ABSTRACT1. Five side-channels and small tributaries of the River Avon (Hampshire, UK) were examined between spring 1999 and spring 2000 using point abundance sampling by electrofishing to determine the status of fish listed in Annex II of the EC Habitats Directive prior to habitat management works to enhance spring feeding habitat of wading birds.2. Seasonal patterns of abundance and microhabitat use of bullhead Cottus gobio and accompanying fish species were examined. Parr of Atlantic salmon Salmo salar were sufficiently abundant for microhabitat analysis at one site only. Only two specimens of brook lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis were observed, one at each of two sites. Bullhead was amongst the most abundant fish species at all five sites, 0+ bullhead predominating.3. Bullhead microhabitat preferences were generally similar at all five sites, but seasonal variations were observed, as was the case for the accompanying fish species, which included dace Leuciscus leuciscus, chub Leuciscus cephalus, stone loach Barbatula barbatula, roach Rutilus rutilus, and threespine stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus.4. Bullhead conservation status is discussed, in particular the possible exemption of British bullhead populations, such as already granted for those of Finland, from Annex II of the Habitats Directive. # Crown

Monitoring is an important aspect of any procedure that seeks to determine whether a technique has worked effectively. The river restoration process is no different. Unfortunately, monitoring is often not undertaken due to constraints on time and resources, as well as the commonly held belief that river restoration is inherently a good thing and, as a result, monitoring is unnecessary. There are many reasons to monitor projects and among the most important is the need to learn from experiences and for regulatory compliance. This paper examines the issues associated with the monitoring of river restoration schemes. In particular, it details monitoring selection models focusing on those associated with ecology and geomorphology. The paper also considers the requirements of monitoring schemes that will help deliver the goals of the Water Framework Directive (WFD).

Freshwater ecosystems are declining faster than their terrestrial and marine counterparts because of physical pressures on habitats. European legislation requires member states to achieve ecological targets through the effective management of freshwater habitats. Maps of habitats across river networks would help diagnose environmental problems and plan for the delivery of improvement work. Existing habitat mapping methods are generally time consuming, require experts and are expensive to implement. Surveys based on sampling are cheaper but provide patchy 2 representations of habitat distribution. In this study, we present a method for mapping habitat indices across networks using semi-quantitative data and a geostatistical technique called regression kriging. The method consists of the derivation of habitat indices using multivariate statistical techniques that are regressed on map-based covariates such as altitude, slope and geology. Regression kriging combines the Generalised Least Squares (GLS) regression technique with a spatial analysis of model residuals. Predictions from the GLS model are 'corrected' using weighted averages of model residuals following an analysis of spatial correlation. The method was applied to channel substrate data from the River Habitat Survey in Great Britain. A Channel Substrate Index (CSI) was derived using Correspondence Analysis and predicted using regression kriging. The model explained 74% of the main sample variability and 64% in a test sample. The model was applied to the English and Welsh river network and a map of CSI was produced. The proposed approach demonstrates how existing national monitoring data and geostatistical techniques can be used to produce continuous maps of habitat indices at the national scale.