Action

Promote knowledge exchange between fishers to improve good practice

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

  • One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of promoting knowledge exchange between fishers to improve good practice. This study was in the USA.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

  • Survival (1 study): One before-and-after study in the USA found that following the introduction of a tool to help facilitate knowledge exchange and the avoidance of loggerhead turtles, loggerhead turtle bycatch was similar compared to the two years before the tool was introduced.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

OTHER (1 STUDY)

Human behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in the USA found that following the introduction of a tool to help facilitate avoidance of loggerhead turtles, fishers did not spend less time fishing in the areas recommended for avoidance by the tool.

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 before-and-after study in 2005–2007 in pelagic waters north of Hawaii, USA (Howell et al. 2008) found that a tool (‘TurtleWatch’) created to facilitate knowledge exchange and the avoidance of loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta interactions with a swordfish Xiphias gladius shallow-set longline fishery, did not reduce turtle catch, and fishers did not spend less time fishing in areas recommended for avoidance by the tool. Results were not statistically tested. After the tool was deployed, 0–0.03 loggerhead turtles/1000 hooks (12 total turtles) were caught compared to 0.01–0.04 loggerhead turtles/1000 hooks (17 total turtles) in the previous year and 0–0.05 turtles/1000 hooks (9 total turtles) two years earlier. Fishers did not remain south of the fishing boundary line recommended by the tool, instead the whole fishery moved further north than previously and remained north for a longer time than in the two preceding years (see paper for details). ‘TurtleWatch’ combined historical fishing, environmental and turtle behavioural data to recommend areas to avoid fishing. In January–March 2007, information from the tool was disseminated daily in electronic and paper format to industry professionals and fishers. The fishery also had a legal catch limit of 17 turtles/year, after which fishery closures were imposed. In January–March 2005–2007, line deployments (2005: 520 deployments; 2006: 842; 2007: 797), number of hooks put out (2005: 429,580 hooks; 2006: 670,914; 2007: 689,486), and loggerhead turtle interactions were monitored.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Sainsbury K.A., Morgan W.H., Watson M., Rotem G., Bouskila A., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2021) Reptile Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for reptiles. Conservation Evidence Series Synopsis. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Reptile Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Reptile Conservation
Reptile Conservation

Reptile Conservation - Published 2021

Reptile synopsis

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 19

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 Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust