The frequency and timing of hedgerow cutting effects biodiversity in England and Wales

  • Published source details Maudsley M.J., Marshall E.J.P. & West T.M. (2000) Guidelines for hedge management to improve the conservation value of different types of hedge. Defra report.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Manage hedgerows to benefit wildlife (includes no spray, gap-filling and laying)

Action Link
Farmland Conservation
  1. Manage hedgerows to benefit wildlife (includes no spray, gap-filling and laying)

    A replicated study of hedgerows within seven arable and pastoral farms in England and Wales (Maudsley, Marshall & West 2000) found that cutting frequency and timing affected invertebrate numbers but not plant diversity. Abundance of individual invertebrate groups tended to decline with regular hedge cutting. However, although numbers of some taxa such as jumping plant lice (Psyllids) were higher in uncut sections, cutting increased others, notably herbivores and detritivores such as true bugs (Heteroptera; uncut: 4/plot; annual: 22-28; biennial: 15-23), beetles (Coleoptera; uncut: 4/plot; annual: 5-9; biennial: 8-13), springtails (Collembola) and thrips (Thysanoptera). Cutting in February rather than September reduced numbers of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera; 33 vs 65/plot) and flies (Diptera; 82 vs 118/plot), but increased beetles (Coleoptera; 9-13 vs 5-8) the following summer. Cutting frequency (uncut, annual, biennial and triennial) and timing did not affect numbers of plant species in the hedge or hedge base. Hedge dimensions were greatest on annually cut hedges and smallest on those uncut. The longer the hedge was left between cuts, the more berries were produced (uncut, biennial, annual). Berry numbers were reduced with triennial cuts. Each hedgerow received replicated treatments (15-21) of each cutting frequency and timing. Data were obtained on the abundance of berries (autumn), shrubs, hedge-base flora and invertebrates (May and July) within each hedgerow plot. The same study is presented in Marshall et al. 2001.

    Additional reference

    Marshall, E. J. P., Maudsley, M. J., West, T. M. and Rowcliffe, H. R. (2001) Effects of management on the biodiversity of English hedgerows. 361-365 in: C. Barr and S. Petit (eds) Hedgerows of the World: Their Ecological Functions in Different Landscapes, International Association for Landscape Ecology, 10th Annual Conference of the International Association for Landscape Ecology. September 2001, Birmingham, UK.


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