EUROBATS 6. Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects. Revision 2014 [1/1, 1 ed.] 9789295058309, 9789295058316

Citation preview

EUROBATS Publication Series No.

EUROBATS

6

Europe is faced with the need to tackle climate change and pollution and to find sustainable means to meet demands for energy generation. Thus the promotion of alternative methods for the production of energy such as wind power has been intensified. The low-emission production of wind energy brings benefits for the environment but on the other hand causes problems for wildlife, such as certain bat species. Therefore EUROBATS has developed guidelines for assessing potential impacts of wind turbines on bats and for planning, construction and operation of wind turbines in accordance with the ecological requirements of bat populations. A first version of the guidelines was published in 2008, having the primary purpose to raise awareness amongst developers and planners of the need to consider bats and their roosts, migration routes and foraging areas. Guidelines should also be of interest to local and national consenting authorities who are required to draw up strategic sustainable energy plans. Furthermore, it was a base for national guidelines that were subsequently published in several countries.

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects Revision 2014

A large amount of research has been carried out into the impacts of wind turbines on bats and the increased knowledge urged for this revision of the document. The revised guidelines are applicable to larger wind farm developments in urban as well as in rural areas, on the land as well as offshore. Some case studies were included to illustrate implementation of mitigation measures in some countries. Member countries should adapt these guidelines to their situation and prepare or update their national guidelines accordingly.

ISBN 978-92-95058-30-9 (printed version) ISBN 978-92-95058-31-6 (electronic version)

,2ODRIGUESs,"ACHs- *$UBOURG 3AVAGEs"+ARAPANDäA $+OVAC€s4+ERVYNs*$EKKERs!+EPELs0"ACHs*#OLLINS #(ARBUSCHs+0ARKs"-ICEVSKIs*-INDERMAN

2ODRIGUES , "ACH - * $UBOURG 3AVAGE " +ARAPANDäA $ +OVAC€ 4 +ERVYN *$EKKER !+EPEL 0"ACH *#OLLINS #(ARBUSCH +0ARK "-ICEVSKI *-INDERMAN (2015): Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects - Revision 2014. %52/"!430UBLICATION3ERIES.O%NGLISHVERSION 5.%0%52/"!433ECRETARIAT Bonn, Germany, 133 pp. 0RODUCEDBY #OORDINATOR %DITORS 0ROOFREADING $ESIGN





5.%0%52/"!43 3UREN'AZARYAN%52/"!433ECRETARIAT 3UREN'AZARYAN 4INE-EYER #ORDS *EAN-ATTHEWS 3ANDRA-ENZEL

¥!GREEMENTONTHE#ONSERVATIONOF0OPULATIONSOF%UROPEAN"ATS5.%0%52/"!43  This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowLEDGEMENTOFTHESOURCEISMADE5.%0%52/"!43WOULDAPPRECIATERECEIVINGACOPYOFANY publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose WHATSOEVERWITHOUTPRIORPERMISSIONINWRITINGFROM5.%0%52/"!43

#OPIESOFTHISPUBLICATIONAREAVAILABLEFROMTHE 5.%0%52/"!433ECRETARIAT 5NITED.ATIONS#AMPUS 0LATZDER6EREINTEN.ATIONEN 53113 Bonn, Germany Tel (+49) 228 815 24 21 Fax (+49) 228 815 24 45 E-mail [email protected] Web www.eurobats.org ISBN 978-92-95058-30-9 (printed version) ISBN 978-92-95058-31-6 (electronic version) Cover photo: Fiona Mathews, UK

UNEP promotes environmentally sound practices globally and in its own activities. This publication is printed on chlorine-free, FSCcertified, 60% recycled paper, using environmentally friendly practices. Our distribution policy aims to reduce UNEP's carbon footprint.

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

Contents 1

Foreword

6

Introduction

7

2

General aspects of the planning process

10

2.1

Site selection phase

10



#ONSTRUCTIONPHASE



2.3

Operation phase

13



$ECOMMISSIONINGPHASE



2.5

Micro- and small wind turbines

14



#ARRYINGOUTIMPACTASSESSMENTS



Goals of the impact assessment in relation to bats

17



0RE SURVEYASSESSMENT



#OLLATIONANDREVIEWOFEXISTINGINFORMATION



3.2

Survey

20

3.2.1

Survey design

20

3.2.2

Survey methods

3.2.2.1 Land-based wind turbines

21 21

3.2.2.2 Offshore wind turbines

23

3.2.2.3 Micro- and small wind turbines

24

3.2.3

Survey effort

24

3.2.4

Type of survey

25

3.2.4.1 Onshore survey a) Investigation of important roost sites

25 25

b) Bat detector surveys on the ground

25

c) Activity surveys at height

26

d) Equipment requirements

26

e) Timing of survey

27

Manual bat detector surveys from the ground

27

Automated bat detector survey at the proposed wind turbine locations

27

#ONTINUOUSAUTOMATEDBATDETECTORMONITORING Within all types of woodland

3.2.4.2 Offshore survey a) Surveys from land

 28 29 29

b) Surveys at sea

29

c) Timing of surveys

29

3

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

3.2.5

Survey report and evaluation

29



(OWEFFECTIVEARETHEMITIGATIONMEASURESTHATAREUSEDTODAY



2EPOWERING%XTENSION





(OWLARGEISTHEEFFECTONPOPULATIONS ESPECIALLYTHECUMULATIVEEFFECT

4

Monitoring the impacts

32



)NWHICHHABITATSLANDSCAPESWINDTURBINESSHOULDNOTBEALLOWEDDUE

6.6

What is the behaviour of bats migrating over large water bodies, especially seas? In what numbers do they exhibit this behaviour?

57

6.7

Small wind turbines

58

of wind farms? 4.1

Monitoring of activity at nacelle height

32

4.2

Monitoring of mortality

34

4.2.1

Searching for bat fatalities

34

A 3EARCHPLOTSIZE



4.2.2



55 56

b) Number of sampled wind turbines

35

c) Time interval between samples

35



#ONTENTOFNATIONALGUIDELINES



d) Monitoring schedule

35



$EVELOPINGNATIONALGUIDELINES



e) Search methods and recording results

35



#OMPLIANCEOFNATIONALGUIDELINESWITH%52/"!43'UIDELINES



Estimation of fatalities

36

7.3

The content of national guidelines

61

A #ARCASSREMOVALTRIALS



7.4

Adapting guidelines to local conditions

63

b) Searcher efficiency trials

36

7.5

Ensuring implementation of guidelines

64

c) Mortality estimators

38

D #UMULATIVEEFFECTS





#ONCLUSIONSANDFURTHERWORK





2EFERENCESFURTHERREADING



10

Glossary

79

5

Avoidance, mitigation and compensation

40

5.1

Fatalities

41

5.1.1

Avoidance

 0LANNINGOFSITELAYOUT

42 

 0REVENTIONOFROOSTSITESDESTRUCTIONWHILEBATSAREPRESENTWITHINTHEM



5.1.1.3 Elimination of attraction factors

43

5.1.2

to high collision rate?



Mitigation

5.1.2.1 Blade feathering and increase of cut-in wind speeds

44

81

Annex 1: Studies done in Europe

82

44

 $ETERRENTS







#OMPENSATION

Acknowledgements



,OSS$ETERIORATIONOF(ABITATS



5.2.1

Avoidance

49

5.2.2

Mitigation

49



#OMPENSATION





$ISTURBANCE



5.3.1

Avoidance

51

5.3.2

Mitigation

51

6

Research priorities

52

6.1

Why do bats collide with turbines?

52

6.2

What are the best methods to assess likely impacts on bats from wind

Annex 2: Reported bat fatalities in Europe (2003-2014)

124

Annex 3: Maximum foraging distances of species and height of flight

126

Annex 4: $ETECTABILITYCOEFFICIENTSTOCOMPAREACTIVITYINDICES

132

turbine construction during impact assessments and post-construction monitoring (Methodology development)?

4

54

5

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

3.2.5

Survey report and evaluation

29



(OWEFFECTIVEARETHEMITIGATIONMEASURESTHATAREUSEDTODAY



2EPOWERING%XTENSION





(OWLARGEISTHEEFFECTONPOPULATIONS ESPECIALLYTHECUMULATIVEEFFECT

4

Monitoring the impacts

32



)NWHICHHABITATSLANDSCAPESWINDTURBINESSHOULDNOTBEALLOWEDDUE

6.6

What is the behaviour of bats migrating over large water bodies, especially seas? In what numbers do they exhibit this behaviour?

57

6.7

Small wind turbines

58

of wind farms? 4.1

Monitoring of activity at nacelle height

32

4.2

Monitoring of mortality

34

4.2.1

Searching for bat fatalities

34

A 3EARCHPLOTSIZE



4.2.2



55 56

b) Number of sampled wind turbines

35

c) Time interval between samples

35



#ONTENTOFNATIONALGUIDELINES



d) Monitoring schedule

35



$EVELOPINGNATIONALGUIDELINES



e) Search methods and recording results

35



#OMPLIANCEOFNATIONALGUIDELINESWITH%52/"!43'UIDELINES



Estimation of fatalities

36

7.3

The content of national guidelines

61

A #ARCASSREMOVALTRIALS



7.4

Adapting guidelines to local conditions

63

b) Searcher efficiency trials

36

7.5

Ensuring implementation of guidelines

64

c) Mortality estimators

38

D #UMULATIVEEFFECTS





#ONCLUSIONSANDFURTHERWORK





2EFERENCESFURTHERREADING



10

Glossary

79

5

Avoidance, mitigation and compensation

40

5.1

Fatalities

41

5.1.1

Avoidance

 0LANNINGOFSITELAYOUT

42 

 0REVENTIONOFROOSTSITESDESTRUCTIONWHILEBATSAREPRESENTWITHINTHEM



5.1.1.3 Elimination of attraction factors

43

5.1.2

to high collision rate?



Mitigation

5.1.2.1 Blade feathering and increase of cut-in wind speeds

44

81

Annex 1: Studies done in Europe

82

44

 $ETERRENTS







#OMPENSATION

Acknowledgements



,OSS$ETERIORATIONOF(ABITATS



5.2.1

Avoidance

49

5.2.2

Mitigation

49



#OMPENSATION





$ISTURBANCE



5.3.1

Avoidance

51

5.3.2

Mitigation

51

6

Research priorities

52

6.1

Why do bats collide with turbines?

52

6.2

What are the best methods to assess likely impacts on bats from wind

Annex 2: Reported bat fatalities in Europe (2003-2014)

124

Annex 3: Maximum foraging distances of species and height of flight

126

Annex 4: $ETECTABILITYCOEFFICIENTSTOCOMPAREACTIVITYINDICES

132

turbine construction during impact assessments and post-construction monitoring (Methodology development)?

4

54

5

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

1 Introduction

Foreword Following Resolution 4.7, approved at the 4th 3ESSION OF THE -EETING OF 0ARTIES OF EUROBATS (Sofia, Bulgaria, 22–24 SepTEMBER  THE !DVISORY #OMMITTEE OF the Agreement was requested to assess the evidence regarding the impacts of wind turbines on bat populations. Also, if appropriate, to develop voluntary guidelines for assessing potential impacts on bats and for the construction of wind turbines, taking into account the ecological requirements of bat populations. In response to this request, an Intersessional Working Group (IWG) was established during the 9 th -EETING OF THE !DVISORY #OMMITTEE 6ILNIUS ,ITHUANIA n-AY 3OME members of this IWG volunteered to prepare guidelines for assessing potential impacts of wind turbines on bats, which were adopted at the 5th Session of the Meeting

6

OF 0ARTIES ,JUBLJANA 3LOVENIA n 3EPtember 2006) as an Annex to Resolution 5.6. Those guidelines were published in %52/"!43 0UBLICATION 3ERIES RODRIGUES et al. 2008). According to Resolution 6.12 of the 6 th 3ESSION OF THE -EETING OF 0ARTIES 0RAGUE #ZECH 2EPUBLIC n 3EPtember 2010), these guidelines (and any subsequently updated versions) should be the basis for national guidance to be developed and implemented, with consideration of the local environment. The guidelines have subsequently been updated and the revised version (this document) was adopted at the 7th Session of THE-EETINGOF0ARTIES"RUSSELS "ELGIUM 15–17 September 2014) as an Annex to Resolution 7.5. Terms highlighted in bold and italics are included in the Glossary.

