Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or maintain dry stone walls We have captured no evidence for the effects of restoring or maintaining dry stone walls on farmland wildlife. '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%2F74https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F74Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:05:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create traditional water meadows Of three studies from Sweden and the UK (two before-and-after trials) looking at bird numbers or densities following water meadow restoration, one study found increases, one study found increases and decreases and one found northern lapwing populations did not increase despite an increase in the area of managed water meadows. Seventeen studies from France, Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland and the UK (seven replicated controlled studies of which two were also randomized and two reviews) found one or more management techniques that were successful in restoring wet meadow plant communities. The techniques were topsoil removal, introduction of target plant species, raising water levels, grazing, mowing or a combination of removing topsoil and introducing target plant species, plus livestock exclusion. Three studies (one replicated controlled study and two reviews) from the Netherlands, Sweden, Germany and the UK found restoration of wet meadow plant communities had reduced or limited success. Thirteen studies (five replicated and controlled of which two randomized) from France, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the UK monitored the effects of methods to restore or create wet meadow plant communities over a relatively short time period after restoration, and found some positive effects within five years. Three replicated studies (one controlled, one a site comparison) from the Netherlands and Germany found restoration was not complete five, nine or 20 years later. A replicated controlled site comparison from Sweden found plant species richness increased with time since restoration. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F119https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F119Tue, 01 Nov 2011 20:58:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create traditional water meadows Four out of five before-and-after studies, all from the UK, found that the number of waders and wildfowl on sites increased following the restoration of water meadows. One before-and-after study from Sweden found no increase in northern lapwing population following an increase in the area of managed meadows in the study area. This study also found that restored meadows were used less than expected by breeding lapwings. A before-and-after study from Sweden found that hatching success of northern lapwings were higher on meadows than on spring-sown crops. There were no differences between meadows and autumn-sown crops or grasslands.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F363https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F363Mon, 06 Aug 2012 12:51:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create shrubland Only one of the four studies captured investigated the effects of shrubland restoration in isolation. This small before-and-after study from the UK found that one or two pairs of northern lapwing bred on an area of restored moorland, whereas none had previously bred in the area. A study from the USA and one from the Azores found that populations of target species (gamebirds and seabirds) increased following shrubland restoration, amongst other interventions. A replicated study from the UK which did not distinguish between several interventions performed found a negative relationship between the combined intervention and the ratio of young-to-old grey partridges.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F364https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F364Mon, 06 Aug 2012 13:03:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create savannas We found no evidence for the effects of savanna restoration or creation 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%2F365https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F365Mon, 06 Aug 2012 13:10:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create inland wetlands Of eleven studies captured, 11, from the mainland USA, Guam, Canada and Hawaii, found that birds used artificially restored or created wetlands. Two found that rates of use and species richness were similar or higher than on natural wetlands. One found that use rates were higher than on unrestored wetlands. Three studies from the USA and Puerto Rico found that restored wetlands held lower densities and fewer species of birds than natural wetlands. A replicated study from the USA found that least bittern productivity was similar in restored and natural wetlands. Two replicated studies examined wetland characteristics: one from the USA found that semi-permanent restored wetlands were used more than temporary or seasonal ones. A study from Hawaii found that larger restored wetlands were used more than smaller sites.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F366https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F366Mon, 06 Aug 2012 13:34:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create kelp forestsA before-and-study in the USA found that the densities of five of the nine bird species analysed increased following kelp forest restoration.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F368https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F368Tue, 07 Aug 2012 13:39:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create lagoonsA before-and-after study in the UK found that large numbers of bird species used, and bred, in a newly-created lagoon.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F369https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F369Tue, 07 Aug 2012 13:47:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create wood pasture One replicated controlled trial in Belgium found that protection from grazing enhanced the survival and growth of tree seedlings planted in pasture. One replicated study in Switzerland found that cattle browsing increased the mortality of tree saplings of four species, and reduced average shoot production and total above-ground biomass. Browsing frequency decreased with increasing height of the surrounding vegetation.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F644https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F644Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:01:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create upland heath/moorland A small unreplicated trial of heather moorland restoration in northern England found that mowing and flail cutting along with grazing could be used to control the dominance of purple moor grass. The same study found moorland restoration benefited one bird species, with one or two pairs of northern lapwing found to breed in the area of restored moorland, where none had bred prior to restoration. A review from the UK concluded that vegetation changes took place very slowly following the removal of grazing to restore upland grassland to heather moorland.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F650https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F650Tue, 23 Oct 2012 13:03:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create traditional orchards We have captured no evidence for the effects of restoring or creating traditional orchards on farmland wildlife. '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%2F701https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F701Mon, 07 Jan 2013 13:15:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create low input grasslandsOne randomized, replicated trial in the Netherlands and one controlled trial from France found that restoring grasslands increased the diversity of soil animals. One trial also found higher microbial biomass, activity and carbon under grassland. SOIL TYPES COVERED: sandy-loam, silty.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F905https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F905Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:04:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create linear habitat features/green corridors We found no studies that evaluated the effects of restoring or creating linear habitat features/green 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%2F2035https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2035Wed, 05 Dec 2018 18:27:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create wetlands One study evaluated the effects of restoring wetlands on bat populations. The study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that restoring wetlands increased overall bat activity (relative abundance), and restored wetlands had similar bat activity to undisturbed wetlands. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2036https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2036Wed, 05 Dec 2018 18:28:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create savannas Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of restoring or creating savannas. One study was in Senegal and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): A replicated, randomized, paired sites, controlled study in the USA found that restoring savannas by removing trees increased small mammal diversity. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): A study in Senegal found that in a population of dorcas gazelle translocated into a fenced enclosure where vegetation had been restored, births outnumbered deaths. A replicated, randomized, paired sites, controlled study in the USA found that restoring savannas by removing trees did not, in most cases, change small mammal abundance. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2568https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2568Tue, 09 Jun 2020 15:54:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create shrubland Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of restoring or creating shrubland. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): Two site comparison studies, in the USA and Mexico, found that following desert scrub or shrubland restoration, mammal species richness was similar to that in undisturbed areas. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A site comparison study in the USA found that restored desert scrub hosted similar small mammal abundance compared to undisturbed desert scrub. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that restoring shrubland following tree clearance did not increase usage of areas by mule deer compared to tree clearance alone. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2569https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2569Tue, 09 Jun 2020 16:19:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create wetlands Four studies evaluated the effects on mammals of restoring or creating wetlands. Three studies were in the USA and one was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): A site comparison study in the USA found that the composition of mammal species present differed between a created and a natural wetland. Richness/diversity (2 studies): Two site comparison studies (one replicated) in the USA, found that mammal species richness did not differ between created and natural wetlands. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): A before-and-after study in the USA found that following marshland restoration, muskrat abundance increased. Survival (1 study): A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the UK, found that water voles persisted better in wetlands that were partially restored using mechanical or manual methods than they did in wetlands undergoing complete mechanical restoration. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2572https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2572Wed, 10 Jun 2020 09:45:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or maintain beaches (‘beach nourishment’) Three studies evaluated the effects of restoring or maintaining beaches on reptile populations. All three studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that gopher tortoise densities were higher and numbers occupying burrows similar on constructed sand dunes compared to natural dunes. Reproductive success (2 studies): Two controlled, before-and-after studies in the USA found that one year after adding sand to beaches, nesting activity decreased more for loggerhead turtles, and loggerhead and green turtles compared to on unmodified beaches. Two years after nourishment, both studies found that loggerhead nesting activity had increased, and in one study nesting had returned to pre-nourishment levels. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that burrows on a constructed dune were discovered by gopher tortoises after three months. Behaviour change (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that one year after adding sand to beaches, loggerhead turtles made more non-nesting crawls than on unmodified beaches, but the difference was smaller two years after nourishment. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3669https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3669Fri, 10 Dec 2021 11:30:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or maintain species-rich grassland along road/railway verges Eight studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or maintaining species-rich grassland along road or railway verges. Three studies were in the USA and one was in each of Germany, the UK, Finland, Poland, and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (6 studies): Four replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in Germany, the UK, the USA and Finland found that restored roadside prairies, verges sown with native wildflowers, with more butterfly species’ larval food plants, with more species of plants and with more plants in flower had a higher species richness and diversity of butterflies, day-flying moths, burnet moths and meadow-specialist moths than verges dominated by non-native vegetation or with fewer butterfly species’ larval food plants, fewer plant species, and fewer plants in flower. However, one of these studies also found that verges sown with more plant species did not have higher species richness of meadow-specialist butterflies. One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that road verges and land under power lines managed by mowing once or twice a year, or not at all, had a similar species richness of butterflies to remnant prairies. One replicated, site comparison study in Poland found that wide road verges had a higher species richness of butterflies than narrow road verges. POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of three replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the UK, the USA and Finland found that restored roadside prairies and verges sown with more butterfly species’ larval food plants had a greater abundance of butterflies and burnet moths than verges dominated by non-native vegetation or with fewer butterfly species’ larval food plants. However, one of these studies also found that verges with more plants in flower did not have a greater abundance of butterflies and burnet moths than verges with fewer plants in flower. The other study found that verges sown with more plant species did not have a greater abundance of meadow-specialist butterflies or moths. One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that road verges and land under power lines managed by mowing once or twice a year, or not at all, had a similar abundance of butterflies to remnant prairies. One replicated, site comparison study in Poland found that wide road verges had a greater abundance of butterflies than narrow road verges. Survival (3 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the USA found that restored prairie road verges had a lower mortality risk for butterflies than verges dominated by non-native grasses. The other study found more dead butterflies and moths on roads with tall meadow verges than on roads with frequently mown, non-native, short grass verges or wooded verges. This study also found more dead butterflies and moths on roads with habitat in the central reservation than on roads without habitat in the central reservation. One replicated, site comparison study in Poland found that less frequently mown road verges, and verges mown later in the summer, had fewer dead butterflies than verges which were mown more frequently or earlier in the summer. Condition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that monarch caterpillars living on road verges mown once or twice a year had a similar number of parasites to caterpillars living in mown and unmown prairies. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3854https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3854Tue, 05 Jul 2022 12:03:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create new habitats after mining and quarrying Four studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating new habitats after mining and quarrying. Two studies were in the Czech Republic, and one was in each of the UK and New Zealand. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the Czech Republic found that 15% of 380 invertebrate species (including 208 moth species) were only found on flattened spoil heaps, compared to 30% which were only found on unflattened heaps. Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the Czech Republic found that technically restored quarries had a lower species richness of butterflies and day-flying moths than quarries left to restore naturally. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the Czech Republic found that flattened spoil heaps had a lower species richness of moths than unflattened spoil heaps. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that on slate waste tips trees where fertilizer was applied had a similar abundance of caterpillars to trees that were unfertilized. One site comparison study in New Zealand found that a peat bog restored after mining supported a similar density of Fred the thread moth caterpillars to undisturbed bogs. Condition (1 study): One site comparison study in New Zealand found that a peat bog restored after mining supported Fred the thread moth caterpillars of a similar size to caterpillars on undisturbed bogs. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3862https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3862Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:53:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create habitat connectivity Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating habitat connectivity. Three studies were in the USA, two were in the UK and one was in Sweden. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Four studies (including one controlled, before-and-after study and one before-and-after study) in the USA and the UK found that restoring connectivity between lupine, bracken, pastures or prairie patches increased the abundance of Karner blue, high brown fritillary, small pearl-bordered fritillary, marsh fritillary and regal fritillary. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One site comparison study in Sweden reported that grassland strips providing nectar or shelter were each more likely to be used by one of four butterfly species than strips with no resources. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that common buckeye and variegated fritillary butterflies were more likely to move between connected than unconnected habitat patches. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3934https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3934Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:42:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create heathland/shrubland Three studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating heathland or shrubland. Two studies were in the UK and one was in the Netherlands. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the UK found that the moth community on restored moorland was more similar to that on established heather moorland than on degraded moorland. Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that in heathlands restored by topsoil removal butterfly species richness was lower than in the surrounding landscape. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that in heathlands restored by topsoil removal butterfly species richness was lower than in the surrounding landscape but at restored sites abundance was higher in areas where heather litter had also been spread than where it had not. One study in the UK reported that a population of silver-studded blue butterflies released into a site which was managed for heathland restoration increased in abundance over 11 years. