Use signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

The effects of summer (e.g. Moore et al. 2006) or winter (Sato et al. 2013) human recreational activity on reptiles can be negative (Larson et al. 2016). Different reptile species may tolerate different levels of disturbance, but it may lead to behaviour changes (Nyhof et al. 2015), nest abandonment (Moore et al. 2006), physical damage to reptiles or nests, or the displacement of individuals or populations. For vulnerable species or nests it may be possible to reduce the impacts of human disturbance using signs or access restrictions in areas subject to high use. Reducing access may also help reduce the risk of human introduction of non-native plants, animals or disease.

^{Larson C.L., Reed S.E., Merenlender A.M. & Crooks K.R. (2016) Effects of recreation on animals revealed as widespread through a global systematic review. PLoS One, 11, e0167259.}

^{Sato C.F., Wood J.T. & Lindenmayer D.B. (2013) The effects of winter recreation on alpine and subalpine fauna: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PloS one, 8, e64282}

^{Nyhof P.E. & Trulio L. (2015) Basking western pond turtle response to recreational trail use in urban California. Chelonian Conservation and Biology, 14, 182–184.}

^{Moore M.J. & Seigel R.A. (2006) No place to nest or bask: effects of human disturbance on the nesting and basking habits of yellow-blotched map turtles (Graptemys flavimaculata). Biological Conservation, 130, 386–393.}

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance. This study was in Turkey.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Turkey found that in an area with signs where sea turtle nests were fenced, nests had higher hatching success than nests from areas with no fencing or signs.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

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 replicated, controlled study in 2000 on a sandy beach in southwest Turkey (Başkale & Kaska 2005) found that sea turtle nests protected from human foot traffic using fencing and signs around individual nests tended to have higher hatching success rates than unprotected nests. Results were not statistically tested. Nests fenced for protection had 76% hatching success (667 of 880 eggs hatched, of which 653 hatchlings reached the sea) compared to 65% hatching success of unfenced nests (3,317 of 5,075 eggs hatched, of which 3,078 hatchlings reached the sea). All nests (12 nests) in a 2.5 km section of the 8 km long Fethiye Beach were fenced (70 × 70 × 150 cm with a 1 cm plastic mesh) with a sign “Do not disturb the turtle nests” in both Turkish and English to prevent human disturbance. Nests on the rest of the beach (72 nests) were unfenced. Nests were monitored from June to September 2000.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Başkale E. & Kaska Y. (2005) Sea turtle nest conservation techniques on southwestern beaches in Turkey. Israel Journal of Ecology & Evolution, 51, 13-26.

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

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Reptile Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Use signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Introduce and enforce regulations for reptile watching tours Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Use nest covers to protect against human disturbance Action Link	Awaiting assessment	2	Synopsis Link