Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect habitats Four studies (two replicated) from Europe found population increases following habitat protection, more positive population trends in protected habitats, compared with outside, or with increases amounts of protected habitats. A literature review reported that a large number of cranes (Gruidae) of seven species used nature reserves in China, whilst a replicated, randomised and controlled study from Argentina found that some guilds of birds were found at higher species richnesses in protected forests, some at higher densities, and that some showed no differences. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F158https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F158Tue, 15 May 2012 13:48:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Ensure connectivity between habitat patches A replicated, controlled study in Canada found significantly higher abundances of some birds, but not forest specialists, in forest patches connected to a continuous area of forest, than in isolated patches. Another study of the same system found evidence that corridors were used by some bird species more than clearcuts between patches, although corridors near cut forest were not used more than those near uncut stands. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F160https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F160Tue, 15 May 2012 14:47:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide or retain un-harvested buffer strips Four replicated studies from Canada and the USA found that wider buffer strips retained a bird community more similar to that of uncut forest than narrower strips. Two replicated and controlled studies from the USA found that several forest-specialist species were absent from buffers up to 70 m wide. Two replicated and controlled studies from the USA found that richness was higher in buffers <100 m wide, compared to wider strips or forest. A replicated, controlled study in the USA (6) found that thinned buffer strips had lower abundances of forest species than unthinned strips, but higher abundances of early successional species. A replicated study from the USA (4) found that species richness was similar between 20–50 m buffers and original forest. A replicated study from the USA found that bird abundances were higher in 20–50 m wide buffer strips than in original forest. A replicated study in the USA found no differences in productivity of birds nests between buffer strips wider than 350 m, compared to those thinner than 250 m. Whilst a replicated, controlled study from the USA found that predation of artificial nests was significantly higher in buffer strips compared with continuous forest, but that there was no diffrerence between narrow and wide buffers. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F161https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F161Tue, 15 May 2012 14:59:57 +0100