Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set limits for change in sediment particle size during rock dumping We found no studies that evaluated the effects of setting limits for change in sediment particle size during rock dump on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2055https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2055Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:30:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Bury pipelines instead of surface laying and rock dumping We found no studies that evaluated the effects of burying pipelines instead of surface laying and rock dumping on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2056https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2056Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:33:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the amount of stabilisation material used We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the amount of stabilisation material used on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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 effectsCollected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2057https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2057Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:38:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use stabilisation material that can be more easily recovered at decommissioning stage We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using stabilisation material that can be more easily recovered at decommissioning stage on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2058https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2058Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:39:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave pipelines and infrastructure in place following decommissioning We found no studies that evaluated the effects of leaving pipelines and infrastructure in place following decommissioning on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2059https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2059Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:41:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove pipelines and infrastructure following decommissioning We found no studies that evaluated the effects of removing pipelines and infrastructure in place following decommissioning on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2060https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2060Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:42:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit oil and gas drilling We found no studies that evaluated the effects of ceasing or prohibiting oil and gas drilling on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2061https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2061Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:43:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit the deposit of drill cuttings on the seabed We found no studies that evaluated the effects of ceasing or prohibiting the deposit of drill cuttings on the seabed on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2062https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2062Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:45:24 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Dispose of drill cuttings on land rather than on the seabed We found no studies that evaluated the effects of disposing of drill cuttings on land rather than on the seabed on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2063https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2063Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:46:21 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove drill cuttings after decommissioning We found no studies that evaluated the effects of removing drill cuttings after decommissioning on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2064https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2064Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:47:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the thickness of drill cuttings We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the thickness of drill cuttings on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2065https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2065Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:47:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Bury drill cuttings in the seabed rather than leaving them on the seabed surface  We found no studies that evaluated the effects of burying drill cuttings in the seabed rather than leaving them on the seabed surface on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2066https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2066Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:49:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use water-based muds instead of oil-based muds (drilling fluids) in the drilling process We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using water-based muds instead of oil-based muds (drilling fluids) in the drilling process on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2067https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2067Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:50:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Recycle or repurpose fluids used in the drilling process We found no studies that evaluated the effects of recycling or repurposing fluids used in the drilling process on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2069https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2069Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:51:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit aggregate extraction Seven studies examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting aggregate extraction on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. One study was in the English Channel (France), one in the Mediterranean Sea (Italy), one a global study, and four in the North Sea (UK, Belgium).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Overall community composition (4 studies): One global systematic review found that it took nine months to several decades for overall invertebrate community composition to recover after ceasing aggregate extraction. One before-and-after, site comparison study in the Mediterranean Sea and one of two site comparison studies in the North Sea found that after ceasing aggregate extraction overall invertebrate community composition became more similar to pre-extraction and/or natural site communities. Overall richness/diversity (5 studies): Two before-and-after, site comparison studies in the English Channel and the Mediterranean Sea and one of two site comparison studies in the North Sea found that after ceasing aggregate extraction, overall invertebrate species richness and/or diversity became more similar to that of pre-extraction and/or natural sites. The other site comparison found that species richness did not change over time and remained different to that of natural sites. One replicated, site comparison study in the North Sea found that 21 months after ceasing aggregate extractiom, invertebrate species richness was similar to that of natural sites. Worm community composition (1 study): One before-and-after study in the North Sea found that after ceasing aggregate extraction, nematode worm community composition remained different to the pre-extraction community. Worm richness/diversity (1 study): One before-and-after study in the North Sea found that after ceasing aggregate extraction, nematode worm species richness remained different to pre-extraction richness. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Overall abundance (5 studies): Two before-and-after, site comparison studies in the English Channel and the Mediterranean Sea and one of two site comparison studies in the North Sea found that after ceasing aggregate extraction overall invertebrate abundance and/or biomass became more similar to that of pre-extraction and/or natural sites. The other site comparison found that abundance and biomass did not change over time and remained different to that of natural sites. One replicated, site comparison study in the North Sea found that 21 months after ceasing aggregate extraction, invertebrate abundance was similar to that of natural sites. Worm abundance (1 study): One before-and-after study in the North Sea found that after ceasing aggregate extraction, nematode worm abundance remained different to pre-extraction abundance. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2070https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2070Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:07:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Extract aggregates from a vessel that is moving rather than static One study examined the effects of dredging from a vessel that is moving rather than static on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in the English Channel (UK).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall species richness/diversity (1 study): One site comparison study in the English Channel found that a site where aggregate extraction was undertaken using a moving trailer suction hopper dredger had similar invertebrate species richness and lower diversity compared to a site where extraction occurred using a static suction hopper dredger. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in the English Channel found that a site where aggregate extraction was undertaken using a moving trailer suction hopper dredger had higher abundance of invertebrates compared to a site where extraction occurred using a static suction hopper dredger. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2071https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2071Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:17:57 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set limits for change in sediment particle size during aggregate extraction We found no studies that evaluated the effects of setting limits for change in sediment particle size during aggregate extraction on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2072https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2072Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:19:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit, cease, or prohibit sediment discard during aggregate extraction We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting, ceasing, or prohibiting sediment discard during aggregate extraction on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2073https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2073Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:19:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove discarded sediment material from the seabed following cessation of aggregate extraction We found no studies that evaluated the effects of removing discarded sediment material from the seabed following cessation of aggregate extraction on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2074https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2074Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:36:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit marine mining One study examined the effects of ceasing or prohibiting mining on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in the Bering Sea (USA).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall community composition (1 study): One site comparison study in the Bering Sea found that following cessation of gold mining, overall invertebrate community composition became similar to that of an unmined site. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One site comparison study in the Bering Sea found that following cessation of gold mining, overall invertebrate richness and diversity became similar to that of an unmined site. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in the Bering Sea found that following cessation of gold mining, overall invertebrate abundance and biomass became similar to that of an unmined site. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2075https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2075Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:43:03 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cease or prohibit mining waste (tailings) disposal at sea We found no studies that evaluated the effects of ceasing or prohibiting mining waste (tailings) disposal at sea on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2076https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2076Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:43:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave mining waste (tailings) in place following cessation of disposal operations One study examined the effects of leaving mining waste (tailings) in place following cessation of disposal operations on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations. The study was in Auke Bay (USA).   COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in Auke Bay found that plots where mine tailings were left in place had similar invertebrate community composition as plots where tailings had been removed, but both had different communities to plots of natural sediment. Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in Auke Bay found that plots where mine tailings were left in place had similar invertebrate species richness as plots where tailings had been removed, but both had lower richness compared to plots of natural sediment. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Overall abundance (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in Auke Bay found that plots where mine tailings were left in place had similar invertebrate overall abundance and biomass as plots where tailings had been removed. While plots with and without tailings had similar abundances to plots of natural sediment, their biomasses were higher. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2077https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2077Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:45:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the number and/or extent of, or prohibit additional, renewable energy installations in an area We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number and/or extent of, or prohibit additional, renewable energy installations in an area on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2078https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2078Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:46:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Co-locate aquaculture systems with other activities and other infrastructures (such as wind farms) to maximise use of marine space We found no studies that evaluated the effects of limiting the number and/or extent of, or prohibit additional, renewable energy installations in an area on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2079https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2079Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:46:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Set limits on the area that can be covered by utility and service lines at one location We found no studies that evaluated the effects of setting limits on the area that can be covered by utility and service lines at one location on subtidal benthic invertebrate populations.   ‘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%2F2080https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F2080Mon, 21 Oct 2019 14:47:47 +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