5 ms·

Not dismissing the danger to bats in general, as they do provide more good services to nature than bad, but let's not forget, that in numbers, bats comprise mor

Not dismissing the danger to bats in general, as they do provide more good services to nature than bad, but let's not forget, that in numbers, bats comprise more than 1/4 of all mammals. Losing a few, while likely (hopefully) preventable, is not a real dent in their population like it would be with eagles or other birds with smaller populations.

cr1895 7y ago
>is not a real dent in their population In aggregate, sure, but is there an acute local impact that is more serious?
- stirfrykitty 7y ago
  Bats are the single best resource for keeping the populations of bad insects down. Some places have actually imported bats for this reason.
  - cr1895 7y ago
    Yeah that's why I'm wondering if perhaps there's a knock-on effect where a reduction in a local bat population causes trees to suffer, shifting a local ecosystem out of balance. I suppose though, all things considered, this might be preferable to razing the mountain for coal.
    - stirfrykitty 7y ago
      Well, Australia has two massive issues: mosquitoes and cane toads (poisonous). Both species are invasive. They developed an agent that should, within a year or so, kill off 80% of the population of mosquitoes, which the cane toad eats. Since they want to get rid of both species, this will affect species far outside those two, as other species eat both of the aforementioned species. Australia has imported cane toads, foxes, rabbits, domestic cats (now at epic feral proportions), camels, and more, which has upended their indigenous species, which are now dying, some bordering on extinction. I think when humans tinker with nature, we don't look too many chess moves ahead. We see gain in one area, not realizing we will affect ten other areas.
  - LinuxBender 7y ago
    I second this. I have a bat that lives in my roof (yeah, that will eventually be a problem) and eats its body weight in mosquitoes and moths every day. A neighbors bat tested positive for rabies and that is my only real concern. I keep an eye on mine. The species in my neck of the woods lives about 15 years. That's 15 years of free pest control.
    - stirfrykitty 7y ago
      Some people have actually gone so far as to have an outside wall taken out, a bat house installed (prevents ingress into the house at large) and then sealed up save the small bat entrance. They enter, hang, sleep, exit. There is a tray that can be slid out, washed, and re-inserted. This is not for the faint of heart, as the potential for exposure to rabies and other toxic goo is high, but some do it nonetheless.
      - LinuxBender 7y ago
        I am actually considering something like that. At some point, I need to strip my home down to the studs regardless. I might just have a box on a lever-pole that allows lowering and cleaning. Being attached directly to the house means that each time a new pup is born and hits the teenage years, it has to learn it doesn't have dominion and eventually stops complaining when I make noise.
7952 7y ago
Bats don't have many babies so the death of individuals is much more damaging than with say rabbits. It's a relative of course.

cr1895 7y ago

>is not a real dent in their population In aggregate, sure, but is there an acute local impact that is more serious?

stirfrykitty 7y ago
Bats are the single best resource for keeping the populations of bad insects down. Some places have actually imported bats for this reason.
- cr1895 7y ago
  Yeah that's why I'm wondering if perhaps there's a knock-on effect where a reduction in a local bat population causes trees to suffer, shifting a local ecosystem out of balance. I suppose though, all things considered, this might be preferable to razing the mountain for coal.
  - stirfrykitty 7y ago
    Well, Australia has two massive issues: mosquitoes and cane toads (poisonous). Both species are invasive. They developed an agent that should, within a year or so, kill off 80% of the population of mosquitoes, which the cane toad eats. Since they want to get rid of both species, this will affect species far outside those two, as other species eat both of the aforementioned species. Australia has imported cane toads, foxes, rabbits, domestic cats (now at epic feral proportions), camels, and more, which has upended their indigenous species, which are now dying, some bordering on extinction. I think when humans tinker with nature, we don't look too many chess moves ahead. We see gain in one area, not realizing we will affect ten other areas.
- LinuxBender 7y ago
  I second this. I have a bat that lives in my roof (yeah, that will eventually be a problem) and eats its body weight in mosquitoes and moths every day. A neighbors bat tested positive for rabies and that is my only real concern. I keep an eye on mine. The species in my neck of the woods lives about 15 years. That's 15 years of free pest control.
  - stirfrykitty 7y ago
    Some people have actually gone so far as to have an outside wall taken out, a bat house installed (prevents ingress into the house at large) and then sealed up save the small bat entrance. They enter, hang, sleep, exit. There is a tray that can be slid out, washed, and re-inserted. This is not for the faint of heart, as the potential for exposure to rabies and other toxic goo is high, but some do it nonetheless.
    - LinuxBender 7y ago
      I am actually considering something like that. At some point, I need to strip my home down to the studs regardless. I might just have a box on a lever-pole that allows lowering and cleaning. Being attached directly to the house means that each time a new pup is born and hits the teenage years, it has to learn it doesn't have dominion and eventually stops complaining when I make noise.

7952 7y ago

Bats don't have many babies so the death of individuals is much more damaging than with say rabbits. It's a relative of course.