Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide supplementary food for raptors to increase adult survivalTwo randomised, replicated and controlled studies in the USA found that nesting northern goshawks Accipiter gentilis were significantly heavier in territories supplied with supplementary food, compared with those from unfed territories.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F546https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F546Sun, 16 Sep 2012 09:12:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate raptors Six studies of three translocation programmes in the UK and the USA found that all three successfully established populations of white-tailed eagles Haliaeetus albicilla, red kites Milvus milvus and ospreys Pandion halieatus. However, the latest review of the programme to reintroduce red kites to England and Scotland reported that one of six populations was very small, with only four pairs, despite 90 birds being released. A replicated study in Spain found high survival and establishment of translocated Montagu’s harrier Circus pygargus fledglings.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F574https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F574Sun, 30 Sep 2012 14:09:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use artificial insemination in captive breeding A review of artificial insemination argued that it could be a useful tool to conservationists, but that there were challenges to its use. Deep and repeated inseminations increased fertility. Two trials from the USA found that artificial insemination of raptors achieved approximately 50% fertility or 0%. A review of a houbara bustard Chlamydotis undulata macqueenii captive breeding programme in Saudi Arabia found that artificial insemination increased fertility, whilst another review found that the highest fertility levels were achieved with inseminations of at least 10 million spermatozoa every 4–5 days.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F601https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F601Sat, 13 Oct 2012 16:16:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide supplementary food after release Three studies from found that malleefowl Leipoa ocellata, Andean condors Vultur gryphus and pink pigeons Nesoenas mayeri used supplementary food when it was provided after release. A replicated, controlled study from Australia found that malleefowl had higher survival when supplied with supplementary food. A study in Peru found that supplementary food could be used to increase the foraging range of condors after release, or to guide them back to suitable feeding areas.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F639https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F639Sun, 14 Oct 2012 23:54:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pay farmers to cover the cost of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes) Twenty-six studies from four European countries (including one UK systematic review and three European reviews) looked at the effects of agri-environment schemes on birds. Twenty-four studies (including one systematic review, six site comparisons and nine reviews) found increases in population size, density or more favourable population trends of some or all birds studied on sites with agri-environment schemes compared to non-scheme sites (some of these differences were seasonal). Eleven studies (including one systematic review and four reviews) found negative or no effects. One UK study found higher numbers of some birds where higher tier management was in place, another UK study found no difference between Entry Level or Higher Level Stewardship Scheme fields. One study from the Netherlands found that not all agri-environment scheme agreements were sited in ideal locations for black-tailed godwit. Eleven studies from five European countries (including three replicated paired site comparisons and two reviews) looked at the effects of agri-environment schemes on plants. Seven studies (including three replicated paired site comparisons and one European review) found agri-environment schemes maintained or had little or no effect on plants, plant diversity or species richness. Three studies found increases in plant species richness in areas with agri-environment schemes, two found decreases. A replicated site comparison study from Estonia found higher flower abundance on farms with agri-environment schemes in two out of four areas. A review found Environmentally Sensitive Areas in England had contributed to halting the loss of semi-natural grassland habitats but were less effective at enhancing or restoring grassland biodiversity. Ten studies from three European countries (including two replicated paired site comparisons and a review) looked at the effects of agri-environment schemes on invertebrates. Six studies (including two replicated site comparisons) showed agri-environment schemes maintained or had little or no effect on some invertebrates in terms of diversity, abundance, species richness or bee colony growth. Five studies found increases in abundance or species richness of some invertebrates. A UK study found agri-environment scheme prescriptions had a local but not a landscape-scale effect on bee numbers. Four studies (including two replicated site comparisons and a review) from the UK looked at the effects of agri-environment schemes on mammals. One study found positive effects, three studies found mixed effects in different regions or for different species. Three of the studies above found higher numbers of wildlife on land before agri-environment schemes were introduced. However two studies collecting baseline data found no difference in the overall number of birds or earthworms and soil microorganisms between areas with and without agri-environment schemes. A review found two out of three agri-environment schemes in Europe benefited wildlife. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F700https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F700Fri, 21 Dec 2012 14:38:13 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release translocated mammals into fenced areas Twenty-four studies evaluated the effects of releasing translocated mammals into fenced areas. Nine studies were in Australia, six studies were in South Africa, two studies were in the USA and one study was in each of India, China, Spain, Hungary, Namibia and South Africa and France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (22 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Five studies (one replicated) in the USA, Australia and South Africa found that following translocation into fenced areas, 18 African elephant populations, tule elk, brushtail possum and elk and bison increased in number and following eradiation of invasive species a population of translocated and released captive-bred burrowing bettongs increased. A replicated, controlled study in Spain found that the abundance of translocated European rabbits was higher in areas fenced to exclude predators than unfenced areas. Reproductive success (7 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in France and Spain found that after translocation, reproductive success of common hamsters and European rabbits was higher inside than outside fenced areas or warrens. Four studies (one replicated, controlled) in China and South Africa found that following translocation into a fenced area, Père David's deer, lions, translocated and captive-bred African wild dogs and one of two groups of Cape buffalo reproduced. A study in Australia found that four of five mammal populations released into a predator-free enclosure and one population released into a predator-reduced enclosure reproduced, whereas two populations released into an unfenced area with ongoing predator management did not survive to breed. Survival (13 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in Spain and France found that after translocation, survival rates of common hamsters and European rabbits were