Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Revert arable land to permanent grassland All five studies looking at the effects of reverting arable land to grassland found no clear benefit to birds. The studies monitored birds or grey partridges in the UK and wading birds in Denmark (4). They included three replicated controlled trials. One of the studies, a controlled before-and-after study from the UK, showed that grey partridge numbers fell significantly following the reversion of arable fields to grassland.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F210https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F210Sun, 15 Jul 2012 18:00:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce tillage Four replicated and controlled studies from North America and Canada and the UK and two literature reviews found that some or all bird groups had higher species richness or diversity on reduced-tillage fields, compared to conventional field in some areas. Two replicated and controlled studies from Canada and the UK and a review found that some measures of diversity were lower, or no different, on reduced-tillage fields, compared to conventional fields. Five replicated and controlled studies from the USA and Europe, a small study and two reviews all found that some bird species are found at higher densities on fields with reduced tillage than conventional fields. Five replicated and controlled studies from the USA, Canada and Europe, and a review found that some or all species were found at similar or lower densities on reduced-tillage fields compared to conventional fields, with one finding that preferences decreased over time (possibly due to extreme weather) and another finding that preferences were only found in spring. Two controlled studies (one replicated) and a review found evidence for higher productivity, nesting success or earlier laying on reduced tillage fields, compared to conventional fields. One controlled study found no evidence for greater success or larger chicks on reduced-tillage fields.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F211https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F211Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:11:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use 1% barley in wheat crops for corn buntingsWe have found no studies investigating the impact of adding barley to wheat on corn bunting Miliaria calandra populations.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F212https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F212Mon, 16 Jul 2012 17:48:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave uncropped, cultivated margins or plots, including lapwing and stone curlew plots Two studies and two reviews examined population-level effects of uncropped margins or plots. A before-and-after study from the UK and two reviews found an increase in Eurasian thick-knee Burhinus oedicnemus numbers following a scheme that promoted plots (amongst other interventions); a replicated study from the UK found no effect of plots on grey partridge density changes. Four studies (three replicated) and a review from the UK found that at least one species was associated with lapwing plots or used them for foraging or nesting. One replicated study from the UK found that 11 species were not associated with plots; another found that fewer birds used the plots than cropland in two out of three UK regions. Two of the three studies that examined productivity (one replicated) found that nesting success of birds was higher in fallow fields or lapwing plots than in crops. A replicated study from the UK found that grey partridge Perdix perdix productivity was not related to the amount of lapwing plots on a site and that the proportion of young partridges in the population was lower on sites with lots of cultivated fallow plots.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F213https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F213Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:09:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create skylark plots for bird conservation A before-and-after study found an increase in Eurasian skylark Alauda arvensis population on a farm after the creation of skylark plots; a replicated, controlled study from the UK found higher densities of skylarks on fields with plots, compared to those without. No other studies investigated population-level effects. Two UK studies, one replicated and controlled, found that skylark productivity was higher in plots or in fields with plots than in controls. One replicated and controlled study from Switzerland found no differences in productivity between territories that included plots and those that did not. Two replicated studies (one controlled) from Denmark and Switzerland found that skylark plots were used by skylarks more than expected. A replicated and controlled study from the UK found that seed-eating songbirds did not use skylark plots more than surrounding crops.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F214https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F214Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:43:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create corn bunting plots We have found no evidence investigating the impact of corn bunting plots on corn bunting Miliaria calandra or other bird 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%2F215https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F215Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:53:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant cereals in wide-spaced rows A replicated and controlled study from the UK found that planting cereals in wide-spaced rows “offered benefits over conventional wheat for Eurasian skylarks, but details were not given. Another replicated and controlled study from the UK found that fields with wide-spaced rows had fewer skylark nests than control or skylark plot fields. A replicated and controlled study from the UK found that the faecal content (and therefore diet) of skylark nestlings was similar between control fields and those with wide-spaced rows.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F216https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F216Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:58:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create beetle banks A small UK study found that a site with beetle banks had increasing populations of rare or declining species, although several other interventions were used on this site. A literature review from the UK found that grey partridge Perdix perdix populations were far larger on sites with beetle banks and other interventions than on other farms. Two replicated studies from the UK also investigated population-level effects: one found that no bird species were strongly associated with beetle banks; the second found no relationship between beetle banks and grey partridge population density trends. A UK literature review found that two bird species nested in beetle banks and that some species were more likely to forage in them than others. A study in the UK found that one of two species used beetle banks more than expected. The other used them less than other agri-environment options.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F217https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F217Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:04:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain species-rich, semi-natural grassland A before-and-after study from the UK found five species of conservation concern increased after the implementation of management designed to maintain unimproved grasslands. A replicated study from Switzerland found that wetland birds appeared to preferentially choose managed hay meadows; birds of open farmland avoided it.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F218https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F218Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:27:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce management intensity on permanent grasslands for birds Four replicated trials and a review, of seven studies in total, found that some or all birds monitored were more abundant or foraged more on grasslands with lower management intensity than on conventionally managed agricultural grasslands. Four analyses from three replicated trials, of seven studies in total, found that some or all birds monitored were less or similarly abundant on grasslands with lower management intensity than on conventionally managed agricultural grasslands.