So what’s
the problem? Are we seeing our churches invaded by hordes of big booted vandals
intent on destruction? Have the iconoclasts of the 17th century
returned to deface, smash and destroy all that they overlooked the last time?
No. The answer is that our churches are increasingly becoming home to colonies
of small, rather cute, flying mammals. Bats.
I may sound
as though I am overstating the case here. What harm can a few bats and their
droppings do to so many churches. We have 650 in Norfolk alone. Surely a few
bats can’t be too much of a problem. Well you only have to go and see for
yourself. Bat urine is highly corrosive and it isn’t simply a case of being
able to wipe away the damage. It actually eats into the surface upon which it
lands. Medieval wall paintings, memorial brasses, ledger stones, rood screens
and alabaster monuments are all being affected. It isn’t simply damage we are
seeing, which can be fixed by costly and clever conservation – but their slow, relentless
and irreversible destruction. I have seen the surface of alabaster memorials
simply crumbling away and ledger stones etched and pock marked by bat
droppings. I have seen the glorious medieval paintings that grace our East
Anglian rood screens dripping in bat droppings that eat into the pigment. And
once these things are gone – they are gone forever.
Don’t
misunderstand me. I actually rather like bats. Fascinating little creatures
that we still have so much to learn about. Indeed, it was only very recently
that we discovered that the Pipistrelle bat was not one species, as we’d previously
assumed, but actually two. Now here is the real problem though. Both the bats
and the medieval artworks are protected by legislation. To harm a bat or
disturb its roost can result in prosecution and a very hefty fine, in the same
way that damaging a designated heritage asset can.
Which rather
leaves those who care for our medieval churches in something of a catch 22
situation. They cannot in any way disturb the bats but, by allowing them to
continue their incontinent infestation, they are failing in their own duty of
care to the medieval building and the artworks they contain. Damned if you do
and damned if you don’t.
But surely
this is nothing new I hear you ask (I have very good hearing) - and you would
be right. We have always had bats in certain churches - bats in the belfry.
However, the problem is growing at an extremely alarming rate. The number of
churches being used as bat roosts is growing and the number of bats at
established roosts also appears, from the quantity of crap they are leaving
across our medieval monuments, to be on the increase too. Why should this be
so? Well, to some extent it is a result of the success of bat legislation. The
legal protection now afforded to bats has seen their numbers rise significantly
– which is unquestionably a good thing. However, this rise in the number of
bats has corresponded with a massive loss in traditional bat roosting sites.
The traditional farm buildings, barns and outbuildings that once littered the
East Anglian countryside, and played host to numerous bat roosts, are all but
gone; either converted to housing, or demolished to make way for buildings more
suited to modern farming and farm vehicles. The decline in use of harmful
pesticides, coupled with wider field margins and uncut roadside verges, has led
to an increase in insects – essentially making the growth of bat populations
sustainable. As a result the bats are moving wholesale into our medieval
churches – leaving them rather sticky and crunchy underfoot.
And the solution?
Well there isn’t a cheap or simple one. Whilst certain churches have taken to
covering almost every surface in plastic sheeting, cleared away only for
services, this can cause as many problems as it solves. The sheeting causes
condensation beneath, causing further damage to medieval artworks already
damaged by bat droppings. No, like the last late night drunk at the bar, the
bats need to be firmly and politely asked to vacate the premises. If this means
building expensive and purpose built bat roosts in our churchyards, already a
haven for wildlife, then so be it. In the long run it will surely be cheaper
that trying to repair the damage being done to our medieval heritage.
However, if
we sit back and do nothing, letting this low-key and gentle crisis continue unabated,
then I urge you all, every one, to go and visit the wonders of medieval art
that still sit in our glorious East Anglian churches. They won’t be there too
much longer…
I've been thinking about this before this and I agree with you. Why can't people donate bat boxes and hang them out side the churches? Most churches have trees. Work with the Bat Groupand have a grand make a bat box event and hopefully wake people up to the problem and at the same time do something constructive and make (hah) some new homes. I like bats and I like medieval stuff -just please don't ever put me in the situation where I have to choose through lack of foresight
ReplyDeleteWonder why they only choose these old churches and not any other places to do their thing. Is it because the churches are not open all the time and are less frequented by people than by bats? If that is the case then it means that a lot of visits by the locals as well as from those outside the region are made to make the bats realise that they are using a pretty busy site and they might not come there any more. Would hate to see any of these churches get damaged by the bats and would definitely not want the poor bats to be made homeless or driven out without being given an alternative site to stay in. Hope a middle path is found soon and our lovely heritage is not lost forever due to the bats.
ReplyDelete