Evaluating effectiveness of restoration to address current stressors to riverine fish

相似文献   

Five Elements for Effective Evaluation of Stream Restoration

River and stream restoration projects are increasingly numerous but rarely subjected to systematic post-project evaluation. The few such evaluation studies conducted have indicated a high percentage of failures. Thus, post-project evaluation (and dissemination of results) is essential if the field of river restoration is to advance. Effective evaluation of project success should include: (1) Clear objectives, essential to identity potential incompatibilities among project objectives and to provide a framework for design of project evaluation. (2) Baseline data, needed as an objective basis for evaluating change caused by the project and encompassing as long a pre-project period as possible (including a detailed historical study). (3) Good study design, to demonstrate the effects of restoration projects in the complex riverine environment. (4) Commitment to the long term, to detect effects evident only years following project completion; in general, monitoring should continue for at least a decade, with surveys conducted after each flood above a predetermined threshold. (5) Willingness to acknowledge failures, or rather to recognize that each restoration project constitutes an experiment, so that a failure can be just as valuable to the science as a success, provided we can learn from it (which requires objective, robust post-project evaluation).     

Macroinvertebrate conservation in river ecosystems: Challenges,restoration strategies,and integrated management approaches

River ecosystems face growing threats from human-induced stressors, resulting in habitat degradation and biodiversity loss. Crucial to these ecosystems, macroinvertebrates maintain river health and functioning. In this review, we examine the challenges confronting macroinvertebrates, explore restoration strategies and management approaches, and shed light on knowledge gaps and future research directions. Habitat degradation, water pollution, climate change, and invasive species are discussed as key challenges. Various restoration strategies, such as in-stream habitat restoration, flow regime restoration, riparian zone restoration, and connectivity restoration, are evaluated for macroinvertebrate conservation. Integrated catchment management, adaptive management, community-based management, monitoring, and policy integration are highlighted as essential management approaches, and knowledge gaps in long-term monitoring, innovative restoration techniques, climate change resilience, and policy incorporation are identified as areas calling for further research. Ultimately, a proactive, adaptable, and cooperative approach to river management will ensure macroinvertebrate conservation and sustainable river ecosystems.     

Freshwater Habitat Restoration Actions in the Pacific Northwest: A Decade's Investment in Habitat Improvement

Across the Pacific Northwest (PNW), both public and private agents are working to improve riverine habitat for a variety of reasons, including improving conditions for threatened and endangered salmon. These projects are moving forward with little or no knowledge of specific linkages between restoration actions and the responses of target species. Targeted effectiveness monitoring of these actions is required to redress this lack of mechanistic understanding, but such monitoring depends on detailed restoration information—that is, implementation monitoring. This article describes the process of assembling a database of restoration projects intended to improve stream and river habitat throughout the PNW. We designed the database specifically to address the needs of regional monitoring programs that evaluate the effectiveness of restoration actions. The database currently contains spatially referenced, project‐level data on over 23,000 restoration actions initiated at over 35,000 locations in the last 15 years (98% of projects report start or end dates between 1991 and 2005) in the states of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana. Data sources included federal, state, local, nongovernmental organization, and tribal contributors. The process of database production identified difficulties in the design of regional project tracking systems. The technical design issues range from low‐level information such as what defines a project or a location to high‐level issues that include data validation and legalities of interagency data sharing. The completed database will inform efficient monitoring design, effectiveness assessments, and restoration project planning.     

Assessing stream channel restoration: the phased recovery framework

Channel reconfiguration is one of the most common and costly stream restoration techniques, though its effectiveness is frequently questioned. Project monitoring often tracks changes in macroinvertebrate communities and other responses for a 5‐year period. However, channel reconfiguration is a documented disturbance to stream ecosystems, suggesting that this form of restoration initiates succession over longer time frames than monitoring typically captures. To address the role of succession in stream ecosystem recovery, we developed the Phased Recovery Framework (PRF) which proposes benchmarks represented by predictable habitat structure and community composition based on project age. The PRF was tested across nine stream restoration projects in western Montana, ranging in age from 1 to 18 years, each paired with an established reference system. We tested for differences in channel form, habitat character, and macroinvertebrate community composition. While restoration established desired channel form, most biotic variables had not recovered to reference condition even for the oldest projects. Across all sites, phases of the PRF were poor predictors of response. However, analyzing responses to reconfiguration independently for sites in watersheds with unimpaired water quality versus those experiencing excessive nutrient enrichment (i.e. impaired sites) indicated that biological variables converged on reference conditions at unimpaired sites, but diverged across impaired reaches. These large‐scale anthropogenic influences may play a stronger role in recovery than do changes to channel form and need to be incorporated into project design and success criteria. Assessment of the PRF suggests that short‐term monitoring is not likely to produce reliable indicators of effectiveness without incorporating locally appropriate change associated with watershed impairment and successional progression.     