0RESENTLY THEREAREBATSPECIESOCCURring in the EUROBATS area and listed under the Agreement. Bats are legally protected in all European countries. Those occurring in the EU countries are proTECTED BY THE (ABITATS $IRECTIVE ALL SPECIESARELISTEDIN!NNEX)6OFTHISDIRECTIVE (Member States are required to take the requisite measures to establish a system of strict protection for them in their natural range) and some of them additionally in Annex II (species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation). In addition, most species are redlisted in one or more countries in Europe and on the )5#.2ED,IST)5#.  Europe continues to be faced with the need to tackle climate change and environmental pollution and to find sustainable methods to meet demands for power production. The commitment to low-emission energy generation leads to an increased promotion of alternative methods, e.g. WINDPOWER FOLLOWING+YOTO0ROTOCOLAND $IRECTIVE%#OFTHE%UROPEAN0ARLIAMENTANDOFTHE#OUNCILOF!PRIL on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, amending and subseQUENTLY REPEALING $IRECTIVES %# AND %# &URTHERMORE THERE IS A growing public and political awareness to reduce or stop nuclear power production. Wind turbines have been described as a problem for birds for many years (WINKELMAN 1989, PHILLIPS 1994, REICHENBACH 2002). More recently, many studies have estab-

lished that wind turbines can have negative impacts on bats (e.g. A RNETT et al. 2008, BAERWALD & BARCLAY 2014, R YDELL et al. 2010a, L EHNERT et al. 2014). Bat mortality at WINDTURBINESOCCURSDUETOCOLLISIONAND or barotrauma (A RNETT et al. 2008, BAERWALD et al. 2008, G RODSKY et al. 2011, ROLLINS et al. 2012).

A common pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) found dead with broken skull under a wind turbine (Germany). © H. Schauer-Weisshahn & R. Brinkmann

There are various reasons for bat presence, and resulting fatalities, around wind TURBINES #LEARLY THE LOCATION OF THE TURbines is an important variable (e.g. DÜRR & BACH 2004). There are several European examples where an appropriate impact assessment has resulted in a wind turbine project being abandoned due to inappropriate siting with respect to bats. Annex 1 summarises studies done in Europe. At low wind speeds, insect flight and bat activity occur at higher altitude, in-

7

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

1 Introduction

Foreword Following Resolution 4.7, approved at the 4th 3ESSION OF THE -EETING OF 0ARTIES OF EUROBATS (Sofia, Bulgaria, 22–24 SepTEMBER  THE !DVISORY #OMMITTEE OF the Agreement was requested to assess the evidence regarding the impacts of wind turbines on bat populations. Also, if appropriate, to develop voluntary guidelines for assessing potential impacts on bats and for the construction of wind turbines, taking into account the ecological requirements of bat populations. In response to this request, an Intersessional Working Group (IWG) was established during the 9 th -EETING OF THE !DVISORY #OMMITTEE 6ILNIUS ,ITHUANIA n-AY 3OME members of this IWG volunteered to prepare guidelines for assessing potential impacts of wind turbines on bats, which were adopted at the 5th Session of the Meeting

6

OF 0ARTIES ,JUBLJANA 3LOVENIA n 3EPtember 2006) as an Annex to Resolution 5.6. Those guidelines were published in %52/"!43 0UBLICATION 3ERIES RODRIGUES et al. 2008). According to Resolution 6.12 of the 6 th 3ESSION OF THE -EETING OF 0ARTIES 0RAGUE #ZECH 2EPUBLIC n 3EPtember 2010), these guidelines (and any subsequently updated versions) should be the basis for national guidance to be developed and implemented, with consideration of the local environment. The guidelines have subsequently been updated and the revised version (this document) was adopted at the 7th Session of THE-EETINGOF0ARTIES"RUSSELS "ELGIUM 15–17 September 2014) as an Annex to Resolution 7.5. Terms highlighted in bold and italics are included in the Glossary.

0RESENTLY THEREAREBATSPECIESOCCURring in the EUROBATS area and listed under the Agreement. Bats are legally protected in all European countries. Those occurring in the EU countries are proTECTED BY THE (ABITATS $IRECTIVE ALL SPECIESARELISTEDIN!NNEX)6OFTHISDIRECTIVE (Member States are required to take the requisite measures to establish a system of strict protection for them in their natural range) and some of them additionally in Annex II (species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation). In addition, most species are redlisted in one or more countries in Europe and on the )5#.2ED,IST)5#.  Europe continues to be faced with the need to tackle climate change and environmental pollution and to find sustainable methods to meet demands for power production. The commitment to low-emission energy generation leads to an increased promotion of alternative methods, e.g. WINDPOWER FOLLOWING+YOTO0ROTOCOLAND $IRECTIVE%#OFTHE%UROPEAN0ARLIAMENTANDOFTHE#OUNCILOF!PRIL on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, amending and subseQUENTLY REPEALING $IRECTIVES %# AND %# &URTHERMORE THERE IS A growing public and political awareness to reduce or stop nuclear power production. Wind turbines have been described as a problem for birds for many years (WINKELMAN 1989, PHILLIPS 1994, REICHENBACH 2002). More recently, many studies have estab-

lished that wind turbines can have negative impacts on bats (e.g. A RNETT et al. 2008, BAERWALD & BARCLAY 2014, R YDELL et al. 2010a, L EHNERT et al. 2014). Bat mortality at WINDTURBINESOCCURSDUETOCOLLISIONAND or barotrauma (A RNETT et al. 2008, BAERWALD et al. 2008, G RODSKY et al. 2011, ROLLINS et al. 2012).

A common pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) found dead with broken skull under a wind turbine (Germany). © H. Schauer-Weisshahn & R. Brinkmann

There are various reasons for bat presence, and resulting fatalities, around wind TURBINES #LEARLY THE LOCATION OF THE TURbines is an important variable (e.g. DÜRR & BACH 2004). There are several European examples where an appropriate impact assessment has resulted in a wind turbine project being abandoned due to inappropriate siting with respect to bats. Annex 1 summarises studies done in Europe. At low wind speeds, insect flight and bat activity occur at higher altitude, in-

7

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

creasing the potential presence of bats near rotating blades. Security lights at the bottom of tower, the colour of wind turbines and acoustic effects are also suspected to attract flying insects and BATS INTO THE RISK ZONE H ORN et al. 2008, R YDELL et al. 2010b, L ONG et al. 2011). It has been suggested that lights for civil aviation above the nacelle may also attract bats, but B ENNET & H ALE (2014) rejected this hypothesis. Furthermore, the outer extremities of the blades may reach SPEEDSASHIGHAS KMH MAKING them totally undetectable for echolocating bats (L ONG et al. 2009, 2010a). In addition to the risk of direct collision, the wake effect drastically modifies the air pressure in the vicinity of the rotating BLADES ENLARGINGTHERISKZONEANDCAUSing fatal barotraumas to flying bats (BAER WALD et al. 2008). Altogether 27 European bat species have been found as casualties beneath turbines (Annex 2). Adequate avoidance and mitigation measures taking these risks into account should be included in the environmental impact as-

sessment and in the permit delivered by authorities before the operating phase (see #HAPTER). A first version of the guidelines was published in 2008, having the primary purpose of raising awareness amongst developers and planners of the need to consider bats and their roosts, migration routes and feeding areas when they are assessing applications for wind turbines. Guidelines should also be of interest to local and national consenting authorities who are required to draw up strategic sustainable energy plans. Furthermore, it was a base for national guidelines that were subsequently published in several countries. A large amount of research has been carried out into the impacts of wind turbines on bats and the increased knowledge justifies the update of this document. These guidelines are applicable to larger wind farm developments in urban as well as rural areas, on the land as well as offshore. Small wind turbines (SWT) are briefly mentioned, including an over-

view of the types of issues that need to be considered. Some case studies were included to illustrate implementing of mitigation measures in some countries. Member countries should adapt these guidelines to their situation and prepare or update their national guidelines accordingly. 4AKING INTO CONSIDERATION THAT 0ARTIES of the EUROBATS Agreement are committed to the common goal of conserving bats throughout Europe, in situations where bat migration routes cross borders, any strategic environmental assessment (SEA) or environmental impact assessment (EIA) of wind energy plans and projects with the potential for cross boundary impacts should seek international co-operation from other governments.

It has been suggested that bats may be attracted to insects around wind turbines: swarming ants caught in sticky insect trap (right photo) installed at the nacelle (left photo) in Sweden. © J. Rydell

8

9

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

creasing the potential presence of bats near rotating blades. Security lights at the bottom of tower, the colour of wind turbines and acoustic effects are also suspected to attract flying insects and BATS INTO THE RISK ZONE H ORN et al. 2008, R YDELL et al. 2010b, L ONG et al. 2011). It has been suggested that lights for civil aviation above the nacelle may also attract bats, but B ENNET & H ALE (2014) rejected this hypothesis. Furthermore, the outer extremities of the blades may reach SPEEDSASHIGHAS KMH MAKING them totally undetectable for echolocating bats (L ONG et al. 2009, 2010a). In addition to the risk of direct collision, the wake effect drastically modifies the air pressure in the vicinity of the rotating BLADES ENLARGINGTHERISKZONEANDCAUSing fatal barotraumas to flying bats (BAER WALD et al. 2008). Altogether 27 European bat species have been found as casualties beneath turbines (Annex 2). Adequate avoidance and mitigation measures taking these risks into account should be included in the environmental impact as-

sessment and in the permit delivered by authorities before the operating phase (see #HAPTER). A first version of the guidelines was published in 2008, having the primary purpose of raising awareness amongst developers and planners of the need to consider bats and their roosts, migration routes and feeding areas when they are assessing applications for wind turbines. Guidelines should also be of interest to local and national consenting authorities who are required to draw up strategic sustainable energy plans. Furthermore, it was a base for national guidelines that were subsequently published in several countries. A large amount of research has been carried out into the impacts of wind turbines on bats and the increased knowledge justifies the update of this document. These guidelines are applicable to larger wind farm developments in urban as well as rural areas, on the land as well as offshore. Small wind turbines (SWT) are briefly mentioned, including an over-

view of the types of issues that need to be considered. Some case studies were included to illustrate implementing of mitigation measures in some countries. Member countries should adapt these guidelines to their situation and prepare or update their national guidelines accordingly. 4AKING INTO CONSIDERATION THAT 0ARTIES of the EUROBATS Agreement are committed to the common goal of conserving bats throughout Europe, in situations where bat migration routes cross borders, any strategic environmental assessment (SEA) or environmental impact assessment (EIA) of wind energy plans and projects with the potential for cross boundary impacts should seek international co-operation from other governments.

It has been suggested that bats may be attracted to insects around wind turbines: swarming ants caught in sticky insect trap (right photo) installed at the nacelle (left photo) in Sweden. © J. Rydell

8

9

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

2 General aspects of the planning process

2008, BAERWALD et al. 2008, GRODSKY et al. 2011, ROLLINS et al. 2012). The reasons that bats fly close to turbines and collide with

them are numerous (see #HAPTER #LEARLY the location of the turbines in relation to bat habitat is an important factor (Table 1).

Table 1: Most important impacts related to the siting of wind turbines, from Bach & Rahmel (2004).

