The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Comparison of coarse-resolution rapid methods for assessing fish passage at riverine barriers: ICE and SNIFFER protocols

Comparison of coarse-resolution rapid methods for assessing fish passage at riverine barriers: ICE and SNIFFER protocols
Comparison of coarse-resolution rapid methods for assessing fish passage at riverine barriers: ICE and SNIFFER protocols

Man-made barriers have led to river fragmentation, restricting fish migrations to critical habitat. Fragmentation is relevant to the Water Framework and Habitats (Annex II fish) Directives of the European Union. SNIFFER (Water Framework Directive 111) is a United Kingdom-developed fish passability assessment method with passability scores based on published data describing the physiological abilities of different fish species/life stages. SNIFFER is an objective protocol, but final scores require assessor opinion on specific nonquantified elements. The French ICE fish passability assessment protocol covers a larger number of fish species/life stages and removes the requirement for velocity readings (except in a few situations) and expert opinion with assessors following a decision tree process. In most situations, fewer direct measurements are required for the ICE protocol, and the evaluation process is quicker and simpler. Both protocols utilize a similar passability scoring system (0 = total barrier, 0.3 = high impact, 0.6 = low impact, 1 = no risk). Comparison of outcomes for species categories for both protocols was made in paired comparisons for 112 transversal sections (fish passage routes) recorded at 52 barriers (in-river structures) of varying complexity in Irish rivers. Overall scores were found to be in high agreement for species groups at impassable (Score 0) and no risk (Score 1) barriers. Protocol agreement dropped significantly for high-impact (Score 0.3) and low-impact (Score 0.6) barriers. Results are discussed in the context of barrier passability at the 52 structures examined, primarily in the context of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) and of sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus L.). In total, 22 of the structures had one or more fishways or fish passage solutions built into them as part of the original design. Both protocols identified substantial problems for sea lamprey and adult salmon at the majority of the fish passage solutions surveyed. The merits and shortcomings of both protocols, for managers assessing fish passability at complex riverine structures, are discussed.

Atlantic salmon, hydromorphology, river connectivity, sea lamprey
1535-1459
Barry, James
32febc4f-7ca9-4c00-b001-a82a9a6515da
Coghlan, Brian
5d471333-392e-4f1c-8d7d-eb58ea363ac2
Cullagh, Alan
558e0774-c61f-4278-8793-b468819e40cf
Kerr, James R.
cfdf2892-19c2-4206-9416-848b2b0f672c
King, James J.
12837388-21db-49a1-b806-5c46fd9afac6
Barry, James
32febc4f-7ca9-4c00-b001-a82a9a6515da
Coghlan, Brian
5d471333-392e-4f1c-8d7d-eb58ea363ac2
Cullagh, Alan
558e0774-c61f-4278-8793-b468819e40cf
Kerr, James R.
cfdf2892-19c2-4206-9416-848b2b0f672c
King, James J.
12837388-21db-49a1-b806-5c46fd9afac6

Barry, James, Coghlan, Brian, Cullagh, Alan, Kerr, James R. and King, James J. (2018) Comparison of coarse-resolution rapid methods for assessing fish passage at riverine barriers: ICE and SNIFFER protocols. River Research and Applications. (doi:10.1002/rra.3358).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Man-made barriers have led to river fragmentation, restricting fish migrations to critical habitat. Fragmentation is relevant to the Water Framework and Habitats (Annex II fish) Directives of the European Union. SNIFFER (Water Framework Directive 111) is a United Kingdom-developed fish passability assessment method with passability scores based on published data describing the physiological abilities of different fish species/life stages. SNIFFER is an objective protocol, but final scores require assessor opinion on specific nonquantified elements. The French ICE fish passability assessment protocol covers a larger number of fish species/life stages and removes the requirement for velocity readings (except in a few situations) and expert opinion with assessors following a decision tree process. In most situations, fewer direct measurements are required for the ICE protocol, and the evaluation process is quicker and simpler. Both protocols utilize a similar passability scoring system (0 = total barrier, 0.3 = high impact, 0.6 = low impact, 1 = no risk). Comparison of outcomes for species categories for both protocols was made in paired comparisons for 112 transversal sections (fish passage routes) recorded at 52 barriers (in-river structures) of varying complexity in Irish rivers. Overall scores were found to be in high agreement for species groups at impassable (Score 0) and no risk (Score 1) barriers. Protocol agreement dropped significantly for high-impact (Score 0.3) and low-impact (Score 0.6) barriers. Results are discussed in the context of barrier passability at the 52 structures examined, primarily in the context of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) and of sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus L.). In total, 22 of the structures had one or more fishways or fish passage solutions built into them as part of the original design. Both protocols identified substantial problems for sea lamprey and adult salmon at the majority of the fish passage solutions surveyed. The merits and shortcomings of both protocols, for managers assessing fish passability at complex riverine structures, are discussed.

Text
Comparison of coarse-resolution rapid methods for assessing fish passage at riverine barriers : ICE and SNIFFER protocols - Accepted Manuscript - Accepted Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only until 27 September 2019.
Request a copy

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 21 August 2018
e-pub ahead of print date: 27 September 2018
Keywords: Atlantic salmon, hydromorphology, river connectivity, sea lamprey

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 425353
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/425353
ISSN: 1535-1459
PURE UUID: d86c8f07-9e5a-4324-bca0-30aff1334c51
ORCID for James R. Kerr: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-2990-7293

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 15 Oct 2018 16:30
Last modified: 14 Mar 2019 01:35

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: James Barry
Author: Brian Coghlan
Author: Alan Cullagh
Author: James R. Kerr ORCID iD
Author: James J. King

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×