Flying foxes to wilt with climate change, by ABC Science Online’s Stephen Pincock, contends that new research shows some of Australia’s flying foxes face a grave threat from extreme temperatures expected to become more frequent with climate change.
Dr Nicola Markus, an Australian expert on their ecology and co-author of this new research, says, “It bodes extremely badly for the black flying foxes.”
In early 2002, she and an international team of researchers witnessed the deaths of more than 1,300 grey-headed and black flying foxes at Dallis Park in northern New South Wales (most of them females and their dependent young).
“On that day, what we saw was, very simply, that the flying foxes died of heat stress,” Dr Markus said. The temperatures, which exceeded 42 degrees Celsius, killed more than 1,300 of the animals. State-wide, more than 3,500 flying foxes fell to the soaring temperatures in that single heatwave.
Flying foxes are keystone species for forest environments. They have also been central to a taxonomic debate, which asks, are they really primates?
In 1986, Dr. John D. Pettigrew published his findings that all flying fox species (examined) shared the half-dozen brain pathways that were otherwise unique to primates. Under a microscope, their brain affinities with lemurs were difficult to tell apart.
Megabats and microbats had been historically grouped together because of the obvious similarities of their handwings. However, Dr. Pettigrew observed that the differences between to two groups included such things as diet, dentition, chromosomes, world geographic distribution, sperm, biochemistry, parasitology and numerous features of behavior. He also hypothesised that the two groups evolved flight separately, with the mega-chiroptera in the Tertiary era and the micro-chiroptera, much earlier, in the Cretaceous.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
There is more to this story than meets the eye. According to Tim Low in “The New Nature” one Francis Ratcliffe, of Oxford University, was assigned by the NSW Government to investigate Flying Foxes in 1929.
As Low said, “He realised that Flying Foxes go south in the warmer months, journeying from Queensland into NSW and sometimes reaching Victoria. During winter no bat camps remained south of the Mary River in southern Queensland, although occasional bats over-wintered further south.The story is very different today. Grey Headed Flying-foxes occupy permanent camps as far south as Sydney and Melbourne. Black Flying-foxes maintain year round camps in northern NSW. Ratcliffe himself detected some ‘natural change’ when a permanent camp appeared at Nambucca in 1932”.
They were attracted there by the year round abundance of orchard crops that came with the settlers. Interestingly, one of the major food sources was Bananas. And since the 1970s, this industry has undergone major decline in Northern NSW as production shifted to north Queensland where conditions allowed this fruit to be grown on flat land. In NSW the crop was grown on north facing hillsides to maximise insolation and avoid frost. But this came at the expense of reduced access for machinery, reduced labour productivity and an 18 month growing cycle compared to the 12 month cycle in the north.
The much touted decline in southern Flying-fox numbers is, therefore, in a context of;
1 it was a decline in a population that had previously expanded its range and size due to human intervention,
2 it was a decline in a non-remnant population,
3 it was a decline produced by the same market forces that were allowed to impact on the NSW farming communities,
4 it was a decline that is likely to have been balanced by a similar population increase in the north as the Banana industry moved north, and
5 it was a decline that involved slow starvation of the population and far exceeded any recent impacts attributed to temperature extremes.
In fact, the mortality that is normally suffered in a dry year due to lack of food is far greater than the mortality reported above.
And it is often the case that the part of the population that dies from heat in midsummer is also the part that enjoyed higher survival rates from an earlier start to spring fruit production that also came with a warmer weather.
As previous posts on this blog have pointed out, most of the change in temperature that has been attributed to global warming has actually come in the form of milder winters, milder night time minimums, and warmer winter, spring and autumn days. Summer extreme heat events make up only a very small portion of the total change.
It should also be noted that these southern, non-remnant populations, by remaining in the south over winter, have acclimatised to that southern winter which, in turn, would have reduced their capacity to deal with heat stress.
But as usual, the ABC has only managed to master that minor portion of the truth that would enable them to flog the smelly old climate “Bunyip” once again.
If ‘global warming’ is caused by CO2 – it’s flying pigs we have to worry about!
Well you do have Mottsa.
Flying-foxes actually taste quite good. The New Caledonians like them in a thick wine sauce with Bacon and Prunes. Deadly in a small lift/elevator.
Ian
you are the bat master.
and your kid is the bat master son. (ba boom tish)
Eating flying foxes in places like Guam has apparently led to some neurological disorders.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/11/everything_is_caused_by_global.html
Dr. John Brignell, a British engineering professor, runs a website called numberwatch. He has compiled what has to be the most complete collection of links to media stories ascribing the cause of everything under the sun to global warming. He has already posted more than six-hundred links.
