Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore and manage abandoned orchards for bats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of restoring and managing abandoned orchards for bats on bat populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2285https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2285Tue, 19 Nov 2019 18:23:58 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore bat foraging habitat at ex-quarry sites One study evaluated the effects of restoring bat foraging habitat at ex-quarry sites on bat populations. The study was in France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in France found that gravel-sand pits had higher overall bat activity (relative abundance) 10 years after restoration than gravel-sand pit sites before or during quarrying. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2286https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2286Wed, 20 Nov 2019 11:35:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect bats within roosts from disturbance or predation by native species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of protecting bat roosts from disturbance or predation by native species on bat populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2287https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2287Wed, 20 Nov 2019 16:35:02 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify bats roosts to reduce negative impacts of one bat species on another We found no studies that evaluated the effects of modifying bat roosts to reduce negative impacts of one bat species on another on bat populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2288https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2288Wed, 20 Nov 2019 16:36:13 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Slow rotation of turbine blades at low wind speeds One study evaluated the effects of slowing the rotation of turbine blades at low wind speeds on bat populations. The study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Canada found that bat fatalities were reduced when turbine blades were slowed at low wind speeds. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2939https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2939Fri, 12 Feb 2021 16:16:13 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change timing of maintenance work at road/railway bridges and culverts We found no studies that evaluated the effects of changing the timing of maintenance work at road/railway bridges and culverts on bat populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F2940https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2940Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:47:15 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Exclude bats from roosts during maintenance work at road/railway bridges and culverts We found no studies that evaluated the effects of excluding bats from roosts during maintenance work at road/railway bridges and culverts on bat populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F2941https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2941Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:48:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide alternative bat roosts during maintenance work at road/railway bridges and culverts One study evaluated the effects of providing alternative bat roosts during maintenance work at road bridges. The study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY)         Use (1 study): One review in the USA found that bat houses provided as alternative roosts during bridge replacement works were used by fewer Mexican free-tailed bats than the original roost at one site and were not used by bats at all at three sites. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2942https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2942Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:51:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace or improve roosting habitat for bats along utility and service line corridors We found no studies that evaluated the effects of replacing or improving roosting habitat for bats along utility and service line corridors on bat populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F2943https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2943Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:56:27 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vegetation along utility and service line corridors to increase foraging habitat for bats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing vegetation along utility and service line corridors to increase forgaing habitat for bats on bat populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F2944https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2944Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:57:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide training to wildlife control operators on least harmful ways of removing bats from their roosts We found no studies that evaluated the effects of providing training to wildlife control operators on the least harmful ways of removing bats from their roosts. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F2945https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2945Sun, 14 Feb 2021 16:57:04 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect greenfield sites or undeveloped land in urban areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of protecting greenfield sites or undeveloped land in urban areas on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3477https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3477Fri, 03 Dec 2021 11:37:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect brownfield or ex-industrial sites in urban areas One study evaluated the effects of protecting brownfield or ex-industrial sites in urban areas. This study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One study in the UK reported that an ex-industrial site that was protected was occupied by up to four species of reptiles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3478https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3478Fri, 03 Dec 2021 11:43:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant native species for reptile habitat in urban areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of planting native species for reptile habitat in urban areas on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3479https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3479Fri, 03 Dec 2021 11:53:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create suitable habitats to offset habitat lost within development footprint We found no studies that evaluated the effects of creating suitable habitats to offset habitat lost within a development footprint on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3480https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3480Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:00:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Erect fencing to exclude reptiles from construction zones We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of erecting fencing to exclude reptiles from construction zones. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3481https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3481Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:04:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Avoid carrying out construction work during sensitive periods We found no studies that evaluated the effects of avoiding carrying out construction work during sensitive periods on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3482https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3482Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:08:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove invasive plant species to improve habitat within development footprints We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of removing invasive plant species to improve habitat within development footprints. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3483https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3483Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:10:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide training for construction workers on the potential risks to reptiles and how to mitigate disturbance during works We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of providing training for construction workers on the potential risks to reptiles and how to mitigate disturbance during works. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3484https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3484Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:12:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Engage landowners and volunteers to manage land for reptiles We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of engaging landowners and volunteers to manage land for reptiles. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3485https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3485Fri, 03 Dec 2021 13:03:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pay farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures   One study evaluated the effects of paying farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures on reptiles. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that sites managed under agri-environment schemes had similar reptile species richness compared to sites that were managed purely for livestock production or areas of unmanaged woodland. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that sites managed under agri-environment schemes had similar reptile abundances compared to sites that were managed purely for livestock production or areas of unmanaged woodland. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3486https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3486Fri, 03 Dec 2021 13:08:13 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage tillage practices We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing tillage practices on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3488https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3488Fri, 03 Dec 2021 13:43:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage crop diversity We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing crop diversity on reptile populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3489https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3489Mon, 06 Dec 2021 11:01:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify grazing regime: Grassland & shrubland Four studies evaluated the effects of modifying grazing regimes in grassland and shrubland on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA and one was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One replicated site comparison study in the USA found that sites with different grazing intensities had similar reptile diversity. One replicated, site-comparison, paired sites study in Australia found no clear effects of modifying grazing intensities on reptile species richness. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that areas that were lightly grazed or unmanaged had lower reptile species richness than areas that were heavily grazed in combination with burning. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated studies (including one site comparison, paired sites study) in the USA and Australia found that plots with lighter grazing had higher lizard abundance than those with heavier grazing in four of five vegetation types. The other study found that the abundance of individual reptile species or species groups remained similar at different grazing intensities. Survival (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that survival of Texas horned lizards was higher in moderately grazed than heavily grazed sites. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that light grazing or heavy grazing and burning had mixed effects on the reptile species that used those areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3490https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3490Mon, 06 Dec 2021 11:22:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify grazing regime: Forest, open woodland & savanna Seven studies evaluated the effects of managing grazing regimes in forest, open woodland and savanna on reptile populations. Six studies were in Australia and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One replicated site comparison study in the USA found that sites with different grazing intensities had similar reptile diversity. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Australia found that farms with rotational grazing did not have higher reptile species richness than farms with continuous grazing. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that following replanting of native vegetation, ungrazed or occasionally grazed plots had higher reptile species richness than plots that were continuously grazed. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): One of three replicated studies (including one randomized, before-and-after study) in the USA and Australia found that areas with lighter grazing had higher lizard abundance than those with heavier grazing. The other two studies found that different grazing regimes had mixed effects on the abundance of lizards and four-clawed geckos and inland snake-eyed skinks. Two paired, site comparison studies (including one replicated study) in Australia found that sites with rotational grazing had similar reptile abundance as sites with continuous grazing. Occupancy/range (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that different grazing regimes had mixed effects on local colonization and extinction events of six lizard species. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Australia found that jacky dragons were found in sheep-grazed paddocks more frequently than in cattle-grazed paddocks. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3492https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3492Mon, 06 Dec 2021 11:38:49 +0000
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