Effectiveness of engineered in-stream structure mitigation measures to increase salmonid abundance: a systematic review.

Engineered in-stream structures are often installed to increase salmonid abundance, either for commercial gain in fisheries or for conservation purposes in degraded habitats. Having been in widespread use for the last 80 years, at an estimated cost of hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars each year, the effectiveness of these structures is still widely debated in the literature. Many studies of varying quality have been undertaken that attempt to address this issue, but it has proved difficult for practitioners to develop a consensus regarding the utility of these structures, despite their continued use. Systematic review methodology was used to formally synthesize empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of engineered in-stream structures as a management tool to increase salmonid abundance. Meta-analysis shows that evidence regarding the effectiveness of in-stream devices is equivocal. Heterogeneity is significant both for population size and local habitat preference. This heterogeneity is related to stream width, with in-stream devices being less effective in larger streams. Consequently, widespread use of in-stream structures for restoration, particularly in larger streams, is not supported by the current scientific evidence base.

[1]  Christopher G. Clancy,et al.  Effects of Riprap Bank Reinforcement on Stream Salmonids in the Western United States , 2001 .

[2]  G. Giannico.  Habitat selection by juvenile coho salmon in response to food and woody debris manipulations in suburban and rural stream sections , 2000 .

[3]  Katie A. Barnas,et al.  Synthesizing U.S. River Restoration Efforts , 2005, Science.

[4]  Stephen James Ormerod,et al.  Restoration in applied ecology: editor's introduction , 2003 .

[5]  C. Ryan,et al.  Stream Restoration and Enhancement Projects: Is Anyone Monitoring? , 2002, Environmental management.

[6]  Jessica Gurevitch,et al.  STATISTICAL ISSUES IN ECOLOGICAL META‐ANALYSES , 1999 .

[7]  Eduardo Fernandez-Duque,et al.  Meta‐Analysis: A Valuable Tool in Conservation Research , 1994 .

[8]  N. Laird,et al.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials. , 1986, Controlled clinical trials.

[9]  T. Kwak,et al.  Use of Rehabilitated Habitat by Brown Trout and Rainbow Trout in an Ozark Tailwater River , 2000 .

[10]  Truman P. Young,et al.  Restoration ecology and conservation biology , 2000 .

[11]  Andrew S. Pullin,et al.  Are review articles a reliable source of evidence to support conservation and environmental management? A comparison with medicine , 2006 .

[12]  Charles Gowan,et al.  Long‐Term Demographic Responses of Trout Populations to Habitat Manipulation in Six Colorado Streams , 1996 .

[13]  D. Scruton,et al.  Pamehac Brook: a case study of the restoration of a Newfoundland, Canada, river impacted by flow diversion for pulpwood transportation , 1998 .

[14]  N. A. Binns,et al.  Response of Bonneville Cutthroat Trout and Their Habitat to Drainage-Wide Habitat Management at Huff Creek, Wyoming , 1994 .

[15]  R. Adams,et al.  Cumulative Effects and Optimal Targeting of Conservation Efforts: Steelhead Trout Habitat Enhancement in Oregon , 2000 .

[16]  Robert House,et al.  An Evaluation of Stream Restoration Structures in a Coastal Oregon Stream, 1981–1993 , 1996 .

[17]  A. Pullin,et al.  Guidelines for Systematic Review in Conservation and Environmental Management , 2006, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[18]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[19]  E. E. Knudsen,et al.  Effects of Riprap Bank Reinforcement on Juvenile Salmonids in Four Western Washington Streams , 1987 .

[20]  J. Rosenfeld,et al.  Relationship between Large Woody Debris Characteristics and Pool Formation in Small Coastal British Columbia Streams , 2003 .

[21]  Patricia A. Flebbe.  Trout use of woody debris and habitat in Wine Spring Creek, North Carolina , 1999 .

[22]  Phil Edwards,et al.  Identification of randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening records , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[23]  Claude Amoros,et al.  Restoration ecology of riverine wetlands: A 5-year post-operation survey on the Rhône River, France , 2002 .

[24]  W. Sutherland,et al.  The need for evidence-based conservation. , 2004, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[25]  Nick Otting,et al.  An Ecological Perspective of Riparian and Stream Restoration in the Western United States , 1997 .

[26]  Jessica Gurevitch,et al.  Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments , 1993 .

[27]  S. Johnson,et al.  Effectiveness of selected stream improvement techniques to create suitable summer and winter rearing habitat for juvenile coho salmon oncorhynchus kisutch in oregon coastal streams , 1992 .

[28]  G. Power,et al.  Evaluation of Atlantic salmon parr responses to habitat improvement structures in an experimental channel in Newfoundland, Canada , 1998 .

[29]  G. Lamberti,et al.  Responses in Fish Community Structure to Restoration of Two Indiana Streams , 2003 .

[30]  N. A. Binns.  Effectiveness of Habitat Manipulation for Wild Salmonids in Wyoming Streams , 2004 .

[31]  Michelle M. McClure,et al.  Recovery Planning for Endangered Species Act-listed Pacific Salmon: Using Science to Inform Goals and Strategies , 2007 .

[32]  J. Meyer,et al.  Standards for ecologically successful river restoration , 2005 .

[33]  G. Pess,et al.  A Review of Stream Restoration Techniques and a Hierarchical Strategy for Prioritizing Restoration in Pacific Northwest Watersheds , 2002 .

[34]  Andrew S. Pullin,et al.  Effectiveness in Conservation Practice: Pointers from Medicine and Public Health , 2001 .

[35]  James R. Hartzler.  The Effects of Half-Log Covers on Angler Harvest and Standing Crop of Brown Trout in McMichaels Creek, Pennsylvania , 1983 .

[36]  N. A. Hvidsten,et al.  River bed construction: impact and habitat restoration for juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., and brown trout, Salmo trutta L. , 1992 .

[37]  John Lyons,et al.  EFFECTS OF WATERSHED BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON HABITAT AND FISH IN WISCONSIN STREAMS 1 , 2002 .

[38]  S. Johnson,et al.  Effects of an increase in large wood on abundance and survival of juvenile salmonids (Oncorhynchus spp.) in an Oregon coastal stream , 2005 .

[39]  D. M. Thompson,et al.  Did the pre-1980 use of in-stream structures improve streams? A reanalysis of historical data. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[40]  K. Hartman,et al.  Effects of Large Woody Debris Addition on Stream Habitat and Brook Trout Populations in Appalachian Streams , 2006, Hydrobiologia.

[41]  A. Grootjans,et al.  Restoration Ecology: The New Frontier , 2006 .

[42]  P. Giller,et al.  Experimental provision of large woody debris in streams as a trout management technique , 2002 .

[43]  L. Hedges,et al.  The Handbook of Research Synthesis , 1995 .

[44]  S. Sharp,et al.  Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. , 1999 .

[45]  W. Tonn,et al.  Productive capacity of an artificial stream in the Canadian Arctic: assessing the effectiveness of fish habitat compensation , 2003 .

[46]  The effect of wood and temperature on juvenile coho salmon winter movement, growth, density and survival in side‐channels , 2003 .

[47]  P. Bisson,et al.  Response of Juvenile Coho Salmon and Steelhead to Placement of Large Woody Debris in a Coastal Washington Stream , 1997 .

[48]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Statistical Methods for Examining Heterogeneity and Combining Results from Several Studies in Meta‐Analysis , 2008 .

[49]  J. Culp,et al.  Simulated Fine Woody Debris Accumulations in a Stream Increase Rainbow Trout Fry Abundance , 1996 .

[50]  The introduction of woody debris into a channelized stream: effect on trout populations and habitat , 2002 .

[51]  J. David Allan,et al.  River Restoration in the Twenty‐First Century: Data and Experiential Knowledge to Inform Future Efforts , 2007 .