COMMENTARY CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 107, NO. 6, 25 SEPTEMBER 2014 949 Freshwater fish safe zones: a prospective conservation strategy for river ecosystems in India Nishikant Gupta, Rajeev Raghavan, K. Sivakumar and Vinod B. Mathur The 21st century is a ‘time of crisis’ for freshwater ecosystems and their resour- ces 1 . A multitude of stressors, including urbanization and associated habitat alte- ration and loss, alien invasive species, overharvest, pollution and climate change, have resulted in freshwater eco- systems and freshwater fish becoming one of the most threatened ecosystems and taxa on Earth 2–8 . However, the lack of connection between freshwater biodiversity and the general public 9 has resulted in less attention being focused on freshwater-related conserva- tion issues. The Convention on Biological Diver- sity’s Aichi Strategic Plan for Biodiver- sity 2011–2020 has set out a series of biodiversity targets where protection and conservation of rivers and their biodiver- sity is an important priority 10 . The plan recommends that by the year 2020, ‘at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water is conserved through effectively and equi- tably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of Protected Areas (PAs), and other effective area- based conservation measures 10 .’ Further, it also recommends that ‘all fish are man- aged and harvested sustainably, legally and applying ecosystem-based appro- aches, so that overfishing is avoided 10 .’ India, a megadiversity nation, has over 600 PAs covering about 5% of its total land area 11 . Of this, only a small fraction has been set up to protect freshwater fauna, largely focused on charismatic taxa such as Gharial ( Gavialis gangeti- cus) and South Asian River Dolphin (Platanista gangetica). Although the freshwater ecosystems of India harbour close to 900 fish species 12 with high lev- els of endemism and threats 13 , there are no dedicated ‘formal’ PAs for freshwater fish in the country. Although some of India’s major rivers flow through the boundaries of various terrestrial PAs, little or no attention is given to the health of these rivers and their biodiversity. While seasonal streams are impounded within Project Tiger Reserves during the drier summer months to provide water for the terres- trial species, various tourist roads, tem- porary bridges and upcoming lodges on river banks within PAs contribute to habitat degradation (N. Gupta, pers. obs.). This has been largely due to the callous attitude of policy makers in India, for whom freshwater ecosystems and fish conservation have been ‘out of sight’ and ‘out of mind’ 14 . The drastic state of Indian rivers and their biodiversity, therefore calls for novel protection and management strate- gies. In this context, we discuss the idea of setting up of ‘freshwater fish safe zones’ (FFSZs), defined as ‘river reaches important for biodiversity maintenance and connectivity of a river, protected and conserved through legislative measures and local stakeholders’ support’ border- ing the current PA network, to act as a supplementary strategy offering protec- tion to highly threatened river reaches or fish species requiring urgent legislative intervention. For setting up of FFSZs in India, how- ever, the policy makers need to be convinced regarding their long-term benefits. Similar to marine ecosystems, there are multiple stakeholders associ- ated with a riverine ecosystem 15 . There- fore, before setting up of future FFSZs, there is a need to understand resource use and dependency in the area in order to develop an integrated management plan 16 . This should also take into account the social and economic needs from a river 17 . In this context, there is a greater need for involving local stakeholders in the setting up of FFSZs. Most PAs were initially set up to pro- tect threatened or charismatic terrestrial species 18 , and the availability of land or local stakeholders’ support too played a decisive role 19 . Additionally, as far as protecting rivers and their species within PAs are concerned, the seasonal migra- tory behaviour of many riverine species which often encompasses multiple habitats over long distances, is a cause of con- cern 20–22 for the design of FFSZs. We acknowledge that the length of a river and the size of its catchment area can restrict the inclusion of its headwaters as well as its lower reaches within a PA 16 . Protect- ing river ecosystems also requires a catchment-scale approach 23,24 due to high permeability of freshwater ecosystems 15 , as threats originating anywhere within its catchment could have profound effects on any of its reaches within FFSZs 3,22 . Nevertheless, suggestions to protect a river system’s upstream catchment and downstream habitats of focal species 15,22–24 should not hinder such an approach 25 , as safeguarding critical fish habitats could have wide-scale benefits in comparison to providing no defence at all 22,26 . The conservation of imperilled river ecosys- tems does not necessarily always have to involve the macro-scale integrated catch- ment management, but depending on local circumstances could also focus on the micro-scale restoration of individual habitats 15,22–24 . The protection of care- fully selected reaches over an entire river can no doubt have an overall positive effect 27 . Even when FFSZs are unable to enclose an entire catchment basin, they could play a vital role by protecting spawning grounds, nurseries, refuge or migratory routes of various fish species within river reaches inside their bounda- ries 27 . Furthermore, PAs for marine ecosystems are a widely recognized con- servation tool 16,28–30 . In addition, terrestrial ecosystems within PAs could positively benefit from protecting their bordering river ecosystems 15,30 due to the dynamic ecological and biophysical interactions between them 31 . As a first step, we provide here a list of nine important needs for planning, development and management of FFSZs in India. (i) Every major river system should have representative FFSZs to protect critically important habitats of native and endemic fish species. (ii) The exact geographical boundaries of river reaches that need to be managed and conserved should be well defined. River reaches having multiple jurisdic- tion issues, i.e. rivers shared between different states/union territories and/or river reaches managed by different state ministries, will require utmost inter and intra-governmental cooperation. (iii) Spatial zonation of FFSZs should be delineated in the form of both ‘core