Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Impose restrictions on cave visits Four studies evaluated the effects of imposing restrictions on cave visits on bat populations. One study was in each of the USA, Canada, Madagascar, and Turkey. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies in Canada and Turkey found that bat populations within caves increased after restrictions on cave visitors were imposed. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Behaviour change (2 studies): One study in the USA found that reducing the number of people within cave tour groups did not have a significant effect on the number of take-offs, landings or overall activity (bat movements) of a cave myotis colony roosting within the cave. One study in Madagascar found that increasing visitor approach distances, along with avoiding direct illumination of bats, reduced the alertness and number of take-offs of Madagascan rousettes during experimental cave tours. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1002https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1002Fri, 20 Dec 2013 17:17:00 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Impose noise limits in proximity to bat roosts and habitats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of imposing noise limits in proximity to bat roosts and habitats on bat 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%2F1021https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1021Fri, 20 Dec 2013 18:01:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Improve soil quality after tree planting (excluding applying fertilizer) One of two randomized, replicated, controlled studies in Australia found that different soil enhancers had mixed effects on tree seedling survival and height, but no effect on tree seedling health. The other found that combinations of soil enhancers did not increase seedling survival, height, diameter or health.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1153https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1153Wed, 18 May 2016 15:12:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement speed limits in particular areas (e.g. with high primate densities) to reduce vehicle collisions with primates We found no evidence for the effects of implementing speed limits in particular areas to reduce vehicle collisions with primates on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1458https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1458Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:30:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Impose fines for breaking the speed limit or colliding with primates We found no evidence for the effects of imposing fines for breaking the speed limit or colliding with primates on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1460https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1460Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:37:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement no-hunting seasons for primates We found no evidence for the effects of implementing no-hunting seasons for primates on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1467https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1467Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:25:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement sustainable harvesting of primates (e.g. with permits, resource access agreements) We found no evidence for the effects of implementing sustainable harvesting of primates on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1468https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1468Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:27:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement road blocks to inspect cars for illegal primate bushmeat We found no evidence for the effects of implementing road blocks to inspect cars for illegal primate bushmeat on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1470https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1470Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:31:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement small and dispersed logging compartments We found no evidence for the effects of implementing small and dispersed logging compartments on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1487https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1487Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:31:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement quarantine for people arriving at, and leaving the site We found no evidence for the effects of implementing quarantine for people arriving at, and leaving the site on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1540https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1540Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:40:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement quarantine for primates before reintroduction/translocation One before-and-after study in Brazil found that most reintroduced golden lion tamarins did not survive over seven years despite being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Uganda found that a reintroduced chimpanzee repeatedly returned to human settlements after being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that most reintroduced black-and-white ruffed lemurs did not survive over five years despite being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Malaysia found that a population of reintroduced orangutans decreased by 33% over 40 years despite individuals being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. A controlled study in Indonesia found that all orangutans that underwent quarantine prior to release, alongside other interventions, survived over three months. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Republic of Congo and Gabon found that more than 80% of the reintroduced gorillas that underwent quarantine, alongside other interventions, survived over a ten year period. Two site comparison studies in Vietnam and a before-and-after study in Indonesia found that most reintroduced lorises either died or their radio signal was lost despite being quarantined before release, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1541https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1541Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:44:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement multimedia campaigns using theatre, film, print media, discussions Two before-and-after studies in Belize found that black howler monkey numbers increased by 61-138% over 3–13 years after the implementation of a multimedia campaign or the opening of a museum for wildlife education, alongside other interventions. Two before-and-after studies in Brazil and Colombia found that the implementation of education programs focusing on tamarins improved attitudes towards- and knowledge about tamarins. One study in the Republic of Congo found that large numbers of people were informed about lowland gorillas through multimedia campaigns using theatre and film. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that poaching of diademed sifakas and black and white ruffed lemurs appeared to have ceased after the distribution of conservation books in local primary schools. One before-and-after study in India found that numbers of hoolock gibbons increased by 66% over five years after the implementation of an education and awareness programme, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in four African countries found that the level of knowledge about primates of visitors to a sanctuary housing guenons, mangabeys, chimpanzees and bonobos increased after the implementation of an education programme. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1571https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1571Fri, 20 Oct 2017 11:45:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Improve connectivity between areas of shrubland to allow species movements and habitat shifts in response to climate change We found no studies that evaluated the effects of improving connectivity between areas of shrubland to allow species movements in response to climate change on shrublands. '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%2F1673https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1673Sun, 22 Oct 2017 15:20:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement quarantine to avoid accidental introduction of disease, non-native or problem species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of implementing quarantine to avoid accidental introduction of disease, non-native or problem species 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%2F2156https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2156Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:07:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement regular inspections to avoid accidental introduction of disease or non-native or problem species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of implementing regular inspections to avoid accidental introduction of disease, non-native or problem species 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%2F2157https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2157Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:07:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Import spat and/or eggs to aquaculture facilities rather than juveniles and adults to reduce the risk of introducing hitchhiking species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of importing spat and/or eggs to aquaculture facilities rather than juveniles and adults to reduce the risk of introducing hitchhiking species 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%2F2160https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2160Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:11:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Improve fish food and pellets to reduce aquaculture waste production We found no studies that evaluated the effects of improving fish food and pellets to reduce aquaculture waste production 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%2F2192https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2192Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:02:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Incentivise species protection through licensed trophy hunting One study evaluated the effects on mammals of incentivising species protection through licensed trophy hunting. This study was in Nepal. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A study in Nepal found that after trophy hunting started, bharal abundance increased, though the sex ratio of this species, and of Himalayan tahr, became skewed towards females. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2610https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2610Thu, 11 Jun 2020 16:42:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Include fishers in management groups for marine protected areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of including fishers in management fora for marine protected areas on marine fish 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%2F2809https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2809Fri, 05 Feb 2021 10:00:36 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Improve methods for locating fishing gear We found no studies that evaluated the effects of improving methods for locating fishing gear 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%2F2889https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2889Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:51:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement rapid response plans for stranded mammals following extreme events We found no studies that evaluated the effects of implementing rapid response plans for stranded mammals following extreme events. ‘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%2F2911https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2911Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:20:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Improve treatment standards of sewage and wastewater We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of improving treatment standards of sewage and wastewater. ‘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%2F3569https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3569Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:08:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Impose noise limits in proximity to reptile habitats and routes We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of imposing noise limits in proximity to reptile habitats and routes. ‘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%2F3639https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3639Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:06:52 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement vessel decommissioning schemes We found no studies that evaluated the effects of implementing vessel decommissioning schemes on marine fish 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%2F3821https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3821Fri, 27 May 2022 08:48:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement multi-year or long-term management strategies One study examined the effects of implementing multi-year or long-term management strategies on marine fish populations. The study was worldwide.   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Stock status (1 study): One worldwide study found that commercial fisheries with multi-year or long-term management plans in place, among other management and governance strategies, had stocks that were more likely to be sustainable and less likely to be in decline compared to fisheries typically without long-term objectives. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3825https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3825Fri, 27 May 2022 09:04:24 +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