ORCID Profile
0000-0002-7800-7259
Current Organisation
NIWA - The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd.
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: CSIRO Publishing
Date: 2019
DOI: 10.1071/MF19176
Abstract: Irrigated agriculture and inland fisheries both make important contributions to food security, nutrition, livelihoods and wellbeing. Typically, in modern irrigation systems, these components operate independently. Some practices, commonly associated with water use and intensification of crop production can be in direct conflict with and have adverse effects on fisheries. Food security objectives may be compromised if fish are not considered in the design phases of irrigation systems. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development provides a framework that can serve as a backdrop to help integrate both sectors in policy discussions and optimise their contributions to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Inland fisheries systems do play an important role in supporting many SDG objectives, but these contributions can sometimes be at odds with irrigated agriculture. Using case studies of two globally important river catchments, namely the Lower Mekong and Murray–Darling basins, we highlight the conflicts and opportunities for improved outcomes between irrigated agriculture and inland fisheries. We explore SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) as a path to advance our irrigation systems as a means to benefit both agriculture and inland fisheries, preserving bio ersity and enhancing the economic, environmental and social benefits they both provide to people.2
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 15-03-2023
DOI: 10.1111/JFB.15355
Abstract: Researchers have used laboratory experiments to examine how fish might be affected by anthropogenic alterations and conclude how best to adjust fish passage and culvert remediation designs in response. A common way to document swimming performance for this purpose is measuring fish critical swimming speed ( U crit ). Nonetheless, the U crit protocol as defined by Brett [(1964) Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada , 21, 1183–1226] may be inappropriate for studying swimming performance and determining how it relates to upstream migration in benthic fish, as they may not actively swim throughout the entire U crit test. An alternative method to estimate swimming performance is sprint swimming speed ( U sprint ), which is suggested to be a measure of the burst speed of fish rather than maximum sustained swimming speed. The authors conducted comparative swimming performance experiments to evaluate whether U sprint can be used to compare swimming performance of benthic species to that of pelagic, actively swimming species. They measured in idual swimming speeds of īnanga ( Galaxias maculatus) , an actively swimming pelagic species, and banded kōkopu ( Galaxias fasciatus) , a fish that exhibits benthic station‐holding behaviour, using both the U sprint and U crit test. Experiments revealed that no significant statistical difference between swimming speeds was estimated using the U crit and U sprint test protocols for both G. maculatus and G. fasciatus . The result of this study suggests that fish swimming speeds obtained using these two methods are comparable for the species used in this study. By using U sprint for benthic‐associated fish and U crit for pelagic fish, we may be able to compare a broader range of species' swimming abilities for use in a fish passage context.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 02-07-2016
Publisher: Canadian Science Publishing
Date: 19-06-2023
DOI: 10.1139/ER-2022-0116
Abstract: Freshwater bio ersity loss is accelerating globally, but humanity can change this trajectory through actions that enable recovery. To be successful, these actions require coordination and planning at a global scale. The Emergency Recovery Plan for global freshwater bio ersity aims to reduce the risk for freshwater bio ersity loss through six priority actions: (1) accelerate implementation of environmental flows (2) improve water quality to sustain aquatic life (3) protect and restore critical habitats (4) manage exploitation of freshwater species and riverine aggregates (5) prevent and control nonnative species invasions in freshwater habitats and (6) safeguard and restore freshwater connectivity. These actions can be implemented using future-proofing approaches that anticipate future risks (e.g., emerging pollutants, new invaders, and synergistic effects) and minimize likely stressors to make conservation of freshwater bio ersity more resilient to climate change and other global environmental challenges. While uncertainty with respect to past observations is not a new concern for freshwater bio ersity, future-proofing has the distinction of accounting for the uncertainty of future conditions that have no historical baseline. The level of uncertainty with respect to future conditions is unprecedented. Future-proofing of the Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater bio ersity will require anticipating future changes and developing and implementing actions to address those future changes. Here, we showcase future-proofing approaches likely to be successful using local case studies and ex les. Ensuring that response options within the Emergency Recovery Plan are future-proofed will provide decision makers with science-informed choices, even in the face of uncertain and potentially new future conditions. We are at an inflection point for global freshwater bio ersity loss learning from defeats and successes can support improved actions toward a sustainable future.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 09-08-2018
DOI: 10.1002/RRA.3320
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 20-02-2019
DOI: 10.1002/AQC.3049
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2021
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: New Zealand
No related grants have been discovered for Paul Franklin.