Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Apply insecticide to protect seedlings from invertebrates One randomized, replicated, controlled study in the USA found that applying insecticide increased tree seedling emergence and survival.      Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1149https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1149Tue, 17 May 2016 15:18:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt certification One replicated, site comparison study in Ethiopia found that the risk of deforestation was lower in certified than uncertified forests. One controlled, before-and-after trial in Gabon found that when logging intensity was taken into account although tree damage did not differ, changes in above-ground biomass were smaller in certified than in uncertified forests.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1150https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1150Tue, 17 May 2016 16:23:09 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control birds One controlled study in Australia found that removing bell-miners from narrow-leaved peppermint forests did not improve the health of the trees in the forest.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1151https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1151Wed, 18 May 2016 14:46:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt community-based management to protect forests Two studies from Ethiopia and Nepal (including one replicated, before-and-after, site comparison) found that forest cover increased more in community-managed forests than in forests not managed by local communities. One replicated, site comparison study in Colombia found that deforestation rates in community-managed forests did not differ from deforestation rates in forests that were not managed by local communities, or in uninhabited national parks.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1152https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1152Wed, 18 May 2016 14:58:54 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Apply fungicides to protect seedlings from fungal diseases We found no evidence for the effect of applying fungicides to planted trees. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1156https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1156Wed, 18 May 2016 15:30:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Create managed paths/signs to contain disturbance We found no evidence for the effects of creating managed paths/signs to contain disturbance on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1170https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1170Thu, 19 May 2016 09:40:40 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt ecotourism We found no evidence for the effects of adopting ecotourism on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1173https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1173Thu, 19 May 2016 09:46:59 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Compensate for woodland removal with compensatory planting We found no evidence for the effects of compensatory planting on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1174https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1174Thu, 19 May 2016 10:22:18 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt continuous cover forestry We found no evidence for the effects of adopting continuous cover forestry on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1179https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1179Thu, 19 May 2016 10:33:07 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Construct water detention areas to slow water flow and restore riparian forests We found no evidence for the effects of constructing water detention areas to slow water flow and restore riparian forests on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1186https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1186Thu, 19 May 2016 11:44:22 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Coppice trees We captured no evidence for the effects of tree coppicing on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1190https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1190Thu, 19 May 2016 11:50:11 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt conservation grazing of woodland We captured no evidence for the effects of adopting conservation grazing of woodland. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1192https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1192Thu, 19 May 2016 11:53:01 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control large herbivore populations We found no evidence of the effects of controlling large herbivore populations on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1198https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1198Thu, 19 May 2016 13:14:29 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control medium-sized herbivores We found no evidence of the effects of controlling medium-sized herbivores on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1200https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1200Thu, 19 May 2016 13:17:04 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Adopt protected species legislation (impact on forest management) We found no evidence of the effects of adopting protected species legislation on forests. '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%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1201https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1201Thu, 19 May 2016 13:21:26 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Control rodents One controlled study in New Zealand1 found that rodent control decreased native plant species richness and did not affect total plant species richness.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1232https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1232Mon, 23 May 2016 11:19:19 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover the ground with plastic mats after restoration planting One replicated study in Canada found that covering the ground with plastic mats after restoration planting decreased the cover of herbecous plants and grasses.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1239https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1239Fri, 03 Jun 2016 09:35:17 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover the ground using techniques other than plastic mats after restoration planting One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that covering the ground with mulch after planting increased total plant cover.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1240https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1240Fri, 03 Jun 2016 09:38:37 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Apply herbicides after restoration planting One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the USA found that controlling vegetation using herbicides after restoration planting decreased plant species richness and diversity.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1241https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1241Fri, 03 Jun 2016 09:52:52 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Build bird-perches to enhance natural seed dispersal One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Brazil found that building perches for birds increased species richness and abundance of new tree seedlings.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1245https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1245Fri, 03 Jun 2016 11:06:15 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add lime to the soil to increase fertility One replicated, randomized controlled study in the USA found that adding lime increased vegetation cover.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1249https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1249Fri, 03 Jun 2016 12:48:10 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add organic matter One replicated, randomized, controlled study in Brazil found that leaf litter addition increased species richness of young trees. One replicated, controlled study in Costa Rica found leaf litter addition decreased young tree density in artificial forest gaps. Both studies found no effect of litter addition on the density of tree regenerations under intact forest canopy. One replicated, controlled study in Portugal found that adding plant material to the soil surface increased total plant cover. One replicated, controlled study in the USA found mixed effects on cover depending on understory plant group.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1250https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1250Fri, 03 Jun 2016 12:51:42 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add organic matter after tree planting Two replicated, randomized, controlled studies in the USA found that adding leaf litter or wood-chips before restoration planting increased seedling biomass, but decreased seedling emergence and survival.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1258https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1258Mon, 06 Jun 2016 10:36:39 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Add lime to the soil after tree planting One of two replicated, randomized, controlled studies in the USA found that adding lime before restoration planting decreased the survival of pine seedlings. The other study found no effect of adding lime on planted oak seedling growth.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1259https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1259Mon, 06 Jun 2016 10:42:49 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Cover the ground with straw after tree planting One replicated, randomized, controlled study in the Czech Republic found that covering the ground with straw, but not bark or fleece, increased the growth rate of planted trees and shrubs.  Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1266https%3A%2F%2Fconservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1266Fri, 10 Jun 2016 08:44:29 +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