Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore island ecosystems Three studies evaluated the effects of restoring island ecosystems on reptile populations. One study was in each of the Seychelles, the USA and the US Virgin Islands. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Occupancy/range (1 study): One study in the US Virgin Islands found that following translocation to a restored island, St. Croix ground lizards expanded their range during the fifth to seventh year after release. Reproductive success (2 studies): One study in the Seychelles found that following a range of interventions carried out to restore an island ecosystem, the number of hawksbill and green turtle nests increased. One replicated study in the USA found that during and after an island was rebuilt, diamondback terrapins continued to nest on the island. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3736https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3736Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:00:08 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore grasslands Four studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring grasslands on reptile populations. One study was in each of South Africa, China, Australia and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, controlled study in Mongolia found that areas of restored grassland had similar species richness compared to unrestored areas. One replicated, site comparison study in South Africa found that an area of restored grassland had lower species richness than natural grassland in three of four comparisons. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One of two replicated, controlled studies (including one paired study) in Mongolia and the USA found that areas of restored grassland had higher lizard abundance than unrestored areas. The other study found that areas of restored grassland had fewer snakes than unrestored areas. One replicated, site comparison study in South Africa found that an area of restored grassland had a similar abundance of reptiles compared to two areas of natural grassland. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that some areas of restored grassland and rocky outcrops were recolonized by pink-tailed worm-lizards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3737https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3737Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:05:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore savannas One study evaluated the effects of creating or restoring savannas on reptile populations. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in Australia found that reptile species richness was higher following restoration of savanna-like habitat on a golf course. POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3739https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3739Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:15:59 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore forests Six studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring forests on reptile populations. Three studies were in the USA, two were in Australia and one was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One of two replicated studies (including one randomized, controlled study) in the USA and Australia found that restored and natural riparian forest had similar reptile species richness. The other study found that restored forest areas had higher reptile species richness than remnant forest areas. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that the type of restoration had mixed effects on reptile species richness in tropical and subtropical areas. POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of three replicated studies (including two controlled, before-and-after studies) in the USA and Mexico found that areas of restored forest had similar abundances of snakes and six lizard species as unrestored areas. The other study found that restoring forest stands had mixed effects on the abundance of reptiles. One replicated, site comparison study in Australia found that areas with different restoration types had similar reptile abundance in tropical and subtropical areas. One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Australia found that restored forest areas had higher reptile abundance than remnant forest areas. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3749https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3749Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:15:47 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore shrubland One study evaluated the effects of creating or restoring shrubland on reptile populations. This study was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Mexico found that areas of restored shrubland had similar reptile and amphibian species richness compared to areas that were not restored. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, controlled study in Mexico found that areas of restored shrubland had a higher abundance of lizards than areas that were not restored. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3751https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3751Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:28:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore beaches One study evaluated the effects of restoring beaches on reptile populations. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Reproductive success (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that removing beach debris from one section of beach did not increase nesting success in that section. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that after the removal of beach debris from one of three beach sections, a higher percentage of both the total nests laid and failed nesting attempts occurred in that section. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3752https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3752Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:30:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore waterways Two studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring waterways on reptile populations. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that restored and pristine streams had similar turtle community composition. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One site comparison study in the USA found that restored and pristine streams had a similar abundance of turtles. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that creating new waterways by redirecting flows during forest restoration had mixed effects of reptile abundance. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3754https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3754Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:37:31 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create or restore wetlands Seven studies evaluated the effects of creating or restoring wetlands on reptile populations. Six studies were in the USA and one was in Kenya. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA found that reptile species richness and diversity tended to be lower in a restored wetland compared to an undisturbed wetland. One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that created, restored, enhanced and natural wetlands had similar combined reptile and amphibian species richness. One site comparison study in the USA found that created wetlands and adjacent natural forest had similar reptile species richness and diversity. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Reproductive success (2 studies): One site comparison study in the USA found that a created wetland was used by snapping turtles for egg laying. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the USA found that in a restored wetland, 16 snake, six lizard and eight turtle species successfully reproduced. BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES) Use (4 studies): One site comparison study and three before-and-after studies (including one replicated study) in the USA and Kenya found that created or restored wetlands were used by black rat snakes and snapping turtles, turtles, lizards, green grass snakes and terrapins, six or 18 reptile species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3755https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3755Tue, 14 Dec 2021 13:41:45 +0000
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