Information needs for assessing critical habitat of freshwater fish

Abstract

The core assumptions of critical habitat designation are a positive relationship between habitat and population size and that a minimum habitat area is required to meet a recovery target. Effects of habitat on population limitation scale from (i) effects on performance of individuals (growth, survival, fecundity) within a life history stage, to (ii) limitation of populations by habitats associated with specific life history stages, and (iii) larger-scale habitat structure required for metapopulation persistence. The minimum subset of habitats required to achieve a recovery target will depend on the extent, quality, and spatial configuration of habitats available to sequential life history stages. Although populations may be limited by available habitat for a single life history stage, altering habitat quality for subsequent stages will also affect individual survival and population size, providing multiple leverage points within a life history for habitat management to achieve recovery targets. When habitat-explicit demographic data are lacking, consequences of uncertainty in critical habitat assessment need to be explicit, and research should focus on identifying habitats most likely to be limiting based on species biology.