Assessing Stream Ecosystem Rehabilitation: Limitations of Community Structure Data

Inappropriate land use practices, pollutants, exploitation, and overpopulation have simplified stream habitats and degraded water quality worldwide. Management agencies are now being tasked to ameliorate impacts and restore stream “health,” yet there is a dearth of rigorous scientific methods and theory on which to base sound restoration design and monitoring. Despite this, many localized restoration projects are being constructed to stabilize erosion and enhance habitat heterogeneity in streams. Many restoration attempts adopt the paradigm that increasing habitat heterogeneity will lead to restoration of biotic diversity, yet there have been few studies that have manipulated variation of a physical parameter independent of the mean to isolate the effects of heterogeneity per se. We conducted a field experiment to mimic restoration of habitat heterogeneity in a shallow. stony stream. By using an experimental approach rather than a detailed assessment of existing restoration work, we were able to control the starting conditions of replicate riffles so that organism responses could be unambiguously attributed to the heterogeneity treatments. We successfully manipulated the variability of streambed particle sizes and consequently near‐bed flow characteristics of entire riffles. These factors define axes of habitat heterogeneity at scales relevant to the resident macroinvertebrate fauna. Despite this, we were unable to distinguish differences in community structure between high and low habitat heterogeneity treatments. Power analysis indicated that macroinvertebrate populations were more sensitive to individual site conditions at each riffle than to the heterogeneity treatments, suggesting that increasing habitat heterogeneity may be an ineffective technique if the restoration goals are to promote macroinvertebrate recovery in denuded streams. With extremely high variability between replicate riffles, monitoring programs for localized restoration projects or point source impacts are unlikely to detect gradual shifts in community structure until the differences between the reference and treatment sites are extreme. Innovative measurement of other parameters, such as ecosystem function variables (e.g., production, respiration, decomposition), may be more appropriate indicators of change at local scales.     

River Restoration in Victoria, Australia: Change is in the Wind, and None too Soon

Stream restoration has become a multibillion dollar industry worldwide, yet there are few clear success stories and the scientific basis for effective stream restoration remains uncertain. We compiled data on completed river restoration projects from four management authorities in Victoria, Australia, to examine how the available data could inform the science of restoration ecology in rivers, and thus improve future restoration efforts. We found that existing data sources are limited and much historical information has been lost through industry restructuring and poor data archiving. Examining records for 2,247 restoration projects, we found that riparian management projects were the most common, followed by bank stabilization and in‐stream habitat improvement. Only 14% of the project records indicated that some form of monitoring was carried out. It is evident that overall there is little scientific guidance and little or no monitoring and evaluation of the projects for which we had information. However, recent advances with mandatory, statewide reporting and an increased emphasis on project design and monitoring strongly suggest that the design, implementation, monitoring, and reporting of stream restoration projects have improved in recent years and will continue to do so.     

Systematic Postproject Appraisals to Maximize Lessons Learned from River Restoration Projects: Case Study of Compound Channel Restoration Projects in Northern California

We conducted systematic postproject appraisals (PPAs) of seven compound channel restoration projects, supplementing available data with new field data and analyses to produce comparable datasets for all seven projects. We describe how systematic PPAs can be developed and illustrate a systematic PPA for compound channel projects organized around performance with respect to geomorphic, habitat, and conveyance objectives. We found that preexisting monitoring programs for a group of similar restoration projects can be supplemented with relatively low‐effort data collection and analyses to produce lessons on a “class” of restoration projects. Using this approach to assess a set of seven compound channel projects, we found that two fully achieved geomorphic objectives, three appear likely to achieve geomorphic objectives with additional time and/or minor interventions, and two did not achieve geomorphic objectives. Further, four projects achieved habitat objectives and three projects appeared likely to achieve objectives if given more time to develop and/or a minor intervention to mitigate limitations on critical ecological processes. Finally, four of the projects satisfied conveyance objectives, and the remaining three appeared likely to satisfy objectives with minor interventions to maintain design roughness and geometry conditions. Based on observations from our new systematic PPA approach applied to compound channels in Mediterranean climates, we suggest application of systematic PPAs for other classes of river restoration projects to evaluate scale and geomorphic setting issues in project design, to refine postproject monitoring guidelines, and to predict vegetation recruitment, growth, and succession patterns to avoid potential vegetation problems.     

Response of secondary production by macroinvertebrates to large wood addition in three Michigan streams

1. We measured responses in macroinvertebrate secondary production after large wood additions to three forested headwater streams in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. These streams had fine‐grained sediments and low retention capacity due to low amounts of in‐channel wood from a legacy of past logging. We predicted that wood addition would increase macroinvertebrate secondary production by increasing exposed coarse substrate and retention of organic matter. 2. Large wood (25 logs) was added haphazardly to a 100‐m reach in each stream, and a 100‐m upstream reach served as control; each reach was sampled monthly, 1 year before and 2 years after wood addition (i.e. BACI design). Macroinvertebrate secondary production was measured 1 year after wood addition in two habitat types: inorganic sediments of the main channel and debris accumulations of leaf litter and small wood. 3. Overall macroinvertebrate production did not change significantly because each stream responded differently to wood addition. Production increased by 22% in the main‐channel of one stream, and showed insignificant changes in the other two streams compared to values before wood addition. Changes in main‐channel macroinvertebrate production were related to small changes in substrate composition, which probably affected habitat and periphyton abundance. Macroinvertebrate production was much greater in debris accumulations than in the main‐channel, indicating the potential for increased retention of leaf litter to increase overall macroinvertebrate production, especially in autumn. 4. Surrounding land use, substrate composition, temperature and method of log placement are variables that interact to influence the response of stream biota to wood additions. In most studies, wood additions occur in altered catchments, are rarely monitored, and secondary production is not a common metric. Our results suggest that the time required for measurable changes in geomorphology, organic matter retention, or invertebrate production is likely to take years to achieve, so monitoring should span more than 5 years, and ecosystem metrics, such as macroinvertebrate secondary production, should be incorporated into restoration monitoring programs.     

River and Riparian Restoration in the Southwest: Results of the National River Restoration Science Synthesis Project

Restoration activity has exponentially increased across the Southwest since 1990. Over 37,000 records were compiled into the National River Restoration Science Synthesis (NRRSS) database to summarize restoration trends and assess project effectiveness. We analyzed data from 576 restoration projects in the Southwest (NRRSS‐SW). More than 50% of projects were less than or equal to 3 km in length. The most common restoration project intent categories were riparian management, water quality management, in‐stream habitat improvement, and flow modification. Common project activities were well matched to goals. Conservative estimates of total restoration costs exceeded $500 million. Most restoration dollars have been allocated to flow modification and water quality management. Monitoring was linked to 28% of projects across the Southwest, as opposed to just 10% nationwide. Mean costs were statistically similar whether or not projects were monitored. Results from 48 telephone interviews provided validation of NRRSS‐SW database analyses but showed that project costs are often underreported within existing datasets. The majority of interviewees considered their projects to be successful, most often based upon observed improvements to biota or positive public reaction rather than evaluation of field data. The efficacy of restoration is difficult to ascertain given the dearth of information contained within most datasets. There is a great need for regional entities that not only track information on project implementation but also maintain and analyze monitoring data associated with restoration. Agencies that fund or regulate restoration should reward projects that emphasize monitoring and evaluation as much as project implementation.     

Stream Restoration in the Upper Midwest, U.S.A.

