Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional farm buildings We have captured no evidence for the effects of maintaining traditional farm buildings 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%2F94https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F94Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:37:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make selective use of spring herbicidesA replicated, controlled, randomized study in the UK found that spring herbicides had some benefits for beneficial weeds and arthropods. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F98https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F98Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:50:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make direct payments per clutch for farmland birds Two replicated and controlled studies from the Netherlands found limited evidence for increased wading bird populations on farms with per-clutch payments. One study found no population effects over three years. The second found slightly higher breeding densities of wading birds, but not higher overall numbers. A replicated and controlled study found higher hatching success of northern lapwing and black-tailed godwit on farms with payment schemes than control farms. A replicated site comparison from the Netherlands that looked at the effects of per-clutch payments in combination with postponed agricultural activities found more birds bred on 12.5 ha plots under the per-clutch payment and postponed agricultural activities scheme but found no differences at the field-scale. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F146https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F146Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:46:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain species-rich, semi-natural grassland A before-and-after study from the UK found five species of conservation concern increased after the implementation of management designed to maintain unimproved grasslands. A replicated study from Switzerland found that wetland birds appeared to preferentially choose managed hay meadows; birds of open farmland avoided it. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F218https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F218Tue, 17 Jul 2012 12:27:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional water meadows A replicated study from the UK found that northern lapwing and common redshank populations increased on nature reserves managed to maintain water meadows. Two replicated studies from the Netherlands found that there were more waders or birds overall on specially managed meadows or 12.5 ha plots including several management interventions than on conventional fields, but one study found that these differences were present before the management scheme was introduced and the other found no differences between individual fields under different management. A replicated study from the UK found that common snipe decreased on nature reserves managed to maintain water meadows and a replicated before-and-after study from the Netherlands found that wader population trends on specially managed meadows were no different to those on conventionally-managed meadows. A replicated study from the UK found that lapwing populations on three of four water meadow sites managed for conservation did not have high enough productivity to maintain population levels. All three sites were judged deficient in at least one management category. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F229https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F229Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:37:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain upland heath/moorA literature review from the UK found that agri-environment guidelines on moorland grazing were leading to increased bird populations in one region. There were localised problems with overgrazing, burning and scrub encroachment. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F230https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F230Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:50:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wood pasture and parkland We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining wood pasture and parkland 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%2F235https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F235Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:57:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional orchardsTwo site comparison studies from the UK and Switzerland found that traditional orchards did not benefit many birds. In Switzerland, one species was associated with orchards; in the UK, the focal species was negatively related to the presence of orchards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F240https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F240Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:42:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make selective use of spring herbicides We found no evidence for the effects of selective use of spring herbicides 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%2F457https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F457Wed, 29 Aug 2012 14:33:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain upland heath/moorland Of 15 individual studies from the UK, eight (including three replicated, controlled trials, of which one also randomized) found that appropriate management can help to maintain the conservation value of upland heath or moorland. Of these eight studies, four tested the effectiveness of excluding or reducing grazing. Impacts included increases in the abundance of Scottish primrose and other broadleaved plant species, heather cover and numbers of true bugs, biomass of arthropods associated with the bird diet, number and diversity of moths and benefits to black grouse. Among other treatments, repeated cutting and grazing by goats were found to be effective in controlling the dominance of certain grass species. A review found management under the Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme had broadly positive effects on moorland birds and a reduction in grazing benefited most bird species and increased heath vegetation and heather cover. A replicated before-and-after study found that moorland management under the Environmentally Sensitive Area scheme maintained the number of plant species in two out of three areas. Three studies (including one before-and-after trial) reported mixed results for invertebrates or birds, where management to maintain upland heath or moorland benefited some but not all species or where the effect depended on the vegetation type. Treatments tested included reducing grazing intensity and grouse moor management (burning and predator control). Four studies (including one controlled site comparison and two reviews) found that reducing the intensity of livestock grazing reduced the abundance of soil organisms including invertebrates, bacteria or fungi. A randomized, replicated before-and-after study found that heather cover declined over nine years on a moorland site managed under the Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme in which grazing intensity had increased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F647https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F647Wed, 17 Oct 2012 17:51:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wood pasture and parkland A randomized, replicated, controlled trial in Sweden found that annual mowing maintained the highest number of plant species on wood pasture. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F649https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F649Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:59:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional water meadows (includes management for breeding and/or wintering waders/waterfowl) Four studies from Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK (including two site comparisons of which one also replicated) found that maintaining traditional water meadows resulted in an increased population size or number of territories of northern lapwing, common redshank and black-tailed godwit and increased plant species richness. However one of these studies also found common snipe declined on all sites under management to maintain traditional water meadows, and another of the studies found that differences in numbers of birds were present before meadow bird management. Two studies (a replicated study and a review of European studies) found that managing traditional water meadows by grazing had mixed impacts on wildlife and that the productivity of northern lapwings was too low to sustain populations on three of the four water meadows managed for waders. A randomized, replicated, controlled trial in the Netherlands found that cutting in June maintained relatively stable vegetation and a review found mowing could be used to maintain water meadows but had variable effects on plant species richness. One replicated site comparison from the Netherlands found more birds bred on 12.5 ha plots with management for wading birds (in combination with per-clutch payments), however at the field scale there was no difference in bird abundance or species richness between conventionally managed fields and those managed for birds. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F696https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F696Fri, 07 Dec 2012 09:05:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional orchards Two replicated site comparisons from Germany and Switzerland found that, on average, 12% of traditional orchards in Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas were of ‘good ecological quality’, and traditional orchards under a German agri-environment scheme did not have more plant species than paired control sites. Traditional orchards in Ecological Compensation Areas appeared to offer little benefit to birds. A replicated, controlled site comparison study in Germany found that plant species richness was higher on mown orchards than grazed or abandoned ones, but numbers of species and brood cells of bees and wasps did not differ. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F703https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F703Tue, 29 Jan 2013 13:17:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/create buffer zones One site comparison study in Australia found that a forest edge protected by a planted buffer strip had higher canopy cover and lower stem density, but similar understory species richness to an unbuffered forest edge. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1168https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1168Thu, 19 May 2016 08:58:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/create habitat corridors We found no evidence for the effects of maintaining or creating habitat corridors on forests. '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%2F1176https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1176Thu, 19 May 2016 10:26:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/create habitat corridors in developed areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of maintaining or creating habitat corridors in developed areas 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%2F1543https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1543Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:44:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/restore water flow across service corridors One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of restoring water flow across service corridors. The study was in a fen. Characteristic plants (1 study): One before-and-after study in a fen in the USA found that following restoration of water inflow across a road (along with general rewetting), cover of wet peatland sedges increased whilst cover of grasses preferring drier conditions decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1741https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1741Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:25:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage climate-driven range extensions of problematic species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing climate-driven range extensions of problematic 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%2F2217https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2217Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:35:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/restore/create habitat connectivity on farmland We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of maintaining, restoring or creating habitat connectivity on farmland. ‘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%2F2381https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2381Wed, 27 May 2020 14:29:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make introduction of non-native mammals for sporting purposes illegal We found no studies that evaluated the effects on native mammals of making introduction of non-native mammals for sporting purposes illegal. ‘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%2F2621https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2621Fri, 12 Jun 2020 10:47:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain water level and flow along regulated rivers We found no studies that evaluated the effects of maintaining water level and flow along regulated 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%2F2850https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2850Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:39:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage crop diversity We found no studies that evaluated the effects of managing crop diversity 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%2F3489https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3489Mon, 06 Dec 2021 11:01:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wild-caught, gravid females in captivity during gestation Seven studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of maintaining wild-caught, gravid females in captivity during gestation. Two studies were in the USA and New Zealand and one was in each of Japan, Iran and Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Reproductive success (7 studies): Five replicated studies in the USA, Japan, Iran and Mexico found that varying numbers of wild-caught snakes and lizards gave birth to live young or laid eggs that hatched successfully in captivity. One study also found that eggs laid in artificial nest chambers had higher hatching success than those laid outside of the chambers. One study in New Zealand found mixed effects of providing different basking conditions on the number of McCann’s skinks and common geckos that gave birth successfully. One controlled study in New Zealand found that McCann’s skinks in captivity that were treated for mites completed pregnancy more often and produced more viable offspring compared to skinks not treated. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3766https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3766Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:16:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional orchards to benefit butterflies and moths Two studies evaluated the effects of maintaining traditional orchards on butterflies and moths. One study was in each of the USA and Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that managed orchards had a similar community composition of butterflies and burnet moths to abandoned orchards. Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that managed orchards had a similar species richness of butterflies and burnet moths to abandoned orchards. One controlled study in the USA found that an unmanaged and a partially managed orchard had a greater species richness and diversity of leaf-eating arthropods (including caterpillars) than a commercially managed orchard. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Germany found that managed orchards had a lower abundance of butterflies and burnet moths than abandoned orchards. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3917https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3917Thu, 11 Aug 2022 11:04:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain upland heath/moorland Three studies evaluated the effects of maintaining upland heath/moorland on butterflies and moths. All three studies were in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that lightly grazed or ungrazed upland acid grassland had a higher species richness of moths than commercially grazed grassland. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Three controlled studies (including two replicated, randomized studies) in the UK found that ungrazed, lightly grazed or summer grazed upland grassland had a higher abundance of adult moths, moth caterpillars and all caterpillars than grassland grazed at commercial stocking densities or all year round. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3973https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3973Sun, 14 Aug 2022 10:40:21 +0100