Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement food labelling schemes relating to biodiversity-friendly farming (organic, LEAF marque) We have captured no evidence for the effects of implementing food labelling schemes relating to biodiversity-friendly farming (organic, LEAF marque) 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%2F71https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F71Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:01:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement 'mosaic management', a Dutch agri-environment option A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study from the Netherlands found that northern lapwing population trends changed from decreases to increases following the introduction of mosaic management. Three other species of wading bird did not show such a response and Eurasian oystercatcher populations did less well under mosaic management than other management types. A replicated, paired sites study in the Netherlands that black-tailed godwit had higher productivity under mosaic management than other management types due to higher nest survival, and nests were less likely to be trampled by livestock or destroyed by mowing under mosaic management. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F130https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F130Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:01:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Immunize amphibians against chytridiomycosis infection One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the USA found that vaccinating mountain yellow-legged frogs with formalin-killed chytrid fungus did not significantly reduce chytridiomycosis infection rate or mortality. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F765https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F765Fri, 16 Aug 2013 16:05:06 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Imitate natural disturbances by pushing over trees We captured no evidence for the effects of imitating natural disturbances by pushing over trees 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%2F1194https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1194Thu, 19 May 2016 11:55:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Humans chase primates using random loud noise One controlled, replicated, before-and-after study in Indonesia found that in areas where noise deterrents were used, along with tree nets, crop raiding by orangutans was reduced. One study in the Democratic Republic Congo found that chasing gorillas and using random noise resulted in the return of gorillas from plantations to areas close to protected forest. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1449https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1449Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:53:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Humans chase primates using bright light We found no evidence for the effects of humans chasing primates using bright light to deter crop-raiding 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%2F1450https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1450Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:17:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement a minimum number of roads (& minimize secondary roads) needed to reach mining extraction sites We found no evidence for the effects of implementing a minimum number of roads needed to reach mining sites 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%2F1462https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1462Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:52:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement local no-hunting community policies/traditional hunting ban One review found that very few snub nosed monkeys were killed annually at a site in China where it is forbidden to kill wildlife. One controlled study in the Democratic Republic of Congo found that a lowland gorilla population increased after the implementation of a local hunting ban. One before-and-after study in Belize found that an introduced black howler monkey population increased over time in an area where hunting was controlled, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Cameroon found that a drill population increased in numbers after being protected by a hunting ban, alongside other interventions. A study in Nigeria found that populations of Sclater’s monkey increased in an area where hunting of the species was prohibited by local taboos. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1478https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1478Tue, 17 Oct 2017 18:40:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement monitoring surveillance strategies (e.g. SMART) or use monitoring data to improve effectiveness of wildlife law enforcement patrols One before-and-after study in Nigeria found that more gorillas and chimpanzees were observed after the implementation of law enforcement and a monitoring system. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1481https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1481Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:05:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement community control of patrolling, banning hunting and removing snares A site comparison study in the Democratic Republic of Congo found that community control was more effective at reducing illegal bushmeat hunting, including primates, compared to the nearby national park. A before-and-after study in Cameroon found that no incidents of gorilla poaching occurred over three years after implementation of community control and monitoring of illegal activities. A site comparison study in Nigeria found that there were more gorillas and chimpanzees in an area managed by a community conservation organisation than in areas not managed by local communities. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1482https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1482Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:12:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement a ‘no-feeding of wild primates’ policy One controlled, before-and-after study in Japan found that several previously increasing Japanese macaque populations declined in size and productivity after limiting and then prohibiting food provisioning. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1502https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1502Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:59:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement birth control to stabilize primate community/population size We found no evidence for the effects of implementing birth control to stabilize primate community/population size 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%2F1521https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1521Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:32:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement legal protection for primate species under threat A before-and-after study in India found that following a ban on export of the species, a population of rhesus macaques increased over 17 years. Two studies in Thailand and India found that primate populations declined despite the respective species being legally protected, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Malaysia found that the majority of introduced Müller's Bornean gibbons died despite legal protection, along with other interventions. A site comparison of five sites in Cameroon found that drill populations declined in four sites but increased at one, despite legal protection. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1524https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1524Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:39:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement continuous health monitoring with permanent vet on site One controlled, before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that the population size of mountain gorillas that were continuously monitored by vets, alongside other interventions, increased by 168% over 41 years. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1554https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1554Thu, 19 Oct 2017 20:53:44 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement a health programme for local communities We found no evidence for the effects of implementing a health programme for local communities 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%2F1557https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1557Thu, 19 Oct 2017 21:07:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement ‘mosaic management’ of agriculture We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of implementing mosaic management in agricultural systems. ‘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%2F1729https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1729Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:08:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement ‘mosaic management’ when harvesting wild biological resources We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of implementing mosaic management when harvesting wild biological resources. ‘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%2F1747https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1747Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:28:42 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement biosecurity measures to prevent introductions of problematic species We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of implementing biosecurity measures to prevent introductions of problematic species. ‘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%2F1767https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1767Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:40:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Hold translocated mammals in captivity before release Fifteen studies evaluated the effects of holding translocated mammals in captivity before release. Four studies were in the USA, two were in Australia and one was in each of India, Canada, Switzerland, Croatia and Slovenia, the USA and Canada, the UK, France, Spain and South Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (13 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): Two studies (one replicated, before-and-after study) in Croatia and Slovenia and the USA found that following translocation, with time in captivity prior to release, Eurasian lynx established an increasing population and Allegheny woodrat numbers in four of six sites increased over the first two years. Reproductive success (4 studies): Four studies in Croatia and Slovenia, Spain, the USA and Canada and Australia found that following translocation, with time in captivity prior to release, Eurasian lynx established a breeding population, and swift foxes, European otters and red-tailed phascogales reproduced. Survival (10 studies): Two studies (one controlled) in the UK and USA found that being held for longer in captivity before release increased survival rates of translocated European hedgehogs and, along with release in spring increased the survival rate of translocated Canada lynx in the first year. Four of six studies in India, the USA and Canada, the USA, France, South Africa and Australia found that following translocation, with time in captivity prior to release, most swift foxes and greater Indian rhinoceroses survived for at least 12-20 months, 48% of Eurasian lynx survived for 2–11 years and red-tailed phascogales survived for at least six years. The other two studies found that most kangaroo rats and all rock hyraxes died within 5-87 days. A replicated, controlled study in Canada found that translocated swift foxes that had been held in captivity prior to release had higher post-release survival rates than did released captive-bred animals. Condition (3 studies): A randomised, controlled study in Australia found that holding translocated eastern bettongs in captivity before release did not increase their body mass after release compared to animals released directly into the wild. A controlled study the UK found that being held for longer in captivity before release, reduced weight loss after release in translocated European hedgehogs. A study in Spain found that offspring of translocated European otters that were held in captivity before release, had similar genetic diversity to donor populations. Occupancy/range (2 studies): A study in the USA found that most translocated and captive-bred mountain lions that had been held in captivity prior to release established home ranges in the release area. A study in Croatia and Slovenia and review in Switzerland found that following translocation, with time in captivity prior to release, the range of Eurasian lynx increased over time. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2458https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2458Tue, 02 Jun 2020 11:23:58 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement ‘mosaic management’ of farmlandWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on marsh/swamp vegetation, of implementing mosaic management in agricultural systems. ‘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%2F2949https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2949Mon, 01 Mar 2021 16:15:18 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement ‘mosaic management’ when harvesting wild vegetationWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of implementing mosaic management when harvesting wild vegetation from 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%2F3013https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3013Wed, 31 Mar 2021 14:20:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement biosecurity measures to prevent introductions of problematic speciesWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of implementing biosecurity measures to prevent introductions of problematic species to 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%2F3082https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3082Fri, 02 Apr 2021 17:02:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Heat tree/shrub seeds before sowing: freshwater wetlands One study evaluated the effects – on trees/shrubs typical of freshwater wetlands – of heating their seeds before sowing. The study was in a laboratory in the USA. VEGETATION COMMUNITY VEGETATION ABUNDANCE VEGETATION STRUCTURE OTHER Germination/emergence (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in a laboratory in the USA found that heating baldcypress Taxodium distichum seeds in a flame before sowing reduced their germination rate. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3373https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3373Mon, 12 Apr 2021 07:44:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Heat tree/shrub seeds before sowing: brackish/saline wetlandsWe found no studies that evaluated the effects – on trees/shrubs typical of brackish/saline wetlands – of heating their seeds before sowing. ‘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%2F3374https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3374Mon, 12 Apr 2021 07:44:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement multi-species management strategies We found no studies that evaluated the effects of implementing multi-species management strategies 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%2F3824https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3824Fri, 27 May 2022 09:02:14 +0100