0LANNING IS USUALLY ORGANISED AT THE LOCAL or regional level, and each locality or region has its own strategies to deal with a broad range of planning issues, including economic development, transport, housING ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY 0LANNING POLICIESSTRATEGIESREGARDINGWINDTURBINES need to address various environmental factors. Bats should be considered in higher level regional planning when designating priority areas for wind energy. Modelling may be a powerful tool in some cases at this regional planning level (ROSCIONI et al. 2013, 2014, SANTOS et al. 2013). Since bats are present almost everywhere and bat mortality at wind turbines is recorded in nearly all types of landscapes, it is likely that bats will be affected by most wind farm developments. Therefore, competent authorities issuing permits and decisions on environmental conditions for wind energy projects should require an appropriate impact assessment for bats (which may or may not be part of a formalised, legal SEA or EIA process) to be carried out before they grant permission for the plan or project. It is also necessary to adopt policies and practices that reflect the experience gained at existing wind turbine sites to ensure that bat populations are not threatened. The aim of an impact assessment is to assess possible impacts on local and migrating bat populations, as well as to design site-specific avoidance

10

or mitigation measures and monitoring programmes. #OMPETENTAUTHORITIESCANREGULATETHE construction and operation of wind turbines by means of planning and operation CONDITIONS ANDOR PLANNING OBLIGATIONS These conditions and obligations can apPLY TO A RANGE OF ISSUES INCLUDING SIZE layout, and location of the project, and temporal curtailment of turbines. When assessing planning applications for wind turbines and when drawing up conditions or obligations, planners should be mindful of impacts such as fatalities, disturbance to bats, severance of roosts from foraging areas, severance of commuting or migrationROUTES ANDORHABITATLOSSORDAMAGE Authorities should also require that the impacts of the turbines on bat populations are monitored during the post-construction phase. The strategy to reduce impacts should be based first on avoidance of impact, then minimisation (or mitigation) of impacts, and finally compensation of residual effects, in that order. This is known as the mitigation hierarchy. Every phase of wind turbine developments (pre-, during and post-construction) can have an impact on bats to a greater or lesser extent. 2.1 Site selection phase Bat mortality at wind turbines occurs due TO COLLISION ANDOR BAROTRAUMA ARNETT et al.

Impacts related to siting Impact

Summer time

During migration

Loss of hunting habitats during Small to medium impact, de- Small impact. construction of access roads, pending on the site and spefoundations, etc.

cies present at that site.

Loss of roost sites due to con- 0ROBABLY HIGH OR VERY HIGH (IGH OR VERY HIGH IMPACT struction of access roads, foun- impact, depending on the site e.g. loss of mating roosts. dations, etc.

and species present at that site.

$EVELOPERSSHOULDCONSIDERLOCATINGWIND turbines away from narrow bat migration and commuting routes as well as from areas where bats gather for foraging and roosting. Wind turbines may act as landmarks during migration or commuting, which could exacerbate the problem of COLLISION "UFFER ZONES SHOULD BE CREATED around nationally and regionally important roosts. The presence of habitats likely to be utilised by bats during their life cycle such as forests, trees, hedgerow networks, wetlands, waterbodies, watercourses and mountain passes should be taken into account. The presence of these habitats will increase the likelihood of bat presence. For example, large river corridors may serve as migration routes for bats such as Nyctalus noctula or Pipistrellus nathusii (OWEVER even at wind farms in large, open, agricul-

tural areas, high levels of bat mortality still occur (BRINKMANN et al. 2011). Information on habitats and locations where wind turbines may have an impact would aid decision making. In European countries, many wind turbines originally proposed at inappropriate locations where impacts on bats would have occurred have not subsequently been built due to appropriate impact assessment. For instance, wind turbine projects NEAR THE INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED HIBERNACULAOF-ONTAGNE3AINT 0IERRE3INT 0IETERSBERGATTHE"ELGIAN $UTCHBORDERWERE refused by authorities for bat conservation reasons. Wind turbines should not be installed within all types of woodland or within 200 m due to the high risk of fatalities (DÜRR 2007, K ELM et al. 2014) and the severe im-

11

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

2 General aspects of the planning process

2008, BAERWALD et al. 2008, GRODSKY et al. 2011, ROLLINS et al. 2012). The reasons that bats fly close to turbines and collide with

them are numerous (see #HAPTER #LEARLY the location of the turbines in relation to bat habitat is an important factor (Table 1).

Table 1: Most important impacts related to the siting of wind turbines, from Bach & Rahmel (2004).

0LANNING IS USUALLY ORGANISED AT THE LOCAL or regional level, and each locality or region has its own strategies to deal with a broad range of planning issues, including economic development, transport, housING ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY 0LANNING POLICIESSTRATEGIESREGARDINGWINDTURBINES need to address various environmental factors. Bats should be considered in higher level regional planning when designating priority areas for wind energy. Modelling may be a powerful tool in some cases at this regional planning level (ROSCIONI et al. 2013, 2014, SANTOS et al. 2013). Since bats are present almost everywhere and bat mortality at wind turbines is recorded in nearly all types of landscapes, it is likely that bats will be affected by most wind farm developments. Therefore, competent authorities issuing permits and decisions on environmental conditions for wind energy projects should require an appropriate impact assessment for bats (which may or may not be part of a formalised, legal SEA or EIA process) to be carried out before they grant permission for the plan or project. It is also necessary to adopt policies and practices that reflect the experience gained at existing wind turbine sites to ensure that bat populations are not threatened. The aim of an impact assessment is to assess possible impacts on local and migrating bat populations, as well as to design site-specific avoidance

10

or mitigation measures and monitoring programmes. #OMPETENTAUTHORITIESCANREGULATETHE construction and operation of wind turbines by means of planning and operation CONDITIONS ANDOR PLANNING OBLIGATIONS These conditions and obligations can apPLY TO A RANGE OF ISSUES INCLUDING SIZE layout, and location of the project, and temporal curtailment of turbines. When assessing planning applications for wind turbines and when drawing up conditions or obligations, planners should be mindful of impacts such as fatalities, disturbance to bats, severance of roosts from foraging areas, severance of commuting or migrationROUTES ANDORHABITATLOSSORDAMAGE Authorities should also require that the impacts of the turbines on bat populations are monitored during the post-construction phase. The strategy to reduce impacts should be based first on avoidance of impact, then minimisation (or mitigation) of impacts, and finally compensation of residual effects, in that order. This is known as the mitigation hierarchy. Every phase of wind turbine developments (pre-, during and post-construction) can have an impact on bats to a greater or lesser extent. 2.1 Site selection phase Bat mortality at wind turbines occurs due TO COLLISION ANDOR BAROTRAUMA ARNETT et al.

Impacts related to siting Impact

Summer time

During migration

Loss of hunting habitats during Small to medium impact, de- Small impact. construction of access roads, pending on the site and spefoundations, etc.

cies present at that site.

Loss of roost sites due to con- 0ROBABLY HIGH OR VERY HIGH (IGH OR VERY HIGH IMPACT struction of access roads, foun- impact, depending on the site e.g. loss of mating roosts. dations, etc.

and species present at that site.

$EVELOPERSSHOULDCONSIDERLOCATINGWIND turbines away from narrow bat migration and commuting routes as well as from areas where bats gather for foraging and roosting. Wind turbines may act as landmarks during migration or commuting, which could exacerbate the problem of COLLISION "UFFER ZONES SHOULD BE CREATED around nationally and regionally important roosts. The presence of habitats likely to be utilised by bats during their life cycle such as forests, trees, hedgerow networks, wetlands, waterbodies, watercourses and mountain passes should be taken into account. The presence of these habitats will increase the likelihood of bat presence. For example, large river corridors may serve as migration routes for bats such as Nyctalus noctula or Pipistrellus nathusii (OWEVER even at wind farms in large, open, agricul-

tural areas, high levels of bat mortality still occur (BRINKMANN et al. 2011). Information on habitats and locations where wind turbines may have an impact would aid decision making. In European countries, many wind turbines originally proposed at inappropriate locations where impacts on bats would have occurred have not subsequently been built due to appropriate impact assessment. For instance, wind turbine projects NEAR THE INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED HIBERNACULAOF-ONTAGNE3AINT 0IERRE3INT 0IETERSBERGATTHE"ELGIAN $UTCHBORDERWERE refused by authorities for bat conservation reasons. Wind turbines should not be installed within all types of woodland or within 200 m due to the high risk of fatalities (DÜRR 2007, K ELM et al. 2014) and the severe im-

11

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

pact on habitat such siting can cause for all bat species. Mature broad-leaved forests are the most important bat habitats in Europe both in terms of species diversity and abundance (e.g. WALSH & HARRIS 1996a, b, MESCHEDE & HELLER 2000, RUSSO & JONES 2003, KUSCH & SCHOTTE 2007), but also young forests or monoculture conifer forest can support a considerable bat fauna (BARATAUD et al. 2013, KIRKPARTRICK et al. 2014, WOJCIUCH-PLOSKONKA & BOBEK 2014). When wind farms are constructed within forests, it is often necessary to fell trees to clear ground for the construction of the wind turbines and supporting infrastructure. This could potentially result in a significant loss of roosts. Also, the consequent increase in forest edge habitats will improve foraging potential for bats (KUSCH et al. 2004, MÜLLER et al. 2013, WALSH & HARRIS 1996a, b), which could lead to an increase in bat activity closer to the wind turbines and further increase the risk of fatalities. Furthermore, such large changes in the habitat reduce the efficacy of the pre-construction studies in predicting the likely impacts of the development on bats. In Northern European countries with high forest cover it may be necessary to include forests in the selection of sites for wind farms because of the lack of alternative locations. The importance of such areas for bat populations needs to be considered at a strategic level during the planning process. In these circumstances, particular attention should be paid to national guidance and to the planning process so that wind turbines are not sited in areas important for bats.

12

Wind farm in the Black Forest in Germany. A local population of common pipistrelle (P. pipistrellus) was affected by these wind turbines, as well as migrating species such as Leisler‘s bat (Nyctalus leisleri). © H. SchauerWeisshahn & R. Brinkmann

$ESPITETHERECOMMENDATIONTHATWINDTURbines should not be installed within all types of woodland or within 200 m, as clearly expressed in the previous version of these guidelines (and maintained and further supported in this version), wind farms have been allowed and are already operating in forests, albeit in a few European countries. Therefore, reluctantly, guidance for survey (see #HAPTER ), monitoring (see #HAPTER ) and mitigation (see #HAPTER ) for wind turbines in forests is provided in these guidelines, and following these strictly is even more demanding than for other more acceptable locations, because of the increased risks to bats in this type of siting. Buffer zones of 200 m should also apply to other habitats which are specifically important for bats, such as tree lines, hedgerow networks, wetlands, waterbodies and watercourses (e.g. LIMPENS et al. 1989,

LIMPENS & KAPTEYN 1991, DE JONG 1995, VERBOOM & HUITEMA 1997, WALSH & HARRIS 1996a, b, KELM et al. 2014), as well as to any areas where high bat activity has been determined by impact assessment. Low levels of bat activity prior to construction cannot reliably indicate that there will be no impact on bats post-construction because bat activity can change due to the presence of the wind turbines and supporting infrastructure, as well as from year to year. The buffer distance should be measured from the outer range of blades, not from the axis of the tower.

species will also play a part, as some coldtolerant bat species are much more active during winter than others. The construction of the wind turbines and all supporting infrastructure for the wind farm, including turbine bases, crane pads, temporary or permanent access roads, cables for grid connection and buildings, should all be considered as potential sources of disturbance or damage. #ONSTRUCTIONSHOULDTAKEPLACEATAPPROpriate times to minimise impacts of noise, vibrations, lighting and other related disturBANCEONBATS#ONSTRUCTIONACTIVITYSHOULD 2.2 Construction phase be clearly delineated in any plan to ensure #ONSTRUCTION PHASE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE LIKE- operations are restricted to least sensitive ly to have an impact on bats should be times in that area. planned, whenever possible, for times of Reports also mention the use of the naTHE DAYYEAR WHEN THEY NOT IMPACT BATS celles by bats as roosts. Gaps and intersticThis requires local knowledge about the es of the turbines should therefore be made bat species present in the area, knowledge inaccessible to bats. of the presence of hibernacula and maternity roosts, and an understanding of their 2.3 Operational phase annual life cycle. A typical year in the life $EPENDING ON THE LOCALITY AND PREDICTED of bats in Europe involves a period when level of impact (Table 2), consideration they are active and a period when they are should be given to the use of planning in hibernation. In central Europe generally and operational conditions on developbats are active from April to October and ment permissions for wind farm projects they are usually less active or in hibernation to restrict the operation of wind turbines from November to March, but in the warm- at times of peak bat activity such as durer south and in the maritime climate of the ing the autumn migration and swarming west, hibernation only occurs from mid- PERIODS0OSSIBLEPLANNINGANDOPERATIONAL $ECEMBER TO &EBRUARY AND IN SOME MILD conditions could include shutting down winters some populations do not hibernate the turbines during the night during critical at all). Timing of activity and hibernation periods of the year. Examples are given in will vary according to geographical loca- #HAPTER. tion (latitude and altitude) and also from one year to the next, depending on ambient weather conditions. Behaviour of some

13

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

pact on habitat such siting can cause for all bat species. Mature broad-leaved forests are the most important bat habitats in Europe both in terms of species diversity and abundance (e.g. WALSH & HARRIS 1996a, b, MESCHEDE & HELLER 2000, RUSSO & JONES 2003, KUSCH & SCHOTTE 2007), but also young forests or monoculture conifer forest can support a considerable bat fauna (BARATAUD et al. 2013, KIRKPARTRICK et al. 2014, WOJCIUCH-PLOSKONKA & BOBEK 2014). When wind farms are constructed within forests, it is often necessary to fell trees to clear ground for the construction of the wind turbines and supporting infrastructure. This could potentially result in a significant loss of roosts. Also, the consequent increase in forest edge habitats will improve foraging potential for bats (KUSCH et al. 2004, MÜLLER et al. 2013, WALSH & HARRIS 1996a, b), which could lead to an increase in bat activity closer to the wind turbines and further increase the risk of fatalities. Furthermore, such large changes in the habitat reduce the efficacy of the pre-construction studies in predicting the likely impacts of the development on bats. In Northern European countries with high forest cover it may be necessary to include forests in the selection of sites for wind farms because of the lack of alternative locations. The importance of such areas for bat populations needs to be considered at a strategic level during the planning process. In these circumstances, particular attention should be paid to national guidance and to the planning process so that wind turbines are not sited in areas important for bats.

12

Wind farm in the Black Forest in Germany. A local population of common pipistrelle (P. pipistrellus) was affected by these wind turbines, as well as migrating species such as Leisler‘s bat (Nyctalus leisleri). © H. SchauerWeisshahn & R. Brinkmann

$ESPITETHERECOMMENDATIONTHATWINDTURbines should not be installed within all types of woodland or within 200 m, as clearly expressed in the previous version of these guidelines (and maintained and further supported in this version), wind farms have been allowed and are already operating in forests, albeit in a few European countries. Therefore, reluctantly, guidance for survey (see #HAPTER ), monitoring (see #HAPTER ) and mitigation (see #HAPTER ) for wind turbines in forests is provided in these guidelines, and following these strictly is even more demanding than for other more acceptable locations, because of the increased risks to bats in this type of siting. Buffer zones of 200 m should also apply to other habitats which are specifically important for bats, such as tree lines, hedgerow networks, wetlands, waterbodies and watercourses (e.g. LIMPENS et al. 1989,

LIMPENS & KAPTEYN 1991, DE JONG 1995, VERBOOM & HUITEMA 1997, WALSH & HARRIS 1996a, b, KELM et al. 2014), as well as to any areas where high bat activity has been determined by impact assessment. Low levels of bat activity prior to construction cannot reliably indicate that there will be no impact on bats post-construction because bat activity can change due to the presence of the wind turbines and supporting infrastructure, as well as from year to year. The buffer distance should be measured from the outer range of blades, not from the axis of the tower.

species will also play a part, as some coldtolerant bat species are much more active during winter than others. The construction of the wind turbines and all supporting infrastructure for the wind farm, including turbine bases, crane pads, temporary or permanent access roads, cables for grid connection and buildings, should all be considered as potential sources of disturbance or damage. #ONSTRUCTIONSHOULDTAKEPLACEATAPPROpriate times to minimise impacts of noise, vibrations, lighting and other related disturBANCEONBATS#ONSTRUCTIONACTIVITYSHOULD 2.2 Construction phase be clearly delineated in any plan to ensure #ONSTRUCTION PHASE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE LIKE- operations are restricted to least sensitive ly to have an impact on bats should be times in that area. planned, whenever possible, for times of Reports also mention the use of the naTHE DAYYEAR WHEN THEY NOT IMPACT BATS celles by bats as roosts. Gaps and intersticThis requires local knowledge about the es of the turbines should therefore be made bat species present in the area, knowledge inaccessible to bats. of the presence of hibernacula and maternity roosts, and an understanding of their 2.3 Operational phase annual life cycle. A typical year in the life $EPENDING ON THE LOCALITY AND PREDICTED of bats in Europe involves a period when level of impact (Table 2), consideration they are active and a period when they are should be given to the use of planning in hibernation. In central Europe generally and operational conditions on developbats are active from April to October and ment permissions for wind farm projects they are usually less active or in hibernation to restrict the operation of wind turbines from November to March, but in the warm- at times of peak bat activity such as durer south and in the maritime climate of the ing the autumn migration and swarming west, hibernation only occurs from mid- PERIODS0OSSIBLEPLANNINGANDOPERATIONAL $ECEMBER TO &EBRUARY AND IN SOME MILD conditions could include shutting down winters some populations do not hibernate the turbines during the night during critical at all). Timing of activity and hibernation periods of the year. Examples are given in will vary according to geographical loca- #HAPTER. tion (latitude and altitude) and also from one year to the next, depending on ambient weather conditions. Behaviour of some

13

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

Table 2: Most important potential impacts related to the operation of wind turbines, adapted from Bach & Rahmel (2004).

Impacts related to operating the wind farm Impact

Summer time

During migration

Loss or shifting of flight corridors

Medium impact

Small impact

Fatalities

Small to high impact, depending on the species

(IGHTOVERYHIGHIMPACT

Wind turbines and their immediate surroundings should be managed and maintained in such a manner that they do not attract insects (suggested measures to accomplish this recommendation are indicated in 5.1.1.3).

height and swept area) and design varies greatly, so their exact number is difficult TO ESTABLISH (OWEVER THE 7ORLD 7IND %Nergy Association (WWEA) reports that up to 650,000 SWTs of capacity 25, up to the canopy and above

60, 64, 67, 68

Yes, no

11, 12, 30, 34, 35, 64, 68, 71

Yes, no

usually 1,5

(foraging and direct flight)

25

above canopy, >25, canopy and above (foraging and direct flight)

Miniopterus schreibersii Tadarida teniotis

30 to 40

2-5 (foraging) and open sky (transit), >25

8, 30, 41, 40, 64

Yes, no

0ORTUGAL 

10-300

44, 9, 10, 30

Yes

3WITZERLAND

127

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

Annex 3: Maximum foraging distances of species and height of flight

In the framework of the Environmental Im-

Species

pact Assessment of wind farm projects, it is

Max foraging distance

Height of flight (m)

References

(km)

Radio-tracking studies

important to know the maximum distance at

Nyctalus noctula

26

10 to a few hundred

1, 7, 30, 65

Yes, no

which the different species have been encoun-

Nyctalus leisleri

17

above canopy,   FORAGINGDIRECTmIGHT

5, 6, 30, 32, 42, 45, 64, 65, 68

Yes, no

tered while foraging and the height at which

Nyctalus lasiopterus

90

TELESCOPERADAR

2, 3, 4, 30

Yes

Pipistrellus nathusii

12

 FORAGING  MIGRATION >25, foraging above

43, 45, 46, 47, 30, 64, 65, 68

Yes, no

Pipistrellus pygmaeus

1,7 (mean radius)

up to the rotor, occasionally >25, >40-50 in direct flight

20, 30, 64, 65, 68

Yes, no

Pipistrellus pipistrellus

5,1

up to the rotor, >25, >40-50 in direct flight

21, 61, 65, 68

.OCHEMILUMINESCENT

no information

 UPTOAFEWHUNDRED >25

30, 64, 65

?

>100

33, 37, 64, 65

No, no

5-7,12

50 (up to the rotor), >25, forages above canopy,

13, 14, 15, 16, 30, 62, 64, 65, 68

Yes, no

they can fly. The following table updates the

CANOPY INDIRECTmIGHT

information for the different bat species which have been killed by wind turbines. For most species the information comes from radio tracking studies (except data in blue) and the references cited are listed below the table. As the maximum distance can vary according to the individual status or the season, different

tags, no

Pipistrellus kuhlii Hypsugo savii Eptesicus serotinus

values are indicated.

Yes, no

>40-50 in direct flight ?

?

?

?

Eptesicus nilssonii

 BREEDINGPERIOD 

FORAGINGDIRECTmIGHT

51, 52, 64, 65, 68, 72

Yes

Vespertilio murinus

6,2 Ƃ ƃ

20-40, ABOVECANOPYFORAGING  DIRECTmIGHT

48, 49, 64, 65, 68

Yes, no

Myotis myotis

25

 DIRECTmIGHTINOPENSKYINTRANSIT 

26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 64, 68

Yes, no

3CHREBER  'ROSSER !BENDSEGLER )N +RAPP &

Myotis blythii

26

1-15

22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30

Yes

%D (ANDBUCHDER3ËUGETIERE%UROPAS &LEDERTIERE

Myotis punicus

mean 6, up to 16,5

< 2 (foraging), probably 100 commuting from

69, 70, 71

Yes

 

no information ?

17, 18, 30, 33, 36, 38, 39

Yes

12, 30, 31, 38, 39, 68

Yes, no

Eptesicus isabellinus

afterwards

References 1

GEBHARD, J. & W. BOGDANOWICZ (2004): Nyctalus noctula

up to 40 (50) in direct flight

ridge to ridge

#HIROPTERA ))!ULA6ERLAG 7IEBELSHEIM  2

POPA-LISSEANU, A.G. (2007): Roosting behaviour, for-

Myotis emarginatus

aging ecology and enigmatic dietary habits of the

Myotis bechsteinii

2,5

1-5 and in the canopy, sometimes above canopy

Myotis dasycneme

FROMNURSERY 

2-5 (up to the rotor)

  

Yes

1-5, FORAGESUPTOTHECANOPYSOMETIMESABOVEIN

57, 58, 68

Yes, no

49, 54, 55, 68

?, no

55, 56, 68

Yes, no

(direct flight)

aerial-hawking bat Nyctalus lasiopterus0H$4HESIS Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain. 3

IBAÑEZ, A., A. GUILLÉN & W. BOGDANOWICZ (2004): Nycta-

(spring and autumn)

Myotis daubentonii

10 Ƃƃ

lus lasiopterus (Schreber, 1780) - Riesenabendsegler   )N +RAPP & %D  (ANDBUCH DER 3ËUGETIERE

direct flight

Myotis brandtii

10

%UROPAS &LEDERTIERE#HIROPTERA ))!ULA6ERLAG 7IEbelsheim: 695-716. 4

flight

Myotis mystacinus

2OOSTUTILIZATIONOFANURBANPARKBYTHEGREATERNOCT-

Plecotus auritus

ule, Nyctalus lasiopterus, in Spain. Abstracts for the

Plecotus austriacus

SCHORCHT, W.   :UM NËCHTLICHEN 6ERHALTEN VON Nyctalus leisleri. Schriftenr. Landschaftspf. NaturSCHUTZ 

126

up to 15 in the canopy, UPTOCANOPYFORAGING  sometimes above in direct flight

TH)NTERNATIONAL"AT#ONFERENCEIN0OLAND-U-

5

2,8

POPA-LISSEANU, A.G., C. IBAÑEZ, O. MORA & C. RUIZ (2004):

SEUMAND)NSTITUTEOF:OOLOGY0!3 6ARSOVIE

up to the canopy FORAGING SOMETIMESABOVEINDIRECT

Barbastella barbastellus

2,2-3,3

up to the canopy and above (foraging and direct flight)

59, 68

Yes, no

regularly up to 7,

exceptionally >25, up to the canopy and above

60, 64, 67, 68

Yes, no

11, 12, 30, 34, 35, 64, 68, 71

Yes, no

usually 1,5

(foraging and direct flight)

25

above canopy, >25, canopy and above (foraging and direct flight)

Miniopterus schreibersii Tadarida teniotis

30 to 40

2-5 (foraging) and open sky (transit), >25

8, 30, 41, 40, 64

Yes, no

0ORTUGAL 

10-300

44, 9, 10, 30

Yes

3WITZERLAND

127

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

6

WATERS, D., G. JONES & M. FURLONG (1999): Foraging

serotine bat (Eptesicus serotinus) in southern Eng-

Bouches-du-Rhône. Bilan sur deux années : été 2002

ecology of Leisler´s bat (Nyctalus leisleri) at two sites

LAND*:OOL 

ETÏTÏ2APPORTFINALPOURLA$)2%.0!#! PP

INSOUTHERN"RITAIN*:OOL  7

8

Basel, 381 pp.

