Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove and relocate ‘problem’ animals One replicated, before-and-after study in India found that ‘problem’ rhesus monkeys that were translocated, alongside other interventions, survived and remained at the release sites for at least four years. One controlled, before-and-after study in Kenya found that after 16 years, most crop-raiding olive baboons that were translocated from farmland, alongside other interventions, had survived and had similar survival rates compared to non-translocated populations. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Republic of Congo and Gaboon found that 84% of the ‘problem’ western lowland gorillas that were relocated, alongside other interventions, survived for at least four years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1422https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1422Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:04:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Relocate primates to non-residential areas We found no evidence for the effects of relocating primates to non-residential 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%2F1423https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1423Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:26:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fences as biological corridors for primates We found no evidence for the effects of using fences as biological corridors 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%2F1426https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1426Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:31:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain nesting trees/shelter for primates within agricultural fields We found no evidence for the effects of retaining nesting trees/shelter for primates within agricultural 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%2F1430https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1430Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:53:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use GPS and/or VHF tracking devices on individuals of problem troops to provide farmers with early warning of crop raiding We found no evidence for the effects of tracking devices on crop-raiding primates to provide farmers with early warning of 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%2F1443https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1443Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:17:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Train langur monkeys to deter rhesus macaques We found no evidence for the effects of training langurs to deter rhesus macaques 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%2F1445https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1445Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:20:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use loud-speakers to broadcast primate alarm calls We found no evidence for the effects of using loud-speakers to broadcast primate alarm calls to crop-raiding 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%2F1447https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1447Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:35:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Strategically lay out the scent of a primate predator (e.g. leopard, lion) We found no evidence for the effects of strategically laying out scent of predators to deter crop-raiding 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%2F1448https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1448Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:50:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use 'set-aside' areas of natural habitat for primate protection within mining area We found no evidence for the effects of using ‘set-aside’ areas of natural habitat for primate protection within mining 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%2F1453https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1453Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:59:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Strengthen/support/re-install traditions/taboos that forbid the killing of primates One site comparison in Laos found that Laotian black crested gibbons occurred at higher densities in areas where they were protected by a local hunting taboo than at sites were there was no taboo. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1479https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1479Tue, 17 Oct 2017 18:52:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees within forests We found no evidence for the effects of thinning trees within forests 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%2F1491https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1491Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:39:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use 'set-asides' for primate protection within logging area We found no evidence for the effects of using 'set-asides' for primate protection within logging area 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%2F1497https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1497Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:50:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict the number of people that are allowed access to site We found no evidence for the effects of restricting the number of people that are allowed access to 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%2F1504https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1504Tue, 17 Oct 2017 20:04:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Run research project and ensure permanent human presence at site Two before-and-after studies in Rwanda, Uganda and Congo found that numbers of mountain gorillas increased over 5-41 years while gorillas were continuously monitored by researchers, alongside other interventions. One review on mountain gorillas in Uganda found that no gorilla was killed over one year while gorillas were continuously monitored by researchers, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Brazil found that most reintroduced golden lion tamarins did not survive over seven years post-release despite being permanently monitored by researchers, alongside other interventions, yet tamarins reproduced succesfully. One before-and-after study in Belize found that numbers of black howler monkeys increased by 138% over 13 years after being permanently monitored by researchers, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo found that most reintroduced chimpanzees permanently monitored by researchers, alongside other interventions, survived over 3.5 years. One before-and-after study in Kenya found ‘problem’ olive baboon troops still survived over 17 years post-translocation while being permanently monitored by researchers, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1511https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1511Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:51:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Run tourist projects and ensure permanent human presence at site Three studies, including two before-and-after studies and one controlled study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Republic of Congo found that numbers of mountain gorillas increased after touristic projects were initiated, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after and site comparison study in Rwanda found that the number of immature mountain gorillas increased by 22% and the number of snares declined by 30% after a tourism project was initiated, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Kenya found that numbers of Tana River red colobus and crested mangabeys decreased despite implementing a tourism project, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Belize found that numbers of black howler monkeys increased by 138% over 13 years after a tourism project was implemented, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after, replicated study in China found that implementing an intensive tourism project for Tibetan macaques that included food provisioning and range restrictions, increased their stress levels compared to previous periods, with infant mortality reaching 100% in some years. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that after implementing a tourism project the population size and/or body size and group size declined for two lemur species but the number of individuals increased for one other lemur species.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1512https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1512Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:55:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Resettle illegal human communities (i.e. in a protected area) to another location One review on mountain gorillas in Uganda found that no more gorillas were killed after illegal settlers were relocated from the area, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo found that most reintroduced chimpanzees survived over five years after human communities were resettled, from the protected area alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1515https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1515Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:12:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove alien invasive vegetation where the latter has a clear negative effect on the primate species in question We found no evidence for the effects of removing alien invasive vegetation 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%2F1533https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1533Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:35:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Treat sick/injured animals Two before-and-after studies in Brazil found that most reintroduced golden lion tamarins died despite being treated when sick or injured, alongside other interventions. One study in Brazil found that one out of four reintroduced black lion tamarins died after being release despite receiving treatment, alongside other interventions. One review on reintroduced lar gibbons in Thailand found that their population declined by 6% seventeen months after release despite having medical treatment available when sick or injured, alongside other interventions. One study in Malaysia found that 98% of translocated orangutans, some of which received treatment for injuries along with other interventions, survived capture and subsequent release. One controlled study, also in Malaysia, found that a population of reintroduced orangutans decreased by 33% over 33 years despite receiving treatment when sick or injured, alongside other interventions. Four studies, including two before-and-after studies, in Liberia, the Republic of Congo and The Gambia found that most reintroduced chimpanzees that were treated when sick, alongside other interventions, survived for at least 1-5 years and in one case the population increased. One study in Senegal found that a young chimpanzee was reunited with its mother after being treated for injuries, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Uganda found that treatment for mange, alongside other interventions, cured some infected mountain gorillas. One study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and one before-and-after, site comparison study in the Republic of Congo and Gabon found that most western lowland gorillas treated when sick or injured, alongside other interventions, survived over 4–41 years. Two before-and-after studies in South Africa and Indonesia found that most reintroduced or translocated primates that were treated when sick, alongside other interventions, survived over six months. However, two before-and-after studies in Madagascar and Kenya found that most reintroduced or translocated primates did not survived over five years or their population size decreased despite treated when sick, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1550https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1550Thu, 19 Oct 2017 18:35:05 +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: Translocate (capture & release) wild primates from development sites to natural habitat elsewhere One study in Malaysia found that the majority of orangutans survived following translocation from a development site to natural habitat, alongside other interventions. Three before-and-after studies in Tanzania, French Guiana, and Madagascar found that a majority of primates survived for 5-30 months following translocation from a development site to natural habitat, alongside other interventions. One study in French Guiana found that a minority of primates survived for at least 18 months. One before-and-after study in India found that rhesus monkeys remained at the sites where they were released following translocation from a development site to natural habitat, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1558https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1558Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:44:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate (capture & release) wild primates from abundant population areas to non-inhabited environments One replicated study in Belize found that the majority of black howler monkeys survived for at least 10 months after translocation from abundant population areas to an uninhabited site, along with other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1559https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1559Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:01:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove human food waste that may potentially serve as food sources for primates to avoid disease transmission and conflict with humans We found no evidence for the effects of removing human wastes that may potentially serve as food sources for primates to avoid disease transmission and conflict with humans, 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%2F1561https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1561Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:04:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore habitat corridors We found no evidence for the effects of restoring habitat corridors 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%2F1583https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1583Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:06:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce primates into habitat without predators One study in Tanzania found that a population of reintroduced chimpanzees increased over 16 years following reintroduction into habitat without predators. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1592https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1592Fri, 20 Oct 2017 14:15:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reintroduce primates into habitat with predators Two before-and-after studies in Brazil found that most golden lion tamarins reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, did not survive over one to seven years but reproduced succesfully. Three studies, including two before-and-after studies, in the Congo, The Gambia and Guinea, found that most chimpanzees reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, survived over one to five years or increased population numbers. One before-and-after study in Gabon found that most western lowland gorillas reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, survived over nine months. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that most black-and-white ruffed lemurs reintroduced into habitat with predators did not survive over five years. One study in Madagascar found that all reintroduced lemurs survived over 30 months after being released into habitat with predators, along with other interventions. One study in Gabon found that most mandrills reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, survived over 30 years. Two before-and-after studies in South Africa found that most vervet monkeys reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, survived over six months. Two studies, including one before-and-after study, in Vietnam and Indonesia found that most lorises reintroduced into habitat with predators, alongside other interventions, were assumed dead within approximately one year after being released. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1593https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1593Fri, 20 Oct 2017 14:16:39 +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
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.

Accept & continue