Nathusius' pipistrelle (Pipistrellus nathusii)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > terrestrial mammal > Bat |
| Red List Status: | Near Threatened (Not Relevant) [NT(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | Included in the baseline Red List Index for England (Wilkins, Wilson & Brown, 2022) |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | Nathusius's Pipistrelle |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Pipistrellus nathusii |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Keyserling & Blasius, 1839) |
| 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: | GB and England status is near threatened. This is our only long-distance migratory bat species. It migrates over a thousand kilometres from Eastern Europe. There have been breeding colonies in the east of England in the past. No active breeding colonies known currently. Previous breeding may have occurred when females have failed to return to Eastern Europe/Russia due to poor body condition or poor weather but much remains unknown. With climate change this species may eventually have a stable breeding population in England. There is a significant threat to this migrant species from offshore wind turbines in the North sea and an urgent need to understand the levels of impact that current and planned offshore windfarm schemes could have on this species. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | There are two elements that need specific species recovery actions. One is to understand more about the roosting and habitat needs of this species when it is within our shores and the other is to understand the level of threat that offshore wind installations pose to this migratory bat. |
| 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: | The species' typical foraging habitats include lowland woodland rides and edge (deciduous and occasionally coniferous), damp lowland forests, meadows, over or near water, such as canals, rivers, lakes, and waterlogged areas. Wetlands are frequently preferred as feeding habitats and any management that increases habitat quality and insect abundance and diversity will be beneficial in providing increased availability of quality foraging habitat. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 1. Taxonomy established |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Ongoing legal protection of roosts is vital to prevent extinction. No ongoing National Bat Monitoring Programme (NBMP) monitoring protocol exists for this species. The Nathusius pipistrelle project has been run by BCT for a number of years to establish their presence in the UK but funding for this has now come to an end. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Understanding the impacts of offshore wind farms on this species that migrates to our shores is a high priority.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites: Y - emphasis on the south and east coasts.'
Comments: The reach of this work includes UK offshore windfarms and other north sea farms that are on the migration routes of this species. Cost could increase due to placing detectors offshore, thermal imaging, and use of MOTUS.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: More needs to be understood about the status and needs of this species within England. Extending the terrestrial monitoring of this species will greatly help, as will the development of a standardised approach to monitoring in England the longer term.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments: This would apply across its range and the reason for stating 2 years duration is the time to make the monitoring approach mainstream
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: The impact on this species of onshore wind turbines is unclear. Data from ongoing monitoring following mitigation measures needs to be assessed to ascertain whether it is being successful in stopping mortalities.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Pressure mitigation
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: This action could be grouped in with the same needs for noctule, soprano pipistrelle, serotine and Leisler's bat. It would take the joint funds to carry out this work.
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.