Collected 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: Reseed logged forest One study evaluated the effects of reseeding logged forest on reptile populations. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that reptile communities in areas that were reseeded were not more similar to mature forest stands than those left to regenerate naturally. Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that areas that were reseeded had similar reptile species richness and diversity compared to areas left to regenerate naturally. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that areas that were reseeded had similar reptile abundance compared to areas left to regenerate naturally. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3638https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3638Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:04:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Impose noise limits in proximity to reptile habitats and routes We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of imposing noise limits in proximity to reptile habitats and routes. ‘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%2F3639https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3639Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:06:52 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install sound barriers in proximity to reptile habitats We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of installing sound barriers in proximity to reptile habitats. ‘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%2F3640https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3640Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:09:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide artificial shade for individuals Two studies evaluated the effects of providing artificial shade for individuals on reptile populations. One study was in Australia and one was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): One replicated, randomized study in Australia found that shaded, artificial rocky outcrops were used less often than unshaded ones by velvet geckos. One study in Canada found that coverboards were used by northern pacific rattlesnakes in the year they were installed, but not a decade later. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3641https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3641Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:17:20 +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: Provide artificial shade for nests or nesting sites Four studies evaluated the effects of providing artificial shade for nests or nesting sites on reptile populations. Two studies were in the USA and one was in each of Panama, and Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Reproductive success (3 studies): One of two controlled studies (including one replicated study) in Panama and Australia found that shaded leatherback turtles nests had higher hatching success than unshaded nests. The other study found that shaded and unshaded loggerhead turtle nests had similar hatching success. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that relocating diamondback terrapin nests to artificial nest mounds and providing shade had mixed effects on hatchling success. Condition (2 studies): One of two controlled studies (including one replicated study) in Panama and Australia found that greater shade cover resulted in smaller hatchlings for leatherback turtles. The other study found that shading loggerhead turtle nests had mixed effects on hatchling size and crawl speed. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Offspring sex ratio (2 studies): One of two controlled studies (including one before-and-after study) in Panama and the USA found that shading leatherback turtle nests resulted in fewer female hatchlings compared to unshaded nests. The other study found that shaded and unshaded Agassiz’s desert tortoise nests produced a similar sex ratio of hatchlings. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3643https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3643Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:28:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce and enforce regulations for reptile watching tours We found no studies that evaluated the effects on reptile populations of introducing and enforcing regulations for reptile watching tours. ‘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%2F3644https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3644Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:30:41 +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: Protect habitat along elevational gradients We found no studies that evaluated the effects of protecting habitat along elevational gradients 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%2F3647https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3647Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:47:19 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce cumulative heating effects of urban development by planting vegetation We found no studies that evaluated the effects of reducing the cumulative heating effects of urban development by planting vegetation 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%2F3648https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3648Thu, 09 Dec 2021 15:49:09 +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: 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 +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: Create fire breaks One study evaluated the effects of creating fire breaks on reptile populations. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Australia found that in areas with fire suppression measures combined with fences to exclude predators, reptile abundance increased over time. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3658https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3658Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:45:04 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Put out wildfires We found no studies that evaluated the effects of putting out wildfires 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%2F3659https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3659Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:48:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Regulate water levels One study evaluated the effects of regulating water levels on reptile populations. This study was in France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in France found that autumn–spring marsh flooding with moderate levels of grazing in autumn–winter led to higher numbers of European pond turtles than winter–spring flooding with high levels of grazing in spring–summer. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3660https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3660Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:51:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect habitat: All reptiles (excluding sea turtles) Seventeen studies evaluated the effects of protecting habitat on reptile populations (excluding sea turtles). Four studies were in the USA, two were in each of Australia and Brazil, and one was in each of Canada, Madagascar, South Africa, Spain, Hong Kong, Argentina, the borders of Zambia and Zimbabwe, Pakistan and Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (5 studies): Three of five studies (including two replicated, site comparison studies) in the USA, South Africa, Australia, Pakistan and Mexico found mixed effects of protected areas on reptile species richness and combined reptile and amphibian species richness. The other two studies found that protected areas had higher reptile species richness than unprotected farmland. POPULATION RESPONSE (16 STUDIES) Abundance (13 studies): Six of 11 studies (including five replicated, site comparison studies) in the USA, Canada, Hong Kong, Mexico, Australia, South Africa, Argentina, the border of Zambia and Zimbabwe and Pakistan found that protected areas had a higher abundance of reptiles, tortoises, Nile crocodiles and combined reptiles and amphibians than areas with less or no protection. Four studies found mixed effects of protection on the abundance of reptiles and big-headed turtles. The other study found that water bodies in protected areas had fewer eastern long-necked turtles than those in suburban areas. One site comparison study in Brazil found that areas with community-based management of fishing practices, which included protecting river turtle nesting beaches, had more river turtles than areas that did not manage fishing practices. One site comparison study in Madagascar found that the abundance of different sized radiated tortoises in a protected area was more similar to that of an exploited population than to an unexploited population. Occupancy/range (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Argentina found that Argentine tortoises were found in one of two protected areas and two of three unprotected areas. One before-and-after study in Brazil found that most reptile species were still present 20 years after an area was protected. Survival (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, site comparison study in the USA found that in areas with greater protections, survival of Agassiz’s desert tortoises was higher than in areas with less protections. One replicated, site comparison study in Spain found that roads running through protected areas had more reptile road deaths than roads in unprotected areas. Condition (4 studies): Two of three site comparison studies (including one replicated study) in the USA, Australia and Hong Kong found that protected areas had larger red-eared sliders and big-headed turtles compared to areas where harvesting was allowed or was thought to be occurring illegally. The other study found that eastern long-necked turtles in protected areas grew slower and were smaller than turtles in suburban areas. One site comparison study in Madagascar found that radiated tortoises in a protected area had similar genetic diversity compared to populations outside of the protected area. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated study in the USA found that a protected area was used by common chuckwallas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3661https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3661Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:53:15 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect habitat: Sea turtles Four studies evaluated the effects of protecting habitat on sea turtle populations. One study was in each of Costa Rica, the Seychelles, Belize and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One before-and-after study in Costa Rica found that after an area was protected, there were fewer nesting female leatherback turtles than before protection. One replicated, randomized, site comparison study off the coast of Belize found that in protected areas there were more hawksbill turtles than outside. One site comparison study in the USA found that differences in the abundance of green, loggerhead and hawksbill turtles in protected and unprotected areas were mixed. Reproductive success (2 studies): One before-and-after study in Costa Rica found that after an area was protected, more leatherback turtle hatchlings were produced than before protection. One before-and-after study in the Seychelles found that nesting activity by green turtles increased following both habitat and species protection. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3662https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3662Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:56:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain connectivity between habitat patches Two studies evaluated the effects of retaining connectivity between habitat patches on reptile populations. One study was in Brazil and one was in Madagascar. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forest fragments connected by corridors and isolated forest fragments had similar reptile species composition. One site comparison study in Madagascar found that in an area with hedges connecting different habitat types, reptile communities were more similar across the different habitat types than in an area with no hedges. Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forest fragments connected by corridors and isolated forest fragments had similar reptile species richness. One site comparison study in Madagascar found that an area with hedges connecting different habitat types had more unique reptile species than an area without hedges. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forest fragments connected by corridors and isolated forest fragments had a similar abundance of reptiles, including leaf litter lizards. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3663https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3663Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:57:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain buffer zones around core habitat We found no studies that evaluated the effects of retaining buffer zones around core habitat 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%2F3664https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F3664Fri, 10 Dec 2021 10:59:26 +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