Article 17 web tool

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: 5:1 Gap distance 20.000m ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Methodik zur Ermittlung der Populationsgröße in EU-Einheit: Verschneidung der Vorkommenspunkt (Distribution) mit grids1x1 und Habitatmaskierung mit CorineLandCover-Klassen ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Navarra ha llevado a cabo la colocación de cajas para la especie, con los siguientes resultados durante el seguimiento:
en 2012 se localizaron 13 indiv en 97 cajas (0,13 indiv/caja)
en 2013 se localizaron 9 indiv en 69 cajas (0,16 indiv/caja)
en 2017 se localizaron 33 indiv en 136 cajas (0,24 indiv/caja) ||
->HabInfo: En Navarra los bosques ganan madurez y se han colocado además un numero importante de cajas refugio (>100) que se ha mostrado como una medida eficaz para la especie. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Gatunek znany z nielicznych stanowisk rozmieszczonych na całym obszarze regionu alpejskiego. Niska liczba obserwacji wynika z braku ukierunkowanych badań. Gatunek ten migruje na znaczne odległości – ponad 1000 km pomiędzy miejscami rozrodu i zimowania, dlatego może być znajdowany w dowolnym miejscu. Różnice między mapą rozmieszczenia w aktualnym raporcie i raporcie 2013 wynikają z tego, że aktualna mapa zawiera wyłącznie dane z obserwacji uzyskanych po 2000 r.
Do obliczenia całkowitej powierzchni zasięgu w regionie biogeograficznym użyto standardowego algorytmu IT-tool. Stąd tak duża rożnica w powierzchni zasięgu podawanej w tym i w poprzednim raporcie. ||
->Population: W przypadku tego gatunku rozmieszczenie jest słabo poznane (stwierdzenia gatunku po 2000r. mieszczą się w 8 polach siatki 10x10km) Wielkości populacji w obowiązujących w tym raporcie nowych jednostkach, czyli polach siatki 1x1 km określono na 800, co wynika z przyjętego założenia, że w każdym polu siatki 10x10km, zaznaczonym na mapie rozmieszczenia jako miejsce występowania gatunku, zasiedla on wszystkie pola siatki 1x1 km (8x100=800).
Można zakładać, że liczebność jest znacznie wyższa niż wynika z dotychczasowych stwierdzeń. W przypadku większości (wszystkich?) gatunków leśnych liczebność jest niedoszacowana. Brak danych dla określenia trendów. ||
->HabInfo: W Polsce gatunek leśny, kryjący się w wysoko położonych dziuplach drzew, wielokrotnie zmieniający schronienia w trakcie jednego sezonu.
Dostępność odpowiednich siedlisk wydaje się dobra. Stan siedlisk jest przynajmniej stabilny i nie uległ pogorszeniu ||
->Future: Pomimo niewielkiej liczby stwierdzeń, ale uwzględniając ogólnie dobry stan siedlisk i sezonowe migracje borowiaczka, perspektywy ochrony można ocenić jako dobre, przynajmniej w odniesieniu do siedliska. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Zasięg i rozmieszczenie. Gatunek znany z nielicznych stanowisk rozmieszczonych na całym obszarze regionu alpejskiego. Niska liczba obserwacji wynika z braku ukierunkowanych badań. Gatunek ten migruje na znaczne odległości – ponad 1000 km pomiędzy miejscami rozrodu i zimowania, dlatego może być znajdowany w dowolnym miejscu. Prawdopodobnie gatunek nie rozmnaża się w regionie, mimo obecności odpowiednich siedlisk, a wykorzystuje go głownie jako obszar odbywania godów, w okresie migracji oraz być może do zimowania. Większość lub wszystkie odłowione osobniki były samcami, np. w Bieszczadzkim Parku Narodowym. Różnice między mapą rozmieszczenia w aktualnym raporcie i raporcie 2013 wynikają z tego, że aktualna mapa zawiera wyłącznie dane z obserwacji uzyskanych po 2000 r.
Stan zasięgu określono jako nieznany z uwagi na słabe poznanie rozmieszczenia gatunku. W poprzednim raporcie stan zasięgu określono również jako nieznany XX.

Populacja. Brak danych dla oceny trendów. Stan populacji nie do określenia (po 2000 r. Obserwacje gatunku mieszczą się w 8 polach siatki 10x10 km). Można zakładać, że liczebność jest znacznie wyższa niż wynika z dotychczasowych stwierdzeń. W przypadku większości (wszystkich?) gatunków leśnych liczebność jest niedoszacowana. Brak danych dla określenia trendów. W raporcie 2013 wielkość populacji określono liczbą stwierdzeń (7).
Wielkości populacji referencyjnej nie określono, podobnie jak w raporcie 2013.
Stan populacji nieznany XX; ocena jak w raporcie 2013.

Siedlisko. W Polsce gatunek leśny, kryjący się w wysoko położonych dziuplach drzew, wielokrotnie zmieniający schronienia w trakcie jednego sezonu. W regionie alpejskim do 1000 m n.p.m. Tworzy tez kolonie rozrodcze w skrzynkach dla ptaków i nietoperzy.
W regionie alpejskim brak jest jednak stwierdzeń rozrodu borowiaczka, prawdopodobnie z uwagi na wysokość nad poziomem morza, ponieważ obecne są tam odpowiednie dla tego gatunku siedliska (np… Buczyna karpacka, duże powierzchnie starodrzewu). Dotychczasowe stwierdzenia pochodzą głównie z odłowów nad rzekami i w lasach. Stan siedlisk oceniono jako właściwy, inaczej niż w raporcie z 2013 r., gdzie ocena tego parametru jest zaniżona. Stan siedlisk jest przynajmniej stabilny i nie uległ pogorszeniu.

Perspektywy zachowania. Ogólnie dobry stan siedlisk i sezonowe migracje borowiaczka, jednak nadal niewielka liczba stwierdzeń, stąd perspektywy ochrony ocenione podobnie jak w raporcie z 2013 r. jako nieznane (XX).

Ocena ogólna. Stan gatunku oceniono jako nieznany XX, podobnie jak raporcie 2013.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: 6.15 favourable reference population: there is only little information about colonies in Flanders (only a few known in Limburg, others suspected in Brabant and in other provinces) and almost no information about hibernating animals which makes it difficult to estimate the population size. We expect the population to be below the population size needed for the long-term survival. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: 10.1c
The future prospects for habitat are unknown. On the one hand an increase in habitat area and quality can be expected given the aging forests and the more ecological management of these forests. On the other hand, the migratory behaviour and the foraging in open landscape makes the species very vulnerable to wind energy production, a threat that can be expected to increase in importance. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Methodik zur Ermittlung der Populationsgröße in EU-Einheit: Verschneidung der Vorkommenspunkt (Distribution) mit grids1x1 und Habitatmaskierung mit CorineLandCover-Klassen ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Navarra ha llevado a cabo la colocación de cajas para la especie, con los siguientes resultados durante el seguimiento:
en 2012 se detectaron 16 individuos en 181 cajas (0,088 indiv/caja)
en 2013 se detectaron 51 individuos en 121 cajas (0,42 indiv/caja)
El aumento de individuos (31%) puede deberse a una progresiva colonización de las cajas-refugio.

Alcalde, J. T., Campion, D., Fabo, J., Marín, F., Artázcoz, A., Martínez, I., & Antón, I. (2013). Occupancy of bat-boxes in Navarre Ocupación de cajas-refugio por murciélagos en Navarra. Barbastella, 6(1), 34-43. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Leisler’s bat is one of the most common and widespread bat species in Ireland. Over 7,000 distribution records were collated for this species between 2007 and 2018. These records translated to 629 x 10km squares. Using the range tool, with gap closure set to 20km, an additional 133 grid cells were incorporated giving a total range of 762 cells or 76,200km2. This is thought to provide a good representation of the true extent of the species’ distribution in Ireland. Dedicated survey work in certain 10km squares (e.g. M54, M64, V67, V68) might fill the apparent gaps within the range, but it may be that these squares do not contain suitable habitat.
The range of the Leisler’s bat in 2013, based on data from 2001-2012, was calculated as 69,900km2. Although the current range appears greater, this is considered to be a reflection of better data following more concerted survey work, rather than a genuine increase due to expansion. The trend is considered to be stable.
The Favourable Reference Range is taken to be the same as the Range. The 2013 figure was based on the known range of the species at that time but it has been updated for this assessment to reflect the improved data now available. ||
->Population: The 2007 to 2018 distribution records held by Bat Conservation Ireland for this species were mapped at the 1km level to provide the population estimate used in 6.2. This is considered to be a minimum estimate of the species’ distribution in Ireland and is not considered a useful reflection of population.
The population estimate from the 2013 report (63,000-113,000) is retained for the present reporting period and provided in 6.4. It is not possible to count the population based on a complete census. Instead, the population of mature (volant) individuals has been estimated using data from the Car-based Bat Monitoring Scheme. This population estimate is calculated based on the detection distance for echolocating Leisler's bats (60-80m) and the approximate area that is detectable. The area of Ireland is divided by the approximate detectable area and multiplied by the probability of detecting a Leisler's bat along any given roadside (2007-2012) on any given evening, from Car-based Bat Monitoring data. The minimum end of the range is based on the wider detection range (80m) while the maximum end is based on the closer detection range (60m). This population estimate uses a number of assumptions which may be only approximately correct and it could be improved with more detailed information on size and shape of detectable areas, better knowledge of Leisler's bat habitat use around roadsides and other factors. However, it may be considered a starting point from which to refine future estimates. See Roche et al. (2013) for further details.
Data from the Car-based Bat Monitoring Scheme (2003-2017) shows that this species experienced a significant increase from 2003 until 2014 when the trend turned downwards. The lower 95% confidence interval around the smoothed trend currently overlaps the 2006 baseline index. In the latest twelve-year period (2006-2017) this species has increased by 29.7% in total (95% C.I. = -1% to +65%), equivalent to a per-annum increase of 2.2%. See Aughney et al. (2018) for full details.
The short-term trend was based on data from 2006-2017 but it is assumed to be the same for the default trend period 2007-2018.
The Favourable Reference Population for the species from 2013 is retained for the current reporting period, i.e. 63,000 volant individuals. ||
->HabInfo: Habitat and roosting associations of the Leisler’s bat were modelled using a Maximum Entropy model by Lundy et al. (2011) to determine likelihood of occurrence in specific habitats in the Irish landscape and maternity roost preferences. This modelling was carried out using roost and bat detector location data from 2000-2009 which is stored on the Bat Conservation Ireland bat database and included records from monitoring schemes, BATLAS 2010 and records contributed by ecologists, academics and volunteers, among others. CORINE landcover, altitude, climate data, soil pH and human bias layers were included in the model.
Leisler's bat records were widespread but found to be associated broadly with broadleaved woodland, mixed woodland and riparian habitats and small amounts of urbanisation (Lundy et al., 2011). Since these habitat types are at least stable or, in the case of woodlands, increasing, the habitat area and quality for the species is considered good and the trend is taken, conservatively, to be stable. ||
->Future: Ongoing car-based bat monitoring provides evidence for a steady increase in the population; there is no evidence of any decline in range or habitat. In general the future prospects of these parameters are considered to be good. ||
->Conclusion: Leisler’s bat is widespread across Ireland, but monitoring indicates it is more abundant in the east and south of the country. The most recent estimates for this species suggest a population size of ~60,000-110,000 animals with monitoring over the last 12 years indicating an increasing trend. Two threats/pressures have been identified and need to be investigated further. However, there is no evidence of decline in range or habitat and future prospects are considered good. Overall, the species is assessed as Favourable and the overall trend is demonstrating an on-going increase. There were no qualifiers for Favourable assessments in 2013. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: This migratory species can also to be found at sea (MATL)

Range is favourable maar alleen als onderdeel van een grensoverschrijdend netwerk.

Operator for FFR based on information in Ottburg, F.G.W.A. & C.A.M. van Swaay (red., 2014). For Nyctalus leisleri a FRR of 3100 km2 was given, however this is not a viable range. The number of grid cells positive for the species has increased ; this is however due to increased effort.
Some bat species such as Nyctalus leisleri were difficult to survey leading to lack of data regarding occurrence and distribution. FRR values in Ottburg & van Swaay (2014) are based on incomplete data.
Changes in information on occurrence are likely to be a result of increased survey intensity and new methods. The known range is therefore unsuited to assess a FRR. ||
->Population: Change in method is to estimate a ‘’population size’’ via the proxy of occupied grid cells, in stead of # individuals.
De gegevens uit het NEM zijn onvoldoende voor het berekenen van een (statistisch betrouwbare) trend. ||
->HabInfo: Species probably benefits from maturing forests for roosting. But specific requirements are unknown. Policies to increase area of wetlands will be positive effect of unknown magnitude; De soort heeft op zijn vliegroutes te maken met het risico van windturbines.

Although policy regarding woodland directed on increase of structure and age exists, measures to deal with tree lane management and woodland management need to address the function of roosting habitat. We do not know whether the protection following the Nature conservation law is implemented effectively. ||
->Future: De bosvleermuis is vrijwel geheel afhankelijk van bomen en wordt daardoor niet bedreigd door de verduurzaming van gebouwen.
Relatively wide spread but rare, numbers and trend not well known; Due to historical factors (maternity) roosts are overrepresented in tree lanes; there is an existing gap in age between tree lanes and woodlands. Although policy regarding woodland is directed on increase of structure and age, measures to deal with tree lane management and woodland management need to address the function of roosting habitat. We do not know whether the protection following the Nature conservation law is implemented effectively. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: GIS data and information on micro-habitat requirements is generally insuficient to provide a reliable and meaningful estimate. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Short term trend in range has been assessed by using the 2019 distribution data and the 2013 method for calculating range and comparing the result with range surface area in 2013. For further details please see the 2019 Article 17 UK Approach document and country assessments. ||
->Population: The 1km square count has been calculated from the UK count of 1km squares where the species has been recorded. This is a minimum count because it only includes number of recorded occupied 1km squares. There is no recent population estimate available for this species across the UK, and there are limited accurate data on trends, so it is not possible to comment on population changes or trends for this species at this time. Lack of a population estimate and trend information and inability to set an FRP mean that the population status of this species is currently unknown. ||
->HabInfo: The habitable area has been taken from Mathews et al. (2018). Whilst there is very little information on habitat area for this species, expert opinion is that there is sufficient quantity and quality of habitat available. ||
->Future: Future trend in Range is Overall stable; Future trend in Population is Unknown; and Future trend in Habitat for the species is Overall stable. For further information on how future trends inform the Future Prospects conclusion see the 2019 Article 17 UK Approach document. ||
->Conclusion: Conclusion on Range reached because: (i) the short-term trend direction in Range surface area is stable; and (ii) the current Range surface area is more than the Favourable Reference Range.

Conclusion on Population reached because: (i) the short-term trend direction in Population size is unknown; and (ii) the Favourable Reference Population is unknown.

Conclusion on Habitat for the species reached because: (i) the area of occupied habitat is sufficiently large and (ii) the habitat quality is suitable for the long-term survival of the species; and (iii) the short-term trend in area and quality of habitat is stable.

Conclusion on Future prospects reached because: (i) the Future prospects for Range are good; (ii) the Future prospects for Population are unknown; and (iii) the Future prospects for Habitat for the species are good.

Overall assessment of Conservation Status is Favourable because three of the conclusions are Favourable and one in Unknown.

Overall trend in Conservation Status is based on the combination of the short-term trends for Range -stable, Population - unknown, and Habitat for the species - stable.

Overall assessment of Conservation Status has not changed since 2013.

Overall trend in conservation status was not reported for this species in 2013. It is not clear from the information available, what the overall trend would have been in 2013 but there has been little change since the last reporting round. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The distribution and range maps of the previous Report were based on few historic acoustic reports of the species. According to new data on the variability of echolocation calls of this species and some other species with similar call parameters (N. noctula, Vespertiolio murinus, Eptesicus sp.) we excluded some doubtful records of this species in the time period 2013-2018. Thus the only reliable record of this species is one captured individual in SW of country during autumn migration.
Because of lack of data we consider N.leisleri as a marginal species in Latvia. ||
->Population: We use number of 1X1 km grids in this Report instead of number of individuals in the previous Reports. There is only one record of this species in 2007-2018, which is the only actually hand-held and reliably identified individual in the last 25 years. In 2015 one individual has been captured during the autumn migration indicating a possible occurrence of this species in Latvia during summer season. However the population size of this species is completely unknown and we gave the population size 1 1X1 km grid as the minimum population size. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Population size is estimated to 900 individuals in the boreal region, and 300 individuals in the continental region. This might be an overestimate since the species move around quite a lot and is able to fly long distances. The reference value is 400 in the boreal region and 600 in the continental region. The number of 1 x 1 km squares in which the species has been reported is 36 in the boreal region. ||
->HabInfo: Nyctalus leisleri use large home range and the foraging area is often located more than 10 km from the roosting site. It uses a large number of habitats, but most often open or semi-open habitats, such as pastures, lakes and meadows. The trends for the habitats is considered as unknown, since more detailed information of the habitat selection of the species in Sweden is lacking. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: 5.1 Gap distance 20.000m

