Effects of habitat rehabilitation on brown trout (Salmo trutta) in boreal forest streams
Summary1. Degradation of stream habitat because of anthropogenic activities (e.g. channelisation) has had a dramatic impact on fluvial environments and their biota, and as a consequence, increasing effort has been directed towards the restoration of degraded rivers. However, a major problem is that...
Saved in:
Published in | Freshwater biology Vol. 55; no. 10; pp. 2200 - 2214 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
01.10.2010
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Summary1. Degradation of stream habitat because of anthropogenic activities (e.g. channelisation) has had a dramatic impact on fluvial environments and their biota, and as a consequence, increasing effort has been directed towards the restoration of degraded rivers. However, a major problem is that the success (or failure) of restoration has been rarely tested using a well-designed monitoring programme to allow reliable detection of an impact, if any exists. We used a spatially and temporally replicated, balanced Before-After-Control-Impact design to assess the impact of stream habitat rehabilitation on the densities and growth of brown trout of three age-classes in North Finnish forest streams.2. Three separate sections in each of six streams were selected for the study. After 3 years of pre-rehabilitation monitoring, two randomly selected sections in each stream were restored; one using large woody debris and boulders and the other using only boulders. A third section remained as an unmodified control. Monitoring of fish densities continued for 3 years after rehabilitation.3. Rehabilitation clearly increased streambed complexity, but did not have detectable effects on brown trout stocks in either of the rehabilitation schemes (LWD or stones), except for age-2+ and older fish which decreased in abundance compared to control reaches. A severe drought after rehabilitation in late summer 2002 reduced densities of trout to a low level in all streams, overriding any local effects of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation structures seemed to provide some safeguard against drought for age-2 and older, but not for the younger age-classes.4. Our results add to the growing body of literature suggesting that large-scale regional factors may overwhelm local management efforts. To be successful in the future, stream rehabilitation schemes must include drought refuge areas for fish and other stream biota. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0046-5070 |
DOI: | 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2010.02467.x |