplands, wooded fencerows, and pastures with isolated trees (USFWS 2007). Summer roost areas consist of trees with exfoliating bark. Maternity colonies utilize large, dead trees with high sun exposure (Miller et al. 2002). Suitable winter habitat for the species includes underground caves and cave-like structures (e.g., abandoned or active mines and railroad tunnels). Hibernation occurs after mating in the fall until mid-April (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Winter and summer habitats may be as much as 300 miles apart (USFWS 2004).

2.3.3 Northern Long-eared Bat

NLEBs are known to forage within upland and lowland woodlots, as well as tree-lined corridors (USFWS 2014). Suitable summer habitat consists of a wide variety of forested/wooded habitats, where NLEBs roost, forage, and travel, and their summer habitat may also include some adjacent non-forested habitats, such as emergent wetlands, the edges of agricultural fields, old fields, and pastures (USFWS 2014). The species has also been observed roosting in human-made structures, such as buildings, barns, under bridges, and in bat houses (USFWS 2014). Suitable winter habitat for the species includes underground caves and cave-like structures (e.g., abandoned or active


mines and railroad tunnels). Hibernation occurs from the beginning of October to mid-March, and the summer breeding season occurs from the beginning of April to the end of September (USFWS 2014). The species is considered to be a local migrant (typically 40 to 50 miles), although known migratory distances may vary between 5 and 168 miles (USFWS 2014).

3.0 Methods

The objective of acoustic monitoring in 2017 was to assess bat use and the occurrence of local and migratory bat species at each installation. The overall survey period for this project began in late- March and ended in mid-September; however, the survey duration for each individual installation was approximately 3 months. In general, installations located in the western U.S. surveyed the early window of bat activity (April, May, and June), while installations in the eastern U.S. surveyed bat activity later in the season (June, July, and August). These time periods include the summer maternity period, and may also include periods of migration in the spring and early fall. The statement of objectives provided by AFCEC/CZO required at least three inspection surveys resulting in 4 to 6 survey nights at each site. We designed the acoustic monitoring surveys to exceed the minimum level of effort required in the statement of objectives to protect against potential equipment failures, and to better document presence of rare species. Skalak et al. (2012) found relatively few nights (2-5) were required to detect species considered common, while longer sampling period (> 45 nights) were needed to detect species considered rare. We placed detector stations in locations recommended in the 2017 Range-Wide Indiana Bat Summer Survey Guidelines (USFWS 2017b) to maximize detection of threatened and endangered species (especially NLEBs), and to maximize detection of the overall bat species diversity at installations with no threatened or endangered species present.

3.1 Acoustic Detectors

The Project team used Wildlife Acoustics Song Meter 4 full spectrum monitoring systems (bat detectors) to detect and record the echolocation of bats at each installation. Installations received a variable number of bat detectors (range: 3 – 9), depending on size of installation and the amount of suitable habitat. All detectors remained in their designated locations throughout the study period at each installation (Appendix A). Each bat detector station consisted of the bat detector, powered by a 6-volt battery, and a microphone mounted on a tripod. The microphone height of each of the ground-based bat detectors was approximately 3 meters, which improves recording quality by minimizing the effect of ground clutter and temperature on echolocation sequences. In addition, we attempted to place microphones at least 3 meters from vegetation or other obstructions, and at least 15 meters from known or suitable roost sites. Suitable locations for sampling included, but were not limited to, forest canopy openings, near water sources, wooded tree lines, and woodland edges (USFWS 2017b; Appendix C and Appendix D). We programmed each bat detector to record from sunset to sunrise using the following settings: trigger window = 2 seconds, sampling rate = 256k, gain = 12 decibels, and trigger max = 15 seconds.


3.2 Data Quality Assurance and Control

Tetra Tech implemented quality assurance and quality control measures during all stages of data collection, analysis, and report preparation. The use of multiple detector stations at each installation maximized redundancy and minimized data loss. During data analysis, any potential threatened and endangered species echolocation files were internally reviewed, and also verified by a third-party bat acoustic expert. Additionally, this report received an internal peer review, as well as a review by a technical editor.

3.3 Data Analysis

Bats emit pulses of high frequency sound to navigate in their environment and search for prey. A single pulse (or call), is generally not helpful for identifying a species; however, a series of pulses (known as an echolocation sequence or bat pass) can be used more reliably to assign a species classification. We define a bat pass as an echolocation sequence with two or more call pulses separated by two or more seconds (Loeb et al. 2015). The number of bat passes is then standardized per unit of effort into a detector-night (one detector operational for one night) to describe bat activity.

All recorded data files were initially processed using automated bat echolocation identification software that was approved by USFWS to identify data files containing potential bat passes. Data were filtered and analyzed using Kaleidoscope Pro (Wildlife Acoustics, Inc.) version 4.2.0 and the classifier “Bats of North America 4.2.0” for expected species. A sensitivity level of “0 balanced/neutral” was used, per USFWS recommendations (USFWS 2017c), and signals of interest ranged from 16 to 120 kilohertz, lasting 2 to 500 milliseconds, with a minimum of two call pulses. We determined expected species based on known and expected distributions from USFWS, county records, and the presence of suitable habitat (Appendix E). All activity rates described below were derived from the Kaleidoscope Pro results. No specific classifier exists for cave myotis (Myotis velifer), so we used the classifier for little brown bat (Myotis lucifugus) as a surrogate, because the distribution of these two species does not overlap on these military installations, except at Creech Air Force Base (AFB). At Creech AFB, bat activity auto-classified as little brown bat by the software could include little brown bat and/or cave myotis. We also used the classifier for western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis) as a surrogate for big free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops macrotis), because no classifier exists for the latter species. The ghost-faced bat (Mormoops megalophylla) may be present at Camp Bullis, Fort Sam Houston and Randolph AFB; however, the echolocation characteristics of this species are unknown, and no acoustic classifier exists, so identification of this species was not attempted. Lastly, due to the extreme overlap in acoustic signatures between eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis) and Seminole bat (Lasiurus seminolus), activity rates based the software identifications could be misleading where these two species co-occur.

To ensure accuracy of auto-classifications, a subset of the recordings classified to the species level were manually reviewed in full spectrum format using SonoBat 4.2.1 (SonoBat, Inc.). SonoBat was used for manual review to cross-validate Kaleidoscope Pro classifications with an additional, and independent, bat echolocation identification software program. The species identifications


provided in the results tables that were not manually confirmed were only identified through the initial processing of data with Kaleidoscope Pro. SonoBat was used for manual review because of its extensive reference library of known echolocation sequences and superior spectrogram platform for reviewing full-spectrum calls. In addition, we used SonoBat to filter and auto-classify Leptonycteris species for the three installations in Arizona with the potential for lesser long-nosed bat. A lack of manual confirmation, does not necessarily preclude species presence, as not all echolocation sequences contain species-specific diagnostic characteristics; therefore, some species may be present despite a lack of manual confirmation.

For recordings automatically classified as species other than the gray bat or NLEB, bat passes were filtered based on two parameters (> 5 pulses and a matching pulse ratio > 66 percent) to ensure high quality bat passes were considered, and to confirm at least one classification per species, per installation. All recordings automatically classified as NLEB that met the filter criteria (> 5 pulses, matching pulse ratio > 66 percent, and high frequency > 100 kilohertz) were manually reviewed. All recordings automatically classified as gray bat that met the filter criteria (> 5 pulses, matching pulse ratio > 66 percent, characteristic frequency > 44 kilohertz) were manually reviewed. All probable and questionable files initially identified as gray bat and NLEB were also reviewed by an independent, third-party acoustics expert. No attempt was made to manually confirm Indiana bat echolocation files, as there are no reliable or diagnostic echolocation characteristics that separate this species from the little brown bat (Szewczak et al. 2016). During manual review, Tetra Tech considered a recording as suitable for species-level identification if 1) the recording included search phase pulses, 2) the individual call pulses within the bat pass were not oversaturated, and when possible 3) the individual call pulses included the presence of harmonics.

4.0 Results

During the 2017 survey, 21,044 detector-nights (cumulative number of nights surveyed by all detectors) were sampled over the course of 169 calendar nights, between March 28 and September 12, 2017. A total of 5,873,160 bat passes were recorded and identified to the species level by Kaleidoscope Pro, resulting in an overall mean activity rate of 279.1 bat passes/detector-night across all 241 detectors (Table 2). We manually confirmed a total of 28 different species across all 47 installations. The following tables summarize the results of filtering and species classification of the recorded data files according to Kaleidoscope Pro, even if we were unable to manually confirm presence. Activity rates derived in this study (bat passes/detector-night) do not directly correlate to abundance (e.g., 10 bat passes could be 10 individual bats, or a single bat making 10 passes; or a single bat could be recorded on multiple detectors), but the activity rates presented in the results do provide a relative comparison of standardized activity levels across habitats and locations. Appendix F shows the species diversity across each location.

Table 2. Bat Activity Summary for All Installations


InstallationNumber of Detectors

Total Bat Passes

Mean Activity

Rate2

Standard Error

No. Species

Detector-Nights

Operational

Andrews Air Force Base

5 188,509 380.0 36.3 9 496

Arnold Air Force Base

5 80,830 164.0 16.3 13 493

Barksdale Air Force Base

7 50,863 85.8 9.8 12 593

Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range

6 159,227 265.0 28.2 12 600

Beale Air Force Base

5 86,302 167.0 17.5 16 518

Brandywine Receiver Station

5 67,169 132.0 15.6 9 508

Camp Bullis 6 264,573 754.0 104.0 11 351

Cape Cod Air Force Station

5 39,338 24.9 24.9 7 472

Charleston Air Force Base

5 106,081 246.0 25.8 12 431

Columbus Air Force Base

5 123,062 279.0 28.8 12 441

Creech Air Force Base

4 65,370 169.0 19.9 17 387

Dare County Range

8 78,642 119.0 12.5 11 663

Davidsonville Transmitter Site

5 152,432 312.4 36.7 9 488

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base

5 77,886 189.0 20.8 15 413

Edwards Air Force Base

5 98,880 203.0 19.6 16 487

Fort Dix 6 109,756 190.0 19.9 9 577

Fort Eustis 5 79,620 180.5 19.0 11 441

Fort Sam Houston 5 253,352 708.0 75.1 11 358

Fourth Cliff 4 56,125 178.2 34.1 8 367

Goodfellow Air Force Base

4 88,452 231.5 24.5 8 382



Total Bat Passes

Mean Activity

Rate2

Standard Error

No. Species

Detector-Nights

Operational

Grand Bay Range 5 247,196 563.1 53.0 11 431

Hanscom Air Force Base

6 179,229 340.1 39.4 8 527

Holloman Air Force Base

5 148,606 421.0 49.6 15 353

Keesler Air Force Base

4 148,072 580.7 58.1 12 255

Kirtland Air Force Base

5 153,685 356.6 43.6 16 431

Lackland Air Force Base

5 169,168 416.0 45.8 11 407

Lakehurst Naval Air Center

9 84,069 103.0 11.4 9 817

Langley Air Force Base

5 72,489 160.4 17.5 12 452

Laughlin Air Force Base

4 127,441 357.9 38.4 12 339

Lincoln Receiver 3 117,619 606.3 73.5 15 194

Luke Air Force Base

4 59,402 159.7 19.6 13 372

Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base

5 52,207 126.7 17.6 12 412

McGuire Air Force Base

5 139,476 292.4 10.8 9 477

Moody Air Force Base

5 238,994 533.5 50.7 11 448

Naval Weapons Station Charleston

5 222,599 505.0 53.5 11 441

Nellis Air Force Base

5 124,137 286.0 27.2 17 434

New Boston Air Force Station

6 143,555 240.0 27.3 8 599

North Air Force Auxiliary Field

4 93,002 244.7 22.7 12 380

Poinsett Electronic Combat Range

5 114,766 245.2 24.2 12 459



Total Bat Passes

Mean Activity

Rate2

Standard Error

No. Species

Detector-Nights

Operational

Randolph Air Force Base

4 108,503 728.2 83.4 10 149

Robins Air Force Base

5 251,388 768.8 72.0 12 384

Sagamore Hill 5 116,400 262.8 28.8 7 443

Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base

5 108,183 240.9 24.4 9 449

Shaw Air Force Base

4 98,284 263.5 26.5 12 373

Stockbridge Test Site

7 56,359 96.2 12.2 9 586

Travis Air Force Base

5 82,981 191.6 26.8 13 433

Westover Air Reserve Base

6 188,952 354.5 39.8 8 533

4.1 Andrews Air Force Base

On May 18, the field team deployed five detectors at Andrews AFB, which recorded data until mid to late August (Table 3). The mean activity rate recorded at Andrews AFB (380 bat passes/detector-night) ranked among the top third activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest level of activity at this installation was recorded at Station MDAN-05 (536 bat passes / detector-night), and the lowest was at Station MDAN-04 (189 bat passes/detector-night).

A total of nine species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro; however, only five species were manually confirmed (Table 4). Confirmed species included the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied at each station. The big brown bat was the most frequently recorded species, with a mean activity rate of 201 bat passes/detector-night, followed by the eastern red bat and silver-haired bat. A total of four bat passes were auto-classified as NLEB, but were not able to be identified to the species level during manual review.


Table 3. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Andrews Air Force Base

Station

Level of Effort Bat Activity Summary

Operational Period (2017)

Detector- Nights

Total # of Bat Passes

Mean Activity Rate Standard Error

MDAN-01 May 18 – August 27 101 34,377 340.4 21.0

MDAN-02 May 18 – August 30 104 42,850 412.0 27.9

MDAN-03 May 18 – August 21 95 39,191 412.5 21.6

MDAN-04 May 18 – August 21 95 17,956 189.0 12.0

MDAN-05 May 18 – August 27 101 54,135 536.0 31.4

Overall1 496 188,509 380.0 36.3

1. Represents cumulative values for detector-nights and total number of passes and activity rates across all detectors in the Project Area.

Table 4. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Andrews Air Force Base

Species

Station Overall Mean

Activity Rate

Standard ErrorMDAN-

01MDAN-

02MDAN-

03MDAN-

04MDAN-

05

Big brown bat 191.9 222.7 211.1 52.7 315.4 201.0 8.6

Eastern red bat 62.6 51.6 92.7 48.5 91.9 69.3 2.5

Eastern small-footed bat1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Evening bat1 35.8 15.9 28.3 13.4 53.5 29.5 1.6

Hoary bat 17.9 40.3 22.5 35.0 29.5 29.1 1.4

Little brown bat1 2.2 1.5 8.9 4.5 9.7 5.3 0.4

NLEB1 0 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Silver-haired bat 27.5 77.4 46.1 33.8 32.4 43.7 1.8

Tri-colored bat 2.4 2.7 2.9 1.0 3.5 2.5 0.1

1. Species presence not confirmed during manual review.

4.2 Arnold Air Force Base

On May 4, the field team deployed five detectors within the Industrial Area at Arnold AFB, which recorded data through the end of July and mid-August (Table 5). The field team was unable to deploy detectors in the highest quality bat habitat at Arnold AFB due to site logistics and the Industrial Area experiences noise disturbances from testing, The mean activity rate recorded at Arnold (164 bat passes/detector-night) ranked among the lower activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station TNAR-03 (238


bat passes/detector-night), which was nearly double the activity recorded at Stations TNAR-02 and TNAR-04.

A total of 13 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and eight species were manually confirmed (Table 6). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, gray bat, little brown bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied at each station. The Seminole bat and evening bat were the most commonly identified species, followed by the eastern red bat and hoary bat. Given the lack of previous detections or captures of Seminole bats at Arnold AFB and the ambiguity between Seminole bat and eastern red bat echolocation signatures, the activity identified as Seminole bats by Kaleidoscope Pro likely belongs to eastern red bat.

A total of 13 bat passes were auto-classified as NLEB across four stations, but were not able to be identified to the species level during manual review. A total of 2,143 gray bat passes were auto-classified across all five stations, and presence was confirmed at Stations TNAR-01 and TNAR-02. The Indiana bat was auto-classified at each station, but no attempt was made to differentiate these recordings from the little brown bat; therefore, presence of the Indiana bat was not confirmed.

Table 5. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Arnold Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

TNAR-01 May 4 – August 14 102 20,397 200.0 11.7

TNAR-02 May 4 – August 14 102 11,968 117.3 12.7

TNAR-03 May 4 – August 14 102 24,287 238.1 13.5

TNAR-04 May 4 – August 14 102 10,452 102.0 6.0

TNAR-05 May 4 – July 28 85 13,726 161.5 12.1

Overall1 493 80,830 164.0 16.3


Table 6. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Arnold Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorTNAR-

01TNAR-

02TNAR-

03TNAR-

04TNAR-

05

Big brown bat 4.6 3.4 39.3 7.7 3.2 11.9 1.5

Eastern red bat 11.8 7.0 15.0 18.9 27.5 15.6 1.7

Eastern small-footed bat1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Evening bat 70.6 31.1 63.0 21.7 33.8 44.4 4.9


SpeciesStation Overall

Mean Activity

Rate

Standard ErrorTNAR-

01TNAR-

02TNAR-

03TNAR-

04TNAR-

05

Hoary bat 11.5 20.6 28.9 10.0 3.2 15.2 3.0

Gray bat 4.3 5.2 4.5 3.9 3.6 4.3 0.5

Indiana bat1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.1 <0.1

Little brown bat 1.3 2.5 2.3 8.8 3.5 3.7 0.4

NLEB1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 0 0 <0.1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole Bat1 84.3 33.1 60.6 24.3 66.3 53.3 5.6


Tri-colored bat 9.7 13.4 21.3 5.4 17.2 13.3 1.4


4.3 Barksdale Air Force Base

On April 27, the field team deployed seven at Barksdale AFB, which recorded data through mid-July and early August (Table 7). The mean activity rate recorded at Barksdale AFB (85.8 bat passes/detector-night) ranked among the lower activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest level of activity at this installation was recorded at Station LABA-06 (135.2 bat passes/detector-night), nearly seven times the bat passes recorded at Station LABA-02 or LABA-03.