higher inside than outside fenced areas or warrens. A study in Australia found that four of five mammal populations released into a predator-free enclosure and one population released into a predator-reduced enclosure survived, whereas two populations released into an unfenced area with ongoing predator management did not persist. Five studies in India, China, South Africa, Namibia and South Africa and Australia found that following translocation into fenced areas, most black rhinoceroses and greater Indian rhinoceroses, Père David's deer, most oribi and offspring of translocated golden bandicoots survived for between one and 10 years. Two studies in Australia found that only two of five translocated numbats survived over seven months and western barred bandicoots did not persist. A study in South Africa found that translocated and captive-bred African wild dogs released into fenced reserves in family groups had high survival rates. A study in Australia found that following release into fenced areas, a translocated population of red-tailed phascogales survived longer than a released captive-bred population. A replicated, controlled study in South Africa found that after translocation to a fenced reserve with holding pens, survival of released lions was higher than that of resident lions. Condition (3 studies): A replicated, before-and-after study in Australia found that eastern bettongs translocated into fenced predator proof enclosures increased in body weight post-release, with and without supplementary food. A replicated study in South Africa found that following translocation into fenced reserves, stress hormone levels of African elephants declined over time. A study in Australia found that golden bandicoots descended from a population translocated into a fenced area free from non-native predators, maintained genetic diversity relative to the founder and source populations. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): A site comparison study in Australia found that following translocation into a predator-free fenced area, woylies developed home ranges similar in size to those of an established population outside the enclosure. A study in Hungary found that one fifth of translocated European ground squirrels released into a fenced area with artificial burrows remained in the area after release. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2467https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2467Wed, 03 Jun 2020 09:40:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release captive-bred individuals to re-establish or boost populations in native range Thirty-one studies evaluated the effects of releasing captive-bred mammals to establish or boost populations in their native range. Seven studies were in the USA, three were in Australia and Italy, two studies were in each of Canada, Sweden, Saudi Arabia, the UK, the Netherlands and South Africa and one study was in each of France, Africa, Europe, and North America, Estonia, the USA and Mexico, Poland and China. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (30 STUDIES) Abundance (7 studies): Five of five studies (one replicated) and two reviews in Saudi Arabia, Australia, the USA, South Africa, France, the Netherlands and China found that following release of captive-bred (or in one case captive-reared, or including translocated) animals, populations of mountain gazelles, Corsican red deer, Père David's deer, Eurasian otters and swift foxes increased. The two reviews found that following release of mainly translocated but some captive-bred large carnivores, populations of four of six species increased, and over half of mammal release programmes were considered successful. Reproductive success (5 studies): Four studies (one replicated) in Saudi Arabia, the UK and the Netherlands found that released captive-bred (and in some cases some wild-born translocated) mountain gazelles, dormice and some Eurasian otters reproduced successfully and female Arabian oryx reproduced successfully regardless of prior breeding experience. A controlled study in Italy found that released captive-born Apennine chamois reproduced in similar numbers to wild-caught translocated chamois. Survival (24 studies): Four of three controlled studies (two replicated) and two reviews in Canada, Canada and the USA, Sweden, Italy and across the world found that released captive-bred swift foxes, European otters and mammals from a review of 49 studies had lower post-release survival rates than did wild-born translocated animals. The other study found that released captive-born Apennine chamois survived in similar numbers to wild-caught translocated chamois. Three studies (one replicated) in the USA and Canada found that released captive-born Key Largo woodrats, Vancouver Island marmots and swift fox pups had lower survival rates than wild-born, wild-living animals. One of the studies also found that Vancouver Island marmots released at two years old were more likely to survive than those released as yearlings. Eleven studies (three replicated) in Italy, Sweden, the UK, Estonia, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Australia and the USA found that following the release of captive-bred (and in some cases some wild-born translocated) animals, Arabian oryx, populations of European otters, European mink and mountain gazelle survived for 2-11 years, roe deer and over a third of brush-tailed rock-wallabies, black-footed ferrets and brown hares survived for 0.5-24 months and dormice populations survived three months to over seven years. A review in Australia found that release programmes for macropod species resulted in successful establishment of populations in 61% of cases and that 40% survived over five years, and another review in Australia found that over half of programmes were considered successful. Two studies and a review in the USA, USA and Mexico and South Africa found that over 40% of released captive-bred American black bears were killed or had to be removed, only one of 10 oribi survived over two years and that most black-footed ferret releases were unsuccessful at maintaining a population. BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Use (3 studies): Two studies in the USA and Australia found that following release, most captive-bred and translocated mountain lions that had been held in captivity prior to release and most released captive-bred brush-tailed rock-wallabies established stable home ranges. A controlled study in Italy found that released captive-born Apennine chamois remained closer to the release site than released wild-caught translocated chamois. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2476https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2476Thu, 04 Jun 2020 10:11:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide artificial refuges/breeding sites Eight studies evaluated the effects on mammals of providing artificial refuges/breeding sites. Two studies were in each of the USA, Spain and Portugal and one was in each of Argentina and Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Two studies (one controlled), in Spain and Portugal, found that artificial warrens increased European rabbit abundance. A replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in Argentina found that artificial refuges did not increase abundances of small vesper mice or Azara's grass mice. Survival (1 study): A study in USA found that artificial escape dens increased swift fox survival rates. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): Four studies (two replicated), in Australia, Spain, Portugal and the USA, found that artificial refuges, warrens or nest structures were used by fat-tailed dunnarts, European rabbits, and Key Largo woodrats and Key Largo cotton mice. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2583https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2583Wed, 10 Jun 2020 15:06:41 +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
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