Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage wild honey bees sustainablyWe can find no evidence of the impact of reduced honey-hunting or improved harvesting methods on wild honey bee populations. One trial in southern Vietnam, showed that occupancy of artificial rafters by the giant honey bee Apis dorsata can be over 85% when rafters are placed by a large clearing greater than 25 m in diameter.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F32https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F32Thu, 20 May 2010 05:25:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage stone-faced hedge banks to benefit wildlife We have captured no evidence for the effects of managing stone-faced hedge banks to benefit wildlife 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%2F73https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F73Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:04:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage wild deer numbers We have captured no evidence for the effects of managing wild deer numbers 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%2F111https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F111Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:10:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage woodland edges to benefit widlife We have captured no evidence for the effects of managing woodland edges to benefit wildlife 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%2F140https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F140Fri, 02 Dec 2011 11:19:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage stone-faced hedge banks to benefit birds We found no evidence for the effects of managing stone-faced hedge banks on bird 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%2F179https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F179Wed, 30 May 2012 14:13:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage woodland edges for birds We captured three studies of two experiments, of which one, a before-and-after study from the UK, found an increase in the local population of European nightjars following several management interventions, including the management of woodland edges for birds. Two studies of a replicated, controlled paired sites experiment in the USA found that bird abundances were higher in woodland edges with border-edge cuts and that predation on artificial nests was lower than in uncut edges. Scrub- and edge-nesting species were more abundant. Overall species richness and nest success did not differ different between treatments.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F334https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F334Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:12:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manually control or remove midstorey and ground-level vegetation (including mowing, chaining, cutting etc) in forests Of fifteen studies captured, one, a replicated controlled study from the USA, found higher bird species richness in areas with midstorey thinning, compared to control areas. One study from the USA found similar bird species richness in areas with mid- and understorey control, compared to other management types. A study from Canada found fewer species in treated sites than controls. Seven studies from Europe and the USA found that total bird densities or those of some species or guilds were higher in areas with mid- or understorey management, compared to before management or to areas without management. Four of these studies used understorey removal as part of a wider management regime. Five studies from the USA and Canada found that densities of some species were lower in areas with midi or understorey control, or that overall bird densities did not different between managed and unmanaged areas. Two of these studies investigated several interventions at once. A replicated controlled study from the USA found similar survival for black-chinned hummingbirds in areas with understorey management, compared to areas with other interventions. Two replicated, controlled studies from Canada found higher nest survival in forests with removal of deciduous trees, compared to controls. A controlled study found that northern bobwhite chicks had greater foraging success in areas with cleared understorey vegetation compared to burned areas, but lower than under other managements. A replicated, controlled study from the USA found that midstorey control did not appear to affect competition between species for nesting sites.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F335https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F335Sat, 28 Jul 2012 14:20:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage water level in wetlands Of six studies, one replicated, controlled study from the USA found that bird diversity was affected by maintaining water levels at different levels. A study from the USA found that ducks were more abundant when high water levels were maintained on a wetland site. Geese were more abundant when lower levels were maintained. Three studies from the USA and Canada, two replicated, found that different species showed preferences for different water levels in wetlands. A replicated study from the UK found that great bitterns established territories earlier when deep water levels were maintained, but this had no effect on productivity. A review from Spain found that management successfully maintained water near a greater flamingo nesting area, but the effects of this were not measured.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F355https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F355Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:49:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage the agricultural landscape to enhance floral resources One large replicated controlled trial showed that the average abundance of long-tongued bumblebees on field margins was positively correlated with the number of ‘pollen and nectar’ agri-environment agreements in a 10 km grid square. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F362https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F362Fri, 03 Aug 2012 12:08:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage silviculture practices in plantations Studies investigating the effects of silviculture practices are discussed in ‘Threat: Biological resource use – Logging & wood harvesting’.      Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F792https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F792Thu, 22 Aug 2013 14:35:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage woody debris before tree planting One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Canada found that removal of woody debris increased the survival rate of planted trees. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found mixed effects of removing, chopping and burning woody debris on the size of planted trees.