Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain lowland heathland We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining lowland heath on bird 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%2F226https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F226Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:31:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain rush pastures We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining rush pastures on bird 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%2F227https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F227Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:32:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional water meadows A replicated study from the UK found that northern lapwing and common redshank populations increased on nature reserves managed to maintain water meadows. Two replicated studies from the Netherlands found that there were more waders or birds overall on specially managed meadows or 12.5 ha plots including several management interventions than on conventional fields, but one study found that these differences were present before the management scheme was introduced and the other found no differences between individual fields under different management. A replicated study from the UK found that common snipe decreased on nature reserves managed to maintain water meadows and a replicated before-and-after study from the Netherlands found that wader population trends on specially managed meadows were no different to those on conventionally-managed meadows. A replicated study from the UK found that lapwing populations on three of four water meadow sites managed for conservation did not have high enough productivity to maintain population levels. All three sites were judged deficient in at least one management category. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F229https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F229Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:37:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain upland heath/moorA literature review from the UK found that agri-environment guidelines on moorland grazing were leading to increased bird populations in one region. There were localised problems with overgrazing, burning and scrub encroachment. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F230https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F230Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:50:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant Brassica fodder crops We found no evidence on the effects of planting brassicas on bird 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%2F231https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F231Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:51:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use mixed stocking We found no evidence on the effects of mixed stocking on bird 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%2F232https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F232Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:51:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use traditional breeds of livestockA replicated controlled study in four European countries found no differences in bird abundances between areas grazed with traditional or commercial breeds of livestock. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F233https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F233Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:53:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Employ areas of semi-natural habitat for rough grazing We found no evidence for the effects of employing areas of semi-natural habitat for rough grazing. '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%2F234https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F234Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:56:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wood pasture and parkland We found no intervention-based evidence on the effects of maintaining wood pasture and parkland on bird 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%2F235https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F235Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:57:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Exclude grazers from semi-natural habitats Two replicated (one controlled) studies from the USA found higher species richnesses on sites with grazers excluded; a replicated and controlled study from Argentina found lower species richness in ungrazed sites and a study from the USA found no difference. Seven studies from the USA (three controlled, two replicated) found that overall bird abundance, or the abundances of some species were higher in sites with grazers excluded; seven studies from the USA and Argentina found that overall abundance or the abundances of some species were lower on sites without grazers, or did not differ between treatments. Three studies from the USA investigated productivity and found it higher in sites with grazers excluded. In one study this difference was only found on improved, not unimproved pastures. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F236https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F236Tue, 17 Jul 2012 15:59:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect nests from livestock to reduce trampling A before-and-after study from the Chatham Islands, New Zealand found that the population of Chatham Island oystercatcher increased following several interventions including the erection of fencing around individual nests. A replicated, controlled study in Sweden found that no southern dunlin nests were trampled when protected by cages; some unprotected nests were destroyed. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F237https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F237Tue, 17 Jul 2012 16:44:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Mark fences to reduce bird collision mortalityA randomised, replicated and controlled study from the UK found that fewer birds collided with deer fence marked with orange netting than with unmarked sections. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F238https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F238Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:34:56 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create open patches or strips in permanent grasslandA randomised, replicated and controlled study from the UK found that more Eurasian skylarks used fields with open strips in, but that variations in skylark numbers were too great to draw conclusions from this finding. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F239https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F239Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:38:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional orchardsTwo site comparison studies from the UK and Switzerland found that traditional orchards did not benefit many birds. In Switzerland, one species was associated with orchards; in the UK, the focal species was negatively related to the presence of orchards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F240https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F240Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:42:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage perennial bioenergy crops to benefit wildlife We found no evidence for the effects of managing bioenergy crops for wildlife on bird 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 actionCollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F242https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F242Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:44:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Scare birds from fish farms One before-and-after study from Israel found that the population of pygmy cormorants in the area increased after birds were scared away from fish farms, possibly due to lower persecution. One of two studies that examined fish stocks found that fewer fish were taken from a farm when heron distress calls were played. The other study, a literature review, found no evidence for the effects of scaring birds on fish stocks. Two replicated studies from Belgium and Australia found that using foot patrols to disturb birds from fish farms did not reduce the number of birds present or fish consumption. Ten of eleven studies from across the world, three controlled, found evidence that playing distress calls or using other acoustic deterrents (some with flashes of light) reduced the number of birds at fish farms, or changed bird behaviours. One of these involved underwater broadcasting. One study found effects were only temporary and five found that birds became habituated to noises. Four studies, one replicated and controlled, two before-and-after, found that acoustic deterrents were not effective in scaring birds. Five of seven studies, one controlled, found evidence that visual deterrents (including inflatable ‘Scarey Man’ scarecrows) reduced the number of birds at fish farms. Three found evidence for habituation to deterrents and three studies found no evidence that visual deterrents were effective. Two studies examined other deterrents, finding that trained raptors were effective but that the effects of helicopters and ultra-light aircraft were either inconclusive or very temporary. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F244https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F244Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:00:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Disturb birds at roosts One controlled study from the USA investigated the effects of harassment on fish predation, and found there were fewer double-crested cormorants Phalacrocorax auritus on, and fewer fish were taken from, fish ponds near roosts which were harassed, compared with undisturbed roosts. A review found that there was a reduction in the number of cormorants foraging near roosts after night-time disturbance. Four studies, two replicated, from the USA and Israel, found that cormorants moved away from roosts where they were disturbed at night. One study found that this effect was only temporary. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F245https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F245Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:42:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use electric fencing to exclude fish-eating birdsTwo before-and-after studies from the USA found that electric fencing reduced the use of fish ponds by great blue herons Ardea herodias and great egrets Casmerodius albus. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F247https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F247Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:52:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use netting to exclude fish-eating birds Two replicated studies from Germany and the USA found that netting or closely-spaced string barriers reduced losses of fish or deterred fish-eating birds from fish ponds. A review concluded that excluding birds was an effective way to reduce damage. A series of tests in the Netherlands found that netting or nylon lines over ponds did not prevent birds from landing, but did alter behaviour, whilst a before-and-after study from the USA found that fewer great blue herons Ardea Herodias landed at fish ponds with netting, but that they stayed longer. Two replicated studies from Germany and Israel found that some birds became entangled in netting or closely-spaced string barriers over fish ponds. The Israeli study found that dark, small meshed netting entangled fewer birds than other netting types. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F248https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F248Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:00:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Disturb birds using foot patrolsTwo replicated studies from Belgium and Australia found that using foot patrols to disturb birds from fish farms did not reduce the number of birds present or fish consumption. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F249https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F249Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:05:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use ‘mussel socks’ to prevent birds from attacking shellfishA randomised, replicated controlled experiment in Canada found that fewer medium-sized mussels were taken from mussel socks with a protective ‘sleeve’, compared to un-sleeved socks. There were no differences for small or large mussels. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F250https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F250Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:11:31 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate birds away from fish farmsA study from the USA cited in a review found that translocating birds away from a fish farm appeared to reduce the number of birds at the farm. A study from Belgium found that translocating herons did not seem to be an effective way to reduce bird numbers at fish farms. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F251https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F251Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:15:27 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase water turbidity to reduce fish predation by birdsA randomised trial in France found that little egret Egretta garzetta foraging efficiency was lower in turbid water than clear. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F252https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F252Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:45:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide refuges for fish within pondsA controlled cross-over trial in the UK found that great cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo foraging success was lower in a pond with artificial refuges, compared to a control pond. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F253https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F253Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:49:06 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use in-water devices to reduce fish loss from ponds A before-and-after study from the USA found a 95% reduction in the number of double-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus at two ponds in a fish farm following the installation of underwater ropes. A replicated study at a fish farm in Australia found that hanging gill nets in ponds did not decrease the number of cormorants swimming in ponds. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F254https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F254Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:54:38 +0100