Bechstein's Bat (Myotis bechsteinii)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > terrestrial mammal > Bat |
| Red List Status: | Least Concern (Not Relevant) [LC(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | Included in the baseline Red List Index for England (Wilkins, Wilson & Brown, 2022) |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Myotis bechsteinii |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Kuhl, 1817) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Mathews & Harrower, 2020 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Whilst this species is listed as 'least concern' it is acknowledged that this is an anomaly of the IUCN process. The process uses three generations to assess changes in trends. The Bechstein's bat had very limited records prior to the BCT Bechstein's Bat National Project (2007 to 2011) . This project saw the deployment of a methodology for identifying this species rolled out across its range in England. This greatly increased the number of records which was reflected in the red listing process as an increasing trend. This species relies heavily on mature broadleaf woodland that has a complex structure and undisturbed interior. As such it is one of our most threatened species of bat. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | As a predominantly woodland species with specific needs it often fails to benefit from what is deemed a good standard of conservation woodland management. Those activities that provide open areas, thinning, coppicing, understorey reduction, tracks and breaks will all have a negative impact on this species. A significant area of woodland with complex vegetational structure maintained in areas of minimum intervention is needed. Roost availability is important with woodpecker holes and other similar opportunities such as rot holes being available in a good number of trees (due to this species' roost switching behaviour) and also to have a succession of roosts into the future. |
| Question 3: | At a landscape scale, would the species benefit from untargeted habitat management to increase habitat mosaics, structural diversity, or particular successional stages? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Bechstein’s bat maternity colonies depend on ancient broad-leaved woodland with good structure and plant species diversity. This includes a minimum number of old trees (beech: about 30–35 old trees/ha; oak: 15–20 old trees/ha) and a closed canopy of the dominant tree layer of at least 70% and 60% for beech and oak, respectively. Bechstein’s bat populations also need suitable male roosts in peripheral areas (e.g. hedgerow trees), and adjacent habitat suitable for green woodpecker (e.g. rough grassland with anthills). |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Ongoing legal protection of roosts is vital to prevent extinction. This species is relatively well understood compared to other bat species although there is much left to learn. Only now is a method to monitor it (in line with National Bat Monitoring Programme (NBMP) for other species) being investigated. The limitations of sonogram identification are yet to be fully overcome. The airborne DNA workstream also has great potential for this species. But enough is understood about this species to know what its key needs are. There is good potential to act on the needs of this species. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Promote and advise woodland owners and managers on management of roost trees and ensuring successional trees for future roost provision within range. Whilst ongoing awareness raising of the importance and legal protection of Bechstein's bat roosts needs to continue, other potential roost trees need to be safeguarded, and a future succession of suitable roosting opportunities ensured. As Bechstein's bat maternity colonies heavily rely on woodpecker hole roosts, woodpecker ecology also needs to be considered. This would include leaving/creating areas of rough grassland within which green woodpeckers can forage for ants. The art of veteranisation (particularly to create artificial woodpecker holes) could be helpful in this context but much more research is needed in the UK before this becomes part of the advice package. Such a measure could also be of general use for all tree-roosting bat species.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites: SACs
Comments: This action could have a focus on the SACs but also other high priority sites; especially those with a lack of choices for tree roosting and successional availability. This action can be combined with that for noctule and barbastelle.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Implement standardised national monitoring. A project is currently underway to develop a national Bechstein's bat population monitoring survey (BCT and VWT). The work will be completed by Oct 2026. The next vital step will be implementing this as a standard and widespread approach across its range in Britain. This will allow a much improved insight into the changing population trends of this species, and therefore support a much-needed reassessment of its IUCN Red List status.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments: National in this context is their restricted range in England.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Provide training and guidance on habitat management to support foraging needs of this species (alongside other species needs) to woodland owners and land managers in range. Bechstein's bat not only roost in trees but also forage largely within mature native broad-leaved woodland. Current good practice woodland management can often act against the needs of this mainly woodland species and as such special consideration needs to be given to avoid conservation (or other) actions such as clearing, thinning and fragmentation that erode the capacity for woodland to support this species. Additionally, the use of hedgerow tree roosts is not unusual for both maternity and male roosts, and there is now some limited evidence of open space foraging adjacent to woodland/trees. We have the knowledge of this bat species' needs and this message is given in BCTs training but, to prevent further losses to this species, a greater awareness and action needs to focus on the population left in the remaining range. This would be achieved by landowner workshops with other partners, EPS training with FC or BCT woodland management training. Also local guidance. These woodland management needs will also support barbastelle, lesser horseshoe bat and brown long-eared bat.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Education/awareness raising
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments: National in this context is the limited range in England. Can combine woodland foraging needs with those of barbastelle, lesser horseshoe bat and brown long-eared bat. For maternity colonies, this needs to be either a single large block of woodland or a number of smaller well-connected woodlands/tree-lines. The woodland needs complex structure, good understorey and to be undrained.
Acknowledgment:
Data used on this website are adapted from Threatened species recovery actions 2025 baseline (JP065): Technical report and spreadsheet user guide (Natural England, 2025). Available here.