26 A RLETTAZ, R. (1995): Ecology of the sibling mouse-

38 MESCHEDE, A. & K.-G. HELLER (2000): Ökologie und

K RONWITTER, F.   0OPULATION STRUCTURE HABITAT

First results in radio-tracking Geoffroy’s bats Myo-

eared bats, Myotis myotis and Myotis blythii (ORUS

3CHUTZ VON &LEDERMËUSEN IN 7ËLDERN UNDER BESON-

use and activity patterns of the noctule bat, Nyctalus

tis emarginatus IN #ENTRE REGION &RANCE !BSTRACTS

Eds. Martigny, Suisse, 206 pp.

derer Berücksichtigung wandernder Arten. Schrift-

noctula, revealed by radio-tracking. Myotis 26: 23-85.

of the IXth European Bat Research Symposium, Le

NÉMOZ, M., A. BRISORGUEIL et al. #ONNAISSANCEET

(AVRE

#ONSERVATIONDESGÔTESETHABITATSDECHASSEDE#HI-

18 K RULL, D., A. SCHUMM, W. METZNER & G. NEUWEILER (1991):

roptères cavernicoles: Rhinolophe euryale, Murin de

Foraging areas and foraging behavior in the notch-

#APACCINI ET -INIOPTÒRE DE 3CHREIBERS 3&%0- PRO-

eared bat, Myotis emarginatus. Behav. Ecol. Socio-

GRAMME ,)&% .!452% ,)&%.!4&2 0ARIS

biol. 28: 247-253.

104 pp. 9

17 HUET, R., M. L EMAIRE, L. A RTHUR & N. D EL GUIDICE (2002):

37 GEBHARD, J.   &LEDERMËUSE "IRKHAUSER 6ERLAG

19 A RNOLD, A. & M. BRAUN (2002): Telemetrische Untersu-

27 D RESCHER, C. (2004): Radiotracking of Myotis myo-

39 ROUÉ, S. Y. & M. BARATAUD   (ABITATS ET ACTIVITÏ

implications for its conservation. Mammalia 68: 387-

nocturne des chiroptères menacés en Europe: syn-

395.

thèse des connaissances en vue d’une gestion con-

28 GÜTTINGER, R.   *AGDHABITATE DES 'RO”EN -AUsohrs (Myotis myotis IN DER MODERNEN +ULTURLANDschaft. Schriftenr. Umwelt 288: 1-138.

A RLETTAZ, R. #ONTRIBUTIONÌL|ÏCO ÏTHOLOGIEDU

chungen an Rauhhautfledermäusen (Pipistrellus na-

29 RUDOLPH, B.-U., A. Z AHN & A. LIEGL (2004): Mausohr My-

-OLOSSEDE#ESTONI Tadarida teniotis, dans les Alpes

thusii) in den nordbadischen Rheinauen. Schriftenr.

otis myotis. In: A. Meschede et B.-U. Rudolph (Eds.),

valaisannes (sud-ouest de la Suisse). Z. Säugetierk.

Landschaftspf. Natursch. 71: 177-189.

Fledermäuse in Bayern: 203-231.

55: 28-42. 10 A RLETTAZ, R., C. RUCHET, J. A ESCHIMANN, E. BRUN, M. GENOUD

& P. VOGEL   0HYSIOLOGICAL TRAITS AFFECTING

the distribution and wintering strategy of the bat Tadarida teniotis. Ecology 81: 1004-1014. 11 SIERRO, A.   (ABITAT USE DIET AND FOOD AVAILability in a population of Barbastella barbastellus in a

ENR,ANDSCHAFTSPF.ATURSCHUTZPP

tis #HIROPTERA 6ESPERTILIONIDAE IN 3OUTH 4YROL AND

servatrice. Le Rhinolophe 2: 137 pp. 40 RODRIGUES, L. & J. M. PALMEIRIM (2007): Migratory behaviour of the Schreiber’s bat: when, where and why do cave bats migrate in the Mediterranean region? *:OOL   41 VINCENT, S. (2007): Etude de l’activité et des terrains

20 DAVIDSON -WATTS, I. & G. JONES   $IFFERENCES IN

30 D IETZ, C., O.V. HELVERSEN & D. NILL  (ANDBUCHDER

de chasse exploités par le Minioptère de Schreibers

foraging behaviour between Pipistrellus pipistrellus

&LEDERMËUSE%UROPASUND.ORDWEST!FRIKAS+OSMOS

ENVUEDESACONSERVATION3UZE LA 2OUSSE$RÙME

and Pipistrellus pygmaeus*:OOL 

6ERLAG PP

i3ABLES DU 4RICASTINw &2 ,)&%.!4

21 FEYERABEND, F. & M. SIMON (2000): Use of roosts and

31 K ERTH, G., M. WAGNER, K. WEISSMANN & B. KÖNIG (2002):

ROOSTSWITCHINGINASUMMERCOLONYOFK(ZPHONIC

(ABITAT UND 1UARTIERNUTZUNG BEI DER "ECHSTEINFLE-

type pipistrelle bats (Pipistrellus pipistrellus). Myotis

DERMAUS (INWEISE FàR DEN !RTENSCHUTZ 3CHRIFTENR

leisleri +UHL  +LEINABENDSEGLER )N +RAPP

38: 51-59.

Landschaftspf. Natursch. 71: 99-108.

& %D  (ANDBUCH DER 3ËUGETIERE %UROPAS &LED-

&22APPORT#/2!n3&%0- PP 42 B OGDANOWICZ , W. & A.L. R UPRECHT (2004): Nyctalus

22 GÜTTINGER, R., M. LUTZ & E. MÜHLETHALER (2006): Förder-

32 FUHRMANN, M., C. SCHREIBER & J. TAUCHERT (2002): Telem-

12 STEINHAUSER, D.   5NTERSUCHUNGEN ZUR ¾KOLO-

UNGPOTENZIELLER*AGDHABITATEFàRDAS+LEINE-AUSOHR

etrische Untersuchungen an Bechsteinfledermäusen

717-756.

gie der Mopsfledermaus, Barbastella barbastellus

(Myotis blythii )NTERREG)))" 0ROJEKT,EBENSRAUMVER-

(Myotis bechsteinii UND+LEINEN!BENDSEGLERNNyc-

43 C ONSERVATOIRE

und der Bechsteinfledermaus, Myotis bechsteinii im

NETZUNG PP

talus leisleri) im Oberurseler Stadtwald und Umge-

Swiss alpine valley. Nyctalus (N.F.) 8 (6): 670-673.

Süden des Landes Brandenburg. Schriftenr. LandSCHAFTSPF.ATURSCHUTZ 

23 ROESLI, M., F. BONTADINA, T. MADDALENA, K. MÄRKI, T. HOTZ, A.-S. GENINI, D. TORRIONI, R. GÜTTINGER & M. MORETTI

13 HARBUSCH, C. (2003): Aspects of the ecology of Sero-

(2005): Ambienti di caccia e regime alimentare del

tine bats (Eptesicus serotinus) in contrasting land-

6ESPERTILIO MAGGIORE Myotis myotis E DEL 6ESPER-

BUNG (OCHTAUNUSKREIS  3CHRIFTENR ,ANDSCHAFTSPF .ATURSCHUTZ  33 SCHOBER, W. & E. GRIMMBERGER  $IE&LEDERMËUSE %UROPAS+OSMOS6ERLAG 3TUTTGART PP

ERTIERE #HIROPTERA )) !ULA 6ERLAG 7IEBELSHEIM

DENNE

DU

PATRIMOINE NATUREL

DE

CHAMPAGNE-A R-

(2009): Résultats de radiopistage de colonies

de reproduction. Savart 71-72. 44 MARQUES, J.T., A. R AINHO, M. CARAPUÇO, P. OLIVEIRA & J.M. PALMEIRIM (2004): Foraging behaviour and habitat use by the European free-tailed bat Tadarida teniotis.

scapes in southwest Germany and Luxembourg.

tilio minore (Myotis blythi #HIROPTERA  6ESPERTILIO-

34 RUSSO, D., L. CISTRONE, G. JONES & S. L AZZOLENI (2004):

0H$ THESIS 5NIVERSITYOF!BERDEEN PP

NIDAE NEL#ANTONE4ICINO"OLL3OCTIC3CI.AT

Roost selection by barbastelles, Barbastella barbas-

45 HUTTERER, R., T. IVANOVA, C. MEYER-C ORDS & L. RODRIGUES

63-75.

tellus #HIROPTERA 6ESPERTILIONIDAE IN BEECH WOOD-

(2005): Bat Migrations in Europe. A review of band-

LANDSOF#ENTRAL)TALY"IOL#ONS  

ing data and literature. Federal Agency for Nature

14 P ÉREZ, J.L. & C. IBÁÑEZ   0RELIMINARY RESULTS ON activity rythms and space use obtained by radio-

24 ROESLI, M., F. BONTADINA, T. MADDALENA & M. MORETTI

tracking a colony of Eptesicus serotinus. Myotis 29:

 3TUDIOSULLACOLONIADIRIPRODUZIONEDIMyotis

61-66.

myotis e Myotis blythiiDELLE#OLLEGIATA3ANT!NTONIO

15 ROBINSON, M.F. & R.E. STEBBINGS   (OME RANGE and habitat use by the serotine bat, Eptesicus seroti-

A,OCARNO$IPARTIMENTODELTERRITORIO#ANTONE4ICINO 44 pp.

35 BILLINGTON, G. (pers. com): Radiotracking study of Barbastelle bats (unpublished).

d’une colonie de murins à oreilles échancrées par ra-

MISEBASDE0IPISTRELLEDE.ATHUSIUSEN#HAMPAGNE

16 CATTO, C.M.C., A.M. HUTSON, P.A. R ACEY & P.J. STEPHEN -

Murin, Myotis blythii - Tomes 1857, en vue de décou-

TRES #HIROPTÒRES 'RAND 3UD "IDARRAY  ET  MARS

(1996): Foraging behaviour and habitat use of the

vrir une colonie majeure de reproduction dans les

3&%0-

128

Bonn, 176 pp. 46 PARISE, C. & C. HERVÉ $ÏCOUVERTEDECOLONIESDE

DIOTRACKING0.0ORT#ROS !CTESDES)6ÒMESRENCON-

SON

#ONSERVATION .ATURSCHUTZ UND "IOLOGISCHE 6IELFALT

36 QUEKENBORN, D. 0ORQUEROLLES RECHERCHE

25 GCP %XPÏRIENCEDERADIO PISTAGESURLE0ETIT

nus IN%NGLAND*:OOL 

!CTA#HIROPTEROLOGICA  

Ardenne. Naturale 3: 87-94. 47 CPEPESC LORRAINE   #ONNAÔTRE ET PROTÏGER LES #HAUVES SOURIS DE ,ORRAINE /UVRAGE COLLECTIF COOR-

129

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

6

WATERS, D., G. JONES & M. FURLONG (1999): Foraging

serotine bat (Eptesicus serotinus) in southern Eng-

Bouches-du-Rhône. Bilan sur deux années : été 2002

ecology of Leisler´s bat (Nyctalus leisleri) at two sites

LAND*:OOL 

ETÏTÏ2APPORTFINALPOURLA$)2%.0!#! PP

INSOUTHERN"RITAIN*:OOL  7

8

Basel, 381 pp.

26 A RLETTAZ, R. (1995): Ecology of the sibling mouse-

38 MESCHEDE, A. & K.-G. HELLER (2000): Ökologie und

K RONWITTER, F.   0OPULATION STRUCTURE HABITAT

First results in radio-tracking Geoffroy’s bats Myo-

eared bats, Myotis myotis and Myotis blythii (ORUS

3CHUTZ VON &LEDERMËUSEN IN 7ËLDERN UNDER BESON-

use and activity patterns of the noctule bat, Nyctalus

tis emarginatus IN #ENTRE REGION &RANCE !BSTRACTS

Eds. Martigny, Suisse, 206 pp.

derer Berücksichtigung wandernder Arten. Schrift-

noctula, revealed by radio-tracking. Myotis 26: 23-85.

of the IXth European Bat Research Symposium, Le

NÉMOZ, M., A. BRISORGUEIL et al. #ONNAISSANCEET

(AVRE

#ONSERVATIONDESGÔTESETHABITATSDECHASSEDE#HI-

18 K RULL, D., A. SCHUMM, W. METZNER & G. NEUWEILER (1991):

roptères cavernicoles: Rhinolophe euryale, Murin de

Foraging areas and foraging behavior in the notch-

#APACCINI ET -INIOPTÒRE DE 3CHREIBERS 3&%0- PRO-

eared bat, Myotis emarginatus. Behav. Ecol. Socio-

GRAMME ,)&% .!452% ,)&%.!4&2 0ARIS

biol. 28: 247-253.

104 pp. 9

17 HUET, R., M. L EMAIRE, L. A RTHUR & N. D EL GUIDICE (2002):

37 GEBHARD, J.   &LEDERMËUSE "IRKHAUSER 6ERLAG

19 A RNOLD, A. & M. BRAUN (2002): Telemetrische Untersu-

27 D RESCHER, C. (2004): Radiotracking of Myotis myo-

39 ROUÉ, S. Y. & M. BARATAUD   (ABITATS ET ACTIVITÏ

implications for its conservation. Mammalia 68: 387-

nocturne des chiroptères menacés en Europe: syn-

395.

thèse des connaissances en vue d’une gestion con-

28 GÜTTINGER, R.   *AGDHABITATE DES 'RO”EN -AUsohrs (Myotis myotis IN DER MODERNEN +ULTURLANDschaft. Schriftenr. Umwelt 288: 1-138.

A RLETTAZ, R. #ONTRIBUTIONÌL|ÏCO ÏTHOLOGIEDU

chungen an Rauhhautfledermäusen (Pipistrellus na-

29 RUDOLPH, B.-U., A. Z AHN & A. LIEGL (2004): Mausohr My-

-OLOSSEDE#ESTONI Tadarida teniotis, dans les Alpes

thusii) in den nordbadischen Rheinauen. Schriftenr.

otis myotis. In: A. Meschede et B.-U. Rudolph (Eds.),

valaisannes (sud-ouest de la Suisse). Z. Säugetierk.

Landschaftspf. Natursch. 71: 177-189.

Fledermäuse in Bayern: 203-231.

55: 28-42. 10 A RLETTAZ, R., C. RUCHET, J. A ESCHIMANN, E. BRUN, M. GENOUD

& P. VOGEL   0HYSIOLOGICAL TRAITS AFFECTING

the distribution and wintering strategy of the bat Tadarida teniotis. Ecology 81: 1004-1014. 11 SIERRO, A.   (ABITAT USE DIET AND FOOD AVAILability in a population of Barbastella barbastellus in a

ENR,ANDSCHAFTSPF.ATURSCHUTZPP

tis #HIROPTERA 6ESPERTILIONIDAE IN 3OUTH 4YROL AND

servatrice. Le Rhinolophe 2: 137 pp. 40 RODRIGUES, L. & J. M. PALMEIRIM (2007): Migratory behaviour of the Schreiber’s bat: when, where and why do cave bats migrate in the Mediterranean region? *:OOL   41 VINCENT, S. (2007): Etude de l’activité et des terrains

20 DAVIDSON -WATTS, I. & G. JONES   $IFFERENCES IN

30 D IETZ, C., O.V. HELVERSEN & D. NILL  (ANDBUCHDER

de chasse exploités par le Minioptère de Schreibers

foraging behaviour between Pipistrellus pipistrellus

&LEDERMËUSE%UROPASUND.ORDWEST!FRIKAS+OSMOS

ENVUEDESACONSERVATION3UZE LA 2OUSSE$RÙME

and Pipistrellus pygmaeus*:OOL 

6ERLAG PP

i3ABLES DU 4RICASTINw &2 ,)&%.!4

21 FEYERABEND, F. & M. SIMON (2000): Use of roosts and

31 K ERTH, G., M. WAGNER, K. WEISSMANN & B. KÖNIG (2002):

ROOSTSWITCHINGINASUMMERCOLONYOFK(ZPHONIC

(ABITAT UND 1UARTIERNUTZUNG BEI DER "ECHSTEINFLE-

type pipistrelle bats (Pipistrellus pipistrellus). Myotis

DERMAUS (INWEISE FàR DEN !RTENSCHUTZ 3CHRIFTENR

leisleri +UHL  +LEINABENDSEGLER )N +RAPP

38: 51-59.

Landschaftspf. Natursch. 71: 99-108.

& %D  (ANDBUCH DER 3ËUGETIERE %UROPAS &LED-

&22APPORT#/2!n3&%0- PP 42 B OGDANOWICZ , W. & A.L. R UPRECHT (2004): Nyctalus

22 GÜTTINGER, R., M. LUTZ & E. MÜHLETHALER (2006): Förder-

32 FUHRMANN, M., C. SCHREIBER & J. TAUCHERT (2002): Telem-

12 STEINHAUSER, D.   5NTERSUCHUNGEN ZUR ¾KOLO-

UNGPOTENZIELLER*AGDHABITATEFàRDAS+LEINE-AUSOHR

etrische Untersuchungen an Bechsteinfledermäusen

717-756.

gie der Mopsfledermaus, Barbastella barbastellus

(Myotis blythii )NTERREG)))" 0ROJEKT,EBENSRAUMVER-

(Myotis bechsteinii UND+LEINEN!BENDSEGLERNNyc-

43 C ONSERVATOIRE

und der Bechsteinfledermaus, Myotis bechsteinii im

NETZUNG PP

talus leisleri) im Oberurseler Stadtwald und Umge-

Swiss alpine valley. Nyctalus (N.F.) 8 (6): 670-673.

Süden des Landes Brandenburg. Schriftenr. LandSCHAFTSPF.ATURSCHUTZ 

23 ROESLI, M., F. BONTADINA, T. MADDALENA, K. MÄRKI, T. HOTZ, A.-S. GENINI, D. TORRIONI, R. GÜTTINGER & M. MORETTI

13 HARBUSCH, C. (2003): Aspects of the ecology of Sero-

(2005): Ambienti di caccia e regime alimentare del

tine bats (Eptesicus serotinus) in contrasting land-

6ESPERTILIO MAGGIORE Myotis myotis E DEL 6ESPER-

BUNG (OCHTAUNUSKREIS  3CHRIFTENR ,ANDSCHAFTSPF .ATURSCHUTZ  33 SCHOBER, W. & E. GRIMMBERGER  $IE&LEDERMËUSE %UROPAS+OSMOS6ERLAG 3TUTTGART PP

ERTIERE #HIROPTERA )) !ULA 6ERLAG 7IEBELSHEIM

DENNE

DU

PATRIMOINE NATUREL

DE

CHAMPAGNE-A R-

(2009): Résultats de radiopistage de colonies

de reproduction. Savart 71-72. 44 MARQUES, J.T., A. R AINHO, M. CARAPUÇO, P. OLIVEIRA & J.M. PALMEIRIM (2004): Foraging behaviour and habitat use by the European free-tailed bat Tadarida teniotis.

scapes in southwest Germany and Luxembourg.

tilio minore (Myotis blythi #HIROPTERA  6ESPERTILIO-

34 RUSSO, D., L. CISTRONE, G. JONES & S. L AZZOLENI (2004):

0H$ THESIS 5NIVERSITYOF!BERDEEN PP

NIDAE NEL#ANTONE4ICINO"OLL3OCTIC3CI.AT

Roost selection by barbastelles, Barbastella barbas-

45 HUTTERER, R., T. IVANOVA, C. MEYER-C ORDS & L. RODRIGUES

63-75.

tellus #HIROPTERA 6ESPERTILIONIDAE IN BEECH WOOD-

(2005): Bat Migrations in Europe. A review of band-

LANDSOF#ENTRAL)TALY"IOL#ONS  

ing data and literature. Federal Agency for Nature

14 P ÉREZ, J.L. & C. IBÁÑEZ   0RELIMINARY RESULTS ON activity rythms and space use obtained by radio-

24 ROESLI, M., F. BONTADINA, T. MADDALENA & M. MORETTI

tracking a colony of Eptesicus serotinus. Myotis 29:

 3TUDIOSULLACOLONIADIRIPRODUZIONEDIMyotis

61-66.

myotis e Myotis blythiiDELLE#OLLEGIATA3ANT!NTONIO

15 ROBINSON, M.F. & R.E. STEBBINGS   (OME RANGE and habitat use by the serotine bat, Eptesicus seroti-

A,OCARNO$IPARTIMENTODELTERRITORIO#ANTONE4ICINO 44 pp.

35 BILLINGTON, G. (pers. com): Radiotracking study of Barbastelle bats (unpublished).

d’une colonie de murins à oreilles échancrées par ra-

MISEBASDE0IPISTRELLEDE.ATHUSIUSEN#HAMPAGNE

16 CATTO, C.M.C., A.M. HUTSON, P.A. R ACEY & P.J. STEPHEN -

Murin, Myotis blythii - Tomes 1857, en vue de décou-

TRES #HIROPTÒRES 'RAND 3UD "IDARRAY  ET  MARS

(1996): Foraging behaviour and habitat use of the

vrir une colonie majeure de reproduction dans les

3&%0-

128

Bonn, 176 pp. 46 PARISE, C. & C. HERVÉ $ÏCOUVERTEDECOLONIESDE

DIOTRACKING0.0ORT#ROS !CTESDES)6ÒMESRENCON-

SON

#ONSERVATION .ATURSCHUTZ UND "IOLOGISCHE 6IELFALT

36 QUEKENBORN, D. 0ORQUEROLLES RECHERCHE

25 GCP %XPÏRIENCEDERADIO PISTAGESURLE0ETIT

nus IN%NGLAND*:OOL 

!CTA#HIROPTEROLOGICA  

Ardenne. Naturale 3: 87-94. 47 CPEPESC LORRAINE   #ONNAÔTRE ET PROTÏGER LES #HAUVES SOURIS DE ,ORRAINE /UVRAGE COLLECTIF COOR-

129

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

DONNÏPAR3CHWAAB& +NOCHEL!*OUAN$#ICONIA 33 (N.sp.): 562 pp.

58 ENCARNAÇÃO, J. A., U. K IERDORF, D. HOLWEG, U. JASNOCH

66 BACH, L., P. BACH & K. FREY (2011): Fledermausmonitor-

& V. WOLTERS (2005): Sex-related differences in roost-

ING 7INDPARK 4IMMELER +AMPEN n :WISCHENBERICHT

48 SAMFI, K., $IE:WEIFLEDERMAUSINDER3CHWEIZ

SITESELECTIONBY$AUBENTONSBATSMyotis daubento-

2011. - unpubl. report to Landkreis Aurich: 39 pp.

