Increase size of protected area

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

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

55%
Certainty

30%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Large protected areas may be better able to support viable populations of mammals than are smaller areas. However, protected area effectiveness may also be linked to sites being surrounded by similar habitat, having strong public support, effective law enforcement, low human population densities and sufficient financial resources (Struhsaker et al. 2005). Where these are not in place, factors such as activities of surrounding human populations may have a greater impact on species survival (Parks & Harcourt 2002).

Parks S.A, & Harcourt A.H. (2002) Reserve size, local human density, and mammalian extinctions in U.S. protected areas. Conservation Biology, 16, 800–808.

Struhsaker T.T., Struhsaker P.J. & Siex K.S. (2005) Conserving Africa’s rain forests: problems in protected areas and possible solutions. Biological Conservation, 123, 45–54.

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects on mammals of increasing the size of a protected area. This study was in South Africa.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY)

Behaviour change (1 study): A before-and-after study in South Africa found that expanding a fenced reserve resulted in the home range of a reintroduced group of lions becoming larger but the core range becoming smaller.

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 before-and-after study in 2000–2001 at a primarily savanna site in South Africa (Druce et al. 2004) found that expanding a fenced reserve resulted in the home range of a reintroduced group of lions Panthera leo becoming larger but the core range becoming smaller. Following fence removal, the home range was larger (74 km²) than prior to fence removal (38 km²). The opposite was true for the core range (after fence removal: 2 km²; before fence removal: 11 km²). In December 1994, a pride of five lions was reintroduced to the fenced Greater Makalali Conservancy, where lions had previously become extinct. Two male lions were subsequently removed and replaced by two new males in 1999. In October 2000, the fenced area was enlarged from 11,089 ha to 13,600 ha, by removing a fence between the conservancy and a neighbouring game reserve. Lions were monitored through visual observations for six months before and six months after fence removal. The home range was defined as the smallest area containing 95% of the distribution used and the core range was the smallest area containing 50% of distribution used.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Druce D., Genis H., Braak J., Greatwood S., Delsink A., Kettles R., Hunter L. & Slotow R. (2004) Population demography and spatial ecology of a reintroduced lion population in the Greater Makalali Conservancy, South Africa. Koedoe, 47, 103-118.

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

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Retain buffer zones around core habitat Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Encourage habitat protection of privately-owned land Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Legally protect habitat for mammals Action Link	Beneficial	7	Synopsis Link