Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make selective use of spring herbicidesA replicated, controlled, randomized study in the UK found that spring herbicides had some benefits for beneficial weeds and arthropods.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F98https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F98Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:50:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage ditches to benefit wildlife Five out of a total eight studies from the Netherlands and the UK (including one replicated, controlled paired study and three replicated site comparisons) looking at the effects of managing ditches on biodiversity, found that this intervention resulted in increased invertebrate biomass or abundance, plant species richness, emergent plant cover, amphibian diversity and abundance, bird visit rates and higher numbers of some bird species or positive impacts on some birds in plots with ditches managed under agri-environment schemes. One replicated controlled and paired study from the Netherlands found higher plant diversity on ditch banks along unsprayed edges of winter wheat compared to those sprayed with pesticides. Three studies from the Netherlands and the UK (including two replicated site comparisons) found that ditch management had negative or no clear effects on some farmland bird species or plants.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F135https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F135Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:35:00 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make direct payments per clutch for farmland birds Two replicated and controlled studies from the Netherlands found limited evidence for increased wading bird populations on farms with per-clutch payments. One study found no population effects over three years. The second found slightly higher breeding densities of wading birds, but not higher overall numbers. A replicated and controlled study found higher hatching success of northern lapwing and black-tailed godwit on farms with payment schemes than control farms. A replicated site comparison from the Netherlands that looked at the effects of per-clutch payments in combination with postponed agricultural activities found more birds bred on 12.5 ha plots under the per-clutch payment and postponed agricultural activities scheme but found no differences at the field-scale.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F146https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F146Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:46:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage ditches to benefit wildlife Three out of four replicated studies from the UK found that some farmland birds responded positively to the presence of ditches managed for wildlife. All three also found that some species did not respond positively or responded negatively to management. A replicated, controlled and paired sites study from the UK found that bunded ditches were visited by more birds than non-bunded ditches. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F180https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F180Wed, 30 May 2012 14:17:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wood pasture and parkland We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining wood pasture and parkland 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%2F235https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F235Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:57:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make selective use of spring herbicides We found no evidence for the effects of selective use of spring herbicides 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%2F457https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F457Wed, 29 Aug 2012 14:33:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wood pasture and parkland A randomized, replicated, controlled trial in Sweden found that annual mowing maintained the highest number of plant species on wood pasture.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F649https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F649Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:59:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage ditches One controlled, before-and-after study in the UK found that managing ditches increased common toad numbers. One replicated, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that numbers of amphibian species and abundance was significantly higher in ditches managed under agri-environment schemes compared to those managed conventionally.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F749https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F749Thu, 18 Jul 2013 16:10:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage cutting regimeOne study investigating the effects of changing mowing regimes is discussed in ‘Habitat restoration and creation – Change mowing regime’.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F788https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F788Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:31:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/create buffer zones One site comparison study in Australia found that a forest edge protected by a planted buffer strip had higher canopy cover and lower stem density, but similar understory species richness to an unbuffered forest edge.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1168https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1168Thu, 19 May 2016 08:58:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/create habitat corridors We found no evidence for the effects of maintaining or creating habitat corridors on forests. '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%2F1176https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1176Thu, 19 May 2016 10:26:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/create habitat corridors in developed areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of maintaining or creating habitat corridors in developed areas on shrublands. '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%2F1543https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1543Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:44:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/restore water flow across service corridors One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of restoring water flow across service corridors. The study was in a fen. Characteristic plants (1 study): One before-and-after study in a fen in the USA found that following restoration of water inflow across a road (along with general rewetting), cover of wet peatland sedges increased whilst cover of grasses preferring drier conditions decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1741https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1741Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:25:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage fertilizer or herbicide application near peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of managing fertilizer or herbicide use in adjacent areas. ‘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%2F1784https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1784Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:16:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage ditches to benefit bats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing ditches to benefit 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%2F1944https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1944Tue, 04 Dec 2018 09:59:42 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage forest and woodland to encourage understorey growth One study evaluated the effects of managing forest and woodland to encourage understorey growth on bat populations. The study was in Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One paired sites study in Germany found more bat species and higher bat diversity in a forest managed to encourage understorey growth than in a managed forest without understorey growth. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One paired sites study in Germany found higher overall bat activity (relative abundance) in a forest managed to encourage understorey growth than in a managed forest without understorey growth. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1986https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1986Wed, 05 Dec 2018 11:04:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage climate-driven range extensions of problematic species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing climate-driven range extensions of problematic species on subtidal benthic invertebrate 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%2F2217https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2217Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:35:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/restore/create habitat connectivity on farmland We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of maintaining, restoring or creating habitat connectivity on farmland. ‘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%2F2381https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2381Wed, 27 May 2020 14:29:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make introduction of non-native mammals for sporting purposes illegal We found no studies that evaluated the effects on native mammals of making introduction of non-native mammals for sporting purposes illegal. ‘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%2F2621https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2621Fri, 12 Jun 2020 10:47:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain water level and flow along regulated rivers We found no studies that evaluated the effects of maintaining water level and flow along regulated rivers on marine and freshwater mammal 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%2F2850https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2850Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:39:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage fertilizer or herbicide applicationWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in marshes or swamps, of managing fertilizer or herbicide use in these habitats or adjacent areas.   ‘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%2F3156https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3156Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:13:49 +0100Collected 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: Manage ditches on farmland We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing ditches 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%2F3530https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3530Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:39:53 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wild-caught, gravid females in captivity during gestation Seven studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of maintaining wild-caught, gravid females in captivity during gestation. Two studies were in the USA and New Zealand and one was in each of Japan, Iran and Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Reproductive success (7 studies): Five replicated studies in the USA, Japan, Iran and Mexico found that varying numbers of wild-caught snakes and lizards gave birth to live young or laid eggs that hatched successfully in captivity. One study also found that eggs laid in artificial nest chambers had higher hatching success than those laid outside of the chambers. One study in New Zealand found mixed effects of providing different basking conditions on the number of McCann’s skinks and common geckos that gave birth successfully. One controlled study in New Zealand found that McCann’s skinks in captivity that were treated for mites completed pregnancy more often and produced more viable offspring compared to skinks not treated. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3766https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3766Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:16:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage ditches to benefit butterflies and moths We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing ditches to benefit butterflies and moths. ‘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%2F3977https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3977Thu, 18 Aug 2022 10:39:00 +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