Study

Effect of unsprayed headlands on chick survival of grey partridge Perdix perdix, red-legged partridge Alectoris rufa and ring-necked pheasant Phasianus colchicus in arable farmland in north-eastern Hampshire and East Anglia, southern and eastern England

  • Published source details Rands M.R.W. (1986) The survival of gamebird (Galliformes) chicks in relation to pesticide use on cereals. Ibis, 128, 57-64

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Leave headlands in fields unsprayed (conservation headlands)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation

Leave headlands in fields unsprayed (conservation headlands)

Action Link
Bird Conservation
  1. Leave headlands in fields unsprayed (conservation headlands)

    A replicated, controlled study in 1984 on the same farm in Hampshire as in (Rands 1985) and on eight sites in East Anglia, UK (Rands 1986), found that grey partridge Perdix perdix broods had significantly higher survival, and were significantly larger on plots with conservation headlands, compared to control plots with conventionally-sprayed headlands (average of 75% survival and 7.8-10.0 chicks/brood for five broods on conservation headland plots vs 60% and 4.7-7.5 chicks/brood for four broods on conventional plots, 196 broods surveyed). This paper also describes similar, although less conclusive effects on two non-native gamebirds (red-legged partridge Alectoris rufa and ring-necked pheasant Phasianus colchicus). This study was part of the same experimental set-up as (Rands et al. 1984, Rands 1985, Rands & Sotherton 1986, Dover et al. 1990, Sotherton 1991, Dover 1997).

  2. Leave headlands in fields unsprayed (conservation headlands)

    A replicated, controlled study in 1984 on the same farm as in (Rands et al. 1984, Rands 1985) and on eight sites in East Anglia, England (Rands 1986), found that grey partridge Perdix perdix broods had significantly higher survival, and were significantly larger on plots with conservation headlands, compared to control plots with conventionally-sprayed headlands (average of 75% survival and 7.8-10.0 chicks/brood for five broods on conservation headland plots vs. 60% and 4.7-7.5 chicks/brood for four broods on conventional plots; 196 broods surveyed). This paper also describes similar, although less conclusive effects on two non-native gamebirds.

     

Output references

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, terrestrial 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 18

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust