Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace honey-hunting with apiculture  One study reported that a programme to enhance take-up of stingless beekeeping in southern Mexico increased the number of managed colonies in the area. Five trials contributed to scientific improvement of stingless beekeeping methods. Two controlled trials showed that either brewer's yeast (one trial) or a mix with 25% pollen collected by honey bees Apis mellifera (one trial) can be used as a pollen substitute to feed Scaptotrigona postica in times of pollen scarcity. A study on the island of Tobago found a wooden hive design with separate, different-shaped honey and brood chambers allowed honey to be extracted without damaging the brood. One trial showed that 50 g of comb with mature pupae is enough to start a new daughter colony of S. mexicana. One trial found brood growth was higher in traditional log hives than in box hives with internal volumes exceeding 14 litres, and recommended smaller box hives. We have captured no clear evidence about whether these activities help conserve bees or enhance native bee populations.    Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F33https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F33Thu, 20 May 2010 06:29:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace non-native species of tree/shrubA replicated, controlled study from the USA found that the number of black-chinned hummingbird nests increased at sites with fuel reduction and planting of native species, but that the increase was smaller than at sites without planting.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F341https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F341Sat, 28 Jul 2012 20:22:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/treat endoparasites and diseases Three studies from across the world investigating a range of taxa and parasites found that birds had higher productivity or survival if either chicks or adults were treated for endoparasites. One small study from Spain found no effect of Staphylococcus aureus treatment on eagle survival, while a study from Mauritius found uncertain evidence as to whether trichomoniasis treatment increased survival of pink pigeons Nesoenas mayeri after fledging. A randomised, replicated and controlled trial from the Netherlands found lower parasite burdens but also lower survival in Eurasian oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus chicks treated with anthelmintic drugs.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F434https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F434Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:54:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/treat ectoparasites to increase survival or reproductive success We found no evidence on the effects of removing/treating ectoparasites to increase survival or reproductive success. '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%2F436https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F436Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:22:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/control adult brood parasites All 11 studies from across the world that investigated parasitism rates found that they were lower following cowbird Molothrus spp. control. One study from Ecuador found an increase in host species population after cowbird control, but two American studies found no such effect. Five studies from the Americas found higher productivities or success rates of host nests when cowbirds were removed, five found that at least some measures of productivity did not change with cowbird control.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F441https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F441Thu, 23 Aug 2012 14:28:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace nesting substrate following severe weatherTwo before-and-after studies from Canada found that common tern Sterna hirundo populations increased at one colony where nesting substrates were replaced, but decreased at a second. Several other interventions were used at both sites, making it difficult to evaluate the effects of substrate replacement.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F474https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F474Thu, 30 Aug 2012 12:47:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Repair/support nests to support breedingA small study from Puerto Rico found that nine Puerto Rican parrot Amazona vittata nests were repaired, resulting in no chicks dying of cold.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F502https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F502Tue, 04 Sep 2012 16:31:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove vegetation to create nesting areas Two out of six studies found that the number of waders and terns nesting in an area increased following the removal of vegetation, and another found that a tern colony moved to an area prepared by removing vegetation. Two of these studies used multiple interventions at once. One study found a decrease in colony size after several interventions, including vegetation control. A study from the UK found that gulls and terns nested in an area cleared of vegetation and a controlled study from Puerto Rico found that although no terns nested in plots cleared completely of vegetation, more nested in partially-cleared plots than in uncleared plots. A before-and-after study from Canada found that tern nesting success was higher after plots were cleared of vegetation and other interventions were used.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F505https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F505Thu, 06 Sep 2012 14:00:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove woody debris after timber harvest One of six studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in the USA and France found that woody debris removal increased understory vegetation cover. Three studies found no effect or mixed effects on cover. Four of the studies found no effect or mixed effects on understory vegetation species richness and diversity and two found no effect of woody debris removal on coverand species diversity of trees. Six studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in Canada, Ethiopia, Spain and the USA examined the effect of woody debris removal on young trees. One study found that debris removal increased young tree density, another study found that it decreased young tree density, and three studies found mixed effects or no effect on young tree density. One found no effect of woody-debris removal on young tree survival.