Such as the below (a sample), see the link at top for all of the actual links:
Agricultural land increase, Africa devastated, African aid threatened, Africa hit hardest, air pressure changes, Alaska reshaped, allergies increase, Alps melting, Amazon a desert, American dream end, amphibians breeding earlier (or not), ancient forests dramatically changed, animals head for the hills, Antarctic grass flourishes, anxiety, algal blooms, archaeological sites threatened, Arctic bogs melt, Arctic in bloom, Arctic lakes disappear, asthma, Atlantic less salty, Atlantic more salty, atmospheric defiance, atmospheric circulation modified, attack of the killer jellyfish, avalanches reduced, avalanches increased, bananas destroyed, bananas grow, beetle infestation, bet for $10,000, better beer, big melt faster, billion dollar research projects, billions of deaths, bird distributions change, bird visitors drop, birds return early, blackbirds stop singing, blizzards, blue mussels return, bluetongue, boredom, bridge collapse (Minneapolis), Britain Siberian, British gardens change, brothels struggle, bubonic plague, budget increases, Buddhist temple threatened, building collapse, building season extension, bushfires, business opportunities, business risks, butterflies move north, cancer deaths in England, cardiac arrest, caterpillar biomass shift, challenges and opportunities, childhood insomnia, Cholera, circumcision in decline, cirrus disappearance, civil unrest, cloud increase, cloud stripping, cockroach migration, cod go south, cold climate creatures survive, cold spells (Australia), computer models, conferences, coral bleaching, coral reefs dying, coral reefs grow, coral reefs shrink , cold spells, cost of trillions, cougar attacks, cremation to end, crime increase, crocodile sex, crumbling roads, buildings and sewage systems, cyclones (Australia), damages equivalent to $200 billion, Darfur, Dartford Warbler plague, death rate increase (US), Dengue hemorrhagic fever, dermatitis, desert advance, desert life threatened, desert retreat, destruction of the environment, diarrhoea, disappearance of coastal cities, diseases move north, Dolomites collapse, drought, drowning people, ducks and geese decline, dust bowl in the corn belt, early marriages, early spring, earlier pollen season, Earth biodiversity crisis, Earth dying, Earth even hotter, Earth light dimming, Earth lopsided, Earth melting, Earth morbid fever, Earth on fast track, Earth past point of no return, Earth slowing down, Earth spinning out of control, Earth spins faster, Earth to explode, earth upside down, Earth wobbling, earthquakes, El Niño intensification, erosion, emerging infections, encephalitis, equality threatened, Europe simultaneously baking and freezing, evolution accelerating, expansion of university climate groups, extinctions (human, civilisation, logic, Inuit, smallest butterfly, cod, ladybirds, bats, pandas, pikas, polar bears, pigmy possums, gorillas, koalas, walrus, whales, frogs, toads, turtles, orang-utan, elephants, tigers, plants, salmon, trout, wild flowers, woodlice, penguins, a million species, half of all animal and plant species, not polar bears, barrier reef, leaches), experts muzzled, extreme changes to California, fading fall foliage, famine, farmers go under, fashion disaster, fever,figurehead sacked, fir cone bonanza, fish catches drop, fish catches rise, fish stocks at risk, fish stocks decline, five million illnesses, flesh eating disease, flood patterns change, floods, floods of beaches and cities, Florida economic decline, food poisoning, food prices rise, food security threat (SA), footpath erosion, forest decline, forest expansion, frostbite, frosts, fungi fruitful, fungi invasion, games change, Garden of Eden wilts, genetic diversity decline, gene pools slashed, gingerbread houses collapse, glacial earthquakes, glacial retreat, glacial growth, glacier wrapped, global cooling, global dimming, glowing clouds, god melts,
I’m sorry, Schiller. What point were you trying to make?
SJT,
The point is, if you don’t like it, blame it on global warming. If you want to study something and need a grant, say it has to do with global warming.
Anything at all that has to do with global warming attracts money, and money drives headlines.
Sort of like global cooling attracted lots of money back in the day.
Well like you Schiller, Brignell is a bullshit artist par excellence so your point was what? Go and have another swig of Dieldrin. Surely you’d have some left over for the Darkies too?
Luke,
Thank you. That was a typically cogent refutation of my argument.
That is to say, it wasn’t.
Happy Holidays!
Schiller
This is global warming we are talking about, so it will affect every area on the globe. It affects the environment, and everything depends on the environment. It’s a fair bet that’s why the scientists in the IPCC are getting a little jumpy. As to the list, you have no references to the validity of the claims, if they were made by scientists or opportunist alarmists with no credentials, nor debated them with anything other than ridicule.
The scientists in the IPCC may be getting jumpy because the gravy train they are driving has lost its brakes and they’ve just caught sight of the buffers.
So flying foxes are suffering because of CC. Is it possible to increase the temperature. It is not hot enough if any survive.
The level of debate on this forum pretty well speaks for the denier side of the issue.
Considering your new PM – there will be an initiative to install AC in the banana tree canopy
come next July.
SJT, it would appear the level of debate on this forum is a sad indicator of many things.
Given that SJT and Libby have nothing else to say, can we assume that they do not contest any of the facts and conclusions drawn in my post?
Ian,
I am not a flying fox expert. I do know that there were many deaths suffered from heat stress at a local colony almost two years ago when we had a hot dry day.
I have faith that Dr Nicola Markus has read Tim Lowe’s book, is aware of the historical vs present range of flying fox species, is knowledgeable of their physiology and behaviour, and is far better placed to comment than any of us.
You wrote:
“In fact, the mortality that is normally suffered in a dry year due to lack of food is far greater than the mortality reported above.
And it is often the case that the part of the population that dies from heat in midsummer is also the part that enjoyed higher survival rates from an earlier start to spring fruit production that also came with a warmer weather….It should also be noted that these southern, non-remnant populations, by remaining in the south over winter, have acclimatised to that southern winter which, in turn, would have reduced their capacity to deal with heat stress.”
This is all interesting, but in order to add some credibility to your comments, could you please cite some literature to support this?
My comment to SJT is largely in regards to how something is posted and it degrades VERY rapidly into ad homs, irrelevant banter and disturbing opinions. I could be wrong, but I would have thought that the blog masters Jennifer, Paul and Neil would want this weblog to be taken reasonably seriously and encourage sensible debate. The following thread on beer fridges has convinced me that is never going to happen here.
No Libby, why don’t you go off and have a good think about it yourself to see if it makes sense. Go on, I’m sure you can do it.
But if you really need to cite something, try (Mott, I. pers comm, 2007) or (Mott, I, at jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/002594.htm 30 Nov 2007)
And if, as you say, “Dr Nicola Markus has read Tim Lowe’s book, is aware of the historical vs present range of flying fox species, is knowledgeable of their physiology and behaviour, and is far better placed to comment than any of us”, then why did she dish up such a load of ignorant bollocks at variance with the facts?
The central issue here isn’t whether climate change is bad for the flying foxes.
The issue is whether Dr Nicola Markus should get some grants to study these creatures, and if so, whether she should accept money from neo-Marxist zealots to continue her work.
I say, take ’em for everything they have. Trouble is, if she wants to continue taking their money, she’s got to make the findings they’re expecting. If she doesn’t, they’ll smear her as a corporate pawn and she’ll be looking for a new career.
Thank you Ian. Just the sort of answer I expected from you with the bonus of supporting my conclusion on contributions here.
You’re a turd Schiller – what neo-Marxist zealots would they actually be. Who? You now inform us of her research funding or be exposed for total fraud that you are. Are are you utterly full of it you sleazy sepo.
Libby you have to remember that Grott has long been involved for yonks as an industry apologist to make champagne from sour milk. The longer you pull opinions sans arse the better you actually get at it – in fact you even start to believe your own drivel. Of course he hasn’t a clue about flying fox population dynamics and physiology. Of course his land wrecking ancestors cleared massive areas of bat habitat for a quick buck. “oooo oooo because the guvmint forced me ” He even knows old mates who have the sole surviving numbers of a rare plant species on their farm. (Until you find out that was crap too).
Luke,
All I wanted was evidence to back claims, which is no different to what is demanded here from myself or anyone else. I am not saying I disbelieve what Ian is saying. The reliance on “Ian Mott said” and “good sense” have nothing to do with intelligent debate and fact finding. It is an immature response. If you make a claim, often others question it, perhaps because they want to know more or form their own opinion. That is surely the intended nature of a blog like this.
I find when people resort to insult and refuse to answer a valid question it is because they have nothing worthwhile to say, are being dishonest or have a strange personality “quirk”. Pity.
Luke,
I don’t wish to cast aspersions on our generous hostess, even though it seems she stretches the definition of ‘hospitality’ far beyond most credible denotations–
Still, I wonder at the intellectual value of your use of the terms, “turd,” “total fraud that you are,” “utterly full of it,” and “sleazy sepo.”
These terms have no proper place in polite discussion.
This suggests to me that *you* have no proper place in polite discussion. What’s more, I believe you’d be better off with a half-dozen cans of spray paint and some railroad cars.
You’ve over-played your hand, pretending to be a climate expert. Actual scientists behave better, and what’s more, exhibit a true sense of curiosity.
You’re either a zealot or a shill. It’s time to retire and, perhaps, come back as a random series of letters such as “SJT.”
Sorry mate – I graduated from Motty’s etiquette class. We don’t want double standards now do we. I look forward to your continued protests at his style. What’s that – you haven’t commented – actually none of your side have. How strange. Is that the stench of hypocrisy we smell?
I mean really Schiller you are a fetid skunk – your standards are an utter disgrace and that’s why you get the reactions you do. You have no idea of the researcher involved or any of the issues yet you’re making a sleazy attack. Pathetic.
Libby, I asked you to think about it. If I were a budhist monk I could dong you on the head with a stick in the hope that it might induce a “sartori” or flash of insight. But I am not a monk and you, apparently, are not a seeker of insight, so the said donging would only induce an Apprehended Violence Order and tedious blog abuse.
So lets go through this slowly, most of the casualties were the young, followed by some of the nursing mothers. And the number of suckling young are, whether you agree or not, the product of growing conditions earlier in the season. Therefore, the majority of the deceased young were the product of conditions earlier in the season. Seasons change, get used to it.
And mortality in dry seasons? Flying-foxes reproduce annually, and as with most species that reproduce this way, have the capacity to recover quickly when good seasons come. They also rely on forest fruits and flowers. And from my experience as a second generation bee keeper, and from the gleaned wisdom of keen family observers of these critical industry conditions, I can state that I do not need a reference to a published paper to be able to state, with absolute certainty, that the supply of forest flowers and fruit undergoes major decline in dry seasons.
