Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Apply insecticide to protect seedlings from invertebrates One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the USA found that applying insecticide increased tree seedling emergence and survival.      Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1149https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1149Tue, 17 May 2016 15:18:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control birds One controlled study in Australia found that removing bell-miners from narrow-leaved peppermint forests did not improve the health of the trees in the forest.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1151https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1151Wed, 18 May 2016 14:46:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Recharge groundwater to restore wetland forest We found no evidence for the effects of recharging groundwater to restore wetland forest. '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%2F1185https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1185Thu, 19 May 2016 11:43:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Construct water detention areas to slow water flow and restore riparian forests We found no evidence for the effects of constructing water detention areas to slow water flow and restore riparian forests 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%2F1186https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1186Thu, 19 May 2016 11:44:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce beavers to impede water flow in forest watercourses We found no evidence for the effects of introducing beavers to impede water flow in forest watercourses 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%2F1187https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1187Thu, 19 May 2016 11:46:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce large herbivores We captured no evidence for the effects of reintroducing large herbivores 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%2F1188https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1188Thu, 19 May 2016 11:47:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pollard trees (top cutting or top pruning) We captured no evidence for the effects of tree pollarding 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%2F1189https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1189Thu, 19 May 2016 11:49:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We captured no evidence for the effects of tree coppicing 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%2F1190https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1190Thu, 19 May 2016 11:50:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Halo ancient trees We captured no evidence for the effects of haloing ancient trees 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%2F1191https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1191Thu, 19 May 2016 11:51:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt conservation grazing of woodland We captured no evidence for the effects of adopting conservation grazing of woodland. '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%2F1192https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1192Thu, 19 May 2016 11:53:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain fallen trees We captured no evidence for the effects of retaining fallen trees 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%2F1193https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1193Thu, 19 May 2016 11:54:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Imitate natural disturbances by pushing over trees We captured no evidence for the effects of imitating natural disturbances by pushing over trees 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%2F1194https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1194Thu, 19 May 2016 11:55:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use grazing to remove invasive plant species We found no evidence for the effects of using grazing to remove invasive plant species 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%2F1195https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1195Thu, 19 May 2016 13:10:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed fire to remove invasive plant species We found no evidence for the effects of using prescribed fire to remove invasive plant species 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%2F1196https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1196Thu, 19 May 2016 13:11:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manually/mechanically remove native plants We found no evidence for the effects of manually or mechanically removing native plants 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%2F1197https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1197Thu, 19 May 2016 13:12:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control large herbivore populations We found no evidence of the effects of controlling large herbivore populations 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%2F1198https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1198Thu, 19 May 2016 13:14:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fencing to enclose large herbivores (e.g. deer) We found no evidence of the effects of using fencing to enclose large herbivores 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%2F1199https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1199Thu, 19 May 2016 13:15:58 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control medium-sized herbivores We found no evidence of the effects of controlling medium-sized herbivores 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%2F1200https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1200Thu, 19 May 2016 13:17:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt protected species legislation (impact on forest management) We found no evidence of the effects of adopting protected species legislation 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%2F1201https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1201Thu, 19 May 2016 13:21:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use rotational grazing to restore oak savannas We found no evidence for the effect of using rotational grazing to restore oak savannas. '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%2F1202https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1202Thu, 19 May 2016 13:27:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore woodland herbaceous plants using transplants and nursery plugs We found no evidence for the effect of using transplants and nursery plugs 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%2F1203https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1203Thu, 19 May 2016 13:29:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Encourage leaf litter development in new planting We found no evidence for the effect of encouraging leaf litter development in new planting 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%2F1204https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1204Thu, 19 May 2016 13:32:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use herbicides to remove understory vegetation to reduce wildfires We found no evidence for the effects of using herbicides to remove understory vegetation to reduce wildfiress. '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%2F1218https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1218Fri, 20 May 2016 14:40:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Mechanically remove understory vegetation to reduce wildfires We found no evidence for the effects of mechanically removing understory vegetation to reduce wildfires. '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%2F1219https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1219Fri, 20 May 2016 14:42:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant trees after wildfire We found no evidence for the effects of planting trees after wildfire 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%2F1235https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1235Fri, 03 Jun 2016 08:29:53 +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