Myotis thysanodes - Miller, 1897
Fringed Myotis
Other English Common Names: Fringed Bat, fringed bat
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Myotis thysanodes Miller, 1897 (TSN 180002)
French Common Names: chauve-souris à queue frangée
Spanish Common Names: Un Murciélago
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.100426
Element Code: AMACC01090
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Mammals - Bats
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Mammalia Chiroptera Vespertilionidae Myotis
Genus Size: D - Medium to large genus (21+ species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. xviii + 1206 pp. Available online at: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/msw/.
Concept Reference Code: B93WIL01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Myotis thysanodes
Taxonomic Comments: See Manning (1988) for a description of the new subspecies vespertinus from California, Oregon, and Washington.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 04Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 20Jul2012
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by calculator
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Reasons: Widespread but patchy distribution in western North America; many occurrences in wide range of habitats, but abundance is apparently relatively low; trend is poorly known, but slow declines are probable; primary threats include roost loss and disturbance; not yet known to be afflicted by white-nose syndrome, but this potentially devastating pathogen could eventually spread into the range of M. thysanodes. Theoretical considerations and population models suggest that future climate change may result in substantial declines or widespread extirpations over the next century. Thus better information is needed on abundance and trend.
Nation: United States
National Status: N4 (20Jul2012)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N3 (01Jan2018)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Arizona (S3S4), California (S3), Colorado (S3), Idaho (S3), Montana (S3), Navajo Nation (S4S5), Nebraska (SNR), Nevada (S2), New Mexico (S4S5), Oregon (S2), South Dakota (S2), Texas (S3), Utah (S2B), Washington (S3S4), Wyoming (S2)
Canada British Columbia (S3)

Other Statuses

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Data Deficient (01May2004)
Comments on COSEWIC: This species is rarely reported in its Canadian range. There are, however, a few sites in the Okanagan Valley where they regularly can be captured during the summer. There is a lack of data about the extent of its Canadian range and the habitat that is important for foraging and roosting. We also do not know the population size or trends, nor any key demographic characteristics, such as population structure, reproduction or survival rates. It is not known if this species overwinters in Canada or migrates south for the winter; however, there are maternal colonies recorded in Canada.

Designated Special Concern in April 1988. Status re-examined in May 2004 and designated Data Deficient. Last assessment based on an update status report.

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: >2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: Patchy range includes western North America from southcentral British Columbia south through the western United States to Veracruz and Chiapas in southern Mexico; west to the Pacific coast, east to the Black Hills region of Wyoming-South Dakota-Nebraska, and western Texas (O'Farrell and Studier 1980; Nagorsen and Brigham 1993; Simmons, in Wilson and Reeder 2005). Winter range is little known. Elevational range extends from sea level along the Pacific coast to around 2,440 meters in Colorado (Armstrong et al. 1994), 2,715 meters in Utah (Oliver 2000), and 2,850 meters in New Mexico (Barbour and Davis 1969).

Number of Occurrences:  
Number of Occurrences Comments: The number of distinct occurrences has not been determined using standardized criteria, but this species is represented by a large number of roost sites, collection sites, and locations (as defined by IUCN).

Hasenyager (1980) listed 10 collection sites in Utah. Nagorsen and Brigham (1993) mapped approximately 10 collection sites in British Columbia. Schmidly (1977) mapped 17 collection sites in Texas. Keinath (2004) mapped more than 50 sites in Colorado, Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas (1 site), but many of these (including all 14 in Wyoming) were based on observations prior to 1990. Many additional localities exist in other portions of the range.

Population Size: 10,000 - 1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: Population size is unknown but presumably exceeds 10,000 and may exceed 100,000. This bat may be uncommon or rare through the bulk of the range, not merely at the periphery (Western Bat Working Group 1998), but it can be locally common (Keinath 2004). It is one of the most common bats in Trans-Pecos Texas in summer (Ammerman et al. 2012). Colonial roosts range from 10 to 2,000 individuals, but large colonies are extremely rare (Western Bat Working Group species account, 2005). According to Tuttle and Taylor (1994), mine colonies include dozens to hundreds of individuals. In the Pacific Northwest, 118 individuals emerged from a single ponderosa pine snag (Lacki and Baker 2007). A vacant shack in Arizona housed 100-150 adult females (Hoffmeister 1986).

Overall Threat Impact: Medium
Overall Threat Impact Comments: A primary threat is human disturbance of roost sites, especially maternity colonies, through recreational caving and mine exploration (O'Farrell and Studier 1980, Arizona Game and Fish Department 1993, Keinath 2004). Unprotected caves in South Dakota are heavily used and vandalized (Doug Backlund, pers. comm., 1998), and in Wyoming caves are threatened by recreational use (Mary Neighbours, pers. comm., 1998). Other threats include closure of abandoned mines, renewed mining at historic sites, toxic material impoundments, pesticide spraying, vegetation conversion, livestock grazing, timber harvest (particularly loss of snags that serve as roost sites for tree-roosting populations), and destruction of buildings and bridges used as roosts (Western Bat Working Group species account, 2005; Keinath 2004). Disturbance or destruction of water sources and riparian habitat may negatively affect some populations (George Oliver, pers. comm., 1998). This species is not known to incur signficiant mortality from turbines at wind energy facilities (Arnett and Baerwald 2013) or from white-nose syndrome.

Hypotheses and models of Adams and Hayes (2008), Adams (2010), and Hayes (2011) suggested that M. thysanodes populations in the Southern Rocky Mountains region may be at significant risk of local or regional extinction over the coming 100 - 200 years, if average temperatures significantly increase and surface water resources decrease.

Short-term Trend: Decline of <30% to relatively stable
Short-term Trend Comments: Trend over the past 10 years or three generations is uncertain (Hayes and Wiles 2013), but number of roosts and population size probably have slowly declined. Distribution may be relatively stable, but the proportion of the overall range that is actually occupied is unknown for large areas, and virtually no information is available for any populations in Mexico (Keinath 2004). Anecdotal evidence suggests increases in abundance in some areas and decreases in others, possibly confounded by short-term fluctuations (Keinath 2004). This species appears to be stable in Arizona (Arizona Game and Fish Department 1997). Nevada records are relatively few but suggest an apparent increase in numbers or area occupied by the species over the last 20 years (Altenbach et al. 2002). This may, however, be an artifact of increased survey effort and better techniques (Keinath 2004). Although no trends in abundance were evident, Ramsey (1998) reported that M. thysanodes was recorded in a broader range of habitats in the Gila National Forest of New Mexico than previously reported, which may have had as much to do with structural changes in the environment and water sources than with habitat type per se (Keinath 2004). Jones and Suttkus (1972) obtained relative abundance values over a 10-year period in western New Mexico; populations fluctuated over the 10-year period, with a possible small net gain in abundance.

The status of populations in Canada is uncertain. However, recent evidence of a breeding population in Canada indicates that it is still viable within a very restricted range (Balcombe 1988, Nagorsen and Brigham 1993).

Long-term Trend: Decline of <30% to relatively stable
Long-term Trend Comments: Long-term trend is uncertain, but number of roosts and population size probably have declined to some degree. Limited data for California populations suggest serious population declines; not only have historical maternity colonies disappeared, but those remaining appear to contain significantly fewer animals (Pierson 1998).