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1213https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1213Fri, 20 May 2016 13:32:58 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/treat external/internal parasites to increase reproductive success/survival One before-and-after study in Brazil found that most reintroduced golden lion tamarins treated for parasites, alongside other interventions, did not survive over seven years post-release. Three studies, including two before-and-after studies, in the Republic of Congo and The Gambia found that 70% of reintroduced chimpanzees treated for parasites, alongside other interventions, survived for at least 3.5-5 years and in one case the population increased. One study in Gabon found that 33% of reintroduced mandrills died within one year after release despite being treated for parasites, alongside other interventions. Two site comparison studies in Vietnam found that most reintroduced pygmy slow lorises died or disappeared (lost radio signal soon after release) despite being treated for parasites, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Republic of Congo and Gabon and one before-and-after study in Gabon found that most western lowland gorillas treated for parasites, alongside other interventions, survived over nine months or four years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1551https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1551Thu, 19 Oct 2017 19:11:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace blocks of vegetation after mining or peat extraction Two studies evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of replacing blocks of vegetation after mining or peat extraction. One study was in a bog and one was in a fen. Plant community composition (2 studies): Two studies, in a bog in the UK and a fen in Canada, reported that transplanted vegetation blocks retained their peatland vegetation community. In the UK, the community of the transplanted blocks did not change over time. In Canada, the community of replaced vegetation blocks remained similar to an undisturbed fen. Vegetation cover (2 studies): One before-and-after study in the UK reported that bare peat next to translocated bog vegetation developed vegetation cover (mainly grass/rush). Sphagnum moss cover declined in the translocated blocks. One site comparison study in Canada reported that replaced fen vegetation blocks retained similar Sphagnum and shrub cover to an undisturbed fen. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1738https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1738Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:22:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace culling of bats with non-lethal methods of preventing vampire bats from spreading rabies to livestock We found no studies that evaluated the effects of replacing culling of bats with non-lethal methods of preventing vampire bats from spreading rabies to livestock on vampire 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%2F1950https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1950Tue, 04 Dec 2018 12:18:26 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reopen entrances to closed mines and make suitable for roosting bats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reopening entrances to closed mines and making them suitable for roosting bats on bat populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1965https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1965Tue, 04 Dec 2018 16:54:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace culling of bats with non-lethal methods of preventing vampire bats from spreading rabies to humans We found no studies that evaluated the effects of replacing culling of bats with non-lethal methods of preventing vampire bats from spreading rabies to humans on vampire 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%2F1979https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1979Tue, 04 Dec 2018 18:27:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/control non-native amphibians (e.g. cane toads) We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of removing or controlling non-native amphibians. '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%2F2498https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2498Thu, 04 Jun 2020 15:38:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/control non-native invertebrates One study evaluated the effects on mammals of removing or controlling non-native invertebrates. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study the USA found that after the control of red imported fire ants, capture rates of northern pygmy mice increased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2501https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2501Thu, 04 Jun 2020 15:42:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/control non-native mammals Twenty-five studies evaluated the effects on non-controlled mammals of removing or controlling non-native mammals. Twenty-one studies were in Australia, and one was in each of France, the UK, Equador and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (24 STUDIES) Abundance (21 studies): Ten of 18 controlled, before-and-after or site comparison studies, in Australia, found that after controlling red foxes, abundances, densities or trapping frequencies increased for rock-wallaby spp., eastern grey kangaroo, woylie,, brush-tail possum, tammar wallaby, chuditch and quenda. Seven studies found mixed results with increases in some species but not others, increases followed by declines or increases only where cats as well as foxes were controlled. The other study found no increase in bush rat numbers with fox control. One of three replicated, before-and-after studies (including two controlled studies), in Australia, France and Ecuador, found that control of invasive rodents increased numbers of lesser white-toothed shrews and greater white-toothed shrews. One study found that Santiago rice rat abundance declined less with rodent control and one found mixed results, with increased numbers of short-tailed mice at one out of four study sites. Survival (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in Australia found that controlling red foxes increased survival of juvenile eastern grey kangaroos. Occupancy/range (3 studies): Three studies (two before-and-after, one controlled), in the UK and Australia, found that after controlling non-native American mink, red foxes and European rabbits, there were increases in ranges or proportions of sites occupied by water vole, common brushtail possum, long-nosed potoroo and southern brown bandicoot and four native small mammal species. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): A before-and-after study in the USA found that following removal of feral cats, vertebrate prey increased as a proportion of the diet of island foxes. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2504https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2504Thu, 04 Jun 2020 15:58:03 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/control non-native mammals within a fenced area One study evaluated the effects on native mammals of removing or controlling non-native mammals within a fenced area. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): A site comparison study in Australia found that in a fenced area where invasive cats, red foxes and European rabbits were removed, native mammal species richness was higher than outside the fenced area. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A site comparison study in Australia found that in a fenced area where invasive cats, red foxes and European rabbits were removed, native mammals overall and two out of four small mammal species were more abundant than outside the fenced area. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2528https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2528Mon, 08 Jun 2020 14:51:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/control non-native plants Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of removing or controlling non-native invasive plants. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): A replicated study in the USA found that control of introduced saltcedar did not change small mammal species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A site comparison study in the USA found that partial removal of velvet mesquite did not increase abundances of six mammal species. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2529https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2529Mon, 08 Jun 2020 15:23:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove/control non-native species that could interbreed with native species We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of removing or controlling non-native species that could interbreed with native species. '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%2F2534https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2534Mon, 08 Jun 2020 16:26:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove vegetation using herbicides Six studies evaluated the effects on mammals of removing vegetation using herbicides. All six studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): Two controlled studies (one replicated) in the USA found that applying herbicide did not increase numbers of translocated Utah prairie dogs or alter mule deer densities in areas of tree clearance. Survival (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that applying herbicide, along with mechanical disturbance and seeding, increased overwinter survival of mule deer fawns. Condition (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that applying herbicide did not reduce bot fly infestation rates of rodents and cottontail rabbits. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in the USA found that applying herbicide increased forest use by female, but not male, white-tailed deer and increased pasture use by cottontail rabbits in some, but not all, sampling seasons. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2565https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2565Tue, 09 Jun 2020 14:27:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove vegetation that could compete with planted trees/shrubs: freshwater wetlands Five studies evaluated the effects, on trees/shrubs planted in freshwater wetlands, of removing competing plants. Four studies were in the USA. Two of these took place in the same swamp, but with different experimental set-ups. One study was in Australia. VEGETATION COMMUNITY   VEGETATION ABUNDANCE   VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (3 studies): Three replicated, controlled studies (two also randomized, two also paired) in a wet meadow in Australia and a degraded swamp in the USA found that clearing vegetation before planting tree/shrub seedlings typically had no clear or significant effect on their height, after 1–4 growing seasons. However, one of the studies in the USA found that planted baldcypress Taxodium distichum seedlings were taller, after three growing seasons, when planted amongst cut woody vegetation than below an uncleared canopy. Diameter/perimeter/area (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a wet meadow in Australia found that clearing vegetation, before planting tree/shrub seedlings, typically had no significant effect on the diameter of these seedlings nine months later. OTHER Germination/emergence (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a wet meadow in Australia found that there were more seedlings in plots that had been cleared of vegetation before sowing tree/shrub seeds, than in plots that had not been cleared before sowing. Seedlings were counted two months after sowing. Survival (4 studies): Three replicated, controlled studies (two also randomized, two also paired) in a wet meadow in Australia and a degraded swamp in the USA found that clearing vegetation before planting tree/shrub seedlings typically had no clear or significant effect on their survival, after 1–4 growing seasons. However, one of the studies in the USA found that planted baldcypress Taxodium distichum seedlings had a lower survival rate, after three growing seasons, when planted amongst cut woody vegetation than below an uncleared canopy. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in degraded swamps in the USA found that removing reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea before planting tree/shrub seedlings never significantly reduced their survival rate over 1–2 growing seasons, and often increased it. Growth (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that baldcypress Taxodium distichum seedlings planted into a marsh grew more in diameter, but less in height, when planted into plots cleared of vines than when planted into uncleared plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3334https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3334Sun, 11 Apr 2021 14:09:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove, control or exclude invertebrate herbivores One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of removing, controlling or excluding invertebrate herbivores. The study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found that at sites fenced to exclude grazing animals there was a higher density of pearl-bordered fritillary butterflies than at unfenced sites. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3885https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3885Tue, 26 Jul 2022 18:24:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove, control or exclude native predators Five studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of removing, controlling or excluding native predators. Two studies were in each of the UK and the USA and one was in Kenya. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Survival (5 studies): Three of five replicated studies (including one randomized, paired, controlled study and three paired, controlled studies) in the UK, Kenya and the USA found that using mesh cages, net sleeves and sticky resin to exclude predators (including birds and mammals and spiders and ants) increased the survival of large copper caterpillars, Boisduval silkworm eggs and caterpillars and Appalachian brown eggs and juveniles. The other two studies found that using cages or water and chemicals to exclude vertebrate or terrestrial predators (mainly ants) did not increase the survival of monarch caterpillars. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3889https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3889Tue, 26 Jul 2022 18:30:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove, control or exclude vertebrate herbivores Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of removing, controlling or excluding vertebrate herbivores. Three studies were in the USA, two were in the UK, one was in each of Mauritius, the Netherlands, Canada and Japan, and one was a global systematic review. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (6 studies): Two of four replicated studies (including three controlled studies and one site comparison study) in the USA, Mauritius and Canada found that forest plots fenced to exclude, or reduce the density of, non-native pigs and deer (in one case along with weeding of invasive plants) had a greater species richness of butterflies and macro-moths than unfenced plots. The other two studies found that forest plots fenced to exclude elk had mixed effects on the species richness of butterflies and arthropods including moths depending on fire intensity and year. One of these studies also found that grassland plots fenced to exclude elk had a similar species richness of butterflies to unfenced plots in all years. One global systematic review found that reducing or removing grazing or browsing by wild or domestic herbivores in temperate and boreal forests did not affect the species richness of butterflies and moths. POPULATION RESPONSE (10 STUDIES) Abundance (9 studies): Five of eight studies (including five controlled studies, one before-and-after study, and two site comparison studies) in the UK, the USA, Mauritius, Canada and Japan found that forest and grassland plots fenced to exclude, or reduce the density of, deer, sheep, pigs and large herbivores (in one case along with weeding of invasive plants) had a higher abundance of butterflies, moths, caterpillars, rare macro-moths and New Forest burnet moths than unfenced plots. One of these studies also found that the total abundance of macro-moths was similar in fenced and unfenced plots. Two studies found that forest plots fenced to exclude elk had mixed effects on the abundance of butterflies and arthropods including moths depending on fire intensity and year. One of these studies also found that grassland plots fenced to exclude elk had a similar abundance of butterflies to unfenced plots in all years. The eighth study found that a forest fenced to exclude sika deer had a similar abundance of all moths, but a lower abundance of tree-feeding moths, than unfenced forest. One global systematic review found that reducing or removing grazing or browsing by wild or domestic herbivores in temperate and boreal forests increased the abundance of butterflies and moths. Survival (1 study): One paired, controlled study in the Netherlands reported that all Glanville fritillary caterpillar nests survived in grassland fenced to exclude sheep, compared to 88% in a grazed area. Condition (1 study): One paired, controlled study in the Netherlands found that fewer Glanville fritillary caterpillar nests were damaged in grassland fenced to exclude sheep than in a grazed area. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3891https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3891Tue, 09 Aug 2022 11:49:20 +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