Version classiqueVersion mobile

What Works in Conservation 2018

 | 
William J. Sutherland
, 
Lynn V. Dicks
, 
Nancy Ockendon
, 
et al.

2. Bat conservation

2.1 Threat: Residential and commercial development

Texte intégral

Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)

● Protect brownfield sites

1One study in the USA found bat activity within an urban wildlife refuge on an abandoned manufacturing site to be consistent with predictions across North America based on the availability of potential roosts. Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 40%; certainty 20%; harms 0%).

2http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​953

● Provide foraging habitat in urban areas

3One site comparison study in the USA found higher bat activity in restored forest preserves in urban areas than in an unrestored forest preserve. One replicated, controlled, site comparison study in the UK found higher bat activity over green roofs in urban areas than conventional unvegetated roofs. Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 50%; certainty 30%; harms 0%).

4http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​954

No evidence found (no assessment)

5We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Change timing of building works
  • Conserve existing roosts within developments
  • Conserve old buildings or structures as roosting sites for bats within developments
  • Create alternative roosts within buildings
  • Maintain bridges and retain crevices for roosting
  • Retain or relocate access points to bat roosts
  • Retain or replace existing bat commuting routes within development

Table des illustrations

URL http://books.openedition.org/obp/docannexe/image/6344/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 222k

Lire

Open access

Acheter

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search