3.1 Habitat protection

Based on the collated evidence, what is the current assessment of the effectiveness of interventions for habitat protection?

Likely to be beneficial

● Legally protect habitats

Trade-offs between benefit and harms

● Provide or retain un-harvested buffer strips

Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)

● Ensure connectivity between habitat patches

Likely to be beneficial

Legally protect habitats for birds

1Four studies from Europe found that populations increased after habitat protection and a review from China found high use of protected habitats by cranes. A replicated, randomised and controlled study from Argentina found that some, but not all bird groups had higher species richness or were at higher densities in protected habitats. Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 50%; certainty 52%; harms 0%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​158

Trade-off between benefit and harms

Provide or retain un-harvested buffer strips

2Three replicated studies from the USA found that species richness or abundances were higher in narrow (<100 m) strips of forest, but five replicated studies from North America found that wider strips retained a community more similar to that of uncut forest than narrow strips. Tw replicated studies from the USA found no differences in productivity between wide and narrow buffers, but that predation of artificial nests was higher in buffers than in continuous forest. Assessment: trade-offs between benefits and harms (effectiveness 60%; certainty 55%; harms 20%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​161

Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)

Ensure connectivity between habitat patches

3Two studies of a replicated, controlled experiment in Canadian forests found that some species (not forest specialists) were found at higher densities in forest patches connected to continuous forest, compared to isolated patches and that some species used corridors more than clearcuts between patches. Assessment: unknown effectiveness — limited evidence (effectiveness 38%; certainty 38%; harms 0%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​160