Plant bankside vegetation
-
Overall effectiveness category Evidence not assessed
-
Number of studies: 1
View assessment score
Hide assessment score
How is the evidence assessed?
-
Effectiveness
not assessed -
Certainty
not assessed -
Harms
not assessed
Study locations
Supporting evidence from individual studies
A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in 1995 and 2003–2005 in two streams in North Island, New Zealand (Jowett et al. 2009) found that planting bankside vegetation, along with building fences, bridges and troughs to exclude livestock, had no effect on shortfin Anguilla australis and longfin Anguilla dieffenbachii eel density. The study does not distinguish between the effects of planting vegetation and excluding livestock. Average density did not differ significantly before and 8–10 years after bankside vegetation was planted, and livestock excluded, for shortfin eels (before: 15 eels/100 m, after: 10–12 eels/100 m) or longfin eels (before: 9 eels/100 m, after: 10 eels/100 m). Average density also did not change significantly over the same time period at upstream sites in native forest for shortfin eels (‘before’: 3 eels/100 m, ‘after’: 1–2 eels/100 m) or longfin eels (‘before’: 21 eels/100 m, ‘after’: 5–11 eels/100 m). In 1995–1996, two streams (average 0.9–1.2 m wide) flowing through pasture were restored by planting bankside trees and shrubs, along with building 12 km of fences, five bridges and 12 water troughs to exclude livestock from the stream banks. One unrestored section of each stream located in native forest was sampled for comparison. Eels were surveyed by electrofishing along one unrestored and two restored sections per stream (each 35–50 m long) before restoration in 1995, and after restoration in 2003 and 2005.
Study and other actions tested
Where has this evidence come from?
List of journals searched by synopsis
All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:
Eel Conservation in Inland Habitats