Vous l’avez sans doute déjà repéré : sur la plateforme OpenEdition Books, une nouvelle interface vient d’être mise en ligne.
En cas d’anomalies au cours de votre navigation, vous pouvez nous les signaler par mail à l’adresse feedback[at]openedition[point]org.

Précédent Suivant

15.5 Threat: Biological resource use

p. 865-878


Texte intégral

15.5.1 Hunting and collecting terrestrial animals

Image 10000000000002BE000002E40E9DA808BEDF03B0.jpg

Likely to be beneficial

Prohibit or restrict hunting of a species

1Five studies evaluated the effects of prohibiting or restricting hunting of a mammal species. One study each was in Norway, the USA, South Africa, Poland and Zimbabwe.

2COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

3POPULATION RESPONSE (5 STUDIES)

4Abundance (2 studies): Two studies (including one before-and-after study), in the USA and Poland, found that prohibiting hunting led to population increases of tule elk and wolves.

5Survival (3 studies): A before-and-after study in Norway found that restricting or prohibiting hunting did not alter the number of brown bears killed. A study in Zimbabwe reported that banning the hunting, possession and trade of Temminck’s ground pangolins did not eliminate hunting of the species. A before-and-after study in South Africa found that increasing legal protection of leopards, along with reducing human-leopard conflict by promoting improved animal husbandry, was associated with increased survival.

6BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

7Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 45 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2597

Provide/increase anti-poaching patrols

8Seven studies evaluated the effects of providing or increasing anti-poaching patrols on mammals. Two studies were in Thailand and one each was in Brazil, Iran, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, South Africa and Tajikistan. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

9POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES)

10Abundance (6 studies): Two studies, in Thailand and Iran, found more deer and small mammals and more urial sheep and Persian leopards close to ranger stations (from which anti-poaching patrols were carried out) than further from them. One of three before-and-after studies, in Brazil, Thailand and Lao People’s Democratic Republic, found that ranger patrols increased mammal abundance. The other two studies found that patrols did not increase tiger abundance. A site comparison study in Tajikistan found more snow leopard, argali, and ibex where anti-poaching patrols were conducted.

11Survival (1 study): A study in South Africa found that anti-poaching patrols did not deter African rhinoceros poaching.

12BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

13Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 65 %; certainty 60 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2618

Set hunting quotas based on target species population trends

14Three studies evaluated the effects of setting hunting quotas for mammals based on target species population trends. One study each was in Canada, Spain and Norway.

15COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

16POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

17Abundance (2 studies): Two studies, in Spain and Norway, found that restricting hunting and basing quotas on population targets enabled population increases for Pyrenean chamois and Eurasian lynx.

18Survival (1 study): A before-and-after study in Canada found that setting harvest quotas based on population trends, and lengthening the hunting season, did not decrease the number of cougars killed by hunters.

19BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

20Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 64 %; certainty 42 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2607

Unknown effectiveness

Ban exports of hunting trophies

21One study evaluated the effects of banning exports of hunting trophies on wild mammals. This study was in Cameroon.

22COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

23POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

24Abundance (1 study): A before-and-after study in Cameroon found similar hippopotamus abundances before and after a ban on exporting hippopotamus hunting trophies.

25BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

26Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 10 %; certainty 27 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2625

Ban private ownership of hunted mammals

27One study evaluated the effects of banning private ownership of hunted mammals. This study was in Sweden.

28COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

29POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

30Survival (1 study): A before-and-after study in Sweden found that fewer brown bears were reported killed after the banning of private ownership of hunted bears.

31BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

32Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 70 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2602

Incentivise species protection through licensed trophy hunting

33One study evaluated the effects on mammals of incentivising species protection through licensed trophy hunting. This study was in Nepal.

34COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

35POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

36Abundance (1 study): A study in Nepal found that after trophy hunting started, bharal abundance increased, though the sex ratio of this species, and of Himalayan tahr, became skewed towards females.

37BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

38Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 60 %; certainty 20 %; harms 20 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2610

Prohibit or restrict hunting of particular sex/ breeding status/age animals

39Two studies evaluated the effects of prohibiting or restricting hunting of particular sex, breeding status or age animals. Both studies were in the USA. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

40POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

41Reproduction (2 studies): Two replicated, before-and-after studies, in the USA, found that limiting hunting of male deer did not increase the numbers of young deer/adult female.

42Population structure (1 study): A replicated, before-and-after study in the USA found that limiting hunting of older male elk resulted in an increased ratio of male: female elk.

43BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

44Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 35 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2609

Site management for target mammal species carried out by field sport practitioners

45One study evaluated the effects of site management for a target mammal species being carried out by field sport practitioners. This study was in Ireland. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

46POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

47Abundance (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in the Republic of Ireland found that sites managed for the sport of coursing Irish hares held more of this species than did the wider countryside.

48BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

49Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 65 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2605

Use wildlife refuges to reduce hunting impacts

50Two studies evaluated the effects on mammal species of using wildlife refuges to reduce hunting impacts. One study was in Canada and one was in Mexico. COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

51POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

52Abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated site comparison studies in Canada and Mexico found more moose in areas with limited hunting than in more heavily hunted areas. The other study found mixed results with only one of five species being more numerous in a non-hunted refuge.

53BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

54Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 35 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2612

No evidence found (no assessment)

55We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Commercially breed for the mammal production trade

  • Make introduction of non-native mammals for sporting purposes illegal

  • Promote mammal-related ecotourism

  • Promote sustainable alternative livelihoods

  • Use selective trapping methods in hunting activities.

15.5.2 Logging and wood harvesting

Image 10000000000002BE0000042CE2B2423844FFEC35.jpg

Likely to be beneficial

Thin trees within forest

56Twelve studies evaluated the effects on mammals of thinning trees within forests. Six studies were in Canada and six were in the USA.

57COMMUNITY RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

58Species richness (2 studies): A replicated, site comparison study the USA found that in thinned tree forest stands, there was similar mammal species richness compared to in unthinned stands. A replicated, controlled study in Canada found that thinning of regenerating lodgepole pine did not increase small mammal species richness 12–14 years later.

59POPULATION RESPONSE (8 STUDIES)

60Abundance (8 studies): Three of eight replicated, controlled and replicated, site comparison studies, in the USA and Canada, found that thinning trees within forests lead to higher numbers of small mammals. Two studies showed increases for some, but not all, small mammal species with a further study showing an increase for one of two squirrel species in response to at least some forest thinning treatments. The other two studies showed no increases in abundances of small mammals or northern flying squirrels between 12 and 14 years after thinning.

61BEHAVIOUR (4 STUDIES)

62Use (4 studies): Three of four controlled and comparison studies (three also replicated, one randomized) in Canada found that thinning trees within forests did not lead to greater use of areas by mule deer, moose or snowshoe hares. The other study found that a thinned area was used more by white-tailed deer than was unthinned forest.

63Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 40 %; certainty 42 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2650

Use patch retention harvesting instead of clearcutting

64Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of using patch retention harvesting instead of clearcutting. Two studies were in Canada and one was in Australia.

65COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

66POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

67Abundance (3 studies): Two replicated, controlled, before-and-after studies and a replicated, site comparison study in Canada and Australia found that retaining patches of unharvested trees instead of clearcutting whole forest stands increased or maintained numbers of some but not all small mammals. Higher abundances where tree patches were retained were found for southern red-backed voles, bush rat and for female agile antechinus. No benefit of retaining forest patches was found on abundances of deer mouse, meadow vole and male agile antechinus.

68BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

69Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 40 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2639

Use selective harvesting instead of clearcutting

70Eight studies evaluated the effects on mammals of using selective harvesting instead of clearcutting. Four studies were in Canada, three were in the USA and one was a review of studies in North America.

71COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

72Richness/diversity (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that harvesting trees selectively did not result in higher small mammal species richness compared to clearcutting.

73POPULATION RESPONSE (7 STUDIES)

74Abundance (7 studies): One of six replicated, controlled or replicated, site comparison studies in the USA and Canada found more small mammals in selectively harvested forest stands than in fully harvested, regenerating stands. Three studies found that selective harvesting did not increase small mammal abundance relative to clearcutting. The other two studies found mixed results with one of four small mammal species being more numerous in selectively harvested stands or in selectively harvested stands only in some years. A systematic review in North American forests found that partially harvested forests had more red-backed voles but not deer mice than did clearcut forests.

75BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY)

76Use (1 study): A site comparison study in the USA found that partially harvested forest was not used by snowshoe hares more than was largely clearcut forest.

77Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 40 %; certainty 40 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2637

Unknown effectiveness

Allow forest to regenerate naturally following logging

78One study evaluated the effects on mammals of allowing forest to regenerate naturally following logging. This study was in Canada.

79COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

80POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

81Abundance (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that, natural forest regeneration increased moose numbers relative to more intensive management in the short- to medium-term but not in the longer term. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

82Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 45 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2634

Apply fertilizer to trees

83Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of applying fertilizer to trees. All three studies were in Canada.

84COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

85POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

86BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES)

87Use (3 studies): One of three replicated studies (including one controlled study and two site comparison studies), in Canada, found that thinned forest stands to which fertilizer was applied were used more by snowshoe hares in winter but not in summer over the short-term. The other studies found that forest stands to which fertilizer was applied were not more used by snowshoe hares in the longer term or by mule deer or moose.

88Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 30 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2649

Clear or open patches in forests

89Four studies evaluated the effects on mammals of clearing or opening patches in forests. Two studies were in the USA, one was in Bolivia and one was in Canada.

90COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

91POPULATION RESPONSE (4 STUDIES)

92Abundance (4 studies): Two of four replicated studies (including three controlled studies and a site comparison study), in Bolivia, the USA and Canada, found that creating gaps or open patches within forests did not increase small mammal abundance relative to uncut forest. One study found that it did increase small mammal abundance and one found increased abundance for one of four small mammal species.

93BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

94Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 32 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2641

Fell trees in groups, leaving surrounding forest unharvested

95Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of felling trees in groups, leaving surrounding forest unharvested. Two studies were in Canada and one was in the UK.

96COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

97POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

98Abundance (2 studies): One of two replicated studies (including one controlled study and one site comparison study), in Canada, found that felling groups of trees within otherwise undisturbed stands increased the abundance of one of four small mammal species relative to clearcutting. The other study found that none of four small mammal species monitored showed abundance increases.

99Survival (1 study): A study in the UK found that when trees were felled in large groups with surrounding forest unaffected, there was less damage to artificial hazel dormouse nests than when trees were felled in small groups or thinned throughout.

100BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

101Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 40 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2648

Gather coarse woody debris into piles after felling

102Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of gathering coarse woody debris into piles after felling. Both studies were in Canada.

103COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

104Richness/diversity (1 study): A randomized, replicated, controlled study in Canada found higher mammal species richness where coarse woody debris was gathered into piles.

105POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

106Abundance (2 studies): One of two randomized, replicated, controlled studies in Canada found higher counts of San Bernardino long-tailed voles where coarse woody debris was gathered into piles. The other study found higher small mammal abundance at one of three plots where debris was gathered into piles.

107BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

108Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 70 %; certainty 31 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2653

Leave coarse woody debris in forests

109Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of leaving coarse woody debris in forests. One study was in Canada, one was in the USA and one was in Malaysia.

110COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

111Richness/diversity (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study, in Malaysia found more small mammal species groups in felled forest areas with woody debris than without.

112POPULATION RESPONSE (3 STUDIES)

113Abundance (3 studies): One out of three replicated studies (two controlled, one site comparison, one before-and-after) in Canada, the USA and Malaysia found that retaining or adding coarse woody debris did not increase numbers or frequency of records of small mammals. The other study found that two of three shrew species were more numerous in areas with increased volumes of coarse woody debris than areas without coarse woody debris.

114BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

115Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2647

Leave standing deadwood/snags in forests

116One study evaluated the effects on mammals of leaving standing deadwood or snags in forests. This study was in the USA.

117COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

118POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

119Abundance (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that increasing the quantity of standing deadwood in forests increased the abundance of one of three shrew species, compared to removing deadwood. BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

120Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 55 %; certainty 25 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2646

Plant trees following clearfelling

121One study evaluated the effects on mammals of planting trees following clearfelling. This study was in Canada.

122COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

123POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

124BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY)

125Use (1 study): A replicated, site comparison study in Canada found that forest stands subject to tree planting and herbicide treatment after logging were used more by American martens compared to naturally regenerating stands. Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2631

Provide supplementary feed to reduce tree damage

126One study evaluated the effects of providing supplementary feed on the magnitude of tree damage caused by mammals. This study was in USA.

127COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

128POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

129BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

130OTHER (1 STUDY)

131Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A replicated, randomized, paired sites, controlled, before-and-after study in USA found that supplementary feeding reduced tree damage by black bears.

132Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 70 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2629

Remove competing vegetation to allow tree establishment in clearcut areas

133Three studies evaluated the effects on mammals of removing competing vegetation to allow tree establishment in clearcut areas. Two studies were in Canada and one was in the USA.

134COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

135POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

136BEHAVIOUR (3 STUDIES)

137Use (3 studies): One of three studies (including two controlled studies and one site comparison study), in the USA and Canada, found that where competing vegetation was removed to allow tree establishment in clearcut areas, American martens used the areas more. One study found mixed results for moose and one found no increase in site use by snowshoe hares. Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 40 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2644

Retain dead trees after uprooting

138One study evaluated the effects on mammals of retaining dead trees after uprooting. This study was in the USA.

139COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

140POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

141BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY)

142Use (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that areas where trees were uprooted but left on site were used more by desert cottontails than were cleared areas.

143Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 60 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2642

Retain understorey vegetation within plantations

144One study evaluated the effects on mammals of retaining understorey vegetation within plantations. This study was in Chile.

145COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

146Richness/diversity (1 study): A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Chile found that areas with retained understorey vegetation had more species of medium-sized mammal, compared to areas cleared of understorey vegetation.

147POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

148BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY)

149Use (1 study): A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in Chile found that areas with retained understorey vegetation had more visits from medium-sized mammals, compared to areas cleared of understorey vegetation.

150Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 62 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2645

Retain undisturbed patches during thinning operations

151Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of retaining undisturbed patches during thinning operations. Both studies were in the USA.

152COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

153POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

154BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES)

155Use (2 studies): Two randomized, replicated, controlled studies (one also before-and-after) in the USA found that snowshoe hares and tassel-eared squirrels used retained undisturbed forest patches more than thinned areas. Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 70 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2640

Retain wildlife corridors in logged areas

156Two studies evaluated the effects on mammals of retaining wildlife corridors in logged areas. One study was in Australia and one was in Canada.

157COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

158POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

159BEHAVIOUR (2 STUDIES)

160Use (2 studies): A replicated study in Australia found that corridors of trees, retained after harvesting, supported seven species of arboreal marsupial. A replicated, controlled study in Canada found that lines of woody debris through clearcut areas that were connected to adjacent forest were not used more by red-backed voles than were isolated lines of woody debris.

161Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 50 %; certainty 30 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2651

Use thinning of forest instead of clearcutting

162One study evaluated the effects on mammals of using thinning of forest instead of clearcutting. This study was in the USA.

163COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

164POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

165BEHAVIOUR (1 STUDY)

166Use (1 study): A replicated, controlled study in the USA found that thinned forest areas were used more by desert cottontails than were fully cleared or uncleared areas.

167Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 60 %; certainty 20 %; harms 0 %).

https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/2643

No evidence found (no assessment)

168We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Control firewood collection in remnant native forest and woodland

  • Coppice trees

  • Harvest timber outside mammal reproduction period

  • Retain riparian buffer strips during timber harvest

  • Use tree tubes/small fences/cages to protect individual trees.

Précédent Suivant

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International - CC BY 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.