Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Individual study: Fencing stream banks to exclude livestock did not affect species richness or overall abundance of herpetofauna or macroinvertebrates in Pennsylvania, USA

Published source details

Homyack J.D. & Giuliano W.M (2002) Effect of streambank fencing on herpetofauna in pasture stream zones. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 30, 361–369


This study is summarised as evidence for the intervention(s) shown on the right. The icon shows which synopsis it is relevant to.

Exclude domestic animals or wild hogs by fencing Amphibian Conservation

A replicated, site comparison study in 1998–1999 of streams in pasture in Pennsylvania, USA (Homyack & Giuliano 2002) found that excluding livestock from stream banks did not increase amphibian species richness or abundance overall, but did increase tadpole numbers. There was no significant difference in overall species richness, abundance or biomass, or in the abundance of salamanders, bullfrogs Rana catesbeiana or wood frog Rana sylvatica between fenced and unfenced streams. However, tadpole captures were higher in fenced compared to unfenced areas (20 vs 6). In comparison, captures were higher in unfenced compared to fenced areas for green frogs Rana clamitans (8 vs 5/site) and American toads Bufo americanus (2.4 vs 1.5). Ten grazed and 10 recently fenced (1–2 yrs) streams were selected over 20 farms. Sites were 100m long by 10–15 m wide on both banks. Monitoring was undertaken using two drift-fences per site. Each fence had a pitfall trap, side-flap pail-trap and funnel trap that were checked 3–4 times/week in April–July.