IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envman/v50y2012i3d10.1007_s00267-012-9886-6.html

Dealing With Uncertainty When Assessing Fish Passage Through Culvert Road Crossings

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory B. Anderson

    (University of Georgia, Odum School of Ecology
    Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Fish and Wildlife Conservation)

  • Mary C. Freeman

    (University of Georgia, United States Geological Survey, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center)

  • Byron J. Freeman

    (University of Georgia, Odum School of Ecology and Georgia Museum of Natural History)

  • Carrie A. Straight

    (University of Georgia, Odum School of Ecology)

  • Megan M. Hagler

    (University of Georgia, Odum School of Ecology)

  • James T. Peterson

    (University of Georgia, United States Geological Survey, Georgia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
    USGS Oregon Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit)

Abstract

Assessing the passage of aquatic organisms through culvert road crossings has become increasingly common in efforts to restore stream habitat. Several federal and state agencies and local stakeholders have adopted assessment approaches based on literature-derived criteria for culvert impassability. However, criteria differ and are typically specific to larger-bodied fishes. In an analysis to prioritize culverts for remediation to benefit imperiled, small-bodied fishes in the Upper Coosa River system in the southeastern United States, we assessed the sensitivity of prioritization to the use of differing but plausible criteria for culvert impassability. Using measurements at 256 road crossings, we assessed culvert impassability using four alternative criteria sets represented in Bayesian belief networks. Two criteria sets scored culverts as either passable or impassable based on alternative thresholds of culvert characteristics (outlet elevation, baseflow water velocity). Two additional criteria sets incorporated uncertainty concerning ability of small-bodied fishes to pass through culverts and estimated a probability of culvert impassability. To prioritize culverts for remediation, we combined estimated culvert impassability with culvert position in the stream network relative to other barriers to compute prospective gain in connected stream habitat for the target fish species. Although four culverts ranked highly for remediation regardless of which criteria were used to assess impassability, other culverts differed widely in priority depending on criteria. Our results emphasize the value of explicitly incorporating uncertainty into criteria underlying remediation decisions. Comparing outcomes among alternative, plausible criteria may also help to identify research most needed to narrow management uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory B. Anderson & Mary C. Freeman & Byron J. Freeman & Carrie A. Straight & Megan M. Hagler & James T. Peterson, 2012. "Dealing With Uncertainty When Assessing Fish Passage Through Culvert Road Crossings," Environmental Management, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 462-477, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:envman:v:50:y:2012:i:3:d:10.1007_s00267-012-9886-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s00267-012-9886-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00267-012-9886-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00267-012-9886-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:envman:v:50:y:2012:i:3:d:10.1007_s00267-012-9886-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.