Soprano Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pygmaeus)
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: | Pipistrellus pygmaeus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Leach, 1825) |
| 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: | No |
| Justification: | Soprano pipistrelle is a widespread species and listed as Least Concern on the IUCN Red List for England. While the species faces potential challenges, such as changes in planning policy that could impact roosts and possible risks from onshore wind turbines, evidence indicates it is not currently at significant risk of population decline and requiring further targeted conservation or recovery. The heavy dependence on built structures and human conflicts is largely addressed through existing licensing and regulation. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | More needs to be known about historic levels of this species in England. This species was only separated from the common pipistrelle in 1999. Subsequent research has shown it has differing needs from the common pipistrelle. It is not showing a recovering trend and there is likely to be local variation in how well this species is doing linked to land management practices. More needs to be understood about those local variations and historic changes and causes of these. This will help to attribute the causes of the failure to recover and address these. Threats from windfarms are addressed by current best practice guidance relating to placement, monitoring and mitigation measures of new and existing windfarms. Monitoring windfarms impacts will help inform future decision making in relation to potential negative impacts. Targeted actions additional to this are not considered necessary at this time. |
| 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: | It is likely that the species would benefit from landscape scale habitat management. The species' preferred foraging habitats are those associated with water: rivers, lakes and riparian woodland. Anywhere habitat associated with water that generates a localised high abundance of small diptera. Woodland edges, tree lines and hedgerow are also important for the species. Any management that increases habitat quality and area and insect abundance and diversity will be beneficial in providing increased availability of quality foraging habitat. |
Species Assessment
Not relevant as no Key Actions defined.
Key Actions
No Key Actions Defined
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.