And by the term major, I mean declines, measured by detailed records of the rates of honey production dating from 1935, of greater than 90%. And as we moved our bees over a large area to maximise production, we can confirm that this decline in flower and subsequent fruit production occurs on a landscape scale rather than a district one.
And from our intimate understanding of rainfall patterns and their implications on forest growth, one can advise that good years, of the kind in which large numbers of young make it to maturity, are the exception rather than the rule in the Australian landscape.
So it is not just Flying-foxes that experience major population declines in ‘bad’ years. The same applies to all leaf, flower, sap and fruit dependent forest dwelling species. There is one good example of research by Sharp et al, on gliders in Bungawalbyn State Forest in northern NSW where a population went into an 80% decline in the space of three months due to a failure of the flowering that they depend on.
A failed flowering also means a failed fruiting. And while certain blog stalking types may require a formal research paper before they will accept the fact that flowering of forest species is highly variable due to climate variation, that large portion of Australians that actually live in the regions, and make and retain even the most rudimentary observations of their surroundings, regard this as a self evident truth that needs no perverse “validation” by formal paper for trumped up, self appointed urban inquisitors.
And if that does not convince you then just do the simple maths to explain what sort of natural mortality is required to produce a stable population of a species that breeds annually and has only 12 months to maturity. The maths are inescapable.
“Libby, I asked you to think about it. If I were a budhist monk I could dong you on the head with a stick in the hope that it might induce a “sartori” or flash of insight. But I am not a monk and you, apparently, are not a seeker of insight, so the said donging would only induce an Apprehended Violence Order and tedious blog abuse.”
Sorry Ian, am I s’posed to read past this? You are mentioning (in fact suggesting) violence? “certain blog stalking types” “trumped up, self appointed urban inquisitors.”
Why would you write this stuff? All I want is information from you, which I am entitled to on this public forum when you make the claims that you do. I have seen incorrect information from you on cetaceans and other animals, along with bias, and do not wish that incorrect information is posted here when there may be people who genuinely want to learn something. Why would you resort to this verbal language Ian? It really is concerning.
I respect you have apiarist and forestry experience. There is nothing wrong with asking for literature, especially when you are questioning an actual researcher’s work. However, in this case you have decided to dismiss the researcher’s work for your own observations. If science worked from anecdotal, subjective evidence alone, I wonder where we would be?
“And if that does not convince you then just do the simple maths to explain what sort of natural mortality is required to produce a stable population of a species that breeds annually and has only 12 months to maturity. The maths are inescapable.”
This is one of your classic lines. Simplicity where ecology is involved. Getting your education simply from being out in a forest does not make you an expert where such complicated systems exist, but no doubt you will persist with the delusion.
Here’s some advice Ian, if you want someone to “think about” what you have written, drop the unnecessary insulting tone. You may find people start to actually read what you write and believe you.
“Libby, I asked you to think about it. If I were a budhist monk I could dong you on the head with a stick in the hope that it might induce a “sartori” or flash of insight. But I am not a monk and you, apparently, are not a seeker of insight, so the said donging would only induce an Apprehended Violence Order and tedious blog abuse.”
Sorry Ian, am I s’posed to read past this? You are mentioning (in fact suggesting) violence? “certain blog stalking types” “trumped up, self appointed urban inquisitors.”
Why would you write this stuff? All I want is information from you, which I am entitled to on this public forum when you make the claims that you do. I have seen incorrect information from you on cetaceans and other animals, along with bias, and do not wish that incorrect information is posted here when there may be people who genuinely want to learn something. Why would you resort to this verbal language Ian? It really is concerning.
I respect you have apiarist and forestry experience. There is nothing wrong with asking for literature, especially when you are questioning an actual researcher’s work. However, in this case you have decided to dismiss the researcher’s work for your own observations. If science worked from anecdotal, subjective evidence alone, I wonder where we would be?
“And if that does not convince you then just do the simple maths to explain what sort of natural mortality is required to produce a stable population of a species that breeds annually and has only 12 months to maturity. The maths are inescapable.”
This is one of your classic lines. Simplicity where ecology is involved. Getting your education simply from being out in a forest does not make you an expert where such complicated systems exist, but no doubt you will persist with the delusion.
Here’s some advice Ian, if you want someone to “think about” what you have written, drop the unnecessary insulting tone. You may find people start to actually read what you write and believe you.
No Libby, you set out with the intention of implying that any information gathered outside the formal, and many would say corrupted, scientific mileau is of no value and not based on valid data or observation.
And yet you continue to simply demand references rather than actually pose questions that would indicate you have a desire to learn. You forget that you have a history here of providing half truths and links to supposedly authoratitive sites that are found lacking. And when exposed you have been known to respond with a stream of invective that be worthy of the proverbial “Bullocky’s Daughter”. And even that reference you tried, in your ignorance of Australian folklore, to morph into some sort of implied sexual abuse. And now you use a simple classic literary allusion, to a particular group of (I think 14th century) Chinese monks who did believe that the key to the meaning of life etc would come to one in a sudden flash of wisdom rather than through formal study, as some sort of veiled threat.