Most of the range in Wyoming is represented by records based on observations prior to 1990 (Keinath 2004).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) Patchy range includes western North America from southcentral British Columbia south through the western United States to Veracruz and Chiapas in southern Mexico; west to the Pacific coast, east to the Black Hills region of Wyoming-South Dakota-Nebraska, and western Texas (O'Farrell and Studier 1980; Nagorsen and Brigham 1993; Simmons, in Wilson and Reeder 2005). Winter range is little known. Elevational range extends from sea level along the Pacific coast to around 2,440 meters in Colorado (Armstrong et al. 1994), 2,715 meters in Utah (Oliver 2000), and 2,850 meters in New Mexico (Barbour and Davis 1969).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AZ, CA, CO, ID, MT, NE, NM, NN, NV, OR, SD, TX, UT, WA, WY
Canada BC

Range Map
Note: Range depicted for New World only. The scale of the maps may cause narrow coastal ranges or ranges on small islands not to appear. Not all vagrant or small disjunct occurrences are depicted. For migratory birds, some individuals occur outside of the passage migrant range depicted. For information on how to obtain shapefiles of species ranges see our Species Mapping pages at www.natureserve.org/conservation-tools/data-maps-tools.

Range Map Compilers: Sechrest, 2002


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AZ Cochise (04003), Coconino (04005), Gila (04007), Mohave (04015), Navajo (04017), Pima (04019), Santa Cruz (04023), Yavapai (04025)
CA Butte (06007), Del Norte (06015), El Dorado (06017), Fresno (06019), Humboldt (06023), Kern (06029), Lake (06033), Lassen (06035), Los Angeles (06037), Mariposa (06043), Mono (06051), Napa (06055), Nevada (06057), Plumas (06063), Riverside (06065), San Benito (06069), San Bernardino (06071), San Diego (06073), San Luis Obispo (06079), San Mateo (06081), Shasta (06089), Sierra (06091), Sonoma (06097), Trinity (06105), Tulare (06107), Tuolumne (06109), Ventura (06111)
CO Boulder (08013), Huerfano (08055), Las Animas (08071), Mesa (08077), Teller (08119)
ID Boise (16015)*, Bonner (16017), Bonneville (16019), Boundary (16021), Custer (16037), Idaho (16049), Kootenai (16055), Latah (16057)*, Lemhi (16059), Nez Perce (16069), Owyhee (16073), Shoshone (16079), Valley (16085)
MT Beaverhead (30001), Big Horn (30003), Blaine (30005), Broadwater (30007), Carbon (30009), Cascade (30013), Custer (30017), Deer Lodge (30023), Fergus (30027), Garfield (30033), Granite (30039), Jefferson (30043), Judith Basin (30045), Lewis and Clark (30049), Lincoln (30053), Madison (30057)*, Meagher (30059), Missoula (30063)*, Petroleum (30069), Powder River (30075), Powell (30077), Prairie (30079), Ravalli (30081)*, Sanders (30089), Silver Bow (30093), Stillwater (30095), Teton (30099)
NE Banner (31007), Dawes (31045), Scotts Bluff (31157), Sheridan (31161)
NM Catron (35003), Dona Ana (35013), Grant (35017), Hidalgo (35023), Otero (35035), Sandoval (35043), Sierra (35051), Socorro (35053)
NV Carson City (32510), Clark (32003), Douglas (32005), Lander (32015), Lincoln (32017), Mineral (32021), Nye (32023), Washoe (32031), White Pine (32033)
OR Baker (41001), Benton (41003), Clackamas (41005)*, Clatsop (41007)*, Columbia (41009)*, Coos (41011), Curry (41015), Douglas (41019), Grant (41023), Harney (41025), Jackson (41029), Josephine (41033), Klamath (41035), Lake (41037), Lane (41039), Lincoln (41041), Linn (41043), Malheur (41045), Morrow (41049), Multnomah (41051), Tillamook (41057), Union (41061)*, Wallowa (41063)*, Washington (41067)*
SD Custer (46033), Fall River (46047), Jackson (46071), Lawrence (46081), Meade (46093), Pennington (46103), Perkins (46105), Shannon (46113), Stanley (46117), Walworth (46129)
TX Presidio (48377)
UT Beaver (49001), Cache (49005)*, Daggett (49009), Duchesne (49013)*, Garfield (49017), Grand (49019)*, Iron (49021)*, Juab (49023)*, Kane (49025), Millard (49027)*, San Juan (49037), Sevier (49041)*, Tooele (49045), Uintah (49047), Utah (49049)*, Wasatch (49051)*, Washington (49053), Wayne (49055)*
WA Chelan (53007)+, Columbia (53013)+, Douglas (53017)+, Ferry (53019)+, Garfield (53023)+, Grant (53025)+, Kittitas (53037)+, Klickitat (53039)+, Lincoln (53043)+, Okanogan (53047)+, Pend Oreille (53051)+, Skamania (53059)+, Spokane (53063)+, Stevens (53065)+, Thurston (53067)+, Whatcom (53073)+, Whitman (53075)+, Yakima (53077)+
WY Carbon (56007), Goshen (56015), Laramie (56021), Washakie (56043)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
10 Red Rock (10020001)+, Big Hole (10020004)+, Jefferson (10020005)+, Boulder (10020006)+, Upper Missouri (10030101)+, Smith (10030103)+, Sun (10030104)+, Two Medicine (10030201)+, Teton (10030205)+, Bullwhacker-Dog (10040101)+, Judith (10040103)+, Fort Peck Reservoir (10040104)+, Big Dry (10040105)+, Box Elder (10040204)+, Stillwater (10070005)+, Nowood (10080008)+, Big Horn Lake (10080010)+, Shoshone (10080014)+, Lower Tongue (10090102)+, Lower Powder (10090209)+, Lower Yellowstone-Sunday (10100001)+, Lower Yellowstone (10100004)+, Angostura Reservoir (10120106)+, Beaver (10120107)+, Middle Cheyenne-Spring (10120109)+, Rapid (10120110)+, Middle Cheyenne-Elk (10120111)+, Lower Belle Fourche (10120202)+, Redwater (10120203)+, West Missouri Coteau (10130106)+, Grand (10130303)+, Bad (10140102)+, Upper White (10140201)+, Middle White (10140202)+, Pathfinder-Seminoe Reservoirs (10180003)+, Middle North Platte-Scotts Bluff (10180009)+, Pumpkin (10180013)+, Upper South Platte (10190002)+, St. Vrain (10190005)+, Upper Lodgepole (10190015)+
11 Huerfano (11020006)+, Purgatoire (11020010)+
13 Jemez (13020202)+, Jornada Del Muerto (13020210)+, Elephant Butte Reservoir (13020211)+, Caballo (13030101)+, El Paso-Las Cruces (13030102)+, Jornada Draw (13030103)+, Tularosa Valley (13050003)+, Salt Basin (13050004)+
14 Lower Dolores (14030004)+, Upper Colorado-Kane Springs (14030005)+, Upper Green-Flaming Gorge Reservoir (14040106)+, Lower White (14050007)+*, Lower Green-Diamond (14060001)+*, Ashley-Brush (14060002)+, Duchesne (14060003)+*, Lower Green (14060008)+*, Upper Lake Powell (14070001)+, Muddy (14070002)+*, Fremont (14070003)+*, Dirty Devil (14070004)+, Escalante (14070005)+*, Lower Lake Powell (14070006)+, Paria (14070007)+*, Lower San Juan-Four Corners (14080201)+, Mcelmo (14080202)+, Montezuma (14080203)+*, Lower San Juan (14080205)+*
15 Lower Colorado-Marble Canyon (15010001)+, Grand Canyon (15010002)+, Kanab (15010003)+, Lake Mead (15010005)+*, Hualapai Wash (15010007)+, Upper Virgin (15010008)+, Fort Pierce Wash (15010009)+, Lower Virgin (15010010)+, White (15010011)+, Muddy (15010012)+, Las Vegas Wash (15010015)+, Carrizo Wash (15020003)+, Silver (15020005)+, Middle Little Colorado (15020008)+, Chevelon Canyon (15020010)+, Canyon Diablo (15020015)+, Havasu-Mohave Lakes (15030101)+*, Big Sandy (15030201)+, Upper Gila (15040001)+, Upper Gila-Mangas (15040002)+, Animas Valley (15040003)+, San Francisco (15040004)+, San Simon (15040006)+, Willcox Playa (15050201)+, Upper San Pedro (15050202)+, Upper Santa Cruz (15050301)+, Rillito (15050302)+, Upper Salt (15060103)+, Tonto (15060105)+, Big Chino-Williamson Valley (15060201)+, Upper Verde (15060202)+, Agua Fria (15070102)+, San Bernardino Valley (15080302)+
16 Middle Bear (16010202)+*, Little Bear-Logan (16010203)+*, Utah Lake (16020201)+*, Provo (16020203)+*, Southern Great Salt Lake Desert (16020306)+, Upper Sevier (16030001)+, East Fork Sevier (16030002)+*, Middle Sevier (16030003)+*, Lower Sevier (16030005)+*, Beaver Bottoms-Upper Beaver (16030007)+, Middle Humboldt (16040105)+, Lake Tahoe (16050101)+, Truckee (16050102)+, West Walker (16050302)+, Walker Lake (16050304)+, Spring-Steptoe Valleys (16060008)+, Dry Lake Valley (16060009)+, Sand Spring-Tikaboo Valleys (16060014)+, Ivanpah-Pahrump Valleys (16060015)+
