Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce incidental mortality from birds being attracted to artificial lights We found no evidence for reduced incidental mortality from birds being attracted to artificial lights. '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%2F466https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F466Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:14:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Turn off lights to reduce mortality from artificial lightsA before-and-after study from the UK found that fewer seabirds (Manx shearwaters Puffinus puffinus, European storm petrels Hydrobates pelagicus and Leach’s storm petrels Oceanodroma leucorhoa) were attracted to artificial lighting and downed when lighting was reduced at night, compared to when normal lighting was in place.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F467https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F467Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:24:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce the intensity of lighthouse beams We found no evidence for the effects of reducing the intensity of lighthouse beams on bird mortality. '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%2F468https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F468Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:25:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Shield lights to reduce mortality from artificial lightsA replicated, controlled study in Hawaii found that fewer Newell’s shearwaters Puffinus newelli were found grounded when security lights were shielded, compared to nights when they were not.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F469https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F469Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:27:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use flashing lights to reduce mortality from artificial lightsA randomised, replicated and controlled trial from the USA found that fewer dead birds were found beneath control towers that used only flashing lights, as opposed to those using both flashing and continuous lights.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F470https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F470Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:31:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use lights low in spectral red to reduce mortality from artificial lightsTwo studies from the North Sea and the Netherlands found that fewer birds were attracted to low-red lights (including green and blue lights), compared with the number expected, or the number attracted to white or red lights.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F471https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F471Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:40:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use volunteers to collect downed birds and rehabilitate them We found no evidence that report on the effectiveness of using volunteers to collect and rehabilitate downed birds. '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%2F472https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F472Wed, 29 Aug 2012 16:42:08 +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
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.

Accept & continue