Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42032809›Full record

SynthesisBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2026

The evidence base for ranger patrol effectiveness in conservation and how to improve it.

Trina Rytwinski, Robert S A Pickles, Matthew J Muir, Steven J Cooke, Joseph R Bennett, Lisa A Kelly, Adrienne Smith, Cynthia Cadet, Dwi N Adhiasto, Inés Arroyo Quiroz and 10 more

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Trina Rytwinski *Canadian Centre for Evidence-Informed Conservation, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.
Robert S A Pickles *Panthera Wild Cat Conservation Malaysia, Room L13, G0.16, The Square, Jaya One, Jalan Universiti, Seksyen 13, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, 46200, Malaysia.
Matthew J MuirDivision of International Conservation, International Affairs, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, Virginia, 22041, USA.
Steven J CookeCanadian Centre for Evidence-Informed Conservation, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.
Joseph R BennettCanadian Centre for Evidence-Informed Conservation, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.
Lisa A KellyCanadian Centre for Evidence-Informed Conservation, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.
Adrienne SmithCanadian Centre for Evidence-Informed Conservation, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.
Cynthia CadetCanadian Centre for Evidence-Informed Conservation, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Sciences, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.
Dwi N AdhiastoScience for Endangered and Trafficked Species (SCENTS) Foundation, Arimbi Conservation Integrated Office, Jl. Arimbi 1 No. 7, Bantarjati, Bogor Utara, 16151, Indonesia.
Inés Arroyo QuirozCentro Regional de Investigaciones Multidisciplinarias (CRIM, UNAM), Av. Universidad s/n, Circuito 2, 62210, Col. Chamilpa, Ciudad Universitaria de la UAEM, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico.
Mark D BootonPanthera Corporation, 104 West 40th Street, 5th Floor, New York, NY, 10018, USA.
Daphne P CarlsonDivision of International Conservation, International Affairs, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, Virginia, 22041, USA.
Drew T CroninNorth Carolina Zoo, 4401 Zoo Parkway, Asheboro, NC, 27205, USA.
Anthony DancerZoological Society of London, Regent's Park, London, NW1 4RY, UK.
Meredith L GoreDepartment of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland, 2181 Lefrak Hall, 7251 Preinkert Drive, College Park, Maryland, 20742, USA.
Jennifer R B MillerDivision of International Conservation, International Affairs, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, Virginia, 22041, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6806-392X
Stephen F PiresDepartment of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th Street, PCA 368A, Miami, FL, 33199, USA.
Amy PokempnerDivision of International Conservation, International Affairs, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, Virginia, 22041, USA.
James SladeRe:wild, PO Box 129, Austin, TX, 78767, USA.
Andrew M Lemieux *LEAD Conservation, Plataanlaan 19, Wageningen, 6708 PT, The Netherlands.

Funding

Carleton University 187779Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada 315918U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 140F0420P0252
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ranger patrols are a cornerstone of wildlife protection efforts around the world and occur across all ecological governance systems. Evidence that patrols reduce threats to wildlife and enable their recovery has not been systematically examined previously. Without evidence of patrol effectiveness in varying contexts, protected area managers risk wasting limited conservation resources and lack information required to improve the effectiveness of patrols. We conducted a meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness of terrestrial patrols for conserving African, Asian, and Latin American wildlife directly threatened by exploitation. After filtering 57 studies, we calculated effect sizes from each of the remaining 15 studies that included a comparator and measurement of wildlife abundance and calculated standardised mean difference and % change in wildlife species abundance. Results suggest tentative support that areas implementing patrols (alongside other interventions) were associated with higher wildlife abundance levels compared to time periods or locations without patrols. We were unable to confirm causality between patrols and changes in wildlife population abundance because studies were inadequately designed to evaluate and report on effectiveness. Studies commonly lacked a comparator or counterfactual event, temporal or spatial replication, and consistent and/or long-term monitoring of population abundance, and had study designs that confounded conservation actions. Further, of the 15 included studies linking wildlife abundance to patrol efforts, five also reported a reduction in a poaching threat, but only three of these used a comparator in the threat reduction evaluation. Without monitoring threat trends alongside wildlife abundance, it is difficult to be confident that patrols resulted in increases in wildlife abundance. To help evaluate patrol interventions (i.e. not only whether they work but where and under what conditions they work), we identify opportunities to improve future patrol effectiveness research and provide recommendations on how to improve the evidence base.

Indexed as

Animals, WildConservation of Natural ResourcesHuntingAnimalsEndangered Speciescommunity‐based conservationimpact evaluationlaw enforcementpoachingthreatened specieswildlife crime

Identifiers

PMID42032809
PMCPMC13542308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.