Action Synopsis: Bat Conservation About Actions

Exclude bats from roosts during building work

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
  • Certainty
  • Harms

Source countries

Key messages

  • One study evaluated the effects of excluding bats from roosts during building work on bat populations. The study was in the UK.



USAGE (1 STUDY)                                                 

  • Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in the UK found that excluding bats from roosts within buildings did not change roost switching frequency, core foraging areas or foraging preferences of soprano pipistrelle colonies.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, before-and-after study in 2012–2013 of five buildings across England, UK (Stone et al 2015) found that excluding bats from roosts within buildings resulted in no difference in roost switching frequency, core foraging areas or foraging preferences of soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus colonies. All five bat colonies established in alternative roosts within three days of exclusion in other buildings within 1.5 km of the original roost. Bats switched roosts at a similar frequency before (average every 2.1 days) and after exclusion (average 2 days). Bats also foraged in similar sized core areas (before: average 44 ha; after: average 47 ha), travelled similar distances to foraging sites (before: average 1.5 km, after: average 1.5 km), and had the same foraging habitat preferences (data reported as statistical model results) before and after exclusion. Exclusion experiments were carried out in the spring of 2012 and 2013. Temporary one-way exclusion measures were installed at roost exits. The five sites had 150–300 bats present before exclusion, and four sites were known maternity roosts. Bats were radiotracked for up to four hours after sunset for 4–7 days before and after exclusion.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2019) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.


Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Bat Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bat Conservation
What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation assesses the research looking at whether interventions are beneficial or not. It is based on summarised evidence in synopses, on topics such as amphibians, bats, biodiversity in European farmland, and control of freshwater invasive species. More are available and in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
Our Journal: Conservation Evidence

Our Journal:
Conservation Evidence

A unique, free to publish open-access journal publishing research and case studies that measure the effects of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 16

Special issues: Amphibian special issue

Go to the Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust