Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate habitat-forming (biogenic) species - Translocate reef-forming corals Two studies examined the effects of translocating habitat-forming corals on associated subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One was in Tayabas Bay (Philippines) and one in the South China Sea (Philippines).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the South China Sea found that following coral translocation associated invertebrate communities did not change and remained similar to plots without translocated corals. Overall richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the South China Sea found that following coral translocation richness of associated invertebrates increased but also increased in plots without corals, likely due to spill-over. One replicated, controlled study in Tayabas Bay found that richness of associated invertebrates was higher in plots with translocated corals than in plots without. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the South China Sea found that following coral translocation abundance of associated invertebrates increased and became higher than in plots without translocated corals. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2246https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2246Wed, 23 Oct 2019 08:52:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Locate artificial reefs near aquaculture systems to benefit from nutrient run-offs Two studies examined the effects of locating artificial reefs near aquaculture systems to benefit from nutrient run-offs on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the Gulf of Aqaba (Israel and Jordan), and one in the Mediterranean Sea (Spain).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall community composition (1 study): One controlled study in the Mediterranean Sea found that an artificial reef located under aquaculture cages had similar invertebrate community composition to artificial reefs located at sites without aquaculture cages. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One controlled study in the Gulf of Aqaba found that an artificial reef located at an aquaculture site had similar invertebrate biomass growing on it compared to an artificial reef located at a site without aquaculture cages. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2260https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2260Wed, 23 Oct 2019 10:51:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Offset habitat loss from human activity by restoring or creating habitats elsewhere Two studies examined the effects of offsetting habitat loss from human activity by restoring or creating habitats elsewhere on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the Delaware Bay (USA), the other in the Persian Gulf (Kuwait).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One study in the Persian Gulf found that an area of low ecological value restored to offset habitat lost to land reclamation was colonized by over 198 invertebrate species. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Biological production (1 study): One study in Delaware Bay found that an artificial reef built to offset lost soft-sediment habitat had higher annual secondary production/unit area from sessile invertebrates, but lower total annual secondary production, compared to habitat similar to that lost. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2265https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2265Wed, 23 Oct 2019 11:03:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Place orphaned or abandoned wild young with captive foster parents Two studies evaluated the effects of placing orphaned or abandoned wild young with captive foster parents. One study was in Canada and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): A controlled study in the USA found that stranded sea otter pups reared in captivity by foster mothers had higher post-release survival than did unfostered pups reared mostly alone, and similar survival to wild pups. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Behaviour change (2 studies): A study in Canada found that a captive white-tailed deer adopted a wild orphaned fawn. A controlled study in the USA found that stranded sea otter pups reared in captivity by foster mothers began foraging earlier than did unfostered pups reared mostly alone.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2364https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2364Tue, 26 May 2020 15:47:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Deploy fishing gear at selected times (day/night) to avoid unwanted species Two studies examined the effect of deploying fishing gear at selected times on marine fish populations. Both studies were in the South Pacific Ocean (Lake Wooloweyah, Australia).  COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES)   Reduction of unwanted catch (2 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies in the South Pacific Ocean found that trawling for prawns during the day reduced the overall catch of unwanted fish by number, but not weight, compared to usual night trawling, and the effect differed by species. The other study found that powered handlining in the day avoided catches of Harrison’s dogfish at shallower, but not deeper seamounts, compared to the night.    Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2684https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2684Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:40:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish handling and release protocols in non-recreational fisheries Two studies examined the effects of establishing handling and release protocols in non-recreational fisheries on marine fish populations. One study was in the Atlantic Ocean (West Africa) and one was in the South Pacific Ocean (Australia).  COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One study in the Atlantic Ocean reported that tracked whale sharks released from purse seines using an enhanced protocol survived for at least 21 days, and post-release movements appeared normal. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Behaviour change (2 studies): One study in the Pacific Ocean found that after release protocols (minimal handling and air exposure), reef fish returned more quickly to a reef or the seabed after release, compared to higher stress handling and longer air exposure. One study in the Atlantic Ocean reported that the post-release movements of tracked whale sharks released from purse seines using an enhanced protocol appeared normal. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2692https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2692Wed, 02 Dec 2020 15:51:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set catch limits or quotas for non-targeted commercial catch Two studies examined the effects of setting catch limits or quotas for non-targeted commercial fish species on marine fish populations. One review was in the North Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and one study was in the Pacific Ocean (Canada).  COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction of unwanted catch (2 studies): One review in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans found that setting catch limits or quotas for non-commercially targeted fish reduced unwanted catch in two of three cases. One before-and-after study in the Pacific Ocean found that catch limits for non-target commercial species reduced the amount of unwanted halibut, but a previous quota system based on the whole catch (individual transferrable quotas) did not. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2693https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2693Wed, 02 Dec 2020 16:15:52 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use artificial light on fishing gear Two studies examined the effects of using artificial light on fishing gear on marine fish populations. One study was in the Pacific Ocean (USA) and one in the Barents Sea (Norway).  COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction of unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in the Pacific Ocean found that shrimp trawl nets with artificial lights caught fewer unwanted fish when they were fitted to the fishing line, but not to a size-sorting grid, compared to a conventional trawl. Improved size-selectivity of fishing gear (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Barents Sea found that size-selectivity of long rough dab, Atlantic cod, haddock and redfish was not improved by the presence of LED lights on a size-sorting grid. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2695https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2695Wed, 02 Dec 2020 17:04:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify a bottom trawl to raise parts of the gear off the seabed during fishing Two studies examined the effects of modifying a bottom trawl to raise parts of the gear off the seabed during fishing on marine fish populations. One study was in the Gulf of Carpentaria (Australia) and one was in the Atlantic Ocean (USA).  COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction of unwanted catch (2 studies): Two replicated studies (one randomized and both controlled) in the Gulf of Carpentaria and the Atlantic Ocean found that bottom trawls with parts of the gear raised off the seabed caught fewer unwanted sharks, other elasmobranchs and fish and fewer of three of seven unwanted fish species compared to conventional trawls. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2708https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2708Mon, 28 Dec 2020 15:51:05 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify design or arrangement of tickler chains/chain mats in a bottom trawl Two studies examined the effects of modifying the design or arrangement of tickler chains in a bottom trawl on marine fish populations. One was in the North Sea (Netherlands/UK) and one was in the Atlantic Ocean (Scotland).  COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction of unwanted catch (2 studies): One of two replicated, paired, controlled studies in the North Sea and Atlantic Ocean found that removing the tickler chain from a trawl reduced catches of non-commercial target skates/rays and sharks, and individuals were larger, compared to trawling with the chain. The study also found that catches of commercial target species were typically unaffected. The other study found that two modified tickler chain arrangements did not reduce discarded fish catch compared to a standard arrangement. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2709https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2709Mon, 28 Dec 2020 15:58:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use a separator trawl Two studies examined the effect of using a separator trawl on marine fish populations. One study was in the North Sea (UK) and the other in the Atlantic Ocean (Portugal).  COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction of unwanted catch (2 studies): One replicated, randomized study in the North Sea found that a separator trawl separated unwanted cod from target fish species into the lower codend, where a larger mesh size allowed more unwanted smaller cod to escape capture. One replicated study in the Atlantic Ocean found that a separator trawl fitted with a square-mesh escape panel caught less of one of two unwanted fish species in a crustacean fishery. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2711https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2711Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:27:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate mammals away from aquaculture systems to reduce human-wildlife conflict Two studies evaluated the effects of translocating mammals away from aquaculture systems to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Both studies were in the Tasman Sea and one was also in the Southern Ocean (Tasmania). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)       OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): Two studies (including one site comparison study) in the Tasman Sea (one also in the Southern Ocean) found that more than half or nearly all of Australian and New Zealand fur seals translocated away from salmon farms returned. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2776https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2776Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:43:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set and enforce vessel speed limits Two studies evaluated the effects on marine and freshwater mammals of setting and enforcing vessel speed limits. One study was in the Indian River estuarine system (USA) and the other in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): One before-and-after study in the Indian River estuarine system found similar numbers of manatee deaths before and after vessel speed limits were set in ‘zones’, but fewer deaths were recorded after speed limits were set and enforced in all areas. One before-and-after study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that setting vessel speed limits during specific periods in key habitats resulted in fewer North Atlantic right whale deaths caused by collisions. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2777https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2777Thu, 04 Feb 2021 15:48:43 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase visual detectability of fishing gear for mammals Two studies evaluated the effects on marine mammals of increasing the visual detectability of fishing gear for mammals. One study was in the Gulf of St. Lawrence (Canada) and one was in Cape Cod Bay (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Behaviour change (2 studies): One study in the Gulf of St. Lawrence found that minke whales approached white ropes more slowly and changed their bearing more when approaching black ropes compared to ropes of other colours. One study in Cape Cod Bay found that simulated ropes painted red or orange were detected by North Atlantic right whales at greater distances than green but not black ropes, and more whales collided with green ropes than the other three rope colours. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2805https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2805Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:16:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Attach acoustically reflective objects to fishing gear Two studies evaluated the effects on marine mammals of attaching acoustically reflective objects to fishing gear. One study was in the Timor Sea and Arafura Sea (Australia) and one was in the Gulf of Alaska (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction in entanglements/unwanted catch (1 study): One controlled study in the Timor Sea and Arafura Sea found that attaching metallic bead chains to fishing nets did not reduce the number of dolphin entanglements. Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): One controlled study in the Gulf of Alaska found that attaching acrylic beads next to fishing hooks did not reduce predation on fish catches by sperm whales. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2806https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2806Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:20:11 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use baited lines instead of nets for shark control Two studies evaluated the effects on marine mammals of using baited lines instead of nets for shark control. One study was in the Indian Ocean (South Africa) and one in the South Pacific Ocean (Australia). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One site comparison study in the South Pacific Ocean found that using baited lines instead of nets increased the survival of entangled common and bottlenose dolphins. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction in entanglements/unwanted catch (2 studies): Two site comparison studies in the Indian Ocean and South Pacific Ocean found that baited lines used for shark control had fewer entanglements of dolphins, whales and dugongs than nets. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2856https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2856Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:13:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove derelict fishing gear from mammals found entangled Two studies evaluated the effects of removing derelict fishing gear from mammals found entangled. One study was in the North Pacific Ocean (USA) and one in the North Atlantic Ocean (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (1 study): One review in the North Pacific Ocean found that after removing derelict fishing gear from Hawaiian monk seals, along with at least seven other interventions to enhance survival, more than a quarter of the seals reproduced. Survival (2 studies): One review in the North Pacific Ocean found that removing derelict fishing gear from Hawaiian monk seals, along with at least seven other interventions to enhance survival, resulted in more than a quarter of the seals surviving. One review in the North Atlantic Ocean found that three common bottlenose dolphins survived for at least 1–4 years after they were disentangled from derelict fishing gear and released. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2892https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2892Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:56:01 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit activities that cause disturbance in sensitive areas for marine and freshwater mammals Two studies evaluated the effects of prohibiting activities that cause disturbance in sensitive areas for marine mammals. One study was in the Kattegat Sea (Denmark) and one in the Indian Ocean (Australia). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in the Kattegat sea found that harbour porpoise activity increased at a stony reef after fishing was prohibited and the reef was restored with boulders. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One site comparison study in the Indian Ocean found that a beach where human access was fully prohibited had fewer Australian sea lions showing aggression or retreating compared to a beach where access was partly prohibited. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2917https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2917Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:33:04 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release captive-bred marine and freshwater mammals to re-establish or boost native populations Two studies evaluated the effects of releasing captive-bred marine and freshwater mammals to re-establish or boost native populations. One study was in the Porto de Pedras estuary (Brazil) and one in water bodies in Florida (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): Two studies in the Porto de Pedras estuary and water bodies in Florida found that two of three Antillean manatees and two of 14 Florida manatees born in captivity and released into the wild survived for at least one year without further intervention. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2933https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2933Tue, 09 Feb 2021 11:36:19 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify vessels to reduce or prevent injuries to reptiles from collisions Two studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of modifying vessels to reduce or prevent injuries to reptiles from collisions. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): One controlled study found that using a horizontal-fin propeller guard or a cage propeller guard did not reduce catastrophic injuries to artificial loggerhead turtle shells compared to using no guard, but that the types of injuries sustained were different. One controlled study found that using a jet drive outboard motor reduced catastrophic injuries to artificial loggerhead turtle shells compared to using a standard outboard motor. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3537https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3537Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:07:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce duration of time fishing gear is in the water Two studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of reducing the duration of time fishing gear is in the water. One study was in the Gulf of Gabès (Tunisia) and one was in the Atlantic and North Pacific. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One randomized study in the Gulf of Gabès found that retrieving longlines immediately resulted in fewer loggerhead turtles dying compared to when line retrieval was delayed. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (2 studies): One randomized study in the Gulf of Gabès and one replicated study in the Atlantic and North Pacific found that the amount of time that longlines were in the water for did not affect the number of loggerhead turtles or leatherback and loggerhead turtles caught. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3552https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3552Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:18:02 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use visual deterrents on fishing gear Two studies evaluated the effects of using visual deterrents on fishing gear on reptile populations. One study was off the coast of Mexico and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that shark-shaped and spherical deterrents had mixed effects on a range of captive loggerhead turtle behaviours. OTHER (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch: (1 study): One replicated, controlled study off the coast of Mexico found that gillnets with floating shark shapes attached to them caught fewer green turtles than unmodified nets. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3553https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3553Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:30:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-offset hooks Two studies evaluated the effects of using non-offset hooks on reptile populations. One study was off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica and one was in the north-east Atlantic. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled, paired study in the north-east Atlantic Ocean found that mortality of leatherback turtles was similar when caught with non-offset hooks or offset hooks. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (2 studies): One of two replicated, paired studies (including one controlled study) off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica and in the north-east Atlantic found that non-offset circle hooks caught a similar number of olive ridley and green turtles compared to offset circle hooks in a shallow-set longline fishery. The other study found that non-offset G-style circle hooks caught fewer leatherback and hard-shell turtles compared to offset Gt-style circle hooks or offset J-hooks in a longline swordfish fishery. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3571https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3571Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:13:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use larger hooks Two studies evaluated the effects of using larger hooks on reptile populations. One study was in the USA and one was in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One study in the USA of captive loggerhead turtles found that turtles were less likely to attempt to swallow larger circle hooks than smaller ones. OTHER (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated study in the Eastern Pacific Ocean found that olive ridley turtles were less likely to be caught by swallowing larger hooks than smaller ones. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3578https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3578Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:21:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use dyed bait Two studies evaluated the effects of using dyed bait on reptile populations. One study was in Costa Rica and one was in the North Pacific. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One randomized, paired, controlled study in Costa Rica found that loggerhead and Kemp’s ridley turtles showed mixed preferences for dyed compared to non-dyed bait in captive trials. OTHER (2 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (2 studies): Two paired studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in Costa Rica and the North Pacific found that hooks with dyed bait caught a similar number of olive ridley and green turtles and loggerhead turtles compared to hooks with non-dyed bait. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3611https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3611Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:46:51 +0000
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
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.

Accept & continue