Conservation Monitoring in Freshwater Habitats: An Introduction

Chapter

Abstract

Conservation monitoring differs from other forms of ecological investigation by making assessments against predetermined targets. Clear decision-making is essential, and a simple model can be used to facilitate targets for maintenance management and restoration management: monitoring has a critical role in this. Developing an efficient and reliable monitoring project involves a series of distinct steps, these include identifying the conservation priority; collating the relevant knowledge from existing research and survey exercises; developing a conservation strategy; identifying site-specific condition indicators; selecting appropriate monitoring sites; collecting the data; feeding back into management and safeguarding the monitoring data.

Unambiguous aims are fundamental to the success of a monitoring project, but there are few examples in the literature that are not open to observer interpretation. Naturalness is often quoted as the conservation aim, but is rarely defined in terms that can be consistently assessed. It is also debatable whether ‘naturalness’ is a reasonable conservation goal when the requirements of the human population is taken into account: a more realistic approach would identify which parts of a river, lake or wetland system should be in a clearly defined state and at which times of year.

Keywords

Conservation management monitoring surveillance naturalness condition indicators 

References

  1. Brown A (2000) Habitat monitoring for conservation management and reporting. 3: Technical guide. Life-nature project no LIFE95 NAT/UK/000821. Integrating monitoring with management planning: A demonstration of good practice in Wales. Countryside Council for Wales, BangorGoogle Scholar
  2. Giller PS, Malmqvist B (2005) The biology of streams and rivers. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Grime JP, Hodgson JG, Hunt R (1990) The abridged comparative plant ecology. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Grime JP (2001) Plant strategies, vegetation processes and ecosystem properties, 2nd edn. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  5. Ellenberg H (1979) Zeigerwerte der Gefäßpflanzen Mitteleuropas. Scripta Geobotanica 9:1–122 (in German)Google Scholar
  6. Ellenberg H (1988) Vegetation ecology of Central Europe, 4th edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Ellenberg H, Weber HE, Düll R, Wirth V, Werner W, Paulisson D (1991) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobotanica 18:1–248 (in German)Google Scholar
  8. Hellawell JM (1991) Development of a rationale for monitoring. In: Goldsmith B (ed) Monitoring for conservation and ecology. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  9. Hill MO, Mountford JO, Roy DB, Bunce RGH (1999) Ellenberg’s indicator values for British plants. ECOFACT vol 2, Technical Annex. ITE/DETR. HMSO, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  10. Hurford C, Schneider M (eds) (2006) Monitoring nature conservation in cultural habitats: A practical guide and case studies. Springer, Dordrecht, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  11. JNCC (2005) Common standards monitoring guidance for rivers. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Countryside Council for WalesWoodside, OrieltonUK

Personalised recommendations