Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create suitable habitats to offset habitat lost within development footprint We found no studies that evaluated the effects of creating suitable habitats to offset habitat lost within a development footprint 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%2F3480https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3480Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:00:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Erect fencing to exclude reptiles from construction zones We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of erecting fencing to exclude reptiles from construction zones. ‘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%2F3481https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3481Fri, 03 Dec 2021 12:04:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Engage landowners and volunteers to manage land for reptiles We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of engaging landowners and volunteers to manage land for 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%2F3485https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3485Fri, 03 Dec 2021 13:03:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create uncultivated margins around arable or pasture fields Two studies evaluated the effects of creating uncultivated margins around arable or pasture fields on reptile populations. One study was in Australia and one was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that revegetated linear strips had similar reptile species richness compared to cleared and remnant strips. The study also found that revegetated strips and patches had similar reptile species richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that revegetated linear strips had similar reptile abundance compared to cleared and remnant strips. The study also found that revegetated strips and patches had similar reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in the UK found that uncultivated field margins were used by slow worms, common lizards and grass snakes, but not by adders. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3518https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3518Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:37:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Diversify ground vegetation and canopy structure in the habitat around woody crops Two studies evaluated the effects of diversifying ground vegetation and canopy structure in the habitat around woody crops on reptile populations. One study was in Puerto Rico and the other was in Spain. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Spain found that olive groves with natural ground cover had higher reptile species richness and diversity than those with bare ground, but groves planted with a single species as ground cover had similar richness and diversity as those with bare ground. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Puerto Rico found that two of three lizard species were less abundant in shade-grown coffee plantations than in sun-grown plantations. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in Spain found that olive groves with ground cover had more reptiles than groves with bare ground. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3526https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3526Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:18:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish protocols to reduce collisions We found no studies that evaluated the effects of establishing protocols to reduce collisions 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%2F3533https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3533Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:56:10 +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: 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: 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: Create walls or barriers to exclude pollutants We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of creating walls or barriers to exclude pollutants. ‘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%2F3570https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3570Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:12:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish emergency plans for oil spills We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of establishing emergency plans for oil spills. ‘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%2F3573https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3573Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:14:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish aquaculture facilities to extract the nutrients from agricultural run-off We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of establishing aquaculture facilities to extract the nutrients from agricultural run-off. ‘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%2F3587https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3587Wed, 08 Dec 2021 15:52:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enforce compliance to lighting regulations We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of enforcing compliance to lighting regulations. ‘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%2F3597https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3597Wed, 08 Dec 2021 16:28:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Finance low interest loans to convert to fishing gear that reduces unwanted catch of reptiles We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of financing low interest loans to convert to fishing gear that reduces unwanted catch 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%2F3619https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3619Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:29:15 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Establish handling and release procedures for accidentally captured or entangled (‘bycatch’) reptiles One study evaluated the effects on reptiles of establishing handling and release procedures for accidentally captured or entangled reptiles. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Condition (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Canada in a captive setting found that recovery of painted turtles after a long period of being held underwater was similar when turtles recovered out of the water or in the water. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3621https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3621Thu, 09 Dec 2021 13:31:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Harvest groups of trees instead of clearcutting We found no studies that evaluated the effects of harvesting groups of trees 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%2F3635https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3635Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:51:11 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Engage policy makers to make policy changes beneficial to reptiles We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of engaging policy makers to make policy changes beneficial to 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%2F3679https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3679Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:00:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Engage local communities in conservation activities Six studies evaluated the effects on reptile populations of engaging local communities in reptile conservation. One study was in each of the Philippines, Mozambique, Brazil, Costa Rica, Australia and Colombia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in Brazil found that areas where community-based management of fishing practices was implemented had a higher abundance of river turtles than areas with no community-based management. Reproductive success (3 studies): Two before-and-after studies (including one site comparison study) in Mozambique and Costa Rica found that after involving the community in monitoring of nesting activity, fewer sea turtle eggs were lost to poaching than before projects began. One replicated, before-and-after study in Australia found that when management of a saltwater crocodile egg harvest passed to an Indigenous management group, the number of eggs collected and hatching success of those eggs was lower than when it was run by an external company. Survival (2 studies): One study in the Philippines found that after rural community members were paid a small incentive to protect Philippine crocodile sanctuaries combined with an education and awareness campaign, fewer crocodiles were killed than before community engagement. One before-and-after study in Mozambique found that during a community-based turtle monitoring project no killing of adults was recorded. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human behaviour change (1 study): One replicated study in Colombia found that in areas where communities were engaged in 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. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3681https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3681Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:15:39 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Dispose of waste from pet reptile enclosures carefully to prevent spread of disease We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of disposing of waste from pet reptile enclosures carefully to prevent spread of disease. ‘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%2F3701https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3701Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:00:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Develop/implement species recovery plans One study evaluated the effects of developing/implementing species recovery plans on reptile populations. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Conservation status (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after, paired study in Australia found that the chance of a species’ conservation status improving or being stable was similar for those with a recovery plan (including three reptile species) and those without a plan (including three reptile species). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3707https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3707Mon, 13 Dec 2021 11:13:35 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Disturb soil/sediment surface Two studies evaluated the effects of disturbing the soil/sediment surface on reptile populations. One study was in Sweden and the other was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Sweden found that after sand patches were created by soil scarification within clearings created by tree felling, sand lizards colonized, abundance then declined, but then increased once more, larger clearings were created. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One randomized study in the USA found that tilled areas were used more frequently by Blanding’s turtles for nesting than mown or weeded areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3717https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3717Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:28:14 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore waterways Two studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring waterways on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that restored and pristine streams had similar turtle community composition. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One site comparison study in the USA found that restored and pristine streams had a similar abundance of turtles. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that creating new waterways by redirecting flows during forest restoration had mixed effects of reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3754https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3754Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:37:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore wetlands Seven studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring wetlands on reptile populations. Six studies were in the USA and one was in Kenya. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA found that reptile species richness and diversity tended to be lower in a restored wetland compared to an undisturbed wetland. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that created, restored, enhanced and natural wetlands had similar combined reptile and amphibian species richness. One site comparison study in the USA found that created wetlands and adjacent natural forest had similar reptile species richness and diversity. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (2 studies): One site comparison study in the USA found that a created wetland was used by snapping turtles for egg laying. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA found that in a restored wetland, 16 snake, six lizard and eight turtle species successfully reproduced. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): One site comparison study and three before-and-after studies (including one replicated study) in the USA and Kenya found that created or restored wetlands were used by black rat snakes and snapping turtles, turtles, lizards, green grass snakes and terrapins, six or 18 reptile species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3755https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3755Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:41:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Freeze sperm or eggs for future use We found no studies that evaluated the effects of freezing sperm or eggs for future use 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%2F3760https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3760Tue, 14 Dec 2021 16:06:26 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Fence cliff edges to prevent individuals from falling One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of fencing cliff edges to prevent individuals from falling. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One before-and-after study in Australia found that after installing a fence along a small cliff edge, fewer green turtle carcasses were found at the base of the cliff compared to before installation. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3790https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3790Wed, 15 Dec 2021 16:37:17 +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