Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Food labelling schemes relating to biodiversity-friendly farming We captured no evidence for the effects of food labelling schemes on bird 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%2F170https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F170Sun, 20 May 2012 13:07:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase the proportion of natural/semi-natural vegetation in the farmed landscape Of four studies captured, one, a replicated and controlled paired sites study from Australia, found that farms with plantings of native vegetation held more species than those without. The effect was smaller than that explained by variation in the amount of natural habitat remaining on farms. A replicated study from Switzerland found more species in areas under the Ecological Compensation Area scheme than areas not under it. A before-and-after study from Switzerland found that the populations of three bird species increased after an increase in the amount of land under the Ecological Compensation Scheme. This study found that three species were more found more than expected on Ecological Compensation Scheme land. Another replicated study from Switzerland found that some habitats held more birds if they were close to ECA habitat but that the amount of Ecological Compensation Scheme in an area had no impact on population densities. A small study from the UK found no effect of habitat creation on grey partridge populations. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F171https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F171Sun, 20 May 2012 13:21:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cross compliance standards for all subsidy paymentsApart from the Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas scheme (considered in another section), we found no studies comparing the effects of cross compliance standards with other means of implementing agri-environmental measures, or that considered the effects of cross compliance by monitoring farmland bird populations before and after it was implemented.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F173https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F173Sun, 27 May 2012 14:49:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create uncultivated margins around intensive arable or pasture fields for birds A replicated, controlled study from the USA found that three sparrow species found on uncultivated margins were not found on mown field edges. A replicated study from Canada found fewer species in uncultivated margins than in hedges or in trees planted as windbreaks. Three replicated studies from the USA and UK, one controlled, found that some birds were associated with uncultivated margins, or that birds were more abundant on margins than on other habitats. One study found that these effects were very weak. Four replicated studies (two of the same experiment) from the UK, two controlled, found that uncultivated margins contained similar numbers of birds in winter, or that several species studied did not show associations with margins. A replicated, controlled study from the UK found that yellowhammers Emberiza citrinella used uncultivated margins more than crops in early summer, but use fell in uncut margins in late summer. Cut margins however, were used more than other habitat types late in summer. A replicated study from the UK found high rates of survival for grey partridge Perdix perdix released in margins. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F190https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F190Sat, 16 Jun 2012 19:47:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave refuges in fields during harvest A replicated study in France found that fewer gamebirds came into contact with mowing machinery when refuges were left in fields than when they were not left. A review from the UK found that Eurasian skylarks Alauda arvensis did not nest at higher densities in uncut refuges than in the rest of the fields. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F193https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F193Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:35:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control scrub on farmlandA replicated study from the UK found a negative relationship between the number of young grey partridge Perdix perdix per adult and a combined intervention of scrub control, rough grazing and the restoration of various semi-natural habitats. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F197https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F197Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:55:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase crop diversity to benefit birdsA before-and-after study in the UK found that more barnacle geese Branta leucopsis used a site after the amount of land used to grow cereals was reduced and other interventions were used. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F201https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F201Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:43:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave overwinter stubbles The three studies from the UK (one replicated) that report population-level changes found positive effects of over-winter stubble provision, but all investigated multiple interventions at once. Eight studies from the UK, including a systematic review, found that at least some species or groups of farmland birds were positively associated with over-winter stubbles, or were found on stubbles. Three studies investigated multiple interventions without separating the effects of each. Two studies reported that seed-eating birds in particular were more abundant on stubbles. One of the eight studies found that no more positive responses to stubbles were found than would be expected by chance. A replicated, randomised and controlled study from the UK found that 22 of 23 species did not preferentially use stubbles compared to cover crops. A replicated study from the UK found that the area of stubble in a site was negatively related to grey partridge Perdix perdix brood size. Five studies from the UK, four replicated, found that stubble management affected use by birds. Some species or groups were more common on cut stubbles, some on uncut and some showed preferences for barley over wheat. One study found that only Eurasian skylarks Alauda arvensis were more common on stubbles under agri-environment schemes, and only on highly prescriptive schemes. One study found that all seed-eating species were more abundant on stubbles under agri-environment schemes in one of two regions studied. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F203https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F203Mon, 09 Jul 2012 15:13:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave unharvested cereal headlands within arable fields We found no evidence for the effects of leaving unharvested cereal headlands within arable fields on bird 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%2F206https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F206Sun, 15 Jul 2012 17:11:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave uncropped, cultivated margins or plots, including lapwing and stone curlew plots Two studies and two reviews examined population-level effects of uncropped margins or plots. A before-and-after study from the UK and two reviews found an increase in Eurasian thick-knee Burhinus oedicnemus numbers following a scheme that promoted plots (amongst other interventions); a replicated study from the UK found no effect of plots on grey partridge density changes. Four studies (three replicated) and a review from the UK found that at least one species was associated with lapwing plots or used them for foraging or nesting. One replicated study from the UK found that 11 species were not associated with plots; another found that fewer birds used the plots than cropland in two out of three UK regions. Two of the three studies that examined productivity (one replicated) found that nesting success of birds was higher in fallow fields or lapwing plots than in crops. A replicated study from the UK found that grey partridge Perdix perdix productivity was not related to the amount of lapwing plots on a site and that the proportion of young partridges in the population was lower on sites with lots of cultivated fallow plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F213https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F213Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:09:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create skylark plots for bird conservation A before-and-after study found an increase in Eurasian skylark Alauda arvensis population on a farm after the creation of skylark plots; a replicated, controlled study from the UK found higher densities of skylarks on fields with plots, compared to those without. No other studies investigated population-level effects. Two UK studies, one replicated and controlled, found that skylark productivity was higher in plots or in fields with plots than in controls. One replicated and controlled study from Switzerland found no differences in productivity between territories that included plots and those that did not. Two replicated studies (one controlled) from Denmark and Switzerland found that skylark plots were used by skylarks more than expected. A replicated and controlled study from the UK found that seed-eating songbirds did not use skylark plots more than surrounding crops. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F214https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F214Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:43:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create corn bunting plots We have found no evidence investigating the impact of corn bunting plots on corn bunting Miliaria calandra or other bird 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%2F215https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F215Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:53:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create beetle banks A small UK study found that a site with beetle banks had increasing populations of rare or declining species, although several other interventions were used on this site. A literature review from the UK found that grey partridge Perdix perdix populations were far larger on sites with beetle banks and other interventions than on other farms. Two replicated studies from the UK also investigated population-level effects: one found that no bird species were strongly associated with beetle banks; the second found no relationship between beetle banks and grey partridge population density trends. A UK literature review found that two bird species nested in beetle banks and that some species were more likely to forage in them than others. A study in the UK found that one of two species used beetle banks more than expected. The other used them less than other agri-environment options. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F217https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F217Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:04:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Delay haying/mowing Two reviews from the UK found that the population of corncrakes Crex crex increased following the implementation of two initiatives to encourage farmers to delay mowing (and provide cover and use corncrake-friendly techniques). A replicated and controlled paired sites study from the Netherlands found no evidence that waders and other birds were more abundant in fields with delayed mowing, compared to paired controls. A replicated and controlled before-and-after study from the Netherlands found that fields with delayed mowing held more birds than controls, but did so before the start of the scheme. Population trends did not differ between treatments. A replicated, controlled study from the USA found that destruction of nests by machinery was lower and late-season nesting higher in late-cut fields, compared with early-cut fields. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F223https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F223Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:29:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave uncut rye grass in silage fields for birds Two reviews from the UK found that leaving rye grass uncut, or with only a single cut, benefited seed-eating birds and two replicated, controlled studies from the UK found that seed-eating birds were more abundant on uncut plots. Two replicated and controlled studies and a review, all from the UK, found that seed-eating birds were more abundant on uncut and ungrazed plots than on uncut and grazed plots. A replicated, controlled study from the UK found that the responses of non-seed-eating birds were less certain than seed-eaters, with some species avoiding uncut rye grass. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F224https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F224Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:04:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain lowland heathland We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining lowland heath on bird 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%2F226https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F226Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:31:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain rush pastures We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining rush pastures on bird 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%2F227https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F227Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:32:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Employ areas of semi-natural habitat for rough grazing We found no evidence for the effects of employing areas of semi-natural habitat for rough grazing. '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%2F234https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F234Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:56:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Exclude grazers from semi-natural habitats Two replicated (one controlled) studies from the USA found higher species richnesses on sites with grazers excluded; a replicated and controlled study from Argentina found lower species richness in ungrazed sites and a study from the USA found no difference. Seven studies from the USA (three controlled, two replicated) found that overall bird abundance, or the abundances of some species were higher in sites with grazers excluded; seven studies from the USA and Argentina found that overall abundance or the abundances of some species were lower on sites without grazers, or did not differ between treatments. Three studies from the USA investigated productivity and found it higher in sites with grazers excluded. In one study this difference was only found on improved, not unimproved pastures. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F236https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F236Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:59:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create open patches or strips in permanent grasslandA randomised, replicated and controlled study from the UK found that more Eurasian skylarks used fields with open strips in, but that variations in skylark numbers were too great to draw conclusions from this finding. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F239https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F239Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:38:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Disturb birds at roosts One controlled study from the USA investigated the effects of harassment on fish predation, and found there were fewer double-crested cormorants Phalacrocorax auritus on, and fewer fish were taken from, fish ponds near roosts which were harassed, compared with undisturbed roosts. A review found that there was a reduction in the number of cormorants foraging near roosts after night-time disturbance. Four studies, two replicated, from the USA and Israel, found that cormorants moved away from roosts where they were disturbed at night. One study found that this effect was only temporary. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F245https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F245Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:42:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Disturb birds using foot patrolsTwo replicated studies from Belgium and Australia found that using foot patrols to disturb birds from fish farms did not reduce the number of birds present or fish consumption. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F249https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F249Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:05:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase water turbidity to reduce fish predation by birdsA randomised trial in France found that little egret Egretta garzetta foraging efficiency was lower in turbid water than clear. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F252https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F252Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:45:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Deter birds from landing on shellfish culture gear using spikes on oyster cagesA replicated and controlled study from Canada found that significantly fewer birds landed on oyster cages with spikes attached, compared to control cages. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F256https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F256Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:00:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Deter birds from landing on shellfish culture gear by suspending oyster bags under waterA replicated and controlled study from Canada found that significantly fewer birds roosted on oyster bags suspended 6 cm below the water, compared with non-submerged bags. Birds roosted on bags suspended 3 cm below the water as frequently as control bags. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F257https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F257Wed, 18 Jul 2012 13:31:25 +0100