17 Upper Kootenai (17010101)+, Fisher (17010102)+, Lower Kootenai (17010104)+, Flint-Rock (17010202)+, Blackfoot (17010203)+, Middle Clark Fork (17010204)+*, Bitterroot (17010205)+*, Lower Clark Fork (17010213)+, Pend Oreille Lake (17010214)+, Pend Oreille (17010216), Upper Coeur D'alene (17010301)+, South Fork Coeur D'alene (17010302)+, Coeur D'alene Lake (17010303)+, Lower Spokane (17010307), Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake (17020001), Kettle (17020002), Colville (17020003), Okanogan (17020006), Similkameen (17020007), Methow (17020008), Upper Columbia-Entiat (17020010), Wenatchee (17020011), Moses Coulee (17020012), Banks Lake (17020014), Upper Yakima (17030001), Naches (17030002), Palisades (17040104)+, Medicine Lodge (17040215)+, Upper Owyhee (17050104)+, Lower Owyhee (17050110)+, Boise-Mores (17050112)+*, Brownlee Reservoir (17050201)+*, Powder (17050203)+, Imnaha (17060102)+*, Lower Snake-Asotin (17060103)+, Upper Grande Ronde (17060104)+*, Wallowa (17060105)+*, Lower Grande Ronde (17060106)+*, Lower Snake-Tucannon (17060107), Palouse (17060108)+*, Rock (17060109), Upper Salmon (17060201)+, Lower Middle Fork Salmon (17060206)+, Middle Salmon-Chamberlain (17060207)+, Lower Salmon (17060209)+, Little Salmon (17060210)+, Lower Selway (17060302)+, Willow (17070104)+, Middle Columbia-Hood (17070105), Klickitat (17070106), Upper John Day (17070201)+, North Fork John Day (17070202)+, Middle Fork John Day (17070203)+*, Lower Columbia-Sandy (17080001)+, Lower Columbia-Clatskanie (17080003)+*, Lower Columbia (17080006)+*, Middle Fork Willamette (17090001)+, Coast Fork Willamette (17090002)+, Upper Willamette (17090003)+, Mckenzie (17090004)+, Tualatin (17090010)+*, Clackamas (17090011)+*, Upper Chehalis (17100103), Wilson-Trusk-Nestuccu (17100203)+, Siletz-Yaquina (17100204)+, Alsea (17100205)+, Siuslaw (17100206)+, North Umpqua (17100301)+, South Umpqua (17100302)+, Umpqua (17100303)+, Coquille (17100305)+, Sixes (17100306)+, Upper Rogue (17100307)+, Middle Rogue (17100308)+, Applegate (17100309)+, Lower Rogue (17100310)+, Illinois (17100311)+, Chetco (17100312)+*, Nooksack (17110004), Silver (17120004)+*, Summer Lake (17120005)+, Warner Lakes (17120007)+
18 Smith (18010101)+, Mad-Redwood (18010102)+, Gualala-Salmon (18010109)+, Russian (18010110)+, Sprague (18010202)+, Upper Klamath Lake (18010203)+*, Lost (18010204)+, Upper Klamath (18010206)+, South Fork Trinity (18010212)+, Lower Pit (18020003)+, North Fork Feather (18020121)+, East Branch North Fork Feather (18020122)+, Middle Fork Feather (18020123)+, Upper Yuba (18020125)+, South Fork American (18020129)+, Battle Creek (18020153)+, Clear Creek-Sacramento River (18020154)+, Upper Putah (18020162)+, Middle Kern-Upper Tehachapi- (18030003)+, Upper Kaweah (18030007)+, Upper King (18030010)+, Upper San Joaquin (18040006)+, Upper Merced (18040008)+, Upper Tuolumne (18040009)+, Upper Cosumnes (18040013)+, San Pablo Bay (18050002)+, San Francisco Bay (18050004)+, Salinas (18060005)+, Central Coastal (18060006)+, Santa Clara (18070102)+, Santa Ana (18070203)+, Cottonwood-Tijuana (18070305)+, Honey-Eagle Lakes (18080003)+, Upper Amargosa (18090202)+, Antelope-Fremont Valleys (18090206)+, Mojave (18090208)+, Southern Mojave (18100100)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: A small bat (fringed myotis).
Reproduction Comments: Ovulation, fertilization, and implantation occur in spring (O'Farrell, in Wilson and Ruff 1999). Gestation lasts 50-60 days. Births occur from mid-May to mid-July, with substantial variation among regions and within particular colonies (O'Farrell and Studier 1973, Ammerman et al. 2012). Litter size is 1. Young can fly at 16-17 days. Colony size ranges up to several hundred; colonies begin to disperse by October.
Habitat Type: Terrestrial
Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: Y
Long Distance Migrant: N
Mobility and Migration Comments: These bats evidently migrate, but little is known about migration distances and destinations (O'Farrell and Studier 1980). Migrants arrive in Trans-Pecos Texas by May (Schmidly 1991), sometimes as early as late March, and cease to be found there after October (Ammerman et al. 2012).
Palustrine Habitat(s): Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Aerial, Bare rock/talus/scree, Cliff, Desert, Grassland/herbaceous, Suburban/orchard, Urban/edificarian, Woodland - Conifer, Woodland - Mixed
Subterranean Habitat(s): Subterrestrial
Special Habitat Factors: Standing snag/hollow tree
Habitat Comments: These bats occur primarily at middle elevations in desert, riparian, grassland, and woodland habitats, but they have been recorded at 2,850 meters in spruce-fir habitat in New Mexico, and at low elevations along the Pacific Coast (Barbour and Davis 1969, O'Farrell and Studier 1980, Hoffmeister 1986, Armstrong et al. 1994, Oliver 2000, Foresman 2001, Ammerman et al. 2012). Roosts are in caves, mines, cliff faces, rock crevices, old buildings, bridges, snags, and other sheltered sites (Barbour and Davis 1969, Rabe et al. 1998, Cryan et al. 2001, Foresman 2001, Weller and Zabel 2001, Lacki and Baker 2007, Hayes 2011). In South Dakota, the bats roosted in rock crevices and often changed roosts to nearby locations; maternity colonies maintained group integrity through roost changes, and females carried nonvolant young with them through roost changes (Cryan et al. 2001). In spring and summer in northern California, the bats roosted in snags in early to medium stages of decay and switched roosts often (Weller and Zabel 2001). Rabe et al. (1998) documented roosting in ponderosa pine snags in northern Arizona. On the east side of the Cascade Range in Oregon and Washington, females roosts primarily in rock crevices, infrequently in ponderosa pine snags; roost changes to nearby sites were frequent (Lacki and Baker 2007). In Colorado, most maternity roosts were in crevices of rock faces, sometimes in abandoned mines or in an abandoned cabin; roost changes were infrequent (Hayes 2011). In spring and summer, males roost separately and rarely are found in nursery colonies (Nagorsen and Brigham 1993). Winter habits are poorly known; hibernacula include caves, mines, and buildings (Western Bat Working Group species account, 2005)..
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Food Comments: Diet includes various arthropods (especially moths and beetles, but also spiders) captured in flight or gleaned from plants (Black 1974, O'Farrell and Studier 1980, Warner 1985). Wings have a high puncture strength, which is characteristic of bats that forage by gleaning from the ground or near thick or thorny vegetation (O'Farrell and Studier 1980). Foraging often occurs close to vegetative canopy.
Adult Phenology: Hibernates/aestivates, Nocturnal
Immature Phenology: Hibernates/aestivates, Nocturnal
Phenology Comments: Active individuals hae been found from late March through at least mid-October (Ammerman et al. 2012). During winter, hibernation may be periodically interrupted (O'Farrell and Studier 1980).
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 10 centimeters
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Biological Research Needs: Better information is needed on abundance, trend, extent and effects of threats, movements, and winter habits.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Small and Medium Bats

Use Class: Bachelor colony
Subtype(s): Diurnal Roost, Foraging Area, Nocturnal Roost
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: An area occupied either historically or at present by a persisting or recurring population of males during summer (approximately May through August). Includes mist net captures away from roost sites obtained during the summer months even if the actual roost site(s) are not known. Identification evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and detailed documentation of one or more individuals. In certain regions, recorded echolocation sequences of individuals may be considered reliable observations for certain species that can be confidently identified by their echolocation calls alone, although caution must be used in determining Location Use Class for such observations during the breeding season.
Mapping Guidance: EO includes both the colony site and the associated foraging areas. If separate, the colony site and foraging areas are bounded by separate polygons; that is, areas over which the bats simply commute to and from foraging areas and the colony are not included in the EO.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: The assigned separation distance is intended to generate occurrences that consist of spatially proximate roost sites and capture locations. However, include in the same occurrence (1) any roost sites between which significant of individuals are known to move, regardless of how far apart they are, and (2) known significant foraging areas of occurrences that are based on roost sites.

In two studies, male MYOTIS SODALIS foraged a maximum of 2.0 and 4.2 kilometers from their summer roosts (summarized in USFWS 1999).

Date: 29Mar2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson

Use Class: Breeding
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: An area occupied either historically or at present by a persisting or recurring breeding population during spring/summer (approximately May through August). Includes mist net captures away from colony sites obtained even if the associated roost site is not known. Identification evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and detailed documentation of one or more individuals. In certain regions, echolocation sequences of individuals may be considered reliable observations for certain species that can be confidently identified by their echolocation calls alone, although caution must be used in determining Location Use Class for such observations during the breeding season.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: It is impractical to attempt to delineate occurrences on the basis of discrete populations. Instead, the assigned separation distance is intended to generate occurrences that consist of spatially proximate roost sites and capture locations.
Date: 02Jul2014
Author: Hammerson, G.

Use Class: Hibernaculum
Subtype(s): Pre-hibernation roost site, Hibernaculum
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: A site occupied either historically or at present by a recurring population of hibernating individuals. Identification evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and detailed documentation of one or more individuals. EO also includes immediately surrounding areas used by bats immediately before hibernation, where these areas are known.
Mapping Guidance: Cave/mine passages should be projected to the surface for the purpose of mapping EO boundary.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: These bats sometimes move long distances between different hibernacula. For example, individuals of M. LUCIFUGUS and M. SEPTENTRIONALIS have been recorded flying up to 219 and 89 kilometers respectively between hibernacula during the winter months (Linzey 1998, Griffin 1940). However,
such movements are not a good basis for distinguishing occurrences (occurrences would become too expansive). The assigned separation distance is intended to generate occurrences that consist of spatially proximate hibernacula.

Separation distances suggested take into account the fact that, during the fall, some bats (e.g. M. SODALIS) swarm and mate at their hibernaculum, and males roost in trees nearby during the day and fly to the cave during the night. In two studies, M. SODALIS males roosted within a maximum of 5.6 kilometers of the hibernaculum (Kiser and Elliott 1996; Craig Stihler, West Virginia Division of Natural Resources, pers. observ., October 1996, cited in USFWS 1999).

Although they do not generally fly from one hibernaculum to another, hibernating bats are known to wake and move around to some extent within their hibernating site. As long as the areas are connected (even though they may not be passable by humans) the bats could be expected to move from one part of the system to another (e.g. MYOTIS SODALIS, Clawson et al. 1980).

Date: 29Mar2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson

Use Class: Maternity colony
Subtype(s): Colony Site, Foraging Area, Nocturnal Roost
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: An area occupied either historically or at present by a persisting or recurring population of breeding females and their young during summer (approximately May through August). Includes mist net captures away from colony sites obtained during the summer months even if the associated roost site is not known. Identification evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and detailed documentation of one or more individuals. In certain regions, echolocation sequences of individuals may be considered reliable observations for certain species that can be confidently identified by their echolocation calls alone, although caution must be used in determining Location Use Class for such observations during the breeding season.
Mapping Guidance: The EO includes both the colony site and the associated foraging areas. If separate, the colony site and foraging areas are bounded by separate polygons; that is, areas over which the bats simply commute to and from foraging areas and the colony are not included in the EO.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: It is impractical to attempt to delineate occurrences on the basis of discrete populations. Instead, the assigned separation distance is intended to generate occurrences that consist of spatially proximate roost sites and capture locations.

Nursing female Myotis sodalis moved an average of 1.04 kilometers from roost to center of foraging area, giving a mean foraging diameter of 2.08 kilometers; however, post-lactating females moved more than twice as far, travelling an average of 2.6 kilometers (Garner and Gardner 1992). In Indiana, 11 foraging adult females that were tracked for 2-7 days moved up to 8.4 km from their roost; home range during this brief period averaged 3.35 square kilometers (Sparks et al. 2005). Myotis grisescens females move up to 6.6 kilometers (Tuttle 1976). Female M. septentrionalis had an average foraging home range of 61.1 hectares (Menzel et al. 1999), equivalent to a circle with a diameter of 880 meters.

Date: 08Mar2001
Author: Cannings, S.

Use Class: Nonbreeding
Subtype(s): Diurnal Roost, Foraging Area, Nocturnal Roost
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: A site occupied either historically or at present by a recurring population of migrating or otherwise nonhibernating individuals during the nonbreeding season. Identification evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and detailed documentation of one or more individuals. In certain regions, recorded echolocation sequences of individuals may be considered reliable observations for certain species that can be confidently identified by their echolocation calls alone.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: The assigned separation distance is intended to generate occurrences that consist of spatially proximate roost sites and capture locations. However, include in the same occurrence (1) any roost sites between which individuals are known to move, regardless of how far apart they are, and (2) known significant foraging areas of occurrences that are based on roost sites.

In California, Fellers and Pierson (2002) studied a group of Corynorhinus townsendii inhabiting a maternity colony site after the nursery season had passed and found that the mean center of female foraging activity was 3.2 kilometers from the diurnal roost, whereas the mean center of male foraging activity was only 1.3 kilometers from the roost. No bats traveled more than 10.5 kilometers from the roost, and individuals showed considerable loyalty to the primary roost. Otherwise, little movement data are available.

Date: 19Apr2001
Author: Cannings, S.

Use Class: Roost
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: An area occupied either historically or at present by a persisting or recurring population during summer  (approximately May through August). Includes counts of individuals from roost sites obtained during the summer months during pup rearing and summer residence periods. Identification evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and detailed documentation of one or more individuals during roost counts.
Mapping Guidance: EO includes both the colony site and an approximation of the associated foraging areas. If separate, the colony site and foraging areas are bounded by separate polygons; that is, areas over which the bats simply commute to and from foraging areas and the colony are not included in the EO.
Separation Barriers: None
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: It is impractical to attempt to delineate occurrences on the basis of discrete populations. Instead, the assigned separation distance is intended to generate occurrences that consist of spatially proximate roost sites.
Date: 01Dec2017
Author: Staffen, R.
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 31Mar2015
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 02Apr2015
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): Hammerson, G.

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Adams, R. A. 2003. Bats of the Rocky Mountain West: natural history, ecology, and conservation. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado. xiii + 289 pp.

  • Adams, R. A. 2010. Bat reproduction declines when conditions mimic climate change projections for western North America. Ecology 91(8):2437-2445.

  • Adams, R. A., and M. A. Hayes. 2008. Water availability and successful lactation by bats as related to climate change in arid regions of western North America. Journal of Animal Ecology 77:1115-1121.

  • Allen, C. R., S. Demarais, and R. S. Lutz. 1994. Red imported fire ant impact on wildlife: an overview. The Texas Journal of Science 46(1):51-59.

  • Altenbach, J. S., W. Amy, P. V. Bradley, P. E. Brown, K. Dewberry, D. B. Hall, J. Jeffers, B.Lund, J. E. Newmark, M. J. O'Farrell, M. Rhan, R. E. Sherwin, C. R. Tomlinson, and J. S. Williams. 2002. Nevada Bat Conservation Plan. Nevada Bat Working Group. Austin, Nevada. 188 pp.

  • Ammerman, L. K., C. L. Hice, and D. J. Schmidly. 2012. Bats of Texas. Texas A & M University Press, College Station, Texas. xvi + 305 pp.

  • Andersen, M.D. 2011. Maxent-based species distribution models. Prepared by Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for use in the pilot WISDOM application operational from inception to yet-to-be-determined date of update of tool.

  • Arita, H. T. 1993. Conservation biology of the cave bats in Mexico. Journal of Mammalogy 74:693-702.

  • Arizona Game and Fish Department. 1993. Bats of Arizona. Arizona Wildlife Views, Special Heritage Edition. Vol. 36(8). 36 pp.

  • Arizona Game and Fish Department. 1997. Myotis thysanodes. Unpublished abstract compiled and edited by the Heritage Data Management System, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona. 3 pp.

  • Armstrong, D. M., R. A. Adams, and J. Freeman. 1994. Distribution and ecology of bats in Colorado. University of Colorado Museum, Natural History Inventory 15:1-82.

  • Armstrong, D.M. 1972. Distribution of Mammals in Colorado. Monograph of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas. University of Kansas Printing Service, Lawrence. 415 pp.

  • Armstrong, D.M. 1972. Distribution of mammals in Colorodo. Univ. Kans. Mus. Nat. Hist. Monog. 3: 1-415.

  • Arnett, E. B., and E. F. Baerwald. 2013. Impacts of wind energy development on bats: implications for conservation. Pages 435-456 in R. A. Adams and S. C. Pedersen (editors). Bat evolution, ecology, and conservation. Springer Science+Business Media, New York.

  • Ashton, D.E. and E.M. Dowd. 1991. Fragile Legacy: Endangered, Threatened and Rare Animals of South Dakota. Report No. 91-04. South Dakota Department of Game, Fish & Parks. Wildlife Division, 523 E. Capitol, Pierre, SD.

  • Baker, M.D. and M.J. Lacki. 2001. Roost-site selection and roost microclimates of tree-roosting bats in coniferous forests of the Pacific NW. Report to NW Bat Coop. Unpub.

  • Baker, M.D. and M.J. Lacki. 2004. Forest bat communities in the East Cascades Range, Washington. Northwest Science. 78:234-240.

  • Balcombe, J. P. 1988b. Status report on the Fringed Myotis Myotis thysanodes in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 11 pp.

  • Banfield, A. W. F. 1974. The mammals of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada. 438 pp.

  • Barbour, R. W., and W. H. Davis. 1969. Bats of America. The University of Kentucky Press, Lexington, Kentucky. 286 pp.

  • Beauvais, G. P. 1999. The status of rare vertebrates in the Bighorn landscape. Unpublished report prepared by WYNDD for the Wyoming Field Office of The Nature Conservancy.

  • Bell, G.P. 1980. Habitat use and response to patches of prey by desert insectivorous bats. Canandian Journal of Zoology 58:1876-1883.

  • Bighorn National Forest. 1996. Endangered and Sensitive animal species of the Bighorn National Forest. Unpublished draft report on file at Bighorn NF Supervisor's Office, Sheridan, Wyoming.

  • Black, H. L. 1974. A north temperate bat community: structure and prey populations. J. Mamm. 55:138-157.

  • Bogan, M. A. 1994. Research determines status and distribution of bats on the Colorado Plateau. Colorado Plateau 4(3): 1, 6-7.

  • Bogan, M. A., J. G. Osborne, and J. A. Clarke. 1996. Observations on bats at Badlands National Park, South Dakota. Prairie Naturalist 28:115-123.

  • Bradley, R.D., L.K. Ammerman, R.J. Baker, L.C. Bradley, J.A. Cook. R.C. Dowler, C. Jones, D.J. Schmidly, F.B. Stangl Jr., R.A. Van den Bussche and B. Würsig. 2014. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 2014. Museum of Texas Tech University Occasional Papers 327:1-28. Available at: http://www.nsrl.ttu.edu/publications/opapers/ops/OP327.pdf

  • British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 2004. Fringed Myotis in Accounts and measures for managing identified wildlife. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Victoria, BC. 52pp.

  • Butts, T. W. 1993. A survey of the bats of the Townsend Ranger District, Helena National Forest, Montana. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, Montana. 16 pp.

  • COCKRUM, E.L., B. MUSGROVE, AND Y. PETRYSZYN. 1996. BATS OF MOHAVE COUNTY, ARIZONA: POPULATIONS AND MOVEMENTS. OCCAS. PAPERS MUS., TEXAS TECH UNIV. 157:1-71.

  • COSEWIC. 2004w. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the fringed bat Myotis thysanodes in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 26pp.

  • Choate, J. R., and J. M. Anderson. 1997. Bats of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota. Prairie Naturalist 29:39-47.

  • Choate, J.R., and J.M. Anderson. 1997. Bats of Jewel Cave National Monument, South Dakota. Prairie Naturalist 29(1): 39-48.

  • Clark, T. W. and M. Stromberg. 1987. Mammals in Wyoming. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence. 314 pp.

  • Clark, Tim W. and Mark R. Stromberg. 1987. Mammals in Wyoming. University Press of Kansas. Lawrence, Kansas.

