Create or restore savannas

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

Through under-grazing or burning suppression, savanna vegetation can revert to denser scrubland. Restoring savanna may benefit reptiles typically associated with the habitat.

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects of creating or restoring savannas on reptile populations. This study was in Australia.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

Richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in Australia found that reptile species richness was higher following restoration of savanna-like habitat on a golf course.

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

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 before-and-after study in 1996–2004 of a golf course with degraded savanna-like habitat of open woodland and grassland in Sydney, Australia (Burgin & Wotherspoon 2009) found that restoration that included leaving unmown buffers around ponds, removing non-native weeds, planting native vegetation and adding woody debris resulted in an increase in reptile species over eight years. Reptiles increased from three to eight species in the first two years and to nine species after five years, then remained stable for the following three years. A total of 37 reptile species were predicted in the area of which eight were present following restoration (in 2004), compared to three prior to restoration (in 1996). The golf course was developed in 1993 and restoration undertaken in 1997–2001. The mowing regime was changed to develop rough grassland and a narrow band of herb vegetation was retained around ponds as a buffer zone; native shrubs and trees were planted; non-native weeds were removed and coarse woody debris was reintroduced onto the woodland floor. Reptile surveys were carried out by visual searches (4 hrs long) and checking 12 artificial shelters once a season in 1996–2004.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Burgin S. & Wotherspoon D. (2009) The potential for golf courses to support restoration of biodiversity for biobanking offsets. Urban Ecosystems, 12, 145-155.

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
Restore beaches Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Create or restore grasslands Action Link	Awaiting assessment	4	Synopsis Link
Create or restore savannas Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link