Action

Action Synopsis: Bird Conservation About Actions

Reduce inter-specific competition for nest sites of songbirds by removing competitor species

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    50%
  • Certainty
    22%
  • Harms
    0%

Study locations

Key messages

  • Two studies from Australia found increases in bird populations and species richness after the control of noisy miners Manorina melanocephala – a native but hyper-competitive species.
  • A controlled study from Italy found that blue tits Parus caeruleus nested in more nest boxes when hazel dormice Muscardinus avellanarius were excluded from nest boxes over winter.

 

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 paired site study of patches of remnant eucalypt woodland in Victoria, Australia (Grey et al. 1997), found a significant increase in bird abundance and species richness after reduction in the numbers of noisy miners Manorina melanocephala in two of three sites.  The differences were attributable to an influx of honeyeaters and other small insectivorous birds. In a third site, possibly as the result of the presence of understorey vegetation, there was only a small starting population of noisy miners.  The reduction in their numbers influenced the species composition but not bird abundance.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A controlled trial in 2001-2 in beech, holly and oak forests on Sicily, Italy (Sara et al. 2005), found that blue tits Parus caeruleus (also Cyanistes caeruleus) occupied a higher proportion of nest boxes in an experimental area where hazel dormice Muscardinus avellanarius were excluded from nest boxes over winter, compared to a control area where dormice were not excluded, but this difference was not significant. The authors argue that the lack of significance may be due to the small sample size (25 nest boxes in each treatment). Dormice were excluded by blocking nest box entrances between November 2001 and March 2002. This study is also discussed in ‘Provide artificial nesting sites’.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A before-and-after study of bird species in privately owned remnant eucalypt woodland in New South Wales, Australia (Debus 2008), found a decline in small and medium songbirds after a dense colony of noisy miners Manorina melanocephala became established.  The number of bird species increased after a cull of the noisy miners, and improved further as new planting of native trees and shrubs became established.   The results are consistent with noisy miners causing a decline in small woodland bird diversity by competitive exclusion, released by culling.  The restoration of a shrub layer is likely to have played a part in the maintained increase in the diversity of bird species, but the relative contributions of the cull and planting cannot be quantified.    The study was not replicated or controlled, and the cull was unofficial and unsanctioned.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Williams, D.R., Child, M.F., Dicks, L.V., Ockendon, N., Pople, R.G., Showler, D.A., Walsh, J.C., zu Ermgassen, E.K.H.J. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Bird Conservation. Pages 137-281 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

 

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Bird Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bird 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 18

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