Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide diversionary feeding for mammals to reduce nuisance behaviour and human-wildlife conflict Three studies evaluated the effects of providing diversionary feeding for mammals to reduce nuisance behaviour and human-wildlife conflict. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Slovenia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Uptake (1 study): A site comparison study in Slovenia found that 22-63% of the estimated annual energy content of the diet of brown bears comprised provided diversionary food. OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies (one also a site comparison) in the USA found that diversionary feeding reduced nuisance behaviour by black bears. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2323https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2323Wed, 20 May 2020 10:24:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect mammals close to development areas (e.g. by fencing) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of protecting mammals close to development areas (e.g. by fencing). '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%2F2324https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2324Wed, 20 May 2020 11:54:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use signs or access restrictions to reduce disturbance to mammals One study evaluated the effects of using signs or access restrictions to reduce disturbance to mammals. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A replicated, paired sites, site comparison study in the USA found that removing or closing roads increased use of those areas by black bears. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2325https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2325Thu, 21 May 2020 08:38:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Keep cats indoors or in outside runs to reduce predation of wild mammals One study evaluated the effects on potential prey mammals of keeping cats indoors or in outside runs. This study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated study in the UK found that keeping domestic cats indoors at night reduced the number of dead or injured mammals that were brought home. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2326https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2326Thu, 21 May 2020 09:53:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set minimum distances for approaching mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of setting a minimum permitted distance to which they can be approached. ‘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%2F2327https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2327Thu, 21 May 2020 10:36:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set maximum number of people/vehicles approaching mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of setting a maximum to the number of people or vehicles permitted to approach mammals. ‘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%2F2328https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2328Thu, 21 May 2020 10:38:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Exclude or limit number of visitors to reserves or protected areas Five studies evaluated the effects on mammals of excluding or limiting the number of visitors to reserves or protected areas. Three studies were in the USA, one was in Ecuador and one was in Thailand. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): A site comparison study in Ecuador found that a road with restricted access had a higher population of medium-sized and large mammals compared to a road with unrestricted access. Survival (1 study): A before-and-after study in the USA found that temporarily restricting visitor access resulted in fewer bears being killed to protect humans. BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Use (3 studies): Three studies (one a before-and-after study), in the USA and Thailand, found that restricting human access to protected areas resulted in increased use of these areas by grizzly bears and leopards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2330https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2330Thu, 21 May 2020 10:43:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use collar-mounted devices to reduce predation by domestic animals Five studies evaluated the effects on mammals of using collar-mounted devices to reduce predation by domestic animals. Three studies were in the UK, one was in Australia and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Survival (5 studies): Five replicated studies (including four randomized, controlled studies), in the UK, Australia and the USA, found that bells, a sonic device, and a neoprene flap (which inhibits pouncing) mounted on collars, and a brightly coloured and patterned collar all reduced the rate at which cats predated and returned home with mammals. In one of these studies, an effect was only found in autumn, and not in spring. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2332https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2332Thu, 21 May 2020 11:11:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Keep dogs indoors or in outside enclosures to reduce threats to wild mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of keeping dogs indoors or in outside enclosures to reduce threats to wild mammals. ‘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%2F2334https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2334Thu, 21 May 2020 13:18:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Keep domestic cats and dogs well-fed to reduce predation of wild mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of keeping domestic cats and dogs well-fed to reduce predation of wild mammals. ‘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%2F2335https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2335Thu, 21 May 2020 13:21:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate problem mammals away from residential areas (e.g. habituated bears) to reduce human-wildlife conflict Eleven studies evaluated the effects of translocating problem mammals (such as bears) away from residential areas to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Six studies were in the USA, two were in Canada, one was Russia, one was in India and one was in Romania. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Survival (6 studies): A controlled study in the USA found that grizzly bears translocated away from conflict situations had lower survival rates than did non-translocated bears. A replicated study study in the USA found that fewer than half of black bears translocated from conflict situations survived after one year. Two of three studies (two controlled), in the USA, found that after translocation away from urban sites, white-tailed deer survival was lower than that of non-translocated deer. The third study found that short-term survival was lower but long-term survival was higher than that of non-translocated deer. A study in Russia found that most Amur tigers translocated after attacking dogs or people did not survive for a year after release. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (6 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (6 studies): Five studies (including one controlled and two replicated studies), in the USA and Canada, of brown/grizzly or black bears translocated away from residential areas or human-related facilities, found that at least some returned to their original capture location and/or continued to cause nuisance. In two of the studies, most returned to their capture area and one black bear returned six times following translocation. A before-and-after study in India found that leopards translocated away from human-dominated areas, attacked more humans and livestock than before-translocation. A controlled study in Romania found that translocated brown bears occurred less frequently inside high potential conflict areas than outside, the opposite to bears that had not been translocated. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2336https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2336Thu, 21 May 2020 14:09:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Treat tree/shrub seeds with chemicals before sowing: freshwater wetlands Two studies evaluated the effects – on trees/shrubs typical of freshwater wetlands – of treating their seeds with chemicals before sowing. Both studies were in one laboratory in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Germination/emergence (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in a laboratory in the USA found that soaking baldcypress Taxodium distichum seeds in weak sodium hydroxide increased their germination rate. One of the studies found that soaking in ethyl alcohol and/or hydrochloric acid reduced the germination rate. One of the studies found that soaking in stronger sodium hydroxide, or hydrogen peroxide and ethyl alcohol, had no significant effect on the germination rate. Growth (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in a laboratory in the USA found that soaking baldcypress Taxodium distichum seeds in chemicals before sowing typically had no significant effect on the height of surviving seedlings, 30 days after germination. Soaking in ethyl alcohol, however, reduced seedling height. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3382https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3382Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:30:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Treat tree/shrub seeds with chemicals before sowing: brackish/saline wetlandsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects – on trees/shrubs typical of brackish/saline wetlands – of treating their seeds with chemicals before sowing. ‘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%2F3383https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3383Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:31:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Designate protected area Four studies evaluated the overall effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of designating protected areas involving marshes or swamps. There were two studies in China, one in Malaysia and one in Puerto Rico. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (4 studies): Two studies (one replicated, one before-and-after) in China reported that the area of marsh, swamp or unspecified wetland in protected areas declined over 6–12 years. One replicated, site comparison study in Puerto Rico reported that protection had no clear effect on mangrove forest area, with similar changes over 25 years in protected and unprotected sites. One study of a mangrove forest in Malaysia reported that it retained at least 97% of its forest area over 98 years of protection as a forest reserve. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE Overall structure (2 studies): One replicated study in China reported “degradation” of the landscape structure of protected wetlands over 12 years. One before-and-after study in China reported fragmentation of wetland habitat within a protected area, but that this meant its structure became more like it had been 10–40 years previously. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3384https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3384Mon, 12 Apr 2021 08:40:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide general protection for marshes or swamps Three studies evaluated the overall effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of providing general protection for marshes or swamps. There was one study in each of Puerto Rico, China and Canada. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (3 studies): Two studies in China and Canada reported that the area of wetlands (including habitats other than marshes or swamps) in their study regions declined over 10–29 years, despite general protection of wetlands. However, in China, the decline was slower than in a previous period without protection. One before-and-after study of mangrove forests in Puerto Rico reported that their area increased following legal protection. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE Overall structure (1 study): One before-and-after study in China reported degradation in wetland landscape structure over 29 years when wetlands were generally protected. However, the decline was slower than in a previous period when wetlands were not protected. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3385https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3385Mon, 12 Apr 2021 09:30:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Require mitigation of impacts to marshes or swamps Nine studies evaluated the overall effects – on vegetation or human behaviour – of requiring mitigation of impacts to marshes or swamps. All nine studies were in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (6 studies): Four studies in the USA reported that requiring mitigation of impacts to wetlands did not prevent loss of wetland area: the total area restored/created was less than the area destroyed. One study in the USA reported that the total area of wetlands restored/created for mitigation was greater than the area destroyed. However, the area restored/created was smaller in most individual projects. Two of the studies reported that fewer individual wetlands were restored/created than destroyed. One before-and-after study in the USA found that wetland area declined after legislation to offset impacts came into force, but at a slower rate than before the legislation applied. Four of the studies reported discrepancies between the area of specific vegetation types restored/created vs destroyed. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Compliance (8 studies): Eight studies, all in the USA, provided information about compliance with required mitigation. Five of the studies reported that the total area of wetlands conserved was less than the area required in permits. Three of the studies reported that most mitigation projects failed to meet targets stipulated in permits. One of the studies reported that only one of seven vegetation targets was met in all mitigation sites. One of the studies reported that 64–74% of assessed mitigation areas met success criteria stipulated in permits. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3386https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3386Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:47:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pay stakeholders to protect marshes or swamps Two studies evaluated the overall effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of paying stakeholders to protect marshes or swamps. There was one study in each of the UK and Nigeria. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the UK found that paying landowners to manage farmland ditches under agri-environment rules had no clear or significant effect on the frequency of emergent vegetation. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that farmland ditches managed under agri-environment rules contained a similar number of plant species to ditches not managed under these rules. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Human behaviour (1 study): One study in Nigeria reported that 58 communities with access to micro-credits for sustainable development changed their behaviour. In particular, they switched from livelihood practices that damaged mangrove forests to more sustainable practices. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3387https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3387Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:49:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase ‘on-the-ground’ protection (e.g. rangers) for marshes or swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of increasing ‘on-the-ground’ protection for marshes or swamps. ‘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%2F3388https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3388Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:51:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Raise public awareness about marshes or swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of interventions to raise public awareness about marshes or swamps. ‘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%2F3389https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3389Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:52:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Engage local people in management/monitoring of marshes or swamps Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of engaging local people in management/monitoring of marshes or swamps. One study was in Senegal and one was in India. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Overall extent (1 study): One before-and-after study of a coastal wetland in India reported that after implementing a community-based restoration programme, the area of high-quality mangrove forest increased. Meanwhile, the area of degraded mangrove forest decreased. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Human behaviour (1 study): One before-and-after study of a wetland National Park in Senegal reported that after switching from authoritarian protection to community-based management, fewer fines were issued for illegal activities (including illegal settlement and uncontrolled grazing). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3390https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3390Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:53:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide education/training programmes about marshes or swamps Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of providing education/training programmes related to marshes or swamps. One study was in Kenya and one was in Vietnam. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Human behaviour (2 studies): One study in Kenya reported that after a series of seminars and workshops about marsh conservation, two community-based management groups were established by local stakeholders and a grazing fee was introduced. One before-and-after study in Vietnam reported that after local people were trained to make more complex handicrafts from marsh plants (along with helping them to sell those handicrafts in markets), their income increased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3391https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3391Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:55:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Produce guidance for marsh or swamp conservation One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of producing guidance for marsh or swamp conservation. The study was in Sri Lanka. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Survival (1 study): One study of coastal sites in Sri Lanka found that planted mangrove propagules/seedlings had a higher survival rate in sites where published guidance had been consulted to select appropriate areas for planting, than in sites where guidance was not consulted. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3392https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3392Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:07:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use marketing strategies to increase the value of marshes or swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of using marketing strategies to increase the value of marshes or swamps. The study was in Vietnam. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Human behaviour (1 study): One before-and-after study in Vietnam reported that helping local people to sell handicrafts made from marsh plants in tourist markets (along with training to improve the quality of those products) increased their income. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3393https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3393Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:09:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Lobby/campaign/demonstrate to protect marshes or swamps One study evaluated the effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of lobbying/campaigning/demonstrating to protect marshes or swamps. The study was in Brazil. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Human behaviour (1 study): One study in Brazil reported after lobbying local and national governments, a wetland complex was designated as a sustainable development reserve (rather than being strictly protected) and a sustainable development research institute was created. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3394https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3394Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:11:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Classify conservation status of individual sitesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation or human behaviour, of classifying the conservation status of individual marshes or swamps. ‘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%2F3395https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3395Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:11:48 +0100