Install underpasses beneath ski runs

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
  • Certainty
  • Harms

Study locations

Key messages

  • One study evaluated the effects on mammals of installing underpasses beneath ski runs. This study was in Australia.




  • Use (1 study): A replicated study in Australia found that boulder-filled crossings beneath ski slopes were used by seven small mammal species.

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 replicated study in 2009–2013 in a woodland, heath, and grassland site in New South Wales, Australia (Schroder & Sato 2017) found that boulder-filled crossings beneath ski slopes were used by small mammals. Seven mammal species were detected using crossings. From 131 detections where mammals were identified to species, the most frequent were bush rat Rattus fuscipes (62 detections), broad-toothed rat Mastacomys fuscus (35 detection), dusky antechinus Antechinus swainsonii (21 detections) and black rat Rattus rattus (10 detections). Eight boulder-filled crossings were constructed under ski runs on grass slopes of a ski area that operated in June–September. Crossings linked remnant heath or woodland. Crossings comprised trenches, 0.4–2.4 m deep, 1–9 m wide, 12–79 m long and filled with rocks of 0.2–2 m diameter. Mammal passage was monitored using hair tubes every 3–6 m (4–13 tubes/crossing). Most crossings were surveyed biannually (7 days in each March–April and November–December) from March 2009 to April 2013.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Littlewood, N.A., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K., Martin, P.A., Lockhart, S.L., Schoonover, R.F., Wilman, E., Bladon, A.J., Sainsbury, K.A., Pimm S. and Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Terrestrial Mammal Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for terrestrial mammals excluding bats and primates. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation
Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation - Published 2020

Terrestrial Mammal 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