In short, this stuff has consistently gone right over your head. And that is why I gave up on you long ago.
Ian,
1) “you set out with the intention”
Your assumption Ian.
2) “many would say”
YOU are saying Ian, you have no evidence “many” think the same.
3)”indicate you have a desire to learn”
Your interpretation.
3)”You forget that you have a history here of providing half truths and links to supposedly authoratitive sites that are found lacking.”
Evidence please to back up this claim and don’t even try the “dolphin/whale” claim you made ages ago which was simply ridiculous.
4)”And when exposed you have been known to respond with a stream of invective that be worthy of the proverbial “Bullocky’s Daughter”.”
“Exposed’?! More evidence please. I’ll freely admit to writing some things I later regreted or that were out of character.
5)”And even that reference you tried, in your ignorance of Australian folklore, to morph into some sort of implied sexual abuse.”
Ignorance of Australian folklore, eh? Implied sexual abuse, oh yeah? How come there were others that found your term offensive too Ian? You have a record here (literally) of sexist remarks.
6)”…as some sort of veiled threat.”
So why even use such “illusion” Ian? What actual relevance does it have and purpose does it serve? None.
7)”this stuff has consistently gone right over your head”
Ian, in short I simply don’t understand what sort of human being you are. It is beyond me why a person of your age feels the need to bully just about everyone on this blog, using the most childish language and simplistic “facts”. When you are asked for supporting data you go off in a venom-laden sulk and do your best to drag the discussion into a personal attack rather than defending your point. You intentionally intimidate and drive away posters who don’t share your POV and steer valid discussion away from a topic so you can continue your attacks.
Going over my head? Nope, I can’t be bothered with someone who freely admits to baiting people to get a rise. I used to go to school with bullies who were bored, intellectually challenged, or were victims themselves, but I certainly don’t expect to find it in a forum like this by someone of your age. It’s astounding. I’ve got better things to do with my time, but you seem to need to receive constant attention and to get some sort of response – at the expense of genuine human beings, not creations of your mind in cyberspace. To be honest Ian I hope you are receiving some sort of counselling or medication. I respect you have some valuable insights into various topics, but your psychological profile, especialy in the written record, is cause for concern.
8)”And that is why I gave up on you long ago.”
Then don’t waste my time. Simple Ian, see if you can ignore me – you’ll be doing us both a favour!!!
Libby – would be interested to know if any of the blog gimps have actually read the papers concerning the issue.
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/content/2682344508637641/
http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/content/2682344508637641/fulltext.pdf
Of course personal opinion is always preferred as we are now advised.
Thanks for links Luke. It is good for people to have the option of reading further. We also can’t trust the ABC or journos to get the facts right as we have also been advised.
>They were attracted there by the year round abundance of orchard crops that came with the settlers. Interestingly, one of the major food sources was Bananas.
I would suggest that the Fruit Bats were attracted to orchards due to a shortage of natural food resources
> it was a decline in a population that had previously expanded its range and size due to human intervention,
human intervention that had cleared most of the natural lowland and wetland habitat of the species, forcing them to select alternative food sources.
> it was a decline that is likely to have been balanced by a similar population increase in the north as the Banana industry moved north
All evidence suggest that the grey-headed fyling fox has declined and continues to decline throughout its range.
Historically, Grey-headed Flying-foxes had a greater range in Australia and numbers were estimated as being in the “many millions” (Ratcliffe 1932). Counts of flying foxes over the past decade suggest that the national population may have declined by up to 30% (Birt 2000; Richards 2000). Regular visits to flying-fox camps during this period have shown a marked decline in the numbers of animals using several camps (reductions of 31% to 94% have been recorded at five camps, Eby 2000; Hall 2000; Parry-Jones; P.Eby pers. comm.)
>it was a decline that involved slow starvation of the population and far exceeded any recent impacts attributed to temperature extre.
They were and are threatened by native habitat clearing.
The main threat to Grey-headed Flying-foxes in NSW is clearing or modification of native vegetation. This removes appropriate camp habitat and limits the availability of natural food resources, particularly winter-spring feeding habitat in north-eastern NSW. The urbanisation of the coastal plains of south-eastern Queensland and northern NSW has seen the removal of annually-reliable winter feeding sites, and this threatening process continues (Catterall et al. 1997; Pressey and Griffith 1992; P. Clarke, unpublished data).
Paul, that last paste is pure bull$hit. “The main threat to Grey-headed Flying-foxes in NSW is clearing or modification of native vegetation. This removes appropriate camp habitat and limits the availability of natural food resources, particularly winter-spring feeding habitat in north-eastern NSW.”
By use of the term winter-spring feeding habitat we can assume they mean melaleuca forest types. The satellite scans make it perfectly clear that total clearing in NSW through the 1990s was only in the order of 8,000 to 12,000 hectares each year. And this included regrowth clearing and broadscale clearing in the semi-arid zone.
So to suggest that the more than 1 million hectare forest resources of the NSW north-east has undergone any significant level of habitat modification is pure fantasy.
The most significant urbanisation has been on the Tweed coast but most of this is on land that had been thoroughly strip mined for mineral sands in the 1960s and revegetated with Casuarina (not a FF food source). The entire Ocean Shores site was a dairy farm, Byron expanded onto peat bog, Lismore expanded onto beef and dairy farms and most of the expansion at Ballina was on Cane land, ditto for Grafton and Maclean. So do tell us, exactly where did this claimed habitat modification in the 1990s take place? Indeed, where in the 1970s and 80s as well?
Once again we get these apparently authoratitive papers that are complete crocks of the proverbial with zero basis in fact. They pile unfounded statements upon others in a complex, corrupt assemblage of referenced misinformation.
It is also worth pointing out that a single hectare of Bananas will produce about 27 tonnes of fruit/ha/year, and spread over the entire year, while the volume from a hectare of forest is unlikely to exceed 1 tonne in a good year. And in the 1930s it was not unusual for Flying-foxes to take more than 10% of production.
So a hectare of Bananas would generally support 10 to 20 times more animals than a hectare of forest. But over the past 30 years the industry has used silver plastic bags to cover the maturing bunches to minimise sun damage and pest impacts, including from FF.
That would be the main reason for the reports of minimal change in the north Qld populations despite the shift of Banana production to that area.
Weellll – there has been a tad clearing in south-east Queensland for housing – Logan, Sunshine Coast, Springfield – what would the effect in Indooroopilly Island and North Ipswich colonies be? Or are they satiated by urban back yard delights? But gardens have been dreadful in recent drought years. They certainly will go after blossoms on introduced Cadagis (introduced Eucalyptus torelliana from north Queensland). So I presume their feeding is wider than melaleuca and into all manner of forest species?
Anyway – where are we in this tedious argument.
I believe the paper published shows good data that flying foxes do die in big numbers if the temeperature gets too high.
A globally warmed world promises to bring more extreme temperatures (a more certain projection).
Ian will argue that he’s “waiting for it”.
Certainly the data on increases in hot days from BoM are sparse pickings. http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/silo/reg/cli_chg/extreme_trendmaps.cgi
There has been an increase in 3-4 days in western Queensland which has warmed more than coastal areas; so although there is no current immediate impact the signs are there in areas that have warmed.
Of course species can be dependent on critical periods for breeding. So how El Nino and other droughts play out interspersed with episodic heat waves is the ecological key. And for how many years in succession these occur. (like in recent years).
This isn’t about averages.
And although Ian has demonstrated large areas of fruit production and a case for an increased range growers have taken steps to limit flying fox fruit loss.
So what’s the net balance?
Clearing in SEQ over the past two decades has been marginal, most of it regrowth. And the total area of regrowth is sufficient to ensure that more regrowth forest passes the threshold to remnant status than there is remnant being cleared.
In northern NSW the last significant clearing of forest in Byron Shire, for example, was 60 years ago. I have the 1942 and 1953 aerial photographs to prove it. And the same industry drivers applied in all the other Shires.
So if there was a low point in Flying-fox population it will have been between 1950 and 1970. Since then the area of native forest has increased significantly throughout the NSW north east.
Futhermore, the area of contributive non-native habitat has also expanded. In Byron Shire the area of Camphor Laurel, now a major food source for fruit bats, has expanded to more than 5000ha of mapped clusters and an equivalent area of dispersed thickets that are too small for the map scale. This area is more than 10% of the whole shire, and is on top of the expansion of native forest.
So any suggestion that clearing is having a significant impact on current populations is unmitigated crap.
Yes yes yes all very fascinating but who cares. I’m sure you could prove the sun comes up in the west with enough envelopes. There has been shitloads of urban bushland levelled of late in SEQ – go for a drive numb nuts.
We’re talking about heat stroke and bats boofhead, and synchronicity with episodic events..
It’s pretty obvious isn’t it, that the reserachers are right.
“Anyway – where are we in this tedious argument.
I believe the paper published shows good data that flying foxes do die in big numbers if the temeperature gets too high.
A globally warmed world promises to bring more extreme temperatures (a more certain projection).”
Get with the program, Luke. Are you actually trying to debate the topic?
>Paul, that last paste is pure bull$hit. ”
So the leading flying fox researchers don’t know anything? You’re clearly not a fan of the NSW scientific committee are you?
>The most significant urbanisation has been on the Tweed coast but most of this is on land that had been thoroughly strip mined for mineral sands in the 1960s and revegetated with Casuarina (not a FF food source).
So how much of the lowland coastal vegetation of the Tweed Lowlands and Clarence Lowlands remains? The sort of high quality lowland and wetland habitat that Flying Foxes establish camps and maternity colonies in. For example, Bellingen Island, Susan Island and Stotts Island. That is alluvial floodplain forest. The answer is extremely little. The answer for the big scrub rainforest that once occurred across the basalts soils around is Lismore area is less than 1%. Most of this would’ve been lost early this century. Forcing Flying Foxes to seek alternative food supplies, and establish camps in places where didn’t have to previously.
>That would be the main reason for the reports of minimal change in the north Qld populations despite the shift of Banana production to that
Who says this? Please provide references. My comments are at least backed up by literature, by a census of camp fly outs.
>So to suggest that the more than 1 million hectare forest resources of the NSW north-east has undergone any significant level of habitat modification is pure fantasy.
