Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create uncultivated margins around intensive arable or pasture fields Thirty-nine studies (including 13 replicated controlled trials of which three also randomized and four reviews) from eight European countries compared wildlife on uncultivated margins with other margin options. Twenty-four found benefits to some wildlife groups (including 11 replicated controlled trials of which one also randomised, and four reviews). Nineteen studies (including one randomized, replicated, controlled trial) from Germany, Ireland, Lithuania, Norway, the Netherlands and the UK found uncultivated margins support more invertebrates (including bees) and/or higher plant diversity or species richness than conventionally managed field margins or other field margin options. One replicated, controlled study showed that uncultivated margins supported more small mammal species than meadows and farmed grasslands. Four studies (two replicated UK studies, two reviews) reported positive associations between birds and field margins including food provision. A review from the UK found grass margins (including naturally regenerated margins) benefited plants and some invertebrates. Fifteen studies (including one randomized, replicated, controlled trial) from Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and the UK found that invertebrate and/or plant species richness or abundance were lower in naturally regenerated than conventionally managed fields or sown margins. Six studies (including one randomized, replicated, controlled trial) from Belgium, Germany and the UK found uncultivated margins did not have more plant or invertebrate species or individuals than cropped or sown margins. A review found grass margins (including naturally regenerated margins) did not benefit ground beetles. Five studies (including three replicated controlled trials) from Ireland and the UK reported declines in plant species richness and invertebrate numbers in naturally regenerated margins over time. One replicated trial found that older naturally regenerated margins (6-years old) had more invertebrate predators (mainly spiders) than newly established (1-year old) naturally regenerated margins. Five studies (including one replicated, randomized trial) from the Netherlands and the UK found that cutting margins had a negative impact on invertebrates or no impact on plant species. One replicated controlled study found cut margins were used more frequently by yellowhammers when surrounding vegetation was >60 cm tall. Seven studies (including four replicated controlled trials and a review) from Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway and the UK reported increased abundance or biomass of weed species in naturally regenerated margins. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F63https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F63Tue, 04 Oct 2011 14:51:45 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement food labelling schemes relating to biodiversity-friendly farming (organic, LEAF marque) We have captured no evidence for the effects of implementing food labelling schemes relating to biodiversity-friendly farming (organic, LEAF marque) on farmland wildlife. '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%2F71https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F71Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:01:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain in-field elements such as field islands and rockpiles We have captured no evidence for the effects of maintaining in-field elements such as field islands and rockpiles, on farmland wildlife. '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%2F77https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F77Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:09:32 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce nest boxes stocked with solitary bees We have captured no evidence for the effects of introducing nest boxes stocked with solitary bees on farmland wildlife. '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%2F81https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F81Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:17:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain rush pastures We have captured no evidence for the effects of maintaining rush pastures on farmland wildlife. '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%2F91https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F91Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:34:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional farm buildings We have captured no evidence for the effects of maintaining traditional farm buildings on farmland wildlife. '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%2F94https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F94Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:37:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enforce legislation to protect birds against persecution Two before-and-after studies have evaluated effects of legislative protection on bird species in Europe. Both found that legislation protects bird populations. One found increased population levels of raptors in Scotland, following protective legislation. One found increased survival of kestrels in Denmark stricter protection, but not necessarily population-level responses. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F101https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F101Mon, 24 Oct 2011 21:55:47 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Erect predator-proof fencing around important breeding sites for waders We have captured no evidence for the effects of erecting predator-proof fencing around important breeding sites for waders on farmland wildlife. '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%2F109https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F109Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:06:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Implement 'mosaic management', a Dutch agri-environment option A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study from the Netherlands found that northern lapwing population trends changed from decreases to increases following the introduction of mosaic management. Three other species of wading bird did not show such a response and Eurasian oystercatcher populations did less well under mosaic management than other management types. A replicated, paired sites study in the Netherlands that black-tailed godwit had higher productivity under mosaic management than other management types due to higher nest survival, and nests were less likely to be trampled by livestock or destroyed by mowing under mosaic management.