Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use taste-aversion to reduce predation of livestock by mammals to deter human-wildlife conflict Nine studies evaluated the effects of using taste-aversion to reduce predation of livestock by mammals to deter human-wildlife conflict. Six studies were in the USA, two were in Canada and one was at an unnamed location. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (9 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (9 studies): Three of seven replicated studies (including three controlled studies), in the USA, Canada and at an unnamed location, found that coyotes killed fewer sheep, rabbits or turkeys after taste-aversion treatment. The other four studies found that taste-aversion treatment did not reduce killing by coyotes of chickens, sheep or rabbits. A replicated, before-and-after study in the USA found that taste-aversion treatment reduced egg predation by mammalian predators whilst a replicated, controlled, paired sites study in the USA found no such effect. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2429https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2429Mon, 01 Jun 2020 15:38:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate mammals to reduce overpopulation Three studies evaluated the effects of translocating mammals to reduce overpopulation. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): A before-and-after study in the USA found that adult elk numbers approximately halved after the translocation of wolves to the reserve. Reproductive success (1 study): A before-and-after study in the USA found that elk calf:cow ratios approximately halved after the translocation of wolves to the reserve. Survival (2 studies): A study in Australia found that koalas translocated to reduce overpopulation had lower survival than individuals in the source population. A study in the USA found that following translocation to reduce over-abundance, white-tailed deer had lower survival rates compared to non-translocated deer at the recipient site. Occupancy/range (1 study): A study in the USA found that following translocation to reduce over-abundance at the source site, white-tailed deer had similar home range sizes compared to non-translocated deer at the recipient site. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2430https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2430Mon, 01 Jun 2020 15:46:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate predators for ecosystem restoration Two studies evaluated the effects of translocating predators for ecosystem restoration. These studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)                                POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): A before-and-after study in the USA found that following reintroduction of wolves, populations of beavers and bison increased. A before-and-after study in the USA found that after the translocation of wolves to the reserve, adult elk numbers approximately halved. Reproductive success (1 study): A before-and-after study in the USA found that after the translocation of wolves to the reserve, elk calf:cow ratios approximately halved. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2431https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2431Mon, 01 Jun 2020 16:12:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Dispose of livestock carcasses to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects of disposing of livestock carcasses to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): One site comparison study in the USA found that burying or removing sheep carcasses reduced predation on livestock by coyotes, but burning carcasses did not alter livestock predation rates. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2432https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2432Tue, 02 Jun 2020 08:05:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use guardian animals (e.g. dogs, llamas, donkeys) bonded to livestock to deter predators to reduce human-wildlife conflict Twelve studies evaluated the effects of using guardian animals (e.g. dogs, llamas, donkeys) bonded to livestock to deter mammals from predating these livestock to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Four studies were in the USA, two were in Kenya and one each was in Solvakia, Argentina, Australia, Cameroon, South Africa, and Namibia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (12 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (12 studies): Four of seven studies, (including four site comparison studies), in the USA, Kenya, Solvakia, Australia and Cameroon, found that guardian animals reduced attacks on livestock by predators. The other three studies reported mixed results with reductions in attacks on some but not all age groups or livestock species and reductions for nomadic but not resident pastoralists. Two studies, (including one site comparison study and one before-and-after study), in Argentina and Namibia, found that using dogs to guard livestock reduced the killing of predators by farmers but the number of black-backed jackals killed by farmers and dogs combined increased. A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that fewer sheep guarded by llamas were predated by carnivores in one of two summers whilst a replicated, before-and-after study in South Africa found that using dogs or alpacas to guard livestock reduced attacks by predators. A randomized, replicated, controlled study in USA found that dogs bonded with livestock reduced contact between white-tailed deer and domestic cattle. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2433https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2433Tue, 02 Jun 2020 08:41:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use holding pens at release site prior to release of translocated mammals Thirty-five studies evaluated the effects of using holding pens at the release site prior to release of translocated mammals. Ten studies were in the USA, seven were in South Africa, four were in the UK, three studies were in France, two studies were in each of Canada, Australia and Spain and one was in each of Kenya, Zimbabwe, Italy, Ireland and India. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (31 STUDIES) Abundance (4 studies): Three of four studies (two replicated, one before-and-after study) in South Africa, Canada, France and Spain found that following release from holding pens at release sites (in some cases with other associated actions), populations of roe deer, European rabbits and lions increased in size. The other study found that elk numbers increased at two of four sites. Reproductive success (10 studies): A replicated study in the USA found that translocated gray wolves had similar breeding success in the first two years after release when adult family groups were released together from holding pens or when young adults were released directly into the wild. Seven of nine studies (including two replicated and one controlled study) in Kenya, South Africa, the USA, Italy, Ireland, Australia and the UK found that following release from holding pens at release sites (in some cases with other associated actions), translocated populations of roan, California ground squirrels, black-tailed prairie dogs, lions, four of four mammal populations, most female red squirrels and some pine martens reproduced successfully. Two studies found that one of two groups of Cape buffalo and one pair out of 18 Eurasian badgers reproduced. Survival (26 studies): Two of seven studies (five controlled, three replicated studies) in