>I have the 1942 and 1953 aerial photographs to prove it. And the same industry drivers applied in all the other Shires.
I have access to orthophoto and Spot 5 imagery across the north coast and I can tell you that continuing habitat modification, clearing and degradation is no fantasy.
>In Byron Shire the area of Camphor Laurel, now a major food source for fruit bats, has expanded to more than 5000ha of mapped clusters and an equivalent area of dispersed thickets that are too small for the map
None of the literature states that Camphor Laurel is a major food source for the Flying Fox.
>They pile unfounded statements upon others in a complex, corrupt assemblage of referenced misinformation.
That was what I was thinking when I read your statements. The only word that would change in your case would be unreferenced.
Man faces 35 years in prison for killing trees. Watch up Motty! Arbocide says judge.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-treeman4dec04,0,4847761.story?coll=la-tot-national&track=ntothtml
Perhaps macrochiropterans such as flying foxes will evolve echolocation in response to global warming, much like the microchiropterans developed it during the Palaeocene-Eocene warming period (see Gingerich, 2006). This way they can utilize the aerial invertebrate fauna, if it can adapt to climate change as well of course. The bats themselves will have survived the hot dry days by the green movement installing air conditioning units in their camps.
Thanks very much for your information Paul. I was wondering about the Camphor Laurel.
So are you guys suggesting ever so discretely that Mottsa may have actually perpetrated a few porkies, analagous to the sole surviving batch of plants on the mate’s farm myth.
Paul said, “I have access to orthophoto and Spot 5 imagery across the north coast and I can tell you that continuing habitat modification, clearing and degradation is no fantasy”.
Good, Paul, then you can post some examples so we can confirm whether your “habitat modification” is actual change in remnant forest or just some guy cleaning up some Lantana. Almost all of what has been officially mapped as rainforest in my area is actually gullies full of Lantana. Neither the orthophotos nor the under-resourced, under trained staff employed in compiling the maps can tell the damned difference. I know of one guy who resigned rather than put his name to the crap they were expected to sign off on.
And then, Paul, we might get down to quantifying your “degradation” to get a handle on what you actually mean when you say “continuing habitat modification etc is no fantasy”? Do you mean some minor changes can be detected? Or are you just trying on the usual sleazy imputation of large scale activity without actually saying so?
And that is real interesting that “None of the literature states that Camphor Laurel is a major food source for the Flying Fox”. Because you had better tell that to the guys on my place that certainly prefer Camphor berries to White Cedar.
This is more of that moronic logic where anything that is not officially mentioned cannot possibly exist. It would be laughable if it were not so pathetic. Does any of “the literature” list Bananas, Paw Paws and Passionfruit as a major food source of the Flying-fox? Unlikely.
Indeed, does any of the literature actually examine what hungry Flying-foxes will resort to when gaps occur in the forest fruit supply?
And it is all very well to rabbit on about the extent of the big scrub etc but the last of the big scrub was cleared 80 years ago, when Ratcliffe was a lad. Ditto for the coastal lowland forest which was mostly cleared in the 1890s. These morons who speak about it in general terms as if it only just took place are either deluded or seriously dishonest.
“Does any of “the literature” list Bananas, Paw Paws and Passionfruit as a major food source of the Flying-fox? Unlikely.”
Eby (1995) lists banana, apricots, mangoes and plums as eaten by grey-headed flying fox in addition to their native food, but these items are not listed as “major food sources.” Anyone who deals with them in captivity could say banana and paw paw are “major food items”.
How do you quantify your “major food items” Ian, including your camphor laurel?
“This is more of that moronic logic where anything that is not officially mentioned cannot possibly exist. It would be laughable if it were not so pathetic.”
Not at all. When someone researches a subject and publishes their results, they back up each piece of information with references – evidence of other research that supports their claims. This can also be anecdotal evidence, however must be from a reliable source (after all, who is to say the anecdotal evidence is for real?). Research of the fruit bat study kind can not rely on anecdotal evidence alone. Your assertion that “moronic logic” exists is simply a denial of the way things are done in the world of science. Perhaps you should do your own study and publish the results, or even document your bats and send a little note to a flying fox researcher?
“Indeed, does any of the literature actually examine what hungry Flying-foxes will resort to when gaps occur in the forest fruit supply?”
Yes, for example there is a paper detailing street tree species consumed by fruit bats in Melbourne, however the researchers did not seem to state the physiological condition of the bats as “hungry”.
Singleton (NSW) Council has asked approval to shoot grey-headed flying fox over several months until 2010.
Background info:
http://singleton.yourguide.com.au/news/local/general/bats-must-go/1083672.html
http://singleton.yourguide.com.au/news/local/general/time-for-big-guns/1087748.html
This species is listed as Vulnerable under the Threatened Species Act.
Grott probably tethered flying foxes to a camphor laurel until they were on the brink of starvation.
Maybe stapled to the tree.
So we have evidence from as far back as 1929 that Flying-foxes were taking a terrible toll on the Banana industry, to the extent of commissioning the first formal environmental study, and the plodders still have not listed Bananas as a major food source. Yes, that would be par for the course in the brave new green utopia.