A total of 12 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro; however, only nine species were manually confirmed (Table 8). Confirmed species included the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, silver-haired bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. The evening bat was the most commonly recorded species, followed by the Seminole bat and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at six of the stations, for a total of 21 passes, but this species was not manually confirmed at any station. Each was determined to be either Myotis species or unidentified bats. Kaleidoscope Pro 4.2.0 auto-classified 21 bat passes as potential NLEB during analysis, all of which were manually reviewed.

Table 7. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Barksdale Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

LABA-01 April 27 – July 10 74 4,338 58.6 4.3

LABA-02 April 27 – July 10 74 1,894 25.6 2.4

LABA-03 April 27 – July 16 80 1,922 24.0 5.3


Station



Detector- Nights



LABA-04 April 27 – August 1 96 10,638 110.8 9.1

LABA-05 April 27 – July 12 76 8,312 109.4 7.7

LABA-06 April 27 – August 5 100 13,519 135.2 8.9

LABA-07 April 27 – July 29 93 10,240 110.1 16.2

Overall1 593 50,863 85.8 9.8


Table 8. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Barksdale Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorLABA

-01LABA

-02LABA

-03LABA

-04LABA

-05LABA

-06LABA

-07

Big brown bat 1.1 0.8 0.4 4.2 12.8 22.6 8.2 7.7 0.9

Brazilian free-tailed bat

2.4 3.8 12.3 3.8 6.8 12.4 4.6 1.4 1.4

Eastern red bat 8.6 5.9 0.7 22.6 7.2 7.0 6.6 8.7 1.0

Evening bat 11.9 5.6 2.3 38.6 37.8 41.8 18.4 23.5 2.5

Hoary bat 2.0 1.6 2.7 2.8 4.5 6.6 2.9 3.4 0.6

Little brown bat1 3.1 3.7 0.3 12.6 1.7 3.1 3.2 4.2 0.5

NLEB1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Northern yellow bat

0.7 0.6 0.5 1.9 4.2 3.0 3.4 2.1 0.4

Seminole bat1 12.2 2.6 3.4 9.6 28.5 15.5 31.6 15.1 2.1

Silver-haired bat 0.3 0.4 1.2 1.1 1.0 2.5 1.1 1.2 0.2

Southeastern bat <0.1 0 0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 <0.1

Tri-colored bat 16.2 0.7 0.3 13.3 4.8 20.8 30.0 13.1 1.8


4.4 Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range

On April 10, the field team deployed six detectors at Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range, which recorded data through mid-July (Table 9). The mean activity rate recorded at Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range (265 bat passes / detector-night) is considered within the average range among all installations surveyed. The highest levels of activity at this installation were recorded at Stations AZBG-01, AZBG-02, and AZBG-04.


Station AZBG-05 showed significantly lower activity rates for most species. A total of12 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro and nine species were manually confirmed including big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, cave myotis, hoary bat, pallid bat, western small footed myotis, and Yuma myotis. (Table 10). Activity rates for each species varied across each station. California myotis dominated species activity levels, although canyon bat and Brazilian free-tailed bat were also detected at elevated activity levels compared to other species.

Table 9. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range

Station



Detector- Nights



AZBG-01 April 10 – July 18 99 42,252 426.8 46.3

AZBG-02 April 10 – July 6 87 44,849 515.5 41.0

AZBG-03 April 10 – July 18 99 18,058 182.4 16.7

AZBG-04 April 10 – July 24 105 42,809 407.7 32.8

AZBG-05 April 10 – July 24 105 2,795 26.6 2.9

AZBG-06 April 10 – July 24 105 8,464 80.6 5.6

Overall1 600 159,227 265.0 28.2


Table 10. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Barry M. Goldwater Air Force Range

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorAZBG-

01AZBG-

02AZBG-

03AZBG-

04AZBG-

05AZBG-

06

Big brown bat 30.3 60.7 1.3 4.5 0.7 1.9 15.1 2.5

Brazilian free-tailed bat 96.4 175.0 15.7 1.6 0.7 3.7 44.9 8.0

California myotis 238.7 186.1 54.9 145.9 11.8 33.5 108.9 12.9

Canyon bat 28.0 51.0 86.9 175.6 6.7 20.0 61.7 7.7

Cave myotis2 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Lesser long-nosed bat3 - - - - - - - -

Hoary bat 23.4 12.0 6.4 4.1 2.1 3.4 8.3 0.9

Pallid bat 1.9 1.0 3.4 11.0 2.5 5.7 4.4 0.5

Spotted bat1 0 0 0.1 0.4 <0.1 0.7 0.2 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat1 0.4 1.1 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.1

Western mastiff bat1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorAZBG-

01AZBG-

02AZBG-

03AZBG-

04AZBG-

05AZBG-

06

Yuma myotis 7.9 28.5 13.5 64 2.0 12.2 21.4 2.3

1. Species presence not confirmed during manual review.2. Substitution of a similar species required for analysis.

3. Leptonycteris species identified with SonoBat software.

4.5 Beale Air Force Base

On March 28, the field team deployed five detectors at Beale AFB, which recorded data through late June and mid-July (Table 11). The mean activity rate recorded at Beale AFB (167 bat passes/detector-night) ranked in the bottom third of activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest mean activity rates at this installation were recorded at Stations CABE-01 (304.8 bat passes / detector-night) and CABE-02 (291.4 bat passes / detector-night), nearly five times the volume of bat passes recorded at Stations CABE-03 or CABE-05.

A total of 16 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and 10 species were manually confirmed (Table 12). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, pallid bat, silver-haired bat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, and western red bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. Brazilian free-tailed bat was the most frequently recorded species (59 bat passes / detector-night), followed by California myotis, Yuma myotis, and big brown bat.

Table 11. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Beale Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

CABE-01 March 28 – July 12 106 32,307 304.8 22.1

CABE-02 March 28 – July 12 106 30,889 291.4 23.2

CABE-03 March 28 – June 30 94 5,201 55.3 6.0

CABE-04 March 28 – July 12 106 12,199 115.1 17.8

CABE-05 March 28 – July 12 106 5,706 53.8 5.2

Overall1 518 86,302 167.0 17.5



Table 12. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Beale Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorCABE-

01CABE-

02CABE-

03CABE-

04CABE-

05

Big brown bat 45.0 17.4 5.6 11.9 5.3 17.3 2.4

Brazilian free-tailed bat 93.9 53.2 33.1 75.7 36.2 59.0 7.4

California myotis 69.5 100.7 0.2 3.3 0.3 35.6 4.6

Canyon bat 1.1 2.3 0.1 00.3 0.1 0.8 0.1

Fringed myotis1 <0.1 0.1 0 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Hoary bat 25.7 14.6 10.7 9.5 5.9 13.3 1.6

Little brown bat 0.9 1.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.1

Long-eared bat1 <0.1 <0.1 0 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Long-legged bat1 0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Pallid bat 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.2 <0.1


Spotted bat1 <0.1 <0.1 0 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat 0.2 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0 0.1 <0.1

Western red bat 5.7 5.2 0.5 0.4 0.4 2.5 0.3

Western small-footed bat1 0.7 2.1 <0.1 0 0 0.6 0.1

Yuma myotis1 40.6 83.5 0.7 1.8 1.2 26.1 2.9


4.6 Brandywine Receiver Station

On May 19, the field team deployed five detectors at Brandywine Receiver Station, which recorded data through late August (Table 13). The mean activity rate recorded at Brandywine Receiver Station (132 bat passes / detector-night) ranked among the lower activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station MDBR-01 (222.4 bat passes/ detector-night), nearly twice the mean activity rates recorded at Stations MDBR-02, MDBR-03 and MDBR-05. Station MDBR-01 also recorded the highest level of bat activity for all species at the installation.

A total of nine species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and six species were manually confirmed, including the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat (Table 14). The eastern red bat was the most frequently recorded species (57.4 bat passes / detector-night), followed by the big brown bat and evening bat. A total of 12 bat passes were auto-classified as NLEB across three of the stations, but were not able to be identified to the species level during manual review.


Table 13. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Brandywine Receiver Station

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

MDBR-01 May 19 – August 29 102 22,688 222.4 20.0

MDBR-02 May 19 – August 29 102 10,072 98.7 9.9

MDBR-03 May 19 – August 28 101 10,297 102.0 7.1

MDBR-04 May 19 – August 29 102 13,937 136.6 10.1

MDBR-05 May 19 – August 28 101 10,175 100.7 13.7

Overall1 508 67,169 132.0 15.6


Table 14. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Brandywine Receiver Station

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorMDBR-

01MDBR-

02MDBR-

03MDBR-

04MDBR-

05

Big brown bat 40.8 15.0 35.6 28.6 23.3 28.7 4.1

Eastern red bat 106.2 43.1 34.6 60.1 42.4 57.4 7.1

Eastern small-footed bat1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Evening bat1 43.8 19.9 17.0 21.0 15.8 23.5 2.9

Hoary bat 6.9 2.6 4.1 5.1 3.9 4.5 0.6

Little brown bat 15.3 11.9 2.7 14.8 6.6 10.3 1.2

NLEB1 0.1 <0.1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Tri-colored bat 2.3 2.2 1.3 1.6 2.0 1.9 0.2


4.7 Camp Bullis

On April 24, the field team deployed six detectors at Camp Bullis, which recorded data through late May and mid-July (Table 15). The mean activity recorded at Camp Bullis (754 bat passes/detector-night) was the second highest mean activity recorded among all installations. The highest mean activity rates at this installation were recorded at Stations TXCB-05 and TXCB-06 (1,619.2 and 950.7 bat passes / detector-night, respectively), nearly four times the mean activity rate of Station TXCB-03.

A total of 11 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and 9 species were manually confirmed (Table 16). Confirmed species included the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, cave


myotis, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station, and no station consistently recorded the highest or lowest activity rates across species. The Brazilian free-tailed bat and northern yellow bat dominated species activity levels, followed by the silver-haired bat and hoary bat.

Table 15. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Camp Bullis

Station



Detector- Nights



TXCB-01 April 24 – July 14 81 33,673 415.7 40.4

TXCB-02 April 24 – June 21 58 28,277 487.5 52.7

TXCB-03 April 24 –May 21 27 15,114 560.0 50.9

TXCB-04 April 24 – July 17 84 69,429 826.5 62.0

TXCB-05 April 24 – June 2 33 53,432 1,619.2 61.3

TXCB-06 April 24 – July 1 68 64,648 950.7 49.5

Overall1 351 264,573 754.0 104.0


Table 16. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Camp Bullis

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorTXCB-

01TXCB-

02TXCB-

03TXCB-

04TXCB-

05TXCB-

06

Big brown bat 22.0 36.4 51.2 33.4 101.9 33.9 39.2 6.7

Big free-tailed bat1,2 0.4 0.2 <0.1 0.5 0.2 <0.1 0.3 0.1

Brazilian free-tailed bat 175.2 192.2 264.0 303.0 440.2 366.0 277.3 40.8

Cave myotis2 8.3 3.2 2.4 12.7 3.2 29.5 11.7 1.3

Eastern red bat 15.6 19.4 8.7 27.4 14.6 58.5 26.7 2.8

Evening bat 7.6 9.1 5.2 12.8 7.2 60.5 19.1 2.1

Hoary bat 39.8 45.7 73.0 48.9 122.3 67.0 58.5 9.4

Northern yellow bat 91.9 106.9 65.2 275.0 246.7 199.7 218.6 26.8

Pallid bat1 0.6 0.5 0.8 1.5 1.9 5.6 1.9 0.3

Silver-haired bat 53.3 73.0 88.3 109.0 180.0 127.9 99.0 1.3

Tri-colored bat 1.1 0.9 1.0 2.4 0.8 2.0 1.5 0.2

1. Species presence not confirmed during manual review.2. Substitution of similar species required for analysis.


4.8 Cape Cod Air Force Station

On May 25, the field team deployed five detectors at Cape Cod Air Force Station, which recorded data through late August and early September (Table 17). The mean activity rate recorded at Cape Cod Air Force Station (24.9 bat passes/detector-night) was the lowest mean activity rate among all installations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station MACC-01 (221.4 bat passes/ detector-night), which far surpassed overall activities levels recorded at all other stations at this installation. A high volume of big brown bat passes inflated the overall mean at Station MACC-01, while more even activity levels were recorded among species at Station MACC-03.

A total of seven species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and six were manually confirmed (Table 18). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. The big brown bat was by far the most frequently recorded species (62.7 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the eastern red bat.

A total of 11 species were auto-classified as NLEB across two of the five stations; however, this species was not confirmed during manual review. These files were determined to be false positives, and identified as either Myotis species or unidentified bats.

Table 17. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Cape Cod Air Force Station

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

MACC-01 May 25 – September 5 103 22,805 221.4 37.5



MACC-04 May 25 – August 14 67 1,599 4.9 4.9

MACC-05 May 25 – August 29 96 1,338 1.6 1.6

Overall1 472 39,338 24.9 24.9



Table 18. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Cape Cod Air Force Station

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorMACC-

01MACC-

02MACC-

03MACC-

04MACC-

05

Big brown bat 197.3 36.9 39.4 9.3 8.4 62.7 7.9

Eastern red bat 19.1 9.3 32.4 10.1 1.4 15.0 2.8

Hoary bat 3.1 6.8 1.4 3.1 2.4 3.4 0.6

Little brown bat 0.7 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.1

NLEB1 <0.1 0 0.1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1


Tri-colored bat 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 <0.1


4.9 Charleston Air Force Base

On May 10, the field team deployed five detectors at Charleston AFB, which recorded data through late July and mid-August (Table 19). The mean activity rate recorded at Charleston AFB (246 bat passes/detector-night) within the average range for activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest mean activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station SCCH-01(573.6 bat passes/detector-night), nearly 2.5 times the mean activity recorded at any other station. Station SCCH-01 recorded a much higher level of bat activity for most species, with the exception of Rafinesque’s bat and silver-haired bat. A total of 12 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and eight species were manually confirmed (Table 20). Confirmed species include big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, silver-haired bat and tri-colored bat. Evening bat was the most frequently recorded species (72.8 bat passes/ detector-night), followed by Seminole bat and eastern red bat.

Table 19. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Charleston Air Force Base

StationLevel of Effort Bat Activity Summary


Detector- Nights



SCCH-01 May 10 – July 29 80 45,886 573.6 32.3

SCCH-02 May 10 – August 11 93 14,837 160.0 15.5

SCCH-03 May 10 – July 26 76 15,309 201.4 10.7

SCCH-04 May 10 – August 3 85 13,380 157.4 10.5

SCCH-05 May 10 – August 15 97 16,669 171.8 12.1

Overall1 431 106,081 246.0 25.8



Table 20. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Charleston Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorSCCH-

01SCCH-

02SCCH-

03SCCH-

04SCCH-

05

Big brown bat 4.5 1.1 1.5 1.1 0.3 1.6 0.3


Eastern red bat 128.9 27.6 6.1 9.9 20.0 37.4 4.5

Evening bat 179.9 52.6 30.0 42.7 63.7 72.8 8.0

Hoary bat 8.8 1.6 2.8 3.3 1.5 3.5 0.6

Little brown bat1 31.6 10.5 0.4 1.7 2.3 9.1 1.2

Northern yellow bat 48.6 11.7 34.6 13.7 12.4 23.1 2.6

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 0 <0.1 0 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 102.9 34.1 97.9 56.3 51.8 66.5 7.2


Southeastern bat1 1.4 0.3 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.1

Tri-colored bat 18.5 8.9 1.2 6.1 12.8 9.7 1.2


4.10 Columbus Air Force Base

On May 2, the field team deployed five detectors at Columbus AFB, which recorded data through mid-July and mid-August (Table 21). The mean activity rate recorded at Columbus AFB (279 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station MSCO-04 (576.8 bat passes/detector-night), nearly 4.5 times the activity recorded at Station MSCO-01. Station MSCO-04 recorded the highest level of bat activity for most species, especially the big brown bat.

A total of 12 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and nine species were manually confirmed. (Table 22). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. The evening bat was the most frequently recorded species (72.8 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the big brown bat, and eastern red bat.


Table 21. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Columbus Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

MSCO-01 May 2 – July 20 79 8,901 112.7 11.1

MSCO-02 May 2 – July 31 90 25,856 287.3 16.2

MSCO-03 May 2 – August 10 100 34,063 340.6 22.6

MSCO-04 May 2 – July 15 74 42,686 576.8 23.2

MSCO-05 May 2 – August 8 98 11,556 118.0 6.9

Overall1 441 123,062 279.0 28.8


Table 22. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Columbus Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorMSCO-

01MSCO-

02MSCO-

03MSCO-

04MSCO-

05

Big brown bat 0.7 45.9 58.8 235.1 21.1 67.0 8.0


Eastern red bat 4.8 42.5 85.5 108.9 13.0 50.0 5.8

Evening bat 14.5 79.1 101.0 163.6 16.7 72.8 8.6

Hoary bat 2.1 3.8 3.7 2.1 7.6 4.0 0.6

Little brown bat1 0.9 15.5 14.1 23.8 9.3 12.6 1.4


Rafinesque’s big-eared bat 0 0 0 0.3 0.2 0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 45.2 82.8 49.4 21.0 28.2 46.0 5.5

Silver-haired bat1 0.8 1.2 2.0 4.8 2.0 2.1 0.3

Southeastern bat <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 <0.1

Tri-colored bat 36.1 7.1 13.7 13.3 8.4 15.1 2.0



4.11 Creech Air Force Base

On April 3, the field team deployed four detectors at Creech AFB., which recorded data through early to mid-July (Table 23). The mean activity rate recorded at Creech AFB (169 bat passes/ detector-night) ranked among the bottom third mean activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station NVCR-03 (263.1 bat passes/detector-night), which also recorded the most bat passes, nearly 5.5 times the activity recorded at Station NVCR-04.

A total of 17 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and eight species were manually confirmed. Confirmed species include the big brown bat. Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, hoary bat, pallid bat, silver-haired bat, and western small-footed myotis. (Table 24). The little brown bat was not confirmed, and there is no classifier for cave myotis. Activity rates for each species varied across each station, and no station consistently recorded the highest or lowest activity rates across species. Canyon bat activity levels far exceeded any other species (116 bat passes/ detector-night), with the Brazilian free-tailed bat as a distant second (25.4 bat passes/detector-night).