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1257https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1257Mon, 06 Jun 2016 09:39:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vegetation using livestock grazing Six studies evaluated the effects on mammals of managing vegetation using livestock grazing. Four studies were in the USA, one was in Norway and one was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that introduction of livestock grazing increased the abundance of Stephens’ kangaroo rat after two years. BEHAVIOUR (5 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): One of four studies (three replicated controlled studies and a before-and-after study), in the USA and Norway, found that sheep-grazed pasture was used by feeding reindeer more than was ungrazed pasture. One found mixed effects on Rocky Mountain elk use of grazed plots and another found no response of Rocky Mountain elk to spring cattle grazing. The forth study found cattle grazing to increase the proportion of rough fescue biomass utilized by elk in the first, but not second winter after grazing. Behaviour change (1 study): A replicated, paired sites study in Mexico found that in pastures grazed by cattle, Tehuantepec jackrabbits spent more time feeding than they did in pastures not grazed by cattle. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2545https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2545Tue, 09 Jun 2020 09:12:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vegetation using grazing by wild herbivores Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of managing vegetation using grazing by wild herbivores. One study was in the USA and one was in South Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): A site comparison study in the USA found that areas with higher numbers of wild herbivore grazers hosted more small mammals than did areas grazed by fewer wild herbivores. A study in South Africa found that grazing by Cape mountain zebras did not lead to a higher population of bontebok. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2548https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2548Tue, 09 Jun 2020 09:59:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage wetland water levels for mammal species One study evaluated the effects of managing wetland water levels for mammal species. 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 managing wetland water levels to be higher in winter increased the abundance of muskrat houses. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2574https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2574Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:49:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage water levels and flow in rivers to maintain deep pools and connectivity We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing water levels and flow in rivers to maintain deep pools and connectivity on 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%2F2914https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2914Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:24:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vegetation along utility and service line corridors to increase foraging habitat for bats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing vegetation along utility and service line corridors to increase forgaing habitat for bats 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%2F2944https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2944Fri, 12 Feb 2021 17:57:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage water level to control problematic plantsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of managing water levels to control problematic plants in marshes or swamps.   ‘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%2F3099https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3099Sun, 04 Apr 2021 09:18:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage tillage practices We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing tillage practices 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%2F3488https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3488Fri, 03 Dec 2021 13:43:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vegetation using livestock grazing Two studies evaluated the effects of managing vegetation using livestock grazing on reptile populations. One study was in France and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in France found that one reptile species was more abundant in areas grazed by sheep than in areas managed by burning, whereas the abundance of five other species was similar in all areas. Reproductive success (1 study): One before-and-after study in the USA found that after grazing cattle to restore bog turtle habitat, along with providing artificial nest covers, more bog turtle eggs were laid and hatching success was higher than before. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One before-and-after study in the USA found that bog turtle nests were laid only in areas that had been grazed in the current or previous growing season. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3711https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3711Mon, 13 Dec 2021 13:56:11 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vegetation using herbicides Seven studies evaluated the effects of managing vegetation using herbicides on reptile populations. Four studies were in the USA, two were in Australia and one was in the US Virgin Islands3. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in Australia found that areas where an invasive shrub was sprayed with herbicide had similar composition of reptile species compared to unsprayed areas. Richness/diversity (3 studies): Three replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after studies in Australia and the USA found that areas where vegetation was treated with herbicides had similar richness of reptile species or combined reptile and amphibian species compared to areas not treated with herbicide. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Three of four studies (including three replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Australia found that areas where vegetation was treated with herbicides had similar abundance of all or most reptiles compared to areas not treated with herbicide. The other study found that after glyphosate was applied to pond vegetation, fewer mangrove salt marsh snakes were found compared to immediately before application. Reproductive success (2 studies): One of two controlled studies (including one replicated study and one randomized study) in the USA and US Virgin Islands found that exposure of red-eared slider eggs to high levels of glyphosate caused a reduction in hatching success. The other study found that leatherback turtle nests in areas treated with herbicide had similar hatching and emergence success compared to nests in untreated areas. Survival (1 studies): One randomized, controlled study in the US Virgin Islands found that in areas treated with herbicide, fewer leatherback turtle hatchlings became entangled in vegetation than in untreated areas. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that pink-tailed worm-lizards were not found in restored rocky areas treated with herbicide, but were found in restored areas not treated with herbicide. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3712https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3712Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:00:47 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vegetation by cutting or mowing Seven studies evaluated the effects of managing vegetation by cutting or mowing on reptile populations. Five studies were in the USA, one was in Australia, and one was in Spain. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): Three replicated, randomized, controlled studies (including one before-and-after study) in the USA found that areas where vegetation was managed by cutting had similar reptile species richness compared to areas with no cutting. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Three of four replicated, controlled studies (including three randomized studies) in the USA found that areas where vegetation was managed by cutting had similar reptile abundance compared to areas with no cutting. The other study found that densities of eastern Massassauga rattlesnakes were higher after cutting during the first three years, but similar after four years. Condition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in Spain found that an adapted brush cutter caused less damage to tortoise carcasses than a conventional brush cutter. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that after cutting back canopy vegetation, reptiles used unshaded rocks more often than shaded rocks in winter but not spring. One randomized study in the USA found that mown areas were used for nesting by Blanding’s turtles less frequently than tilled areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3713https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3713Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:26:20 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vegetation by hand (selective weeding) Four studies evaluated the effects of managing vegetation by hand on reptile populations. Two studies were in the USA, one was in South Africa and one was in the US Virgin Islands. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired sites, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that removing invasive, non-native Sahara mustard by hand had mixed effects on the abundance of two lizard species. Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the US Virgin Islands found that in areas where native beach morning glory was removed by hand, leatherback turtle nests had similar hatching and emergence success compared to areas where no removal took place. Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the US Virgin Islands found that in areas where native beach morning glory was removed by hand, fewer leatherback turtle hatchlings became entangled in vegetation compared to areas where no removal took place. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in South Africa found that removing an invasive plant by hand resulted in more sites being used for nesting by Nile crocodiles compared to areas with no removal. One randomized study in the USA found that weeded or mown areas were used less frequently for nesting by Blanding’s turtles than tilled areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3714https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3714Mon, 13 Dec 2021 14:53:37 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage vineyards to benefit butterflies and moths Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing vineyards to benefit butterflies and moths. One study was in each of the USA and Spain. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the USA and Spain found that grass strips between vine rows had a greater species richness of butterflies than the vine rows themselves, and vineyards managed with fewer chemicals had a greater species richness of butterflies than conventionally managed vineyards. The other study found that vineyards managed to encourage native plants, and where insecticide was rarely used, had a similar species richness of butterflies to conventionally managed vineyards. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the USA found that vineyards managed to encourage native plants, and where insecticide was rarely used, had a greater abundance of butterflies than conventionally managed vineyards. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3919https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3919Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:19:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage woodland edges for maximum habitat heterogeneity Two studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing woodland edges for maximum habitat heterogeneity. One study was in Belgium and the other was in Finland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in Finland found that two years after felling 5-m-wide woodland edges, and thinning 20-m-wide adjacent forest, the combined species richness of butterflies, diurnal moths and bumblebees was higher than before management or in unmanaged woodland edges. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Belgium found that scalloped woodland edges had a higher abundance of brown hairstreak eggs than straight woodland edges. One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in Finland found that two years after felling 5-m-wide woodland edges and thinning 20-m-wide adjacent forest, the abundance of specialist butterflies was higher than before management or on unmanaged woodland edges. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3942https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3942Sat, 13 Aug 2022 14:57:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage wetlands or ponds by grazing or cutting to prevent succession Three studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing wetlands or ponds by grazing or cutting. Two studies were in the Netherlands and one was in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Switzerland found that fens managed by mowing had a greater species richness of butterflies than fens managed by cattle grazing. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Netherlands found that recently cut fens had fewer large copper eggs than uncut fens. Survival (2 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies in the Netherlands found that large copper caterpillar survival was lower in recently cut fens, and fens cut in autumn or winter, than in uncut fens. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3950https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3950Sat, 13 Aug 2022 15:22:08 +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