Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shark liver oil to reduce seabird bycatch Two replicated and controlled trials found reductions in the number of seabirds following boats, or diving for baits, when shark liver oil was dripped behind the boats. Other oils had no effect. A third replicated and controlled trial in found no differences in the number of seabirds following a bait-laying boat with shark liver oil. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F297https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F297Tue, 24 Jul 2012 17:16:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective harvesting/logging instead of clearcutting Six studies of seven from the USA and Canada found that some species were more abundant in selective-logged forests, whilst others were less abundant, compared to both control stands and other managements. One study found that there were no consistent differences between selectively harvested and clearcut stands. A replicated study from the USA found a lower species richness of cavity-nesting birds in snags in selectively-logged stands, compared to clearcuts. A replicated study from the USA found that brood parasitism of two species by brown-headed cowbirds was higher in harvested stands compared to controls, but it was lower for two others. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F331https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F331Sat, 28 Jul 2012 13:49:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelterwood cutting instead of clearcuttingA replicated study from the USA found that community composition of birds in shelterwood stands differed from other forestry practices, with some species more abundant and others less so. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F333https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F333Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:08:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use ring-barking (girdling), cutting or silvicides to produce snags Of five studies found, one replicated and controlled study from the USA found that forest plots provided with snags had higher bird diversity and abundance than plots without snags added. Three studies from the USA and UK found that woodpeckers and other species used artificially-created snags for nesting and foraging. One study from the USA found that use increased with how long a snag had been dead. A UK study found that no crested tits used snags created for them, possibly because they were not rotted enough, or because they were too close to the ground. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F343https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F343Sat, 28 Jul 2012 20:29:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use scaring devices (eg. gas guns) and other deterrents to reduce persecution of native species One replicated, controlled trial in Germany found phosphorescent tape was more effective than normal yellow tape at deterring deer from an area, but had no effect on wild boar or European hare. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F645https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F645Wed, 17 Oct 2012 17:00:06 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective or reduced impact logging instead of conventional logging Four studies evaluated the effects of using selective or reduced impact logging instead of conventional logging on bat populations. Two studies were in the Neotropics, one study was in Italy and one in Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, site comparison study in Trinidad found that the composition of bat species differed between selectively logged and conventionally logged forest. Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found similar bat diversity in selectively logged and conventionally logged forest. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found similar overall bat activity (relative abundance) in selectively logged and conventionally logged forest. One review of 41 studies in the Neotropics found that reduced impact logging had a smaller effect on bat abundance than conventional logging. One replicated, site comparison study in Italy found greater bat activity at two of three sites that used selective logging techniques to open up the forest canopy rather than leaving the canopy intact. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F989https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F989Fri, 20 Dec 2013 14:41:00 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelterwood cutting instead of clearcutting One study evaluated the effects of using shelterwood cutting instead of ‘gap release’ cutting on bat populations. The study was in Australia. We found no studies that evaluated the effects of shelterwood cutting instead of clearcutting. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One site comparison study in Australia found more Gould’s long-eared bats roosting in remnant trees within forests that had been shelterwood harvested than in forests harvested using gap release methods. Comparisons were not made with clearcutting. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F990https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F990Fri, 20 Dec 2013 15:27:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use rotational grazing to restore oak savannas We found no evidence for the effect of using rotational grazing to restore oak savannas. '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%2F1202https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1202Thu, 19 May 2016 13:27:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelterwood harvest instead of clearcutting Three replicated, controlled studies in Sweden and the USA found that shelterwood harvesting resulted in higher plant diversity, lower grass cover and higher density of tree species compared with clearcutting. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1214https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1214Fri, 20 May 2016 13:48:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective thinning after restoration planting One replicated, paired sites study in Canada found that selective thinning after restoration planting conifers increased the abundance of herbaceous species and decreased the abundance of trees. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1238https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1238Fri, 03 Jun 2016 09:16:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shading for planted trees One replicated, controlled study in Panama found that shading increased the survival rate of planted native tree seedlings. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1269https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1269Fri, 10 Jun 2016 09:19:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective logging instead of clear-cutting One site comparison in Sierra Leone found that primate densities were higher in forest that had been logged at low intensity than in a forest logged at high intensity. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that the number of lemurs increased following selective logging. One site comparison study in Uganda found that primate densities were similar in forest that had been logged at low intensity and forest logged at high intensity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1485https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1485Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:26:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelter wood cutting instead of clear-cutting We found no evidence for the effects of using shelter wood cutting instead of clear-cutting 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%2F1488https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1488Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:33:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use scent to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Three studies evaluated the effects of using scent to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Botswana. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (3 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (3 studies): Two of three studies (including one replicated, before-and-after study), in the USA and Botswana, found that applying scent marks from unfamiliar African wild dogs and grey wolves restricted movements of these species. The other study found that applying scent marks from coyotes did not restrict their movements. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2450https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2450Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:54:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use scarecrows to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using scarecrows to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2459https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2459Tue, 02 Jun 2020 11:24:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective trapping methods in hunting activities We found no studies that evaluated the effects on non-target mammals of using selective trapping methods in hunting activities. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2611https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2611Thu, 11 Jun 2020 16:44:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use road lighting to reduce vehicle collisions with mammals Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of using road lighting to reduce vehicle collisions with mammals. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): One of two studies (one controlled and one before-and-after), in the USA, found that road lighting reduced vehicle collisions with moose. The other study found that road lighting did not reduce vehicle collisions with mule deer. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2614https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2614Fri, 12 Jun 2020 08:16:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective harvesting instead of clearcutting Eight studies evaluated the effects on mammals of using selective harvesting instead of clearcutting. Four studies were in Canada, three were in the USA and one was a review of studies in North America. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that harvesting trees selectively did not result in higher small mammal species richness compared to clearcutting. POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): One of six replicated, controlled or replicated, site comparison studies in the USA and Canada found more small mammals in selectively harvested forest stands than in fully harvested, regenerating stands. Three studies found that selective harvesting did not increase small mammal abundance relative to clearcutting. The other two studies found mixed results with one of four small mammal species being more numerous in selectively harvested stands or in selectively harvested stands only in some years. A systematic review in North American forests found that partially harvested forests had more red-backed voles but not deer mice than did clearcut forests. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A site comparison study in the USA found that partially harvested forest was not used by snowshoe hares more than was largely clearcut forest. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2637https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2637Fri, 12 Jun 2020 13:06:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use road closures One study evaluated the effects of using road closures on reptile populations. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in Canada found that closed roads were not used more by Blanding’s turtles than unclosed roads. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3503https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3503Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:53:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelterwood harvesting Two studies evaluated the effects of shelterwood harvesting on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that shelterwood harvesting had mixed effects on reptile species richness compared to areas with no management. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized study in the USA found that areas with shelterwood harvesting had a lower abundance of juvenile eastern box turtles than clearcut areas. One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that shelterwood harvesting had mixed effects on reptile abundance compared to areas with no management. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3636https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3636Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:52:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective logging Three studies evaluated the effects of using selective logging in forests on reptile populations. One study was in each of Brazil, the USA and Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Mexico found that areas with low intensity selective logging tended to have similar reptile species richness compared to areas with high intensity selective logging. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated, randomized, controlled studies (including one before-and-after study) in Brazil and the USA found that selective logging intensity had mixed effects on the abundance of three lizard species. The other study found that areas with selective logging had similar reptile abundance compared to areas with combined clearcutting and thinning. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3637https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3637Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:57:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective or reduced impact logging instead of conventional logging Four studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using selective or reduced impact logging instead of conventional logging. Two studies were in Brazil and one was in each of Sweden and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forests managed by reduced impact logging at different intensities had a different community composition of fruit-feeding butterflies to pristine forest. Richness/diversity (3 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that forests harvested by single tree selection had a similar species richness of moths to forests managed by group selection harvesting or clearcutting, but a lower species richness than unharvested forest. One site comparison study in Brazil found that a forest managed by reduced impact logging had a similar species richness and diversity of butterflies to primary forest. One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forests managed by reduced impact logging at different intensities had a similar species richness of fruit-feeding butterflies. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in Sweden found that selectively logged forests had a higher abundance of exposed moth caterpillars, but a similar abundance of concealed moth caterpillars, to clearcut forests, and a similar abundance of all moth caterpillars to undisturbed forests. One site comparison study in Brazil found that a forest managed by reduced impact logging had a higher abundance of butterflies than primary forest. One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forests managed by reduced impact logging at intermediate intensity had a higher abundance of fruit-feeding butterflies than forests managed by high or low intensity reduced impact logging. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3867https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3867Fri, 08 Jul 2022 12:00:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use rotational burning Seventeen studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using rotational burning. Twelve studies were in the USA, one was in South Africa and one was in Japan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that prairies managed by rotational burning (every 1–6 years) and grazing had a different community composition of butterflies to prairies managed by rotational burning or grazing alone. Richness/diversity (5 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA and Japan found that pine-oak barrens and semi-natural grasslands managed by rotational burning every 2 years or 2–5 years (sometimes combined with rotational mowing) had a higher species richness of butterflies than unmanaged sites or sites managed by annual burning or mowing. However, one of these studies also found that the species richness of grassland butterflies was lower in prairies managed by rotational burning than in unmanaged prairies in one of two regions. Two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that the species richness of butterflies was higher on prairies burned more than one or four years ago than on prairies burned in the last one or two years under rotational burning management. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that prairies managed by rotational burning (every 1–6 years) and grazing had a similar species richness of butterflies to prairies managed by rotational burning or grazing alone, but a lower diversity of butterflies than sites managed by rotational burning only. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that species richness of butterflies did not differ between prairies managed with annual rotational burning or complete burning. POPULATION RESPONSE (15 STUDIES) Abundance (15 studies): Four replicated studies (including one paired, controlled study and three site comparison studies) in the USA found that under rotational burning management the total abundance of prairie specialist, grassland and all butterflies, and of most insects including butterflies and moths, was higher on prairies burned more than one, two or four years ago, or longer ago, than on prairies burned in the last one or two years, or recently. One of these studies also found that the abundance of grassland and generalist butterflies was highest in the third year after burning, and migrant butterflies in the first year after burning. Two of these studies6,8, and an additional replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that the total abundance of butterflies, and of most insects including butterflies and moths, was higher in pine-oak barrens and prairies managed by rotational burning every 2–5 years, 2–3 years or 1–6 years than at unmanaged sites or sites managed by rotational burning or grazing alone. One of these studies also found that the abundance of butterflies was lower in prairies managed by rotational burning than in unmanaged prairies in one of two regions. Four of six replicated studies in the USA (including five site comparison studies and one randomized, controlled study) found that rotational burning in prairies, pine barrens and grasslands had mixed effects on butterflies, compared to unmanaged, hayed, grazed, mowed or completely burned sites. The fifth study found that prairies managed by rotational burning had more strongly declining populations of grass-skipper butterflies than unmanaged pine barrens or lightly managed fields. The sixth study found that for three fritillary species rotational burning in prairies did not affect abundance, but for three others, in at least one region surveyed, abundance was lower in prairies managed by rotational burning, sometimes in combination with haying, grazing and/or mowing, than in prairies managed with only haying or grazing, or in unmanaged prairies. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA reported that Karner blue butterfly abundance was similar in rotationally burned and unmanaged oak savannas and prairies. One site comparison study in the USA reported that regal fritillary abundance was higher in grasslands and oak barrens managed by rotational burning every three years (following restoration by seeding) than on unmanaged sites or remnant prairies. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that the abundance of regal fritillary was higher in rotationally burned prairies four years after the last burn than one or eight years after the last burn. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in the USA found that, in June, the abundance of regal fritillaries in prairies burned on rotation that spring was lower than in prairies burned 1–2 years ago, but in July the abundance was higher in recently burned prairies. Survival (1 study): One replicated study in South Africa found that populations of Karkloof blue persisted for at least a year following rotational burning. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3883https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3883Mon, 25 Jul 2022 15:05:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use rotational grazing Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using rotational grazing. Three studies were in France, two were in the USA and one was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that rotational, cattle-grazed grasslands had a similar butterfly community to continuously grazed or patch-burned grasslands. Richness/diversity (5 studies): Two of four replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study, two controlled studies and one site comparison study) in France and the USA found that rotational cattle- and sheep-grazed grasslands had a greater species richness of butterflies and burnet moths than continuously grazed or patch-burned grassland. Another of these studies found that rotationally sheep-grazed grassland had a similar species richness of butterflies and burnet moths to continuously grazed grassland. The other study found that rotational cattle-grazed pastures had a greater species richness of butterflies than constantly grazed pastures but only at a high, not low, stocking density. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that rotationally managed grasslands, including some rotationally grazed grasslands, which were last managed longer ago had a higher species richness of butterflies than more recently managed grasslands. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (6 studies): Two of four replicated, controlled studies (including two randomized studies and one paired study) in France and the UK found that rotational cattle- and sheep-grazed grassland had a higher abundance of butterflies and burnet moths and caterpillars (along with other invertebrates) than continuously grazed grasslands. However, one of these studies only found this in the first of three years of management. Another of these studies found that rotationally sheep-grazed grassland had a similar abundance of butterflies and burnet moths to continuously grazed grassland. The other study found that rotational cattle-grazed pastures had a higher abundance of butterflies than constantly grazed pastures but only at a high, not low stocking density. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that the abundance of two species was higher, two species were lower and the other five species did not differ in rotationally cattle-grazed grasslands compared to continuously grazed or patch-burned grasslands. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that rotationally managed grasslands, including some rotationally grazed grasslands, which were last managed longer ago had a higher abundance of butterflies than more recently managed grasslands. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3965https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3965Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:38:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use rotational mowing Ten studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using rotational mowing. Two studies were in each of the USA, the Czech Republic and Switzerland, and one was in each of the UK, Germany, Europe and Japan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Czech Republic found that grasslands managed with “mixed management”, which included mowing parts of a site at different times and leaving some areas uncut, had a similar community composition of butterflies, but a different community composition of moths, to grasslands managed by complete annual mowing. Richness/diversity (6 studies): Three of four replicated studies (including two paired, controlled studies and two site comparison studies) in Germany, Switzerland, Japan and the Czech Republic found that grasslands managed by mowing strips in alternate years, by mowing and burning one half of the meadow each year, or by mowing parts of a site at different times and leaving some areas uncut, had a greater species richness and diversity of butterflies than grasslands cut in full once/year. However, one of these studies also found that grasslands managed by mowing parts of a site at different times and leaving some areas uncut had a lower species richness of moths than grasslands cut in full once/year. The fourth study found that grasslands managed by leaving a rotational area uncut on each mow had a similar species richness of butterflies and burnet moths to grasslands cut in full twice/year. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that rotationally managed grasslands, including some rotationally mown grasslands, which were last managed longer ago had a higher species richness of butterflies than more recently managed grasslands. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms managed with more in-field agri-environment scheme (AES) options, including staggered mowing dates, had a similar species richness of butterflies to farms with fewer AES options. POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Two replicated, paired, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in Germany and Switzerland found that grasslands managed by mowing strips in alternate years, or by leaving a rotational area uncut on each mow, had a higher abundance of butterflies and burnet moths than grasslands cut in full once or twice per year. One of two replicated, site comparison studies in the USA found that rotationally managed grasslands, including some rotationally mown grasslands, which were last managed longer ago had a higher abundance of butterflies than more recently managed grasslands. The other study found that rotationally mown grasslands had a lower abundance of butterflies in the second year after they were last cut than in the first year after mowing. One replicated, site comparison study in the UK reported that two heath fritillary populations survived on rotationally mown grasslands while six populations went extinct on unmanaged grasslands. One review in Europe reported that rotationally mowing grassland benefitted 27 out of 67 butterfly species of conservation concern. One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that farms managed with more in-field agri-environment scheme (AES) options, including staggered mowing dates, had a similar abundance of butterflies to farms with fewer AES options. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Czech Republic found that 29 out of 32 butterfly species preferred meadows which were half mown in June and August to meadows cut in full twice/year. The other three species were woodland species which only visited meadows temporarily. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3966https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3966Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:38:31 +0100