How do I quantify a major food source Libby? I note the incidence of FF in a number of local Camphor stands and extrapolate to the total area of Camphor in the region, and compare that with the total area of other native and exotic food sources in the region. One could take it all a step further and examine the duration of fruit supply from the full range of sources to identify any gaps where otherwise small amounts of a fruit provide the critical continuity required.
This glaring oversight is a continuation of the green ideological mindset where only remnant vegetation is considered to be capable of delivering habitat services. As the fruit growers and anyone with a few Camphors knows, this is complete bollocks. But the fact is that no-one, in the current corrupt green intellectual millieu, would ever get funding to reveal how much additional “habitat” is actually out there doing the business.
Better to simply map large remnants only and claim there are serious connectivity issues. Thereby ignoring the contribution of non-remnant regrowth, smaller remnant clusters, individual paddock trees and all the other orchard crops and infrastructure like farm dams etc, that provide valuable linking services in a variegated ecological community. A community in which man, shock horror, actually makes a positive contribution.
A bit off topic. There are flying squirrels in Finland and Estonia , living in hollows of old growth trees. Classified by the IUCN as near threatened. It ‘s almost impossible to detect them in daylight. They are extremely cute.
Check this very seldom documented animal on video:
There are flying squirrel gliders here Ann, but they are marsupials, not rodents. I’ve seen a flying squirrel in Indonesia. They also occur in the US, but I wasn’t aware they were in Finland and Estonia.
Hi Libby,
The flying squirrels in Finland and Estonia are called the Siberian flying squirrels
Well,
Since the planet is about to bake to death, a generous short-term solution would be to move these bats to the Antarctic.
That place is about to become a temperate zone, any day now.
One is also tempted to wonder if the real reason the FF were dropping off was because their concentrated faeces had killed off the roost tree and thereby removed all shade from the departed leaves. This is often the case and the mortality from lack of shade in a normal heat wave is just nature’s way of telling them it is time to shift camp (due to their fouling of the nest).
Note, the original reports made no reference to whether the heat wave constituted a new extreme under global warming or just another heat wave of the type that takes place often.
And one must also conclude, as for human mortality in heat waves, that it is the vulnerable that drop off. But once the vulnerable have died in the first heat wave, then mortality in subsequent additional heat waves is unlikely to be the same. Ergo, increased frequency of extreme heat events will not impact on the healthy part of the population.
The conclusion: Bats die in heat waves, as they, and many other species, have done for millenia. But the carion eaters do very well. And summer passes, and life goes on, as it has done for millenia.
There was an extremely hot, dry day in Sydney 2 years ago which also killed off a large number of bats in a local camp. Bats of all age classes and apparent health died.
>sleazy
>pure bull$hit.
>corrupt
Use of these derogatory phrases doesn’t add sophistication to your debate of your unsubstantiated anectdotal opinions about flying foxes, land clearing et, etc.
You’re entitled to your fanciful unreferenced opinions of course. However you seem to vey much focused on your backyard and are threatened by knowledge built on by research.
Find the references to back the claims you make, do the research.
At the moment you are just blowing wind out your….., which is typical of right paranoia and conspiracy theorists
Really, Paul. The inability of the map makers to distinguish between Lantana and rainforest is a fact, not an anecdote. The increase in area of Camphor Laurel is well documented. The use of Camphor fruit by bats is a fact, not an anecdote, as is their use of orchard fruit etc.
But of course, you are just sidestepping the question, aren’t you, Paul. You don’t have any hard evidence of significant recent landscape scale habitat destruction in NE NSW because;
a. you didn’t show any and
b. there is none, is there?
And your use of vague terms to imply a meaning that cannot be substantiated is sleazy. The constant references to clearing of the Big Scrub as if it was done recently, when it actually took place more than a century ago, is pure bullShit. And the deliberate avoidance of any official mention of the scale and extent of forest regeneration onto past (mostly cumpulsorily)cleared land is uncontestable proof of a corrupt scientific and policy millieu.
And the clown has the gall to demand that I “find the references” to official misconduct and fraudulent science? By your responses, Paul, you obviously work in a related field. In which case, get used to it, you are an associate of criminal scum and by your deeds shall we know you.
And Libby, the fact that recent heat waves did not kill all of any colony is sufficient evidence to conclude that the mortality was limited to the least healthy. Unless you can confirm that some were drinking beer to keep cool, it is self evident.
“The use of Camphor fruit by bats is a fact, not an anecdote”
Where is this referenced Ian? And you want to talk about “hard evidence”? You have been asked to match the work of the researchers and have failed, preferring instead to insult and tell us your life story.
“And Libby, the fact that recent heat waves did not kill all of any colony is sufficient evidence to conclude that the mortality was limited to the least healthy. Unless you can confirm that some were drinking beer to keep cool, it is self evident.”
Samples taken showed that animals of no apparent ill-health died, so your typical simplistic view of the world does not hold. The only thing that is self-evident is that you have no idea what you are talking about and yet continue to slag off those who genuinely do.
>In which case, get used to it, you are an associate of criminal scum and by your deeds shall we know you.
That my friend is defamatory. Care to back your defamatory comments in a court of law?