3TATUSUND'RUNDLAGENFàRDEN3CHUTZ:àRICH "RIS-

nii during the nursery period. Mammal Rev. 35: 285-

67 BACH, L., G. MÄSCHER, C. D ENSE, U. R AHMEL, P. BACH, A.

TOL 3TIFTUNG "ERN 3TUTTGART 7IEN (AUPT PP

ZILZ & R. BÖHME &ACHBEITRAG&LEDERMËUSEZUM

294.

49 BAGGØE, H., (1987): The Scandinavian bat fauna: adap-

59 FUHRMANN, M. & A. S EITZ (1992): Nocturnal activity of

Neubau der A39, Abschnitt 6, Wittingen (B 244) -

TIVEWINGMORPHOLOGYANDFREEFLIGHTINTHEFIELD0P

the brown long-eared bat (Plecotus auritus L.1758):

%HRA,  UNPUBLREPORTTO0LANUNGSGRUPPE'RàN

57-74, in Recent advances in the study of bats (M.B.

data from radiotracking in the Lenneburg forest near

&ENTON 0!2ACEY*-62AYNER EDS #AMBRIDGE

-AINZ 'ERMANY  )N 7ILDLIFE TELEMETRY 2EMOTE

68 BANSE, G. !BLEITUNGDES+OLLISIONSRISIKOSVON

5NIVERSITY0RESS #AMBRIDGE 5NITED+INGDOM PP

-ONITORING AND 4RACKING OF !NIMALS )' 0RIEDE 

Fledermäusen an Windenergieanlagen über biologi-

50 BOYE, P. (2004): Eptesicus nilssonii$ASEUROPËISCHE

3- 3WIFT EDS  %LLIS (ORWOOD #HICHESTER 

3CHUTZGEBIETSSYSTEM.ATURA¾KOLOGIEUND6ER-

202 pp.

SCHE0ARAMETER.YCTALUS.&    69 C OURTOIS, J.-Y., D. RIST & G. BEUNEUX (2011): Les

548.

BREITUNGVON!RTENDER&&( 2ICHTLINIEIN$EUTSCHLAND

60 FLUCKIGER, P.F. & A. BECK (1995): Observations on the

3CHRIFTENR ,ANDSCHAFTSPF .ATURSCHUTZ  

habitat used for hunting by Plecotus austriacus (Fis-

394.

cher, 1829). Myotis 32-33: 121-122.

CHAUVES SOURISDE#ORSE'ROUPE#HIROPTÒRES#ORSE Ed. Albiana, Ajaccio, 167 pp. 70 BEUNEUX, G., B. CARRIER, N. CHENAVAL, J-Y. C OURTOIS, T.

51 R YDELL, J. (1989): Eptesicus nilssonii, Nordfleder-

61 R ACEY, P.A. & S.M. SWIFT (1985): Feeding ecology of

POUPART & D. RIST (2014): Le Murin du Maghreb (Myotis

MAUS)N&+RAPP(RSG (ANDBUCHDER3ËUGETIERE

Pipistrellus pipistrellus#HIROPTERA6ESPERTILIONIDAE

punicus EN #ORSE UN GLANEUR DES PRÏS 3YMBIOSES

%UROPAS !ULA6ERLAG 

during pregnancy and lactation: 1. Foraging behav-

52 GERELL, R. & J. R YDELL (2001): Eptesicus nilssonii, NordFLEDERMAUS)N&+RAPP(RSG (ANDBUCHDER3ËUGETIERE%UROPAS ) !ULA6ERLAG 

IOUR*OURNALOF!NIMAL%COLOGY 

N.S. 32: 1-6. 71 GROUPE CHIROPTÈRES C ORSE (pers. com.): possible height

62 BACH, L. & I. NIERMANN (2010): Monitoring der Fledermausaktivität im Windpark Langwedel – Zwischen-

of commuting flight during radiotracking. 72

DE

JONG, J.  (ABITATUSE HOME RANGEANDACTIV-

53 MOSTERT, K. (1997): Meervleermuis Myotis dasycneme

BERICHT UNPUBL2EPORTTO0.%7IND!'PP

ity pattern of the northern bat, Eptesicus nilssoni, in a

"OIE  )N,IMPENS ( +-OSTERT7"ONGERS

63 BOYE, P., C. D ENSE & U. R AHMEL (2004): Myotis dasyc-

hemiboreal coniferous forest. Mammalia 58 (4): 535-

COORD  !TLAS VAN DE .EDERLANDSE VLEERMUIZEN

neme 3CHRIFTENR ,ANDSCHAFTSPF .ATURSCHUTZ  

/NDERZOEK NAAR VERSPREIDING EN ECOLOGIE +..6

482-489.

6ITGEVERIJ 

64 BAS, Y., A. HAQUART, J. TRANCHARD & H. L AGRANGE (2014):

548. 73 HAARSMA, A.-J. & D. A. H. TUITERT (2009): An overview and evaluation of methodologies for locating the

54 D ENSE, C. & U. R AHMEL   5NTERSUCHUNGEN ZUR

3UIVIANNUELCONTINUDELACTIVITÏDES#HIROPTÒRESSUR

summer roosts of pond bats (Myotis dasycneme) in

(ABITATNUTZUNG DER 'RO”EN "ARTFLEDERMAUS Myotis

10 mâts de mesure : évaluation des facteurs de risque

the Netherlands. Lutra 52 (1): 47-64.

brandtii) im nordwestlichen Niedersachsen. Schrift-

liés à l’éolien. Rencontres nationales «chauves-

ENR,ANDSCHAFTSPF.ATURSCHUTZ 

SOURISwDELA3&%0- ETMARS "OURGES3YM-

55 SCHRÖDER, T.   :USAMMENHËNGE ZWISCHEN DEM *AGD UND%CHOORTUNGSVERHALTENDER'RO”EN"ARTFLE-

bioses N.S. 32: 83-87. 65 BEHR, O., R. BRINKMANN, I. NIERMANN & F. KORNER-NIEV(2011): Akustische Erfassung der Fledermau-

dermaus (Myotis brandtii IM6ERGLEICHMITDER+LEIN-

ERGELT

en Bartfledermaus (Myotis mystacinus  $IPLOMARB

saktivität an Windenergieanlagen (Acoustic detec-

Univ. Oldenburg, 147 pp.

tion of bat activity at wind turbines). In: BRINKMANN,

56 C ORDES, B. +LEINE"ARTFLEDERMAUS Myotis mys-

R., O. B EHR, I. NIERMANN ET M. REICH (Eds) : Entwicklung

tacinus)N!-ESCHEDE" 52UDOLPH%DS &LE-

VON-ETHODENZUR5NTERSUCHUNGUND2EDUKTIONDES

DERMËUSEIN"AYERN 5LMER6ERLAG 

+OLLISIONSRISIKOSVON&LEDERMËUSENAN/NSHORE 7IN-

57 A RNOLD, A., M. BRAUN, N. BECKER & V. STORCH (1998):

DENERGIEANLAGEN$EVELOPMENTOFMETHODSTOSTUDY

"EITRAG ZUR ¾KOLOGIE DER 7ASSERFLEDERMAUS Myotis

reduce the collision risk of bats at on-shore wind tur-

daubentoni IN.ORDBADEN#AROLINEA 

bines. Umwelt und Raum 4: 177-286.

130

131

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

DONNÏPAR3CHWAAB& +NOCHEL!*OUAN$#ICONIA 33 (N.sp.): 562 pp.

58 ENCARNAÇÃO, J. A., U. K IERDORF, D. HOLWEG, U. JASNOCH

66 BACH, L., P. BACH & K. FREY (2011): Fledermausmonitor-

& V. WOLTERS (2005): Sex-related differences in roost-

ING 7INDPARK 4IMMELER +AMPEN n :WISCHENBERICHT

48 SAMFI, K., $IE:WEIFLEDERMAUSINDER3CHWEIZ

SITESELECTIONBY$AUBENTONSBATSMyotis daubento-

2011. - unpubl. report to Landkreis Aurich: 39 pp.

3TATUSUND'RUNDLAGENFàRDEN3CHUTZ:àRICH "RIS-

nii during the nursery period. Mammal Rev. 35: 285-

67 BACH, L., G. MÄSCHER, C. D ENSE, U. R AHMEL, P. BACH, A.

TOL 3TIFTUNG "ERN 3TUTTGART 7IEN (AUPT PP

ZILZ & R. BÖHME &ACHBEITRAG&LEDERMËUSEZUM

294.

49 BAGGØE, H., (1987): The Scandinavian bat fauna: adap-

59 FUHRMANN, M. & A. S EITZ (1992): Nocturnal activity of

Neubau der A39, Abschnitt 6, Wittingen (B 244) -

TIVEWINGMORPHOLOGYANDFREEFLIGHTINTHEFIELD0P

the brown long-eared bat (Plecotus auritus L.1758):

%HRA,  UNPUBLREPORTTO0LANUNGSGRUPPE'RàN

57-74, in Recent advances in the study of bats (M.B.

data from radiotracking in the Lenneburg forest near

&ENTON 0!2ACEY*-62AYNER EDS #AMBRIDGE

-AINZ 'ERMANY  )N 7ILDLIFE TELEMETRY 2EMOTE

68 BANSE, G. !BLEITUNGDES+OLLISIONSRISIKOSVON

5NIVERSITY0RESS #AMBRIDGE 5NITED+INGDOM PP

-ONITORING AND 4RACKING OF !NIMALS )' 0RIEDE 

Fledermäusen an Windenergieanlagen über biologi-

50 BOYE, P. (2004): Eptesicus nilssonii$ASEUROPËISCHE

3- 3WIFT EDS  %LLIS (ORWOOD #HICHESTER 

3CHUTZGEBIETSSYSTEM.ATURA¾KOLOGIEUND6ER-

202 pp.

SCHE0ARAMETER.YCTALUS.&    69 C OURTOIS, J.-Y., D. RIST & G. BEUNEUX (2011): Les

548.

BREITUNGVON!RTENDER&&( 2ICHTLINIEIN$EUTSCHLAND

60 FLUCKIGER, P.F. & A. BECK (1995): Observations on the

3CHRIFTENR ,ANDSCHAFTSPF .ATURSCHUTZ  

habitat used for hunting by Plecotus austriacus (Fis-

394.

cher, 1829). Myotis 32-33: 121-122.

CHAUVES SOURISDE#ORSE'ROUPE#HIROPTÒRES#ORSE Ed. Albiana, Ajaccio, 167 pp. 70 BEUNEUX, G., B. CARRIER, N. CHENAVAL, J-Y. C OURTOIS, T.

51 R YDELL, J. (1989): Eptesicus nilssonii, Nordfleder-

61 R ACEY, P.A. & S.M. SWIFT (1985): Feeding ecology of

POUPART & D. RIST (2014): Le Murin du Maghreb (Myotis

MAUS)N&+RAPP(RSG (ANDBUCHDER3ËUGETIERE

Pipistrellus pipistrellus#HIROPTERA6ESPERTILIONIDAE

punicus EN #ORSE UN GLANEUR DES PRÏS 3YMBIOSES

%UROPAS !ULA6ERLAG 

during pregnancy and lactation: 1. Foraging behav-

52 GERELL, R. & J. R YDELL (2001): Eptesicus nilssonii, NordFLEDERMAUS)N&+RAPP(RSG (ANDBUCHDER3ËUGETIERE%UROPAS ) !ULA6ERLAG 

IOUR*OURNALOF!NIMAL%COLOGY 

N.S. 32: 1-6. 71 GROUPE CHIROPTÈRES C ORSE (pers. com.): possible height

62 BACH, L. & I. NIERMANN (2010): Monitoring der Fledermausaktivität im Windpark Langwedel – Zwischen-

of commuting flight during radiotracking. 72

DE

JONG, J.  (ABITATUSE HOME RANGEANDACTIV-

53 MOSTERT, K. (1997): Meervleermuis Myotis dasycneme

BERICHT UNPUBL2EPORTTO0.%7IND!'PP

ity pattern of the northern bat, Eptesicus nilssoni, in a

"OIE  )N,IMPENS ( +-OSTERT7"ONGERS

63 BOYE, P., C. D ENSE & U. R AHMEL (2004): Myotis dasyc-

hemiboreal coniferous forest. Mammalia 58 (4): 535-

COORD  !TLAS VAN DE .EDERLANDSE VLEERMUIZEN

neme 3CHRIFTENR ,ANDSCHAFTSPF .ATURSCHUTZ  

/NDERZOEK NAAR VERSPREIDING EN ECOLOGIE +..6

482-489.

