Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use new crop types to benefit wildlife (such as perennial cereal crops) We have captured no evidence for the effects of using new crop types to benefit wildlife (such as perennial cereal crops) on farmland wildlife. '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%2F89https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F89Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:31:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use mowing techniques to reduce chick mortality A review from the UK found a large increase in corncrake Crex crex populations in the UK following a scheme to delay mowing and promote corncrake-friendly mowing techniques. One replicated controlled study from the UK and a review from the UK found lower levels of mortality of corncrakes and Eurasian skylark Alauda arvensis when wildlife-friendly mowing techniques were used, compared to other techniques. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F192https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F192Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:30:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use netting to exclude fish-eating birds Two replicated studies from Germany and the USA found that netting or closely-spaced string barriers reduced losses of fish or deterred fish-eating birds from fish ponds. A review concluded that excluding birds was an effective way to reduce damage. A series of tests in the Netherlands found that netting or nylon lines over ponds did not prevent birds from landing, but did alter behaviour, whilst a before-and-after study from the USA found that fewer great blue herons Ardea Herodias landed at fish ponds with netting, but that they stayed longer. Two replicated studies from Germany and Israel found that some birds became entangled in netting or closely-spaced string barriers over fish ponds. The Israeli study found that dark, small meshed netting entangled fewer birds than other netting types. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F248https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F248Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:00:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use nest covers to reduce the impact of research on predation of ground-nesting seabirdsA before-and-after study in Canada found that protecting Caspian tern Sterna caspia nests after researchers disturbed parents from them significantly increased hatching success. This was due to a reduction in predation by ring-billed gulls Larus delawarensis. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F316https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F316Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:26:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use multiple barriers to protect nests A replicated, controlled study from the USA found no evidence that erecting an electric fence around nests protected by individual barriers increased fledging success in piping plovers Charadrius melodus. A replicated study from the USA found that removing the outer of two nest protection fences after 15 days appeared to reduce predation compared to when both fences were left for 18 days. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F404https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F404Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:00:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use naphthalene to deter mammalian predatorsA replicated, controlled study from the USA found that scattering naphthalene moth balls near artificial nests did not affect predation rates. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F408https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F408Thu, 16 Aug 2012 15:11:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use mowing techniques to reduce mortality Eight studies investigated the effects of different mowing techniques on wildlife. Seven studies (including four replicated trials of which one randomized, and one controlled and three reviews) from Germany, Ireland, Switzerland and the UK found that using specific mowing techniques can reduce mortality or injury in birds, mammals, amphibians or invertebrates. A review found the UK corncrake population increased around the same period that Corncrake Friendly Mowing schemes were introduced. One replicated trial found that changing the mowing pattern reduced the number of corncrake chicks killed. Sixty-eight percent of chicks escaped mowing when fields were mown from the centre outwards, compared to 45% during conventional mowing from the field edge inwards. Six studies looked at the effects of using different mowing machinery. Two studies (one review, one randomized, replicated trial) found bar mowers and one report found double chop mowers caused less damage or lower mortality among amphibians and/or invertebrates than other types of mowing machinery. A review found evidence that twice as many small mammals were killed by rotary disc mowers with conditioners compared to double blade mowers. Two studies found that using a mechanical processor or conditioner killed or injured more invertebrates than without a conditioner, however one replicated controlled study found mower-conditioners resulted in higher Eurasian skylark nest survival than using a tedder. A review of studies found that skylark chick survival was four times higher when wider mowing machinery was used, whilst a replicated controlled trial found skylark nest survival was highest when swather mowers and forage harvesters were used. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F698https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F698Sun, 09 Dec 2012 10:30:37 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use of probiotics and immunostimulants One replicated study in Scotland found increased survival in salmon fed a probiotic before exposure to four different disease-causing bacteria over a 28 day period compared with controls. A replicated, controlled study in Norway found the number of salmon infected with lice was reduced by 28% when fed a diet composed of fish meal and 28% plant-based protein. Adding beta-glucans to the diet decreased lice infection levels by a further 28% compared with controls. The same study found the addition of mannan oligosaccharides improved gut function by preventing the development of soybean-induced enteritis compared with controls. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F732https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F732Mon, 03 Jun 2013 11:14:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use natural control agents: cleaner wrasse Two studies in Ireland found mixed effects of cleaner wrasse on sea lice numbers infesting salmon. One controlled study found corkwing and goldskinny cleaner wrasse were as effective at controlling lice infestation as chemical treatments. One replicated, controlled study found rockcook cleaner wrasse were ineffective at preventing lice outbreaks. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F738https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F738Mon, 03 Jun 2013 15:28:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use of natural hedges to deter primates We found no evidence for the effects of using natural hedges to prevent primates from entering agricultural areas and raiding crops 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%2F1437https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1437Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:24:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use nets to keep primates out of fruit trees One controlled, replicated, before-and-after study in Indonesia found that areas where nets were used to protect crop trees, crop-raiding by orangutans was reduced. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1442https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1442Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:16:03 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-lethal measures to prevent bats from accessing fruit in orchards to reduce human-wildlife conflict Two studies evaluated the effects of using non-lethal measures to prevent bats from accessing fruit in orchards to reduce human-wildlife conflict. The studies were in Madagascar and Mauritius. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies (including one randomized study) in Madagascar and Mauritius found that using an organic deterrent spray, hanging plastic flags in trees, or covering individual tree branches with nylon net bags reduced damage to lychees caused by Madagascan flying foxes or Mauritius fruit bats. One of the studies found that ringing bells in lychee trees deterred most Madagascan flying foxes. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1953https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1953Tue, 04 Dec 2018 12:22:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use native species instead of non-native species in aquaculture systems We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using native species instead of non-native species in aquaculture systems on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. ‘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%2F2155https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2155Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:05:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use of non-native, invasive or other problematic species from populations established in the wild for recreational or commercial purposes We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using non-native, invasive or other problematic species from populations established in the wild for recreational or commercial purposes on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. ‘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%2F2174https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2174Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:24:03 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-toxic antifouling coatings on surfaces We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using non-toxic antifouling coatings on surfaces on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. ‘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%2F2213https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2213Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:25:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-lethal methods to deter carnivores from attacking humans Eight studies evaluated the effects of using non-lethal methods to deter carnivores from attacking humans. Three studies were in the USA, two were in Australia, one was in the USA and Canada, one was in Austria and one was in Bangladesh. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): A study in Bangladesh found that when domestic dogs accompanied people to give advance warning of tiger presence, fewer tigers were killed by people. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (8 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (8 studies): Two studies, in the USA and Canada, found that pepper spray caused all or most American black bears and grizzly bears to flee or cease aggressive behaviour. One of these studies also showed that tear gas repelled half of American black bears. Two studies in the USA and Austria found that grizzly/brown bears were repelled by rubber bullets or by a range of deterrents including rubber bullets, chasing, shouting and throwing items. A study in the USA found that hikers wearing bear bells were less likely to be approached or charged by grizzly bears than were hikers without bells. A replicated, controlled study in Australia found that ultrasonic sound deterrent units did not affect feeding location choices of dingoes. A study in Bangladesh found that domestic dogs accompanying people gave advance warning of tiger presence, enabling people to take precautionary actions. A study in Australia found that a motorised water pistol caused most dingoes to change direction or speed or move ≥5 m away, but sounding a horn did not.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2385https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2385Wed, 27 May 2020 15:41:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use noise aversive conditioning to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects of using noise aversive conditioning to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in USA found that noise aversive conditioning reduced bait consumption by white-tailed deer. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2461https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2461Tue, 02 Jun 2020 11:44:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use negative stimuli to deter consumption of livestock feed by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects of using negative stimuli to deter consumption of livestock feed by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in the USA. KEY COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that white-tailed deer presence at cattle feeders was usually reduced by a device that produced a negative stimulus. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2486https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2486Thu, 04 Jun 2020 13:03:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use netting of contrasting colour in a trawl net One study examined the effect of using netting of contrasting colour in a trawl net on marine fish populations. The study was in the Baltic Sea (Denmark). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Reduction of unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Baltic Sea found that a trawl codend with contrasting black netting used in conjunction with a square mesh escape panel caught a similar amount of undersized cod as a conventional codend. Improved size-selectivity of fishing gear (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Baltic Sea found that two designs of contrasting netting colour in trawl codends with square mesh escape windows did not improve the size-selectivity of cod compared to conventional codend netting colour. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2718https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2718Tue, 05 Jan 2021 15:46:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use observers on board vessels to detect mammals and allow vessel course or speed to be altered We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using observers on board vessels to detect mammals and allow vessel course or speed to be altered. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F2755https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2755Tue, 02 Feb 2021 16:58:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use noise aversive conditioning to deter mammals from fishing gear One study evaluated the effects on marine mammals of using noise aversive conditioning to deter mammals from fishing gear. The study was in the North Pacific Ocean (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): One study in the North Pacific Ocean found that noise aversive conditioning did not reduce bait foraging behaviour by California sea lions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2819https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2819Fri, 05 Feb 2021 15:12:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-toxic antifouling coatings on surfaces We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using non-toxic antifouling coatings on surfaces, on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F2908https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2908Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:19:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-offset hooks Two studies evaluated the effects of using non-offset hooks on reptile populations. One study was off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica and one was in the north-east Atlantic. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled, paired study in the north-east Atlantic Ocean found that mortality of leatherback turtles was similar when caught with non-offset hooks or offset hooks. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (2 studies): One of two replicated, paired studies (including one controlled study) off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica and in the north-east Atlantic found that non-offset circle hooks caught a similar number of olive ridley and green turtles compared to offset circle hooks in a shallow-set longline fishery. The other study found that non-offset G-style circle hooks caught fewer leatherback and hard-shell turtles compared to offset Gt-style circle hooks or offset J-hooks in a longline swordfish fishery. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3571https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3571Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:13:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-ringed hooks One study evaluated the effects of using non-ringed hooks on reptile populations. This study was in the Mediterranean. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated, paired study in the Mediterranean found that when non-ringed circle hooks were used in a swordfish longline fishery fewer loggerhead turtles were caught compared to when ringed hooks were used. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3576https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3576Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:18:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use nest covers to protect against human disturbance Two studies evaluated the effects of using nest covers to protect against human disturbance on reptiles. One study was in the USA and one was in Greece. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (2 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies (including one paired study) in the USA and Greece found that loggerhead turtle nests that were covered with cages had similar hatching success compared to nests that were not covered. The other study found mixed effects of cages on hatching success of loggerhead turtle nests. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3645https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3645Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:32:25 +0000