Landscape‐scale effects of single‐ and multiple small wind turbines on bat activity

• Published in: Animal Conservation
• Main Authors: Minderman, J., Gillis, M. H., Daly, H. F., Park, K. J.
• Other Authors: University of Stirling Impact Fellowship, People's Trust for Endangered Species
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Wiley 2017
• Subjects: Pipistrellus pipistrellus
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/acv.12331; https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1111%2Facv.12331; https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/acv.12331

Abstract While the effects of wind farms on bats are widely studied, effects of small wind turbines ( SWT s, here <25 m hub height) remain understudied. SWT s are installed in a wider range of habitats compared to wind farms and their effect on wildlife can therefore be different. While single SWT s can adversely affect bat activity in their immediate vicinity, they are often installed in clusters, and to date, no data are available on whether installation of more than one turbine increases the likelihood of adverse effects on bats. Here, we test whether (1) SWT installations affect the activity of two species of bat (the common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus and soprano pipistrelle P. pygmaeus ) on a landscape scale (here defined as up to 500 m from SWT s) and (2) such an effect is stronger when multiple (2–4) SWT s are installed. We show that, after accounting for potentially confounding effects (e.g. variation in habitat and weather), (1) mean P. pipistrellus activity is lower at 0–100 m compared to 200–500 m from SWT s and (2) the effect on P. pygmaeus activity tends to be similar and stronger in multiple SWT sites, although evidence for the latter is limited. We conclude that in some cases, adverse effects of SWT s on bat activity may be measurable over longer spatial scales (within 100 m) than previously thought. However, combined with earlier findings, it is likely that the bulk of such effects operate within relative close proximity of SWT s (<25 m). Moreover, although these effects may be species‐specific, with, for example, P. pygmaeus potentially more strongly affected by multiple SWT sites, this requires further data. These findings are highly relevant to decision‐making aimed at minimizing any adverse effects of wind turbines, specifically single‐ versus multiple SWT developments, on wildlife.