Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide sacrificial rows of crops on outer side of fields We found no evidence for the effects of providing sacrificial rows of crops on the outer side of fields on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1427https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1427Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:48:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pay farmers to cover the costs of non-harmful strategies to deter primates We found no evidence for the effects of paying farmers to cover the costs of non-harmful strategies to deter primates on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1429https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1429Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:51:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant nesting trees/shelter for primates within agricultural fields We found no evidence for the effects of planting nesting trees/shelter for primates within agricultural fields on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1431https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1431Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:54:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prohibit (livestock) farmers from entering protected areas One before-and-after, site comparison in Rwanda found that the number of young gorillas increased after cattle were removed from a protected area, alongside other interventions. A before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda, and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that a mountain gorilla population decreased over time following the removal of livestock from a number of protected areas, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1432https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1432Tue, 17 Oct 2017 09:58:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant crops favoured by primates away from primate areas We found no evidence for the effects of planting crops favoured by primates away from primate areas on populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1440https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1440Tue, 17 Oct 2017 10:49:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Minimize ground vibrations caused by open cast mining activities We found no evidence for the effects of minimizing ground vibrations caused by open cast mining activities on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1451https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1451Tue, 17 Oct 2017 12:53:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide adequate signage of presence of primates on or near roads We found no evidence for the effects of providing adequate signage of presence of primates on or near roads on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1466https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1466Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:13:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide medicine to local communities to control killing of primates for medicinal purposes We found no evidence for the effects of providing medicine to local communities to control the killing of primates for medicinal purposes on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1472https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1472Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:33:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide better equipment (e.g. guns) to anti-poaching ranger patrols One before-and-after study in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda found that gorilla populations increased after anti-poaching guard were provided with better equipment, alongside other interventions. One study in Uganda found that no gorillas were killed for 21 months after game guards were provided with better equipment, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Rwanda found that the number of immature gorillas increased and the number of snares decreased after anti-poaching patrols were supplied with better equipment, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1476https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1476Tue, 17 Oct 2017 17:22:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave hollow trees in areas of selective logging for sleeping sites We found no evidence for the effects of leaving hollow trees in areas on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1489https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1489Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:35:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manually control or remove secondary mid-storey and ground-level vegetation We found no evidence for the effects of manually controlling or removing secondary mid-storey and ground-level vegetation on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1492https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1492Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:41:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide domestic meat to workers of the logging company to reduce hunting We found no evidence for the effects of providing domestic meat to workers of the logging company to reduce hunting on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1501https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1501Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:56:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide monetary benefits to local communities for sustainably managing their forest and its wildlife (e.g. REDD, employment) One before-and-after study in Belize found that numbers of black howler monkeys increased by 138% over 13 years after local communities received monetary benefits, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo found that most central chimpanzees reintroduced to an area where local communities received monetary benefits, alongside other interventions, survived over five years. One before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that numbers of mountain gorillas declined by 28% over 41 years despite the implementation of development projects in nearby communities, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1509https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1509Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:15:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide non-monetary benefits to local communities for sustainably managing their forest and its wildlife (e.g. better education, infrastructure development) One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo found that 70% of the central chimpanzees reintroduced to an area where local people were provided non-monetary benefits, alongside other interventions, survived over seven years. One before-and-after study in India found that numbers of hoolock gibbons increased by 66% over five years after providing local communities with alternative income, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1510https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1510Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:39:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Permanent presence of staff/manager One before-and-after study in Kenya found that numbers of Tana River red colobus and crested mangabeys decreased despite permanent presence of reserve staff, alongside other interventions. One study in Thailand found that a reintroduced population of lar gibbons declined over three years despite permanent presence of reserve staff alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Belize found that numbers of black howler monkeys increased by 138% over 13 years after introducing permanent presence of reserve