Table 23. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Creech Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



NVCR-01 April 3 – July 11 99 18,116 183.0 16.8

NVCR-02 April 3 – July 2 90 14,505 161.2 16.5

NVCR-03 April 3 – July 18 106 27,890 263.1 23.7

NVCR-04 April 3 – July 18 92 4,859 52.8 5.5

Overall1 387 65,370 169.0 19.9


Table 24. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Creech Air Force Base

SpeciesStation

Overall Mean Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNVCR-

01NVCR-

02NVCR-

03NVCR-

04

Big brown bat 2.7 4.3 3.6 1.3 3.0 0.3

Brazilian free-tailed bat 37.4 25.1 27.3 10.6 25.4 3.2

California myotis 7.5 0.8 1.1 0.4 2.5 0.4

Canyon bat 113.2 109.7 194.5 35.7 116.0 15.4

Fringed myotis1 0.9 0.9 2.2 <0.1 1.1 0.2

Hoary bat 6.2 3.7 5.9 2.2 4.6 0.5


SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorNVCR-

01NVCR-

02NVCR-

03NVCR-

04

Little brown bat1 <0.1 0 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Long-eared myotis1 1.6 0.9 0.9 0 0.8 0.2

Long-legged myotis1 0 <0.1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Pallid bat 1.7 7.8 10.1 0.3 5.1 0.8

Silver-haired bat 6.9 5.0 5.0 1.3 4.6 0.6

Spotted bat1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0 0.1 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat1 0.2 0.5 0.5 <0.1 0.3 0.1

Western Mastiff bat1 0.3 0.1 6.2 0 1.8 0.7

Western red bat1 3.0 1.9 5.1 0.8 2.8 0.4

Western small-footed myotis 0.3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1

Yuma myotis1 1.1 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.1


4.12 Dare County Range

On May 16, the field team deployed eight detectors at Dare County Range, which recorded data until mid-June to mid-August (Table 25). The mean activity rate at Dare County Range (119.0 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rate was recorded at Station NCND-06 (164.3 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at Station NCND-08 (48.8 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 11 species, and 10 species were manually confirmed (Table 26). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, NLEB, northern yellow bat, Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The Seminole bat (35.3 bat passes / detector-night) was the most frequently recorded species, followed by the big brown bat, evening bat, and northern yellow bat.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at all eight stations, and was manually confirmed at two stations (NCND-03 and NCND-06). The false positives were identified as little brown bats or were unable to be identified to species.

Table 25. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Dare County Range



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

NCND-01 May 16 – August 12 88 6,637 75.4 5.2

NCND-02 May 16 – August 10 86 8,641 100.5 12.4

NCND-03 May 16 – August 24 100 14,849 148.5 12.2




Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

NCND-04 May 16 – August 4 80 9,485 118.6 11.2

NCND-05 May 16 – August 24 100 11,587 115.9 5.4

NCND-06 May 16 – August 24 100 16,428 164.3 10.8

NCND-07 May 16 – August 4 80 9,599 120.0 6.5

NCND-08 May 16 – June 14 29 1,416 48.8 7.3

Overall1 663 78,642 119.0 12.5


Table 26. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Dare County Range

Species

Station Overall

Mean Activi

ty Rate

Standard

ErrorNCND-01

NCND-02

NCND-03

NCND-04

NCND-05

NCND-06

NCND-07

NCND-08

Big brown bat 14.0 29.0 33.3 10.4 19.7 16.6 21.4 13.3 20.5 2.7

Eastern red bat 7.6 8.2 18.7 3.6 4.7 5.0 4.0 4.2 7.5 0.9

Evening bat 14.9 13.5 30.2 8.4 21.6 15.1 34.5 9.6 19.4 2.1

Hoary bat 2.4 6.9 1.1 41.3 1.8 9.0 2.2 0.8 8.3 1.4

Little brown bat 2.0 1.8 4.8 3.2 1.4 4.6 1.0 1.4 2.7 0.3

NLEB 0.2 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.2 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.4 0.1

Northern yellow bat 10.3 5.9 22.2 8.6 11.4 19.5 11.8 2.0 12.7 1.6

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat

<.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 13.4 20.6 29.6 28.1 43.1 75.0 37.7 14.2 35.3 3.8

Silver-haired bat 7.4 12.5 3.9 13.0 10.1 14.2 4.4 1.1 9.0 1.3

Tri-colored bat 3.2 1.9 4.5 2.0 1.9 4.3 2.0 1.1 2.8 0.4

1. Species presence not confirmed during manual review

4.13 Davidsonville Transmitter Site

On May 19, the field team deployed five detectors at Davidsonville Transmitter Site, which recorded data through late August (Table 27). The mean activity rate recorded at Davidsonville Transmitter Site (312.4 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station MDDT-03 (447.8 bat passes / detector-night), nearly 2.5 times the activity rate recorded at Station MDDT-01.


A total of nine species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and six species were manually confirmed (Table 28). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station, and no station consistently recorded the highest or lowest activity rates across species. The big brown bat dominated species activity levels, followed by the eastern red bat.

A total of 15 bat passes across four stations were auto-classified as NLEB, but none were confirmed as NLEB during manual review. Most were files that were not able to be identified to the species level, and were classified as “high frequency species.”

Table 27. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Davidson Transmitter Site

Station



Detector- Nights



MDDT-01 May 19 – August 24 97 18,312 188.8 21.6

MDDT-02 May 19 – August 30 103 44,914 436.1 29.9

MDDT-03 May 19 – August 17 90 40,301 447.8 44.8

MDDT-04 May 19 – August 30 103 22,123 214.8 20.0

MDDT-05 May 19 – August 22 95 26,782 281.9 28.5

Overall1 488 152,432 312.4 36.7


Table 28. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Davidson Transmitter Site

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorMDDT-

01MDDT-

02MDDT-

03MDDT-

04MDDT-

05

Big brown bat 110.1 243.5 268.2 93.3 143.6 170.4 24.0

Eastern red bat 31.7 96.1 100.2 51.7 73.9 70.4 7.3

Eastern small-footed bat1 0 <0.1 0 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Evening bat1 11.3 31.7 46.3 15.5 24.0 25.4 3.0

Hoary bat 9.3 12.0 9.4 10.7 9.6 10.2 1.2

Little brown bat 5.3 19.9 5.9 17.3 9.0 11.7 1.3

NLEB1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Tri-colored bat 1.6 3.5 2.3 2.1 3.4 2.6 0.3



4.14 Davis-Monthan Air Force Base

On April 12, the field team deployed five detectors at Davis-Monthan AFB, which recorded data through early June to late July (Table 29). The mean activity rate recorded at Davis-Monthan AFB (189 bat passes / detector-night) ranked among the bottom third of mean activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station AZDM-04 (656.7 bat passes / detector-nights), nearly nine times the activity level recorded at Station AZDM-01.

A total of 15 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro and 12 species were manually confirmed (Table 30). Confirmed species include Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, fringed myotis, hoary bat, long-legged myotis, pallid bat, silver-haired bat, western mastiff bat, western red bat, western small-footed myotis, and Yuma myotis. Station AZDM-04 recorded higher levels of bat activity for most species, especially big brown bat and Brazilian free-tailed bat. Brazilian free-tailed bat was the most frequently recorded species (81 bat passes / detector-night), followed by big brown bat and western small-footed bat.

Table 29. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

AZDM-01 April 12 – June 23 72 4,149 57.6 4.0

AZDM-02 April 12 – July 25 104 12,387 119.1 9.8

AZDM-03 April 12 – July 1 80 14,075 175.9 12.7

AZDM-04 April 12 – June 8 57 37,433 656.7 43.4

AZDM-05 April 12 – July 23 100 9,842 98.4 10.6

Overall1 413 77,886 189.0 20.8



Table 30. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorAZDM-

01AZDM-

02AZDM-

03AZDM-

04AZDM-

05

Big brown bat1 5.8 9.2 15.5 178.6 7.2 32.7 4.4


California myotis 0.1 0.3 1.0 7.1 <0.1 1.2 0.2

Canyon bat 0.1 0.3 1.3 88.1 0.2 12.6 1.9

Fringed myotis 0 <0.1 0 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Lesser long-nosed bat2 - - - - - - -

Hoary bat 8.7 7.0 14.8 11.8 15.5 11.5 1.5

Long-legged myotis 0.6 1.8 3.3 4.4 0.1 1.8 0.3

Pallid bat 0.3 0.2 0.9 7.3 0.1 1.3 0.2


Spotted bat1 <0.1 <0.1 0 0 0.2 0.1 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Western Mastiff bat <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Western red bat 0.2 0.3 0.5 4.5 0.1 0.8 0.1

Western small-footed myotis 4.0 29.2 51.3 62.1 1.1 26.8 4.1

Yuma myotis 0.1 0.1 0.2 50.1 <0.1 7.0 2.6

1. Species presence not confirmed during manual review.2. Leptonycteris species identified with SonoBat software.

4.15 Edwards Air Force Base

On March 31, the field team deployed five detectors at Edwards AFB, which recorded data through late June and mid-July (Table 31). The mean activity rate recorded Edwards AFB (203 bat passes/ detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station CAED-01 (373.9), nearly 5.5 times the activity rate recorded at Station CAED-05.

A total of 16 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and seven were manually confirmed (Table 32). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, hoary bat, western small-footed myotis, and Yuma myotis. The California myotis dominated species activity levels, followed by the Yuma myotis, canyon bat, big brown bat, and Brazilian free-tailed bat.


Table 31. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Edwards Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



CAED-01 March 31 – June 25 84 31,409 373.9 32.8

CAED-02 March 31 – July 17 108 40,239 372.6 23.3

CAED-03 March 31 – July 7 98 10,936 111.6 11.1

CAED-04 March 31 – July 5 96 9,115 94.9 10.9

CAED-05 March 31 – July 10 101 7,181 71.1 4.8

Overall1 487 98,880 203.0 19.6


Table 32. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Edwards Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorCAED-

01CAED-

02CAED-

03CAED-

04CAED-

05

Big brown bat 33.2 4.0 8.8 13.5 12.3 13.6 2.1



Canyon bat 10.1 55.7 40.5 0.1 0.4 22.4 2.6

Fringed myotis1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Hoary bat 4.8 1.0 4.3 7.2 3.7 4.1 0.6

Little brown bat1 1.1 0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1

Long-eared myotis1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Long-legged myotis1 0.3 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1

Pallid bat1 1.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.1

Spotted bat1 0 0 0 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat1 0.2 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1

Western Mastiff bat1 0 0 0 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Western red bat1 2.9 2.4 1.2 0.2 1.3 1.6 0.2

Western small-footed myotis 24.1 13.6 0.7 2.5 1.4 8.1 1.3

Yuma myotis 106.0 39.3 4.4 13.1 24.6 35.6 4.9



4.16 Fort Dix

On May 22, the field team deployed six detectors at Fort Dix, which recorded data through late August (Table 33). The mean activity rate recorded at Fort Dix (190 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. All stations recorded a similar number of bat passes, with Station NJFD-06 being the highest. A total of nine species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and seven species were manually confirmed (Table 34). Confirmed species included the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, NLEB, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The big brown bat dominated species activity levels, followed by the eastern red bat and hoary bat.

A total of 611 bat passes were auto-classified as NLEB across the five stations. NLEB was confirmed at stations NJFD-02, NJFD-03, and NJFD-04. Files that could not be confirmed as NLEB were identified as Myotis species or unidentified high frequency species because passes lacked the definitive characteristics of NLEB or, the pass was not a high-quality search phase, which are the best to make a species identification.

Table 33. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Fort Dix Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



NJFD-01 May 22 – August 24 94 15,298 162.7 9.5

NJFD-02 May 22 – August 31 101 11,032 109.0 12.1

NJFD-03 May 22 – August 21 87 21,328 245.1 20.4

NJFD-04 May 22 – August 31 101 19,902 197.0 15.0

NJFD-05 May 22 – August 31 101 18,918 187.0 10.7

NJFD-06 May 22 – August 23 93 23,278 250.3 11.8

Overall1 577 109,756 190.0 19.9


Table 34. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Fort Dix Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNJFD-

01NJFD-

02NJFD-

03NJFD-

04NJFD-

05NJFD-

06

Big brown bat 84.6 54.5 180.2 151.6 76.3 81.2 103.5 11.3

Eastern red bat 24.7 17.9 11.6 4.9 66.0 85.0 35.0 3.7

Eastern small-footed bat1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Evening bat1 15.7 4.6 6.2 2.7 16.5 41.1 14.3 1.6



Mean Activity

Rate

Standard ErrorNJFD-

01NJFD-

02NJFD-

03NJFD-

04NJFD-

05NJFD-

06

Hoary bat 22.0 3.1 25.6 25.2 8.4 15.5 16.4 2.1

Little brown bat 2.8 18.1 7.3 1.6 13.9 9.2 8.9 1.0

NLEB 0.3 3.0 1.7 0.5 0.7 0.1 1.1 0.2


Tri-colored bat 3.0 0.8 0.5 0.9 1.8 4.6 1.9 0.3


4.17 Fort Eustis

On May 17, the field team deployed five detectors at Fort Eustis, which recorded data through late July and late August (Table 35). The mean activity rate recorded at Fort Eustis (180.5 bat passes/ detector-night) ranked among the bottom third of activity rates across all installations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station VAFE-02 (212 bat passes/detector-night), nearly double the bat passes at Station VAFE-04.

A total of 11 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and all were manually confirmed except Seminole bat (Table 36). Activity rates for each species varied across each station, and no station consistently recorded the highest or lowest activity rates across species. The evening bat was the most frequently recorded species (54.1 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the Seminole bat, big brown bat, and eastern red bat.

A total of 135 files across the five stations were auto-classified as NLEB. NLEB presence was confirmed at Stations VAFE-03 and VAFE-04. Reviewed files that were not confirmed as NLEB were identified as Myotis species or as unidentified high frequency bats.

Table 35. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Fort Eustis

Station



Detector- Nights



VAFE-01 May 17 – August 10 85 12,227 143.8 8.2

VAFE-02 May 17 – August 3 78 16,537 212.0 20.1

VAFE-03 May 17 – August 28 103 21,543 209.2 15.2

VAFE-04 May 17 – July 28 72 11,576 160.8 12.9

VAFE-05 May 17 – August 28 103 17,737 172.2 14.0

Overall1 441 79,620 180.5 19.0



Table 36. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Fort Eustis

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorVAFE-

01VAFE-

02VAFE-

03VAFE-

04VAFE-

05

Big brown bat 7.3 4.3 64.2 9.8 47.4 29.8 3.4

Eastern red bat 16.7 54.7 19.0 34.1 21.1 27.7 3.4

Evening bat 30.6 69.0 58.0 49.3 51.4 51.7 6.1

Hoary bat 1.8 2.2 1.1 0.9 1.7 1.5 0.3

Little brown bat 7.0 7.3 5.3 8.4 4.7 6.4 0.8

NLEB 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.1 <0.1 0.3 0.1


Seminole bat1 67.4 60.6 35.6 30.8 21.8 42.1 4.4


Southeastern bat 0.1 0.2 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1

Tri-colored bat 8.2 9.0 12.9 23.9 9.4 12.3 1.6


4.18 Fort Sam Houston

On April 25, the field team deployed five detectors at Fort Sam Houston, which recorded data through early June and late July (Table 37). The mean activity rate recorded at Fort Sam Houston (708 bat passes/detector-night) was the fourth highest mean activity rate recorded across all installations. High levels of activity were recorded at all stations, particularly at Station TXFS- 05 (1,419.5 bat passes/detector-night). Activity rates for each species varied across each station, and no station consistently recorded the highest or lowest activity rates across species.

A total of 11 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and 9 species were manually confirmed (Table 38). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, cave myotis, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. The northern yellow bat was the most frequently recorded species (163.6 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the evening bat and Brazilian free-tailed bat.


Table 37. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Fort Sam Houston



Detector- Nights



TXFS-01 April 25 – July 13 79 50,050 633.5 27.2

TXFS-02 April 25 – July 5 71 45,865 646.0 34.8

TXFS-03 April 25 – July 26 92 40,576 441.0 23.8

TXFS-04 April 25 – July 5 71 52,982 746.2 35.4

TXFS-05 April 25 – June 9 45 63,879 1419.5 83.0

Overall1 358 253,352 708.0 75.1


Table 38. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Fort Sam Houston

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorTXFS-

01TXFS-

02TXFS-

03TXFS-

04TXFS-

05

Big brown bat 12.0 19.5 13.3 28.3 83.3 26 4.2

Big free-tailed bat1,2 <0.1 <0.1 0.3 <0.1 0.2 0.1 <0.1

Brazilian fee-tailed bat 94.8 76.6 87.7 240.8 388.3 155.2 21.4

Cave myotis2 6.5 34.1 1.5 1.6 0.9 9.0 1.5

Eastern red bat 61.6 131.8 37.1 32.2 60.7 63.3 6.7

Evening bat 259.8 204.5 89.1 92.9 101.4 151.9 16.3

Hoary bat 18.9 12.6 12.9 34.0 46.5 22.6 4.2


Pallid bat1 1.2 5.2 0.9 7.7 3.5 3.5 0.5


Tri-colored bat 28.3 58.4 6.6 5.1 184.9 43.8 6.7

1. Species presence not confirmed during manual review2. Substitution of a similar species required for analysis

4.19 Fourth Cliff

On May 27, the field team deployed four detectors at Fourth Cliff, which recorded data through mid-August and early September (Table 39). The mean activity rate recorded at Fourth Cliff (178.2 bat passes / detector-night) ranked among the bottom third of activity rates recorded across all installations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station MAFC-04 (484.6 bat passes/detector-night, nearly least 14 times the activity levels recorded at Stations MAFC-01 and MAFC-02. A total of eight species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro and seven species


were manually confirmed. (Table 40). Confirmed species include big brown bat, eastern red bat, eastern small-footed bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, silver-haired bat, tri- colored bat. Eastern red bat dominated bat activity levels, followed by tri-colored bat and hoary bat.

A total of 39 bat passes were auto-classified as NLEB. No NLEB passes were manual confirmed during review and reviewed files were identified as Myotis species, eastern red bat, or unidentified high frequency bat.

