Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide sacrificial rows of crops on outer side of fields We found no evidence for the effects of providing sacrificial rows of crops on the outer side of fields on primate 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%2F1427https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1427Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:48:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prohibit (livestock) farmers from entering protected areas One before-and-after, site comparison in Rwanda found that the number of young gorillas increased after cattle were removed from a protected area, alongside other interventions. A before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that a mountain gorilla population decreased over time following the removal of livestock from a number of protected areas, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1432https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1432Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:58:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Re-use old roads rather than building new roads We found no evidence for the effects of re-using old roads rather than building new roads on primate 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%2F1463https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1463Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:55:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Re-route vehicles around protected areas We found no evidence for the effects of re-routing vehicles containing invasive species around protected areas on primate 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%2F1464https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1464Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:01:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide adequate signage of presence of primates on or near roads We found no evidence for the effects of providing adequate signage of presence of primates on or near roads on primate 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%2F1466https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1466Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:13:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide medicine to local communities to control killing of primates for medicinal purposes We found no evidence for the effects of providing medicine to local communities to control the killing of primates for medicinal purposes on primate 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%2F1472https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1472Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:33:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide better equipment (e.g. guns) to anti-poaching ranger patrols One before-and-after study in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda found that gorilla populations increased after anti-poaching guard were provided with better equipment, alongside other interventions. One study in Uganda found that no gorillas were killed for 21 months after game guards were provided with better equipment, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Rwanda found that the number of immature gorillas increased and the number of snares decreased after anti-poaching patrols were supplied with better equipment, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1476https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1476Tue, 17 Oct 2017 17:22:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide training to anti-poaching ranger patrols One study in Uganda found that no gorillas were killed over 21 months after game guards received training, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Rwanda found that the number of immature gorillas increased in areas where game guards received training, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in India found that a population of hoolock gibbons increased after sanctuary staff received training, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Cameroon found that no incidents of primate poaching occurred over a three year period after anti-poaching rangers were trained, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1477https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1477Tue, 17 Oct 2017 17:30:03 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide sustainable alternative livelihoods; establish fish- or domestic meat farms We found no evidence for the effects of providing sustainable alternative livelihoods; establish fish- or domestic meat farms on primate 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%2F1483https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1483Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:16:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide domestic meat to workers of the logging company to reduce hunting We found no evidence for the effects of providing domestic meat to workers of the logging company to reduce hunting on primate 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%2F1501https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1501Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:56:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Put up signs to warn people about not feeding primates One review in Japan found that aggressive interactions between Japanese macaques and humans declined after prohibiting tourists from feeding of monkeys. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1507https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1507Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:47:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide monetary benefits to local communities for sustainably managing their forest and its wildlife (e.g. REDD, employment) One before-and-after study in Belize found that numbers of black howler monkeys increased by 138% over 13 years after local communities received monetary benefits, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo found that most central chimpanzees reintroduced to an area where local communities received monetary benefits, alongside other interventions, survived over five years. One before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that numbers of mountain gorillas declined by 28% over 41 years despite the implementation of development projects in nearby communities, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1509https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1509Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:15:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide non-monetary benefits to local communities for sustainably managing their forest and its wildlife (e.g. better education, infrastructure development) One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo found that 70% of the central chimpanzees reintroduced to an area where local people were provided non-monetary benefits, alongside other interventions, survived over seven years. One before-and-after study in India found that numbers of hoolock gibbons increased by 66% over five years after providing local communities with alternative income, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1510https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1510Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:39:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect important food/nest trees before burning We found no evidence for the effects of protecting important food/nest trees before burning on primate 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%2F1518https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1518Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:23:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce primate predation by other primate species through exclusion (e.g. fences) or translocation We found no evidence for the effects of reducing primate predation by other primate species through exclusion or translocation on primate 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%2F1522https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1522Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:32:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide salt licks for primates We found no evidence for the effects of providing salt licks for primates on primate 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%2F1525https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1525Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:40:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide supplementary food for a certain period of time only One study in Tanzania found that a chimpanzee population increased after supplementary feeding for two months immediately after reintroduction, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Brazil found that a golden lion tamarin population declined after one year following supplementary feeding, alongside other interventions. One study in Brazil found that an abandoned infant muriqui was retrieved by its mother and rejoined the wild group after supplementary feeding, alongside other interventions. Four studies in Brazil, Madagascar, and South Africa found that only a minority of reintroduced primates survived after supplementary feeding, alongside other interventions. One study in Guinea found that the majority of introduced chimpanzees survived for at least 27 months following supplementary feeding, alongside other interventions.. Three studies in Gabon, South Africa and Vietnam found that a majority of primates survived reintroduction while being supplimentry fed alongside other interventions. Two studies in Gabon and the Republic of Congo found that the majority of lowland gorillas survived for at least nine months to four years after provision of supplementary food, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1528https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1528Thu, 19 Oct 2017 10:13:06 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide supplementary food to primates through the establishment of prey populations We found no evidence for the effects of providing supplementary food to primates through the establishment of prey populations on primate 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%2F1529https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1529Thu, 19 Oct 2017 10:17:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide additional sleeping platforms/nesting sites for primates One before-and-after study in Brazil found that a translocated lion tamarin population declined after artificial nest boxes were provided, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Brazil found that a majority of reintroduced golden lion tamarins died seven years after artificial nest boxes were provided, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Gabon found that a majority of juvenile western lowland gorillas survived for at least seven years after nesting platforms were provided, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1530https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1530Thu, 19 Oct 2017 10:22:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide artificial water sources One before-and-after trial in Brazil found that a minority of reintroduced golden lion tamarins survived over seven years when provided with supplementary water, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that a minority of reintroduced black-and-white ruffed lemurs survived for five years despite being provided with supplementary water, alongside other interventions. A before-and-after study in South Africa found that a minority of vervet monkeys had survived for 10 months when provided with supplementary water, alongside other interventions. A before-and-after study in Gabon found that a majority of western lowland gorillas survived for at least nine months while being provided with supplementary water, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1531https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1531Thu, 19 Oct 2017 10:26:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce primate predation by non-primate species through exclusion (e.g. fences) or translocation We found no evidence for the effects of reducing primate predation by other non-primate species through exclusion or translocation on primate 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%2F1534https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1534Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:37:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prevent gene contamination by alien primate species introduced by humans, through exclusion (e.g. fences) or translocation We found no evidence for the effects of preventing gene contamination by alien primate species introduced by humans, through exclusion or translocation on primate 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%2F1536https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1536Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:41:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Preventative vaccination of habituated or wild primates One before-and-after study in Puerto Rico found that annual mortality of rhesus macaques decreased after a preventive tetanus vaccine campaign, alongside other interventions. Two before-and-after studies in the Republic of Congo found that 70% of reintroduced chimpanzees vaccinated against poliomyelitis and tetanus, alongside other interventions, survived over 3.5-5 years after release. One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo and Gabon found that more than 80% of the reintroduced gorillas that received preventive vaccination, alongside other interventions, survived over a 10 year period. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1549https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1549Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:45:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce garbage/solid waste to avoid primate injuries We found no evidence for the effects of reducing garbage/solid waste to avoid primate injuries on primate 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%2F1560https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1560Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:02:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce noise pollution by restricting development activities to certain times of the day/night We found no evidence for the effects of reducing noise pollution by restricting development activities to certain times of the day/night on primate 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%2F1562https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1562Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:05:33 +0100