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F219https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F219Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:37:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce grazing intensity Nine studies from the USA and the UK, one replicated and controlled, found increases in populations of some species on fields with reduced grazing, or increased use of such fields by birds. Three of the studies used multiple interventions at once. Five studies from Europe, four replicated and controlled, found that some or all species were no more numerous on fields with reduced grazing, compared to intensively-grazed fields. One paired sites study from the UK found that black grouse Tetrao tetrix populations increased at reduced grazing sites (and declined elsewhere), but that large areas of reduced grazing had lower densities of female grouse. A before-and-after study from the USA found that the number of species on plots with reduced grazing increased over time. A replicated, controlled study from four countries in Europe found no differences in the number of species on sites with low-intensity or high-intensity grazing. One replicated trial in the UK found that some bird groups preferred grassland short in winter (grazing effect simulated by mowing), and others preferred it long (unmown to simulate removal of livestock). Frequency and timing of the simulated grazing did not alter this preference.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F220https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F220Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:28:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide short grass for wadersA replicated UK study found that common starlings and northern lapwings spent more time foraging on short swards, compared to longer grass, and that starlings captured more prey in short grass.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F221https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F221Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:03:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Raise mowing height on grasslands to benefit birds A review from the UK found that raising mowing height may have increased productivity of Eurasian skylarks, but not sufficiently to maintain the local population. A randomised, replicated and controlled study from the UK found that no more foraging birds were attracted to plots with raised mowing heights, compared to plots with shorter grass.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F222https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F222Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:06:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Delay haying/mowing Two reviews from the UK found that the population of corncrakes Crex crex increased following the implementation of two initiatives to encourage farmers to delay mowing (and provide cover and use corncrake-friendly techniques). A replicated and controlled paired sites study from the Netherlands found no evidence that waders and other birds were more abundant in fields with delayed mowing, compared to paired controls. A replicated and controlled before-and-after study from the Netherlands found that fields with delayed mowing held more birds than controls, but did so before the start of the scheme. Population trends did not differ between treatments. A replicated, controlled study from the USA found that destruction of nests by machinery was lower and late-season nesting higher in late-cut fields, compared with early-cut fields.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F223https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F223Tue, 17 Jul 2012 14:29:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave uncut rye grass in silage fields for birds Two reviews from the UK found that leaving rye grass uncut, or with only a single cut, benefited seed-eating birds and two replicated, controlled studies from the UK found that seed-eating birds were more abundant on uncut plots. Two replicated and controlled studies and a review, all from the UK, found that seed-eating birds were more abundant on uncut and ungrazed plots than on uncut and grazed plots. A replicated, controlled study from the UK found that the responses of non-seed-eating birds were less certain than seed-eaters, with some species avoiding uncut rye grass.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F224https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F224Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:04:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant cereals for whole crop silageA replicated, controlled trial in the UK found that seed-eating birds used CBWCS fields, especially those planted with barley, more than other crops in both summer and winter. Insect-eating species used other crops and grassland more.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F225https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F225Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:12:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain lowland heathland We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining lowland heath on bird 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%2F226https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F226Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:31:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain rush pastures We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining rush pastures on bird 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%2F227https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F227Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:32:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional water meadows A replicated study from the UK found that northern lapwing and common redshank populations increased on nature reserves managed to maintain water meadows. Two replicated studies from the Netherlands found that there were more waders or birds overall on specially managed meadows or 12.5 ha plots including several management interventions than on conventional fields, but one study found that these differences were present before the management scheme was introduced and the other found no differences between individual fields under different management. A replicated study from the UK found that common snipe decreased on nature reserves managed to maintain water meadows and a replicated before-and-after study from the Netherlands found that wader population trends on specially managed meadows were no different to those on conventionally-managed meadows. A replicated study from the UK found that lapwing populations on three of four water meadow sites managed for conservation did not have high enough productivity to maintain population levels. All three sites were judged deficient in at least one management category.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F229https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F229Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:37:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain upland heath/moorA literature review from the UK found that agri-environment guidelines on moorland grazing were leading to increased bird populations in one region. There were localised problems with overgrazing, burning and scrub encroachment.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F230https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F230Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:50:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant Brassica fodder crops We found no evidence on the effects of planting brassicas on bird 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%2F231https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F231Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:51:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use mixed stocking We found no evidence on the effects of mixed stocking on bird 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%2F232https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F232Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:51:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use traditional breeds of livestockA replicated controlled study in four European countries found no differences in bird abundances between areas grazed with traditional or commercial breeds of livestock.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F233https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F233Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:53:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Employ areas of semi-natural habitat for rough grazing We found no evidence for the effects of employing areas of semi-natural habitat for rough grazing. '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%2F234https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F234Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:56:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wood pasture and parkland We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining wood pasture and parkland on bird 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%2F235https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F235Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:57:02 +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