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: To protect or neglect? Design, monitoring, and evaluation of a law enforcement strategy to recover small populations of wild tigers and their prey

Published source details

Johnson A., Goodrich J., Hansel T., Rasphone A., Saypanya S., Vongkhamheng C., Venevongphet . & Strindberg S. (2016) To protect or neglect? Design, monitoring, and evaluation of a law enforcement strategy to recover small populations of wild tigers and their prey. Biological Conservation, 202, 99-109


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

Provide/increase anti-poaching patrols Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

A before-and-after study in 2007–2012 in a mainly grassland and forest protected area in Lao People's Democratic Republic (Johnson et al. 2016) found that increasing patrol intensity did not lead to higher tiger Panthera tigris abundance. Patrol effort was positively correlated with funding, but not with tiger abundance trends. The number of large tiger tracks (pads >7 cm wide) at the end of the six-year study period (3/1,000 km patrolled) was lower than that over the first three years (8/1,000 km patrolled). The proportion of collected carnivore scats that were from tigers decreased to 3.6% at the end of the study from 15.4–15.6% in the first two years. Patrol effort in a 5,950 km2 protected area increased from 1.7 days/part-time team in 2005–2007 to a peak of 22.7 days/full-time team in 2008–2009, then dropped by 4.2% in 2009–2012. Track data and scats were collected by foot patrols and other fieldworkers. Scats were identified to species by DNA analysis.

(Summarised by Nick Littlewood)