Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Eradicate existing populations of invasive non-native speciesOne replicated trial in Louisiana, USA, demonstrated that colonies of invasive Africanized honey bees Apis mellifera can be killed by providing insecticide (acephate)-laced syrup for 30 minutes. One replicated controlled before-and-after trial attempted to eradicate European buff-tailed bumblebees Bombus terrestris from trial sites in Japan by catching and killing foraging bees. The treatment led to an increase in numbers of two native bumblebee species, but did not eradicate B. terrestris.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F38https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F38Thu, 20 May 2010 04:54:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ensure commercial hives/nests are disease freeOne randomised controlled trial in Canada found that the antibiotic fumagillin is not effective against Nosema bombi infection in managed colonies of the western bumblebee Bombus occidentalis. One replicated controlled trial in South Korea found that Indian meal moth Plodia interpunctella in commercial bumblebee colonies can be controlled with the insect pathogen Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) Aizawai strain, at a strength of 1 g Bt/litre of water.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F42https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F42Thu, 20 May 2010 11:17:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enhance bee taxonomy skills through higher education and training We have captured no evidence for the effects of developing taxonomy skills on bee conservation. '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%2F57https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F57Thu, 20 May 2010 20:44:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Erect predator-proof fencing around important breeding sites for waders We have captured no evidence for the effects of erecting predator-proof fencing around important breeding sites for waders 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%2F109https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F109Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:06:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ensure connectivity between habitat patches A replicated, controlled study in Canada found significantly higher abundances of some birds, but not forest specialists, in forest patches connected to a continuous area of forest, than in isolated patches. Another study of the same system found evidence that corridors were used by some bird species more than clearcuts between patches, although corridors near cut forest were not used more than those near uncut stands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F160https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F160Tue, 15 May 2012 14:47:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enhance bird taxonomy skills through higher education and training We found no evidence for the effects of enhancing bird taxonomy skills 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%2F164https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F164Sat, 19 May 2012 20:10:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ensure translocated birds are familiar with each other before releaseTwo controlled trials from New Zealand found no evidence that translocating birds which were familiar with each other was more likely to succeed than translocating unfamiliar birds.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F582https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F582Sat, 06 Oct 2012 21:23:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ensure genetic variation to increase translocation success We did not find any studies on the effects of ensuring genetic variation in translocated birds. '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%2F583https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F583Sat, 06 Oct 2012 21:25:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish fallowing to reduce parasites/diseaseA study in Scotland recorded lower lice numbers on Atlantic salmon in cages using a fallowing system. Another study in Australia found no difference in mortality from Amoebic Gill Disease in cages where a fallowing system had been used.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1026https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1026Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:41:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enhance soil compaction Three studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled) in Canada and the USA found that soil compaction decreased tree regeneration height and density. Two of the studies found it increased understory plant cover and density, while one found it decreased understory plant species richness.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1253https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1253Fri, 03 Jun 2016 14:05:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ensure that researchers/tourists are up-to-date with vaccinations and healthy One controlled study in Malaysia found that a population of reintroduced orangutans decreased by 33% over 33 years despite staff and volunteers having received medical checks, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and Congo found that mountain gorilla numbers increased by 168% over 41 years while sick/unwell researchers and visitors were not allowed to visit gorillas, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1546https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1546Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:30:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish areas for conservation which are not protected by national or international legislation (e.g. private sector standards & codes) One before-and-after study in Rwanda and Republic of Congo found that mountain gorilla numbers increased by 15% over five years after the implementation of a conservation project funded by a consortium of organizations, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Belize found that black howler monkey numbers increased by 138% over 13 years after being protected by the local community, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1579https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1579Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:57:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enhance natural habitat features to improve landscape connectivity to allow for range shifts of bats We found no studies that evaluated the effects of enhancing natural habitat features to improve landscape connectivity to allow for range shifts of 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%2F2025https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2025Wed, 05 Dec 2018 18:14:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2200https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2200Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:11:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish community-based fisheries management One study examined the effects of establishing community-based fisheries management on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in the Foveaux Straight (New Zealand).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Mollusc abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Foveaux Straight found that a customary fisheries area where management was community-based had more New Zealand scallops compared to a protected area prohibiting all fishing and an area allowing recreational harvest. Mollusc condition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the Foveaux Straight found that a customary fisheries area where management was community-based, tended to have smaller New Zealand scallops compared to a protected area prohibiting all fishing and an area allowing recreational harvest. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2242https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2242Wed, 23 Oct 2019 08:39:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish deviation ponds in fish farms to reduce predation of fish stock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of establishing deviation ponds in fish farms to reduce predation of fish stock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. 'We found no studies' means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2455https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2455Tue, 02 Jun 2020 11:13:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish ‘move-on rules’ for fishing vessels if mammals are encountered One study evaluated the effects on marine mammals of establishing move-on rules for fishing vessels if mammals are encountered. The study was in the Great Australian Bight (Australia). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One before-and-after study in the Great Australian Bight found that introducing measures to delay or relocate fishing if dolphins were encountered, along with releasing trapped dolphins, resulted in fewer short-beaked common dolphins being encircled and killed. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2790https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2790Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:29:13 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing aquaculture to extract the nutrients from run-offs on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2883https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2883Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:47:05 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Equip ports with dedicated fishing gear disposal facilities We found no studies that evaluated the effects of equipping ports with dedicated fishing gear disposal facilities 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%2F2888https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2888Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:50:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish a network of legally protected areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing a network of legally protected areas on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2913https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2913Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:23:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Erect fencing to exclude reptiles from construction zones We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of erecting fencing to exclude reptiles from construction zones. ‘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%2F3481https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3481Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:04:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish emergency plans for oil spills We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of establishing emergency plans for oil spills. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3573https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3573Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:14:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish aquaculture facilities to extract the nutrients from agricultural run-off We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of establishing aquaculture facilities to extract the nutrients from agricultural run-off. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3587https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3587Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:52:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish “green infrastructure” in urban areas One study evaluated the effects of establishing “green infrastructure in urban areas on butterflies and moths. This study was in Taiwan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Taiwan found that green roofs had a lower species richness of butterflies than urban parks. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Taiwan found that green roofs had a lower abundance of butterflies than urban parks, but the abundance was higher on older green roofs with more nectar plant species in a larger area. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3837https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3837Mon, 04 Jul 2022 15:32:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enhance natural habitat to improve landscape connectivity to allow for range shifts We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of enhancing natural habitat to improve landscape connectivity and allow for range shifts. ‘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%2F3857https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3857Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:29:10 +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