Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use road closures One study evaluated the effects of using road closures on reptile populations. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in Canada found that closed roads were not used more by Blanding’s turtles than unclosed roads. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3503https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3503Mon, 06 Dec 2021 17:53:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use signage to warn motorists about wildlife presence Five studies evaluated the effects of using signage to warn motorists of wildlife presence on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA and one was in each of Dominica and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Survival (5 studies): One of two before-and-after studies (one replicated and controlled) in the USA found that installing road signs reduced road mortalities of massasaugas in autumn but not summer. The other study found that installing road signs did not reduce road mortalities of painted or Blanding’s turtles. Two before-and-after studies (one replicated) in Canada and the USA found that a combination of installing road signs with either fencing and tunnels or a hybrid nestbox-fencing barrier resulted in fewer road mortalities of massasaugas and diamondback terrapins. One before-and-after study in Dominica found that a combination of using road signs and running an awareness campaign resulted in fewer road mortalities of Antillean iguanas. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3524https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3524Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:05:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use technology and reporting systems to avoid collisions We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using technology and reporting systems to avoid collisions. ‘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%2F3535https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3535Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:02:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use visual or acoustic deterrents to discourage reptiles from approaching vessels We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using visual or acoustic deterrents to discourage reptiles from approaching vessels. ‘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%2F3536https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3536Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:06:10 +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 sinking lines instead of floating lines We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using sinking lines instead of floating lines. ‘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%2F3606https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3606Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:36:58 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use stiffened materials or increase tension of fishing gear We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using stiffened materials or increasing tension of fishing 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%2F3607https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3607Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:39:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use smaller machinery to log forests We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using smaller machinery to log forests 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%2F3633https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3633Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:48:35 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelterwood harvesting Two studies evaluated the effects of shelterwood harvesting on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that shelterwood harvesting had mixed effects on reptile species richness compared to areas with no management. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized study in the USA found that areas with shelterwood harvesting had a lower abundance of juvenile eastern box turtles than clearcut areas. One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that shelterwood harvesting had mixed effects on reptile abundance compared to areas with no management. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3636https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3636Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:52:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective logging Three studies evaluated the effects of using selective logging in forests on reptile populations. One study was in each of Brazil, the USA and Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Mexico found that areas with low intensity selective logging tended to have similar reptile species richness compared to areas with high intensity selective logging. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated, randomized, controlled studies (including one before-and-after study) in Brazil and the USA found that selective logging intensity had mixed effects on the abundance of three lizard species. The other study found that areas with selective logging had similar reptile abundance compared to areas with combined clearcutting and thinning. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3637https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3637Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:57:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of using signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance. This study was in Turkey. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Reproductive success (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Turkey found that in an area with signs where sea turtle nests were fenced, nests had higher hatching success than nests from areas with no fencing or signs. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3642https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3642Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:26:40 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use prescribed burning: Wetland Two studies evaluated the effects of using prescribed burning in wetlands on reptile populations. One study was in each of the USA and Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One of two controlled studies (including one replicated, randomized study) in the USA and Australia found mixed effects of using prescribed burning in wetlands on the abundance of western yellow-bellied racer snakes. The other study found that found that burned areas had a similar abundance of reptiles and amphibians compared to unburned areas, but that delicate skinks were less abundant in burned areas. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3652https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3652Thu, 09 Dec 2021 17:44:45 +0000