Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set limits for change in sediment particle size during rock dumping We found no studies that evaluated the effects of setting limits for change in sediment particle size during rock dump 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%2F2055https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2055Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:30:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Bury pipelines instead of surface laying and rock dumping We found no studies that evaluated the effects of burying pipelines instead of surface laying and rock dumping 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%2F2056https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2056Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:33:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the amount of stabilisation material used We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the amount of stabilisation material used 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 effectsCollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2057https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2057Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:38:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use stabilisation material that can be more easily recovered at decommissioning stage We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using stabilisation material that can be more easily recovered at decommissioning stage 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%2F2058https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2058Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:39:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave pipelines and infrastructure in place following decommissioning We found no studies that evaluated the effects of leaving pipelines and infrastructure in place following decommissioning 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%2F2059https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2059Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:41:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove pipelines and infrastructure following decommissioning We found no studies that evaluated the effects of removing pipelines and infrastructure in place following decommissioning 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%2F2060https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2060Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:42:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit oil and gas drilling We found no studies that evaluated the effects of ceasing or prohibiting oil and gas drilling 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%2F2061https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2061Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:43:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the deposit of drill cuttings on the seabed We found no studies that evaluated the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the deposit of drill cuttings on the seabed 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%2F2062https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2062Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:45:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Dispose of drill cuttings on land rather than on the seabed We found no studies that evaluated the effects of disposing of drill cuttings on land rather than on the seabed 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%2F2063https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2063Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:46:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove drill cuttings after decommissioning We found no studies that evaluated the effects of removing drill cuttings after decommissioning 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%2F2064https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2064Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:47:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the thickness of drill cuttings We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the thickness of drill cuttings 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%2F2065https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2065Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:47:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Bury drill cuttings in the seabed rather than leaving them on the seabed surface  We found no studies that evaluated the effects of burying drill cuttings in the seabed rather than leaving them on the seabed surface 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%2F2066https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2066Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:49:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use water-based muds instead of oil-based muds (drilling fluids) in the drilling process We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using water-based muds instead of oil-based muds (drilling fluids) in the drilling process 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%2F2067https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2067Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:50:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Recycle or repurpose fluids used in the drilling process We found no studies that evaluated the effects of recycling or repurposing fluids used in the drilling process 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%2F2069https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2069Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:51:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set limits for change in sediment particle size during aggregate extraction We found no studies that evaluated the effects of setting limits for change in sediment particle size during aggregate extraction 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%2F2072https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2072Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:19:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore biogenic habitats (other methods) - Restore mussel beds Two studies examined the effects of restoring mussel beds (not by transplanting or translocating mussels) on mussels and mussel bed-associated subtidal benthic invertebrates. Both were in Strangford Lough (UK).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Overall community composition (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed, overall invertebrate community composition in restored plots was different to that of unrestored plots. One replicated, controlled study in the same area found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed and translocating horse mussels, overall invertebrate community composition in plots restored with shells and mussels was different to plots restored without mussels (shells only), and both were different to unrestored plots and to nearby natural horse mussel beds. Overall species richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed, overall invertebrate species diversity was lower in restored plots compared to unrestored plots, but species richness was similar. One replicated, controlled study in the same area found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed and translocating horse mussels, species richness and diversity were higher in restored plots with mussels and shells compared to plots with shells only, and similar to nearby natural horse mussel beds. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Strangford Lough found that after restoring beds of horse mussels by adding scallop shells to the seabed, overall invertebrate abundance was higher in restored plots compared to unrestored plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2247https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2247Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:33:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Refill disused borrow pits One study examined the effects of refilling disused borrow pits on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in Barnegat Bay estuary (USA).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Barnegat Bay estuary found that overall invertebrate species richness and diversity increased at a disused borrow pit after being refilled with sediments but remained lower than at a natural non-dredged site. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in Barnegat Bay estuary found that overall invertebrate abundance increased at a disused borrow pit after being refilled with sediments but remained lower than at a natural non-dredged site. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2251https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2251Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:51:36 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install a pump on or above the seabed in docks, ports, harbour, or other coastal areas to increase oxygen concentration One study examined the effects of installing a pump on or above the seabed in docks, ports, harbour, or other coastal areas to increase oxygen concentration on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in Osaka Bay (Japan).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in Osaka Bay found that installing a pump on the seabed of a port to mix seawater and increase oxygen concentration led to an increase in combined invertebrate and fish species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in Osaka Bay found that installing a pump on the seabed of a port to mix seawater and increase oxygen concentration led to an increase in combined invertebrates and fish abundance. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2252https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2252Wed, 23 Oct 2019 09:52:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Repurpose obsolete offshore structures to act as artificial reefs One study examined the effects of repurposing obsolete offshore structures on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was of a sunken oil rig in the Mediterranean Sea (Italy).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall species richness/diversity (1 study): One study in the Mediterranean Sea recorded at least 53 invertebrate species having colonised a sunken oil rig after 30 years. Species included 14 species of molluscs, 14 species of worms, and 11 species of crustaceans. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2262https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2262Wed, 23 Oct 2019 10:57:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove and relocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species before onset of impactful activities One study examined the effects of removing and relocating habitat-forming species before onset of impactful activities on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the Fal Estuary (UK).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate community composition was different in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks. Overall species richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate species richness was lower in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Fal Estuary found that invertebrate abundance was different in plots where maërl bed habitat had been removed and relayed compared to undisturbed maërl after five weeks, but similar after 44 weeks. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2264https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2264Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:00:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Transplant/release captive-bred or hatchery-reared species in predator exclusion cages One study examined the effects of transplanting or releasing hatchery-reared species in predator exclusion cages on their wild populations. The study was in the North Pacific Ocean (Canada).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled study the North Pacific Ocean found that hatchery-reared abalone transplanted in predator exclusion cages had similar survivorship following release compared to those transplanted directly onto the seabed. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2268https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2268Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:32:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate species - Translocate crustaceans One study examined the effects of translocating crustacean species on their wild populations. The study took place in the Tasman Sea (Australia).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Crustacean survival (1 study): One study in the Tasman Sea found that following translocation survival of southern rock lobsters was similar to that of resident lobsters. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2269https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2269Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:36:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate species - Translocate worms One study examined the effects of translocating worm species on their wild populations. The study was in Scottish Lochs (UK).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Worm survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Scottish Lochs found that no reef-forming red tube worm survived when translocated to a new Loch, but survival was high when worms were translocated back to its source Loch. Worm condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Scottish Lochs found that no reef-forming red tube worm survived and so no growth was recorded when translocated to a new loch, worms translocated back to its source Loch grew. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2271https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2271Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:47:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Tag species to prevent illegal fishing or harvesting One study examined the effects of tagging species to prevent illegal fishing or harvesting on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study examined the effects on the Californian abalone fishery (USA).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOURS (1 STUDY) Behaviour-change (1 study): One before-and-after study in California found no significant reduction in non-compliance with daily quotas of abalones after introducing tagging regulations. OTHER (1 STUDY) Illegal catch (1 study): One before-and-after study in California found no significant reduction in illegal takes of abalones after introducing tagging regulations. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2275https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2275Wed, 23 Oct 2019 12:50:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide educational or other training programmes about the marine environment to improve behaviours towards marine invertebrates One study examined the effects of providing educational or other training programmes about the marine environment on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study took place in Hong Kong.   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after survey study in Hong Kong found that a conservation education programme on the Asian horseshoe crab in secondary schools significantly increased the students’ behaviour towards Asian horseshoe crab conservation. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2281https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2281Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:38:47 +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