Table 39. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Fourth Cliff



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

MAFC-01 May 27 – September 6 102 2,952 28.4 3.0

MAFC-02 May 27 – August 13 78 2,790 132.9 8.6

MAFC-03 May 27 – September 5 101 9,191 87.5 10.6

MAFC-04 May 27 – August 21 86 41,192 484.6 60.9

Overall1 367 56,125 178.2 34.1


Table 40. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Fourth Cliff

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorMAFC-

01MAFC-

02MAFC-

03MAFC-

04

Big brown bat 2.2 15.9 11.0 6.5 7.2 0.9

Eastern red bat 10.8 50.1 43.2 393.8 127.6 15.9

Eastern small-footed bat <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.1

Hoary bat 10.6 41.8 15.3 15.9 15.7 1.2

Little brown bat 0.5 1.4 3.3 5.4 2.8 0.3

NLEB1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 21.0 0.1 <0.1


Tri-colored bat 1.3 3.4 6.6 51.9 16.8 2.2



4.20 Goodfellow Air Force Base

On April 17, the field team deployed four detectors at Goodfellow AFB, which recorded data through early and late July (Table 41). The mean activity rate recorded at Goodfellow AFB (231.5 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station TXGO-01 (517.9 bat passes/detector-night), nearly four times the activity level recorded than any other stations. Station TXGO-01 recorded the highest activity levels for most species, with the exception of cave myotis.

A total of eight species were auto classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and five species were manually confirmed. Confirmed species include the Brazilian free-tailed bat, cave myotis, eastern red bat, hoary bat, and silver-haired bat (Table 42). The Brazilian free-tailed bat dominated species activity levels, followed by the silver-haired bat and hoary bat.

Table 41. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Goodfellow Air Force Base



Detector- Nights



TXGO-01 April 17 – July 31 105 54,380 517.9 37.0

TXGO-02 April 17 – July 30 104 10,192 98.0 9.2

TXGO-03 April 17 – July 19 93 13,214 142.1 11.1

TXGO-04 April 17 – July 6 80 10,666 133.3 10.2

Overall1 382 88,452 231.5 24.5


Table 42. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Goodfellow Air Force Base

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorTXGO-

01TXGO-

02TXGO-

03TXGO-

04

Big brown bat1 34.0 11.7 20.4 12.0 20.0 2.6


Cave myotis2 0.5 0.7 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1

Eastern red bat 13.8 2.1 1.2 1.3 4.9 0.6

Hoary bat 49.6 12.1 18.2 15.9 24.7 2.7

Pallid bat1 4.9 0.6 0.9 0.4 1.8 0.4


Townsend’s big-eared bat1 3.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.0 0.2

1. Species presence not confirmed during manual review2. Substitution of similar species required for analysis


4.21 Grand Bay Range

On May 8, the field team deployed five detectors at Grand Bay Range, which recorded data through mid-July to mid-August (Table 43). The mean activity rate recorded at Grand Bay Range (563.1 bat passes/detector-night) was the seventh highest mean activity rate of the installations surveyed. The highest mean activity rates at this installation were recorded at Stations GAGB-01 and GAGB-02 (700 and 773 bat passes/detector-night, respectively), nearly three times the activity level recorded at Station GAGB-05, where the lowest activity was recorded.

A total of 11 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and seven species were manually confirmed (Table 44). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The tri-colored bat was the most frequently recorded species (148.1 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the Seminole bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, northern yellow bat, and evening bat.

Table 43. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Grand Bay Range

Station



Detector- Nights



GAGB-01 May 8 – August 16 100 71,400 700.0 38.6

GAGB-02 May 8 – August 1 85 68,022 773.0 39.3

GAGB-03 May 8 – July 18 71 43,852 600.7 34.5

GAGB-04 May 8 – August 16 94 43,796 465.9 21.0

GAGB-05 May 8 – July 28 81 20,126 245.4 9.9

Overall1 431 247,196 563.1 53.0


Table 44. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Grand Bay Range

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorGAGB-

01GAGB-

02GAGB-

03GAGB-

04GAGB-

05

Big brown bat 5.3 8.7 15.9 2.4 1.8 6.4 0.8


Eastern red bat 14.0 21.0 28.3 21.5 26.2 21.7 2.1

Evening bat 83.1 48.3 70.4 82.3 30.0 63.9 6.4

Hoary bat 9.7 25.5 16.2 4.5 3.7 11.7 1.8

Little brown bat1 4.3 56.1 35.0 23.6 25.3 27.8 2.8



Mean Activity

Rate

Standard ErrorGAGB-

01GAGB-

02GAGB-

03GAGB-

04GAGB-

05

Northern yellow bat1 139.9 75.1 79.8 26.5 14.6 69.2 7.8

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 257.1 104.1 87.2 77.8 23.8 116.2 11.4

Southeastern bat 0.6 8.9 10.2 10.6 34.1 12.3 1.5

Tri-colored bat 35.0 306.5 127.7 201.3 75.9 148.1 15.5


4.22 Hanscom Air Force Base

On May 30, the field team deployed six detectors at Hanscom AFB, which recorded data through mid-August and early September (Table 45). The mean activity rate recorded at Hanscom AFB (340.1 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station MAHA-04 (569 bat passes/detector-night), nearly 3.5 times the rate recorded at MAHA-02.

A total of eight species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and six species were manually confirmed (Table 46). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, canyon bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, and silver-haired bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The big brown bat dominated species activity levels, followed by the migratory tree bat species.

A total 94 bat passes across all six stations were auto-classified as NLEB, 26 of which were manually reviewed. None of the reviewed files were confirmed as NLEB, and most were determined to be big brown bats or unidentified bats. When a high volume of big brown bat files is recorded, it is not uncommon for some of these files to be auto-classified as NLEB, particularly when stations are deployed near a foraging area. The software keys in on the slope of the feeding buzz rather than other metrics such as pulse interval and max frequency.

Table 45. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Hanscom Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



MAHA-01 May 30 – August 12 73 23,330 319.6 25.0

MAHA-02 May 30 – August 23 85 16,442 193.4 17.8

MAHA-03 May 30 – September 6 98 29,088 296.8 23.9



MAHA-06 May 30 – August 9 71 33,683 474.4 31.9


Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

Overall1 527 179,229 340.1 39.4


Table 46. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Hanscom Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorMAHA-

01MAHA-

02MAHA-

03MAHA-

04MAHA-

05MAHA-

06

Big brown bat 503.4 99.1 198.7 221.8 97.9 337.7 244.4 29.0

Eastern red bat 9.7 50.7 20 13.9 10.2 24.2 20.6 2.7

Eastern small-footed bat1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Canyon bat 0.4 0.7 0.8 1.5 1.5 2.3 1.2 0.2

Hoary bat 30.8 20.7 38.6 31 21.8 58 32.2 4.6

Little brown 0.4 1.2 3.2 3.6 0.5 3.1 1.9 0.2

NLEB1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 <0.1

Silver-haired bat 24.9 20.9 58 24.7 64.9 48.8 39.6 4.9


4.23 Holloman Air Force Base

On April 13, the field team deployed five detectors at Holloman AFB, which recorded data through late May and late July (Table 47). The mean activity rate recorded at Holloman AFB (421 bat passes/detector-night) was the tenth highest mean activity rate among all installations. The highest mean activity rates at this installation were recorded at Stations NMHO-03 and NMHO-04 (823.3 and 833.9 bat passes/detector-night, respectively), nearly seven times the activity rate recorded at Station NMHO-01.

A total of 15 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and 11 species were manually confirmed (Table 48). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, hoary bat, pallid bat, silver-haired bat, western mastiff bat, western red bat, western small-footed myotis, and Yuma myotis. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The Brazilian free-tailed bat and big brown bat dominated species activity levels, followed by the California myotis and silver-haired bat.


Table 47. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Holloman Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



NMHO-01 April 13 – July 25 103 11,540 112.0 5.8

NMHO-02 April 13 – July 27 105 25,882 246.5 17.5

NMHO-03 April 13 – May 22 39 32,109 823.3 48.7

NMHO-04 April 13 – May 30 47 39,192 833.9 53.3

NMHO-05 April 13 – June 11 59 39,883 676.0 58.5

Overall1 353 148,606 421.0 49.6


Table 48. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Holloman Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNMHO-

01NMHO-

02NMHO-

03NMHO-

04NMHO-

05

Big brown bat 7.7 12.2 438.3 341.8 86.5 114.2 17.0



Canyon bat 0.1 0.2 16.0 17.5 7.1 5.4 0.9

Fringed myotis1 0.4 2.8 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.1

Hoary bat 4.8 5.9 17.5 23.5 31.4 13.5 2.0

Long-legged myotis1 2.7 3.7 <0.1 0 0.5 2.0 0.3

Pallid bat 5.4 4.9 41.5 11.0 0.8 9.2 1.2


Spotted bat1 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat1 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.1 0.3 0.1

Western mastiff bat 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.6 2.8 0.8 0.2

Western red bat 0.3 2.3 14.8 15.8 13.4 6.7 1.0

Western small-footed bat 65.6 81.1 5.1 1.4 5.6 45 4.8

Yuma myotis 1.1 7.4 1.2 2.4 6.7 4.1 0.9



4.24 Keesler Air Force Base

On April 28, the field team deployed four detectors at Keesler AFB, which recorded data through mid-May and late July (Table 49). The mean activity rate recorded at Keesler AFB (580.7 bat passes/detector-night) was the sixth highest mean activity rate recorded among all installations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station MSKE-03 (1,139.4 bat passes/detector-night), nearly double the activity rate recorded at any other station.

A total of 12 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro, and eight species were manually confirmed (Table 50). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station, and no station consistently recorded the highest or lowest activity rates across species. The evening bat dominated species activity levels, followed by the Brazilian free-tailed bat and Seminole bat.

Table 49. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Keesler Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



MSKE-01 April 28 – July 29 92 60,452 657.1 33.6

MSKE-02 April 28 – July 21 84 36,973 440.2 32.0

MSKE-03 April 28 – May 14 16 18,230 1,139.4 138.6

MSKE-04 April 28 – June 30 63 32,417 514.6 35.4

Overall1 255 148,072 580.7 58.1


Table 50. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Keesler Air Force Base

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorMSKE-

01MSKE-

02MSKE-

03MSKE-

04

Big brown bat 5.4 14.4 119.5 13.5 17.5 2.9


Eastern red bat 60.6 8.8 28.6 16.2 30.6 3.1

Evening bat 456.2 140.5 448.9 293.3 311.5 31.0

Hoary bat 24.7 26.6 129.4 10.7 28.4 4.0

Little brown bat1 14.7 1.1 2.3 3.2 6.6 0.9

Northern yellow bat 15.9 42.8 95.9 14.2 29.4 3.7

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 0 0 1.2 0 0.1 <0.1


SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorMSKE-

01MSKE-

02MSKE-

03MSKE-

04

Seminole bat1 28.4 53.0 52.4 86.9 52.5 6.5

Silver-haired bat1 11.3 21.8 25.1 12.3 15.9 1.8

Southeastern bat 0.1 0 0.1 0 0.1 <0.1

Tri-colored bat 19.2 2.6 4.8 10.9 10.8 1.1


4.25 Kirtland Air Force Base

On April 14, the field team deployed five detectors at Kirtland AFB, which recorded data through mid-June and late July (Table 51). The mean activity rate recorded at Kirtland AFB (356.6 bat passes/detector-night) ranked among the top third activity rates recorded across all installations. Activity rates varied greatly among stations. The highest mean activity at this installation was recorded at Station NMKI-04 (855.7 bat passes / detector-night) and the fewest at Station NMKI-01 (55.3 bat passes/detector-night).

A total of 16 species were auto-classified by Kaleidoscope Pro and 13 species were manually confirmed (Table 52). Confirmed species include big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, hoary bat, long-eared myotis, pallid bat, silver-haired bat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, Western mastiff bat, western red bat, western small-footed myotis, and Yuma myotis. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. Yuma myotis dominated species activity levels, followed by Brazilian free-tailed bat, hoary bat, and big brown bat.

Table 51. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Kirtland Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

NMKI-01 April 14 – June 25 72 3,980 55.3 8.0

NMKI-02 April 14 – July 22 99 11,211 113.2 14.9

NMKI-03 April 14 – July 22 99 42,363 427.9 42.5

NMKI-04 April 14 – June 15 62 53,054 855.7 60.2

NMKI-05 April 14 – July 22 99 43,077 435.1 32.8

Overall1 431 153,685 356.6 43.6



Table 52. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Kirtland Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNMKI-

01NMKI-

02NMKI-

03NMKI-

04NMKI-

05

Big brown bat 5.5 6.4 57.6 76.2 33.9 34.4 4.9



Canyon bat 0.2 0.6 2.6 14.4 8.3 4.8 0.6

Fringed myotis1 0.8 1.7 <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.1

Hoary bat 7.9 11.2 87.3 62.5 26.3 39.0 5.4

Long-eared myotis 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1

Long-legged myotis1 0.3 2.9 10.6 9.4 59.8 18.2 2.8

Pallid bat 1.3 1.9 0.5 4.1 1.8 1.8 0.3


Spotted bat1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 <0.1

Western mastiff bat <0.1 0.1 0.7 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1

Western red bat 0.4 4.5 8.6 43.8 30.0 16.3 1.8

Western small-footed bat 15.8 61.2 5.7 18.2 15.6 24.2 42.0

Yuma myotis 0.1 0.2 110.2 523.3 198.3 146.2 21.2


4.26 Lackland Air Force Base

On April 19, the field team deployed five detectors at Lackland AFB, which recorded data until mid-June and early August (Table 53). The mean activity rate at Lackland AFB (416 bat passes/detector-night) ranked within the top quarter of installations. The highest level of activity at this installation was recorded at Station TXLA-05 (602.6 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Station TXLA-01 (296.9 bat passes/detector-night).

A total of 11 species were identified by Kaleidoscope Pro; however, only nine species were confirmed during manual review (Table 54). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, cave myotis, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Species activity rates varied across most stations. The Brazilian free-tailed was the most frequently recorded species, with a mean activity rate of 134.8 bat passes per detector-night, followed by the northern yellow bat, evening bat, and silver-haired bat.


Table 53. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Lackland Air Force Base

=Station



Detector- Nights



TXLA-01 April 19 – August 1 104 30,881 296.9 30.5

TXLA-02 April 19 – June 15 53 20,444 385.7 33.9

TXLA-03 April 19 – August 1 104 33,909 326.0 25.5

TXLA-04 April 19 – June 28 70 38,133 544.8 31.9

TXLA-05 April 19 – July 4 76 45,801 602.6 29.0

Overall1 407 169,168 416.0 45.8


Table 54. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Lackland Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorTXLA-

01TXLA-

02TXLA-

03TXLA-

04TXLA-

05

Big brown bat 5.9 16.6 17.8 25.8 20.9 16.6 2.6

Big free-tailed bat1,2 0 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1


Cave myotis2 9.1 1.2 1.8 2.0 5.5 4.3 0.5

Eastern red bat 36.4 23.0 33.2 39.5 27.8 32.7 3.5

Evening bat 49.4 47.7 32.9 125.4 43.0 56.8 6.6

Hoary bat 21.4 23.3 10.0 27.3 30.4 21.4 3.5


Pallid bat1 0.8 0.5 1.5 0.9 1.9 1.2 0.1


Tri-colored bat 5.1 1.7 4.3 6.3 1.8 4.1 0.4


4.27 Lakehurst Naval Air Center

On May 23, the field team deployed nine detectors at Lakehurst Naval Air Center, which recorded data until early and late August (Table 55). The mean activity rate at Lakehurst Naval Air Center (103.0 bat passes / detector-night) was the fifth-lowest of any installation. The highest level of


activity at this installation was recorded at Station NJLN-05 (184.5 bat passes/detector-night) and the lowest activity rate at Station NJLN-01 (45.6 bat passes / detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified nine species and eight species were manually confirmed. Confirmed species include big brown bat, eastern red bat, eastern small-footed bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, NLEB, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat (Table 56). Activity rates for each species varied across each station. Eastern red bat was the most frequently recorded species (33.6 bat passes / detector-night), followed by big brown bat and hoary bat.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at all nine stations, and this species was manually confirmed at Stations NJLN-02 and NJLN-08.

Table 55. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Lakehurst Naval Air Center

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

NJLN-01 May 23 – August 31 100 4,565 45.6 4.7

NJLN-02 May 23 – August 30 99 13,767 139.1 10.9

NJLN-03 May 23 – August 6 75 10,822 144.3 11.9

NJLN-04 May 23 – August 23 92 7,766 84.4 6.1

NJLN-05 May 23 – August 31 100 18,452 184.5 16.3

NJLN-06 May 23 – August 24 93 4,959 53.3 4.5

NJLN-07 May 23 – August 7 76 5,730 75.4 6.9

NJLN-08 May 23 – August 31 100 7,893 78.9 5.0

NJLN-09 May 23 – August 13 82 10,115 123.4 9.7

Overall1 817 84,069 103.0 11.4


Table 56. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Lakehurst Naval Air Center

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNJL

N-01NJL

N-02NJL

N-03NJL

N-04NJL

N-05NJL

N-06NJL

N-07NJL

N-08NJLN-09

Big brown bat 22.9 37.9 11.7 10.6 70.4 11.2 28.6 32.7 35.2 29.7 3.9

Eastern red bat 8.0 54.6 63.3 45.9 44.5 18 22.7 16.7 33.8 33.6 3.6

Eastern small-footed bat

0 <0.1 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Evening bat1 2.3 17.9 37.1 2.5 18.7 9.9 4.8 5.4 14.9 12.2 1.4

Hoary bat 4.9 12.3 7.8 5.5 37.0 3.4 5.3 9.2 29.2 12.9 2.1

Little brown bat 3.9 8.9 17.8 16.1 4.7 7.1 9.9 11.7 0.8 8.8 1.0


Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNJL

N-01NJL

N-02NJL

N-03NJL

N-04NJL

N-05NJL

N-06NJL

N-07NJL

N-08NJLN-09

NLEB <0.1 0.1 0.4 0.6 <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1

Silver-haired bat

3.0 6.3 2.6 2.3 7.7 2.8 3.2 2.6 8.5 4.4 0.6

Tri-colored bat 0.7 1.0 3.5 1.0 1.5 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.8 1.1 0.1


4.28 Langley Air Force Base

On May 17, the field team deployed five detectors at Langley AFB, which recorded data until late July and August (Table 57). The mean activity rate at Langley AFB (160.4 bat passes/detector-night) ranked in the bottom third of installations. The highest mean activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station VALA-03 (342 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Station VALA-01 (50.5 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 12 species, and seven species were manually confirmed (Table 58). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, northern yellow bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The big brown bat was the most frequently recorded species (54.1 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the evening bat, Seminole bat, and eastern red bat.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at two stations, but this species was not manually confirmed at either station, as none of the three potential NLEB bat passes were identified to species during manual review.

Table 57. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Creech Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

VALA-01 May 17 – August 8 83 4,195 50.5 6.3

VALA-02 May 17 – August 15 90 18,551 206.1 22.4

VALA-03 May 17 – July 31 75 25,653 342.0 27.0

VALA-04 May 17 – August 28 103 14,527 141.0 12.9

VALA-05 May 17 – August 26 101 9,563 94.7 13.8

Overall1 452 72,489 160.4 17.5



Table 58. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Langley Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorVALA-

01VALA-

02VALA-

03VALA-

04VALA-

05

Big brown bat 2.6 32.5 200.6 32.2 29.2 54.1 6.3

Eastern red bat 8.3 34.2 31.7 37.3 5.6 23.3 2.8

Evening bat1 14.3 64.9 27.3 26.1 7.3 27.6 3.6

Hoary bat 1.7 3.0 15.7 3.2 5.2 5.4 0.7

Little brown bat 1.6 5.5 7.9 5.9 2.4 4.6 0.6

NLEB1 0 <0.1 0 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1


Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 0 <0.1 0 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 17.6 37.5 24.2 22.0 17.2 23.6 2.9


Southeastern bat1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Tri-colored bat 1.0 0.8 1.4 1.3 0.7 1.0 0.1


4.29 Laughlin Air Force Base

On April 18, the field team deployed four detectors at Laughlin AFB, which recorded data until early and late July (Table 59). The mean activity rate at Laughlin AFB (375.9 bat passes/detector-night) ranked in the top third of installations. The highest mean activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station TXLU-04 (394.8 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Station TXLU-01 (231.5 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 12 species, and seven species were manually confirmed (Table 60). Species confirmed include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, canyon bat, cave myotis, eastern red bat, hoary bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The Brazilian free-tailed bat was the most frequently recorded species (153.1 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the eastern red bat and cave myotis.


Table 59. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Laughlin Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

TXLU-01 April 18 – July 1 74 17,130 231.5 30.7

TXLU-02 April 18 – July 15 88 34,174 388.3 23.6

TXLU-03 April 18 – July 1 74 35,471 479.0 34.6

TXLU-04 April 18 – July 30 103 40,666 394.8 14.4

Overall1 339 127,441 375.9 38.4


Table 60. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Laughlin Air Force Base

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorTXLU-

01TXLU-

02TXLU-

03TXLU-

04

Big brown bat 9.0 25.9 36.3 37.2 27.9 4.5

Brazilian free-tailed bat 159.5 115.1 179 162.1 153.1 18.8

Canyon bat 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.4 0.5 0.1

Cave myotis2 1.1 115.1 84.1 26.6 56.6 6.0

Eastern red bat 7.8 87.8 141.8 113.2 89.8 7.9

Hoary bat 16.9 14.6 10.1 16.7 14.7 2.4

Pallid bat1 0.2 1.7 0.4 1.7 1.1 0.2


Townsend’s big-eared bat1 <0.1 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.1

Tri-colored bat 0.2 3.9 5.1 3.0 3.1 0.3

Western mastiff bat1 0.1 0.1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Yuma myotis 1 0.2 0.8 1.1 0.9 0.7 0.1


4.30 Lincoln Receiver

On March 29, the field team deployed three detectors at Lincoln Receiver, which recorded data until late May and early June (Table 61). The mean activity rate at Lincoln Receiver (606.3 bat passes/detector-night) was the fifth highest of any installation. All detector station activity rates were similar, with Station CALR-02 being the highest at 627.1 bat passes per detector-night. The


limited area available at Lincoln Receiver (managed by Beale AFB), required very close spacing of the detectors, possibly resulting in an overlap of sampling volume of detectors.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 15 species, and seven species were manually confirmed. Species confirmed include the Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, little brown bat, silver-haired bat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, western red bat, and Yuma myotis (Table 62). Species activity rates were similar across all stations for most species. The Brazilian free-tailed bat and big brown bat had the highest species activity levels, followed by the migratory tree species (hoary bat and silver-haired bat).

Table 61. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Lincoln Receiver

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

CALR-01 March 29 – June 9 72 41,684 578.9 51.0

CALR-02 March 29 – June 3 66 41,386 627.1 43.8

CALR-03 March 29 – May 24 56 34,549 616.9 49.2

Overall1 194 117,619 606.3 73.5


Table 62. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Lincoln Receiver

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorCALR-

01CALR-

02CALR-

03

Big brown bat1 106.0 196.0 159.0 151.6 19.7

Brazilian free-tailed bat 363.0 300.0 325.0 330.2 44.1

California myotis 1.0 0.5 0.4 0.7 0.2

Canyon bat1 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 <0.1

Fringed myotis1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1

Hoary bat1 64.1 75.5 93.0 76.3 9.5

Little brown bat 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.1

Long-eared myotis1 0 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Pallid bat1 0.9 9.7 2.1 4.2 0.7

Silver-haired bat 36.7 37.9 32.7 36.0 4.3

Spotted bat1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat 0.5 3.4 0.7 1.5 0.2

Western red bat 1.6 0.6 0.8 1.0 0.2

Western small-footed myotis1 0 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1


SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorCALR-

01CALR-

02CALR-

03

Yuma myotis 4.5 3.4 3.2 3.7 0.6


4.31 Luke Air Force Base

On April 6, the field team deployed four detectors at Luke AFB, which recorded data until late June and late July (Table 63). The mean activity rate at Luke AFB (159.7 bat passes/detector-night) ranked the ninth lowest of any installation. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station AZLU-04 (391.0 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest were at Stations AZLU-01 and AZLU-02 (17.5 and 17.1 bat passes/detector-night). Stations AZLU-03 and AZLU-04 consistently recorded the highest species activity levels for all species.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 13 species, and nine species were manually confirmed (Table 64). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, cave bat, hoary bat, long-legged myotis, western red bat, and Yuma myotis. The cave bat was not identified by Kaleidoscope pro, but was confirmed while reviewing other myotis call files. The Yuma myotis had the highest species activity levels (117.3 bat passes/detector-night), with a mean activity rate over 6.5 times higher than the next leading species, the Brazilian free-tailed bat (17.2 bat passes/detector-night).

Table 63. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Luke Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



AZLU-01 April 6 – July 21 106 1,852 17.5 2.0

AZLU-02 April 6 – July 20 105 1,799 17.1 2.2

AZLU-03 April 6 – June 23 78 23,297 298.7 27.1

AZLU-04 April 6 – June 28 83 32,454 391.0 37.0

Overall1 372 59,402 159.7 19.6



Table 64. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Luke Air Force Base

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorAZLU-

01AZLU-

02AZLU-

03AZLU-

04

Big brown bat 1.3 1.9 14.6 11.5 6.5 0.8


California myotis <0.1 0.1 6.0 12.8 4.1 0.5

Canyon bat 0.2 0.5 2.8 5.4 2.0 0.3

Fringed myotis1 0 0 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Hoary bat 1.7 1.6 4.2 3.7 2.6 0.3

Lesser-long nosed bat2 - - - - - -

Long-legged myotis <0.1 0 0.9 1.5 0.5 0.1

Pallid bat1 <0.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 <0.1


Townsend’s big-eared bat1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Western red bat 0.2 0.1 6.4 9.0 3.4 0.5

Western small-footed myotis1 <0.1 <0.1 3.0 10.6 3.0 1.1

Yuma myotis 0.7 0.8 230.3 307.3 117.3 16.5

1. Species presence not confirmed during manual review2. Leptonycteris species identified with SonoBat software

4.32 Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base

On May 1, the field team deployed five detectors at Maxwell/Gunter AFB, which recorded data until mid-July and early August (Table 65). The mean activity rate at Maxwell/Gunter AFB (126.7 bat passes/detector-night) ranked the seventh lowest mean activity rate of any installation. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station ALMG-05 (159.9 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Station ALMG-01 (99.1 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 12 species, and eight species were manually confirmed (Table 66). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The Brazilian free-tailed bat was the most frequently recorded species (47.0 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the Seminole bat, evening bat, and eastern red bat.


Table 65. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

ALMG-01 May 1 – July 22 82 8,130 99.1 11.7

ALMG-02 May 1 – July 24 84 9,171 109.2 17.3

ALMG-03 May 1 – July 15 75 8,450 112.7 12.3

ALMG-04 May 1 – August 7 98 14,785 150.9 18.3

ALMG-05 May 1 – July 13 73 11,671 159.9 23.5

Overall1 412 52,207 126.7 17.6


Table 66. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorALMG-

01ALMG-

02ALMG-

03ALMG-

04ALMG-

05

Big brown bat 1.5 2.4 1.7 1.1 3.1 1.9 0.4


Eastern red bat 7.8 1.7 3.7 16.3 18.7 9.8 1.5

Evening bat 10.5 4.1 4.5 23.1 16.2 12.1 1.4

Hoary bat 6.6 10.9 7.4 5.0 13.6 8.5 1.3

Little brown bat1 2.4 1.2 0.8 1.0 3.8 1.8 0.2


Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 0 0 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 17.1 3.9 4.7 67.2 15.3 23.7 4.5

Silver-haired bat1 6.4 9.7 13.7 5.6 7.1 8.3 1.3

Southeastern bat <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Tri-colored bat 4.0 3.4 10.4 2.5 4.8 4.8 1.0


4.33 McGuire Air Force Base

On May 22, the field team deployed five detectors at McGuire AFB, which recorded data until mid to late August (Table 67). The meant activity rate at McGuire AFB (292.4 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rate at this


installation was recorded at Station NJMC-05 (533.5 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Station NJMC-02 (130.0 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified nine species, and six species were manually confirmed (Table 68). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, NLEB, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The eastern red bat had the highest activity levels (113.9 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the big brown bat, evening bat, and hoary bat.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at all five stations; however, this species was only manually confirmed at Station NJMC-04. All false positives were not able to be identified to the species level.

Table 67. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at McGuire Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



NJMC-01 May 22 – August 22 92 24,106 262.0 25.0

NJMC-02 May 22 – August 31 101 13,132 130.0 14.0

NJMC-03 May 22 – August 31 101 33,330 330.0 20.9

NJMC-04 May 22 – August 31 101 25,162 249.1 13.0

NJMC-05 May 22 – August 12 82 43,746 533.5 33.4

Overall1 477 139,476 292.4 10.8


Table 68. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, McGuire Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNJMC-

01NJMC-

02NJMC-

03NJMC-

04NJMC-

05

Big brown bat 98.1 33.5 48.4 37.4 46.5 52.2 3.8

Eastern red bat 63.0 28.7 132.8 130.1 232.9 113.9 5.3

Eastern small-footed bat1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Evening bat1 51.1 10.8 58.1 28.9 69.9 42.6 2.4

Hoary bat 13.4 21.8 31.0 27.6 121.7 40.5 3.1

Little brown bat 5.4 3.2 20.4 14.4 1.9 9.4 0.8

NLEB 0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.1 <0.1


Tri-colored bat 3.4 1.7 3.8 1.3 2.0 2.4 0.2



4.34 Moody Air Force Base

On May 8, the field team deployed five detectors at Moody AFB, which recorded data through late June and mid-August (Table 69). The mean activity rate at Moody AFB (533.5 bat passes/detector-night) ranked the eighth highest of any installation. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station GAMO-03 (1,140.0 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Station GAMO-05 (250.6 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 11 species, and eight species were manually verified (Table 70). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The tri-colored bat had the highest activity rate (156.9 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the evening bat, and Brazilian free-tailed bat.

Table 69. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Moody Air Force Base



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

GAMO-01 May 8 – August 16 100 61,164 611.6 22.9

GAMO-02 May 8 – August 16 100 34,396 344.0 16.1

GAMO-03 May 8 – June 25 48 54,739 1140.0 49.3

GAMO-04 May 8 – August 16 100 6,333 636.3 25.6

GAMO-05 May 8 – August 16 100 25,063 250.6 12.9

Overall1 448 238,994 533.5 50.7


Table 70. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Moody Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorGAMO-

01GAMO-

02GAMO-

03GAMO-

04GAMO-

05

Big brown bat 6.7 1.4 11.0 6.3 2.2 4.9 0.7


Eastern red bat 73.3 24.1 20.2 43.2 4.6 34.6 3.4

Evening bat 173.1 98.1 63.9 49.0 39.9 87.2 8.3

Hoary bat 11.2 6.0 18.4 15.8 6.7 10.8 1.5

Little brown bat1 17.2 22.3 53.9 82.0 4.7 33.9 3.4


Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 127.4 94.1 92.3 42.8 58.7 82.0 7.8




Mean Activity

Rate

Standard ErrorGAMO-

01GAMO-

02GAMO-

03GAMO-

04GAMO-

05

Tri-colored bat 60.5 47.3 691.0 200.6 63.0 156.9 16.9


4.35 Naval Weapons Station Charleston

On May 10, the field team deployed five detectors at Naval Weapons Station Charleston, which recorded data until mid-July to mid-August (Table 71). The mean activity rates at Naval Weapons Station Charleston (505.0 bat passes/detector-night) ranked the ninth highest of any installation. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station SCNW-02 (1,250.8 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Station SCNW-03 (128.1 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 11 species, and 10 species were manually confirmed (Table 72). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, silver-haired bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The Seminole bat was the most frequently recorded species (138.9 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the evening bat and Brazilian free-tailed bat.

Table 71. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Naval Weapons Station Charleston



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

SCNW-01 May 10 – August 18 100 39,529 395.3 27.4

SCNW-02 May 10 – July 19 70 87,559 1250.8 58.9

SCNW-03 May 10 – August 18 100 12,813 128.1 14.7

SCNW-04 May 10 – August 17 99 51,454 520.0 25.3

SCNW-05 May 10 – July 21 72 31,244 433.9 48.4

Overall1 441 222,599 505.0 53.5



Table 72. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Naval Weapons Station Charleston

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorSCNW-

01SCNW-

02SCNW-

03SCNW-

04SCNW-

05

Big brown bat 2.7 4.9 1.8 4.2 9.6 4.3 0.6


Eastern red bat 28.0 73.7 5.9 22.5 6.1 25.4 2.7

Evening bat 79.6 358.8 16.6 159.9 18.6 117.7 12.5

Hoary bat 18.8 25.0 6.0 10.3 24.7 15.9 1.9


Rafinesque’s big-eared bat 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 96.4 507.7 17.8 130.9 18.5 138.9 16.0



Tri-colored bat 9.0 23.1 2.3 17.1 4.0 10.7 1.2


4.36 Nellis Air Force Base

On April 4, the field team deployed five detectors at Nellis AFB, which recorded data until mid-June to mid-July (Table 73). The mean activity rate at Nellis AFB (286.0 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rates at this installation were recorded at Stations NVNE-02 and NVNE-03 (629.0 and 520.4 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at Station NVNE-01 (54.3 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 17 species, and 10 species were manually confirmed (Table 74). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, canyon bat, hoary bat, western long-eared myotis, pallid bat, silver-haired bat, western red bat, and Yuma myotis. Stations NVNE-02 and NVNE-03 recorded the highest levels of activity for most species. The canyon bat had the highest activity levels (162.9 bat passes/detector-night), with a mean activity rate over 3.5 times higher than the next leading species, the Brazilian free-tailed bat.

Table 73. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Nellis Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

NVNE-01 April 4 – July 8 95 5,154 54.3 4.9

NVNE-02 April 4 – June 27 84 52,835 629.0 33.7

NVNE-03 April 4 – July 14 101 52,558 520.4 25.8


Station



Detector- Nights



NVNE-04 April 4 – June 24 81 7,389 91.2 6.6

NVNE-05 April 4 – June 16 73 6,201 84.9 6.8

Overall1 434 124,137 286.0 27.2


Table 74. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Nellis Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNVNE-

01NVNE-

02NVNE-

03NVNE-

04NVNE-

05

Big brown bat 3.2 95.5 66.5 1.1 2.2 35.2 4.2


California myotis <0.1 6.9 12.7 0 0.1 4.3 1.6

Canyon bat 36.1 327.0 299.4 68.1 55.1 162.9 17.5

Fringed myotis1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Hoary bat 2.9 8.5 8.5 2.1 5.7 5.6 0.7

Little brown bat1 0 0.3 0.3 <0.1 0 0.1 <0.1

Long-eared myotis 0 0.1 0.2 0 <0.1 0.1 <0.1

Long-legged myotis1 <0.1 0.3 0.5 0 0 0.2 <0.1

Pallid bat 0.1 3.6 2.4 <0.1 0.1 1.3 0.2


Spotted bat1 0.4 0 0.1 0 0 0.1 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat 1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Western mastiff bat1 0.7 0.2 0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1

Western red bat 0.4 10.7 8.0 1.4 2.1 4.6 0.5

Western small-footed myotis1 0 0.1 0.3 0 0 0.1 <0.1

Yuma myotis <0.1 92.3 5.2 <0.1 0.2 19.1 3.7


4.37 New Boston Air Force Station

On May 31, the field team deployed six detectors at New Boston Air Force Station, which recorded data until early September (Table 75). The activity rate at New Boston Air Force Station (240.0 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest


activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station NHNB-01 (434.5 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at Station NHNB-02 (75.6 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified eight species, and seven species were manually confirmed (Table 76). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, NLEB, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The big brown bat and hoary bat had the highest activity levels, followed by the little brown bat and silver-haired bat.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at all six stations, and this species was manually confirmed at Station NHNB-03. The false positives were identified as little brown bats, Myotis species, or were unable to be identified to species.

