Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove and relocate ‘problem’ animals One replicated, before-and-after study in India found that ‘problem’ rhesus monkeys that were translocated, alongside other interventions, survived and remained at the release sites for at least four years. One controlled, before-and-after study in Kenya found that after 16 years, most crop-raiding olive baboons that were translocated from farmland, alongside other interventions, had survived and had similar survival rates compared to non-translocated populations. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Republic of Congo and Gaboon found that 84% of the ‘problem’ western lowland gorillas that were relocated, alongside other interventions, survived for at least four years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1422https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1422Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:04:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Relocate primates to non-residential areas We found no evidence for the effects of relocating primates to non-residential areas on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1423https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1423Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:26:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Discourage the planting of fruit trees and vegetable gardens on the urban edge We found no evidence for the effects of discouraging the planting of fruit trees and vegetable gardens on the urban edge on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1424https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1424Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:27:59 +0100
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 21

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 ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust