2011 WNS reported new areas?

[Evan G]

Now we are coming out of winter, what are the new 2011 WNS reported infected areas also what is the estimated bat die off in those areas?

---Please list---

[wyandottecaver]

dont think that picture is complete yet.

die off is always going to be speculative. We know IN got hit hard with several sites in its "first" year. not a lot of observed mortality yet, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. TN is also showing increases

[PYoungbaer]

Evan,

It's way too early yet. Last year, we didn't get the "final" map for the season until May 19. That reflected the announcements of confirmed WNS or Geomyces destructans after laboratory confirmation. Surveys went well into April, and then you have to allow time for the lab analysis.

This year, many surveys were put off until later in the season. This served two purposes: to avoid unnecessary disturbance of bats, and to allow WNS, if present, to progress to a point where it would be obvious. To visit a site in early January, for example, WNS may not be obvious.

That said, so far we have sites in two new states, Indiana and North Carolina. We also have some new sites in Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and West Virginia, and quite a few in Virginia. As of last week, however, Missouri and Kentucky still have no new reports of WNS, nor does Oklahoma. One new Canadian site was just reported last week.

I've not seen any specific numbers of bat die-offs in places like Virginia or Tennessee, nor in West Virginia, the places where the largest totals are likely to come in this year. The best longitudinal data comes from New York and Vermont, although neither have completed their surveys this year. Some early reports from New York report increased bats population numbers at several sites, so we may have hit bottom there last year. The Vermont numbers I've seen still show slight declines from last year.

Here's the latest map:

[hewhocaves]

One of the things that kind of confuses me is that there are no more "filling ins" in the northeast. Are we to take that to mean that every bat place in every county has been checked? Or, as is more likely, they're not looking for new places there. Looking at my old stomping grounds in NJ, I can think of three counties where I've seen significant bat pops in the winter (50+) in counties that, as of yet, have not been marked at WNS-positive.

Any ideas as to what is up with that?

John

[PYoungbaer]

In addition to the news from Kentucky today, three new counties, Fayette, Grant, and Randolph, were confirmed in West Virginia, plus a mine in a new area of Quebec (Abitibi-Témiscamingue). So far this winter, we've added new states of North Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, plus the province of New Brunswick, as well as additional sites in previously identified states and provinces.

In communications with state and federal officials yesterday and today, as well as a number of the academic researchers, an estimate of 1,240,000 bats had been lost to WNS as of early February. This estimate was put together for U.S. Senator Frank Lautenburg prior to his introduction of his wildlife emergency legislation.

This is site-specific population comparison data, as opposed to the extrapolation that resulted in the estimate of about a million bats put together by the people who convened in Austin, Texas, in 2009. Remember also that the big hits in New York and Vermont were already known at that time.

Many were uncomfortable with that methodology, but it was the best available at the time, as little baseline population data had been collected for any bat species in the northeast, other than the Indiana bat. I remember fielding a lot of questions early on when reporting some of the New England sites and reporting bat deaths- "how many were there before?" etc. We didn't know, in most cases.

This new methodology uses real data, but has other limitations, and is best characterized as conservative, if not understated. For example, Vermont sent statewide data, but New York 10-38 sites (not all surveyed every year); Massachusetts one site - it's largest hibernaculum; New Jersey three, Pennsylvania 6, etc. Methodologies vary by state, with the only common reporting being percentage decline figures. For the record, the overall percent decline was 86.5% (aggregate average of all sites and species).

There couldn't be better evidence for why the lack of good baseline data has been a problem in assessing the impact of WNS. Hopefully, other parts of the country can do better in compiling a good baseline prior to WNS arriving (or hope that it never does).

With many states delaying their surveys until later in the winter, data is still coming in from this year. An updated figure is expected by the WNS Symposium in Little Rock next month.

Here's tomorrow's map (tomorrow's date was put on, since an earlier map came out today with just Kentucky on it).

click on image to enlarge

[Evan G]

Thank you for the update Peter.

[dfcaver]

The old areas of the Northeast continue to fill in, although there's not a lot of monitoring by state officials this past winter and spring. Western Pennsylvania has added five or six additional counties this winter.

As far as current infection rates, Ruth Cave, in Huntingdon County, usually had bat counts of over 2000. This spring the count found about 500 remaining bats; the vast majority -over 400- of these survivors were individually infected. Almost no dead bats in the cave. It appears each colony will experience their own infection curve. Although Huntingdon County was noted as having WNS in January 2010, this appears to be the year for massive dieoff in Ruth Cave. Assuming, as we must, that the bats who are WNS positive to the naked eye will die, the percentage of total, from the typical pre WNS counts, will be in 90 to 95% area. From 2000 to less than 100. Unfortunately, most of the those are probably carriers, and will die next winter, after infecting others all summer.

[MUD]

The old areas of the Northeast continue to fill in, although there's not a lot of monitoring by state officials this past winter and spring. Western Pennsylvania has added five or six additional counties this winter.

As far as current infection rates, Ruth Cave, in Huntingdon County, usually had bat counts of over 2000. This spring the count found about 500 remaining bats; the vast majority -over 400- of these survivors were individually infected. Almost no dead bats in the cave. It appears each colony will experience their own infection curve. Although Huntingdon County was noted as having WNS in January 2010, this appears to be the year for massive dieoff in Ruth Cave. Assuming, as we must, that the bats who are WNS positive to the naked eye will die, the percentage of total, from the typical pre WNS counts, will be in 90 to 95% area. From 2000 to less than 100. Unfortunately, most of the those are probably carriers, and will die next winter, after infecting others all summer.

Is the cave open for visitation Derek?

[dfcaver]

Blue Hole Cave, Blair County - if I remember correctly, had bat counts of about 200 or so prior to WNS. This year, there is one bat remaining, located near the entrance. No sign of WNS on that individual. No carcasses noted, in or out of the cave.

[icave]

http://www.phillyburbs.com/my_town/new_ ... 0f31a.html
Speaking of PA die-offs, this one is really close to where I live. From 10,000 bats to 200 is a pretty sever decrease (98%).