HS2 Bat tunnel - some of the backstory

[myotis]

I don't suppose many are too interested in this long post, but it's here for anyone who is.

When I was an ecological consultant, many years ago, I advised on ecological mitigation for many large scale projects.

While very pleased, as a result of EU membership, that the UK was finally taking the issue of ecological damage from development seriously, I was also concerned that "some" nature conservation organisations and ecological consultants were pushing for excessive, and pointless, survey work and mitigation. This, I believed, was not in the best interests of nature conservation, because it made the costs (monetary and time) prohibitive, with minimal benefits, and long term would only strengthen the position of those who were against all but token levels of mitigation for ecological damage.

I was amazed to read about the 100 million pound bat tunnel being proposed as part of the HS2 ecological mitigation, which sounded ridiculous to me, and way beyond the sort of mitigation I would have expected. I was especially concerned about how this level of excess would affect, bat and other ecological mitigation long term, especially given the not unreasonable public and political outcry.

Until today, when reading an interview with Bob Stebbing ( the person who almost single handedly pushed to get bats legally protected back in the 1980s, who I have worked with often in the past) I hadn't put much more thought into the story. However, this is what Bob Stebbings said about it:


"Bob highlights the way in which ill-conceived mitigation projects have been used to paint existing bat legislation as a blocker to development. “There has been much erroneous commentary in relation to the greatly publicised HS2 ‘bat tunnel’, costing £100 million. That was never recommended by bat advisors, but was decided by HS2 planners. Yes, there are rare bats living in that area and bats are killed by vehicles of all kinds, including trains, but there are various ways of carrying out mitigation which could be used at a fraction of the cost.

“Clear excesses in required work have not helped wildlife protection and have made companies and now government think that wildlife gets in the way of development.” "

Fifty years of bat protection in Britain: in conversation with Bob Stebbings - British Wildlife

Fifty years of bat protection in Britain: in conversation with Bob Stebbings This year marks half a century since bats were first given legal protection in Britain. The forthcoming June issue of British Wildlife features a personal reflection from Bob Stebbings, one of the founding figures in...

www.britishwildlife.com

So I looked up what English Nature (The government's advisory body on nature conservation in England) had to say:

"Natural England has not required HS2 Ltd to build the reported structure, or any other structure, nor advised on the design or costs. The need for the structure was identified by HS2 Ltd more than 10 years ago, following extensive surveying of bat populations by its own ecologists in the vicinity of Sheephouse Wood."

Natural England's role in High Speed 2

There has been inaccurate coverage about Natural England’s involvement in the development of HS2's bat tunnel. Natural England has not required HS2 Ltd to build the reported structure, or any other structure, nor advised on the design or costs. The …

naturalengland.blog.gov.uk

And what about the Bat Conservation Trust. who play an influential role in the bat conservation world, including professional bat ecologists and consultants:

"HS2's so-called bat tunnel has become a political scapegoat, used to justify rolling back environmental protections. But the real story is very different. The tunnel was not forced by conservationists or wildlife laws - it was a consequence of poor decisions made by HS2 Ltd and approved by parliament. Now, politicians are misrepresenting this history to push the Planning and Infrastructure Bill (PIB), a law that won’t fix planning delays but will put nature at greater risk."
AND
"Government rhetoric suggests that conservationists forced the bat tunnel to be built - but that’s simply not true. And we think their rhetoric is working, as BCT is flooded with questions about our supposed involvement. But we had nothing to do with it!"

Throwing bats under the train: HS2’s bat tunnel and the dangerous spin behind deregulation - News - Bat Conservation Trust

HS2's so-called bat tunnel has become a political scapegoat, used to justify rolling back environmental protections. But the real story is very different. This page breaks down what the bat tunnel is, who approved it, and why weakening protections won’t solve the UK’s planning challenges.

www.bats.org.uk

I can't find any consultancy reports to see what bat advice was actually given to HS2, nor looked a what the local planning authority said, but for a slightly different perspective,here is an article from the New Civil Engineer about it (one of the non-ecological magazines you subscribe to if you work as an ecological consultant).

Exclusive: HS2 considered over 20 bat protection measures before opting for £119M ‘bat shed’ | New Civil Engineer

NCE can also share the first images from the construction of the structure. What is the ‘bat shed’ and why is it needed? The 1km long Sheephouse Wood Bat

www.newcivilengineer.com

 

[Jannyfox]

I read about this a while back. While I can't remember the details I do remember that it didn't come from the ecologists etc, that there were better, easier and less costly ways of protecting the bats. As you said, it's used as a scapegoat and is pushed to entice the public into believing their tax revenue is being wasted on something they know little and care less about. It's not wildlife vs humans. We all evolved to coexist together. We lose wildlife at our peril.
I am 'batty'. I sometimes get them roosting in my house, I survey and study my local ones and I volunteer on the BCT helpline. The local bat group provided kit for a public event near me recently and I helped out. What was great was to see the number of kids there and how engaged they were. How do you keep that engagement when they become bitter and cynical adults looking for someone else to blame for their own woes?

 

[myotis]

I read about this a while back. While I can't remember the details I do remember that it didn't come from the ecologists etc, that there were better, easier and less costly ways of protecting the bats. As you said, it's used as a scapegoat and is pushed to entice the public into believing their tax revenue is being wasted on something they know little and care less about. It's not wildlife vs humans. We all evolved to coexist together. We lose wildlife at our peril.
I am 'batty'. I sometimes get them roosting in my house, I survey and study my local ones and I volunteer on the BCT helpline. The local bat group provided kit for a public event near me recently and I helped out. What was great was to see the number of kids there and how engaged they were. How do you keep that engagement when they become bitter and cynical adults looking for someone else to blame for their own woes?

I used to give bat talks (and play the bat-moth game) around our local primary schools. When doing house visits to deal with bat complaints, it was good to see how often the parents had been given a "bat education" by their children who had been at one of my talks.

Giving bat talks to children was a great learning tool as they often asked the "obvious' questions, that adults avoided asking for fear of appearing stupid. Not that I can now remember any examples of this, but I was very aware of it at the time.

 

[Jannyfox]

I get people who don't want to pick up a bat in need of help because they're 'scared of bats'. First thing I ask is 'what are you scared of?' Just to make them think. Then I can address the fears they have, while stressing that 'bats eat the insects that want to bite you'. Works every time. For some people all they know about bats is from horror films and Dracula. Not surprising they get such bad press

 

[myotis]

I get people who don't want to pick up a bat in need of help because they're 'scared of bats'. First thing I ask is 'what are you scared of?' Just to make them think. Then I can address the fears they have, while stressing that 'bats eat the insects that want to bite you'. Works every time. For some people all they know about bats is from horror films and Dracula. Not surprising they get such bad press

Picking up a bat, is very different thing today compared to my day, as we weren't concerned about bat lyssavirus, But even then the advice to the general public was to gently bundle it up in a towel.

We always caught a bat with a static hand net when doing a house call and introduced it to the householder. With a few exceptions, people who had started off wanting to get rid of their bats, fell in love with them after being formally introduced. Again, the children were useful allies when dealing with parents who were reluctant to share their house with a bat colony.

I was once at a house where the owner, unaware of the law, had converted the attic into a childrens playroom, but still left access for the lesser horseshoe bat colony which had living in the attic. I had no way of knowing what the numbers had been in the past, but after several years since the conversion, the bats were apparently happily cohabiting the space with the children. When I was there, a few lesser horseshoe bats were hanging under the children's pool table and there LHB droppings under the fishtank table in the living room and at various othe places around the house. I wasn't entirely sure whether it was the family sharing their home with the bats, or the bats sharing their home with the family.

I've been to several houses where bats and people were cohabiting. In one the owners used to open their backdoor every night to let the bats out (LHBs again). The bats used to fly down the stairs from their roost in the attic and hang amongst the coats and jackets on pegs near the back door until the door was opened for them.

It's very easy to become a bit obsessed with bats

 

[Tringa]

Thanks for the post, Graham - a good illustration of how the most well publicised account is not always either the full story or even accurate.

It is always a delight to see bats.

Dave

 

[the black fox]

Interesting post indeed

 

[bass_junkie83]

While I have no experience of bats (but I do think they are beautiful creatures) I do have plenty of experience of HS2.
Ignoring whether the bat tunnel in principle is the right mitigation measure or not, one of the reasons that the costs of HS2 infrastructure is so high comes down to the design requirements, particularly around durability. The project needs to be designed for a minimum 125 year design life with minimal allowance for maintenance interventions. That requires very robust design and construction methods which greatly impacts on cost.

Not saying that is necessarily a bad thing, it reduces the ongoing maintenance costs and service interruption in favour for higher upfront costs. Where the cost/benefit sits will not be the same throughout the project.

 

[myotis]

While I have no experience of bats (but I do think they are beautiful creatures) I do have plenty of experience of HS2.
Ignoring whether the bat tunnel in principle is the right mitigation measure or not, one of the reasons that the costs of HS2 infrastructure is so high comes down to the design requirements, particularly around durability. The project needs to be designed for a minimum 125 year design life with minimal allowance for maintenance interventions. That requires very robust design and construction methods which greatly impacts on cost.

Not saying that is necessarily a bad thing, it reduces the ongoing maintenance costs and service interruption in favour for higher upfront costs. Where the cost/benefit sits will not be the same throughout the project.

Yes, there are many factors affecting the final design of any environmental/ecological mitigation, many of which are unrelated to the ecological requirements.

An important part of the ecologists role is to explain in detail, the mitigation aim and objectives, and not just the mitigation requirements. This allows other specialists to better understand how their aim and objectives for the scheme can work with, and contribute to, the ecological needs. This of course works both ways, so that an ecologists that engages with the scheme's aim and objectives is more likely to successfully promote the best possible ecological mitigation for it.

My own experience of working with engineers, architects etc is that they tend to be pretty clever people, and once they understand what the ecologist is trying to achieve with the mitigation, can make useful suggestions and improve the mitigation for both the scheme and the ecology.

But back to the Bat Bridge, There may well be reasons why this extravagant structure was needed for reasons that went beyond the bat mitigation needs, but I haven' seen that argument made. That doesn't mean it hasn't been made, just that I haven't seen it.

And, while my experience of working as an ecological consultant was generally a good one, I am also aware from seeing documents I wasn't meant to see, and overhearing conversations I wasn't meant to hear, how often the ecologists were blamed for project delays and increased costs, which had nothing to do with us.