Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide diversionary feeding for mammals to reduce nuisance behaviour and human-wildlife conflict Three studies evaluated the effects of providing diversionary feeding for mammals to reduce nuisance behaviour and human-wildlife conflict. Two studies were in the USA and one was in Slovenia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Uptake (1 study): A site comparison study in Slovenia found that 22-63% of the estimated annual energy content of the diet of brown bears comprised provided diversionary food. OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): Two before-and-after studies (one also a site comparison) in the USA found that diversionary feeding reduced nuisance behaviour by black bears. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2323https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2323Wed, 20 May 2020 10:24:28 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect mammals close to development areas (e.g. by fencing) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of protecting mammals close to development areas (e.g. by fencing). '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%2F2324https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2324Wed, 20 May 2020 11:54:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use signs or access restrictions to reduce disturbance to mammals One study evaluated the effects of using signs or access restrictions to reduce disturbance to mammals. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A replicated, paired sites, site comparison study in the USA found that removing or closing roads increased use of those areas by black bears. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2325https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2325Thu, 21 May 2020 08:38:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Keep cats indoors or in outside runs to reduce predation of wild mammals One study evaluated the effects on potential prey mammals of keeping cats indoors or in outside runs. This study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One replicated study in the UK found that keeping domestic cats indoors at night reduced the number of dead or injured mammals that were brought home. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2326https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2326Thu, 21 May 2020 09:53:43 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set minimum distances for approaching mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of setting a minimum permitted distance to which they can be approached. ‘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%2F2327https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2327Thu, 21 May 2020 10:36:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set maximum number of people/vehicles approaching mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of setting a maximum to the number of people or vehicles permitted to approach mammals. ‘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%2F2328https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2328Thu, 21 May 2020 10:38:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Exclude or limit number of visitors to reserves or protected areas Five studies evaluated the effects on mammals of excluding or limiting the number of visitors to reserves or protected areas. Three studies were in the USA, one was in Ecuador and one was in Thailand. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (1 study): A site comparison study in Ecuador found that a road with restricted access had a higher population of medium-sized and large mammals compared to a road with unrestricted access. Survival (1 study): A before-and-after study in the USA found that temporarily restricting visitor access resulted in fewer bears being killed to protect humans. BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES) Use (3 studies): Three studies (one a before-and-after study), in the USA and Thailand, found that restricting human access to protected areas resulted in increased use of these areas by grizzly bears and leopards. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2330https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2330Thu, 21 May 2020 10:43:02 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use collar-mounted devices to reduce predation by domestic animals Five studies evaluated the effects on mammals of using collar-mounted devices to reduce predation by domestic animals. Three studies were in the UK, one was in Australia and one was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES) Survival (5 studies): Five replicated studies (including four randomized, controlled studies), in the UK, Australia and the USA, found that bells, a sonic device, and a neoprene flap (which inhibits pouncing) mounted on collars, and a brightly coloured and patterned collar all reduced the rate at which cats predated and returned home with mammals. In one of these studies, an effect was only found in autumn, and not in spring. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2332https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2332Thu, 21 May 2020 11:11:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Keep dogs indoors or in outside enclosures to reduce threats to wild mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of keeping dogs indoors or in outside enclosures to reduce threats to wild mammals. ‘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%2F2334https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2334Thu, 21 May 2020 13:18:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Keep domestic cats and dogs well-fed to reduce predation of wild mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of keeping domestic cats and dogs well-fed to reduce predation of wild mammals. ‘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%2F2335https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2335Thu, 21 May 2020 13:21:00 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate problem mammals away from residential areas (e.g. habituated bears) to reduce human-wildlife conflict Eleven studies evaluated the effects of translocating problem mammals (such as bears) away from residential areas to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Six studies were in the USA, two were in Canada, one was Russia, one was in India and one was in Romania. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Survival (6 studies): A controlled study in the USA found that grizzly bears translocated away from conflict situations had lower survival rates than did non-translocated bears. A replicated study study in the USA found that fewer than half of black bears translocated from conflict situations survived after one year. Two of three studies (two controlled), in the USA, found that after translocation away from urban sites, white-tailed deer survival was lower than that of non-translocated deer. The third study found that short-term survival was lower but long-term survival was higher than that of non-translocated deer. A study in Russia found that most Amur tigers translocated after attacking dogs or people did not survive for a year after release. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (6 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (6 studies): Five studies (including one controlled and two replicated studies), in the USA and Canada, of brown/grizzly or black bears translocated away from residential areas or human-related facilities, found that at least some returned to their original capture location and/or continued to cause nuisance. In two of the studies, most returned to their capture area and one black bear returned six times following translocation. A before-and-after study in India found that leopards translocated away from human-dominated areas, attacked more humans and livestock than before-translocation. A controlled study in Romania found that translocated brown bears occurred less frequently inside high potential conflict areas than outside, the opposite to bears that had not been translocated. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2336https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2336Thu, 21 May 2020 14:09:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide paths to limit extent of disturbance to mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of providing paths to limit the extent of disturbance to mammals. ‘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%2F2337https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2337Thu, 21 May 2020 15:21:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use voluntary agreements with locals to reduce disturbance We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of using voluntary agreements with locals to reduce disturbance. ‘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%2F2339https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2339Thu, 21 May 2020 15:51:05 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Habituate mammals to visitors One study evaluated the effects of habituating mammals to visitors. 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): A study in the USA found that brown bears that were highly habituated to humans showed less aggression towards human visitors than did non-habituated bears. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2340https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2340Thu, 21 May 2020 15:54:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Translocate mammals that have habituated to humans (e.g. bears) Two studies evaluated the effects of translocating mammals that have habituated to humans. One study was in the USA and one was in the USA and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): A study in the USA found that almost half of the translocated ‘nuisance’ black bears returned to their capture locations. A review of studies in the USA and Canada found that black bears translocated away from sites of conflict with humans were less likely to return to their capture site if translocated as younger bears, over greater distances, or across geographic barriers. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2341https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2341Thu, 21 May 2020 16:10:20 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Treat mammals to reduce conflict caused by disease transmission to humans One study evaluated the effects of treating mammals to reduce conflict caused by disease transmission to humans. This study was in Germany. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A controlled, before-and-after study in Germany found that following a worming programme, proportions of red foxes infested with small fox tapeworm fell. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2342https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2342Thu, 21 May 2020 17:23:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Place orphaned or abandoned wild young with wild foster parents Three studies evaluated the effects of placing orphaned or abandoned wild young with wild foster parents. One study was in the USA, one was in South Africa and one was in Botswana. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Survival (3 studies): Two studies (one controlled) in the USA and Botswana, found that orphaned young black bears and African wild dogs had greater or equal survival compared to animals released alone or young of wild mammals with their biological parents. A study in South Africa found that an orphaned cheetah cub was not accepted by a family of cheetahs. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2343https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2343Fri, 22 May 2020 09:18:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Issue enforcement notices to deter use of non bear-proof garbage dumpsters to reduce human-wildlife conflict One study evaluated the effects of issuing enforcement notices to deter use of non bear-proof garbage dumpsters 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): A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that issuing enforcement notices requiring appropriate dumpster use did not reduce garbage accessibility to black bears. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2345https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2345Fri, 22 May 2020 13:17:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Prevent mammals accessing potential wildlife food sources or denning sites to reduce nuisance behaviour and human-wildlife conflict Two studies evaluated the effects of preventing mammals accessing potential wildlife food sources or denning sites to reduce nuisance behaviour and human-wildlife conflict. One study was in the USA and one was in Switzerland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (2 studies): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that electric shock devices prevented American black bears from accessing or damaging bird feeders. A before-and-after study in Switzerland found that electric fencing excluded stone martens from a building. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2346https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2346Fri, 22 May 2020 13:27:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Scare or otherwise deter mammals from human-occupied areas to reduce human-wildlife conflict Ten studies evaluated the effects of scaring or otherwise deterring mammals from residential areas to reduce human-wildlife conflict. Six studies were in the USA, three were in Canada and one was in Tanzania. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (10 STUDIES) Human-wildlife conflict (10 studies): Two of four studies (including one randomized and controlled study) in the USA, found that a range of noise and pain deterrents did not prevent black bears from returning to urban areas or other human-occupied sites. The other two studies found that such actions did deter them from seeking food at human-occupied sites. Two of three studies, in the USA and Canada, found that chasing nuisance black bears with dogs and chasing elk with people or dogs caused them to stay away longer or remain further from human occupied areas. The other study found that attempts to scare coyotes did not cause them to avoid human occupied areas. A before-and-after study in Canada found that an electric fence prevented polar bear entry to a compound. A study in Canada found that chemical and acoustic repellents did not deter polar bears from baits in most cases. A replicated study in Tanzania found that drones caused African savanna elephants to quickly leave residential areas. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2347https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2347Fri, 22 May 2020 14:14:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease/reduce payments to cull mammals One study evaluated the effects of ceasing or reducing payments to cull mammals. This study was in Sweden and Norway. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): A before-and-after study in Sweden and Norway found that fewer brown bears were reported killed after the removal of financial hunting incentives. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2349https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2349Tue, 26 May 2020 08:24:48 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Temporarily hold females and offspring in fenced area to increase survival of young We found no studies that evaluated the effects on mammals of temporarily holding females and offspring in a fenced area to increase survival of young. '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%2F2351https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2351Tue, 26 May 2020 08:45:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Rehabilitate injured, sick or weak mammals Thirteen studies evaluated the effects of rehabilitating injured, sick or weak mammals. Four studies were in the UK, three were in Spain, two were in Argentina and one each was in Uganda, Australia, the USA and Brazil. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (12 STUDIES) Survival (11 studies): Five studies, in the UK and Spain, found that varying proportions of European hedgehogs released after being rehabilitated in captivity survived during post-release monitoring periods, which ranged from two weeks to 136 days. Five studies, in Australia, Spain, the USA and Brazil, found that four koalas, an Iberian lynx, a gray wolf, a puma and two brown bears released following rehabilitation in captivity survived for varying durations during monitoring periods, which ranged in length from three months to up to seven years. A study in Argentina found that over half of released rehabilitated and captive-reared giant anteaters survived for at least six months. Condition (2 studies): A study in Uganda found that a snare wound in a white rhinoceros healed after treatment and rehabilitation. A study in the UK found that two of three rehabilitated European hedgehogs lost 12-36% of their body weight after release into the wild. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): A controlled study in Argentina found that released wild-born rehabilitated giant anteaters were more nocturnal in their activity patterns than captive-bred individuals.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2352https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2352Tue, 26 May 2020 08:46:51 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain wildlife corridors in residential areas One study evaluated the effects on mammals of retaining wildlife corridors in residential areas. This study was in Botswana. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A replicated study in Botswana found that retained wildlife corridors in residential areas were used by 19 mammal species, including African elephants. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2354https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2354Tue, 26 May 2020 11:35:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install underpasses beneath ski runs One study evaluated the effects on mammals of installing underpasses beneath ski runs. This study was in Australia. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): A replicated study in Australia found that boulder-filled crossings beneath ski slopes were used by seven small mammal species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2355https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2355Tue, 26 May 2020 11:59:24 +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