Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective logging instead of clear-cutting One site comparison in Sierra Leone found that primate densities were higher in forest that had been logged at low intensity than in a forest logged at high intensity. One before-and-after study in Madagascar found that the number of lemurs increased following selective logging. One site comparison study in Uganda found that primate densities were similar in forest that had been logged at low intensity and forest logged at high intensity. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1485https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1485Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:26:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use patch retention harvesting instead of clear-cutting We found no evidence for the effects of using patch retention harvesting instead of clear-cutting on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1486https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1486Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:29:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement small and dispersed logging compartments We found no evidence for the effects of implementing small and dispersed logging compartments on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1487https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1487Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:31:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use shelter wood cutting instead of clear-cutting We found no evidence for the effects of using shelter wood cutting instead of clear-cutting on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1488https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1488Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:33:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave hollow trees in areas of selective logging for sleeping sites We found no evidence for the effects of leaving hollow trees in areas on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1489https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1489Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:35:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Clear open patches in the forest We found no evidence for the effects of clearing open patches in the forest on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1490https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1490Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:37:34 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Thin trees within forests We found no evidence for the effects of thinning trees within forests on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1491https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1491Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:39:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manually control or remove secondary mid-storey and ground-level vegetation We found no evidence for the effects of manually controlling or removing secondary mid-storey and ground-level vegetation on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1492https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1492Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:41:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Avoid slashing climbers/lianas, trees housing them, hemi-epiphytic figs, and ground vegetation We found no evidence for the effects of avoiding slashing climbers/lianas, trees housing them, hemi-epiphytic figs, and ground vegetation on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1493https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1493Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:42:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Avoid/minimize logging of important food tree species for primates One before-and-after study in Belize found that a black howler monkey population increased over 13 years after trees important for food for the species were preserved, alongside other interventions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1494https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1494Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:45:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Incorporate forested corridors or buffers into logged areas We found no evidence for the effects of incorporating forested corridors or buffers into logged areas on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1495https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1495Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:47:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Close non-essential roads as soon as logging operations are complete We found no evidence for the effects of closing non-essential roads as soon as logging operations are complete on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1496https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1496Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:48:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use 'set-asides' for primate protection within logging area We found no evidence for the effects of using 'set-asides' for primate protection within logging area on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1497https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1497Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:50:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Work inward from barriers or boundaries (e.g. river) to avoid pushing primates toward an impassable barrier or inhospitable habitat We found no evidence for the effects of working inward from barriers or boundaries to avoid pushing primates toward an impassable barrier or inhospitable habitat on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1498https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1498Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:51:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce the size of forestry teams to include employees only (not family members) We found no evidence for the effects of reducing the size of forestry teams to include employees only and not family members on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1499https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1499Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:53:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Certify forest concessions and market their products as ‘primate friendly’ We found no evidence for the effects of certifying forest concessions and marketing their products as ‘primate friendly’ on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1500https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1500Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:55:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide domestic meat to workers of the logging company to reduce hunting We found no evidence for the effects of providing domestic meat to workers of the logging company to reduce hunting on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1501https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1501Tue, 17 Oct 2017 19:56:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We found no evidence for the effects of coppicing trees on primate populations. 'No evidence' for an action means we have not yet found any studies that directly and quantitatively tested this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1513https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F1513Thu, 19 Oct 2017 09:08:54 +0100
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 21

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 ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust