We explored the conservation potential of tributaries in the upper Colorado River basin by modeling native fish species richness as a function of river discharge, temperature, barrier‐free length, and distance to nearest free‐flowing main‐stem section. We investigated a historic period prior to large‐scale water development and a contemporary period. In the historic period, species richness was log‐linearly correlated to variables capturing flow magnitude, particularly mean annual discharge. In the contemporary period, the log‐linear relationship between discharge and species richness was still evident but weaker. Tributaries with lower average temperature and separated from free‐flowing main‐stem sections often had fewer native species compared to tributaries with similar discharge but with warmer temperature and directly connected to free‐flowing main stems. Thus, tributaries containing only a small proportion of main‐stem discharge, especially those at lower elevations with warmer temperatures and connected to free‐flowing main stems, can support a relatively high species richness. Tributaries can help maintain viable populations by providing ecological processes disrupted on large regulated rivers, such as natural flow and temperature regimes, and may present unique conservation opportunities. Efforts to improve fish passage, secure environmental flows, and restore habitat in these tributaries could greatly contribute to conservation of native fish richness throughout the watershed.

Summary 1. Channel complexity is an important ecological property of stream systems and is often targeted for restoration in channelised urban streams. However, channel complexity is rarely defined explicitly, and little research on channel complexity has been conducted in streams in urban catchments that have not been directly channelised by human activities. Therefore, it remains unclear whether restoration of non‐channelised urban streams has improved complexity. 2. We explicitly define channel complexity and use a multimetric approach to provide a comprehensive assessment of complexity in multiple restored, urban and forested streams on the Maryland Coastal Plain and two streams of differing land use in Colorado. We also expand on the Maryland and Colorado results with a literature survey of channel complexity from diverse geographical regions. 3. Many streams draining urban catchments in Maryland had relatively high values of some complexity metrics compared to forested reference streams in Maryland and compared to the values for pristine streams calculated from the literature. This suggests that streams in urban catchments that are not directly manipulated by human activities (e.g. channelisation or piping) may be able to maintain channel structures beneficial for aquatic organisms even when impervious surfaces are the dominant form of land use in the catchment. 4. Restored streams in Maryland had equal or lower values of many complexity metrics compared to streams draining urban catchments in Maryland. This suggests that restoration of streams draining urban catchments did not improve the overall channel complexity. 5. Our results highlight the need to explicitly define and measure the attributes of channel complexity that are targeted during restoration, to determine whether the streams in urban catchments are truly degraded with respect to channel complexity. 6. Combined with recent synthesis work suggesting that biodiversity may not be improved by increasing the channel complexity, these results indicate that targeting catchment processes may prove a more useful approach to restoration than attempting to move channel complexity in streams draining urban catchments towards conditions in forested reference streams.

Biased perspectives of fisheries researchers may hinder scientific progress and effective management if limiting factors controlling productivity go unrecognized. We investigated whether river and lake researchers used different approaches when studying salmonid production and whether any differences were ecologically supported. We assessed 564 peer-reviewed papers published between 1966 and 2012 that studied salmonid production or surrogate variables (e.g., abundance, growth, biomass, population) and classified them into five major predictor variable categories: physical habitat, fertility (i.e., nutrients, bottom-up), biotic, temperature, and pollution. The review demonstrated that river researchers primarily analyzed physical habitat (65% of studies) and lake researchers primarily analyzed fertility (45%) and biotic (51%) variables. Nevertheless, understudied variables were often statistically significant predictors of production for lake and river systems and, combined with other evidence, suggests that unjustified a priori assumptions may dictate the choice of independent variables studied. Broader consideration of potential limiting factors on fish production, greater research effort on understudied genera, and increased publication in broadly scoped journals would likely promote integration between lentic and lotic perspectives and improve fisheries management.

Stream restoration is often employed in efforts to stabilize eroding channel banks. Banks are stabilized through a designed channel approach, which involves grading and armoring of stream banks using heavy machinery, or alternatively through planting of seedlings and saplings to establish forested riparian buffers. We hypothesized that designed channel restoration would have detrimental impacts on riparian soils but that soils would recover over time, and we hypothesized that riparian buffer restoration would not impact riparian soils. We tested these hypotheses by comparing soil attributes (bulk density, soil organic matter, and root biomass) at reaches that had undergone designed channel and riparian buffer restoration in different years (project ages ranged from 2 to 16 years) to paired urban (unrestored) control reaches. Soil properties in subsurface soil layers (10-20 and 20-30 cm depth) at both recent (<10 years old) and older (>10 years old) designed channel reaches differed significantly from paired urban control soils; bulk density was higher and root biomass lower in manipulated reaches compared to urban control reaches. At many designed channel reaches, bulk density exceeded values known to restrict root growth. These results indicate that compaction and disturbance of riparian soils may be a significant unintended consequence of designed channel restoration and can persist for at least a decade. In contrast, we found no significant differences in soil properties between riparian buffer restoration reaches and urban control reaches. Thus, the results indicate that riparian buffer restoration is a more ecologically favorable method than designed channel restoration for bank stabilization.