Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use fencing to prevent reptiles from accessing facilities We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using fencing to prevent reptiles from accessing facilities. ‘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%2F3499https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3499Mon, 06 Dec 2021 16:08:27 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use circle hooks instead of J-hooks Eleven studies evaluated the effects of using circle hooks instead of J-hooks on reptile populations. Five studies were in the Atlantic, three were in the Pacific and one study was in each of the Mediterranean, the Atlantic and North Pacific and the western North Atlantic, Azores, Gulf of Mexico and Ecuador. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Survival (3 studies): Two studies (including one replicated, controlled, paired study) off the coast of Hawaii and in the north-east Atlantic Ocean found that survival of loggerhead and leatherback turtles and leatherback and hard-shell sea turtles caught by circle hooks or J-hooks was similar. One review of studies in five pelagic longline fisheries found that fewer sea turtles died when circle hooks were used compared to J-hooks in four of five fisheries. Condition (3 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in the Mediterranean Sea and south-western Atlantic Ocean found that fewer immature loggerhead turtles and loggerhead turtles swallowed circle hooks compared to J-hooks. One before-and-after study off the coast of Hawaii found that a lower percentage of loggerhead and leatherback turtles were deeply hooked by circle hooks compared to J-hooks. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (11 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (11 studies): Seven of 10 studies (including six replicated, controlled studies) in the Pacific, Atlantic, Atlantic and North Pacific and Mediterranean and one review of studies in five pelagic longline fisheries found that circle hooks or circle hooks and tuna hooks caught fewer sea turtles than J-hooks, or that non-offset G-style circle hooks caught fewer leatherback and hard-shell sea turtles that offset J-Hooks. One of these studies also found that circle hooks caught slightly larger loggerhead turtles than J-hooks, and one also found that offset Gt-style circle hooks caught a similar number of leatherback and hard-shell sea turtles compared to offset J-hooks. One study found that circle hooks caught a similar number of leatherback, green and olive ridley turtles compared to J-hooks. One study found that fish-baited circle hooks caught fewer loggerhead and leatherback turtles than squid-baited J-hooks. The review found mixed effects of using circle hooks compared to J-hooks on unwanted catch of sea turtles depending on the fishery. The other study found mixed effects of using circle hooks or J-hooks in combination with squid or fish bait on the number of loggerhead and leatherback turtles that were caught. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3559https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3559Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:21:43 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use biodegradable materials to construct fishing gear to prevent entanglement of reptiles in lost or abandoned gear We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using biodegradable materials to construct fishing gear to prevent entanglement of reptiles in lost or abandoned gear. ‘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%2F3565https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3565Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:56:52 +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 non-ringed hooks One study evaluated the effects of using non-ringed hooks on reptile populations. This study was in the Mediterranean. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch (1 study): One replicated, paired study in the Mediterranean found that when non-ringed circle hooks were used in a swordfish longline fishery fewer loggerhead turtles were caught compared to when ringed hooks were used. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3576https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3576Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:18:56 +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 catch and hook protection devices We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using catch and hook protection devices on reptile 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%2F3582https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3582Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:27:59 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use lower profile gillnets with longer/no tie-downs We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using lower profile gillnets with longer/no tie-downs. ‘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%2F3609https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3609Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:42:43 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use bindings to keep trawl nets closed until they have sunk below the water surface We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using bindings to keep trawl nets closed until they have sunk below the water surface. ‘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%2F3610https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3610Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:45:18 +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 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use low intensity lighting Four studies evaluated the effects of using low intensity lighting on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA1-3 and one was in Malaysia4. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Behaviour change (4 studies): One replicated, controlled study in the USA1 found that reducing the intensity of light sources did not improve loggerhead turtle hatchling seaward orientation. One replicated, site comparison study in Malaysia4 found that green turtle hatchlings in low and moderate ambient artificial light took more direct crawl routes to the sea than hatchlings released in high ambient artificial light. One replicated, controlled study in the USA3 found that in laboratory trials, loggerhead and green turtle hatchlings showed reduced preference for lower intensity light sources. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA2 found mixed effects of embedding streetlights in the road on seaward orientation of loggerhead turtle hatchlings compared to overhead lighting depending on shading by shrubs and weather and lunar phase. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3623https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3623Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:34:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use patch retention harvesting instead of clearcutting We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using patch retention harvesting instead of clearcutting on reptile 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%2F3634https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3634Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:49:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use nest covers to protect against human disturbance Two studies evaluated the effects of using nest covers to protect against human disturbance on reptiles. One study was in the USA and one was in Greece. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (2 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies (including one paired study) in the USA and Greece found that loggerhead turtle nests that were covered with cages had similar hatching success compared to nests that were not covered. The other study found mixed effects of cages on hatching success of loggerhead turtle nests. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3645https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3645Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:32:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning: Forest, open woodland & savanna Twenty-eight studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in forest, open woodland and savanna on reptile populations. Twenty-four studies were in the USA, three were in Australia and one was in Brazil. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (12 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that in areas with prescribed burning, reptile assemblages became similar to more pristine areas that had historically experienced frequent fires. Richness/diversity (11 studies): Seven studies (including two replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Australia found that burned areas had similar reptile species richness compared to unburned areas. One of the studies also found that burned areas had higher reptile diversity than unburned areas. Two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in Australia and the USA found that reptile species richness remained similar with time since burning. One of two studies (including one replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study) in the USA found that burned areas had higher combined reptile and amphibian species richness than unburned areas. The other study found that burned areas had similar combined reptile and amphibian species richness and diversity compared to unburned areas. POPULATION RESPONSE (26 STUDIES) Abundance (23 studies): Nine of 21 studies (including four replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Australia found that burning had mixed effects on the abundance of reptiles, six-lined racerunners and western yellow-bellied racer snakes. Six studies found that burned areas had a higher abundance of reptiles, lizards, black racer snakes and more active gopher tortoise burrows compared to unburned areas. The other six studies found that burned areas had a similar abundance of reptiles, lizards and gopher tortoise burrows compared to unburned areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that reptile abundance increased with time since burning. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that burning in different seasons had mixed effects on the abundance of reptiles. Survival (2 study): One of two studies (one site comparison and one controlled study) in the USA and Brazil found that Texas horned lizard survival was similar in burned and unburned areas. The other study found that burning had mixed effects on survival of an endemic lizard species. Condition (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that eastern fence lizards in recently burned areas ran faster than those from areas that were burned less recently or were unburned. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Behaviour change (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before and-after study in the USA found that burning affected overwintering habitat use by gopher tortoises. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that in burned areas, black racer snakes had higher surface activity than in unburned areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3646https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3646Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:38:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use irrigation systems Two studies evaluated the effects of using irrigation systems on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that hatching success of Agassiz’s desert tortoises was similar in irrigated and non-irrigated enclosures. Survival (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that survival of juvenile Agassiz’s desert tortoises was similar in irrigated and non-irrigated enclosures. Condition (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies (including one paired study) in the USA found that irrigating nests had mixed effects on growth of Agassiz’s desert tortoises and loggerhead turtles. One of the studies also found that loggerhead turtle hatchlings from nests that were irrigated were larger than those from non-irrigated nests. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3649https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3649Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:53:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning: Grassland & shrubland Fourteen studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in grassland and shrubland on reptile populations. Seven studies were in the USA, four were in Australia and one was in each of South Africa, Argentina and France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, before-and-after study in Australia found that reptile species composition was different before and immediately after burning in three grass types and remained different after vegetation grew back in one of three grass types. Richness/diversity (5 studies): Two of three studies (including one replicated, controlled, before-and-after study) in South Africa, Argentina and the USA found that areas with annual burning had similar reptile species richness and diversity compared to unburned areas or that richness was similar across areas with a range of burn frequencies. The other study found that burned areas had higher reptile species richness than unburned areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that areas burned 1–4 years earlier had lower reptile species richness than areas burned 11–15 years earlier. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that areas with different burn frequencies had similar reptile species richness and diversity. POPULATION RESPONSE (11 STUDIES) Abundance (11 studies): Three of six studies (including three replicated, randomized, controlled studies) in the USA and Argentina found that burned areas had a similar abundance of lizards, snakes and lizards and combined reptiles and amphibians compared to unburned areas. Two studies found that burning had mixed effects on the abundance of different reptile species and western yellow-bellied racer snakes.The other study found that burned areas had more eastern massasauga rattlesnakes than unburned areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that areas burned 1–4 years earlier had a lower abundance of reptiles than areas burned 11–15 years earlier. One controlled before-and-after study in the USA found that a burned area had a similar number of four snake species compared to when the area was managed by mowing. One site comparison study in France found that one reptile species was less abundant in areas managed by burning than areas grazed by sheep, whereas the abundance of five other species was similar in all areas. One replicated, before-and-after study in Australia found that immediately after burning, the abundance of reptiles was lower than before burning, but was similar after vegetation grew back. One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in Australia found that small-scale patch burning was associated with increased abundance of sand goanna burrows. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that some rocky outcrops that were burned were recolonized by pink-tailed worm-lizards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3651https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3651Thu, 09 Dec 2021 17:11:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning in combination with vegetation cutting Ten studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in combination with vegetation cutting on reptile populations. Eight studies were in the USA and two were in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that cutting vegetation prior to burning resulted in reptile assemblages becoming similar to areas with more pristine habitat and a history of frequent fires. Richness/diversity (5 studies): Four of five replicated studies (including three randomized, controlled studies) in Australia and the USA found that areas managed by burning in combination with vegetation cutting had similar reptile species richness compared to either burning only, cutting only or areas that were unmanaged. The other study found that areas of woodland managed by burning and vegetation thinning had higher reptile species richness than unmanaged areas. POPULATION RESPONSE (9 STUDIES) Abundance (9 studies): Four of nine replicated studies (including five randomized, controlled studies) in the USA and Australia found that areas that were managed by burning in combination with vegetation cutting had a higher abundance of overall reptiles, lizards, eastern fence lizards and five-lined skinks compared to areas that were either only burned or unmanaged. Three studies found a similar abundance of overall reptiles, snakes and turtles compared to either burning only, cutting only or unmanaged. Four studies found mixed effects of burning in combination with vegetation cutting on the abundance of reptiles and six-lined racerunners. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3655https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3655Fri, 10 Dec 2021 09:25:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning in combination with herbicide application Five studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in combination with herbicide application on reptile populations. Four studies were in the USA and one was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that reptile community composition responded differently to herbicide treatment followed by burning or burning alone when compared to unburned areas or areas of more pristine habitat. Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that areas that were burned in combination with herbicide application had similar combined reptile and amphibian species richness and diversity compared to areas that were managed by burning or herbicide application alone or left unmanaged. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Two of three replicated, randomized, controlled studies (including two before-and-after studies) in the USA found mixed effects of burning in combination with herbicide application on the abundance of reptiles and six-lined racerunners. The other study found that areas that were burned in combination with herbicide application had a similar abundance of reptiles compared to areas that were managed by burning or herbicide application alone or left unmanaged. The study also found that the abundance of eastern fence lizards was higher in the first year after burning and herbicide application compared to unmanaged areas, but similar for the next six years. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that some rocky outcrops that were burned in combination with herbicide application were recolonized by pink-tailed worm-lizards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3656https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3656Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:07:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning in combination with grazing Five studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in combination with grazing on reptile populations. Two studies were in the USA, two were in Australia and one was in Argentina. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One of two studies (including one site comparison study and one replicated, controlled, before-and-after study) in Argentina and the USA found that areas that were burned in combination with grazing had similar reptile species richness and diversity compared to areas not burned or grazed for 3–12 years. The other study found that areas that were burned in combination with grazing had higher species richness than lightly grazed or unmanaged areas and similar richness compared to areas that were burned only. One before-and-after study in the USA found that an area with annual prescribed burning combined with intensive early-season grazing had similar reptile species richness compared to when it was managed by alternate year prescribed burning with season-long grazing. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): Two site comparison studies (including one replicated study) in Australia and Argentina found that that burning in combination with grazing had mixed effects on the abundance of reptile species. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that areas where invasive para grass was removed by burning in combination with grazing had similar overall reptile and amphibian abundance compared to areas that were only burned or unmanaged. The study also found that the abundance of delicate skinks was lower in areas that were burned and grazed compared to those that were unmanaged. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3657https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3657Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:27:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use education and/or awareness campaigns to improve behaviour towards reptiles and reduce threats Seven studies evaluated the effects of using education and/or awareness campaigns to improve behaviour towards reptiles and reduce threats. One study was in each of Costa Rica, India, the Philippines, Dominica, the USA, Saint Kitts and Colombia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (1 studies): One before-and-after study in the Philippines found that following a communication, education, and public awareness campaign, the population of Philippine crocodiles increased. Reproductive success (1 study): One study in Costa Rica found that during a community-based education programme the percentage of leatherback turtle nests lost to poaching decreased. Survival (3 studies): Two before-and-after studies in the Philippines and Dominica found that following education and awareness campaigns, one in combination with use of road signs, human killing of Philippine crocodiles decreased and there were fewer road-deaths of lesser Antillean iguanas compared to before the campaigns began. One study in India reported that following education and awareness campaigns in combination with creating a network of local snake experts, local snake experts reported that they intervened to save 276 non-venomous snakes from being killed over six years. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (5 STUDIES) Human behaviour change (3 studies): One replicated study in Colombia found that in areas with conservation initiatives relating to turtles, more people reported changing consumption habitats and fewer people reported using turtles for food compared to in areas with no initiatives, however, stated rates of hunting, buying and selling of turtles remained similar. One study in Saint Kitts found that attending an educational summer camp on turtle conservation had mixed effects on reported behaviours in relation to sea turtles of attendees and their parents/guardians, and mixed effects on whether they took part in conservation activities after the camp. One study in the USA found that providing an information leaflet did not decrease the number of hotel rooms that left lights on at night compared to when no leaflet was provided. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3682https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3682Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:30:43 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use collar-mounted devices to reduce predation by domestic animals Two studies evaluated the effects of using collar-mounted devices to reduce predation by domestic animals on reptile populations. Both studies were in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): One of two replicated, randomized studies (including one before-and-after and one controlled study) in Australia found that cats wearing collar mounted neoprene bibs, with or without a bell, caught a similar number of combined reptiles and amphibians compared to cats not wearing them. The other study found that cats wearing collar mounted ruffs brought home fewer combined reptiles and amphibians than cats not wearing them. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3683https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3683Fri, 10 Dec 2021 15:42:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use conditioned taste aversion to prevent carnivorous reptiles from eating toxic invasive cane toads Two studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using conditioned taste aversion to prevent carnivorous reptiles from eating toxic invasive cane toads. Both studies were in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies in Australia found that survival of yellow-spotted goannas subjected to conditioned taste aversion was higher at one of two sites than those that were not treated. The other study found that survival of bluetongue skinks given a high dose was higher than those given a low dose, but similar to skinks receiving no dose. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Australia found that yellow-spotted goannas subjected to conditioned taste aversion were less likely to eat cane toads than those that were not treated. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3700https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3700Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:54:41 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use holding pens or enclosures at release site prior to release of wild reptiles Seven studies evaluated the effects of using holding pens or enclosures at release sites prior to release of wild reptiles. Four studies were in the USA and one study was in each of Australia, New Zealand and the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in New Zealand found that in a site where jewelled geckos were translocated into holding pens prior to release, more gravid females were found compared to a site where holding pens were not used. Survival (4 studies): Two of three controlled studies (including one replicated study) in the USA and the UK found that gopher tortoises translocated into holding pens with artificial burrows prior to release or viviparous lizards released into an enclosure had higher survival (recaptured) or assumed survival (dug burrows) than individuals released without pens or enclosures. The other study found that translocating eastern box turtles into holding pens, or keeping them in pens for longer, did not affect post-release survival. One replicated study in the USA found that survival of Florida sand skinks within holding pens with different combinations of habitat features (trees, shade cloth, woody debris) ranged from 49–79% over two years. Condition (1 study): One randomized, controlled study in the UK found that viviparous lizards released into an enclosure had similar body condition compared to those released without an enclosure. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Behaviour change (4 studies): Two of three controlled studies (including two replicated studies) in the USA and New Zealand found that gopher tortoises and jewelled geckos translocated into holding pens prior to release dispersed away from the release site less frequently than those not held in pens. One study also found that the activity area of tortoises held in pens was smaller in the year of release, but similar in the year after release, compared to those not held in pens. The other study found that translocating eastern box turtles into holding pens, or keeping them in pens for longer, did not affect post-release dispersal behaviour. One controlled study in Australia found mixed effects on a range of behavioural measures of translocating pygmy bluetongue lizards into holding pens with artificial burrows for one day compared to five days. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3724https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3724Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:26:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use hormones and/or other drugs during captive-breeding programmes to induce reproduction/birth Nine studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using hormones and/or other drugs during captive-breeding programmes to induce reproduction/birth. Three studies were in each of the USA and New Zealand and one study was in each of the Netherlands, China and Japan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (9 STUDIES) Reproductive success (9 studies): Three of four replicated, controlled studies (including one before-and-after study) in the USA and China found that plains gartersnakes, eastern painted turtles and red-eared sliders induced with oxytocin produced a similar percentage of live young compared to individuals that were not induced and laid eggs with similar hatching success or laid a similar number of eggs compared to what was observed in wild nests. The other study found that 25% of eggs from hormone-injected (luteinizing hormone and gonadotropin) four-eyed turtles were fertile, compared to 7–52% for females that were not injected or injected with a saline solution. One study also found mixed effects of different combinations of hormones and other drugs on inducing 13 turtle species. Five studies (including one before-and-after study) in the Netherlands, New Zealand and Japan found that oxytocin, arginine vasotocin and follicle-stimulating hormone induced egg laying/birth in yellow-headed box turtles, tuatara and common geckos or ovulation in hawksbill turtles. One study also found that only one yellow-headed box turtle female produced fertile eggs. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3767https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3767Tue, 14 Dec 2021 17:27:59 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use holding pens or enclosures at release site prior to release of captive-bred reptiles Two studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using holding pens or enclosures at release sites prior to release of captive-bred reptiles. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): Two controlled studies (including one replicated study) in the USA found that survival of captive-bred smooth green snakes and desert tortoises held in pens before release was similar over 3–5 months or 2–3 years compared to individuals released directly. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One controlled study in the USA found that movement of smooth green snakes held in pens before release was similar compared to snakes that were released directly. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3774https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3774Wed, 15 Dec 2021 12:04:46 +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