Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Remove or change turbine lighting to reduce insect attraction We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of removing or changing turbine lighting to reduce insect attraction. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3843https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3843Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:06:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Change turbine colour to reduce insect attraction We found no studies that evaluated the effects of changing turbine colour to reduce attraction to butterflies and moths. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3844https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3844Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:07:53 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Reduce the size of surface features when prospecting for or extracting underground products One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of reducing the size of surface features when prospecting for or extracting underground products. This study was in Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that narrow corridors used for prospecting for oil had a lower species richness of butterflies than wide corridors, but were similar to undisturbed forest. POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that narrow corridors used for prospecting for oil had a lower abundance of butterflies than wide corridors, but were similar to undisturbed forest. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3845https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3845Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:09:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide training for land managers, farmers and farm advisers One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of providing training for land managers, farmers and farm advisers. The study was in the UK. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One study in the UK reported that 82% of landowners that received advice about applying for the Rural Priorities agri-environment scheme submitted applications, there was a 90% application success rate, and >3,000 ha of farmland were managed for the marsh fritillary. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3846https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3846Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:24:55 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Raise awareness amongst the general public to promote conservation actions We found no studies that evaluated the effects of raising awareness amongst the general public to promote conservation actions for butterflies and moths. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3847https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3847Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:26:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase consideration of butterflies and moths in international, national and local conservation plans We found no studies that evaluated the effects of increasing the consideration of butterflies and moths in international, national and local conservation plans. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3848https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3848Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:27:13 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using signs and access restrictions to reduce disturbance. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3849https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3849Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:30:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restrict recreational activities to particular areas We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restricting recreational activities to particular areas. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3850https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3850Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:31:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Design the route of roads to maximize habitat block size We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of designing the route of roads to maximize habitat block size. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3851https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3851Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:33:46 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Minimize road lighting to reduce insect attraction We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of minimizing road lighting to reduce insect attraction. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3852https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3852Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:34:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use infrastructure to reduce vehicle collision risk along roads One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using infrastructure to reduce vehicle collision risk along roads. This study was in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One controlled study in the USA reported that “altitude guide” netting, and poles topped with bright colours or flowers (attractive features), did not alter the behaviour of Oregon silverspot around roads. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3853https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3853Tue, 05 Jul 2022 11:41:12 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or maintain species-rich grassland along road/railway verges Eight studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or maintaining species-rich grassland along road or railway verges. Three studies were in the USA and one was in each of Germany, the UK, Finland, Poland, and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (6 studies): Four replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in Germany, the UK, the USA and Finland found that restored roadside prairies, verges sown with native wildflowers, with more butterfly species’ larval food plants, with more species of plants and with more plants in flower had a higher species richness and diversity of butterflies, day-flying moths, burnet moths and meadow-specialist moths than verges dominated by non-native vegetation or with fewer butterfly species’ larval food plants, fewer plant species, and fewer plants in flower. However, one of these studies also found that verges sown with more plant species did not have higher species richness of meadow-specialist butterflies. One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that road verges and land under power lines managed by mowing once or twice a year, or not at all, had a similar species richness of butterflies to remnant prairies. One replicated, site comparison study in Poland found that wide road verges had a higher species richness of butterflies than narrow road verges. POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES) Abundance (5 studies): Two of three replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the UK, the USA and Finland found that restored roadside prairies and verges sown with more butterfly species’ larval food plants had a greater abundance of butterflies and burnet moths than verges dominated by non-native vegetation or with fewer butterfly species’ larval food plants. However, one of these studies also found that verges with more plants in flower did not have a greater abundance of butterflies and burnet moths than verges with fewer plants in flower. The other study found that verges sown with more plant species did not have a greater abundance of meadow-specialist butterflies or moths. One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that road verges and land under power lines managed by mowing once or twice a year, or not at all, had a similar abundance of butterflies to remnant prairies. One replicated, site comparison study in Poland found that wide road verges had a greater abundance of butterflies than narrow road verges. Survival (3 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in the USA found that restored prairie road verges had a lower mortality risk for butterflies than verges dominated by non-native grasses. The other study found more dead butterflies and moths on roads with tall meadow verges than on roads with frequently mown, non-native, short grass verges or wooded verges. This study also found more dead butterflies and moths on roads with habitat in the central reservation than on roads without habitat in the central reservation. One replicated, site comparison study in Poland found that less frequently mown road verges, and verges mown later in the summer, had fewer dead butterflies than verges which were mown more frequently or earlier in the summer. Condition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the USA found that monarch caterpillars living on road verges mown once or twice a year had a similar number of parasites to caterpillars living in mown and unmown prairies. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3854https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3854Tue, 05 Jul 2022 12:03:30 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage land under power lines for butterflies and moths Six studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing land under power lines for butterflies and moths. Two studies were in each of the USA and Finland, and one was in each of the UK and Canada. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Richness/diversity (3 studies): Two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in Finland found that land under power lines managed by mechanical cutting had a higher species richness of butterflies than unmanaged land, and butterfly species richness was highest 2–4 years after scrub and trees were cleared. One replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that the species richness of butterflies was similar under power lines and on road verges mown once or twice a year, or left unmown. POPULATION RESPONSE (6 STUDIES) Abundance (6 studies): One of two replicated, site comparison studies (including one paired study) in Finland and Canada found that land under power lines managed by mechanical cutting had a higher abundance of butterflies than unmanaged land. The other study found that land under power lines and on road verges managed by mowing had a lower abundance of pearl crescent and northern pearl crescent butterflies, and a similar abundance of other butterflies, to those left unmown. Two of three site comparison studies (including two replicated studies) in the USA, the UK and Finland found that the time since management under power lines did not affect the abundance of Karner blue butterflies or small pearl-bordered fritillaries, but chequered skipper abundance was higher in areas cleared ≤2 years ago than in areas cut ≥4 years earlier. The other study found that power lines cleared of trees and scrub 2–4 years earlier had a higher abundance of butterflies than power lines cleared 1 year or 6–8 years earlier. Two site comparison studies in the USA found that land under power lines managed by cutting or herbicide application, and by mowing or cutting, had a similar abundance of Karner blue butterflies and six other butterfly species, but the abundance of frosted elfin was higher under power lines managed by mowing than those managed by cutting. BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in the UK reported that pearl-bordered fritillaries used areas under power lines where scrub had been cleared one or two years earlier, but not under power lines cleared three or more years ago. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3855https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3855Tue, 05 Jul 2022 12:26:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect and connect habitat along elevational gradients We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of protecting and connecting habitat along elevational gradients. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3856https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3856Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:27:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Enhance natural habitat to improve landscape connectivity to allow for range shifts We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of enhancing natural habitat to improve landscape connectivity and allow for range shifts. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3857https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3857Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:29:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage natural waterbodies in arid areas to prevent desiccation We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of managing natural waterbodies in arid areas to prevent desiccation. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3858https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3858Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:30:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create microclimate and microhabitat refuges We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of creating microclimate and microhabitat refuges. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3859https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3859Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:32:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide shelter habitat against highly adverse weather conditions We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of providing shelter habitat against highly adverse weather conditions. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3860https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3860Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:33:35 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Retain or plant trees to act as windbreaks One study evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of retaining or planting trees to act as windbreaks. This study was in Sweden. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Use (1 study): One site comparison study in Sweden reported that sheltered grassland strips were more likely to be used by one of four butterfly species than strips providing nectar resources or no resources. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3861https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3861Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:39:41 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Restore or create new habitats after mining and quarrying Four studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of restoring or creating new habitats after mining and quarrying. Two studies were in the Czech Republic, and one was in each of the UK and New Zealand. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the Czech Republic found that 15% of 380 invertebrate species (including 208 moth species) were only found on flattened spoil heaps, compared to 30% which were only found on unflattened heaps. Richness/diversity (2 studies): One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the Czech Republic found that technically restored quarries had a lower species richness of butterflies and day-flying moths than quarries left to restore naturally. One replicated, paired, site comparison study in the Czech Republic found that flattened spoil heaps had a lower species richness of moths than unflattened spoil heaps. POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the UK found that on slate waste tips trees where fertilizer was applied had a similar abundance of caterpillars to trees that were unfertilized. One site comparison study in New Zealand found that a peat bog restored after mining supported a similar density of Fred the thread moth caterpillars to undisturbed bogs. Condition (1 study): One site comparison study in New Zealand found that a peat bog restored after mining supported Fred the thread moth caterpillars of a similar size to caterpillars on undisturbed bogs. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3862https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3862Tue, 05 Jul 2022 15:53:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect butterflies and moths We found no studies that evaluated the effects of legally protecting butterflies and moths. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3863https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3863Fri, 08 Jul 2022 11:54:50 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use education programmes and local engagement to reduce persecution or exploitation of species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using education programmes and local engagement to reduce persecution or exploitation of butterflies and moths. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3864https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3864Fri, 08 Jul 2022 11:56:08 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect large native trees We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of legally protecting large native trees. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3865https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3865Fri, 08 Jul 2022 11:58:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Strengthen cultural traditions such as sacred groves that prevent timber harvesting We found no studies that evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of strengthening cultural traditions that prevent timber harvesting. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated 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%2F3866https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3866Fri, 08 Jul 2022 11:59:38 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use selective or reduced impact logging instead of conventional logging Four studies evaluated the effects on butterflies and moths of using selective or reduced impact logging instead of conventional logging. Two studies were in Brazil and one was in each of Sweden and the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Community composition (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forests managed by reduced impact logging at different intensities had a different community composition of fruit-feeding butterflies to pristine forest. Richness/diversity (3 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in the USA found that forests harvested by single tree selection had a similar species richness of moths to forests managed by group selection harvesting or clearcutting, but a lower species richness than unharvested forest. One site comparison study in Brazil found that a forest managed by reduced impact logging had a similar species richness and diversity of butterflies to primary forest. One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forests managed by reduced impact logging at different intensities had a similar species richness of fruit-feeding butterflies. POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES) Abundance (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in Sweden found that selectively logged forests had a higher abundance of exposed moth caterpillars, but a similar abundance of concealed moth caterpillars, to clearcut forests, and a similar abundance of all moth caterpillars to undisturbed forests. One site comparison study in Brazil found that a forest managed by reduced impact logging had a higher abundance of butterflies than primary forest. One replicated, site comparison study in Brazil found that forests managed by reduced impact logging at intermediate intensity had a higher abundance of fruit-feeding butterflies than forests managed by high or low intensity reduced impact logging. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3867https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidencejournal.com%2Factions%2F3867Fri, 08 Jul 2022 12:00:53 +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