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One study in the UK reported that a population of silver-studded blue butterflies released into a site where heathland was being restored expanded its range beyond its initial release area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3946https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3946Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:59:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create peatland Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating peatland. Two studies were in each of Finland and the UK, and one was in each of the Netherlands and Ireland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Finland found that mires restored by filling ditches and cutting trees had a moth community which was intermediate between drained and pristine mires. Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in Finland found that after mires were restored by raising the water table and removing large trees, they had a higher species richness of mire specialist butterflies than before restoration or than unrestored, drained mires, and a similar species richness to pristine mires. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Ireland reported that protected bogs re-wetted by blocking drains had a similar species richness of moths to unrestored and unprotected bogs. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Two before-and-after studies (including one replicated, paired, controlled study) in the UK and Finland found that bogs re-wetted by blocking drains and mires restored by raising the water table and removing large trees had a higher abundance of rosy marsh moth caterpillars and mire specialist butterflies than before restoration or than unrestored mires, and a similar abundance to pristine mires. Two replicated, paired, site comparison studies in Finland and Ireland found that mires restored by filling ditches and cutting trees and bogs restored by blocking drains (along with legal protection) had mixed effects on moth abundance compared to unrestored sites depending on species. Survival (1 study): One replicated study in the UK found that where water levels had risen due to peatland restoration, large heath butterfly caterpillars had lower winter survival than in areas where water levels had not risen. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that wet heathland where water levels had been recently raised were less frequently occupied by Alcon large blue than sites where the water level had not been raised. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3948https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3948Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:59:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create wetlands and floodplains Three studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating wetlands and floodplains. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Sweden. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Sweden found that wetland creation increased macroinvertebrate diversity (including butterflies and moths), and that species richness increased with wetland age and was similar to mature ponds. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that wetland prairie restored by seeding willow dock and seasonal flooding had a higher abundance of great copper eggs than degraded, unflooded prairie. Survival (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that the survival of great copper eggs and caterpillars was lower in wetland prairie restored by planting native seed mixes and flooding annually than in degraded, unflooded prairie. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that wetland prairie restored by planting native seed mixes and flooding annually was used more by adult great copper than degraded, unflooded prairie. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3949https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3949Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:21:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create species-rich, semi-natural grassland Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating species-rich, semi-natural grassland. Two studies were in Finland, and one was in each of Switzerland, Sweden, the UK and Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that semi-natural grasslands restored by scrub clearance and the reintroduction of grazing or mowing had different butterfly communities to existing species-rich grasslands, and they did not become more similar over time. Richness/diversity (3 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies in Finland and Sweden found that semi-natural grasslands restored by scrub clearance and grazing had a similar species richness of butterflies and burnet moths to both unrestored and continuously managed grassland. The other study found that semi-natural grasslands restored by cattle grazing had a lower species richness of butterflies and day-flying moths than unrestored and continuously managed grasslands. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that the species richness of butterflies on semi-natural grasslands restored by scrub clearance and the reintroduction of grazing or mowing remained similar over time since restoration. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of five replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in Switzerland, Finland, Sweden and Germany found that semi-natural grasslands restored by cattle grazing had a lower total abundance of butterflies and day-flying moths, and of 13 out of 32 individual species, than unmanaged, abandoned grasslands, but that three species had higher abundance, and three had lower abundance, on restored grasslands than on continuously grazed grasslands. Two studies found that grasslands restored by scrub clearing and grazing or mowing had a similar abundance of butterflies and burnet moths and heath fritillaries to unmanaged grasslands and continuously managed grasslands, although the abundance of heath fritillary adults and caterpillars was lower on restored grasslands than on continuously managed grasslands. The fifth study found that the density of blue-spot hairstreak eggs, and egg batches, was higher in grasslands restored by scrub cutting than in unrestored or continuously managed grasslands. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that in grasslands restored by scrub cutting, a greater proportion of small buckthorn bushes contained blue-spot hairstreak eggs than in unrestored or continuously managed grasslands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3955https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3955Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:35:55 +0100
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

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

Accept & continue