A roadmap for implementing the Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater biodiversity
No abstract available.
Environmental Reviews↗
Geology topics
J. Robert Britton
Publications and source records attributed to J. Robert Britton.
Global responses to the COVID-19 pandemic by recreational anglers: Considerations for developing more resilient and sustainable fisheries
The global COVID-19 pandemic resulted in many jurisdictions implementing orders restricting the movements of people to inhibit virus transmission, with recreational angling often either not permitted or access to fisheries and/or related infrastructure being prevented. Following the lifting of restrictions, initial angler surveys and licence sales suggested increased participation and effort, and altered angler demographics, but with evidence remaining limited. Here, we overcome this evidence gap by identifying temporal changes in angling interest, licence sales, and angling effort in world regions by comparing data in the ‘pre-pandemic’ (up to and including 2019); ‘acute pandemic’ (2020) and ‘COVID-acclimated’ (2021) periods. We then identified how changes can inform the development of more resilient and sustainable recreational fisheries. Interest in angling (measured here as angling-related internet search term volumes) increased substantially in all regions during 2020. Patterns in licence sales revealed marked increases in some countries during 2020 but not in others. Where licence sales increased, this was rarely sustained in 2021; where there were declines, these related to fewer tourist anglers due to movement restrictions. Data from most countries indicated a younger demographic of people who participated in angling in 2020, including in urban areas, but this was not sustained in 2021. These short-lived changes in recreational angling indicate efforts to retain younger anglers could increase overall participation levels, where efforts can target education in appropriate angling practices and create more urban angling opportunities. These efforts would then provide recreational fisheries with greater resilience to cope with future global crises, including facilitating the ability of people to access angling opportunities during periods of high societal stress.
Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries↗
Tracking anadromous fish over successive freshwater migrations reveals the influence of tagging effect, previous success and abiotic factors on upstream passage over barriers
Predicting and mitigating the impact of anthropogenic barriers on migratory fish requires an understanding of the individual and environmental factors that influence barrier passage. Here, the upstream spawning migrations of iteroparous twaite shad Alosa fallax were investigated over three successive spawning migrations in a highly fragmented river basin using passive acoustic telemetry (n=184). More fish approached and passed barriers in the lower river reaches than further upstream, with the median cumulative weir passage time (IQR) of 4.6 (1.8 - 9.2) days representing 18% of their time in river. Returning fish in their second year had significantly higher weir passage rates than in their tagging year, with passage rates also positively influenced by previous passage success. Higher water temperature and river level also had positive impacts on passage rates. Lower weir passage rates by newly tagged individuals suggests that reliance on within-year passage estimates in telemetry-based barrier impact assessments could result in conservative results, while higher passage rates of previously successful versus unsuccessful individuals suggests a conserved motivation and/or inherent ability to pass barriers.
Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences↗
Preventing and controlling nonnative species invasions to bend the curve of global freshwater biodiversity loss
The Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater biodiversity recognizes that addressing nonnative species is one of six principal actions needed to bend the curve in freshwater biodiversity loss. This is because introduction rates of nonnative species continue to accelerate globally and where these species develop invasive populations, they can have severe impacts on freshwater biodiversity. The most effective management measure to protect freshwater biodiversity is to prevent introductions of nonnative species. Should a nonnative species be introduced, however, then its early detection and the implementation of rapid reaction measures can avoid it establishing and dispersing. If these measures are unsuccessful and the species becomes invasive, then control and containment measures can minimize its further spread and impact. Minimizing further spread and impact includes control methods to reduce invader abundance and containment methods such as screening of invaded sites and strict biosecurity to avoid the invader dispersing to neighbouring basins. These management actions have benefitted from developments in invasion risk assessment that can prioritize species according to their invasion risk and, for species already invasive, ensure that management actions are commensurate with assessed risk. The successful management of freshwater nonnative species still requires the overcoming of some implementation challenges, including nonnative species often being a symptom of degraded habitats rather than the main driver of ecological change, and eradication methods often being nonspecies specific. Given the multiple anthropogenic stressors in freshwaters, nonnative species management must work with other restoration strategies if it is to deliver the Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater biodiversity.
Environmental Reviews↗
A global perspective on the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on freshwater fish biodiversity
The COVID-19 global pandemic and resulting effects on the economy and society (e.g., sheltering-in-place, alterations in transportation, changes in consumer behaviour, loss of employment) have yielded some benefits and risks to biodiversity. Here, we considered the ways the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced (or may influence) freshwater fish biodiversity (e.g., richness, abundance). In many cases, we could only consider potential impacts using documented examples (often from the media) of likely changes, because anecdotal observations are still emerging and data-driven studies are yet to be completed or even undertaken. We evaluated the potential for the pandemic to either mitigate or amplify widely acknowledged, pre-existing threats to freshwater fish biodiversity (i.e., invasive species, pollution, fragmentation, flow alteration, habitat loss and alteration, climate change, exploitation). Indeed, we identified examples spanning the extremes of positive and negative outcomes for almost all known threats. We also considered the pandemic's impact on freshwater fisheries demand, assessment, research, compliance monitoring, and management interventions (e.g., restoration), with disruptions being experienced in all domains. Importantly, we provide a forward-looking synthesis that considers the potential mechanisms and pathways by which the consequences of the pandemic may positively and negatively impact freshwater fishes over the longer term. We conclude with a candid assessment of the current management and policy responses and the extent to which they ensure freshwater fish populations and biodiversity are conserved for human and aquatic ecosystem benefits in perpetuity.
Biological Conservation↗
The effectiveness of non-native fish removal techniques in freshwater ecosystems: a systematic review
In aquatic systems, biological invasions can result in adverse ecological effects. Management techniques available for non-native fish removal programs (including eradication and population size control) vary widely, but include chemicals, harvest regimes, physical removal, or biological control. For management agencies, deciding on what non-native fish removal program to use has been challenging because there is little reliable information about the relative effectiveness of these measures in controlling or eradicating non-native fish. We conducted a systematic review, including a critical appraisal of study validity, to assess the effectiveness of different non-native fish removal methods, and to identify the factors that influence the overall success rate of each type of method. We found 95 relevant studies, generating 158 data sets. The evidence base was dominated by poorly documented studies with inadequate experimental designs (76% of removal projects). When the management goal was non-native fish eradication, chemical treatments were relatively successful (antimycin 75%; rotenone 89%) compared to other interventions. Electrofishing and passive removal measure studies indicated successful eradication was possible (58% each respectively) but required intensive effort and multiple treatments over a number of years. Of these studies with sufficient information, electrofishing had the highest success for population size control (56% of data sets). Overall, inadequate data quality and completeness severely limited our ability to make strong conclusions about the relationships between non-native fish abundance and different methods of eradication and population control, and the factors influencing the overall success rate of each method. Our review highlights that there is considerable scope for improving our evaluations of non-native fish removal methods. It is recommended that programs should have explicitly stated objectives, better data reporting, and study designs that (when possible and appropriate) incorporate replicated and controlled investigations with rigorous, long-term quantitative monitoring. Future research on the effectiveness of non-native fish removal methods should focus on: (1) the efficacy of existing or potentially new removal measures in larger, more complex environments; (2) a broader range of removal measures in general, and (3) phenotypic characteristics of individual fish within a population that fail to be eradicated or controlled.
Environmental Reviews↗