Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit heavy vehicle use We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting heavy vehicle use 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%2F3493https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3493Mon, 06 Dec 2021 11:43:39 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave/maintain/restore strips of undisturbed habitat between solar arrays We found no studies that evaluated the effects of leaving/maintaining/restoring strips of undisturbed habitat between solar arrays 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%2F3494https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3494Mon, 06 Dec 2021 12:07:41 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Regulate temperature of water discharged from power plants One study evaluated the effects of regulating temperature of water discharged from power plants. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One study in the USA reported that power plant water cooling canals were occupied by a population of American crocodiles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3495https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3495Mon, 06 Dec 2021 12:12:00 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify grazing regime: Wetland One study evaluated the effects of managing grazing regimes in wetlands on reptile populations. This study was in France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One controlled before-and-after study in France found that moderate density autumn–winter grazing and autumn–spring marsh flooding resulted in higher abundance of European pond turtles than high density spring–summer grazing and winter–spring marsh flooding or low year-round grazing and flooding. Condition (1 study): One controlled before-and-after study in France found that high-density spring–summer grazing resulted in fewer incidences of trampling compared to moderate-density autumn–winter grazing or low-density year-round grazing. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3496https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3496Mon, 06 Dec 2021 12:17:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore former mining or energy production sites Thirteen studies evaluated the effects of restoring former mining or energy production sites on reptile populations. Nine studies were in Australia, two were in the USA, one was in Spain and one was on Reunion Island. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Community composition (4 studies): Two of four site comparison studies (including two replicated studies) in Austalia and Spain found that restored mining areas hosted different reptile communities than unmined areas. One study found that reptile communities in the oldest restored areas were most similar to unmined areas. The other study found that restored mining areas that were seeded or received topsoil had similar community composition compared to surrounding unmined forests. Richness/diversity (5 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies and one review in Australia found that restored mining sites had lower reptile species richness than unmined sites. One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in Spain found that after restoration, reptile species richness increased steadily over a six-year period. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that restored areas supported most of typical reptile species found in the wider habitat. POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Five of six replicated, site comparison studies and one review in Australia found that in restored mining areas reptiles tended to be less abundant than in unmined areas. The other study found mixed effects of restoration on reptile abundance. One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that restored areas that were thinned and burned 10–18 years after restoration began had higher reptile abundance than restored areas that were not thinned and burned. Reproductive success (2 studies): One review in Australia found that one study reported reptiles breeding in restored mining areas. One study on Reunion Island found that four of 34 and eight of 40 artificial egg laying sites in restored mining areas were used by Reunion day geckos nine months and two years after installation respectively. Condition (1 study): One review of restoration of mining sites in Australia found that three of three studies indicated that reptile size or condition was similar in restored mines and undisturbed areas. BEHAVIOUR (5 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): Three studies (including one replicated, site comparison study) in Australia and the USA found that restored mining areas were occupied by up to 14 snake, five turtle and one lizard species, or that generalist reptile species colonized restoration sites more quickly than did specialist species. One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that Napoleon’s skinks reintroduced to a restored mining site all moved to an unmined forest within one week of release. Behaviour change (1 studies): One review of restoration of mining sites in Australia reported that one of one studies indicated that there were changes in behaviour of lizards between restored mines and undisturbed areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3497https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3497Mon, 06 Dec 2021 12:43:42 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease livestock grazing: Grassland & shrubland Fifteen studies evaluated the effects of ceasing livestock grazing in grassland and shrubland on reptile populations. Eight studies were in the USA, three were in Australia, two were in the UK and one was in each of New Zealand and Egypt. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (6 studies): Four of six studies (including one replicated, controlled, before-and-after study) in the USA and Australia found that ungrazed and grazed areas had similar reptile species richness, combined reptile and amphibian or reptile and small mammal species richness. One study found that ungrazed sites had higher species richness than grazed sites. The other study found that fencing areas to exclude grazers had mixed effects on lizard species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (15 STUDIES) Abundance (15 studies): Seven of 14 studies (including one replicated, controlled, before-and-after study) in the USA, New Zealand, Australia, Egypt and the UK found that ceasing grazing (in one case after eradicating invasive mice3 and in one case after burning11) had mixed effects on reptile or lizard abundance. Four studies found that ungrazed areas had a higher abundance of lizards or smooth snakes than grazed areas. The other three studies found that ungrazed and grazed areas had a similar abundance of reptiles, reptiles and small mammals or Texas tortoises. One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in the USA found that areas with fencing that excluded both grazing and recreational vehicle use had more Agassiz’s desert tortoises than areas with less restrictions on grazing or vehicle use. Survival (2 studies): One of two replicated studies (including one controlled study) in the USA found that areas with fencing that excluded grazing and recreational vehicle use had lower death rates of Agassiz’s desert tortoises than areas with less restrictions on grazing or vehicle use. The other study found that in areas where grazing was ceased and where grazing was rotational, survival of Texas tortoises was similar. Condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that in areas where grazing was ceased and where grazing was rotational, size and growth of Texas tortoises was similar. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One site comparison study in Egypt found that in areas protected from grazing with fences, Be’er Sheva fringe-fingered lizards spent less time moving and were observed further away from the nearest vegetation compared to in areas with grazing and low-impact watermelon farming. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3498https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3498Mon, 06 Dec 2021 13:47:23 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fencing to prevent reptiles from accessing facilities We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using fencing to prevent reptiles from accessing facilities. ‘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%2F3499https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3499Mon, 06 Dec 2021 16:08:27 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install barriers along roads/railways Seven studies evaluated the effects of installing barriers along roads/railways on reptile populations. Six studies were in the USA and one was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Survival (3 studies): One before-and-after study in the USA found that following installation of a barrier fence, along with creating artificial nest mounds on the non-road side of the fence, and actively moving turtles off the road, fewer turtles were found dead on the road. One before-and-after study in the USA found that following installation of a roadside barrier with nest boxes along with a warning sign, fewer female diamondback terrapins were killed while crossing the road compared to before installation. One study in Canada found that dead snakes were found in the vicinity of a barrier fence up to 11 years after it was installed. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): One controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that following installation of a roadside barrier with nest boxes, fewer diamond-backed terrapin crossed the road compared to before installation. One replicated study in the USA found that after installing barriers, diamondback terrapins laid more nests on the marsh-side of the fence than on the road-side. The study also found that terrapins were less likely to breach barriers with smaller gaps at the bottom. One replicated study in the USA found that desert tortoises were effectively blocked by a concrete barrier. One replicated study in the USA found that taller fences were better at excluding painted and snapping turtles than lower ones. Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated study in the USA found that desert tortoises interacted less with solid compared to non-solid barriers. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3500https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3500Mon, 06 Dec 2021 16:31:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce legal speed limit We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing the legal speed limit 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%2F3501https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3501Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:42:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit or exclude off-road vehicle use Two studies evaluated the effects of limiting or excluding off-road vehicle use on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (1 studies): One replicated, site comparison study found that restricting access of off-road vehicles and sheep had mixed effects on lizard species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one randomized study) in the USA found that areas where off-road vehicles were completely excluded using fencing that also excluded livestock grazing had higher densities of Agassiz’s desert tortoises compared to areas with some restrictions or no restrictions. The other study found that restricting off-road vehicle and sheep access had mixed effects on lizard abundance. Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in the USA found that in areas where off-road vehicles were completely excluded, death rates of Agassiz’s desert tortoises were lower than in areas with some restrictions or no restrictions. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3502https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3502Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:44:34 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use road closures One study evaluated the effects of using road closures on reptile populations. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in Canada found that closed roads were not used more by Blanding’s turtles than unclosed roads. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3503https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3503Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:53:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Alter road surfaces One study evaluated the effects of altering road surfaces on reptile populations. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in Canada found that paved roads were not used more by Blanding’s turtles than unpaved roads. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3504https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3504Mon, 06 Dec 2021 18:00:05 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain/maintain road verges as habitat We found no studies that evaluated the effects of retaining/maintaining road verges as habitat 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%2F3505https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3505Tue, 07 Dec 2021 09:57:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit road construction in important habitats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting road construction in important habitats 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%2F3506https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3506Tue, 07 Dec 2021 10:00:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install barriers and crossing structures along roads/railways Sixteen studies evaluated the effects of installing barriers and crossing structures along roads/railways on reptile populations. Five studies were in the USA, three were in each of Spain, Australia and Canada and one was in each of France and South Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Survival (8 studies): Four of seven studies (including one randomized, controlled, before-and-after study and one review) in the USA, Australia, Canada and South Africa found that installing fencing and crossing structures did not reduce road mortalities of reptiles, and in one case the percentage of mortalities may have increased. Two studies found that areas with fencing and crossing structures had fewer road mortalities of turtles and overall reptiles. One study found that reptile road mortalities still occurred in in areas with roadside barrier walls and culverts. One replicated, before-and-after study in Canada found that following installation of tunnels and guide fencing, along with signs for motorists, there were fewer road mortalities of eastern massasauga rattlesnakes. BEHAVIOUR (12 STUDIES) Use (12 studies): Six studies (including two replicated studies and one review) in Spain, France, the USA and Australia found that crossing structures with fencing that were not specifically designed for wildlife were used by lizards, snakes, tortoises, turtles and alligators and ophidians. One study also found that the addition of fencing around crossing structures did not affect the number of reptile crossings. Three studies (including one replicated and one before-and-after study and one review) in the USA and Spain found that wildlife crossing structures with fencing were used by gopher tortoises and 12 snake species, American alligators and lacertid lizards. One study also found that an American alligator did not use the wildlife crossing structure. Two before-and-after studies (including one controlled study) in Canada found mixed effects of installing roadside fencing and culverts on road use by turtles and snakes. One replicated study in Spain found that use of different crossing structures depended on species group. One replicated study in Australia found that reptiles used wildlife underpasses or culverts for only 1% of road crossings. One replicated, before-and-after study in Canada found that following installation of tunnels and guide fencing, along with signs for motorists, fewer eastern massasauga rattlesnakes were found crossing the road. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3507https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3507Tue, 07 Dec 2021 10:03:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install tunnels/culverts/underpasses under roads/railways Fifteen studies evaluated the effects of installing tunnels/culverts/underpasses under roads/railways on reptile populations. Four of the studies were in the USA, four were in Australia, three were in Spain, two were in Canada and one was in each of Australia, Europe and North America and South Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Survival (3 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one before-and-after study) in Australia and South Africa found a similar number of reptile road mortalities with or without culverts or wildlife underpasses. One replicated study in Spain found that the number of underpasses in an area did not affect the number of reptile road mortalities. BEHAVIOUR (12 STUDIES) Use (12 studies): Six studies (including four replicated studies and one replicated, before-and-after study) and one review in Spain, Australia, the USA and Australia, Europe and North America found that crossing structures, including tunnels, culverts, underpasses, pipes and trenches under roads and railways were used by reptiles, lizards, snakes and/or tortoises. One review in Australia, Europe and North America also found that wildlife underpasses were used by reptiles in only one of 13 studies. Three of four replicated studies (including one before-and-after study) in the USA and Canada found that desert tortoises, painted and snapping turtles and rattlesnakes and garter snakes showed a willingness to enter some, or all types of tunnel. The other study found that only 9% of painted turtles entered a culvert during a choice experiment. One site comparison study in Australia found that the area under an overpass was used by five reptile species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3508https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3508Tue, 07 Dec 2021 11:55:41 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install overpasses over roads/railways Five studies evaluated the effects of installing overpasses over roads/railways on reptile populations. Three studies were in Spain, one was a review of studies in Australia, Europe and North America and one study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that the composition of reptile species on a vegetated overpass was more similar to woodland on one side of the overpass than the other. Richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that a vegetated overpass was colonised by two reptile species each year over five years. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Occupancy/range (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that a vegetated overpass was colonized by 14 of 23 native reptile species and one non-native reptile species. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): Three of four studies (including two replicated studies and one review) in Spain and Australia, Europe and North America found that overpasses not designed for wildlife were used by lizards and snakes and reptiles. The other study found that overpasses not designed for wildlife were not used by snakes or lizards. Two replicated studies in Spain found that wildlife overpasses were used by lizards and Ophidians (snakes and legless lizards), and one review in Australia, Europe and North America found that one of 10 wildlife overpasses were used by reptiles. One review of road crossing structures in Australia, Europe and North America found that a rope bridge was not used by reptiles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3510https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3510Tue, 07 Dec 2021 12:26:43 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease livestock grazing: Forest, open woodland & savanna Five studies evaluated the effects of ceasing livestock grazing in forest, open woodland and savanna on reptile populations. Two studies were in each of Argentina and Australia and one was in Mexico1. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (4 studies): Three of four studies (including two replicated, site-comparison studies) in Mexico, Argentina and Australia found that ungrazed and grazed areas, in one case with burning, had similar reptile species richness and diversity. The other study found that in areas where livestock grazing was stopped, combined reptile and small mammal species richness increased more than in areas with grazing. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of five studies (including three replicated, site comparison studies) in Mexico, Argentina and Australia found that ungrazed areas had a higher abundance of reptiles and lizards than grazed areas. Two studies found that ungrazed areas, in one case with burning, had similar overall reptile or reptile and small mammal abundance compared to grazed areas. The other study found that grazing had mixed effects on reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3511https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3511Tue, 07 Dec 2021 13:43:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease livestock grazing: Wetland Two studies evaluated the effects of ceasing livestock grazing in wetlands on reptile populations. One study was in the USA and one was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that ungrazed sites had fewer bog turtles than grazed sites. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that ungrazed areas had similar overall reptile and amphibian abundance compared to that were grazed, burned or grazed and burned (to remove invasive non-native para grass). The study also found that unmanaged areas (no grazing or burning) had a higher abundance of one skink species than areas with grazing and/or burning. Occupancy/range (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that juvenile box turtles were present less frequently in ungrazed sites compared to grazed sites. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3512https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3512Tue, 07 Dec 2021 13:58:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Raise mowing height One study evaluated the effects of raising mowing height on reptile populations. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that in long-sward pastures or crops marbled geckos did not navigate directly towards a tree, whereas in short-sward pastures they did. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3513https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3513Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:11:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create uncultivated margins around arable or pasture fields Two studies evaluated the effects of creating uncultivated margins around arable or pasture fields on reptile populations. One study was in Australia and one was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that revegetated linear strips had similar reptile species richness compared to cleared and remnant strips. The study also found that revegetated strips and patches had similar reptile species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that revegetated linear strips had similar reptile abundance compared to cleared and remnant strips. The study also found that revegetated strips and patches had similar reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in the UK found that uncultivated field margins were used by slow worms, common lizards and grass snakes, but not by adders. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3518https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3518Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:37:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide or maintain hedgerows on farmland One study evaluated the effects of providing or maintaining linear features on reptile populations. This study was in Madagascar. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in Madagascar found that reptile communities in cultivated areas with hedges were more similar to those found in forests than were communities from cultivated areas without hedges. The study also found that more reptile species were found only areas with hedges than only in areas without hedges. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3519https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3519Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:42:00 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide or retain set-aside areas on farmland We found no studies that evaluated the effects of providing or retaining set-aside areas on farmland 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%2F3520https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3520Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:46:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prevent access to livestock water feeders One study evaluated the effects of preventing access to livestock water feeders on reptile populations. This study was in Morocco. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in Morocco found that covering water feeder openings with wire mesh resulted in fewer combined reptiles and amphibians being trapped compared to water feeders without mesh covers. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3521https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3521Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:55:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manually remove reptiles from roads One study evaluated the effect on reptile populations of manually removing reptiles from roads. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One study in the USA reported that when turtles were being removed from a road following installation of a fence and artificial nesting mounds, fewer turtles were killed on the road than in the year before any interventions began. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3523https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3523Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:58:50 +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
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