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: Field assessment of great crested newt Triturus cristatus mitigation projects in England

Published source details

Lewis B., Griffiths R.A. & Barrios Y. (2007) Field assessment of great crested newt Triturus cristatus mitigation projects in England. Natural England report. Natural England Research Report NERR001.


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

Create artificial hibernacula or aestivation sites Amphibian Conservation

A replicated, before-and-after study in 2005 of four mitigation projects in England, UK (Lewis, Griffiths & Barrios 2007) found that providing artificial hibernacula and refugia for great crested newts Triturus cristatus helped to maintain populations (see also Lewis 2012). Populations persisted at all four sites following development, although numbers were lower than pre-development at two sites. After three or more years, three of the populations were classified as ‘medium’ sized (peak count: 19–86) and the other as ‘large’ (167). Mitigation projects during development work had been carried out at least three years previously. Artificial hibernacula and refugia were created at sites in 1992–1999. Terrestrial habitat management was also undertaken at the sites and two sites received 37–73 translocated newts. Monitoring was undertaken in March–May 2005 using egg searches, torch surveys, bottle trapping and mark-recapture.

 

Create refuges Amphibian Conservation

A replicated, before-and-after study in 2005 of four mitigation projects in England, UK (Lewis, Griffiths & Barrios 2007) found that providing refugia and artificial hibernacula for great crested newts Triturus cristatus helped maintain populations (see also Lewis 2012). Populations persisted at all four sites following development, although numbers were lower than pre-development at two sites. Three populations were classified as ‘medium’ (peak count: 19–86) and the other as ‘large’ (167) after three or more years. Mitigation projects during development work had been carried out at least three years previously. Artificial hibernacula and refugia were created at sites in 1992–1999. Terrestrial habitat management was also undertaken at the sites and two sites received 37–73 translocated newts. Monitoring was undertaken in March–May 2005 using egg searches, torch surveys, bottle trapping and mark-recapture.

 

Create ponds for great crested newts Amphibian Conservation

A replicated, before-and-after study in 2005 of seven mitigation projects in England, UK (Lewis, Griffiths & Barrios 2007) found that translocated great crested newt Triturus cristatus established populations at four sites with created ponds. The four populations were classified as ‘medium’ sized (peak count: 16–86) after three or more years. Very low numbers were captured at the other three sites (peak count: 1–2). Newts used nine of 13 created ponds. Mitigation projects during development work had been carried out at least three years previously. Between one and three ponds were created and 2–164 newts translocated to each site in 1992–2000. Terrestrial habitat management was also undertaken at two sites. Monitoring was undertaken in March–May 2005 using egg searches, torch surveys, bottle trapping and mark-recapture.

 

Translocate great crested newts Amphibian Conservation

A replicated, before-and-after study in 2005 of nine mitigation projects in England, UK (Lewis, Griffiths & Barrios 2007) found that translocation of great crested newts Triturus cristatus resulted in the maintenance or establishment of populations at all sites. However, after three or more years, numbers captured at five of the nine populations were lower than that prior to translocation or less than the total number translocated. Four populations were classified as ‘small’ (peak count: 1–3) and five as ‘medium’ (16–86). Mitigation projects during development work had been carried out at least three years previously. Between two and 164 newts were translocated at each site between 1987 and 2001. Terrestrial habitat management was also undertaken at two sites and artificial refugia provided at one. Monitoring was undertaken in March–May 2005 using egg searches, torch surveys, bottle trapping and mark-recapture.

 

 

Clear vegetation Amphibian Conservation

A before-and-after study in 2005 of a mitigation site in England, UK (Lewis, Griffiths & Barrios 2007) found that vegetation clearance, along with other terrestrial and aquatic habitat management, maintained a great crested newt Triturus cristatus population (see also (ewis 2012). The population was classified as ‘large’ (peak count: 167) six years after habitat management. Management included tree felling, clearance of both terrestrial and aquatic vegetation and the re-profiling of ponds. Artificial hibernacula and refugia were also created in 1999. Monitoring was undertaken in March–May 2005 using egg searches, torch surveys and bottle trapping.

 

Create refuges Amphibian Conservation

A continuation of a study (Lewis, Griffiths & Barrios 2007) in 2006–2010 of four mitigation projects in England, UK (Lewis 2012) found that providing refugia and artificial hibernacula, along with other management for great crested newts Triturus cristatus helped to maintain populations. Numbers decreased initially at two sites (over 100 to 19; 42 to 31 in 2005), but had increased to 60 at both sites by 2009 and 2010 respectively. Populations decreased between 2005 and 2010 at the other two sites (167 to 10; 86 to 40). Artificial hibernacula and refugia were created at sites in 1992–1999. Terrestrial habitat management was also undertaken at the sites and one site received 73 translocated newts. Monitoring was undertaken in March–May using egg searches, torch surveys, bottle trapping and mark-recapture.