Canada, the USA, France, the UK found that releasing animals from holding pens at release sites (in some cases with associated actions) resulted in higher survival for water voles and female European rabbits compared to those released directly into the wild. Four studies found that translocated swift foxes, gray wolves, Eurasian lynx and Gunnison's prairie dogs released from holding pens had similar survival rates to those released directly into the wild. One study found that translocated American martens released from holding pens had lower survival than those released directly into the wild. Two of four studies (three controlled) in South Africa, Spain, and the USA found that translocated African wild dogs and European rabbits that spent longer in holding pens at release sites had a higher survival rate after release. One study found mixed effects for swift foxes and one found no effect of time in holding pens for San Joaquin kit foxes. Eleven studies (one replicated) in Kenya, South Africa, the USA, France, Italy, Ireland, India, Australia and the UK found that after release from holding pens at release sites (in some cases with other associated actions), translocated populations or individuals survived between one month and six years, and four of four mammal populations survived. Two studies in the UK and South Africa found that no released red squirrels or rock hyraxes survived over five months or 18 days respectively. One of two controlled studies (one replicated, one before-and-after) in South Africa and the USA found that following release from holding pens, survival of translocated lions was higher than that of resident animals, whilst that of translocated San Joaquin kit foxes was lower than that of resident animals. A study in Australia found that translocated bridled nailtail wallabies kept in holding pens prior to release into areas where predators had been controlled had similar annual survival to that of captive-bred animals. Condition (1 study): A controlled study in the UK found that translocated common dormice held in pens before release gained weight after release whereas those released directly lost weight. BEHAVIOUR (5 STUDIES) Behaviour change (5 studies): Three studies (one replicated) in the USA and Canada found that following release from holding pens, fewer translocated sea otters and gray wolves returned to the capture site compared to those released immediately after translocation, and elk remained at all release sites. Two studies in Zimbabwe and South Africa found that following release from holding pens, translocated lions formed new prides. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2434https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2434Tue, 02 Jun 2020 08:44:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use loud noises to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Three studies evaluated the effects of using loud noises to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (3 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (3 studies): Three replicated studies (including two controlled studies), in the USA and Mexico, found that loud noises at least temporarily deterred sheep predation or food consumption by coyotes and (combined with visual deterrents) deterred livestock predation by large predators. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2435https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2435Tue, 02 Jun 2020 09:12:23 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate predators away from livestock to reduce human-wildlife conflict Eleven studies evaluated the effects on mammals of translocating predators away from livestock to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Four studies were in the USA two were in Botswana, one each was in Canada, Zimbabwe and Namibia, one was in Venezuela and Brazil and one covered multiple locations in North and Central America and Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES) Reproductive success (2 studies): Two studies, in Zimbabwe and Namibia, found that predators translocated away from livestock bred in the wild after release. Survival (8 studies): Four of eight studies (including three replicated studies and a systematic review), in the USA, Canada, Zimbabwe, South America, Botswana and Namibia, found that translocating predators reduced their survival or that most did not survive more than 6–12 months after release. Three studies found that translocated predators had similar survival to that of established animals or persisted in the wild and one study could not determine the effect of translocation on survival. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (6 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (6 studies): Four of six studies (including a review and a systematic review), in the USA, South America and in North and Central America and Africa, found that some translocated predators continued to predate livestock or returned to their capture sites. One study found that translocated predators were not subsequently involved in livestock predation and one study could not determine the effect of translocation on livestock predation. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2436https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2436Tue, 02 Jun 2020 09:18:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide diversionary feeding to reduce predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Two studies evaluated the effects of providing diversionary feeding to reduce predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. One study was in the USA and one was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Reproductive success (1 study): A controlled study in the USA found that diversionary feeding of predators did not increase overall nest success rates for ducks. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): One of two studies (one controlled, one before-and-after study) in the USA and Canada found that diversionary feeding reduced striped skunk predation on duck nests. The other study found that diversionary feeding of grizzly bears did not reduce predation on livestock. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2437https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2437Tue, 02 Jun 2020 09:36:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Keep livestock in enclosures to reduce predation by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects of keeping livestock in enclosures to reduce predation by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in Portugal. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A replicated study in Portugal found fewer wolf attacks on cattle on farms where cattle were confined for at least some of the time compared to those with free-ranging cattle. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2438https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2438Tue, 02 Jun 2020 09:42:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install electric fencing to protect crops from mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Eleven studies evaluated the effects of installing electric fencing to protect crops from mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Three studies were in Japan, three were in the USA, two were in the UK and one each was in Namibia, India and Guinea-Bissau. KEY COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (11 studies) Human-wildlife conflict (11 studies): Nine of 11 studies (including three before-and-after studies and three controlled studies), in the USA, the UK, Japan, Namibia, India and Guinea-Bissau, found that electric fences deterred crossings by mammals, ranging in size from European rabbits to elephants. Two studies had mixed results, with some fence designs deterring elephants and black bears. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2439https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2439Tue, 02 Jun 2020 09:46:58 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install metal grids at field entrances to prevent mammals entering to reduce human-wildlife conflict Two studies evaluated the effects on mammal incursions of installing metal grids at field entrances to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Both of these studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): One of two replicated studies (including one controlled study), in the USA, found that deer guards (horizontal, ground-level metal grids) reduced entry into enclosures by white-tailed deer whilst the other found that they did not prevent crossings by mule deer or elk. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2440https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2440Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:19:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install automatically closing gates at field entrances to prevent mammals entering to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects on mammal movements of installing automatically closing gates at field entrances to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in USA. KEY COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A replicated, controlled study, in the USA found that vehicle-activated bump gates prevented white-tailed deer from entering enclosures. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2441https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2441Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:22:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use tree nets to deter wild mammals from fruit crops to reduce human-wildlife conflict We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using tree nets to deter mammals from fruit crops to reduce human-wildlife conflict. ‘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%2F2442https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2442Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:25:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release translocated/captive-bred mammals to areas outside historical range Seven studies evaluated the effects of releasing translocated or captive-bred mammals to areas outside their historical range. Three studies were in Australia, one study was in each of Kenya, France and South Africa, and one was a review of studies in Andorra, Spain and France. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Three of four studies in Kenya, Australia, France, and South Africa found that after translocating mammals to areas outside their historical range, populations increased for Alpine marmots, most of 22 herbivorous species and bridled nailtail wallabies (including captive and enclosure bred animals). A study in Kenya found that a population of translocated roan persisted for more than six years but did not increase. A review of studies in Andorra, Spain and France found that following translocation to areas outside their native range, alpine marmots had similar densities and family group sizes to those of populations in their native range. Reproductive success (1 study): A study in Kenya found that a population of roan translocated into an area outside their native range persisted and bred for more than six years. Survival (3 studies): A study in Australia found that captive-bred, translocated and enclosure born bridled nailtail wallabies released into areas outside their historical range had annual survival rates of 40–88% over four years. A study in Australia found that most captive-bred Tasmanian devils released into an area outside their native range survived over four months. A study in Australia found that half the captive-bred and wild-caught translocated eastern barred bandicoots released to a red fox-free island outside their historical range survived for at least two months. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2443https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2443Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:27:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Deter predation of livestock by mammals by having people close by to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects of deterring predation of livestock by mammals by having people close by to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in Kenya. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): One study in Kenya recorded fewer attacks by predators on livestock in bomas when people were also present but the presence of people did not reduce predator attacks on grazing herds. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2444https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2444Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:28:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Deter predation of livestock by herding livestock using adults instead of children to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects on predatory mammal activities of herding livestock using adults instead of children to reduce human-wildlife conflict. This study was in Cameroon. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A site comparison study in Cameroon found that using adults to herd livestock reduced losses through predation relative to that of livestock herded solely by children. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2445https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2445Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:32:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Deter predation of livestock by using shock/electronic dog-training collars to reduce human-wildlife conflict Five studies evaluated the effects of using shock/electronic dog-training collars to deter predation of livestock to reduce human-wildlife conflict. All five studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (5 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (5 studies): Three of four replicated studies (including two controlled studies), in the USA, found that electric shock collars reduced livestock predation or bait consumption by wolves, whilst one found that they did not reduce wolf bait consumption. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found that electric shock collars reduced the frequency of attacks by captive coyotes on lambs. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2446https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2446Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:37:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release translocated/captive-bred mammals at a specific time (e.g. season, day/night) Seven studies evaluated the effects of releasing translocated or captive-bred mammals at a specific time (season or day/night). Three studies were in the USA and one each was in the UK, Canada, Ireland and Hungary. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Survival (7 studies): Four of five studies in the UK, Canada and the USA found that translocated common dormice, black bears and Canadian lynx and captive-bred swift foxes released in a specific season had higher survival rates than those released during another season. The other study found that red squirrels translocated in autumn and winter had similar survival rates. A randomised, replicated, controlled study in Hungary found that translocated European ground squirrels released during the morning had higher recapture rates than those released during the afternoon. A study in the USA found that most translocated kangaroo rats released at dusk in artificial burrows supplied with food died within five days of release. Condition (1 study): A study in the UK found that common dormice translocated during summer lost less weight than those translocated during spring. BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES) Behaviour change (2 studies): Two studies in the UK and USA found that common dormice translocated during spring and black bears translocated during winter travelled shorter distances or settled closer to the release site than those translocated during summer. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2447https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2447Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:40:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Fit livestock with protective collars to reduce risk of predation by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects of fitting livestock with protective collars to reduce human-wildlife conflict on rates of livestock killings by predators. This study was in South Africa. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A replicated, before-and-after study in South Africa found that livestock protection collars reduced predation on livestock by carnivores. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2448https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2448Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:46:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use lights and sound to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Three studies evaluated the effects of using lights and sound to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. All three studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (3 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (3 studies): Three replicated studies (including one controlled study), in the USA, found that devices emitting sounds and lights deterred predators from predating sheep or consuming bait. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2449https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2449Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:49:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use scent to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Three studies evaluated the effects of using scent to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Botswana. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (3 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (3 studies): Two of three studies (including one replicated, before-and-after study), in the USA and Botswana, found that applying scent marks from unfamiliar African wild dogs and grey wolves restricted movements of these species. The other study found that applying scent marks from coyotes did not restrict their movements. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2450https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2450Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:54:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use watchmen to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using watchmen to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict. ‘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%2F2451https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2451Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:57:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use mobile phone communications to warn farmers of problematic mammals (e.g. elephants) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using mobile phone communications to warn farmers of problematic mammals (e.g. elephants). ‘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%2F2452https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2452Tue, 02 Jun 2020 10:59:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Release translocated/captive-bred mammals into area with artificial refuges/breeding sites Seventeen studies evaluated the effects of releasing translocated or captive-bred mammals into areas with artificial refuges or breeding sites. Five studies were in the USA, three were in Australia, three were in Spain, two were in the UK and one was in each of Ireland, South Africa, Hungary and Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (15 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of three studies (two replicated, two controlled) in Spain and the USA found that translocation release sites with artificial burrows provided had higher abundances of European rabbits and densities of California ground squirrels compared to those without. The other study found that abundance of European rabbits following translocation was similar with and without artificial burrows provided. A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that after translocating black-tailed prairie dogs to areas with artificial burrows, colonies increased in size. A before-and-after study in Spain found that translocating European rabbits into areas with artificial refuges to supplement existing populations did not alter rabbit abundance, although two of three populations persisted for at least three years. Reproductive success (4 studies): Three studies in Australia, Ireland and the UK found that released captive-bred sugar gliders, most translocated female red squirrels and some translocated pine martens provided with nest boxes and supplementary food reproduced. A study of 12 translocation projects in Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland found that translocated European ground squirrels released initially into enclosures or burrows with retention caps reproduced after release, whereas those without enclosures or burrows dispersed from release sites. Survival (9 studies): Five of eight studies in Australia, the USA, UK, Ireland and South Africa found that at release sites with artificial refuges, and in some cases food provided, a population of captive-bred sugar gliders survived at least three years, two of three populations of red-tailed phascogales survived for more than four years, most translocated black bears survived at least one year and over half translocated red squirrels and pine martens survived 8-12 months. Three studies found that at release sites with artificial refuges, food and in one case water provided, no translocated red squirrels survived more than five months, all translocated rock hyraxes died within three months and most translocated Tipton and Heermann’s kangaroo rat spp. died within five days. A randomised, replicated, controlled study in Hungary found that translocated European ground squirrels released into plugged artificial burrows had higher recapture rates than those released into unplugged artificial burrows. BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Use (2 studies): Two studies in Australia found that released captive-bred sugar gliders used artificial nest boxes provided. Behaviour change (1 study): A replicated, before-and-after study in the USA found that translocated Utah prairie dogs released into an area with artificial burrows, after the control of native predators, tended to leave the release site and spent more time being vigilant than before. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2453https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2453Tue, 02 Jun 2020 11:09:26 +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