Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Discourage the planting of fruit trees and vegetable gardens on the urban edge We found no evidence for the effects of discouraging the planting of fruit trees and vegetable gardens on the urban edge 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%2F1424https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1424Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:27:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Farm more intensively and effectively in selected areas and spare more natural land We found no evidence for the effects of farming more intensively and effectively in selected areas to spare more natural land 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%2F1435https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1435Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:20:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Destroy habitat within buffer zones to make them unusable for primates We found no evidence for the effects of destroying habitat within buffer zones to make them unusable for primate 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%2F1441https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1441Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:13:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Humans chase primates using random loud noise One controlled, replicated, before-and-after study in Indonesia found that in areas where noise deterrents were used, along with tree nets, crop raiding by orangutans was reduced. One study in the Democratic Republic Congo found that chasing gorillas and using random noise resulted in the return of gorillas from plantations to areas close to protected forest. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1449https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1449Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:53:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Humans chase primates using bright light We found no evidence for the effects of humans chasing primates using bright light to deter crop-raiding 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%2F1450https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1450Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:17:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish no-mining zones in/near watersheds so as to preserve water levels and water quality We found no evidence for the effects of establishing no-mining zones in/near watersheds so as to preserve water levels and water quality 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%2F1452https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1452Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:55:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create/preserve primate habitat on islands before dam construction We found no evidence for the effects of creating/preserving primate habitat on islands before dam construction 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%2F1455https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1455Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:04:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement a minimum number of roads (& minimize secondary roads) needed to reach mining extraction sites We found no evidence for the effects of implementing a minimum number of roads needed to reach mining sites 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%2F1462https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1462Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:52:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Encourage use of traditional hunting methods rather than using guns We found no evidence for the effects of encouraging the use of traditional hunting methods rather than using guns 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%2F1469https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1469Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:29:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement community control of patrolling, banning hunting and removing snares A site comparison study in the Democratic Republic of Congo found that community control was more effective at reducing illegal bushmeat hunting, including primates, compared to the nearby national park. A before-and-after study in Cameroon found that no incidents of gorilla poaching occurred over three years after implementation of community control and monitoring of illegal activities. A site comparison study in Nigeria found that there were more gorillas and chimpanzees in an area managed by a community conservation organisation than in areas not managed by local communities. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1482https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1482Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:12:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Employ hunters in the conservation sector to reduce their impact We found no evidence for the effects of employing hunters in the conservation sector to reduce their impact 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%2F1484https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1484Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:18:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement a ‘no-feeding of wild primates’ policy One controlled, before-and-after study in Japan found that several previously increasing Japanese macaque populations declined in size and productivity after limiting and then prohibiting food provisioning. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1502https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1502Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:59:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Do not allow people to consume food within natural areas where primates can view them We found no evidence for the effects of not allowing people to consume food within natural areas where primates can view them 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%2F1508https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1508Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:06:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Habituate primates to human presence to reduce stress from tourists/researchers etc. A before-and-after study in Brazil found that an introduced population of golden lion tamarins declined after one year, following habituation to human presence, alongside other interventions. A before-and-after study in Madagascar found that the majority of introduced black-and-white ruffed lemurs and diademed sifakas survived over 30 months, following habituation to human presence, alongside other interventions. A controlled, before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda, and Democratic Republic of Congo found that a mountain gorilla population increased over 41 years, following habituation to human presence, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1519https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1519Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:30:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement birth control to stabilize primate community/population size We found no evidence for the effects of implementing birth control to stabilize primate community/population size 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%2F1521https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1521Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:32:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Guard habituated primate groups to ensure their safety/well-being A controlled, before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that a population of mountain gorillas increased over 41 years after being guarded against poachers, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1523https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1523Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:34:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ensure that researchers/tourists are up-to-date with vaccinations and healthy One controlled study in Malaysia found that a population of reintroduced orangutans decreased by 33% over 33 years despite staff and volunteers having received medical checks, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and Congo found that mountain gorilla numbers increased by 168% over 41 years while sick/unwell researchers and visitors were not allowed to visit gorillas, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1546https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1546Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:30:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Detect & report dead primates and clinically determine their cause of death to avoid disease transmission One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo found that most reintroduced chimpanzees survived over five years when dead chimpanzees were examined to determine their cause of death, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in French Guiana found that most translocated white-faced sakis survived over four months when dead sakis were examined to determine their cause of death, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that most black-and-white ruffed lemurs did not survive over five years despite the fact that dead lemurs were clinically examined to determine their cause of death, alongside other interventions. One controlled, before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that the population size of mountain gorillas where dead animals were examined to determine the cause of death, alongside other interventions, increased by 168% over 41 years. One before-and-after, site comparison study in Congo and Gabon found that most western lowland gorillas survived over four years when dead individuals were examined to determine their cause of death, alongside other interventions. Two studies, including a before-and-after, in Vietnam and Indonesia found that most reintroduced pygmy slow lorises either died or disappeared despite the fact that dead lorises were examined to determine their cause of death, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1556https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1556Thu, 19 Oct 2017 20:58:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement a health programme for local communities We found no evidence for the effects of implementing a health programme for local communities 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%2F1557https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1557Thu, 19 Oct 2017 21:07:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Educate local communities about primates and sustainable use One before-and-after study in Cameroon found that numbers of drills increased after the implementation of an education programme, alongside one other intervention. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1563https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1563Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:07:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish areas for conservation which are not protected by national or international legislation (e.g. private sector standards & codes) One before-and-after study in Rwanda and Republic of Congo found that mountain gorilla numbers increased by 15% over five years after the implementation of a conservation project funded by a consortium of organizations, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Belize found that black howler monkey numbers increased by 138% over 13 years after being protected by the local community, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1579https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1579Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:57:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create/protect habitat corridors One before-and-after study in Belize found that black howler monkey numbers increased by 138% over 13 years after the protection of a forest corridor, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1580https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1580Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:58:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create/protect forest patches in highly fragmented landscapes One before-and-after study in Belize found that black howler monkey numbers increased by 138% over 13 years after the protection of forest along property boundaries and across cleared areas, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1581https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1581Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:01:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Demarcate and enforce boundaries of protected areas We found no evidence for the effects of demarcating and enforcing boundaries of 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%2F1582https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1582Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:04:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Fostering appropriate behaviour to facilitate rehabilitation Two before-and-after studies in Brazil found that most reintroduced golden lion tamarins did not survive over 1–7 years, despite being fostered to survive in the wild, alongside other interventions but in one study they reproduced successfully which partly compensated mortality. Two before-and-after studies in Liberia and Congo found that most reintroduced chimpanzees that were fostered to facilitate reintroduction, alongside other interventions, survived over 1-3.5 years. One before-and-after study in Uganda found that a reintroduced chimpanzee repeatedly returned to human settlements despite being fostered to facilitate reintroduction, alongside other interventions. One controlled study in Indonesia found that reintroduced orangutans that were fostered natural behaviour, alongside other interventions, did not act more like wild orangutans than individuals that were not fostered. One study in Indonesia found that reintroduced orangutans that were fostered to facilitate reintroduction, alongside other interventions, fed on fewer plant species and spent more time building nests. One site comparison study in Vietnam found that all reintroduced pygmy slow lorises were assumed dead despite being fostered natural behaviour prior to release, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1600https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1600Fri, 20 Oct 2017 15:00:07 +0100