Search

Renewable energy is growing at a rapid pace globally but as yet there has been little research on the effects of ground‐mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) developments on bats, many species of which are threatened or protected.We conducted a paired study at 19 ground‐mounted solar PV developments in southwest England. We used static detectors to record bat echolocation calls from boundaries (i.e. hedgerows) and central locations (open areas) at fields with solar PV development, and simultaneously at matched sites without solar PV developments (control fields). We used generalised linear mixed‐effect models to assess how solar PV developments and boundary habitat affected bat activity and species richness.The activity of six of eight species/species groups analysed was negatively affected by solar PV panels, suggesting that loss and/or fragmentation of foraging/commuting habitat is caused by ground‐mounted solar PV panels. Pipistrellus pipistrellus and Nyctalus spp. activity was lower at solar PV sites regardless of the habitat type considered. Negative impacts of solar PV panels at field boundaries were apparent for the activity of Myotis spp. and Eptesicus serotinus, and in open fields for Pipistrellus pygmaeus and Plecotus spp.Bat species richness was greater along field boundaries compared with open fields, but there was no effect of solar PV panels on species richness.Policy implications: Ground‐mounted solar photovoltaic developments have a significant negative effect on bat activity, and should be considered in appropriate planning legislation and policy. Solar photovoltaic developments should be screened in Environmental Impact Assessments for ecological impacts, and appropriate mitigation (e.g. maintaining boundaries, planting vegetation to network with surrounding foraging habitat) and monitoring should be implemented to highlight potential negative effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Passive acoustic methods are increasingly used in biodiversity research and monitoring programs because they are cost-effective and permit the collection of large datasets. However, the accuracy of the results depends on the bioacoustic characteristics of the focal taxa and their habitat use. In particular, this applies to bats which exhibit distinct activity patterns in three-dimensionally structured habitats such as forests. We assessed the performance of 21 acoustic sampling schemes with three temporal sampling patterns and seven sampling designs. Acoustic sampling was performed in 32 forest plots, each containing three microhabitats: forest ground, canopy, and forest gap. We compared bat activity, species richness, and sampling effort using species accumulation curves fitted with the clench equation. In addition, we estimated the sampling costs to undertake the best sampling schemes. We recorded a total of 145,433 echolocation call sequences of 16 bat species. Our results indicated that to generate the best outcome, it was necessary to sample all three microhabitats of a given forest location simultaneously throughout the entire night. Sampling only the forest gaps and the forest ground simultaneously was the second best choice and proved to be a viable alternative when the number of available detectors is limited. When assessing bat species richness at the 1-km2 scale, the implementation of these sampling schemes at three to four forest locations yielded highest labor cost-benefit ratios but increasing equipment costs. Our study illustrates that multiple passive acoustic sampling schemes require testing based on the target taxa and habitat complexity and should be performed with reference to cost-benefit ratios. Choosing a standardized and replicated sampling scheme is particularly important to optimize the level of precision in inventories, especially when rare or elusive species are expected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]