Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change mowing regime One before-and-after study in Australia found that restoration that included reduced mowing increased numbers of frog species.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F783https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F783Thu, 22 Aug 2013 13:49:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change effluent treatments of domestic and urban waste water One study evaluated the effects of different sewage treatments on the activity of foraging bats. The study was in the UK. We found no studies that evaluated the effects of changing effluent treatments of domestic and urban waste water discharged into rivers on bat populations. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK found higher activity (relative abundance) of foraging bats over filter bed sewage treatment works than over active sludge systems. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1014https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1014Fri, 20 Dec 2013 17:50:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change effluent treatments used in agriculture and forestry We found no studies that evaluated the effects of changing the effluent treatments used in agriculture and forestry 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%2F1016https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1016Fri, 20 Dec 2013 17:52:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Certify farms and market their products as ‘primate friendly’ We found no evidence for the effects of certifying farms and marketing their products as ‘primate friendly’ to sell at a premium 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%2F1434https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1434Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:19:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change of crop (i.e. to a crop less palatable to primates) We found no evidence for the effects of changing the crop to a less palatable crop 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%2F1439https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1439Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:47:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Certify mines and market their products as ‘primate friendly’ (e.g. ape-friendly cellular phones) We found no evidence for the effects of certifying mines and marketing their products as ‘primate friendly’ 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%2F1454https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1454Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:00:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Certify forest concessions and market their products as ‘primate friendly’ We found no evidence for the effects of certifying forest concessions and marketing their products as ‘primate friendly’ 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%2F1500https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1500Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:55:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of livestock grazing We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of changing the season or timing of livestock grazing. ‘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%2F1737https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1737Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:22:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of cutting/mowing Two studies evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of mowing or cutting in different seasons. One study was in a fen meadow and one was in a peatland with mixed vegetation. Plant community composition (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, before-and after study in a fen meadow in the UK reported that changes in plant community composition were typically similar in spring-, summer- and autumn-mown plots. However, one study in a peatland in the Netherlands reported that summer- and winter-mown areas developed cover of different plant community types. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, before-and after study in a fen meadow in the UK found that plant species richness increased more, over two years, in summer-mown plots than spring- or autumn-mown plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1771https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1771Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:42:35 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the harvesting of scallops Three studies examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the harvesting of scallops on their populations. One study was in the South Atlantic Ocean (Argentina), one in the English Channel (UK) and one in the Irish Sea (UK).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Scallop abundance (3 studies): Two of three site comparison studies (one replicated, one before-and-after) in the South Atlantic Ocean, the English Channel, and the Irish Sea found that in areas where scallop harvesting had stopped scallop abundance was similar, and one found that scallop biomass was higher, compared to harvested areas.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2277https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2277Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:53:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the harvest of conch We found no studies that evaluated the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the harvest of conch on their 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%2F2278https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2278Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:35:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the harvest of sea urchins We found no studies that evaluated the effects ceasing or prohibiting the harvest of sea urchins on their 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%2F2279https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2279Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:36:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease/reduce payments to cull mammals One study evaluated the effects of ceasing or reducing payments to cull mammals. This study was in Sweden and Norway. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): A before-and-after study in Sweden and Norway found that fewer brown bears were reported killed after the removal of financial hunting incentives. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2349https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2349Tue, 26 May 2020 08:24:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change mowing regime (e.g. timing, frequency, height) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of changing mowing regime (e.g. timing, frequency, height) on mammals. ‘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%2F2399https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2399Thu, 28 May 2020 10:56:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the disposal of mining waste (tailings) at sea or in rivers We found no studies that evaluated the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the disposal of mining waste (tailings) at sea or in rivers 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%2F2873https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2873Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:38:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of livestock grazing: freshwater marshes Three studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of grazing freshwater marshes in different seasons or at different times. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Canada. In all three studies, the livestock were cattle. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study of freshwater marshes and wet meadows in the USA reported that plots grazed in the summer and autumn experienced similar changes in overall plant community composition over a year. Relative abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study of ephemeral pools in the USA found that pools grazed in the dry or wet seasons had similar cover of grasses relative to forbs over three years. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of freshwater marshes in Canada found that in summer, marshes grazed in the summer/autumn contained more plant genera than marshes grazed in the spring/summer. Native/non-target richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study of ephemeral pools in the USA found that pools grazed in the dry and wet seasons experienced similar changes in native plant richness over three years. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study of freshwater marshes and wet meadows the USA found that, in three of four habitat types, summer- and autumn-grazed plots experienced similar changes in live vegetation biomass over one year. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Height (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study of freshwater marshes in Canada found that in summer, marshes grazed in the summer/autumn contained taller emergent vegetation than marshes grazed in the spring/summer. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2974https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2974Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:17:41 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of livestock grazing: brackish/salt marshes Two studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of grazing brackish/salt marshes in different seasons or at different times. One study was in the USA and one was in the Netherlands. In both studies, the focal livestock were cattle. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study on a salt marsh in the Netherlands found that plots grazed annually by 0.5 cattle/ha and plots grazed biennially by 1.0 cattle/ha experienced a similar turnover of plant species over six years, and had a similar overall plant community composition after six years. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): The same study found that plots grazed annually by 0.5 cattle/ha and plots grazed biennially by 1.0 cattle/ha experienced similar increases in plant species richness over six years, and had similar species richness after six years. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in alkali marshes in the USA found that summer- and autumn-grazed plots experienced similar changes in live vegetation biomass, over one year. Individual species abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study on a salt marsh in the Netherlands found that grazing annually with 0.5 cattle/ha stimulated greater increases in cover of sea aster Aster tripolium than grazing biennially with 1.0 cattle/ha. There was no significant difference between the grazing regimes for cover of sea couch grass Elytrigia atheria. Vegetation was monitored over six years. VEGETATION STRUCTURECollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2975https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2975Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:17:58 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of livestock grazing: freshwater swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of grazing freshwater swamps in different seasons or at different times.   ‘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%2F2976https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2976Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:18:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of livestock grazing: brackish/saline swampsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of grazing brackish/saline swamps in different seasons or at different times.   ‘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%2F2977https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2977Thu, 25 Mar 2021 14:18:26 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of cutting/mowing: freshwater marshes Four studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting/mowing freshwater marshes in different seasons or at different times. There was one study in each of Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium and Japan. VEGETATION COMMUNITY Community composition (2 studies): Two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled studies in wet meadows in Switzerland and farmland ditches in the Netherlands reported that cutting vegetation in different seasons typically had similar effects on the overall plant community composition, over 1–4 years. Overall richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in farmland ditches in the Netherlands found that marshy areas cut in May and areas cut in November typically contained a similar number of plant species, when surveyed in July. One replicated, paired, controlled study of wet grasslands in Belgium reported that the effect of a single mow between June and November on overall plant species richness depended on the month of mowing. VEGETATION ABUNDANCE Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study of wet grasslands in Belgium reported that the effect of a single mow between June and November on overall vegetation abundance (including litter) depended on the month of mowing. Individual species abundance (4 studies): All four studies quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. The studies all reported that the abundance of some plant species responded differently to cutting in different seasons. The controlled, before-and-after study in Japan, for example, reported that cutting in June reduced the abundance of common reed Phragmites australis in the following summer more than cutting in July. VEGETATION STRUCTURE Overall structure (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in wet meadows in Switzerland reported that summer-mown and winter-mown plots both experienced a shift in vegetation cover towards lower vegetation layers, over 3–4 years. Diameter/perimeter/area (1 study): The same study reported that summer-mowing and winter-mowing had opposite effects on the diameter of common reed Phragmites australis shoots: they became thinner over four years of summer mowing but thicker over three years of winter mowing. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3070https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3070Fri, 02 Apr 2021 13:38:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of cutting/mowing: brackish/salt marshesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting/mowing brackish/salt marshes in different seasons or at different times.   ‘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%2F3071https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3071Fri, 02 Apr 2021 13:41:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the disposal of mining waste (tailings) at sea or in rivers We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of ceasing or prohibiting the disposal of mining waste (tailings) at sea or in rivers. ‘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%2F3592https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3592Wed, 08 Dec 2021 16:21:52 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change hook baiting technique One study evaluated the effects of changing the hook baiting technique on reptile populations. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One study in the USA found that captive loggerhead turtles were more likely to attempt to swallow thread-baited than single-baited hooks. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3616https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3616Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:24:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change season/timing of prescribed burning Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of changing the season or timing of prescribed burning. One study was in each of Australia and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Australia found that management of a tropical savanna and floodplain with early season burning or no burning for 2–5 years increased the abundance of caterpillars, but management with late season burning did not. One replicated, paired, controlled study in the USA found that Karner blue butterfly abundance was similar on grasslands managed by burning in summer or autumn, and on unmanaged grasslands. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3878https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3878Thu, 21 Jul 2022 16:32:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change mowing regime on grassland Three studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of changing mowing regimes on grassland. Two studies were in the USA and one was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)   POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in the UK found that mowing coastal grassland in August reduced the abundance of Fisher’s estuarine moth caterpillars, whereas mowing in November or leaving sites unmown did not reduce abundance. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that prairies managed by haying had a higher abundance of prairie specialist butterflies, but a lower abundance of generalist and migrant butterflies, than prairies managed by burning, and the abundance of prairie specialists was higher in the first year after haying than in the second year. One replicated, paired, controlled study in the USA found that the abundance of Karner blue butterflies on oak savannas managed by mowing was similar to unmanaged savannas or savannas managed by burning. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3945https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3945Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:58:36 +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