6ITGEVERIJ 

64 BAS, Y., A. HAQUART, J. TRANCHARD & H. L AGRANGE (2014):

548. 73 HAARSMA, A.-J. & D. A. H. TUITERT (2009): An overview and evaluation of methodologies for locating the

54 D ENSE, C. & U. R AHMEL   5NTERSUCHUNGEN ZUR

3UIVIANNUELCONTINUDELACTIVITÏDES#HIROPTÒRESSUR

summer roosts of pond bats (Myotis dasycneme) in

(ABITATNUTZUNG DER 'RO”EN "ARTFLEDERMAUS Myotis

10 mâts de mesure : évaluation des facteurs de risque

the Netherlands. Lutra 52 (1): 47-64.

brandtii) im nordwestlichen Niedersachsen. Schrift-

liés à l’éolien. Rencontres nationales «chauves-

ENR,ANDSCHAFTSPF.ATURSCHUTZ 

SOURISwDELA3&%0- ETMARS "OURGES3YM-

55 SCHRÖDER, T.   :USAMMENHËNGE ZWISCHEN DEM *AGD UND%CHOORTUNGSVERHALTENDER'RO”EN"ARTFLE-

bioses N.S. 32: 83-87. 65 BEHR, O., R. BRINKMANN, I. NIERMANN & F. KORNER-NIEV(2011): Akustische Erfassung der Fledermau-

dermaus (Myotis brandtii IM6ERGLEICHMITDER+LEIN-

ERGELT

en Bartfledermaus (Myotis mystacinus  $IPLOMARB

saktivität an Windenergieanlagen (Acoustic detec-

Univ. Oldenburg, 147 pp.

tion of bat activity at wind turbines). In: BRINKMANN,

56 C ORDES, B. +LEINE"ARTFLEDERMAUS Myotis mys-

R., O. B EHR, I. NIERMANN ET M. REICH (Eds) : Entwicklung

tacinus)N!-ESCHEDE" 52UDOLPH%DS &LE-

VON-ETHODENZUR5NTERSUCHUNGUND2EDUKTIONDES

DERMËUSEIN"AYERN 5LMER6ERLAG 

+OLLISIONSRISIKOSVON&LEDERMËUSENAN/NSHORE 7IN-

57 A RNOLD, A., M. BRAUN, N. BECKER & V. STORCH (1998):

DENERGIEANLAGEN$EVELOPMENTOFMETHODSTOSTUDY

"EITRAG ZUR ¾KOLOGIE DER 7ASSERFLEDERMAUS Myotis

reduce the collision risk of bats at on-shore wind tur-

daubentoni IN.ORDBADEN#AROLINEA 

bines. Umwelt und Raum 4: 177-286.

130

131

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

Annex 4: Detectability coefficients to compare activity indices

The following table (after BARATAUD 2012) is an

energy promoters to evaluate the risks of their

sity call (e.g. R. hipposideros) is smaller than

example of activity indices that can be used.

PROJECTS"UTTHENUMBEROFBATCONTACTSHOUR

a species with a very high intensity call (e.g.

Activity indices (usually the number of con-

can only be compared between species that

Nyctalus spp.). Range variations of a signal

tacts per time unit) result generaly of precon-

have calls of similar intensity. The probabil-

depend also on many parameters that make

struction surveys and are required by wind

ity of contacting a species with a low inten-

comparison even more difficult. To allow

Open space

Clutter (underwood)

comparison, bats have therefore been sorted Intensity levels of calls

Low

Medium

Distance of detection (m)

Detectability coefficient

R. hipposideros

5

5.00

R. ferr./eur./meh.

10

M. emarginatus

6ERYHIGH

sonar calls. A detectability coefficient, based

Detectability coefficient

R. hipposideros

5

5.00

been calculated for two different observer’s

2.50

Plecotus spp.

5

5.00

locations (open habitat vs. woodland). Apply-

10

2.50

M. emarginatus

8

3.10

ing this coefficient to the number of contacts

M. alcathoe

10

2.50

M. nattereri

8

3.10

or indices per species will then allow compar-

M. mystacinus

10

2.50

R. ferr./eur./meh.

10

2.50

ing the activity between species or groups of

M. brandtii

10

2.50

M. alcathoe

10

2.50

species. For more details see BARATAUD 2012.

M. daubentonii

15

1.70

M. mystacinus

10

2.50

Low

Species

M. nattereri

15

1.70

M. brandtii

10

2.50

M. bechsteinii

15

1.70

M. daubentonii

10

2.50

B. barbastellus

15

1.70

M. bechsteinii

10

2.50

B. barbastellus

15

1.70

M. blythii

20

1.20

M. blythii

15

1.70

M. myotis

20

1.20

M. myotis

15

1.70

P. pygmaeus

25

1.00

P. pipistrellus

30

0.83

P. kuhlii

30

0.83

P. nathusii

30

0.83

M. schreibersii

30

0.83

H. savii (IGH

according to the increasing intensity of their

Distance of detection (m)

Species

Intensity levels of calls

40

on the maximum distance of detection, has

References BARATAUD, M. (2012): Ecologie acoustique des chiroptères d’Europe. Identification des espèces, étude de leurs habitats ETCOMPORTEMENTSDECHASSE#OLLECTIONINVENTAIRESETBIODIVERSITÏ "IOTOPE  -USÏUM NATIONAL D(ISTOIRE NATURELLE

Medium

P. pygmaeus

20

1.20

M. schreibersii

20

1.20

P. pipistrellus

25

1.00

P. kuhlii

25

1.00

P. nathusii

25

1.00

337 pp.

0.71

E. serotinus

40

0.71

Plecotus spp.*

40*

0.71

(IGH

H. savii

30

0.83

E. serotinus

30

0.83

E. nilssonii

50

0.50

E. nilssonii

50

0.50

V. murinus

50

0.50

V. murinus

50

0.50

N. leisleri

80

0.31

N. noctula

100

0.25

N. leisleri

80

0.31

N. noctula

100

0.25

T. teniotis

150

N. lasiopterus

150

0.17

T. teniotis

150

0.17

0.17

N. lasiopterus

150

0.17

6ERYHIGH

* Note for Plecotus spp.: some high intensity calls are sometimes emitted during commuting flight in the open space REFCALL$6$

132

133

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects – Revision 2014

EUROBATS Publication Series No. 6

Annex 4: Detectability coefficients to compare activity indices

The following table (after BARATAUD 2012) is an

energy promoters to evaluate the risks of their

sity call (e.g. R. hipposideros) is smaller than

example of activity indices that can be used.

PROJECTS"UTTHENUMBEROFBATCONTACTSHOUR

a species with a very high intensity call (e.g.

Activity indices (usually the number of con-

can only be compared between species that

Nyctalus spp.). Range variations of a signal

tacts per time unit) result generaly of precon-

have calls of similar intensity. The probabil-

depend also on many parameters that make

struction surveys and are required by wind

ity of contacting a species with a low inten-

comparison even more difficult. To allow

Open space

Clutter (underwood)

comparison, bats have therefore been sorted Intensity levels of calls

Low

Medium

Distance of detection (m)

Detectability coefficient

R. hipposideros

5

5.00

R. ferr./eur./meh.

10

M. emarginatus

6ERYHIGH

sonar calls. A detectability coefficient, based

Detectability coefficient

R. hipposideros

5

5.00

been calculated for two different observer’s

2.50

Plecotus spp.

5

5.00

locations (open habitat vs. woodland). Apply-

10

2.50

M. emarginatus

8

3.10

ing this coefficient to the number of contacts

M. alcathoe

10

2.50

M. nattereri

8

3.10

or indices per species will then allow compar-

M. mystacinus

10

2.50

R. ferr./eur./meh.

10

2.50

ing the activity between species or groups of

M. brandtii

10

2.50

M. alcathoe

10

2.50

species. For more details see BARATAUD 2012.

M. daubentonii

15

1.70

M. mystacinus

10

2.50

Low

Species

M. nattereri

15

1.70

M. brandtii

10

2.50

M. bechsteinii

15

1.70

M. daubentonii

10

2.50

B. barbastellus

15

1.70

M. bechsteinii

10

2.50

B. barbastellus

15

1.70

M. blythii

20

1.20

M. blythii

15

1.70

M. myotis

20

1.20

M. myotis

15

1.70

P. pygmaeus

25

1.00

P. pipistrellus

30

0.83

P. kuhlii

30

0.83

P. nathusii

30

0.83

M. schreibersii

30

0.83

H. savii (IGH

according to the increasing intensity of their

Distance of detection (m)

Species

Intensity levels of calls

40

on the maximum distance of detection, has

References BARATAUD, M. (2012): Ecologie acoustique des chiroptères d’Europe. Identification des espèces, étude de leurs habitats ETCOMPORTEMENTSDECHASSE#OLLECTIONINVENTAIRESETBIODIVERSITÏ "IOTOPE  -USÏUM NATIONAL D(ISTOIRE NATURELLE

Medium

P. pygmaeus

20

1.20

M. schreibersii

20

1.20

P. pipistrellus

25

1.00

P. kuhlii

25

1.00

P. nathusii

25

1.00

337 pp.

0.71

E. serotinus

40

0.71

Plecotus spp.*

40*

0.71

(IGH

H. savii

30

0.83

E. serotinus

30

0.83

E. nilssonii

50

0.50

E. nilssonii

50

0.50

V. murinus

50

0.50

V. murinus

50

0.50

N. leisleri

80

0.31

N. noctula

100

0.25

N. leisleri

80

0.31

N. noctula

100

0.25

T. teniotis

150

N. lasiopterus

150

0.17

T. teniotis

150

0.17

0.17

N. lasiopterus

150

0.17

6ERYHIGH

* Note for Plecotus spp.: some high intensity calls are sometimes emitted during commuting flight in the open space REFCALL$6$

132

133

EUROBATS Publication Series No.

EUROBATS

6

Europe is faced with the need to tackle climate change and pollution and to find sustainable means to meet demands for energy generation. Thus the promotion of alternative methods for the production of energy such as wind power has been intensified. The low-emission production of wind energy brings benefits for the environment but on the other hand causes problems for wildlife, such as certain bat species. Therefore EUROBATS has developed guidelines for assessing potential impacts of wind turbines on bats and for planning, construction and operation of wind turbines in accordance with the ecological requirements of bat populations. A first version of the guidelines was published in 2008, having the primary purpose to raise awareness amongst developers and planners of the need to consider bats and their roosts, migration routes and foraging areas. Guidelines should also be of interest to local and national consenting authorities who are required to draw up strategic sustainable energy plans. Furthermore, it was a base for national guidelines that were subsequently published in several countries.

Guidelines for consideration of bats in wind farm projects Revision 2014

A large amount of research has been carried out into the impacts of wind turbines on bats and the increased knowledge urged for this revision of the document. The revised guidelines are applicable to larger wind farm developments in urban as well as in rural areas, on the land as well as offshore. Some case studies were included to illustrate implementation of mitigation measures in some countries. Member countries should adapt these guidelines to their situation and prepare or update their national guidelines accordingly.

ISBN 978-92-95058-30-9 (printed version) ISBN 978-92-95058-31-6 (electronic version)

,2ODRIGUESs,"ACHs- *$UBOURG 3AVAGEs"+ARAPANDäA $+OVAC€s4+ERVYNs*$EKKERs!+EPELs0"ACHs*#OLLINS #(ARBUSCHs+0ARKs"-ICEVSKIs*-INDERMAN