  • Clawson, R. L., R. K. LaVal, M. L. LaVal, and W. Claire. 1980. Clustering behavior of hibernating Myotis sodalis in Missouri, USA. Journal of Mammalogy 61:245-53.

  • Collard, T.S., S.D. Grindal, R.M. Brigham, and R.M.R. Barclay. 1990. Identification of the status and critical habitats of the spotted bat (Euderma maculatum), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), and fringed bat (Myotis thysanodes) in the South Okanagan valley, British Columbia. Unpubl. rep. submitted to the B.C. Minist. of Environ., Wildl. Branch, Victoria. 27pp.

  • Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 1999. Canadian Species at Risk: April 1999. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 17 pp.

  • Coombs, E. M. [no date-1977?]. Wildlife observations of the hot desert region, Washington County, Utah, with emphasis on reptilian species and their habitat in relation to livestock grazing. A report to the Cedar City District, BLM by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

  • Cryan, P. M., M. A. Bogan and G. M. Yanega. 2001. Roosting habits of four bat species in the Black Hills of South Dakota. Acta Chiropterologica 3(1): 43-52.

  • Cryan, P. M., M. A. Bogan and G. M. Yanega. 2001. Roosting habits of four bat species in the Black Hills of South Dakota. Acta Chiropterologica 3(1): 43-52.

  • Cryan, P. M., M. A. Bogan, and J. S. Altenbach. 2000. Effect of elevation on distribution of female bats in the Black Hills, South Dakota. Journal of Mammalogy 81:719-725.

  • Dubois, Kristi. 1999. Region 4 bat surveys: 1998 progress report. Unpublished report, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Region 4 Headquarters, Great Falls, Montana. 20pp.

  • Durrant, S. D. 1952. Mammals of Utah, taxonomy and distribution. University of Kansas Publications, Museum of Natural History 6: 1-549.

  • Easterla, D. A. 1973. Ecology of the 18 species of Chiroptera at Big Bend National Park, Texas. Part I and II. Northwest Missouri State University Studies 34:1-165.

  • Easterla, David A. 1973. Ecology of the 18 species of Chiroptera at Big Bend National Park, Texas. Pages 90-96, 117-126, 126-131. Northwest Missouri State University, Maryville, MO. 165 pp.

  • Ecology, conservation and management of western bat species. 1998. Bat species accounts and notes from the Western Bat Working Group Workshop, Reno, NV.

  • Ellinwood, S. 1978. A survey of bats in southeast Colorado. M.S. Thesis, Univ. of Northern Colorado, Greeley. 77pp.

  • Fellers, G. M., and E. D. Pierson. 2002. Habitat use and foraging behavior of Townsend's Big-eared Bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in coastal California. Journal of Mammalogy 83:167-177.

  • Finch, D.M. 1992. Threatened, endangered, and vulnerable species of terrestrial vertebrates in the Rocky Mountain Region. General Technical Report RM-215. USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ft. Collins CO. 38 p.

  • Fitzgerald, J. P., C. A. Meaney, and D. M. Armstrong. 1994. Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History and University Press of Colorado.

  • Foresman, K. R. 2001. The Wild Mammals of Montana. American Society of Mammalogists, Lawrence, Kansas. Special Publication No. 12. 278 pp.

  • Foresman, K. R. 2001. The wild mammals of Montana. American Society of Mammalogists, Special Publication 12:1-278.

  • Foster, D. A., L. Grignon, E. Hammer, and B. Warren. 1996. Inventory of bats in high plateau forests of central and southern Utah. National Park Service, Bryce Canyon National Park, Bryce Canyon, Utah. 16 pp.

  • Freeman, J. 1982. Statewide bat distribution study. Federal Aid report. Colorado Division of Wildlife.

  • Garner, J. D., and J. E. Gardner. 1992. Determination of summer distribution and habitat utilization of the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) in Illinois. Illinois Department of Conservation. Final Report, Project E-3. Springfield, IL, 23 pp.

  • Geluso, K. N., J. S. Altenbach, and R. C. Kerbo. 1987. Bats of Carlsbad Caverns National Park. Natural History Association, Carlsbad, New Mexico. 31 pp.

  • Gerhart, W.A., R.A. Olson. 1982. Handbook for evaluating the importance of Wyoming's riparian habitat to terrestrial wildlife. Wyoming Game and Fish Dept.

  • Griffin, D. R. 1940b. Migrations of New England bats. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 86:217-246.

  • Hall, E. R. 1981. The mammals of North America. 2nd ed. John Wiley, New York. 2 vols.

  • Hall, E. R. 1981a. The Mammals of North America, second edition. Vols. I & II. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York. 1181 pp.

  • Hasenyager, R. N. 1980. Bats of Utah. Utah State Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City. Publ. No. 80-15, 109 pp.

  • Hasenyager, R. N. 1980. Bats of Utah. Utah State Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City. Publ. No. 80-15, 109 pp.

  • Hayes, G. and G.J. WIles. 2013. Washington bat conservation plan. WA Dpt. Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, WA 138pp.

  • Hayes, G., and G. J. Wiles. 2013. Washington bat conservation plan. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. viii + 138 pp.

  • Hayes, M. A. 2011. An analysis of fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes), with a focus on Colorado distribution, maternity roost selection, and preliminary modeling of population dynamics. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley.

  • Hendricks, P., K. Jurist, D. L. Genter, and J. D. Reichel. 1995. Bat survey of the Sioux District, Custer National Forest: 1994. Montana Natural Heritage Program. Helena, Montana. 41 pp.

  • Hoffmann, R. S., D. L. Pattie and J. F. Bell. 1969. The distribution of some mammals in Montana. II. Bats. Journal of Mammalogy 50(4):737-741.

  • Hoffmeister, D. F. 1986. Mammals of Arizona. University of Arizona Press and Arizona Game and Fish Department. 602 pp.

  • Holroyd, S.L., R.M.R. Barclay, L.M. Merk, and R.M. Brigham. 1994. A Survey of the Bat Fauna of the Dry Interior of British Columbia. B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Wildl. Branch. Working Rep. WR-63. 80pp.

  • Humes, M. L., J. P. Hayes, and M. W. Collopy. 1999. Bat activity in thinned, unthinned, and old-growth forests in western Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:553-561.

  • JONES, CLYDE AND ROBERT D. BRADLEY. 1999. NOTES ON RED BATS, LASIURUS (CHIROPTERA: VESPERTILIONIDAE), OF THE DAVIS MOUNTAINS AND VICINITY, TEXAS. TEXAS JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, 51:341-344.

  • Johnson, R.E. and K.M. Cassidy. 1997. Terrestrial mammals of Washington State: Location data and predicted distributions. Vol. 3 in Washington State Gap Analysis - Final report (K.M. Cassidy, C.E. Grue, M.R. SMith, and K.M. Dvornich, eds.). Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research UNit. University of Washington, Seattle, 304 pp.

  • Jones, C. 1966. Changes in populations of some western bats. American Midland Naturalist 76:522-528.

  • Jones, C. and R. D. Suttkus. 1972. Notes on netting bats for eleven years in western New Mexico. Southwestern Naturalist 16:261-266.

  • Jones, J. K. Jr., D. M. Armstrong, R. S. Hoffmann and C. Jones. 1983. Mammals of the northern Great Plains. University of Nebraska Press, Linclon, Nebraska. 379 pp.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr. and C. Jones. 1992. Revised checklist of recent land mammals of Texas, with annotations. The Texas Journal of Science 44(1):53-74.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr., C. Jones, and D. J. Schmidly. 1988. Annotated checklist of recent land mammals of Texas. Occasional Papers The Museum Texas Tech University 119:1-26.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr., R. S. Hoffman, D. W. Rice, C. Jones, R. J. Baker, and M. D. Engstrom. 1992a. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 1991. Occasional Papers, The Museum, Texas Tech University, 146:1-23.

