Restore bat foraging habitat at ex-quarry sites

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

50%
Certainty

35%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Abandoned mining sites, such as quarries, may be rehabilitated to provide foraging habitat for bats, e.g. through the restoration of grassland, trees and wetlands.

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects of restoring bat foraging habitat at ex-quarry sites on bat populations. The study was in France.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in France found that gravel-sand pits had higher overall bat activity (relative abundance) 10 years after restoration than gravel-sand pit sites before or during quarrying.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

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

A replicated, site comparison study in 2009–2013 of 21 gravel-sand pit sites in France (Kerbiriou et al. 2018) found that restored gravel-sand pits had higher overall bat activity 10 years after restoration than gravel-sand pit sites before or during quarrying, but there was no difference for gravel-sand pits less than 10 years after restoration. Overall bat activity was higher at gravel-sand pits that had been restored more than 10 years previously (average 0.8 bat passes/six minute interval) than at gravel-sand pit sites before or during quarrying (both 0.3 bat passes). However, there was no significant difference between gravel-sand pits restored 5–10 years previously (0.5 bat passes) or less than five years previously (0.4 bat passes) and gravel-sand pit sites before or during quarrying. Twelve bat species were recorded in total (see original paper for data for individual species). Gravel-sand pit sites (average 4 ha) consisted of bare soil and were restored to water, wooded vegetation and meadows after quarrying ceased. At each of 21 sites, 1–5 points (18–37 points/treatment in total across all sites) were sampled with bat detectors during two visits/year in June–September 2009–2013.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Kerbiriou C., Parisot-Laprun M. & Julien J.F. (2018) Potential of restoration of gravel-sand pits for bats. Ecological Engineering, 110, 137-145.

Please cite as:

Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2021) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bat Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Install and maintain gates at mine entrances to restrict public access Action Link	Trade-off between benefit and harms	9	Synopsis Link
Relocate bats from reclaimed mines to alternative subterranean roost sites Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Provide artificial subterranean bat roosts to replace roosts in reclaimed mines Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link