Restoration activities intended to improve the condition of streams and rivers are widespread throughout the Upper Midwest, U.S.A. As with other regions, however, little information exists regarding types of activities and their effectiveness. We developed a database of 1,345 stream restoration projects implemented from the years 1970 to 2004 for the states of Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin in order to analyze regional trends in goals, presence of monitoring, spatial distribution, size, and cost of river restoration projects. We found that data on individual projects were fragmented across multiple federal, state, and county agencies, as well as nonprofit groups and consulting firms. The most common restoration goals reported for this region were in‐stream habitat improvement, bank stabilization, water‐quality management, and dam removal. The former two were most common in Michigan and Wisconsin, where salmonid fisheries enhancement appeared to be an important concern, whereas water‐quality management was most frequent in Ohio. The most common restoration activities were the use of sand traps and riprap, and other common activities were related to the improvement of fish habitat. The median cost was $12,957 for projects with cost data, and total expenditures since 1990 were estimated at $444 million. Over time, the cost of individual projects has increased, whereas the median size has decreased, suggesting that restoration resources are being spent on smaller, more localized, and more expensive projects. Only 11% of data records indicated that monitoring was performed, and more expensive projects were more likely to be monitored. Standardization of monitoring and record keeping and dissemination of findings are urgently needed to ensure that dollars are well spent and restoration effectiveness is maximized.     

Restoring Rivers One Reach at a Time: Results from a Survey of U.S. River Restoration Practitioners

Despite expenditures of more than 1 billion dollars annually, there is little information available about project motivations, actions, and results for the vast majority of river restoration efforts. We performed confidential telephone interviews with 317 restoration project managers from across the United States with the goals of (1) assessing project motivations and the metrics of project evaluation and (2) estimating the proportion of projects that set and meet criteria for ecologically successful river restoration projects. According to project managers, ecological degradation typically motivated restoration projects, but post‐project appearance and positive public opinion were the most commonly used metrics of success. Less than half of all projects set measurable objectives for their projects, but nearly two‐thirds of all interviewees felt that their projects had been “completely successful.” Projects that we classified as highly effective were distinct from the full database in that most had significant community involvement and an advisory committee. Interviews revealed that many restoration practitioners are frustrated by the lack of funding for and emphasis on project monitoring. To remedy this, we recommend a national program of strategic monitoring focused on a subset of future projects. Our interviews also suggest that merely conducting and publishing more scientific studies will not lead to significant improvements in restoration practice; direct, collaborative involvement between scientists, managers, and practitioners is required for forward progress in the science and application of river restoration.     

Post‐Project Appraisals of River Restoration in Advanced University Instruction

Post‐project appraisals (PPAs) are systematic assessments of built restoration projects, which provide feedback on performance of restoration approaches to improve future restoration efforts. Unfortunately, most restoration projects are not subject to systematic assessment because of lack of institutional arrangements to sustain long‐term evaluation and the orientation of most funding agencies towards project implementation rather than “studies.” As semester‐long courses on river restoration increasingly appear in university curricula at the graduate and advanced undergraduate level, independent student research projects for such courses can provide a mechanism for building a database of PPAs (and components thereof) and providing the students with a powerful learning experience. In two UC Berkeley courses, we require independent student projects involving original field research, peer review of first drafts, instructor (and often outside) review of second drafts, and presentation of results to a public symposium. Since 1995, the revised, final papers have been added to the University of California library, where they constitute one of the largest collections of restoration‐related studies currently available for any region: over 300 restoration‐related studies, of which 80 are PPAs or components thereof. Since 2003, the papers have been posted on‐line, with 40,000 full text downloads through 2010. Some term projects have directly influenced river restoration programs, inducing changes in salmon habitat enhancement project design, documenting failure of projects based on inappropriate restoration approaches, and contributing to systematic assessments of step‐pool and compound channel designs in urban areas. Student evaluations cite the term projects as valuable learning experiences.     

An Assessment of a Small Urban Stream Restoration Project in Northern California

Stream restoration projects have become increasingly common, and the need for systematic post‐project evaluation, particularly for small‐scale projects, is evident. This study describes how a 70‐m restored reach of a small urban stream, Baxter Creek (in Poinsett Park, El Cerrito, California), was quickly and inexpensively evaluated using habitat, biological, and resident‐attitude assessments. The restoration involved opening a previously culverted channel, planting riparian vegetation, and adding in‐stream step‐pool sequences and sinuosity. Replicated benthic macroinvertebrate samples from the restored site and an upstream unrestored site were compared using several metrics, including taxa richness and a biotic index. Both biological and habitat quality improved in the restored compared with the unrestored section. However, when compared with a creek restored 12 years before, habitat condition was of lower quality in the recently restored creek. A survey of the neighborhood residents indicated that, overall, they were pleased with the restored creek site. The approach used in this demonstration project may be applicable to other small‐scale evaluations of urban stream restorations.     

River Restoration in the Twenty-First Century: Data and Experiential Knowledge to Inform Future Efforts

Despite some highly visible projects that have resulted in environmental benefits, recent efforts to quantify the number and distribution of river restoration projects revealed a paucity of written records documenting restoration outcomes. Improving restoration designs and setting watershed priorities rely on collecting and making accessible this critical information. Information within the unpublished notes of restoration project managers is useful but rarely documents ecological improvements. This special section of Restoration Ecology is devoted to the current state of knowledge on river restoration. We provide an overview of the section’s articles, reflecting on lessons learned, which have implications for the implementation, legal, and financing frameworks for restoration. Our reflections are informed by two databases developed under the auspices of the National River Restoration Science Synthesis project and by extensive interactions with those who fund, implement, and permit restoration. Requiring measurable ecological success criteria, comprehensive watershed plans, and tracking of when and where restoration projects are implemented are critical to improving the health of U.S. waters. Documenting that a project was put in the ground and stayed intact cannot be equated with ecological improvements. However, because significant ecological improvements can come with well‐designed and ‐implemented stream and river restorations, a small investment in documenting the factors contributing to success will lead to very large returns in the health of our nation’s waterways. Even projects that may appear to be failures initially can be turned into success stories by applying the knowledge gained from monitoring the project in an adaptive restoration approach.     

Application of the functional habitat concept to the regulated Lower Ord River,Western Australia,Part I,macroinvertebrate assemblages

This paper tests the applicability of the Functional Habitat Concept (FHC) to a lowland tropical river in Australia. The underlying tenet of the FHC is that in-stream hydrological and physical processes form distinct habitats, and where these habitats support distinct macroinvertebrate assemblages they are considered ‘functional’ habitats. This concept has been employed in the northern hemisphere as a tool for river restoration and management, especially where habitats are easier to manage than species, but the FHC has yet to be tested in Australia. This study reports the application of the FHC to the regulated Lower Ord River (LOR) in the remote far north of Western Australia. Seven ‘potential’ in-stream habitat units were identified on the basis of their physical properties. Multivariate and species preference analysis of macroinvertebrate data indicated that these habitats supported six distinct macroinvertebrate assemblages, providing six ‘functional’ habitats (gravel runs and rock rapids, sand margins, mud/silt margins, flooded riparian vegetation, emergent vegetation, and submerged macrophyte beds). Macroinvertebrate preferences for particular habitats reflected the broad ecology and life-history characteristics of the species, which in turn reflected the physical attributes of the habitats. We argue that in a region where the fauna has been little studied, and for which there is little ecological information, the FHC is a valuable approach. For a river that is facing increased water abstraction, the FHC potentially aids in the preservation of macroinvertebrate diversity as it identifies critical functional habitats for managers to maintain. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Handling editor: K. Martens     

Conceptual Evaluation of Factors Potentially Affecting Restoration of Habitat Structure within the Channelized Kissimmee River Ecosystem

A critical element of the ongoing effort to restore the ecological integrity of Florida's Kissimmee River ecosystem is the reestablishment of pre-channelization habitat structure and function. Restoration of habitat will form the basis for responses by most biological components of the ecosystem and will provide a key indicator of the success of the restoration effort. This paper evaluates the relative importance of a range of abiotic and biotic habitat parameters in the existing and historic Kissimmee River ecosystem and provides a conceptual framework for predicting expected spatial and temporal responses of river and floodplain habitats to the restoration project. Among the ecological factors and process that influenced the development, dynamics, and maintenance of river and floodplain habitat structure, hydrology is expected to be of central importance in eliciting restoration responses in the Kissimmee River Ecosystem. Based on the assumption that the restoration plan will reestablish historic hydrologic characteristics, predictions are made of expected responses by geomorphic and vegetative components of the Kissimmee River's habitat structure. Recommendations are made regarding key habitat parameters requiring long term tracking and analysis and utilization of a geographic information system(GIS). A hierarchical habitat classification scheme is provided as a foundation for all components of the restoration evaluation program.     

Contribution of microspatial factors to benthic diatom communities

Large rivers are worldwide under severe pressure and there is a lack of information on large river restoration. The present paper represents a meta-analysis of available data on river rehabilitation projects performed at the Austrian Danube River consisting of six rehabilitation projects addressing 19 sites. The overall goal was to analyse the response of fish assemblages to different rehabilitation types based on (1) morphological type (“Instream Habitat Enhancement”, “backwater Enhancement”, “extended Enhancement”), (2) length of rehabilitation measure (3) time after construction (4) applied monitoring design. Biological metrics evaluated included number of fish species and relative density, habitat guilds and Leitbild species. In total, number of species increases by 55% comparing rehabilitated with unrestored sites. The number of species of all habitat guilds is higher after rehabilitation. The proportion of rheophilic species increased and the community evolved toward a more type-specific community, according to the Leitbild. Significant differences between measure types were not detected. The rehabilitation success depends mainly on its spatial extent. Highest positive response of number of rheophilic species is achieved by a length >3.9 km. The results show that habitat rehabilitation of large rivers is effective if the spatial extent of the measure is in accordance with river size.     

Long-Term Monitoring and Evaluation of the Lower Red River Meadow Restoration Project, Idaho, U.S.A.

Although public and financial support for stream restoration projects is increasing, long‐term monitoring and reporting of project successes and failures are limited. We present the initial results of a long‐term monitoring program for the Lower Red River Meadow Restoration Project in north‐central Idaho, U.S.A. We evaluate a natural channel design’s effectiveness in shifting a degraded stream ecosystem onto a path of ecological recovery. Field monitoring and hydrodynamic modeling are used to quantify post‐restoration changes in 17 physical and biological performance indicators. Statistical and ecological significance are evaluated within a framework of clear objectives, expected responses (ecological hypotheses), and performance criteria (reference conditions) to assess post‐restoration changes away from pre‐restoration conditions. Compared to pre‐restoration conditions, we observed ecosystem improvements in channel sinuosity, slope, depth, and water surface elevation; quantity, quality, and diversity of in‐stream habitat and spawning substrate; and bird population numbers and diversity. Modeling documented the potential for enhanced river–floodplain connectivity. Failure to detect either statistically or ecologically significant change in groundwater depth, stream temperature, native riparian cover, and salmonid density is due to a combination of small sample sizes, high interannual variability, external influences, and the early stages of recovery. Unexpected decreases in native riparian cover led to implementation of adaptive management strategies. Challenges included those common to most project‐level monitoring—isolating restoration effects in complex ecosystems, securing long‐term funding, and implementing scientifically rigorous experimental designs. Continued monitoring and adaptive management that support the establishment of mature and dense riparian shrub communities are crucial to overall success of the project.     

Stream Restoration in the Pacific Northwest: Analysis of Interviews with Project Managers

Hundreds of millions of dollars per year are spent on river restoration in the Pacific Northwest (PNW), but little is known about the effectiveness of this effort. To help address this gap, we analyzed a database containing 23,000 projects at 35,000 locations in the region. We selected a subset of these projects for interviews using a survey instrument developed by a national team of scientists. In total, 47 project contacts in the PNW were interviewed to learn from the individuals directly involved in restoration. At least one‐third of the projects surveyed (34%) did not conduct sufficient monitoring to evaluate effectiveness. More than two‐thirds (70%) of all respondents reported their projects were successful, but 43% either have no success criteria or are unaware of any criteria for their project. Although almost two‐thirds (66%) of respondents anticipate a need for ongoing project maintenance, less than half (43%) have maintenance funds available. These findings suggest that establishing a connection between effectiveness monitoring and project implementation is not a usual component of project design. Consequently, we can only assess the benefits in a few isolated projects and cannot quantify the cumulative benefits of restoration on a larger scale. These findings highlight the need for (1) planning prior to implementation of restoration projects that accounts for monitoring design; (2) coordinated effectiveness monitoring to assess cumulative effects of restoration; and (3) management and maintenance of projects based on real measures of project performance.