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F130https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F130Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:01:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Delay mowing or first grazing date on pasture or grassland Eight studies from the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK (three replicated and controlled of which one also randomized and one European systematic review) found that delaying mowing or grazing dates resulted in benefits to some or all plants, invertebrates or birds studied. These benefits included: higher plant species richness, higher densities of two rare arable weeds, more insect species and individuals visiting flowers, greater abundance of some spiders and ground beetles, increased breeding wading bird densities, and increased Eurasian skylark productivity. Three reviews found the UK corncrake population increased after measures including delaying mowing dates were introduced. Six studies from Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK (including three replicated controlled trials of which one was also randomized and a European systematic review) found that delaying mowing or grazing dates on grassland had no clear effect on plant species richness, ground beetle communities, abundance of some insects and spiders, or population trends of wading bird species. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F131https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F131Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:17:17 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave uncut strips of rye grass on silage fields Two reviews and two replicated controlled trials from the UK found that leaving uncut strips of rye grass on silage fields resulted in benefits to birds including increased numbers. One of these studies found that whilst seed-eating birds preferred rye grass cut once only, birds that fed on different food resources such as insect-eaters showed more variable results with some preferring plots cut two or more times. One replicated controlled randomized study from the UK found no difference in ground beetle abundance and diversity between cut and uncut silage field headlands in the first two years of the experiment, but higher species diversity in uncut plots in the third year.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F132https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F132Mon, 14 Nov 2011 22:28:34 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase the proportion of semi-natural habitat in the farmed landscapeFive studies monitored the effects of the Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas scheme at a landscape scale, including three replicated site comparisons. Of these, one found an increase in numbers of birds of some species. Two found no effect on the number of bird species or population densities of farmland birds. Three studies found mixed effects, with some species or groups of species increasing and others decreasing.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F145https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F145Sat, 14 Jan 2012 13:48:09 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Make direct payments per clutch for farmland birds Two replicated and controlled studies from the Netherlands found limited evidence for increased wading bird populations on farms with per-clutch payments. One study found no population effects over three years. The second found slightly higher breeding densities of wading birds, but not higher overall numbers. A replicated and controlled study found higher hatching success of northern lapwing and black-tailed godwit on farms with payment schemes than control farms. A replicated site comparison from the Netherlands that looked at the effects of per-clutch payments in combination with postponed agricultural activities found more birds bred on 12.5 ha plots under the per-clutch payment and postponed agricultural activities scheme but found no differences at the field-scale.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F146https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F146Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:46:56 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Exclude livestock from semi-natural habitat (including woodland) Seven studies (including four replicated controlled trials of which one also randomized, and a review) from Ireland, Poland and the UK looked at the effects of excluding livestock from semi-natural habitats. Three studies (including one replicated controlled and randomized study) from Ireland and the UK found that excluding livestock benefited plants and invertebrates. Three studies (one replicated controlled and one replicated paired sites comparison) from Ireland and the UK found that excluding grazing did not benefit plants or birds. Two studies (one replicated and controlled, one review) from Poland and the UK found that the impact of excluding grazing as a tool in habitat restoration was neutral or mixed.    Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F150https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F150Sat, 14 Jan 2012 15:15:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase crop diversity All four studies (including one replicated, controlled study and one review) from Belgium, Germany, Hungary and unspecified European countries reported a positive effect of crop rotations on ground beetles or plants. Three studies found higher ground beetle species richness and/or abundance and one study found higher plant species richness in rotation fields or on farms with more crops in rotation compared to monoculture fields. A study from Hungary found that fields in monoculture had a more stable and abundant ground beetle community than fields within a rotation.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F560https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F560Tue, 25 Sep 2012 12:08:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave cultivated, uncropped margins or plots (includes 'lapwing plots') Nineteen individual studies looked at the effect of uncropped, cultivated margins or plots on wildlife. Seventeen studies from the UK and northwest Europe (six reviews and seven replicated studies of which two were site comparisons, one a before-and-after trial and one was controlled and randomized) found that leaving uncropped, cultivated margins or plots on farmland provides benefits to some or all target farmland bird species, plants, invertebrates, and mammals. These wildlife benefits included increased species richness of plants, bumblebees, species richness and abundance of spiders, abundance of ground-dwelling invertebrates and ground beetles, increased stone curlew breeding population size, northern lapwing hatching success, Eurasian skylark nesting success and the establishment, abundance or species richness of rare arable plant species. A replicated study found northern lapwing, Eurasian skylark, grey partridge and yellow wagtail bred in lapwing plots. Two studies (a replicated study and a review) from the UK found that leaving uncropped, cultivated margins or plots on farmland had no effect on 11 out of 12 farmland bird species or ground beetles. A replicated site comparison study in the UK found fewer seed-eating birds on fallow plots for ground-nesting birds in two out of three regions. One review from the UK found evidence that pernicious weeds were more commonly found on uncropped cultivated margins than conservation or conventional headlands. A replicated site comparison from the UK found the proportion of young grey partridges in the population was lower in areas with a high proportion of uncropped cultivated margins and plots. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F562https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F562Tue, 25 Sep 2012 14:57:25 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave unharvested cereal headlands in arable fields We have captured no evidence for the effects on farmland wildlife of leaving unharvested cereal headlands. '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%2F646https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F646Wed, 17 Oct 2012 17:14:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain upland heath/moorland Of 15 individual studies from the UK, eight (including three replicated, controlled trials, of which one also randomized) found that appropriate management can help to maintain the conservation value of upland heath or moorland. Of these eight studies, four tested the effectiveness of excluding or reducing grazing. Impacts included increases in the abundance of Scottish primrose and other broadleaved plant species, heather cover and numbers of true bugs, biomass of arthropods associated with the bird diet, number and diversity of moths and benefits to black grouse. Among other treatments, repeated cutting and grazing by goats were found to be effective in controlling the dominance of certain grass species. A review found management under the Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme had broadly positive effects on moorland birds and a reduction in grazing benefited most bird species and increased heath vegetation and heather cover. A replicated before-and-after study found that moorland management under the Environmentally Sensitive Area scheme maintained the number of plant species in two out of three areas. Three studies (including one before-and-after trial) reported mixed results for invertebrates or birds, where management to maintain upland heath or moorland benefited some but not all species or where the effect depended on the vegetation type. Treatments tested included reducing grazing intensity and grouse moor management (burning and predator control). Four studies (including one controlled site comparison and two reviews) found that reducing the intensity of livestock grazing reduced the abundance of soil organisms including invertebrates, bacteria or fungi. A randomized, replicated before-and-after study found that heather cover declined over nine years on a moorland site managed under the Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme in which grazing intensity had increased.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F647https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F647Wed, 17 Oct 2012 17:51:16 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain wood pasture and parkland A randomized, replicated, controlled trial in Sweden found that annual mowing maintained the highest number of plant species on wood pasture.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F649https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F649Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:59:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave headlands in fields unsprayed (conservation headlands) Twenty-two studies from 14 replicated, controlled experiments (of which two randomized) including two reviews, from a total of 32 studies from 20 experiments (of which 17 replicated, controlled) including three reviews from Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK that investigated species richness and diversity of farmland wildlife found that conservation headlands contained higher species richness or diversity of invertebrates or plants than other habitat types. Twelve studies (including a review) from ten replicated experiments (of which eight controlled and three controlled and randomized) found that some or all invertebrates or plants investigated did not have higher species richness or diversity on conservation headlands compared to other habitat types. This included both replicated, controlled studies investigating bee diversity. Two replicated studies from the UK found that unfertilized conservation headlands had more plant species than fertilized conservation headlands. Positive effects of conservation headlands on abundances or behaviours of some or all species investigated were found by 27 studies from 15 replicated experiments (of which 13 controlled) including five reviews out of a total of 36 studies from 20 experiments (17 replicated, controlled) including five reviews from Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the UK that investigated birds (some studies looked at number of visits), mammals (some studies looked at number of visits), invertebrates and plant abundance/cover. One review from the UK found a positive effect on grey partridge populations but did not separate the effects of several other interventions including conservation headlands. Nineteen studies from 13 replicated (12 controlled) experiments and a review from Finland, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK found that some or all species of birds, invertebrates or plants investigated were at similar, or lower, abundances on conservation headlands compared to other management. One review from the UK and a study in Germany found conservation headlands had a positive effect on plants and some, but not all invertebrates, or rare arable weeds but did not specify how. All eight studies from the UK and Sweden that investigated species’ productivity, from three replicated (two controlled) experiments including two reviews found that grey partridge productivity or survival was higher in conservation headlands (or in sites with conservation headlands), compared to other management. One replicated study from the UK found that conservation headlands did not increase the proportion of young grey partridges in the population. A before-and-after study from the UK found that some invertebrates in conservation headlands survived pesticide applications to neighbouring fields. A review found crop margins reduce the effects of spray drift on butterflies. A replicated study from Germany and a review found that conservation headlands appeared to prevent or reduce the establishment and spread of pernicious weeds. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F652https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F652Wed, 31 Oct 2012 09:36:44 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Leave overwinter stubbles Eighteen studies (including four reviews and one systematic review) investigated the effects of overwinter stubbles on farmland wildlife. Thirteen studies from Finland, Switzerland and the UK (six replicated trials, including two site comparisons, four reviews and a systematic review) found evidence that leaving overwinter stubbles provides some benefits to plants, insects, spiders, mammals and farmland birds. These benefits include higher densities of farmland birds in winter, increased grey partridge productivity, and increased cirl bunting population size (in combination with several other conservation measures) and territory density. One replicated site comparison study from the UK found evidence that leaving overwinter stubbles had inconsistent or no effects on farmland bird numbers. Three studies found only certain bird species showed positive associations with overwinter stubbles. Two replicated studies (of which one also randomized and controlled) found that only Eurasian skylark or both Eurasian skylark and Eurasian linnet benefited, out of a total 23 and 12 farmland bird species tested respectively. One study found that only grey partridge and tree sparrow showed positive population responses to areas with overwinter stubbles. Two studies from the UK (one randomized, one replicated and controlled) found that different farmland bird species benefited from different stubble heights. One replicated site comparison found mixed effects between different stubble management options on seed-eating bird abundance.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F695https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F695Sun, 02 Dec 2012 12:01:18 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional water meadows (includes management for breeding and/or wintering waders/waterfowl) Four studies from Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK (including two site comparisons of which one also replicated) found that maintaining traditional water meadows resulted in an increased population size or number of territories of northern lapwing, common redshank and black-tailed godwit and increased plant species richness. However one of these studies also found common snipe declined on all sites under management to maintain traditional water meadows, and another of the studies found that differences in numbers of birds were present before meadow bird management. Two studies (a replicated study and a review of European studies) found that managing traditional water meadows by grazing had mixed impacts on wildlife and that the productivity of northern lapwings was too low to sustain populations on three of the four water meadows managed for waders. A randomized, replicated, controlled trial in the Netherlands found that cutting in June maintained relatively stable vegetation and a review found mowing could be used to maintain water meadows but had variable effects on plant species richness. One replicated site comparison from the Netherlands found more birds bred on 12.5 ha plots with management for wading birds (in combination with per-clutch payments), however at the field scale there was no difference in bird abundance or species richness between conventionally managed fields and those managed for birds.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F696https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F696Fri, 07 Dec 2012 09:05:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Employ areas of semi-natural habitat for rough grazing (includes salt marsh, lowland heath, bog, fen) A series of site comparison studies from the UK found that areas of heathland that had been re-seeded with grass to improve livestock grazing were avoided by nesting whimbrels but were the main early spring feeding areas for them. There was no difference in whimbrel chick survival between areas of heathland re-seeded with grass and those that had not. Two replicated studies from the UK found higher butterfly abundance and species richness and a higher frequency of occurrence of songbirds and invertebrate-feeding birds on areas of grazed semi-natural upland grassland than grazed improved pasture. However members of the crow family showed the opposite trend. A review found excluding cattle from fenland reduced the number of plant species, and that low-medium grazing levels could have positive effects on fenland biodiversity but may need to be accompanied by additional management such as mowing. One study from the UK found northern lapwing nest survival and clutch size were greater on ungrazed than grazed marshes. A replicated site comparison from the UK found the proportion of young grey partridges was negatively associated with rough grazing (in combination with several other interventions). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F697https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F697Fri, 07 Dec 2012 15:57:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain species-rich, semi-natural grassland Of 22 studies (including eleven replicated trials, three reviews and a systematic review) from the Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Russia, Slovenia, Switzerland and the UK, 13 identified management regimes that maintained species-rich grassland. Four of these studies were replicated, controlled trials (including two randomized). Nine studies (including two randomized, replicated before-and-after trials) from Switzerland and the UK examined the effectiveness of existing or historical agri-environment schemes: seven testing the effectiveness of the Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme in England and two testing the effectiveness of the Ecological Compensation Areas scheme in Switzerland. All except one reported mixed results, with the schemes broadly maintaining plant species richness, but being less effective, for example, in enhancing species richness, preserving the highest quality sites, or overcoming the effects of past intensive management. One study found six Environmentally Sensitive Areas were of ‘outstanding’ significance for their lowland grassland, containing >40% of the English resource of a grassland type. A replicated site comparison study found that on average 86% of Swiss Ecological Compensation Area litter meadows were of ‘good ecological quality’ compared with only 20% of hay meadow Ecological Compensation Areas. Twelve studies (including a systematic review, six replicated trials of which two also controlled and randomized, and three reviews) from the Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Slovenia, Switzerland and the UK tested the effects of management treatments on species richness or vegetation quality usually involving combinations of mowing, grazing or no fertilizer but some also tested the effectiveness of mulching or burning. All of these studies identified management treatments which benefited or maintained species richness or vegetation quality. One site comparison from Finland and northwest Russia found that butterfly species richness, diversity and total abundance did not differ significantly between mown meadows and grazed pastures and that grassland age and origin had a greater impact on butterfly communities than present management. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F702https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F702Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:44:12 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain traditional orchards Two replicated site comparisons from Germany and Switzerland found that, on average, 12% of traditional orchards in Swiss Ecological Compensation Areas were of ‘good ecological quality’, and traditional orchards under a German agri-environment scheme did not have more plant species than paired control sites. Traditional orchards in Ecological Compensation Areas appeared to offer little benefit to birds. A replicated, controlled site comparison study in Germany found that plant species richness was higher on mown orchards than grazed or abandoned ones, but numbers of species and brood cells of bees and wasps did not differ.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F703https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F703Tue, 29 Jan 2013 13:17:09 +0000
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust