Collected 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: 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: Regulate wildlife harvesting Four studies evaluated the effects of regulating wildlife harvesting on reptile populations. One study was in each of Costa Rica, Australia, Indonesia and Japan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One before-and-after study in Australia found that following legal protection and harvest regulations, the density of saltwater crocodile populations increased. One before-and-after study in Japan found that following regulation of the green turtle harvest in combination with allowing harvested turtles to lay eggs prior to being killed, the number of nesting females tended to be higher. Reproductive success (1 study): One before-and-after study in Japan found that following regulation of the green turtle harvest in combination with allowing harvested turtles to lay eggs prior to being killed, the number of hatchlings produced in natural nests tended to be higher. Condition (1 study): One before-and-after study in Australia found that following legal protection and harvest regulations, the average size of crocodiles increased. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human behaviour change (2 studies): One replicated study in Costa Rica found that in an area with a legalized turtle egg harvest run by a community cooperative, a majority of people reported a willingness to do more to protect sea turtles. One study in Indonesia reported that quotas to regulate wildlife harvesting did not limit the number of individuals of three reptile species that were harvested and exported. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3538https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3538Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:33:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Commercially breed reptiles to reduce pressure on wild populations One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of commercially breeding reptiles to reduce pressure on wild populations. This study was in the Cayman Islands. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)   POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)   BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)   OTHER (1 STUDY) Human behaviour change (1 study): One study in the Cayman Islands found that where there was a commercial turtle farm, consumption and purchase of wild turtle products was rare, though some residents still showed a preference for wild turtle meat. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3539https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3539Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:45:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enforce regulations to prevent trafficking and trade of reptiles We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of enforcing regulations to prevent trafficking and trade of reptiles. ‘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%2F3540https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3540Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:50:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Patrol or monitor nesting beaches Seven studies evaluated the effects of patrolling or monitoring nesting beaches on reptile populations. Three studies were in Costa Rica and one was in each of the US Virgin Islands, Mexico, Mozambique and the Dominican Republic. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (2 studies): One before-and-after site comparison study in Costa Rica found that olive ridley turtle nests that were moved to a patrolled hatchery and nests that were camouflaged on the nesting beach had similar hatching success. One replicated, controlled study in the Dominican Republic found that on beaches with regular patrols, hatching success of leatherback turtle nests was higher than in nests relocated to hatcheries. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (6 STUDIES) Human behaviour change (6 studies): Two studies in the US Virgin Islands and Costa Rica found that during years when beach patrols were carried out poaching of leatherback turtle nests decreased. Three studies (including two before-and-after studies) in Costa Rica and Mexico found that when beach patrols were carried out in combination with either an education programme for local communities, limiting beach access or camouflaging nests and moving nests to a hatchery, poaching of leatherback turtle nests and olive ridley turtle nests decreased. One before-and-after study in Mozambique found that during a community-based turtle monitoring project no green turtle egg collection or hunting of adults was recorded. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3541https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3541Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:56:30 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce alternative income sources to replace hunting or harvesting of reptiles One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of introducing alternative income sources to replace hunting or harvesting of reptile populations. This study was in St Kitts1. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in St Kitts1 found that fishers that took jobs on a turtle management project reported that they ceased turtle fishing activity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3542https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3542Tue, 07 Dec 2021 17:10:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit all types of fishing We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of ceasing or prohibiting all types of fishing. ‘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%2F3543https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3543Tue, 07 Dec 2021 17:21:27 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit commercial fishing We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of ceasing or prohibiting commercial fishing. ‘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%2F3544https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3544Tue, 07 Dec 2021 17:22:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish temporary fishery closures Three studies evaluated the effects of establishing temporary fishery closures on reptile populations. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Brazil. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in Brazil found that areas where a fishing agreement was implemented that involved seasonal fishing restrictions along with a wider set of measures had more river turtles than areas that did not implement the agreement.  Survival (2 studies): One replicated, before-and-after study in the USA found that during seasonal closures of shrimp trawling there were fewer lethal strandings of loggerhead and Kemp’s ridley turtles. One study in the USA found that following the re-opening of a swordfish long-line fishery with turtle catch limits in place, loggerhead turtle bycatch reached the annual catch limit in two of three years, and when the limit was reached the fishery was closed for the rest of the year. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3545https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3545Tue, 07 Dec 2021 17:27:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit or prohibit specific fishing methods One study evaluated the effects of limiting or prohibiting specific fishing methods on reptile populations. This study was in Brazil. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in Brazil found that in areas where a fishing agreement was implemented that involved limiting the use of gill nets along with a wider suit of measures had more river turtles than areas that did not implement the agreement. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3546https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3546Wed, 08 Dec 2021 09:26:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Deploy fishing gear at different depths Three studies evaluated the effects of deploying fishing gear at different depths on reptile populations. One study was in each of Canada, off the coast of Mexico and the Atlantic. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired study in Canada found that no turtles died in floated nets, but some died in submerged nets. Condition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired study in Canada found that turtles caught in floated nets were less at risk of drowning than those caught in submerged nets. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (3 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (3 studies): Two of three studies (including two replicated studies) in Canada, Mexico and the Atlantic found that bottom-set fishing nets with fewer buoys caught fewer sea turtles than standard nets or that fewer loggerhead turtles were caught when longline hooks were set below 22 m deep, but the number of leatherback turtles caught was unaffected by hook depth. The other study found that floated and submerged nets caught a similar number of turtle species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3547https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3547Wed, 08 Dec 2021 09:29:51 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set commercial catch quotas We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of setting commercial catch quotas. ‘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%2F3548https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3548Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:05:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set unwanted catch quotas One study evaluated the effects of setting unwanted catch quotas on reptile populations. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One study in the USA found that following the re-opening of a swordfish long-line fishery with turtle catch limits in place, loggerhead turtle bycatch reached the annual catch limit in two of three years, and when the limit was reached the fishery was closed for the rest of the year. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3549https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3549Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:07:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number of fishing vessels or fishing days in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of limiting the number of fishing vessels or fishing days in an area. ‘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%2F3550https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3550Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:09:23 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the length of fishing gear or density of traps in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of limiting the length of fishing gear or density of traps in an area. ‘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%2F3551https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3551Wed, 08 Dec 2021 12:11:09 +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: Add lights to fishing gear Five studies evaluated the effects of adding lights to fishing gear on reptile populations. Two studies were in the Baja California peninsula (Mexico) and one was in each of Sechura Bay (Peru), the Atlantic and North Pacific and the Adriatic Sea. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One randomized, controlled, paired study in the Adriatic Sea found that no loggerhead turtles were caught and died in in gillnets with UV lights whereas some did in nets without lights. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (5 STUDIES) Unwanted catch (5 studies): Four controlled studies (including three replicated and two paired studies) in the Baja California peninsula, Sechura Bay and the Adriatic Sea found that gillnets with LED lights, light sticks or UV lights caught fewer green turtles and loggerhead turtles than nets without lights. One replicated study in the Atlantic and North Pacific found mixed effects of increasing the number of light sticks on longlines on the chance of catching loggerhead and leatherback turtles. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3554https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3554Wed, 08 Dec 2021 13:59:36 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain buoys and lines at the sea floor or riverbed when not hauling We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of retaining buoys and lines at the sea floor or riverbed when not hauling. ‘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%2F3555https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3555Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:08:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain offal on fishing vessels instead of discarding overboard We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of retaining offal on fishing vessels instead of discarding overboard. ‘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%2F3556https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3556Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:10:15 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set gillnets perpendicular to the shore We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of setting gillnets perpendicular to the shore. ‘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%2F3557https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3557Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:11:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Promote knowledge exchange between fishers to improve good practice One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of promoting knowledge exchange between fishers to improve good practice. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One before-and-after study in the USA found that following the introduction of a tool to help facilitate knowledge exchange and the avoidance of loggerhead turtles, loggerhead turtle bycatch was similar compared to the two years before the tool was introduced. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in the USA found that following the introduction of a tool to help facilitate avoidance of loggerhead turtles, fishers did not spend less time fishing in the areas recommended for avoidance by the tool.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3558https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3558Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:13:04 +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 +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