Table 75. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at New Boston Air Force Station

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

NHNB-01 May 31 – September 7 99 43,015 434.5 35.5






Overall1 599 143,555 240.0 27.3


Table 76. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, New Boston Air Force Station

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNHNB-

01NHNB-

02NHNB-

03NHNB-

04NHNB-

05NHNB-

06

Big brown bat 134.6 32.5 35.0 136.5 155.1 158.4 172.6 14.0

Eastern red bat 12.3 4.0 6.5 8.5 5.8 4.5 11.0 0.7

Eastern small-footed bat1 0 0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 <0.1

Hoary bat 252.8 22.5 41.5 49.6 49.7 26.1 116.6 9.0

Little brown bat 6.3 7.2 37.9 87.0 17.2 15.8 45.4 4.2

NLEB <0.1 <0.1 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.4 <0.1


Tri-colored bat 0.7 0.6 0.5 1.9 0.7 0.3 1.2 0.1


4.38 North Air Force Auxiliary Field

On May 11, the field team deployed four detectors at North Air Auxiliary, which recorded data until early to mid-August (Table 77). The mean activity rate recorded at North Air Auxiliary Field (244.7 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rates at this installation were recorded at Stations SCNA-03 and SCNA-04 (330.6 and 370.8 bat passes/detector-night), more than twice the activity rate at the other two stations.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 12 species, and nine species were manually confirmed (Table 78). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, silver-haired bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Station SCNA-04 recorded the highest level of activity for most species. The Seminole bat had the highest activity rate (77.2 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the evening bat, eastern red bat, and tri-colored bat.

Table 77. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at North Air Force Auxiliary Field

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

SCNA-01 May 11 – August 21 102 12,619 123.7 7.7

SCNA-02 May 11 – August 2 83 12,173 146.7 11.3

SCNA-03 May 11 – August 21 102 33,723 330.6 18.0

SCNA-04 May 11 – August 12 93 34,487 370.8 17.7

Overall1 380 93,002 244.7 22.7



Table 78. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, North Air Force Auxiliary Field

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorSCNA-

01SCNA-

02SCNA-

03SCNA-

04

Big brown bat 1.7 0.6 7.5 22.9 8.2 1.0


Eastern red bat 13.2 24.6 57.3 25.6 30.6 3.2

Evening bat 30.3 38.7 93.6 114.3 69.7 6.8

Hoary bat 3.9 5.7 4.0 7.8 5.3 0.7

Little brown bat1 6.0 7.8 12.1 6.1 8.1 0.9

Northern yellow bat1 4.1 5.3 11.4 21.6 10.6 1.2

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat 0.1 0.0 <0.1 0.1 0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 46.0 32.5 97.5 129.2 77.2 7.4


Southeastern bat 0.9 0.2 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.1

Tri-colored bat 12.1 10.6 37.5 21.6 20.9 2.4


4.39 Poinsett Electronic Combat Range

On May 12, the field team deployed five detectors at Poinsett Electronic Combat Range, which recorded data until mid-July to mid-August (Table 79). The activity rate at Poinsett Electronic Combat Range (245.2 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station SCPE-01 (485.1 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Station SCPE-03 (110.8 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 12 species, and eight species were manually confirmed (Table 80). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, silver-haired bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The Seminole bat was the most frequently recorded species (78.4 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the evening bat and Brazilian free-tailed bat.

Table 79. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Poinsett Electronic Combat Range

Station



Detector- Nights



SCPE-01 May 12 – July 19 68 33,958 485.1 48.6

SCPE-02 May 12 – August 18 98 16,640 166.4 11.3


Station



Detector- Nights



SCPE-03 May 12 – August 22 102 11,409 110.8 6.1

SCPE-04 May 12 – August 9 89 18,783 206.4 15.4

SCPE-05 May 12 – August 22 102 33,976 326.7 17.4

Overall1 459 114,766 245.2 24.2


Table 80. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Poinsett Electronic Combat Range

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorSCPE-

01SCPE-

02SCPE-

03SCPE-

04SCPE-

05

Big brown bat 4.1 1.1 0.9 1.2 2.2 1.8 0.2


Eastern red bat 12.1 25.6 10.5 24.9 20.5 19.0 0.9

Evening bat 32.3 50.5 18.1 44.6 90.6 48.4 2.5

Hoary bat 20.9 3.2 2.6 2.9 4.1 5.9 0.6

Little brown bat1 2.1 7.4 3.4 7.6 2.6 4.7 0.3

Northern yellow bat1 63.8 7.0 6.7 16.2 14.5 18.9 1.9

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 99.8 50.0 47.5 67.8 131.3 78.4 3.3


Southeastern bat <0.1 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 <0.1

Tri-colored bat 2.3 7.3 4.8 8.1 25.6 10.2 1.6


4.40 Randolph Air Force Base

On April 25, the field team deployed four detectors at Randolph AFB that recorded data until late May to late June (Table 81). The mean activity rate at Randolph AFB (728.2 bat passes/detector-night) ranked the third highest of any installation. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at TXRA-04 (1,006.9 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at Station TXRA-01 (438.4 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 10 species, and seven species were manually confirmed (Table 82). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, cave myotis, eastern red bat,


evening bat, hoary bat, and tri-colored bat. The Brazilian free-tailed bat and northern yellow bat had the highest species activity levels, with more than double the mean activity rate for the next leading species, the silver-haired bat.

Table 81. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Randolph Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



TXRA-01 April 25 – June 6 7 3,069 438.4 118.3

TXRA-02 April 25 – June 16 52 37,401 719.3 28.9

TXRA-03 April 25 – June 25 61 38,833 636.6 21.7

TXRA-04 April 25 – May 24 29 29,200 1,006.9 35.3

Overall1 149 108,503 728.2 83.4


Table 82. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Randolph Air Force Base

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorTXAR-

01TXRA-

02TXRA-

03TXRA-

04

Big brown bat 43.1 49.9 34.1 66.4 46.3 7.5


Cave myotis2 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.1

Eastern red bat 6.0 14.2 15.0 19.8 15.2 2.4

Evening bat 3.6 9.3 8.2 1.9 7.1 1.0

Hoary bat 26.6 34.9 22.3 40.9 30.5 4.9

Northern yellow bat1 120.0 205.4 203.8 325.1 224.0 25.3

Pallid bat1 0.4 0.9 1.3 2.4 1.3 0.3


Tri-colored bat 0.7 8.4 0.6 0.4 3.3 2.2


4.41 Robins Air Force Base

On May 5, the field team deployed five detectors at Robins AFB, which recorded data until early July to early August (Table 83). The detector stations at Robins AFB recorded the highest mean activity rate of any installation (768.8 bat passes/detector-night). The highest activity rate was recorded at


Station GARO-03 (1,419.1 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at GARO-04 (352.1 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 12 species, and 10 species were manually confirmed (Table 84). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, northern yellow, Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, silver-haired bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Station GARO-05 recorded the highest level of activity for most species. The Seminole bat had the highest species activity levels (221.9 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the evening bat and Brazilian free-tailed bat.

Table 83. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Robins Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

GARO-01 May 5 – August 1 88 47,720 530.2 28.3

GARO-02 May 5 – July 4 60 55,429 879.8 77.2

GARO-03 May 5 – July 18 74 72,376 1,419.1 70.6

GARO-04 May 5 – July 20 76 27,111 352.1 21.4

GARO-05 May 5 – July 30 86 48,752 1,059.8 42.5

Overall1 384 251,388 768.8 72.0


Table 84. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Robins Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorGARO-

01GARO-

02GARO-

03GARO-

04GARO-

05

Big brown bat 26.7 8.5 10.4 23.1 68.9 25.7 1.2


Eastern red bat 21.1 18.3 40.2 19.6 62.5 29.0 1.1

Evening bat 81.5 107.8 289.3 86.2 320.4 153.7 6.2

Hoary bat 23.0 32.8 46.3 16.0 54.0 31.2 1.4

Little brown bat1 2.1 6.3 1.8 4.0 13.0 4.9 0.4


Rafinesque’s big-eared bat 0.2 0.0 <0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 167.9 114.4 676.2 79.9 208.7 221.9 10.0


Southeastern bat <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 1.7 0.3 <0.1


Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorGARO-

01GARO-

02GARO-

03GARO-

04GARO-

05

Tri-colored bat 5.3 385.7 30.9 4.7 28.7 85.7 10.8


4.42 Sagamore Hill

On May 30, the field team deployed five detectors at Sagamore Hill, which recorded data until mid-August to late September (Table 85). The mean activity rate at Sagamore Hill (262.8 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station MASH-01 (290.7 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at MASH-03 (208.2 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified seven species, and five species were manually confirmed (Table 86). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, little brown bat, NLEB, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The big brown bat had the highest species activity rates (136.1 bat passes/detector-night), almost two times higher than the next most active species, the little brown bat.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at all five stations, and this species was manually confirmed at Station MASH-05. Kaleidoscope Pro auto-classified 4,241 bat passes as potentially being NLEB during analysis, 37 of which were manually reviewed. The false positives were primarily identified as little brown bats, Myotis species, or were unable to be identified to a species.

Table 85. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Sagamore Hill

Station



Detector- Nights



MASH-01 May 30 – September 7 100 29,072 290.7 19.8

MASH-02 May 30 – August 29 88 23,649 268.7 26.5

MASH-03 May 30 – August 16 78 16,241 208.2 25.2

MASH-04 May 30 – August 15 77 19,479 253.0 16.4

MASH-05 May 30 – September 7 100 27,959 279.6 22.1

Overall1 443 116,400 262.8 28.8


Table 86. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Sagamore Hill


Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorMASH-

01MASH-

02MASH-

03MASH-

04MASH-

05

Big brown bat 205.6 89.1 123.0 120.1 130.4 136.1 16.5

Eastern red bat1 23.9 19.7 15.9 46.6 16.5 23.9 3.2

Hoary bat1 25.8 14.7 6.9 18.8 4.5 14.2 1.8

Little brown bat 15.5 110.4 51.7 47.6 117.7 69.4 9.0

NLEB 1.9 28.9 3.2 10.4 4.6 9.6 1.4


Tri-colored bat 1.0 0.9 3.3 1.3 2.6 1.8 0.3


4.43 Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base

On May 15, the field team deployed five detectors at Seymour-Johnson AFB, which recorded data until mid-July to mid-August (Table 87). The mean activity rate at Seymour-Johnson AFB (240.9 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station NCSJ-05 (389.1 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at NCSJ-01 (96.9 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified nine species, and eight species were manually confirmed (Table 88). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, evening bat, hoary bat, Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, silver-haired bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The Seminole bat was the most frequently recorded species (58.8 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the hoary bat, evening bat, and eastern red bat.


Table 87. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base



Detector- Nights



NCSJ-01 May 15 – August 18 95 9,203 96.9 7.6

NCSJ-02 May 15 – August 23 100 17,206 172.1 12.5

NCSJ-03 May 15 – July 22 68 20,099 295.6 21.8

NCSJ-04 May 15 – August 23 100 28,216 282.2 17.9

NCSJ-05 May 15 – August 9 86 33,459 389.1 20.9

Overall1 449 108,183 240.9 24.4


Table 88. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Seymore-Johnson Air Force Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNCSJ-

01NCSJ-

02NCSJ-

03NCSJ-

04NCSJ-

05

Big brown bat 3.4 5.9 6.2 22.9 23.0 12.5 1.4

Eastern red bat 15.7 13.4 94.7 65.3 25.2 40.0 4.3

Evening bat 21.6 32 73.1 68.2 34.5 44.6 4.7

Hoary bat 12.6 33.0 23.1 30.0 150.7 49.1 5.2

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat 0 0 <0.1 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 31.2 66.1 82.1 72.1 47.2 58.8 6.1



Tri-colored bat 3.5 6.7 3.1 5.2 4.4 4.7 0.6


4.44 Shaw Air Force Base

On May 12, the field team deployed four detectors at Shaw AFB, which recorded data until late July to mid-August (Table 89). The mean activity rate at Shaw AFB (263.5 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station SCSH-03 (547.1 bat passes/detector-night), and the lowest was at Stations SCSH-01 and SCSH-04 (139.8 and 138.2 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 12 species, and eight species were manually confirmed (Table 90). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, Brazilian free-tailed bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, northern yellow bat, silver-haired bat, southeastern bat, and tri-colored bat. Station SCSH-03


recorded the highest levels of activity for most species. The tri-colored bat was the most frequently recorded species (86.8 bat passes/detector-night), followed by the Brazilian free-tailed bat and Seminole bat.

Table 89. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Shaw Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights



SCSH-01 May 12 – August 22 102 14,261 139.8 8.8

SCSH-02 May 12 – July 30 79 20,681 261.8 11.1

SCSH-03 May 12 – August 10 90 49,242 547.1 39.9

SCSH-04 May 12 – August 22 102 14,100 138.2 8.2

Overall1 373 98,284 26.5 263.5


Table 90. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Shaw Air Force Base

SpeciesStation


Standard ErrorSCSH-

01SCSH-

02SCSH-

03SCSH-

04

Big brown bat 1.0 3.1 2.6 1.5 1.9 0.2


Eastern red bat 14.0 16.7 18.0 6.1 13.4 1.4

Evening bat1 17.8 45.2 26.1 17.8 24.8 2.6

Hoary bat 4.4 8.6 12.8 3.5 7.1 0.8

Little brown bat1 3.8 4.1 4.5 0.5 3.1 0.4

Northern yellow bat 4.0 7.6 17.5 7.3 8.9 1.2

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat1 0 <0.1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1

Seminole bat1 24.5 54.4 91.3 28.8 48.1 6.2


Southeastern bat <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Tri-colored bat 37.6 54.1 256.3 11.7 86.8 11.3


4.45 Stockbridge Test Site

On June 2, the field team deployed seven detectors at Stockbridge Test Site, which recorded data until late August to mid-September (Table 91). The mean activity rate at Stockbridge Test Site (96.1


bat passes/detector-night) ranked the fourth lowest mean activity rate of any installation. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station NYST-05 (206.6 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at Station NYST-03 (33.0 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified nine species, and all species except NLEB and Indiana bat were manually confirmed (Table 92). Station NYST-05 recorded the highest levels of activity for most species. The big brown bat was the most frequently recorded species (61.7 bat passes/detector -night), followed by the migratory tree bat species (hoary bat, eastern red bat, and silver-haired bat).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at five stations, but this species was not manually confirmed at any station. False positives were determined to be little brown bats, or were unable to be identified to species. Low levels of Indiana bat detections occurred at all detector stations, however, none of these passes were manually reviewed.

Table 91. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Stockbridge Test Site

Station



Detector- Nights



NYST-01 June 2 – September 12 102 9,700 95.1 8.4

NYST-02 June 2 – August 26 85 6,472 76.1 8.8

NYST-03 June 2 – August 30 89 2,935 33.0 2.7

NYST-04 June 2 – September 4 94 4,597 48.9 5.4

NYST-05 June 2 – August 13 72 14,875 206.6 18.2

NYST-06 June 2 – August 25 64 10,984 171.6 19.3

NYST-07 June 2 – August 21 80 6,796 85.0 9.4

Overall1 586 56,359 96.2 12.2


Table 92. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Stockbridge Test Site

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNYST

-01NYST

-02NYST

-03NYST

-04NYST

-05NYST

-06NYST

-07

Big brown bat 61.4 58.8 16.5 28.5 123.5 123.2 49.5 61.7 8.1

Eastern red bat 6.4 3.4 3.6 4.4 25.7 4.4 11.5 8.1 1.1

Eastern small-footed bat <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 <0.1

Hoary bat 17.5 6.8 8.1 8.5 32.9 36.2 14.2 16.5 2.5

Indiana bat1 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.1 2 0.2 1.9 0.7 0.1

Little brown bat 2.4 1.6 1 1.3 6.3 1.4 3.4 2.4 0.3


Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorNYST

-01NYST

-02NYST

-03NYST

-04NYST

-05NYST

-06NYST

-07

NLEB1 <0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.7 0 0.4 0.2 <0.1

Silver-haired bat 6.9 4.8 3.4 5.6 14.3 5.8 3.1 6.1 0.8

Tri-colored bat 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 1 0.4 0.9 0.4 0.1


4.46 Travis Air Force Base

On March 29, the field team deployed five detectors at Travis AFB, which recorded data through late April to mid-July (Table 93). The point of contact at the installation was unavailable to meet the deployment team and security on site recommended the detectors be placed within the fenced areas of the installation. The mean activity rate at Travis AFB (191.6 bat passes/detector-night) was within the average range for all installations surveyed. The highest activity rates at this installation were recorded at Station CATR-01 (1,264.5 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at Station CATR-03 (48.8 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified 13 species, and five species were manually confirmed (Table 94). Confirmed species include the Brazilian free-tailed bat, California myotis, hoary bat, western red bat, and Yuma myotis. Activity rates for each species varied across each station. The Brazilian free-tailed bat had the highest species activity levels (152.0 bat passes/detector-night) with a mean activity rate 7 times higher than the next most common species, the hoary bat.

Table 93. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Travis Air Force Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate2 Standard Error

CATR-01 March 29 – April 28 30 37,935 1,264.5 96.5

CATR-02 March 29 – June 23 86 24,670 286.9 25.6

CATR-03 March 29 – July 13 106 5,177 48.8 7.6

CATR-04 March 29 – July 12 105 7,613 72.5 12.9

CATR-05 March 29 – July 13 106 7,586 71.6 8.3

Overall1 433 82,981 191.6 26.8

1. Represents cumulative values for detector-nights and total number of passes and activity rates across all detectors in the Project Area. 2. Bat passes/detector-night

Table 94. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Travis Air Force Base


Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorCATR-

01CATR-

02CATR-

03CATR-

04CATR-

05

Big brown bat1 84.2 18.7 4.1 8.7 11.0 15.4 2.3

Brazilian free-tailed bat 1,109.5 214.3 38.4 55.4 39.9 152.0 22.0

California myotis 0 0.7 0 <0.1 2.5 0.8 0.2

Canyon bat1 0 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.3 0.1 <0.1

Fringed myotis1 0 <0.1 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Hoary bat 70.4 48.1 6.2 8.2 12.9 21.1 3.3

Long-eared myotis1 0 <0.1 0 0 0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Long-legged myotis1 0 0.2 0 0 0.6 0.2 <0.1

Pallid bat1 0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 <0.1

Townsend’s big-eared bat1 0.1 0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Western mastiff bat1 0 0 0 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Western red bat 0.2 2.4 <0.1 <0.1 2.7 1.2 0.2

Yuma myotis <0.1 2.0 0 <0.1 1.3 0.7 0.1


4.47 Westover Air Reserve Base

On June 1, the field team deployed six detectors at Westover Air Reserve Base, which recorded data until early August to mid-September (Table 95). The mean activity rate at Westover Air Reserve Base (354.5 bat passes/detector-night) ranked in the top third compared to other installations. The highest activity rate at this installation was recorded at Station MAWE-02 (545.0 bat passes/detector-night), and lowest was at MAWE-04 (261.1 bat passes/detector-night).

Kaleidoscope Pro identified eight species, and six species were manually confirmed (Table 96). Confirmed species include the big brown bat, eastern red bat, hoary bat, little brown bat, silver-haired bat, and tri-colored bat. Station MAWE-02 recorded the highest levels of activity for most species. The big brown bat had the highest species activity levels (218.0 bat passes/detector-night), over three times higher than the next most common species, the eastern red bat.

Kaleidoscope Pro identified NLEB at four stations, but this species was not manually confirmed at any station. Kaleidoscope Pro auto-classified eight bat passes as potential NLEBs during analysis, all of which were manually reviewed. Most were determined to be false positives and identified as little brown bats, while the rest were unable to be identified to the species level.


Table 95. Summary of Acoustic Bat Monitoring Surveys at Westover Air Reserve Base

Station



Detector- Nights


Mean Activity Rate

Standard Error

MAWE-01 June 1 – September 11 102 37,026 363.0 39.0

MAWE-02 June 1 – August 27 87 47,447 545.0 30.1

MAWE-03 June 1 – September 11 102 32,482 318.5 27.1

MAWE-04 June 1 – August 28 88 22,977 261.1 21.8

MAWE-05 June 1 – August 30 90 25,240 280.4 22.0

MAWE-06 June 1 – August 4 64 23,780 371.6 24.4

Overall1 533 188,952 354.5 39.8


Table 96. Mean Activity Rates (Bat Passes/Detector-night) Recorded per Species at Each Detector Station, Westover Air Reserve Base

Species


Activity Rate

Standard ErrorMAWE

-01MAWE

-02MAWE

-03MAWE

-04MAWE

-05MAWE

-06

Big brown bat 112.7 419.0 238.2 195.7 178.5 168.8 218.0 26.0

Eastern red bat 178.6 47.6 16.8 11.0 45.7 88.8 65.3 9.1

Eastern small-footed bat1 0 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1

Hoary bat 41.9 44.0 36.9 33.6 34.5 92.0 44.7 5.6

Little brown bat 6.9 9.0 2.0 3.0 2.2 0.7 4.1 0.5

NLEB1 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 <0.1 <0.1


Tri-colored bat 0.7 1.4 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.3 0.7 0.1


5.0 Discussion

Per section 7 of the ESA, federal agencies must consult with USFWS to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, permit, or carry out does not jeopardize the existence of a listed species. Currently, seven bat species are federally listed within the continental United States, and are considered particularly vulnerable to environmental stressors due to their unique life history strategies that include low reproductive rates and relatively long lifespan (more than 30 years; Loeb et al. 2015).


Acoustic surveys provide an efficient and cost-effective method for evaluating presence for most bat species and allow the agencies to begin considering potential effects to listed species.

5.1 Federal Threatened and Endangered Species

The desktop analysis using species distributions of federally threatened and endangered bat species revealed 21 installations that may harbor these species. Species presence is often dictated by availability of foraging and roosting habitat. Installations in the eastern United States provide suitable habitat for the NLEB, and two installations (Arnold AFB and Stockbridge Test Site) contain suitable habitat for the Indiana bat. Arnold AFB is the only installation in this study with suitable habitat and overlapping range for gray bat. Most forested tracts of land, especially contiguous forest, provides suitable habitat for NLEB, whereas Indiana bat distributions are more restricted, and closely related to riparian areas and hibernacula. Similarly, gray bat distributions are more closely related to the presence of caves, and Arnold AFB is located in a region of known gray bat hibernacula.

5.1.1 Gray Bat

We acoustically detected and manually confirmed the presence of gray bats at Arnold AFB in Tennessee. Gray bats have a disjointed and limited distribution, based on proximity to suitable caves for roosting. This sporadic distribution includes Arnold AFB, and USFWS recognizes Coffee and Franklin counties as a portion of the known or expected distribution of the gray bat (USFWS 2018). Previous surveys have documented movements of gray bats at Arnold AFB in association with eight caves that are in the area (Arnold Air Force Base et al. 2009).

5.1.2 Indiana Bat

Distinguishing between Indiana bats and little brown bats based on their echolocation signatures has been a tremendous challenge for bat biologists since scientists began using bat detectors to attempt to differentiate species. While some researchers felt confident identifying Indiana bats based on their echolocation signature, continued acoustic monitoring and an expanded reference library of known echolocation calls from both Indiana bats and little brown bats has created significant evidence of overlap in their echolocation signatures, resulting in the current conclusion that these two species cannot be reliably distinguished based on echolocation calls (Szewczak et al. 2016). Given this lack of ability to reliably distinguish Indiana bats and little brown bats, we did not attempt to manually confirm Indiana bats at any installation.

Kaleidoscope Pro software identified Indiana bats at Arnold AFB, and the Indiana bat is expected to have a high probability of occurrence at Arnold AFB, as suitable habitat for this species exists at this installation. Maternity colonies have been documented at Arnold AFB in the past (USFWS 2012), but the number of captures have been too low to provide information on population trends, from approximately 1998-2016 (Lamb 2016). The acoustic data collected for Indiana bats at Arnold AFB may be helpful in guiding potential capture surveys in order to confirm presence of this endangered species. Kaleidoscope Pro software also identified Indiana bats at Stockbridge Test Site, however,


these bat passes were not confirmed and follow-up mist netting surveys at this installation may be warranted.

5.1.3 Northern Long-eared Bat

Of the 18 installations with the potential for NLEB to occur, we documented presence of the species at seven installations, all of which occur within the WNS Zone. Installations with confirmed NLEB include Fort Dix, Lakehurst Naval Air Center, and McGuire AFB in New Jersey; Sagamore Hill in Massachusetts; New Boston Air Force Station in New Hampshire; Fort Eustis in Virginia; and Dare County Range in North Carolina. We identified potential NLEB bat passes at Stockbridge Test Facility in New York and at Cape Cod Air Force Station in Massachusetts, but were not able to able to definitively confirm species identification. The dramatic population decline of NLEB due to WNS likely contributes to the low detection rate of this species, and these population declines may be responsible for reduced detections for this species during other recent studies in the eastern United States (Ford et al. 2011).

Kaleidoscope Pro software identified NLEB at nine installations that we were unable to manually confirm. The species identifications from this software are derived from probabilistic analysis (Agranat 2012), and not all call types are accurately identified, emphasizing the importance and need for manual review. Additionally, overlap in echolocation signature exists between NLEB and other species of Myotis, and only a subset of recorded files contain characteristics diagnostic to NLEB to confirm presence. Therefore, we cannot definitively conclude NLEB is not present at these nine installations, but we were unable to manually confirm detections of this species during this survey effort. The NLEB uses very high frequency echolocation that attenuates quickly in cluttered forest environments, which can be difficult to detect acoustically; therefore, other methods of verification, such as mist netting, may be required to confirm NLEB at these locations.

5.2 Other Bat Species

In addition to the federally-listed species, we documented 26 other species of bats on these installations (Appendix E). The installations included in this survey effort span several broad regions, including the deciduous forests, spanning from Mississippi to New Hampshire, the Great Plains, and the shrub lands of drier regions in the southwest. The greatest species diversity we documented occurred in Nevada, at Creech AFB and Nellis AFB, confirming a total of 17 species. The least diverse locations (7 species) occurred in Massachusetts at Sagamore Hill and Cape Cod Air Force Station. Other installations in the west, such as Beale AFB, Edwards AFB, and Kirtland AFB, also stand out with a large diversity of bat species.

The surveys primarily confirmed the presence of common species across all of the installations, but we also documented other species that are considered less common or rare. In addition to federally listed species, the state of South Carolina lists the Rafinesque’s big-eared bat (manually confirmed at Charleston AFB, Naval Weapons Station Charleston, North Air Force Auxiliary Field, and Poinsett Electrical Combat Range) as endangered due to its restricted distribution within the state (SCDNR


2015). We also documented presence of tri-colored bats at 34 of the 47 installations, which is a species currently being petitioned for federal listing (USFWS 2016d).

Results from the 2017 surveys indicate these installations are used by both hibernating and migratory bats. Migratory tree bats (hoary bats, eastern red bats, and silver-haired bats) and hibernating bats (Myotis spp.) were confirmed at all 47 installations. Migratory tree bats primarily roost in the foliage and cavities of trees, and escape cold temperatures and reduced prey availability by migrating long distances to southern latitudes for the winter (Cryan 2003). Presence of these species likely only occurs during the summer maternity period, after their spring migration northward, and prior to their southward migration in late summer and fall (Cryan and Veilleux 2007). In contrast, hibernating bats overwinter in local hibernacula, or make short regional migrations to suitable hibernacula.

6.0 Conclusion

This extensive acoustic monitoring survey effort, spanning 47 installations across 18 states, confirmed the presence of the federally threatened NLEB at seven Installations in five states. Due to the inability to reliably distinguish between Indiana bats and little brown bats with acoustics, no attempt was made to confirm the presence of Indiana bats at Arnold AFB or Stockbridge Test Site, the only installations with a software classification of that species. The most appropriate and reliable method for determining the presence of Indiana bat is through mist netting, following the 2017 USFWS survey guidelines (USFWS 2017b). Gray bat presence was expected at Arnold AFB, and confirmed through this acoustic survey effort.

7.0 Literature Cited

Agranat, Ian. 2012. “Bat Species Identification from Zero Crossing and Full Spectrum Echolocation Calls using HMMS, Fisher Scores, Unsupervised Clustering and Balanced Winnow Pairwise Classifiers.” Wildlife Acoustics, Inc. Concord, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

Arnold Air Force Base et al. 2009. White-nose Syndrome Cooperative Monitoring and Response Plan for Tennessee.

Caire, W., J. D. Tyler, B. P. Glass, and M. A. Mares. 1989. Mammals of Oklahoma. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Oklahoma. 567 pp.

Cryan, P. M. 2003. Seasonal distribution of migratory tree bats (Lasiurus and Lasionycteris) in North America. Journal of Mammalogy 84:579–593.

Cryan, P. M. and J. P. Veilleux. 2007. Migration and use of autumn, winter and spring roosts by tree bats. Pages 153–176 in Bats in Forests: Conservation and Management, eds. J. P. H. M.J. Lacki, and A. Kurta. Baltimore, MD, The Johns Hopkins University Press.


Ford, W.M., E.R. Britzke, C.A. Dobony, J.L. Rodrigue, and J.B. Johnson. 2011. Patterns of acoustical activity of bats prior to and following white-nose syndrome occurrence. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 2:125 – 134.

Hays, H. A., and D. C. Bingman. 1964. A colony of gray bats in southeastern Kansas. Journal of Mammalogy 45:150.

Humphrey, S.R., A.R. Richter and J.B. Cope. 1977. Summer habitat and ecology of the Indiana bat, Myotis sodalis. J. Mamm. 58:334-346.

Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). 2015. Checklist of Illinois endangered and threatened animals and plants list. https://www.dnr.illinois.gov/ESPB/Documents/2015_ChecklistFINAL_for_webpage_051915.pdf. Accessed February 2017.

Lamb, J. 2016. Capture Trends at Arnold Air Force Bat, TN. 13th Annual Meeting of the Tennessee Bat Working Group

LaVal, R. K., R. L. Clawson, M. L. LaVal and W. Caire. 1977. Foraging behavior and nocturnal activity patterns of Missouri bats, with emphasis on the endangered species Myotis grisescens and Myotis sodalis. Journal of Mammalogy 58:592-599.

Loeb, S. C., T. J. Rodhouse, L. E. Ellison, C. L. Lausen, J. D. Reichard, K. M. Irvine, T. E. Ingersoll, J. T. H. Coleman, W. E. Thogmartin, J. R. Sauer, C. M. Francis, M. L. Bayless, T. R. Stanley, and D. H. Johnson. 2015. A plan for the North American Bat Monitoring Program (NABat). General Technical Report SRS-208. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 112 p.

Medellín, R. 2016. Leptonycteris yerbabuenae. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/summary/136659/0. Accessed March 2018.

Miller, N.E., R.D. Drobney, R.L. Clawson and E.V. Callahan. 2002. Summer habitat in northern Missouri. Pp. 165-171 In The Indiana Bat: Biology and Management of an Endangered Species (A. Kurta and J. Kennedy, Eds.). Bat Conservation International, Austin, Texas.

Saugey, D.A. 1997. Bat faunal survey Little Rock Air Force Base. Prepared for The Nature Conservancy, Arkansas Field Office. 26 pp.

Skalak, S.L., R.E. Sherwin, and R. M. Brigham. 2012. Sampling period, size and duration influence measures of bat species richness from acoustic surveys. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3: 490 – 502.

Szewczak, J.M., J.D. Chenger, and J.D. Tyburec. 2016. More reference recordings decreases, rather than increases, acoustic classification performance of Myotis sodalis and M.lucifugus. Presentation at the North American Society for Bat Research Symposium, San Antonio, TX.

Tuttle, M. D. 1976. Population ecology of the gray bat (Myotis grisescens): philopatry, timing, and patterns of movement, weight loss during migration, and seasonal adaptive strategies. University of Kansas Museum of Natural History Occasional Papers (54):1-38.

http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/summary/136659/0


Tuttle, M. D. 1979. Status, causes of decline, and management of endangered gray bats. Journal of Wildlife Management 43:1-17.

Tuttle, M. D., and J. Kennedy. 2005. Field guide to eastern cave bats. Bat Conservation International, Inc., Austin, TX. 41 pp.

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 1995. Lesser Long-nosed Bat Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 45 pp.

USFWS. 2004. Indiana bat. https://www.fws.gov/northeast/pdf/indianabat.fs.pdf. Accessed February 2017.

USFWS. 2007. Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) draft recovery plan: first revision. Region 3, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Snelling, Minnesota. 258 pp.

USFWS. 2012. Interim Indiana Bat Mitigation Guidance for the State of Tennessee. https://www.fws.gov/cookeville/pdfs/MYSO%20interim%20mitig.%20guidance%20TN%20120321.pdf. Accessed March 2018.

USFWS. 2014. Northern long-eared bat interim conference and planning guidance. USFWS Regions 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nlba/. Accessed February 2017.

USFWS. 2015. Survey for the federally endangered Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) at Scott Air Force Base. 438pp.

USFWS. 2016a. Northern long-eared bat -Final 4 (d) rule; Questions and answers. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/FAQsFinal4dRuleNLEB.pdf. Accessed February 2017.

USFWS. 2016b. Northern Long-Eared Bat final 4 (d) Rule. White-Nose Syndrome Zone Around WNS/Pd Positive Counties/Districts. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/WNSZone.pdf. Accessed November 2016.

USFWS. 2016c. Species status assessment for the lesser long-nosed bat. December 2016. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, NM. 96 pp.

USFWS. 2016d. Endangered species act petitions received by Fish and Wildlife Service. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/petitions-received.html. Accessed February 2017.

USFWS. 2017a. ECOS – Environmental Conservation Online System. Results of species search. http://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/pub/SpeciesReport.do. Accessed February 2017.

USFWS. 2017b. 2017 Range-Wide Indiana Bat Summer Survey Guidelines May 2017. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/inba/surveys/pdf/2017INBASummerSurveyGuidelines9May2017.pdf. Accessed May 2017.

USFWS. 2017c. Indiana Bat Summer Survey Guidance; Automated acoustic bat ID software programs.


https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/inba/surveys/inbaAcousticSoftware.html. Accessed May 2017.

USFWS. 2018. Species Profile for Gray bat (Myotis grisescens). https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/profile/speciesProfile?spcode=A04J. Accessed March 2018.

Whittaker, J.O., and W.J. Hamilton, Jr. 1998. Mammals of the eastern United States. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, New York. Third Edition.

