Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce agri-environment schemes to benefit wild beesFour replicated trials in Europe have shown enhanced diversity and/or abundance of foraging wild bees on land managed under various European agri-environment schemes, relative to conventionally-managed fields or field margins. These schemes were the Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas (one replicated trial), the German organic arable farming option (one replicated trial), the Dutch botanical and meadow bird agreements (one replicated trial, very low numbers of bee species) and the Scottish Rural Stewardship Scheme (one replicated trial, also included nest-searching queen bumblebees). Four replicated trials in Europe found that the number of bees and/or bee species is not enhanced on land managed under agri-environment schemes, including meadow bird agreements in wet grassland in the Netherlands, measures to protect steppe-living birds and compensation measures around a National Park in Spain, and 6 m wide grass field margin strips in England (one replicated trial for each). On a wider landscape scale, two replicated trials in the UK have found bumblebee populations were not enhanced on farmland managed under agri-environment schemes. One trial compared the reproductive success of colonies of the buff-tailed bumblebee Bombus terrestris, the other compared queen bumblebee numbers in spring in conventionally managed field margins, on farms with and without agri-environment schemes. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F24https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F24Thu, 20 May 2010 16:11:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Insulate power pylons to prevent electrocutionA single before-and-after study in the USA found the insulating power pylons significantly reduced the number of Harris’s hawks Parabuteo unicinctus electrocuted. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F268https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F268Thu, 19 Jul 2012 16:10:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Integrated aquaculture systems One replicated, controlled study in the USA reported greater growth of scallops grown next to fish farms. A study in Canada found that blue mussels absorbed waste from a salmon farm. A replicated, controlled study in Scotland reported enhanced algal growth when placed adjacent to fish farms. One study in Spain found no evidence that oyster and mussels were feeding on fish farm waste. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F932https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F932Fri, 25 Oct 2013 13:57:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install underpasses or culverts as road/railway crossing structures for bats Eight studies evaluated the effects of installing underpasses or culverts as road crossing structures for bats. Seven studies were in Europe and one in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (8 STUDIES) Use (8 studies): Eight studies (including six replicated studies) in Germany, Ireland, the UK, Australia and France found that bats used underpasses and culverts below roads, and crossed over the roads above them, in varying proportions. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that bat species adapted to cluttered habitats used small culverts and underpasses more than bat species adapted to open or edge habitats. One replicated, site comparison study in France found that the use of underpasses by five bat species was influenced by underpass type and height, road width, and the amount of forest and hedgerows in the surrounding landscape. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F976https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F976Fri, 20 Dec 2013 14:08:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce ammunition tax We found no evidence for the effects of introducing ammunition tax 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%2F1473https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1473Tue, 17 Oct 2017 16:54:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Integrate religion/local taboos into conservation education We found no evidence for the effects of integrating religion/local taboos into conservation education. '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%2F1574https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1574Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:30:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce an organism to control problematic plants One study evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of introducing an organism (other than large vertebrate grazers) to control problematic plants. The study was in a fen meadow. Plant community composition (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a fen meadow in Belgium found that introducing a parasitic plant altered the overall plant community composition. Vegetation cover (1 study): The same study found that introducing a parasitic plant reduced cover of the dominant sedge but increased moss cover. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): The same study found that introducing a parasitic plant increased overall plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1777https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1777Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:44:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce alternative treatments to reduce the use of bats in traditional medicine We found no studies that evaluated the effects of introducing alternative treatments to reduce the use of bats in traditional medecine 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%2F1975https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1975Tue, 04 Dec 2018 18:24:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install underpasses beneath ski runs One study evaluated the effects on mammals of installing underpasses beneath ski runs. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A replicated study in Australia found that boulder-filled crossings beneath ski slopes were used by seven small mammal species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2355https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2355Tue, 26 May 2020 11:59:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install tunnels/culverts/underpass under roads Twenty-five studies evaluated the effects on mammals of installing tunnels, culverts or underpass under roads. Eight studies were in the USA, four were in Australia, four were in Canada, two were in Spain, one each was in Germany, the Netherlands and South Korea and three were reviews with wide geographic coverage. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Survival (3 studies): A study in South Korea found that road sections with higher underpass density did not have fewer wildlife-vehicle collisions. A review found that most studies recorded no evidence of predation of mammals using crossings under roads. A controlled, before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that overwinter survival of mountain pygmy-possums increased after an artificial rocky corridor, which included two underpasses, was installed. BEHAVIOUR (23 STUDIES) Use (23 studies): Seventeen of 20 studies (including seven replicated studies and two reviews), in the USA, Canada, Australia, Spain, the Netherlands, and across multiple continents, found that crossing structures beneath roads were used by mammals whilst two studies found mixed results depending on species and one study found that culverts were rarely used as crossings by mammals. One of the studies found that crossing structures were used by two of four species more than expected compared to their movements through adjacent habitats. A controlled, before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that an artificial rocky corridor, which included two underpasses, was used by mountain pygmy-possums. A replicated study in Germany found that use of tunnels by fallow deer was affected by tunnel colour and design. A study in the USA found that a range of mammals used culverts, including those with shelves fastened to the sides. Behaviour change (1 study): A controlled, before-and-after, site comparison study in Australia found that after an artificial rocky corridor, which included two underpasses, was installed, dispersal of mountain pygmy-possums increased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2514https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2514Fri, 05 Jun 2020 10:17:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install tunnels/culverts/underpass under railways Six studies evaluated the effects on mammals of installing tunnels, culverts or underpass under railways. Two studies were in Spain, one was in each of Australia, Canada and the Netherlands and one reviewed literature from a range of countries. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): A review found that most studies recorded no evidence of predation in or around passages under railways or roads of mammals using those passages. BEHAVIOUR (5 STUDIES) Use (5 studies): Five studies, in Spain, Australia, Canada and the Netherlands, found that tunnels, culverts and underpasses beneath railways were used by a range of mammals including rodents, rabbits and hares, carnivores, marsupials, deer and bears. One of these studies found that existing culverts were used more than were specifically designed wildlife tunnels. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2519https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2519Mon, 08 Jun 2020 09:27:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install wildlife warning reflectors along roads Fifteen studies evaluated the effects on mammals of installing wildlife warning reflectors along roads. Nine studies were in the USA, three were in Austalia, two were in Germany and one was in Denmark. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (10 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): A before-and-after study in Australia found that when warning reflectors were installed (along with speed restrictions, reflective wildlife signs, rumble strips, wildlife escape ramps and an educational pamphlet) a small population of eastern quoll re-established in the area. Survival (10 studies): Five of eight controlled or before-and-after studies in the USA and Germany found that wildlife warning reflectors did not reduce collisions between vehicles and deer. Two studies found that vehicle-deer collisions were reduced by reflectors and one found that collisions were reduced in rural areas but increased in suburban areas. A before-and-after study in Australia found that when warning reflectors were installed (along with speed restrictions, reflective wildlife signs, rumble strips, wildlife escape ramps and an educational pamphlet) vehicle collisions with Tasmanian devils, but not eastern quolls, decreased. A review of two studies in Australia found mixed responses of mammal road deaths to wildlife warning reflectors. BEHAVIOUR (5 STUDIES) Behaviour change (5 studies): Three of four studies (including three controlled studies), in the USA, Denmark and Germany, found that wildlife warning reflectors did not cause deer to behave in ways that made collisions with vehicles less likely (such as by avoiding crossing roads). The other study found that deer initially responded to wildlife reflectors with alarm and flight but then became habituated. A replicated, controlled study in Australia found that one of four reflector model/colour combinations increased fleeing behaviour of bush wallabies when lights approached. The other combinations had no effect and none of the combinations affected red kangaroos. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2591https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2591Thu, 11 Jun 2020 09:30:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install wildlife crosswalks One study evaluated the effects on mammals of installing wildlife crosswalks. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): A replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA found that designated crossing points with barrier fencing did not significantly reduce road deaths of mule deer. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2593https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2593Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:27:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install wildlife exclusion grates/cattle grids Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of installing wildlife exclusion grates or cattle grids. All three studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Behaviour change (3 studies): Two of three studies (including two replicated, before-and-after studies), in the USA, found that steel grates largely prevented crossings by deer whilst two found that they did not prevent crossings by deer and elk or black bears. In one of the studies, only one of three designs prevented crossings. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2594https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2594Thu, 11 Jun 2020 13:35:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install traffic calming structures to reduce speeds One study evaluated the effects on mammals of installing traffic calming structures to reduce speeds. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): A before-and-after study in Australia found that following installation of barriers to create a single lane, rumble strips, reflective wildlife signs, reflective wildlife deterrents, wildlife escape ramps and production of an educational pamphlet, a small population of eastern quoll population re-established in the area. Survival (1 study): A before-and-after study in Australia found that following installation of barriers to create a single lane, rumble strips, reflective wildlife signs, reflective wildlife deterrents, wildlife escape ramps and production of an educational pamphlet, vehicle collisions with Tasmanian devils, but not eastern quolls decreased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2598https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2598Thu, 11 Jun 2020 15:10:14 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce alternative treatments to reduce the use of marine and freshwater mammals in traditional medicine We found no studies that evaluated the effects of introducing alternative treatments to reduce the use of marine and freshwater mammals in traditional medicine. ‘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%2F2783https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2783Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:19:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce alternative food sources to replace marine and freshwater mammal meat We found no studies that evaluated the effects of introducing alternative food sources to replace marine and freshwater mammal meat. ‘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%2F2784https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2784Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:21:34 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce alternative income sources to reduce marine and freshwater mammal exploitation and trade We found no studies that evaluated the effects of introducing alternative income sources to reduce marine and freshwater mammal exploitation and trade. ‘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%2F2785https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2785Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:22:40 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce alternative sources of bait to replace the use of marine and freshwater mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects of introducing alternative sources of bait to replace the use of marine and freshwater mammals. ‘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%2F2786https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2786Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:23:36 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install stormwater traps or grids We found no studies that evaluated the effects of installing stormwater traps or grids 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%2F2894https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2894Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:58:26 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Integrate marshes or swamps into developed areasWe found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of incorporating marshes or swamps into developed areas. ‘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%2F2948https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2948Mon, 01 Mar 2021 16:15:08 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install tunnels/culverts/underpasses under roads/railways Fifteen studies evaluated the effects of installing tunnels/culverts/underpasses under roads/railways on reptile populations. Four of the studies were in the USA, four were in Australia, three were in Spain, two were in Canada and one was in each of Australia, Europe and North America and South Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Survival (3 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one before-and-after study) in Australia and South Africa found a similar number of reptile road mortalities with or without culverts or wildlife underpasses. One replicated study in Spain found that the number of underpasses in an area did not affect the number of reptile road mortalities. BEHAVIOUR (12 STUDIES) Use (12 studies): Six studies (including four replicated studies and one replicated, before-and-after study) and one review in Spain, Australia, the USA and Australia, Europe and North America found that crossing structures, including tunnels, culverts, underpasses, pipes and trenches under roads and railways were used by reptiles, lizards, snakes and/or tortoises. One review in Australia, Europe and North America also found that wildlife underpasses were used by reptiles in only one of 13 studies. Three of four replicated studies (including one before-and-after study) in the USA and Canada found that desert tortoises, painted and snapping turtles and rattlesnakes and garter snakes showed a willingness to enter some, or all types of tunnel. The other study found that only 9% of painted turtles entered a culvert during a choice experiment. One site comparison study in Australia found that the area under an overpass was used by five reptile species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3508https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3508Tue, 07 Dec 2021 11:55:41 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce alternative income sources to replace hunting or harvesting of reptiles One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of introducing alternative income sources to replace hunting or harvesting of reptile populations. This study was in St Kitts1. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in St Kitts1 found that fishers that took jobs on a turtle management project reported that they ceased turtle fishing activity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3542https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3542Tue, 07 Dec 2021 17:10:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install stormwater traps to prevent garbage from reaching rivers, coastal and marine environments We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of installing stormwater traps to prevent garbage from reaching rivers, coastal and marine environments. ‘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%2F3589https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3589Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:59:03 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce a pause when hauling dredge gear We found no studies that evaluated the effects of introducing a pause when hauling dredge gear 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%2F3829https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3829Fri, 27 May 2022 10:36:30 +0100