Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use a larger mesh size on trammel nets One study examined the effects of using a larger mesh size on trammel nets on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study was in the North Atlantic Ocean (Portugal).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch community composition (1 study): One replicated, controlled, study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that using larger mesh sizes in the inner and/or outer panels of trammel nets did not affect the community composition of unwanted catch of non-commercial invertebrates (discard). POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled, study in the North Atlantic Ocean found that using larger mesh sizes in the inner and/or outer panels of trammel nets did not reduce the abundance of unwanted catch of non-commercial invertebrates (discard). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2141https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2141Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:07:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use traps instead of fishing nets One study examined the effects of using traps instead of fishing nets on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study took place in the Mediterranean Sea (Spain).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Mediterranean Sea found that the combined amount of unwanted catch of invertebrates and fish appeared lower using plastic traps than trammel nets, but higher using collapsible traps. OTHER (1 STUDY) Commercial catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Mediterranean Sea found that the catch of commercially targeted lobsters was lower using traps than in trammel nets. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2142https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2142Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:08:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify the design of traps Two studies examined the effects of modifying the design of traps on subtidal benthic invertebrates. One study took place in the Mediterranean Sea (Spain), and one in the South Pacific Ocean (New Zealand).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Unwanted catch abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in the Mediterranean Sea and the South Pacific Ocean found that the amount of combined unwanted catch of invertebrates and fish varied with the type of trap design used and the area. OTHER (1 STUDY) Commercial catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Mediterranean Sea found that plastic traps caught some legal-size commercially targeted lobsters while collapsible traps caught none. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2143https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2143Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:11:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify the position of traps Two studies examined the effects of modifying the position of traps on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the Varangerfjord (Norway), the other in the North Atlantic Ocean (Spain).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch species richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the North Atlantic found that semi-floating traps caught fewer unwanted catch species compared to standard bottom traps. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Unwanted catch abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in the Varangerfjord and the North Atlantic found that floating or semi-floating traps caught fewer unwanted invertebrates compared to standard bottom traps. OTHER (2 STUDIES) Commercial catch abundance (2 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in the Varangerfjord and the North Atlantic found that floating or semi-floating traps caught similar amounts (abundance and biomass) of commercially targeted species as standard bottom traps. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2144https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2144Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:14:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use different bait species in traps One study examined the effects of using different bait species in traps on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study took place in the South Pacific Ocean (New Zealand).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the South Pacific Ocean found that the type of bait used in fishing pots did not change the amount of unwanted invertebrates caught. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2145https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2145Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:16:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Fit one or more soft, semi-rigid, or rigid grids or frames on pots and traps One study examined the effects of fitting one or more soft, semi-rigid, or rigid grids or frames on pots and traps on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study took place in the Corindi River system (Australia).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Corindi River system found that traps fitted with escape frames appeared to reduce the proportion of unwanted undersized mud crabs caught, compared to conventional traps without escape frames. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2146https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2146Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:17:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Fit one or more mesh escape panels/windows on pots and traps We found no studies that evaluated the effects of fitting one or more mesh escape panels/windows on pots and traps on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2147https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2147Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:18:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase the mesh size of pots and traps One study examined the effects of increasing the mesh size of pots and traps on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study took place in the Corindi River system (Australia).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Corindi River system found that traps designed with larger mesh appeared to reduce the proportion of unwanted undersized mud crabs caught, compared to conventional traps of smaller mesh. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2148https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2148Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:20:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Fit one or more soft, semi-rigid, or rigid grids or frames and increase the mesh size of pots and traps One study examined the effects of fitting one or more soft, semi-rigid, or rigid grids or frames and increasing the mesh size of pots and traps on subtidal benthic invertebrates. The study took place in the Corindi River system (Australia).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Unwanted catch abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in the Corindi River system found that traps fitted with escape frames and designed with larger mesh appeared to reduce the proportion of unwanted undersized mud crabs caught, compared to conventional traps without escape frames and smaller mesh. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2149https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2149Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:21:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release live unwanted catch first before handling commercial species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of releasing live unwanted catch first before handling commercial species on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2150https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2150Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:21:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Modify harvest methods of macroalgae We found no studies that evaluated the effects of modifying harvest methods of macroalgae on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this intervention during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore, we have no evidence to indicate whether or not the intervention has any desirable or harmful effects.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2151https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2151Tue, 22 Oct 2019 11:22:45 +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
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.

Accept & continue