  • Jones, J. K., S. Demarais, and C. T. McAllister. 1995. Contribution to a bibliography of recent Texas mammals 1981-1990. Special Publications, The Museum Texas Tech University 38:1-64.

  • Jones, J. Knox Jr. June 1978. Distribution of Two Species of Long-eared Bats of the Genus Myotis on the Northern Great Plains. Prairie Naturalist. V.10(2) pp.49-52.

  • Jones, J.K. Jr. and Genoways, H.H. 1967. A new subspecies of the fringe-tailed bat, Myotis thysanedes, from the Black Hills of South Dakota and Wyoming. Journal of Mammalogy 48(2):231-235.

  • Keinath, D. 2003. Species assessment for Fringed Myotis (Myotis thysanodes) in Wyoming. Report prepared for USDI Wyoming Bureau of Land Management by Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, Wyoming.

  • Keinath, D. A. 2004. Fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/fringedmyotis.pdf

  • Keinath, D.A. 2004. Fringed Myotis (Myotis thysanodes): a technical conservation assessment. Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database - University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming.

  • Kiser, J. D. and C. L. Elliott. 1996. Foraging habitat, food habits, and roost tree characteristics of the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) during autumn in Johnson County, Kentucky. Final report, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Frankfort, Kentucky. 65pp.

  • Lacki, M. J. and M. D. Baker. 2007. Day roosts of female fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes) in xeric forests of the Pacific Northwest. Journal of Mammalogy 88(4): 967-973.

  • Lacki, M. J. and M. D. Baker. 2007. Day roosts of female fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes) in xeric forests of the Pacific Northwest. Journal of Mammalogy 88(4): 967-973.

  • Lacki, Michael J.; Mickael D. Adam, Laura G. Shoemaker. 1994. Observations on Seasonal Cycle, Population Patterns and Roost Selection in Summer Colonies of Plecotus townsendii Virginianus in Kentucky. Am. Midl. Nat., vol. 131, 34-42 pp.

  • Lewis, S. E. 1995. Roost fidelity of bats: a review. Journal of Mammalogy 76(2):481-496.

  • Linzey, D. W. 1998. The mammals of Virginia. McDonald and Woodward, Blacksburg, VA. 459 pp.

  • Long, C.A. 1965. The mammals of Wyoming. Univ. of Kansas, Publ. Museum of Natural History 14: 493-758.

  • Luce, B. 1998. Wyoming's bats: Wings of the night. Wyoming Wildlife. August issue.

  • Luce, B. 1998. Wyoming's bats: Wings of the night. Wyoming Wildlife. August issue.

  • Mammalian Species, nos. 1-604. Published by the American Society of Mammalogists.

  • Manning, R. W., and J. K. Jones, Jr. 1988. A new subspecies of fringed myotis, MYOTIS THYSANODES, from the northwestern coast of the United States. Occas. Pap. Mus. Texas Tech Univ. No. 123:1-6.

  • Marcot, B.G. 1996. An ecosystem context for bat management: a case study of the interior Columbia River Basin. in R.M.R. Barclay and R.M. Brigham (eds) Bats and forest symposium. Research Branch, B.C. Ministry of Forestry. Victoria, B.C.

  • Maslin, T. P. 1938. Fringe-tailed myotis bat in British Columbia. Journal of Mammalogy 19: 373.

  • Mattson, T. A. and M. A. Bogan. 1993. Survey of bats and bat roosts in the southern Black Hills in 1993. Unpublished report prepared for Jewel Cave National Monument, National Park Service, Custer, South Dakota. 14+ pp.

  • McGee, M., D.A. Keinath, and G.P. Beauvais. 2002. Survey for rare vertebrates in the Pinedale Field Office of the USDI Bureau of Land Management (Wyoming). Unpublished report prepared for USDI Bureau of Land Management - Wyoming State Office by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database - University of Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming.

  • Menzel, M. A., R. Odom, S. Owen, W. M. Ford, B. R. Chapman, K. V. Miller, J. Edwards, and P. Wood. 1999b. Investigation of foraging habitat use by bats with a focus on Northern Long-eared Myotis (Myotis septentrionalis): a comparison of methods. IN M. K. Clark, editor. Abstracts from the 1999 Colloquium on the conservation of mammals in the Southeastern United States. Available at: http://www.batworkinggroups.org/sbdnnews.htm. Accessed 2001-06-12.

  • Ministry of Environment. 2008. Map-Fringed Myotis (Myotis thysanodes). Bat distribution. mapping project. Victoria, BC.

  • Ministry of Environment. 2017. Best Management Practices for Bats in British Columbia. Chapters 1-4. On-line. Available: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eirs/viewDocumentDetail.do?fromStatic=true&repository=BDP&documentId=12460 (accessed 10 July 2017).

  • Morrell, T.E., H.M. Green, K. Yasuda, R. Miller, J. deVos, and J.B. Grantges. 1994. Roost site characteristics of forest dwelling bats in northcentral Arizona. Presented at 24th Ann. North Am. Symp. on Bat Res., Guadalajara, Mexico.

  • Nagorsen D, C. Lausen, D. Burles, and P. Govindarajulu. 2010. Identification of long-eared Myotis bat species in British Columbia: An essential tool for developing management recommendations for bat species at risk. Forest Sciences Program Project Y092135. Final Report. 26 pp.

  • Nagorsen, D. 1990. The mammals of British Columbia: a taxonomic catalogue. Mem. No. 4. Royal B.C. Mus., Victoria. 140pp.

  • Nagorsen, D. 1998. Mammals. in B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Resour. Inventory Branch. 1998. The Vertebrates of British Columbia: Scientific and English Names. Standards for Components of British Columbia's Biodiversity, No. 2. Version. 2.0. Resour. Inventory Comm. Victoria, BC. 119pp.

  • Nagorsen, D. W., A. Bryant, D. Kerridge, G. Roberts, A. Roberts and M. Sarell. 1993. Winter bat records from British Columbia. Northwestern Naturalist 74: 61-66.

  • Nagorsen, D. W., and R. M. Brigham. 1993. Bats of British Columbia. Vol. I. The Mammals of British Columbia. UBC Press, Vancouver, 164 pp.

  • Nagorsen, D. and R. M. Bringham. 1993. Bats of British Columbia. Vol. I. The Mammals of British Columbia. University of British Columbia Press, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 164 pp.

  • Nagorsen, D.W. and R.M. Brigham. 1993. Bats of British Columbia. Mammals of Canada, Vol 1. Royal British Museum Handbook. University of British Columbia Press. 164pp.

  • Nagorsen, D.W., and R.M. Brigham. 1993. The bats of British Columbia. Royal B.C. Mus. Handb. Victoria, BC. 164pp.

  • New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. 1997. Fish and Wildlife Information Exchange--VA Tech. Online. Available: http://www.fw.vt.edu/fishex/nm.htm. Accessed 14 April 1998, last update 29 October 1997.

  • O'FARRELL, MICHAEL J. AND EUGENE H. STUDIER. 1980. MYOTIS THYSANODES. MAMMALIAN SPECIES (137):1-5.

  • O'Farell, M.J., and E.H. Studier. 1975. Population structure and emergence activity patterns in Myotis thysanodes and M. lucifugus (Chiroptera: Vesperitilionidae) in northeastern New Mexico. Am. Midl. Nat. 93:368-376.

  • O'Farrell, M. J., and E. H. Studier. 1973. Reproduction, growth, and development in MYOTIS THYSANODES and M. LUCIFUGUS (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae). Ecology 54:18-30.

  • O'Farrell, M. J., and E. H. Studier. 1980. Myotis thysanodes. Mammalian Species 137: 1-5.

  • O'Farrell, M.J. and E.H. Studier. 1980. Myotis thysanodes. Mammalian Species 137:1-5.

  • OWEN, JAMES G. 1990. AN ANALYSIS OF THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF MAMMALIAN DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS IN TEXAS. ECOLOGY 71(5):1823-1832.

  • OWEN, JAMES G. 1990. PATTERNS OF MAMMALIAN SPECIES RICHNESS IN RELATION TO TEMPERATURE, PRODUCTIVITY, AND VARIANCE IN ELEVATION. J. MAMM. 71(1):1-13.

  • Oliver, G. V. 2000. The bats of Utah: a literature review. Publication No. 00-14, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City.

  • Paradiso, J. L., and A. M. Greenhall. 1967. Longevity records for American bats. American Midland Naturalist 78:251-252.

  • Parks Canada. 2000. Vertebrate Species Database. Ecosystems Branch, 25 Eddy St., Hull, PQ, K1A 0M5.

  • Perkins, J. M., J. M. Barss, and J. Peterson. 1990. Winter records of bats in Oregon and Washington. Northwestern Naturalist 71:59-62.

  • Perkins, J.M. 1987. Three Year Bat Survey For Washington National Forests Results of Year One-Gifford Pinchot and Umatilla National Forests. US Forest Service Contract # 53-04H1-7-4240. Unpub.

  • Pierson, E. D. 1998. Tall trees, deep holes, and scarred landscapes: conservation biology of North American bats. Pages 309-325 in T. H. Kunz and P. A. Racey, editors. Bat biology and conservation. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

  • Pierson, E. D., and 14 others. 1999. Species conservation assessment and strategy for Townsends big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii townsendii and Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens). Idaho Conservation Effort, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho. 68 pp.

  • Priday, J., and B. Luce. 1997. Inventory of bats and bat habitat associated with caves and mines in Wyoming: completion report. Pp. 50-109 in Endangered and nongame bird and mammal investigations annual completion report. Nongame Program, Biological Services Section, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

  • Priday, J., and B. Luce. 1997. Inventory of bats and bat habitat associated with caves and mines in Wyoming: completion report. Pp. 50-109 in Endangered and nongame bird and mammal investigations annual completion report. Nongame Program, Biological Services Section, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

  • Rabe, M. J., T. E. Morrell, H. Green, J. C. DeVos, Jr., and C. R. Miller. 1998a. Characteristics of ponderosa pine snag roosts used by reproductive bats in northern Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management 62:612-621.

  • Rabe, M. J., T.E. Morrell, H. Green, J. Devos, and C.R. Miller. 1998. Characteristics of Ponderosa Pine snag roosts used by reproductive bats in northern Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management 62(2):612-621.

  • Ramsey, M. 1998. Status and population trends of bats in the Gila National Forest of southwestern New Mexico: Preliminary Patterns. Bat Research News 39:183.

  • Ransome, R. 1990. The natural history of hibernating bats. Christopher Helm, London. xxi + 235 pp.

  • Rasheed, S.A., P.F.J. Garcia, and S.L. Holroyd. 1995. Status of the fringed myotis in British Columbia. B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Wildl. Branch, Victoria. Working Rep. WR-73. 28pp.

  • Reid, F. A. 1997. A field guide to the mammals of Central America and southeast Mexico. Oxford University Press, Incorporated New York, New York. 334 pp.

  • Ryke, N., D. Winters, L. McMartin and S. Vest. 1994. Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species of the Pike and San Isabel National Forests and Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands. May 25, 1994.

  • Sarell, M., T. Hill, J. Hobbs and F. Iredale. 2010. Bridge River bat assessment. Bridge-Coastal Restoration Program project #10.W.BRG.03. Burnaby, BC. 57 pp.

  • Schmidly, D. J. 1977. The mammals of Trans-Pecos Texas including Big Bend National Park and Guadalupe Mountains National Park. Texas A & M University Press, College Station.

  • Schmidly, D. J. 1991. The bats of Texas. Texas A & M University Press, College Station, Texas. 188 pp.

  • Schmidly, David J. 1977. The Mammals of Trans-Pecos Texas. Texas A& M University Press. College Station, Tx. 225 pp.

  • Seidman, V. M., and C. J. Zabel. 2001. Bat activity along intermittent streams in northwestern California. Journal of Mammalogy 82:738-747.

  • Skinner, S. 1990. Bats. Wyoming Wildlife 54(9):17-25.

  • Stevens, V., and S. Lofts. 1988. Species Notes for Mammals. Vol. 1 in A.P. Harcombe, tech. ed. Wildlife Habitat Handbooks for the Southern Interior Ecoprovince. B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Wildl. Branch. Tech. Rep. R-15. 174pp.

  • Turner, R. W., and J. K. Jones, Jr. 1968. Additional notes on bats from western South Dakota. Southwestern Naturalist 13:444-447.

  • Tuttle, M. D. 1976a. 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.

  • Tuttle, M. D. and A.A.R. Taylor. 1994. Bats and mines. Bat Conservation International, Inc. No. 3. 41 pp.

  • Tuttle, Merlin D. 1988. America's neighborhood bats. University of Texas Press, Austin. 96 pp.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS. 1999. Agency draft Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) revised recovery plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Snelling, Minnesota. 53 pp.

  • Verts, B.J. and L.N. Carraway. Land mammals of Oregon. University of California Press. Berkley and Los Angeles. 668pp.

  • Warner, R. M. 1985. Interspecific and temporal dietary variation in an Arizona bat community. Journal of Mammalogy 66:45-51.

  • Weller, T. J. and C. J. Zabel. 2001. Characteristics of fringed myotis day roosts in northern California. Journal of Wildlife Management 65(3): 489-497.

  • Weller, T. J. and C. J. Zabel. 2001. Characteristics of fringed myotis day roosts in northern California. Journal of Wildlife Management 65(3): 489-497.

  • Weller, T.J. and C.J. Zabel. 2001. Characteristics of fringed myotis day roosts in northern California. J. Wildlife Management. 65:489-497.

  • Western Bat Working Group. 1998. Ecology, conservation and management of western bat species, bat species accounts (draft). Unpublished document prepared as preliminary information for a group workshop conducted in February 1998. Obtained from Bill Austin, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 520-527-0849.

  • Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. xviii + 1206 pp. Available online at: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/msw/.

  • Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 2005. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Third edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Two volumes. 2,142 pp. Available online at: http://vertebrates.si.edu/msw/mswcfapp/msw/index.cfm

  • Wilson, D. E., and S. Ruff. 1999. The Smithsonian book of North American mammals. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 750 pp.

  • Wyoming Game and Fish Department, 1992. Wyoming Bird and Mammal Atlas.

  • Wyoming Game and Fish Department. 1996. Nongame Bird and Mammal Plan, a plan for inventories and management of nongame birds and mammals in Wyoming. Prepared by B. Oakleaf, A.O. Cerovski, and B. Luce, Nongame Program Biological Services Section, Wyoming Game and Fish Dept. 183 pp.

  • Yancey II, Franklin D. 1997. The mammals of Big Bend Ranch State Park, Texas. Special Publication 39. 1 October 1997. Texas Tech University. Lubbock. 210 pp.

  • van Zyll de Jong, C.G. 1985. Handbook of Canadian Mammals. Vol. II, Bats. National Museum of Natural Sciences, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa, Canada. 212 pp.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2018.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2018 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2018. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.