5.3 Change is due to methodological reasons ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Range was probably underestimated the previous monitoring assessement. ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Methodik zur Ermittlung der Populationsgröße in EU-Einheit: Verschneidung der Vorkommenspunkt (Distribution) mit grids1x1 und Habitatmaskierung mit CorineLandCover-Klassen ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: Même si les perspectives futures sont inconnues, notamment vis-à-vis du développement du bois énergie qui risque d'impacter l'habitat forestier de l'espèce, et aussi vis-à-vis du développement de l'énergie éolienne, à court terme on peut penser que la situation restera stable.
--> revu validation : U2 pour population ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Range based on records and experts' opinion ||
->Population: Population size in reporting unit (grids 1x1) based on records and experts' opinion, estimated by deciduous broad-leaved forests and larger river valleys, … ||
->HabInfo: Based on expert opinion: habitat quality is likely decreasing, mainly of maternity and roosting sites due to insulation of buildings etc. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: Rather rare species with a low density due to suboptimal habitat (likely declining habitat quality) and low prey availability ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Różnice między mapą rozmieszczenia w aktualnym raporcie i w raporcie 2013 wynikają z tego, że aktualna mapa opiera się wyłącznie na stwierdzeniach gatunku po 2000 r. Rozmieszczenie ustalono na podstawie danych pochodzących z okresu letniego, brak danych z sezonu zimowego wynika z migracji na duże odległości (ponad 1000 km). W okresie migracji borowiaczek może być znajdowany w dowolnym miejscu Polski.
Do obliczenia całkowitej powierzchni zasięgu w regionie biogeograficznym użyto standardowego algorytmu IT-tool. Stąd tak duża różnica w powierzchni zasięgu podawanej w tym i poprzednim raporcie. ||
->Population: Wielkość populacji w obowiązujących w tym raporcie nowych jednostkach, czyli polach siatki 1x1 km, określono na min. 4300, co wynika z przyjętego założenia, że w jednym polu siatki 10x10km, zaznaczonym na mapie rozmieszczenia jako miejsce występowania gatunku, zasiedlone są przez gatunek wszystkie pola siatki 1x1 km (43 x100=4300). Niemniej jednak w przypadku tego gatunku rozmieszczenie jest słabo i zasiedlonych może być więcej takich pól. Liczebność populacji nie do określenia, ale można zakładać, że jest ona znacznie wyższa niż dotychczas uważano, ale jak w przypadku większości (wszystkich?) gatunków leśnych jest niedoszacowana. Brak danych dla określenia trendów. ||
->HabInfo: Głównym siedliskiem borowiaczka są większe kompleksy leśne nizinnej i wyżynnej części kraju, które zajmują dość znaczącą powierzchnię w skali kraju. Odpowiednimi siedliskami tego gatunku są także mniejsze lasy, ale z udziałem starych drzew oraz parki miejskie. Potencjalne siedlisko obejmuje starodrzewia, gdzie w dziuplach i pęknięciach kory zakłada kolonie rozrodcze . Niedobór dziupli może być u tego gatunku kompensowany zasiedlaniem skrzynek dla ptaków i nietoperzy. Wiek drzewostanów, a co za tym idzie dostępność dziupli i spękań w pniach ograniczany jest w całej Polsce (za wyjątkiem rezerwatów i parków narodowych) na skutek regularnego i intensywnego użytkowania rębnego. Niemniej, dostępność odpowiednich siedlisk można obecnie określić jako dobrą. Stan siedlisk jest stabilny. ||
->Future: Pomimo niewielkiej liczby stwierdzeń, ale uwzględniając sezonowe migracje borowiaczka i ogólnie dobry stan siedlisk, perspektywy ochrony można ocenić jako dobre. Dla populacji i zasiegu nieznane z uwagi na brak informacji o trendach. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Zasięg i rozmieszczenie:
Zasięg ustalono na podstawie danych pochodzących z okresu letniego, przede wszystkim odłowów, brak danych z sezonu zimowego wynika z migracji na duże odległości (ponad 1000 km), gatunek dotychczas nie był stwierdzony zimą w Polsce. Kryjówki jego kolonii rozrodczych znajdują się w lasach różnego typu, głównie starych drzewostanów, ale także w skrzynkach dla ptaków i nietoperzy. W okresie migracji borowiaczek może być znajdowany w dowolnym miejscu Polski. Stan zasięgu określono obecnie jako nieznany XX (właściwy w raporcie 2013). Różnice między wielkością zasięgu w aktualnym raporcie i w raporcie 2013 wynikają z tego, że obecnie zastosowano do jej obliczenia algorytm IT-tool.
Populacja:
