90 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 
Series 4, Volume 65, Supplement I 
eastern California housing a wintering colony of about 2,000 of these bats has been successfully 
gated, resulting in increased use by bats (Henry, 2002), as has another mine in the area that was 
gated in 2006 (Brown, 2013). In Arizona, a wintering colony of about 400 individuals in an aban¬ 
doned mine being encroached upon by suburban sprawl near Phoenix has also been protected with 
bat-friendly gating (Corbett, 2008), as has a mine in the Trigo Mountains of the Lower Colorado 
River area that continues to serve as both a winter roost and a lek mating area in autumn since gat¬ 
ing in 2007 (Brown, 2013). In an analysis of the effects of bat gates on multiple species, Tobin 
(2016) concluded that California leaf-nosed bats continued using gated mines over the long-term, 
tolerated various gate designs, and that the landscape location and structural complexity of a mine 
were better predictors than gate characteristics in determining if this species would continue using 
a site after gating. 
California leaf-nosed bats will drink from artificial water sources provided in arid areas, but 
whether addition or removal of such water sources influences local populations remains unknown 
(Schmidt, 1999). 
King et al. (2001) reported on concentrations of potentially toxic elements and organochlo- 
rines in small numbers of bats sampled at two sites in Arizona (four samples for organochlorines) 
and California (five samples analyzed for organochlorines, six for metals) in 1998. None of the bats 
had concentrations of toxic elements indicative of harmful effects, and organochlorines were pres¬ 
ent only at very low concentrations. However, King et al. (2003) analyzed a larger sample of indi¬ 
viduals at former mine sites on the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge in 2001 and 2002, including two 
abandoned lead mines. They reported lead in carcasses and livers of these bats from the former lead 
mines at exceptionally high concentrations but were unable to directly link these high concentra¬ 
tions with impacts on the health of the bats. King et al. (2003) also found very high lead levels in 
the soils from the floor of these mines and hypothesized that the leaf-nosed bats were accumulat¬ 
ing lead though grooming lead particles from dust on the fur and from inhaling lead-contaminated 
dust within the min es. The analyses in this study also included up to 17 other toxic elements, but 
concentrations of these other elements were not considered to be elevated. 
Notes and Comments. — Natural history observations by Dr. Patricia Brown and colleagues 
strongly indicated that California leaf-nosed bats have a lek-based mating system: multiple males 
were seen to hang singly from small chambers in the ceilings of a mine, singing and displaying and 
chasing away other males, while females chose certain of these males for mating (Anonymous, 
1995). 
Myotis austroriparius — Southeastern myotis (Family Vespertilionidae) 
Conservation Status. — National and International Designations: U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (1994, 1996a,b): Species of Concern (inactive, former Category 2 candidate for listing 
under the U.S. Endangered Species Act). U.S. Forest Service (2005a,b): Sensitive Species. Inter¬ 
national Union for the Conservation of Nature (2017): Least Concern. NatureServe (2017): Round¬ 
ed Global Status G4, Apparently Secure. 
State Designations: Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (2015a,b): 
Priority 1 Species of Greatest Conservation Need, Highest Conservation Concern. Arkansas Game 
and Fish Commission (Fowler, 2015): Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Florida Fish and 
Wildlife Conservation Commission (2012): Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Georgia 
Department of Natural Resources (2015): High Priority Species. Illinois Department of Natural 
Resources (2015): State Endangered. Indiana Department of Natural Resources (2006,2015): Spe¬ 
cial Concern, Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife 
Resources (2013): Species of Greatest Conservation Need. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and 
