Translocate mammals away from sites of proposed energy developments

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Source countries

Key messages

  • Two studies evaluated the effects of translocating mammals away from sites of proposed energy developments. One study was in Brazil and one was in Australia.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES)

  • Behaviour change (2 studies): A study in Brazil found that lesser anteaters translocated away from a hydroelectric development site remained close to release sites while a study in Australia found that at least one out of eight chuditchs translocated from a site to be mined returned to its site of capture.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A study in 1996–1998 of savanna at a hydroelectric development scheme in Goiás, Brazil (Rodrigues et al. 2001) found that translocated lesser anteaters Tamandua tetradactyla remained close to release sites up to at least nine months after release. Anteaters moved 0.3–2.2 km from release sites during tracking periods. The greatest distances between recorded points in each anteater’s range were 0.3–2.6 km. Eight adult lesser anteaters were moved from an area being flooded for a reservoir and were released at the edge of the reservoir (distances from capture to release sites not stated). They were monitored by radio-tracking, over two weeks each month. Animals were monitored for between four days and nine months and were located between two and thirty times in total, between December 1996 and February 1998.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A study in 2016 in a forest site in Western Australia, Australia (Cannella & Henry 2017) found that following translocation away from an area being cleared for mining, at least one out of eight chuditchs Dasyurus geoffroii returned to its area of capture. Out of eight translocated chuditchs, one was recaptured, 12 days after release, close to the initial capture site. Its recapture site was 13.5 km from the release point and 1 km from the original capture location. Between first capture and recapture, the individual had lost 13% of its body weight but was otherwise in good condition. In January–March 2016, eight chuditchs were live-trapped across four 53–73-ha woodland plots about to be cleared for mining. Chuditchs were marked with PIT-tags and released in a forest area, approximately 14 km away (linear distance). No details are provided about the release procedures or about post-release monitoring.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Littlewood, N.A., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K., Martin, P.A., Lockhart, S.L., Schoonover, R.F., Wilman, E., Bladon, A.J., Sainsbury, K.A., Pimm S. and Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Terrestrial Mammal Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for terrestrial mammals excluding bats and primates. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation
Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation - Published 2020

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

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 latest volume: Volume 17

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