Summary1. Evidence-based policy requires researchers to provide the answers to ecological questions that are of interest to policy makers. To find out what those questions are in the UK, representatives from 28 organizations involved in policy, together with scientists from 10 academic institutions, were asked to generate a list of questions from their organizations. 2. During a 2-day workshop the initial list of 1003 questions generated from consulting at least 654 policy makers and academics was used as a basis for generating a short list of 100 questions of significant policy relevance. Short-listing was decided on the basis of the preferences of the representatives from the policy-led organizations. 3. The areas covered included most major issues of environmental concern in the UK, including agriculture, marine fisheries, climate change, ecosystem function and land management. 4. The most striking outcome was the preference for general questions rather than narrow ones. The reason is that policy is driven by broad issues rather than specific ones. In contrast, scientists are frequently best equipped to answer specific questions. This means that it may be necessary to extract the underpinning specific question before researchers can proceed. Synthesis and applications.Greater communication between policy makers and scientists is required in order to ensure that applied ecologists are dealing with issues in a way that can feed into policy. It is particularly important that applied ecologists emphasize the generic value of their work wherever possible.

ABSTRACT1. Characterizing the physical structure and assessing the habitat quality of rivers is becoming more important in the context of environmental planning, appraisal and impact assessment. In Europe the EC Water Framework Directive requires assessment of hydromorphological quality in establishing the ecological status of rivers.2. Hydromorphological quality assessment plays a crucial role in the Directive because it is used to determine 'undisturbed' and 'heavily modified' conditions of rivers. A common approach is needed to ensure comparability of classification outputs between EU Member States.3. Three hydromorphological and river habitat assessment methods, developed in Germany, France and the UK, were used for qualitative cross-comparison in 2001. Each was tested on river stretches in North-East France and in the French Pyr! e en! e ees.4. The type of features recorded by all three methods was broadly similar, but differences in survey strategy, data collection, and analysis resulted in variations in quality assessment. Different interpretation of what constitutes 'undisturbed conditions' has a major impact on outputs. There are also scale-related problems in comparing the different methods.5. Despite these differences, there is sufficient common ground to allow refinement of the methods and achieve better harmonization. This will require technical agreement on the terminology and definition of features, and a reach-based hierarchical framework for survey and reporting.6. An impact-based assessment centred on deviation from undisturbed hydromorphological conditions could be the best option for a simple, practicable classification scheme, but agreement is needed on the criteria used to define and calibrate such a system.7. Habitat quality assessment using the presence and diversity of features as a basis for classification needs to be improved. Assumptions used for diagnostic interpretation need to be tested

Small, 1st and 2nd-order, headwater streams and ponds play essential roles in providing natural flood control, trapping sediments and contaminants, retaining nutrients, and maintaining biological diversity, which extend into downstream reaches, lakes and estuaries. However, the large geographic extent and high connectivity of these small water bodies with the surrounding terrestrial ecosystem makes them particularly vulnerable to growing land-use pressures and environmental change. The greatest pressure on the physical processes in these waters has been their extension and modification for agricultural and forestry drainage, resulting in highly modified discharge and temperature regimes that have implications for flood and drought control further downstream. The extensive length of the small stream network exposes rivers to a wide range of inputs, including nutrients, pesticides, heavy metals, sediment and emerging contaminants. Small water bodies have also been affected by invasions of non-native species, which along with the physical and chemical pressures, have affected most groups of organisms with consequent implications for the wider biodiversity within the catchment. Reducing the impacts and restoring the natural ecosystem function of these water bodies requires a three-tiered approach based on: restoration of channel hydromorphological dynamics; restoration and management of the riparian zone; and management of activities in the wider catchment that have both point-source and diffuse impacts. Such activities are expensive and so emphasis must be placed on integrated programmes that provide multiple benefits. Practical options need to be promoted through legislative regulation, financial incentives, markets for resource services and voluntary codes and actions.

No abstract

ABSTRACT1. The current approaches to setting objectives for river restoration at a catchment and national scale in the UK are described. 2. A framework for setting Physical Quality Objectives (PQOs) using River Habitat Survey (RHS) data is proposed for United Kingdom river systems. Indices of habitat modification and habitat quality are used to classify existing habitat conditions and to suggest objectives for improvement. 3. Strategies for applying this PQO framework are presented, including:(a) simple national scale 'rules' such as the global maintenance of 'good' habitat and the improvement of lower classifications; (b) applications to individual reach-based projects, in an iterative approach to habitat improvement throughout catchments; (c) applications to reaches within a catchment context, identifying opportunities and constraints for improvements in terms of different 'management areas'; and (d) ecological strategies, such as the functional division of catchment areas and objectives based upon significance of habitats for key species. 4. The rationale for developing PQOs are discussed, including the merits and constraints of indices of modification and quality based on scoring systems. The different strategies for applying PQOs are also discussed with reference to current river management needs and future needs, (including those associated with the European Water Framework Directive).

No abstract

No abstract

Large Wood (LW) is increasingly employed in river restoration to promote physical habitat heterogeneity and ecological diversity. To explore how LW has been used in restoration schemes across the United Kingdom in recent decades, we analysed data on 912 LW projects archived in the UK's National River Restoration Inventory (NRRI). The number of LW schemes has continued to increase following the earliest records in the 1990s, largely tracking overall trends in river restorations. LW projects have been predominantly located in lowland, rural streams, although there has been a notable cluster in and around London. LW projects have mainly revolved around the desire to deliver hydromorphological improvements and specifically the creation of fish habitat. Most schemes used LW in simple deflector forms despite the growing scientific evidence of the benefits of using structurally complex LW. Post project monitoring has been limited and mostly restricted to photographic records. This type of database analysis can provide important insights and help guide future restoration practice.