Action: Manage cutting regime 
Key messages
Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.
Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.
One study investigating the effects of changing mowing regimes is discussed in ‘Habitat restoration and creation – Change mowing regime’.
Many amphibians require damp terrestrial habitat once they move out of water. If vegetation surrounding water bodies is cut very short, it will not retain sufficient humidity and cover for amphibians during their terrestrial stages. Cutting can also disturb amphibians.
Smith, R.K., Meredith, H. & Sutherland, W.J. (2018) 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 2018. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.
An expert assessment of the effectiveness of this action based on the summarized evidence (0 = no effect, 100% = always effective). Effectiveness, certainty and harms scores are used to determine the effectiveness category (for more details see FAQ What Works in Conservation).
An expert assessment of the harms of this action based on the summarized evidence (0 = none, 100% = major negative side-effects to the group of species/habitat of concern). Effectiveness, certainty and harms scores are used to determine the effectiveness category (for more details see FAQ What Works in Conservation).
An expert assessment of the certainty of the evidence for this action based on the summarized evidence (0 = no evidence, 100% = high quality evidence). Effectiveness, certainty and harms scores are used to determine the effectiveness category (for more details see FAQ What Works in Conservation).