staff, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Congo found that most reintroduced central chimpanzees survived over five years after being accompanied by reserve staff, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Gabon found that most reintroduced western lowland gorillas survived over nine months, after being accompanied by reserve staff, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1517https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1517Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:22:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect important food/nest trees before burning We found no evidence for the effects of protecting important food/nest trees before burning on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1518https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1518Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:23:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide additional sleeping platforms/nesting sites for primates One before-and-after study in Brazil found that a translocated lion tamarin population declined after artificial nest boxes were provided, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Brazil found that a majority of reintroduced golden lion tamarins died seven years after artificial nest boxes were provided, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Gabon found that a majority of juvenile western lowland gorillas survived for at least seven years after nesting platforms were provided, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1530https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1530Thu, 19 Oct 2017 10:22:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide artificial water sources One before-and-after trial in Brazil found that a minority of reintroduced golden lion tamarins survived over seven years when provided with supplementary water, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that a minority of reintroduced black-and-white ruffed lemurs survived for five years despite being provided with supplementary water, alongside other interventions. A before-and-after study in South Africa found that a minority of vervet monkeys had survived for 10 months when provided with supplementary water, alongside other interventions. A before-and-after study in Gabon found that a majority of western lowland gorillas survived for at least nine months while being provided with supplementary water, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1531https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1531Thu, 19 Oct 2017 10:26:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prevent gene contamination by alien primate species introduced by humans, through exclusion (e.g. fences) or translocation We found no evidence for the effects of preventing gene contamination by alien primate species introduced by humans, through exclusion or translocation on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1536https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1536Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:41:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Keep safety distance to habituated animals One before-and-after study in the Democratic Republic of Congo found that most reintroduced chimpanzees survived over five years after being followed from a distance of 5–100 m, alongside other interventions. One controlled study in Malaysia found that the number of reintroduced orangutans declined by 33% over 31 years despite visitors being required to keep a safety distance to the animals, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and Congo found that numbers of mountain gorillas increased by 168% over 41 years while being observed from a safety distance, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1538https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1538Thu, 19 Oct 2017 14:38:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit time that researchers/tourists are allowed to spend with habituated animals One controlled study in Indonesia found that reintroduced Sumatran orangutans that spent limited time with caretakers acted more similar to wild orangutans than orangutans that spend more time with caretakers, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo found that numbers of mountain gorillas increased by 168% over 41 years while being visited by researchers and visitors during a restricted amount of time, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1539https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1539Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:12:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Preventative vaccination of habituated or wild primates One before-and-after study in Puerto Rico found that annual mortality of rhesus macaques decreased after a preventive tetanus vaccine campaign, alongside other interventions. Two before-and-after studies in the Republic of Congo found that 70% of reintroduced chimpanzees vaccinated against poliomyelitis and tetanus, alongside other interventions, survived over 3.5-5 years after release. One before-and-after study in the Republic of Congo and Gabon found that more than 80% of the reintroduced gorillas that received preventive vaccination, alongside other interventions, survived over a 10 year period. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1549https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1549Thu, 19 Oct 2017 17:45:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect primate habitat A review on the status of rhesus monkeys and grey snub-monkeys in China found that primate numbers increased or no more individuals were killed after the area was legally protected, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in Kenya found that Tana River red colobus monkey and crested mangabey numbers decreased despite the area being declared legally protected, alongside other interventions. One before-and-after study in China found that Hainan gibbon numbers increased by 34% over nine years after the area was declared legally protected. One before-and-after study in Brazil found that most golden lion tamarins did not survive over seven years despite being reintroduced to a legally protected area, alongside other interventions yet they reproduced and surviving offspring partly compensated adult mortality. Two before-and-after studies in the Republic of Congo and Gabon found that most central chimpanzees and lowland gorillas reintroduced to areas that received legal protection, alongside other interventions, survived over 4–5 years. One controlled, site comparison study in Mexico found that black howler monkeys in protected areas had lower stress levels than individuals living in unprotected forest fragments. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1578https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1578Fri, 20 Oct 2017 12:49:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant indigenous trees to re-establish natural tree communities in clear-cut areas One site comparison study in Kenya found that two out of three primate species had lower group densities in planted forests than in natural forests. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1584https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1584Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:07:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant indigenous fast-growing trees (will not necessarily resemble original community) in clear-cut areas We found no evidence for the effects of planting indigenous fast-growing trees in clear-cut areas on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested 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%2F1586https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1586Fri, 20 Oct 2017 13:09:25 +0100