Use electric fencing to exclude large native herbivores

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

65%
Certainty

10%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Activity of large herbivores can result in physical damage and degraded understory species diversity. Excluding large herbivores from forest areas by creating exclosures using electric fences can increase species diversity.

Study locations

Key messages

One controlled study in South Africafound that using electric fencing to exclude elephants and nyalas increased tree density.

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

A controlled study in 2005-2007 in Sand Forest in South Africa (Lagendijk et al. 2011) found that exclusion of elephant Loxodonta africana and nyala Tragelaphus angasii increased tree density. The density of all trees was higher when both species were excluded than unfenced plots (unfenced: ~8,000/ha; elephant excluded: ~10,000; nyala and elephant excluded: ~14,000). The density of seedlings was higher when both species were excluded than unfenced plots (unfenced: ~5,000; elephant excluded: ~6,000; nyala and elephant excluded: ~8,500). There were no differences between treatments for the density of saplings (unfenced: ~2,000; elephant excluded: ~2,500; nyala and elephant excluded: ~3,200) and grown trees (unfenced: ~1,000; elephant excluded: ~1,500; nyala and elephant excluded: ~2,300). Data was collected in 2007 in 12 plots (20 ×20 m) of each treatment: unfenced (accessible to elephants and nyalas), elephant excluded (inside elephant-excluded area of 3.1 km² surrounded by electrified-wire) and nyala and elephant excluded (wire-fence exclosures to exclude nyalas inside the elephant-free area) treatments. Treatments were applied in 2005 in a 5.2 km² Sand Forest patch.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Lagendijk D.G., Mackey R.L., Page B.R. & Slotow R. (2011) The effects of herbivory by a mega-and mesoherbivore on tree recruitment in Sand Forest, South Africa. PloS one, 6, e17983.

Please cite as:

Agra, H., Schowanek, S., Carmel, Y., Smith, R.K. & Ne’eman, G. (2020) Forest Conservation. Pages 323-366 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Forest Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Control large herbivore populations Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Use electric fencing to exclude large native herbivores Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link
Use wire fencing to exclude large native herbivores Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	13	Synopsis Link