Study

Mammals or reptiles, as surveyed by pittraps, as bio-indicators of rehabilitation success for mine sites in the Goldfields region of Western Australia?

  • Published source details Thompson G.G. & Thompson S.A. (2005) Mammals or reptiles, as surveyed by pittraps, as bio-indicators of rehabilitation success for mine sites in the Goldfields region of Western Australia?. Pacific Conservation Biology, 11, 268-286.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Restore former mining or energy production sites

Action Link
Reptile Conservation

Restore former mining sites

Action Link
Terrestrial Mammal Conservation
  1. Restore former mining or energy production sites

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2000–2002 of woodland and scrub at five mines in Western Australia, Australia (Thompson & Thompson 2005) found that reptiles recolonized restored sites over three–nine years, although species richness and abundances were lower than on adjacent, undisturbed sites. The number of reptile species caught in restored sites were lower (9–16 species) than in adjacent, undisturbed sites (17–35 species). Reptile abundances were generally less on restored sites than undisturbed adjacent sites (results reported as model outputs). Five former mine site waste dumps, where restoration had started three–nine years previously, and an unmined area adjacent to each dump were monitored. At four mines, pitfall traps and drift fencing were used to survey sites over a seven-day period, on 10 occasions, from spring 2000 to winter 2002. At one mine, surveying was carried out five times, from spring 2001 to winter 2002.

    (Summarised by: Katie Sainsbury)

  2. Restore former mining sites

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2000–2002 of woodland and scrub at five mines in Western Australia, Australia (Thompson & Thompson 2005) found that restored sites had a similar mammal species richness compared to unmined sites. The average number of species/site/month in restored sites (2–4) was similar to that in unmined sites (2–5). The overall number of mammal species recorded/site was also similar (restored: 5–8; unmined: 4–7). Five former mine site waste dumps, where restoration had started 3–9 years previously, and an unmined area adjacent to each dump were sampled. At four mines, pit-traps and drift fencing were used to sample sites over a seven-day period, on 10 occasions, from spring 2000 to winter 2002. At one mine, sampling was carried out five times, from spring 2001 to winter 2002.

    (Summarised by: Nick Littlewood)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

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, 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 19

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


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