Collected 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: 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: Implement speed limits in particular areas (e.g. with high primate densities) to reduce vehicle collisions with primates We found no evidence for the effects of implementing speed limits in particular areas to reduce vehicle collisions with 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%2F1458https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1458Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:30:20 +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: Implement no-hunting seasons for primates We found no evidence for the effects of implementing no-hunting seasons 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%2F1467https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1467Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:25:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement sustainable harvesting of primates (e.g. with permits, resource access agreements) We found no evidence for the effects of implementing sustainable harvesting of 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%2F1468https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1468Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:27:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement road blocks to inspect cars for illegal primate bushmeat We found no evidence for the effects of implementing road blocks to inspect cars for illegal primate bushmeat 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%2F1470https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1470Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:31:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement local no-hunting community policies/traditional hunting ban One review found that very few snub nosed monkeys were killed annually at a site in China where it is forbidden to kill wildlife. One controlled study in the Democratic Republic of Congo found that a lowland gorilla population increased after the implementation of a local hunting ban. One before-and-after study in Belize found that an introduced black howler monkey population increased over time in an area where hunting was controlled, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Cameroon found that a drill population increased in numbers after being protected by a hunting ban, alongside other interventions. A study in Nigeria found that populations of Sclater’s monkey increased in an area where hunting of the species was prohibited by local taboos. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1478https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1478Tue, 17 Oct 2017 18:40:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement monitoring surveillance strategies (e.g. SMART) or use monitoring data to improve effectiveness of wildlife law enforcement patrols One before-and-after study in Nigeria found that more gorillas and chimpanzees were observed after the implementation of law enforcement and a monitoring system. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1481https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1481Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:05:51 +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: Implement small and dispersed logging compartments We found no evidence for the effects of implementing small and dispersed logging compartments 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%2F1487https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1487Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:31:20 +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: 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: Implement legal protection for primate species under threat A before-and-after study in India found that following a ban on export of the species, a population of rhesus macaques increased over 17 years. Two studies in Thailand and India found that primate populations declined despite the respective species being legally protected, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Malaysia found that the majority of introduced Müller's Bornean gibbons died despite legal protection, along with other interventions. A site comparison of five sites in Cameroon found that drill populations declined in four sites but increased at one, despite legal protection. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1524https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1524Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:39:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement quarantine for people arriving at, and leaving the site We found no evidence for the effects of implementing quarantine for people arriving at, and leaving the site 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%2F1540https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1540Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:40:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement quarantine for primates before reintroduction/translocation One before-and-after study in Brazil found that most reintroduced golden lion tamarins did not survive over seven years despite being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Uganda found that a reintroduced chimpanzee repeatedly returned to human settlements after being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that most reintroduced black-and-white ruffed lemurs did not survive over five years despite being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Malaysia found that a population of reintroduced orangutans decreased by 33% over 40 years despite individuals being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. A controlled study in Indonesia found that all orangutans that underwent quarantine prior to release, alongside other interventions, survived over three months. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Republic of Congo and Gabon found that more than 80% of the reintroduced gorillas that underwent quarantine, alongside other interventions, survived over a ten year period. Two site comparison studies in Vietnam and a before-and-after study in Indonesia found that most reintroduced lorises either died or their radio signal was lost despite being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1541https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1541Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:44:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement continuous health monitoring with permanent vet on site One controlled, before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that the population size of mountain gorillas that were continuously monitored by vets, alongside other interventions, increased by 168% over 41 years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1554https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1554Thu, 19 Oct 2017 20:53:44 +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: Implement multimedia campaigns using theatre, film, print media, discussions Two before-and-after studies in Belize found that black howler monkey numbers increased by 61-138% over 3–13 years after the implementation of a multimedia campaign or the opening of a museum for wildlife education, alongside other interventions. Two before-and-after studies in Brazil and Colombia found that the implementation of education programs focusing on tamarins improved attitudes towards- and knowledge about tamarins. One study in the Republic of Congo found that large numbers of people were informed about lowland gorillas through multimedia campaigns using theatre and film. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that poaching of diademed sifakas and black and white ruffed lemurs appeared to have ceased after the distribution of conservation books in local primary schools. One before-and-after study in India found that numbers of hoolock gibbons increased by 66% over five years after the implementation of an education and awareness programme, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in four African countries found that the level of knowledge about primates of visitors to a sanctuary housing guenons, mangabeys, chimpanzees and bonobos increased after the implementation of an education programme. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1571https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1571Fri, 20 Oct 2017 11:45:16 +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: 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
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