Coupling systematic planning and expert judgement enhances the efficiency of river restoration.
Ineffectiveness of current river restoration practices hinders the achievement of ecological quality targets set by country-specific regulations. Recent advances in river restoration help planning efforts more systematically to reach ecological targets at the least costs. However, such approaches are often desktop-based and overlook real-world constraints. We argue that combining two techniques commonly used in the conservation arena - expert judgement and systematic planning - will deliver cost-effective restoration plans with a high potential for implementation. We tested this idea targeting the restoration of spawning habitat, i.e. gravel bars, for 11 rheophilic fish species along a river system in Germany (Havel-Spree rivers). With a group of local fish experts, we identified the location and extent of potential gravel bars along the rivers and necessary improvements to migration barriers to ensure fish passage. Restoration cost of each gravel bar included the cost of the action itself plus a fraction of the cost necessary to ensure longitudinal connectivity by upgrading or building fish passages located downstream. We set restoration targets according to the EU Water Framework Directive, i.e. relative abundance of 11 fish species in the reference community and optimised a restoration plan by prioritising a subset of restoration sites from the full set of identified sites, using the conservation planning software Marxan. Out of the 66 potential gravel bars, 36 sites which were mainly located in the downstream section of the system were selected, reflecting their cost-effectiveness given that fewer barriers needed intervention. Due to the limited overall number of sites that experts identified as being suitable for restoring spawning habitat, reaching abundance-targets was challenged. We conclude that coupling systematic river restoration planning with expert judgement produces optimised restoration plans that account for on-the-ground implementation constraints. If applied, this approach has a high potential to enhance overall efficiency of future restoration efforts.
Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries IGB, Müggelseedamm 310, 12587 Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: langhans@igb-berlin.de.
Simone D
SD
Langhans
Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries IGB, Müggelseedamm 310, 12587 Berlin, Germany; Society to Save the Sturgeon, Rostock, Germany. Electronic address: sturgeon@igb-berlin.de.
Jörn
J
Gessner
Centre Tecnològic Forestal de Catalunya, Ctra. Sant Llorenç de Morunys km 2, Solsona, Lleida, Spain. Electronic address: virgilio.hermoso@gmail.com.
Virgilio
V
Hermoso
Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries IGB, Müggelseedamm 310, 12587 Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: wolter@igb-berlin.de.
Christian
C
Wolter
D000818:Animals; D003247:Conservation of Natural Resources / Q000379:methods*; D052918:Environmental Restoration and Remediation / Q000379:methods; D005399:Fishes; D005858:Germany; D045483:Rivers
Cost-efficiency; Ecological status; Marxan; River restoration planning; Spawning habitat; Water Framework Directive