On the relevance of animal behavior to the management and conservation of fishes and fisheries

There are many syntheses on the role of animal behavior in understanding and mitigating conservation threats for wildlife. That body of work has inspired the development of a new discipline called conservation behavior. Yet, the majority of those synthetic papers focus on non-fish taxa such as birds and mammals. Many fish populations are subject to intensive exploitation and management and for decades researchers have used concepts and knowledge from animal behavior to support management and conservation actions. Dr. David L. G. Noakes is an influential ethologist who did much foundational work related to illustrating how behavior was relevant to the management and conservation of wild fish. We pay tribute to the late Dr. Noakes by summarizing the relevance of animal behavior to fisheries management and conservation. To do so, we first consider what behavior has revealed about how fish respond to key threats such as habitat alteration and loss, invasive species, climate change, pollution, and exploitation. We then consider how behavior has informed the application of common management interventions such as protected areas and spatial planning, stock enhancement, and restoration of habitat and connectivity. Our synthesis focuses on the totality of the field but includes reflections on the specific contributions of Dr. Noakes. Themes emerging from his approach include the value of fundamental research, management-scale experiments, and bridging behavior, physiology, and ecology. Animal behavior plays a key role in understanding and mitigating threats to wild fish populations and will become more important with the increasing pressures facing aquatic ecosystems. Fortunately, the toolbox for studying behavior is expanding, with technological and analytical advances revolutionizing our understanding of wild fish and generating new knowledge for fisheries managers and conservation practitioners.publishedVersio

Predicting differences in angler beliefs, threat perceptions, and actions in British Columbia's rainbow trout and steelhead fisheries

Anglers are a diverse population whose behaviours and perspectives are influenced by a myriad of factors including knowledge, expertise, management actions, and regulations. We examine similarities and differences in behaviours and perspectives amongst freshwater anglers of rainbow trout and steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in British Columbia, Canada, using an online survey. Findings from the survey suggest that subgroups or “types” of anglers are identifiable by differences in their behaviours and perspectives according to geographic area, gear type, fishery, and frequency of fishing activities. Our results indicate that angler types share many of the same motivations for engaging in fishing behaviours and similar concerns regarding threats to their preferred fishery; however, differences were evident across types of issues related to angler behaviour, as well as views on fisheries management. Overall, we argue that understanding fishery-scale angler heterogeneity can benefit fisheries management by highlighting areas of agreement and disagreement and encouraging tailored communications and relationship-building with important angler subgroups

Foresight science in conservation: Tools, barriers, and mainstreaming opportunities.

Funder: Canadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFunder: MitacsForesight science is a systematic approach to generate future predictions for planning and management by drawing upon analytical and predictive tools to understand the past and present, while providing insights about the future. To illustrate the application of foresight science in conservation, we present three case studies: identification of emerging risks to conservation, conservation of at-risk species, and aid in the development of management strategies for multiple stressors. We highlight barriers to mainstreaming foresight science in conservation including knowledge accessibility/organization, communication across diverse stakeholders/decision makers, and organizational capacity. Finally, we investigate opportunities for mainstreaming foresight science including continued advocacy to showcase its application, incorporating emerging technologies (i.e., artificial intelligence) to increase capacity/decrease costs, and increasing education/training in foresight science via specialized courses and curricula for trainees and practicing professionals. We argue that failure to mainstream foresight science will hinder the ability to achieve future conservation objectives in the Anthropocene

A freshwater perspective on the United Nations decade for ecosystem restoration

Globally, ecosystems have suffered from anthropogenic stressors as we enter the sixth mass extinction within the Anthropocene. In response, the UN has declared 2020-2030 the Decade for Ecosystem Restoration, aiming to mitigate ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss. Freshwater ecosystems are disproportionately impacted relative to marine or terrestrial systems and ecological restoration is needed to preserve biodiversity and ecosystem services. Paradoxically, freshwater is among Earth's most vital ecosystem services. Here we identify meaningful considerations from a freshwater perspective that will lead to progression toward the restoration of freshwater ecosystems: work across terrestrial and freshwater boundaries during restoration, emulate nature, think and act on a watershed scale, design for environmental heterogeneity, mitigate threats alongside restoration, identify bright spots, think long term (a decade is not long enough), and embrace social-ecological systems thinking. Further, we reflect upon the three implementation pathways identified by the UN to translate these considerations into practice in hopes of "bending the curve" for freshwater biodiversity and ecosystems. Pathway 1, building a global movement, could create a network to share experiences and knowledge promoting vicarious learning, ultimately leading to more effective restoration. Pathway 2, generating political support, will be necessary to institutionalize ecosystem protection and restoration by demonstrating the value of freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity. Pathway 3, building technical capacity, aims to improve the current and often ineffective restoration toolbox by incorporating evidence syntheses (i.e., appraisal of evidence base) and Indigenous ways of knowing (i.e., two eyed seeing). Given that freshwater ecosystems are in dire need of repair, it is our hope that these considerations and implementation pathways will contribute to an actionable and productive Decade for Ecosystem Restoration

Towards effective ecological restoration: Investigating knowledge co‐production on fish–habitat relationships with Aquatic Habitat Toronto

Abstract For decades, the working paradigm for ecological restoration was independent operation of knowledge generators (researchers and scientists) and knowledge users (decision makers and practitioners), resulting in a knowledge–action gap. Knowledge co‐production is a collaborative process where research is conducted in a respectful and engaging manner with continuous knowledge exchange and heralded as a means of bridging the divide. Aquatic Habitat Toronto (AHT) is a unique consensus‐based partnership with diverse member agencies that engage in restoration ecology and practice along the Toronto Waterfront of Lake Ontario, Canada. Here, we examine the process that AHT uses to enable knowledge co‐production and identify associated benefits and challenges. Benefits to AHT's consensus‐based partnership include advanced notice of projects, access to diverse expertise and local knowledge, increased understanding of fish habitat, adoption of novel restoration techniques and more effective restoration and improved knowledge exchange, collectively mitigating the knowledge–action divide. Challenges of knowledge co‐production facilitated by AHT include consistent agency participation and meaningful engagement, closed or exclusive networks, time commitments and limited financial resources, evolving political landscapes, stability of funding cycles and issues stemming from varying goals and relevancy. Key recommendations for ensuring that knowledge co‐production results in actionable science and for maximizing the effectiveness of ecological restoration using AHT's format include securing long‐term and stable funding, developing relationships across agencies and allied partners, engaging early, outlining goals/objectives collaboratively, conducting before and after scientific monitoring, minimizing personal biases, periodically reviewing partnerships to maximize inclusivity, sharing successes (and failures) broadly, and providing open data. AHT embraces an approach that includes integrated planning with multi‐jurisdictional support with diverse partners at a tractable scale and we argue that this should be the standard model of aquatic ecosystem management

Animal migration in the Anthropocene: threats and mitigation options

Animal migration has fascinated scientists and the public alike for centuries, yet migratory animals are facing diverse threats that could lead to their demise. The Anthropocene is characterised by the reality that humans are the dominant force on Earth, having manifold negative effects on biodiversity and ecosystem function. Considerable research focus has been given to assessing anthropogenic impacts on the numerical abundance of species/populations, whereas relatively less attention has been devoted to animal migration. However, there are clear linkages, for example, where human-driven impacts on migration behaviour can lead to population/species declines or even extinction. Here, we explore anthropogenic threats to migratory animals (in all domains – aquatic, terrestrial, and aerial) using International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Threat Taxonomy classifications. We reveal the diverse threats (e.g. human development, disease, invasive species, climate change, exploitation, pollution) that impact migratory wildlife in varied ways spanning taxa, life stages and type of impact (e.g. from direct mortality to changes in behaviour, health, and physiology). Notably, these threats often interact in complex and unpredictable ways to the detriment of wildlife, further complicating management. Fortunately, we are beginning to identify strategies for conserving and managing migratory animals in the Anthropocene. We provide a set of strategies that, if embraced, have the potential to ensure that migratory animals, and the important ecological functions sustained by migration, persist.</p

The movement ecology of fishes

Movement of fishes in the aquatic realm is fundamental to their ecology and survival. Movement can be driven by a variety of biological, physiological and environmental factors occurring across all spatial and temporal scales. The intrinsic capacity of movement to impact fish individually (e.g., foraging) with potential knock-on effects throughout the ecosystem (e.g., food web dynamics) has garnered considerable interest in the field of movement ecology. The advancement of technology in recent decades, in combination with ever-growing threats to freshwater and marine systems, has further spurred empirical research and theoretical considerations. Given the rapid expansion within the field of movement ecology and its significant role in informing management and conservation efforts, a contemporary and multidisciplinary review about the various components influencing movement is outstanding. Using an established conceptual framework for movement ecology as a guide (i.e., Nathan et al., 2008: 19052), we synthesized the environmental and individual factors that affect the movement of fishes. Specifically, internal (e.g., energy acquisition, endocrinology, and homeostasis) and external (biotic and abiotic) environmental elements are discussed, as well as the different processes that influence individual-level (or population) decisions, such as navigation cues, motion capacity, propagation characteristics and group behaviours. In addition to environmental drivers and individual movement factors, we also explored how associated strategies help survival by optimizing physiological and other biological states. Next, we identified how movement ecology is increasingly being incorporated into management and conservation by highlighting the inherent benefits that spatio-temporal fish behaviour imbues into policy, regulatory, and remediation planning. Finally, we considered the future of movement ecology by evaluating ongoing technological innovations and both the challenges and opportunities that these advancements create for scientists and managers. As aquatic ecosystems continue to face alarming climate (and other human-driven) issues that impact animal movements, the comprehensive and multidisciplinary assessment of movement ecology will be instrumental in developing plans to guide research and promote sustainability measures for aquatic resources