Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use real-time automated tools at renewable energy sites to detect marine and freshwater mammals and allow operations to be stopped or modified We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using real-time automated tools at renewable energy sites to detect marine and freshwater mammals and allow operations to be stopped or modified. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2749https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2749Tue, 02 Feb 2021 16:49:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use cooling towers instead of once-through cooling systems We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using cooling towers instead of once-through cooling systems on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2753https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2753Tue, 02 Feb 2021 16:56:13 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use observers on board vessels to detect mammals and allow vessel course or speed to be altered We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using observers on board vessels to detect mammals and allow vessel course or speed to be altered. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2755https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2755Tue, 02 Feb 2021 16:58:54 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use real-time automated tools on board vessels to detect mammals and allow vessel course or speed to be altered We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using real-time automated tools on board vessels to detect mammals and allow vessel course or speed to be altered. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2756https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2756Tue, 02 Feb 2021 17:00:08 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use remote tools to detect mammals in an area and allow vessel course or speed to be altered We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using remote tools to detect mammals in an area and allow vessel course or speed to be altered. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2757https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2757Tue, 02 Feb 2021 17:01:20 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use passive listening devices to detect mammals and prompt fishing vessels to move away We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using passive listening devices to detect mammals and prompt fishing vessels to move away on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2791https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2791Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:30:32 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use weakened fishing gear We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using weakened fishing gear on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2797https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2797Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:39:26 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use sinking lines instead of floating lines We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using sinking lines instead of floating lines on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2799https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2799Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:41:08 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use bindings to keep trawl nets closed until they have sunk below the water surface We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using bindings to keep trawl nets closed until they have sunk below the water surface on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2800https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2800Thu, 04 Feb 2021 16:41:58 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use stiffened materials or increase tension of fishing gear One study evaluated the effects on marine mammals of using stiffened materials in fishing nets. The study was in the South Atlantic Ocean (Argentina). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Reduction in entanglements/unwanted catch (1 study): One controlled study in the South Atlantic Ocean found that using stiffened fishing nets did not reduce the number of Franciscana dolphin entanglements. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2801https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2801Thu, 04 Feb 2021 17:10:46 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use noise aversive conditioning to deter mammals from fishing gear One study evaluated the effects on marine mammals of using noise aversive conditioning to deter mammals from fishing gear. The study was in the North Pacific Ocean (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): One study in the North Pacific Ocean found that noise aversive conditioning did not reduce bait foraging behaviour by California sea lions. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2819https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2819Fri, 05 Feb 2021 15:12:55 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use catch and hook protection devices on fishing gear Five studies evaluated the effects on marine mammals of using catch and hook protection devices on fishing gear. Two studies were in the South Pacific Ocean (Chile, Australia and Fiji), two were in the Indian Ocean (Seychelles, Madagascar) and one was in the Southwest Atlantic Ocean. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (5 STUDIES) Reduction in entanglements/unwanted catch (1 study): One study in the South Pacific Ocean found that using cage or chain devices on fishing hooks resulted in fewer unwanted catches of toothed whales. Human-wildlife conflict (5 studies): Two of four studies (including three controlled and one before-and-after study) in the South Pacific Ocean, the Southwest Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean found that net sleeves or cage and chain devices on fishing hooks reduced damage to fish catches by sperm whales, killer whales and toothed whales. The two other studies found that attaching ‘umbrella’ or ‘spider’ devices on fishing hooks did not reduce predation and/or damage to fish catches by sperm whales or toothed whales. One controlled study in the Indian Ocean found that attaching catch protection devices made from streamers to fishing lines reduced Indo-Pacific bottlenose and spinner dolphin predation on fish bait, but only during the first two trials. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2821https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2821Fri, 05 Feb 2021 15:18:24 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use different bait species for fishing that are less attractive to mammals We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using different bait species for fishing that are less attractive to mammals on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2826https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2826Fri, 05 Feb 2021 15:57:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use volunteers to deter tourists from harassing marine and freshwater mammals at wildlife-viewing sites One study evaluated the effects of using volunteers to deter tourists from harassing marine and freshwater mammals at wildlife-viewing sites. The study was at the Ohau Stream waterfall (New Zealand). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (1 STUDY) Change in human behaviour (1 study): One randomized, controlled study at the Ohau Stream waterfall found that the presence of an official-looking volunteer resulted in fewer tourists harassing New Zealand fur seals at a waterfall. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2844https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2844Fri, 05 Feb 2021 16:27:37 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use biological control to manage invasive or problematic species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using biological control to manage invasive or problematic species on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2852https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2852Mon, 08 Feb 2021 10:59:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use deterrents to reduce predation on marine and freshwater mammals by native species One study evaluated the effects of using deterrents to reduce predation by native species on marine mammals. The study was in the North Pacific Ocean (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One controlled study in the North Pacific Ocean found that neither boat motor sounds nor the presence of humans reduced Galapagos shark predation on Hawaiian monk seal pups, although shark presence was low throughout the study. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2855https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2855Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:09:15 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use baited lines instead of nets for shark control Two studies evaluated the effects on marine mammals of using baited lines instead of nets for shark control. One study was in the Indian Ocean (South Africa) and one in the South Pacific Ocean (Australia). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY) Survival (1 study): One site comparison study in the South Pacific Ocean found that using baited lines instead of nets increased the survival of entangled common and bottlenose dolphins. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES) OTHER (2 STUDIES) Reduction in entanglements/unwanted catch (2 studies): Two site comparison studies in the Indian Ocean and South Pacific Ocean found that baited lines used for shark control had fewer entanglements of dolphins, whales and dugongs than nets. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2856https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2856Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:13:28 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Vaccinate against disease We found no studies that evaluated the effects of vaccinating against disease on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2858https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2858Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:15:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use drugs to treat parasites Two studies evaluated the effects on marine mammals of using drugs to treat parasites. Both studies were in the North Pacific Ocean (USA). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES) Survival (2 studies): One of two controlled studies (including one before-and-after study) in the North Pacific Ocean found that treating northern fur seal pups with an anti-parasitic drug (ivermectin) reduced mortality rates. The other study found that Hawaiian monk seal pups treated with an anti-parasitic drug (praziquantel) had similar survival rates to untreated pups. Condition (2 studies): One of two controlled studies (including one before-and-after study) in the North Pacific Ocean found that northern fur seal pups treated with an anti-parasitic drug (ivermectin) had reduced hookworm infections and greater growth rates than untreated pups. The other study found that Hawaiian monk seal pups treated with an anti-parasitic drug (praziquantel) had similar parasite loads to untreated pups. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2861https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2861Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:21:49 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use double hulls to prevent oil spills We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using double hulls to prevent oil spills on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2869https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2869Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:29:07 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use biodegradable fishing gear We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using of biodegradable fishing gear on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2885https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2885Mon, 08 Feb 2021 11:48:20 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use methods to dampen underwater noise emissions (e.g. bubble curtains, screens) One study evaluated the effects on marine mammals of using bubble curtains or screens to dampen underwater noise emissions. The study was in the North Sea (Germany). COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES) BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY) Behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after, site comparison study in the North Sea found that using bubble curtains or screens during pile driving resulted in harbour porpoise detections within 15 km decreasing less compared to before pile driving than at sites without bubble curtains or screens. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2901https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2901Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:11:37 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use methods to reduce sediment disturbance during dredging (e.g. curtains, screens) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using methods to reduce sediment disturbance during dredging, on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2906https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2906Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:17:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use non-toxic antifouling coatings on surfaces We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using non-toxic antifouling coatings on surfaces, on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2908https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2908Mon, 08 Feb 2021 16:19:22 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Use biocides or other chemicals to control invasive or problematic species We found no studies that evaluated the effects of using biocides or other chemicals to control invasive or problematic species on marine and freshwater mammal populations. ‘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%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2937https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F2937Tue, 09 Feb 2021 17:48:47 +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
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