Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish fallowing to reduce parasites/diseaseA study in Scotland recorded lower lice numbers on Atlantic salmon in cages using a fallowing system. Another study in Australia found no difference in mortality from Amoebic Gill Disease in cages where a fallowing system had been used.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1026https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1026Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:41:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish fallowing to reduce pollutionA trial in Tasmania found sediment community structure under Atlantic salmon cages became more similar to non- impacted sites over two fallowing cycles.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1027https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1027Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:45:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish no-mining zones in/near watersheds so as to preserve water levels and water quality We found no evidence for the effects of establishing no-mining zones in/near watersheds so as to preserve water levels and water quality 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%2F1452https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1452Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:55:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish areas for conservation which are not protected by national or international legislation (e.g. private sector standards & codes) One before-and-after study in Rwanda and Republic of Congo found that mountain gorilla numbers increased by 15% over five years after the implementation of a conservation project funded by a consortium of organizations, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Belize found that black howler monkey numbers increased by 138% over 13 years after being protected by the local community, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1579https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1579Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:57:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish pollution emergency plans We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing pollution emergency plans 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%2F2177https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2177Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:28:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs 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%2F2200https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2200Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:11:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish community-based fisheries management One study examined the effects of establishing community-based fisheries management on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in the Foveaux Straight (New Zealand).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Mollusc abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Foveaux Straight found that a customary fisheries area where management was community-based had more New Zealand scallops compared to a protected area prohibiting all fishing and an area allowing recreational harvest. Mollusc condition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Foveaux Straight found that a customary fisheries area where management was community-based, tended to have smaller New Zealand scallops compared to a protected area prohibiting all fishing and an area allowing recreational harvest. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2242https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2242Wed, 23 Oct 2019 08:39:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish long-term cover on erodible cropland One study evaluated the effects on mammals of establishing long-term cover on erodible cropland. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in the USA, found that establishing long-term cover on erodible cropland did not increase the abundance of eastern cottontails. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2402https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2402Thu, 28 May 2020 11:16:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish deviation ponds in fish farms to reduce predation of fish stock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of establishing deviation ponds in fish farms to reduce predation of fish stock 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%2F2455https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2455Tue, 02 Jun 2020 11:13:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish riparian buffers We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of establishing riparian buffers. ‘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%2F2541https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2541Mon, 08 Jun 2020 17:51:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish populations isolated from disease One study evaluated the effects on mammals of establishing populations isolated from disease. The study was in sub-Saharan Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Condition (1 study): A site comparison study throughout sub-Saharan Africa found that fencing reduced prevalence of canine distemper but not of rabies, coronavirus or canine parvovirus in African wild dogs. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2588https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2588Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:12:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish long-term fishery closures Five studies examined the effects of establishing long-term fishery closures in an area on marine fish populations. One study was in each of the Norwegian Sea (Norway), the North Sea (UK), the Gulf of Maine (USA), the Bismark Sea (Papua New Guinea) and the Kattegat (Sweden/Denmark). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Condition (2 studies): One replicated, before-and-after study in the Norwegian Sea found that in the five years after the long-term closure of a commercial coastal fishery, the weights of young salmon returning to rivers were higher than before, and weights of older salmon were similar or lower. One site comparison study in the Gulf of Maine found that there were smaller, but similar condition monkfish inside an area closed year-round to groundfish fishing for six to seven years than an area open to all fishing. Abundance (4 studies): Two site comparison studies in the Gulf of Maine and Bismark Sea found a higher abundance of only one of seven fish species and lower abundance of monkfish in areas closed to groundfish (bottom-dwelling) fisheries for six to eight years, compared to open areas. One of two replicated, before-and-after studies (one controlled) in the Norwegian Sea and North Sea found that there were more young salmon and similar numbers of older salmon returning to rivers than before, in the five years after the long-term closure of a commercial coastal fishery. The other study found that lesser sandeel biomass and density peaked but there was no overall increase in the three years after a long-term fishery closure compared to before. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One site comparison study in the Bismark Sea found that in an area closed to customary fishing for eight years, six of seven fish species had a lower flight response distance compared to an area open to customary fishing, making them more vulnerable to capture with spear guns. OTHER (3 STUDIES) Reduction of unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in the Kattegat found that a combination of long-term fishery closures and areas limited to specific gears reduced unwanted catch of cod compared to before. Reduction of fishing effort (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the North Sea found that long-term closure of a commercial fishery reduced overall fishing effort for lesser sandeel. Commercial catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the North Sea found that annual sandeel catch rates were varied after the indefinite closure of the commercial fishery in an area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2655https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2655Thu, 12 Nov 2020 14:53:37 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish handling and release protocols in non-recreational fisheries Two studies examined the effects of establishing handling and release protocols in non-recreational fisheries on marine fish populations. One study was in the Atlantic Ocean (West Africa) and one was in the South Pacific Ocean (Australia).  COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One study in the Atlantic Ocean reported that tracked whale sharks released from purse seines using an enhanced protocol survived for at least 21 days, and post-release movements appeared normal. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Behaviour change (2 studies): One study in the Pacific Ocean found that after release protocols (minimal handling and air exposure), reef fish returned more quickly to a reef or the seabed after release, compared to higher stress handling and longer air exposure. One study in the Atlantic Ocean reported that the post-release movements of tracked whale sharks released from purse seines using an enhanced protocol appeared normal. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2692https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2692Wed, 02 Dec 2020 15:51:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish open and transparent reporting of fishing effort data We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing open and transparent fishing effort data 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%2F2770https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2770Wed, 03 Feb 2021 10:37:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish handling and release protocols for mammals captured by fisheries One study evaluated the effects on marine mammals of establishing handling and release protocols for mammals captured by wild fisheries. The study was in the Great Australian Bight (Australia). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One before-and-after study in the Great Australian Bight found that introducing a code of conduct for releasing dolphins trapped in nets, along with avoiding dolphins during fishing, resulted in lower mortality of short-beaked common dolphins. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2829https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2829Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:02:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish pollution emergency plans We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing emergency pollution plans 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%2F2862https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2862Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:24:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs 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%2F2883https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2883Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:47:05 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish fishing gear registration programmes We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing fishing gear registration programmes 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%2F2890https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2890Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:52:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish a network of legally protected areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing a network of legally protected areas 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%2F2913https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2913Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:23:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish protocols to reduce collisions We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing protocols to reduce collisions on reptile 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%2F3533https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3533Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:56:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish emergency plans for oil spills We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of establishing emergency plans for oil spills. ‘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%2F3573https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3573Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:14:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish aquaculture facilities to extract the nutrients from agricultural run-off We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of establishing aquaculture facilities to extract the nutrients from agricultural run-off. ‘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%2F3587https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3587Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:52:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish handling and release procedures for accidentally captured or entangled (‘bycatch’) reptiles One study evaluated the effects on reptiles of establishing handling and release procedures for accidentally captured or entangled reptiles. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Canada in a captive setting found that recovery of painted turtles after a long period of being held underwater was similar when turtles recovered out of the water or in the water. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3621https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3621Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:31:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish move-on rules for temporary, targeted fishing restrictions or closures when a catch or unwanted catch threshold is reached Two studies examined the effects of establishing move-on rules for temporary, targeted fishing restrictions or closures when a catch or unwanted catch threshold is reached on marine fish populations. One study was in the North Atlantic Ocean and North Sea (Scotland) and one was in the North Atlantic Ocean (Scotland).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction of unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in in the North Atlantic Ocean/North Sea found that after move-on rules were established when a catch threshold limit triggered temporary fishing closures there were lower overall cod discards. Reduction of fishing effort (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies (one replicated and controlled) in the North Atlantic Ocean and North Sea found that after move-on rules were established for vessels when a catch threshold limit was reached fishing effort for cod and blue ling was reduced. Commercial catch abundance (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies (one replicated and controlled) in the North Atlantic Ocean and North Sea found that after move-on rules were established for vessels when a catch threshold limit was reached commercial landings of cod and blue ling were reduced. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3815https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3815Fri, 27 May 2022 08:36:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish “green infrastructure” in urban areas One study evaluated the effects of establishing “green infrastructure in urban areas on butterflies and moths. This study was in Taiwan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Taiwan found that green roofs had a lower species richness of butterflies than urban parks. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Taiwan found that green roofs had a lower abundance of butterflies than urban parks, but the abundance was higher on older green roofs with more nectar plant species in a larger area. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3837https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3837Mon, 04 Jul 2022 15:32:09 +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