W zachodniej części Polski gatunek ten jest notowany rzadziej niż we wschodniej, gdzie jest rozpowszechnionym i dość często notowanym nietoperzem, zwłaszcza we wszystkich większych kompleksach leśnych, gdzie prowadzono dokładniejsze badania. Gatunek leśny - ważne dla niego jest zachowanie starych drzewostanów liściastych i mieszanych, gdzie w dziuplach i pęknięciach w korze drzew zakładane są kolonie rozrodcze przez co trudne do odnalezienia. W starych drzewostanach dużych kompleksów leśnych wschodniej i południowo-wschodniej Polski, gatunek ten stanowi zwykle znaczny % wszystkich nietoperzy chwytanych w sieci (np. w Puszczy Białowieskiej i Kozienickiej trzeci gatunek pod względem liczebności, po borowcu wielkim i nocku rudym). Liczebność populacji nie do określenia, ale można zakładać, że jest ona znacznie wyższa niż dotychczas uważano, ale jak w przypadku większości (wszystkich?) gatunków leśnych jest niedoszacowana. Brak danych dla określenia trendów. Stan populacji nieznany; ocena jak w raporcie 2013.
Siedlisko.
Głównym siedliskiem borowiaczka są większe kompleksy leśne nizinnej i wyżynnej części kraju, które zajmują dość znaczącą powierzchnię w skali kraju. Odpowiednimi siedliskami tego gatunku są także mniejsze lasy, ale z udziałem starych drzew oraz parki miejskie. Potencjalne siedlisko obejmuje starodrzewia, gdzie w dziuplach i pęknięciach kory zakłada kolonie rozrodcze (powierzchnie oszacowano jako ok. 10% pow. leśnej w regionie kontynentalnym). Niedobór dziupli może być u tego gatunku kompensowany zasiedlaniem skrzynek dla ptaków i nietoperzy. Wiek drzewostanów, a co za tym idzie dostępność dziupli i spękań w pniach ograniczany jest w całej Polsce (za wyjątkiem rezerwatów i parków narodowych) na skutek regularnego i intensywnego użytkowania rębnego. Niemniej stan siedlisk ocenia się jako właściwy, inaczej niż w raporcie z 2013 r., gdzie ocena tego parametru jest zaniżona. Stan siedlisk jest stabilny i nie uległ pogorszeniu.
Perspektywy ochrony: Ogólnie dobry stan siedlisk i sezonowe migracje borowiaczka, jednak nadal niewielka liczba stwierdzeń, sta perspektywy ochrony ocenione podobnie jak w raporcie z 2013 r., jako nieznane (XX).
Ocena ogólna:
Stan gatunku oceniono jako nieznany, a więc inaczej niż w raporcie 2013, w którym ocena U1 wydaje się zaniżona.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The species range was poorly known before 2012. Thus, estimation of a range trend is not possible. The species surface area of range was miscalculated in the previous report. Recently it was found in a number of sites in the areas not under the effective control of the Government of the R. of Cyprus ||
->Population: The species population size was poorly known before 2012. Thus, estimation of a population trend is not possible. Available intervals (individuals) are provided in 6.4. The known number of occupied 1X1 cells is given in 6.2d. ||
->HabInfo: The species habitat sufficiency (area and/or quality) was poorly known before 2012. Thus, estimation of a habitat trend is chancy, but there is no data to justify that it has improved the past 12 years. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Navarra ha llevado a cabo la colocación de cajas para la especie, con los siguientes resultados durante el seguimiento:
2012 6 individuos en 80 c ajas
2013 11 individuos en 11 cajas ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: el seguimiento de cajas-refugio indica que es una especie bien representada y que responde correctamente a la colocación de las mismas. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: QA feedback : Confirmation que la tendance générale est "En amélioration" - Les populations sont stables, l'aire de répartition est importante ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Method used for population estimates in 5X5 grid cells from ecological niche modelling: all 5X5 grid cells inside current species distribution were selected with probability of occurrence greater than 0,3 (p>0,3) for minimum population estimate and greater than 0,2 (p>0,2) for maximum population estimate.
The population size in 6.2.d has been calculated in GIS using spatial information from the distribution data (10x10 km or smaller grids if additional data were available). Following the conversion of the available data in 1x1 km grid unit, marine or terrestrial grid cells have been deleted and thus excluded from the calculation, depending on the biogeographical region where the species occurs (MED or MMED, respectively). ||
->HabInfo: The surface area of the habitat is estimated at 39100 km2, the area of suitable habitat is42250 km2 and its quality is good.
Roosts on trees and buildings which are abundant, but threatened. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: For this species not enough data were collected during the period 2001-2014. Thus, the distribution, range, population size, habitat area and suitable habitat area were calculated or estimated using the most recent qualitative and quantitative data.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: GIS data and information on micro-habitat requirements is generally insuficient to provide a reliable and meaningful estimate. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Nyctalus leisleri"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report