Action

Artificially mist habitat to keep it damp

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    24%
  • Certainty
    20%
  • Harms
    0%

Source countries

Key messages

  • One before-and-after study in Tanzania found that installing a sprinkler system to mitigate against a 90% reduction of river flow did not maintain a population of Kihansi spray toads.

 

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 1996–2004 of a sprinkler system to mitigate against a 90% reduction of river flow caused by a hydropower project along the Lower Kihansi River, Tanzania (Krajick 2006, Conservation Breeding Specialist Group IUCN/SSC 2007) found that following a brief recovery, the Kihansi spray toad Nectophrynoides asperginis declined rapidly. Following the implementation of the sprinkler system, numbers increased to approximately 20,000 by June 2003 from 11,000 in 2000. However, the population then declined rapidly to 40 in August 2003 and five in January 2004. Authors suggest that causes for the sudden decline may have been introduction of the chytrid fungus or pesticides. The population estimate for the toads had decreased from 50,000 in 1996 to 11,000 toads in 2000 once the river flow was reduced. The hydropower project was implemented in May 2000 resulting in a reduction of water flow, but the sprinkler system was not completed until February 2001. The system comprised a several kilometre-long gravity-fed pipe system that delivered mist from hundreds of spray nozzles onto a quarter of the suitable toad habitat.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Smith, R.K., Meredith, H. & Sutherland, W.J. (2019) Amphibian Conservation. Pages 9-65 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, N. Ockendon, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2019. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Amphibian Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Amphibian Conservation

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, terrestrial 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 latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

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