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/inba/surveys/inbaAcousticSoftware.html

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/inba/surveys/inbaAcousticSoftware.html


APPENDIX A. FIGURES


This page intentionally left blank


APPENDIX B. STATE STATUS OF BAT SPECIES BY REGION


Table 97. State Status of Bat Species in the Northeast

Common Name Scientific NameLevel of State Concern

Massachusetts Maryland New Hampshire New Jersey New York

Big brown bat Eptesicus fuscus SC

Eastern red bat Lasiurus borealis SC SC

Eastern Small-footed bat Myotis leibii E E E SC

Evening bat Nycticeius humeralis SC

Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus SC SC

Indiana bat Myotis sodalis E E E E

Little brown bat Myotis lucifugus E SC E

Northern long-eared bat Myotis septentrionalis E T E T

Seminole bat Lasiurus seminolus SC

Silver-haired bat Lasionycteris noctivagans SC SC

Southeastern myotis Myotis austroriparius SC

Tri-colored bat Perimyotis subflavus E SC E

E: Endangered; T: Threatened; SC: Species of Special Concern


Table 98. State Status of Bat Species in the Southeast


Alabama Louisiana North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Virginia

Big Brown bat Eptesicus fuscus SC SC SC

Brazilian free-tailed bat Tadarida brasiliensis SC

Eastern big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii macrotus SC

Eastern red bat Lasiurus borealis SC SC SC

Eastern small-footed bat Myotis leibii SC SC SC SC

Evening bat Nycticeius humeralis SC

Florida yellow bat Lasiurus intermedius floridanus SC

Gray bat Myotis grisescens SC E E E

Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus SC SC SC

Indiana bat Myotis sodalis SC E E E

Little brown bat Myotis lucifugus SC SC SC E

Northern long-eared bat Myotis septentrionalis SC SC T SC T

Northern yellow bat Lasiurus intermedius SC SC

Ozark big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii ingens

Rafinesque’s big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii SC SC T E SC E

Seminole bat Lasiurus seminolus SC SC

Silver-haired bat Lasionycteris noctivagans SC SC SC SC

Southeastern myotis Myotis austroriparius SC SC SC SC SC SC

Tri-colored bat Perimyotis subflavus SC SC SC SC E

Virginia big-eared batCorynorhinus townsendii virginianus

E SC E

E: Endangered; T: Threatened; SC: Species of Concern, Species of Conservation Concern, or Species of Greatest Conservation Need


Table 99. State Status of Bat Species in the Southwest


Arizona California New Mexico Nevada Texas

Allen's big-eared bat Idionycteris phyllotis SC

Arizona myotis Myotis occultus SC

Big free-tailed bat Nyctinomops macrotis SC

California leaf-nosed bat Macrotus californicus C SC SC

Cave myotis Myotis velifer SC SC

Fringed myotis Myotis thysanodes SC

Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus SC

Lesser long-nosed bat Leptonycteris yerbabuenae T

Little brown myotis Myotis lucifugus SC

Long-eared myotis Myotis evotis SC

Mexican free-tailed bat Tadarida brasiliensis SC

Mexican long-nosed bat Leptonycteris nivalis SC E

Mexican long-tonged bat Choeronycteris mexicana T SC E

Pallid bat Antrozous pallidus SC

Pocketed free-tailed bat Nyctinomops femorosaccus SC

Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii T

Silver-haired bat Lasionycteris noctivagans SC

Southern long-nosed bat Leptonycteris curasoae E

Southern yellow bat Lasiurus ega T

Spotted bat Euderma maculatum C SC T SC T

Townsend's big-eared bat Corynorhinus townsendii SC SC SC

Western mastiff bat Eumops perotis SC

Western red bat Lasiurus blossivillii C SC SC



Arizona California New Mexico Nevada Texas

Western small-footed myotis Myotis ciliolabrum SC

Western yellow bat Lasiurus xanthinus C SC T

E: Endangered; T: Threatened; SC: Species of Concern, Species of Special Concern, or Species of Greatest Conservation Need; C: Candidate for Listing


APPENDIX C. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS


APPENDIX D. GEOGRAPHIC COORDINATES FOR ALL DETECTOR LOCATIONS


Detector Locations

Installation State County Station ID SM4 S/N Latitude Longitude

Andrews Air Force Base MarylandPrince

George’sUM-MDAN-01 S4U01851 N 38.82531 W 076.85654









Arnold Air Force Base TennesseeCoffee and Franklin

UM-TNAR-01 S4U01887 N 35.38646 W 086.06624


UM-TNAR-02 S4U01662 N 35.37796 W 086.06547


UM-TNAR-03 S4U01743 N 35.37735 W 086.08418


UM-TNAR-04 S4U01701 N 35.39777 W 086.07705


UM-TNAR-05 S4U01732 N 35.38850 W 086.05788

Barksdale Air Force Base Louisiana Bossier UM-LABA-01 S4U00688 N 32.51462 W 093.61749








ArizonaMaricopa and

YumaUM-AZBG-01 S4U01837 N 32.88790 W 112.73946


ArizonaMaricopa and

YumaUM-AZBG-02 S4U01727 N 32.88881 W 112.73831


ArizonaMaricopa and

YumaUM-AZBG-03 S4U01655 N 32.70942 W 112.83484


ArizonaMaricopa and

YumaUM-AZBG-04 S4U01823 N 32.64886 W 112.77930


ArizonaMaricopa and

YumaUM-AZBG-05 S4U01777 N 32.64638 W 112.78415


ArizonaMaricopa and

YumaUM-AZBG-06 S4U01812 N 32.70367 W 112.83582

Beale Air Force Base California Yuba UM-CABE-01 S4U01745 N 39.10890 W 121.34057






MarylandPrince

George’sUM-MDBR-01 S4U01675 N 38.68356 W 076.84023


MarylandPrince





MarylandPrince



MarylandPrince



MarylandPrince


Camp Bullis TexasBexar and

ComalUM-TXCB-01 S4U01763 N 29.65214 W 098.58544












Massachusetts Barnstable UM-MACC-01 S4U01921 N 41.75463 W 070.53738










South Carolina Charleston UM-SCCH-01 S4U01904 N 32.90822 W 080.03845









Columbus Air Force Base Mississippi Lowndes UM-MSCO-01 S4U00772 N 33.63258 W 088.42728





Creech Air Force Base Nevada Clark UM-NVCR-01 S4U00686 N 36.57969 W 115.68315




Dare County Range North Carolina Dare UM-NCND-01 S4U01919 N 35.69670 W 075.79091











Maryland Anne Arundel UM-MDDT-01 S4U01649 N 38.96481 W 076.67819










Arizona Pima UM-AZDM-01 S4U01660 N 32.12720 W 110.80190









Edwards Air Force Base California

Kern and Los Angeles and

San Bernardino

UM-CAED-01 S4U00719 N 34.90765 W 117.93828



San Bernardino

UM-CAED-02 S4U01889 N 34.93637 W 117.69415



San Bernardino

UM-CAED-03 S4U01906 N 34.93666 W 117.69303



San Bernardino

UM-CAED-04 S4U00596 N 34.82330 W 117.92244



San Bernardino

UM-CAED-05 S4U00687 N 34.79179 W 118.12103

Fort Dix New JerseyBurlington and Ocean

UM-NJFD-01 S4U01767 N 40.02205 W 074.56313


UM-NJFD-02 S4U01651 N 40.03036 W 074.54755


UM-NJFD-03 S4U01841 N 40.03691 W 074.49471


UM-NJFD-04 S4U01670 N 40.03458 W 074.51247




UM-NJFD-05 S4U01853 N 39.99635 W 074.56763


UM-NJFD-06 S4U01845 N 39.99331 W 074.59987

Fort Eustis VirginiaNewport

NewsUM-VAFE-01 S4U01905 N 37.14765 W 076.60496


NewsUM-VAFE-02 S4U01661 N 37.14196 W 076.60026


NewsUM-VAFE-03 S4U01700 N 37.12920 W 076.59626


NewsUM-VAFE-04 S4U01761 N 37.12452 W 076.58689


NewsUM-VAFE-05 S4U01855 N 37.12710 W 076.61652

Fort Sam Houston Texas Bexar UM-TXFS-01 S4U01843 N 29.46257 W 098.42583





Fourth Cliff Massachusetts Plymouth UM-MAFC-01 S4U01713 N 42.16188 W 070.70658





Texas Tom Green UM-TXGO-01 S4U00729 N 31.44116 W 100.41053







Grand Bay Range Georgia Lanier UM-GAGB-01 S4U01668 N 30.98013 W 083.13242





Hanscom Air Force Base Massachusetts Middlesex UM-MAHA-01 S4U01866 N 42.46296 W 071.26951






Holloman Air Force Base New Mexico Otero UM-NMHO-01 S4U00727 N 32.89406 W 106.12780







Keesler Air Force Base Mississippi Harrison UM-MSKE-01 S4U00691 N 30.40369 W 088.93279




Kirtland Air Force Base New Mexico Bernalillo UM-NMKI-01 S4U00751 N 34.99839 W 106.47161





Lackland Air Force Base Texas Bexar UM-TXLA-01 S4U01703 N 29.38568 W 098.60520






New Jersey Ocean UM-NJLN-01 S4U01894 N 40.02310 W 074.36115

















Langley Air Force Base Virginia Hampton UM-VALA-01 S4U00646 N 37.06969 W 076.36913





Laughlin Air Force Base Texas Val Verde UM-TXLU-01 S4U00690 N 29.36107 W 100.79700




Lincoln Receiver California Placer UM-CALR-01 S4U1702 N 38.86944 W 121.39041





Luke Air Force Base Arizona Maricopa UM-AZLU-01 S4U00661 N 33.52603 W 112.37339





Alabama Montgomery UM-ALMG-01 S4U00738 N 32.38263 W 086.33610









McGuire Air Force Base New JerseyBurlington and Ocean

UM-NJMC-01 S4U01764 N 40.03159 W 074.56686


UM-NJMC-02 S4U01836 N 40.02832 W 074.56336


UM-NJMC-03 S4U01734 N 40.03210 W 074.56822


UM-NJMC-04 S4U01666 N 40.03354 W 074.56647


UM-NJMC-05 S4U01650 N 40.02749 W 074.55993

Moody Air Force Base GeorgiaLowndes and

LanierUM-GAMO-01 S4U01753 N 30.97854 W 083.21552










South Carolina Berkeley UM-SCNW-01 S4U01892 N 32.95414 W 079.93031









Nellis Air Force Base Nevada Clark UM-NVNE-01 S4U00587 N 36.24953 W 115.07154






New Hampshire Hillsborough UM-NHNB-01 S4U01810 N 42.94163 W 071.63571














South Carolina Orangeburg UM-SCNA-01 S4U01895 N 33.61448 W 081.06242








South Carolina Sumter UM-SCPE-01 S4U01677 N 33.83994 W 080.49406









Randolph Air Force Base Texas Bexar UM-TXRA-01 S4U01704 N 29.51614 W 098.27503




Robins Air Force Base Georgia Houston UM-GARO-01 S4U01918 N 32.59434 W 083.58550





Sagamore Hill Massachusetts Essex UM-MASH-01 S4U01857 N 42.63207 W 070.81872






North Carolina Wayne UM-NCSJ-01 S4U01820 N 35.36330 W 077.96745





Seymour-Johnson Air North Carolina Wayne UM-NCSJ-04 S4U01901 N 35.35090 W 077.95400



Force Base



Shaw Air Force Base South Carolina Sumter UM-SCSH-01 S4U01750 N 33.97701 W 080.44681




Stockbridge Test Site New York Oneida UM-NYST-01 S4U00760 N 43.03447 W 075.64561







Travis Air Force Base California Solano UM-CATR-01 S4U01840 N 38.28225 W 121.93395






Massachusetts HampdenUM-MAWE-

01S4U01802 N 42.19172 W 072.53044



02S4U00732 N 42.19986 W 072.52163



03S4U00730 N 42.21249 W 072.52351



04S4U01766 N 42.21348 W 072.53291



05S4U01714 N 42.21441 W 072.53976



06S4U01884 N 42.20925 W 072.53038


APPENDIX E. BAT SPECIES INCLUDED IN ACOUSTIC ANALYSIS AT EACH INSTALLATION


Species Included in Acoustic Analysis by Installation, Part 1

Installation

Big brown bat Big free-tailed batBrazilian free-

tailed batCalifornia myotis Canyon bat Cave myotis Eastern red bat


Evening bat Fringed myotis Gray bat Hoary bat

Eptesicus fuscusNyctinomops

macrotisTadarida

brasiliensisMyotis

californicusParastrellus

hesperusMyotis velifer Lasiurus borealis Myotis leibii

Nycticeius humeralis

Myotis thysanodes Myotis grisescens Lasiurus cinereus

Andrews Air Force Base Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes

Arnold Air Force Base Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Barksdale Air Force Base Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes


Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No Yes

Beale Air Force Base Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes

Brandywine Receiver Station Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes

Camp Bullis Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes

Cape Cod Air Force Station Yes No No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes

Charleston Air Force Base Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Columbus Air Force Base Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Creech Air Force Base Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes

Davidsonville Transmitter Site Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes

Edwards Air Force Base Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes

Fort Dix Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes

Fort Eustis Yes No No No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Fort Sam Houston Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes

Fourth Cliff Yes No No No No No Yes Yes No No No `Yes

Goodfellow Air Force Base Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes

Grand Bay Range Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Hanscom Air Force Base Yes No No No No No Yes Yes No No No `Yes

Holloman Air Force Base Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes

Keesler Air Force Base Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Kirtland Air Force Base Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes

Lackland Air Force Base Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes

Lakehurst Naval Air Center Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes

Langley Air Force Base Yes No No No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Laughlin Air Force Base Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes

Lincoln Receiver Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes

Luke Air Force Base Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes

Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base Yes No No No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

McGuire Air Force Base Yes No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes

Moody Air Force Base Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Naval Weapons Station Charleston Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Dare County Range Yes No No No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Nellis Air Force Base Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes

New Boston Air Force Station Yes No No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes

North Air Force Auxiliary Field Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes


Installation

Big brown bat Big free-tailed batBrazilian free-

tailed batCalifornia myotis Canyon bat Cave myotis Eastern red bat


Evening bat Fringed myotis Gray bat Hoary bat

Eptesicus fuscusNyctinomops

macrotisTadarida

brasiliensisMyotis

californicusParastrellus

hesperusMyotis velifer Lasiurus borealis Myotis leibii

Nycticeius humeralis

Myotis thysanodes Myotis grisescens Lasiurus cinereus

Poinsett Electronic Combat Range Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Randolph Air Force Base Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes

Robins Air Force Base Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Sagamore Hill Yes No No No No No Yes No No No No Yes

Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base Yes No No No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Shaw Air Force Base Yes No Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes

Stockbridge Testing Site Yes No No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes

Travis Air Force Base Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes

Westover Air Reserve Base Yes No No No No No Yes Yes No No No Yes


Species Included in Acoustic Analysis by Installation, Part 2

Installation

Indiana batLittle brown

batLong-eared

myotisLong-legged

myotisNorthern long-

eared batPallid bat


Seminole batSilver-haired

batSoutheastern

myotisTownsend's big

- eared batTri-colored bat

Western small-footed myotis

Yuma myotis

Myotis sodalisMyotis

lucifugusMyotis evotis Myotis volans

Myotis septentrionalis

Antrozous pallidus

Corynorhinus rafinesquii

Lasiurus seminolus

Lasionycteris noctivagans

Myotis austroriparius

Corynorhinus townsendii

Perimyotis subflavus

Myotis ciliolabrum

Myotis yumanensis

Andrews Air Force Base No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Arnold Air Force Base Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No No

Barksdale Air Force Base No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No


No No No No No Yes No No No No Yes No NoYes

Beale Air Force Base No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes

Brandywine Receiver Station No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Camp Bullis No No No No No Yes No No Yes No No Yes No No

Cape Cod Air Force Station No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Charleston Air Force Base No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No No

Columbus Air Force Base No Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No

Creech Air Force Base No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes

Davidsonville Transmitter Site No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes

Edwards Air Force Base No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No Yes Yes

Fort Dix No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Fort Eustis No Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No

Fort Sam Houston No No No No No Yes No No Yes No No Yes No No

Fourth Cliff No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Goodfellow Air Force Base No No No No No Yes No No Yes No Yes No No No

Grand Bay Range No Yes No No No No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No No

Hanscom Air Force Base No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Holloman Air Force Base No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes

Keesler Air Force Base No Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No

Kirtland Air Force Base No No Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes

Lackland Air Force Base No No No No No Yes No No Yes No No Yes No No

Lakehurst Naval Air Center No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Langley Air Force Base No Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No

Laughlin Air Force Base No No No No No Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes

Lincoln Receiver No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Luke Air Force Base No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Maxwell/Gunter Air Force Base No Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No

McGuire Air Force Base No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Moody Air Force Base No Yes No No No No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes No No


No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes NoNo

Dare County Range No Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No No

Nellis Air Force Base No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes Yes

New Boston Air Force Station No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No


Installation

Indiana batLittle brown

batLong-eared

myotisLong-legged

myotisNorthern long-

eared batPallid bat


Seminole batSilver-haired

batSoutheastern

myotisTownsend's big

- eared batTri-colored bat

Western small-footed myotis

Yuma myotis

Myotis sodalisMyotis

lucifugusMyotis evotis Myotis volans

Myotis septentrionalis

Antrozous pallidus

Corynorhinus rafinesquii

Lasiurus seminolus

Lasionycteris noctivagans

Myotis austroriparius

Corynorhinus townsendii

Perimyotis subflavus

Myotis ciliolabrum

Myotis yumanensis

North Air Force Auxiliary Field No Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No No


No Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes NoNo

Randolph Air Force Base No No No No No Yes No No Yes No No Yes No No

Robins Air Force Base No Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No

Sagamore Hill No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No


No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes NoNo

Shaw Air Force Base No Yes No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No No

Stockbridge Testing Site Yes Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No

Travis Air Force Base No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No No Yes No No Yes

Westover Air Reserve Base No Yes No No Yes No No No Yes No No Yes No No


APPENDIX F. SPECIES DIVERSITY BY SURVEY LOCATION


Andr

ews

AFB

Arno

ld A

FBBa

rksd

ale

AFB

Barr

y M

. Gol

dwat

er A

FRBe

ale

AFB

Bran

dyw

ine

Rece

iver

Sta

tion

Cam

p Bu

llis

Cape

Cod

AFS

Char

lest

on A

FBCo

lum

bus

AFB

Cree

ch A

FBDa

re C

ount

y Ra

nge

Davi

dson

ville

Tra

nsm

itter

Site

Davi

s-M

onth

an A

FBEd

war

ds A

FBFo

rt D

ixFo

rt E

ustis

Fort

Sam

Hou

ston

Four

th C

liffG

oodf

ello

w A

FBG

rand

Bay

Ran

ge

Hans

com

AFB

Hollo

man

AFB

Kees

ler A

FBKi

rtla

nd A

FBLa

ckla

nd A

FBLa

kehu

rst N

aval

Air

Cent

erLa

ngle

y AF

BLa

ughl

in A

FBLi

ncol

n Re

ceiv

erLu

ke A

FBM

axw

ell/

Gun

ter A

FBM

cGui

re A

FBM

oody

AFB

Nav

al W

eapo

ns S

tatio

n Ch

arle

ston

Nel

lis A

FBN

ew B

osto

n AF

SN

orth

Air

Forc

e Au

xilia

ry F

ield

Poin

sett

Ele

ctro

nic

Com

bat R

ange

Rand

olph

AFB

Robi

ns A

FBSa

gam

ore

Hill

Seym

our-

John

son

AFB

Shaw

AFB

Stoc

kbrid

ge T

est S

iteTr

avis

AFB

Wes

tove

r Air

Rese

rve

Base

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Spec

ies D

iver

sity

Species Diversity by Survey Location