Action Synopsis: Bat Conservation About Actions

Relocate bat colonies roosting inside dams

How is the evidence assessed?

Study locations

Key messages

  • One study evaluated the effects of relocating bat colonies inside dams on bat populations. The study was in Argentina.



  • Abundance (1 study): One study in Argentina found that almost two-thirds of a large colony of Brazilian free-tailed bats relocated to a different dam compartment five months after being displaced from six compartments where the colony originally roosted.


About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A study in 2002–2003 at one dam reservoir in Tucumán Province, Argentina (Regidor et al 2003) found that almost two-thirds of a large colony of Brazilian free-tailed bats Tadarida brasiliensis relocated to a different internal dam compartment after being displaced from the six compartments where the colony originally roosted. Approximately 1,400,000 Brazilian free-tailed bats were estimated to be roosting in one dam compartment five months after the displacement of a colony of approximately 2,000,000 bats from six of the seven dam compartments where it previously roosted. The study was conducted inside a dam wall (100 m long, 90 m high). The wall housed seven compartments used by Brazilian free-tailed bats. In October 2012, bats were deterred from six of the seven compartments using high intensity lights and naphthalene vapour. Once empty of bats, the dam compartments were sealed with metal doors. Bat numbers were estimated by three observers based on the area occupied by each single bat. Bats were counted three times between October 2002 and March 2003.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Berthinussen, A., Richardson O.C. and Altringham J.D. (2021) Bat Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.


Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Bat Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bat Conservation
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust