Using structured decision making to evaluate the tradeoffs of selective fish passage

Abstract Dams have dramatically altered rivers and are a major contributor to native fish population declines. However, many dams serve important ecological, social, and economic functions, such as flood control, invasive species control, and provision of recreational opportunities. Therefore, dam removal is often contentious among stakeholders and involves making tradeoffs among multiple competing objectives. This research uses structured decision making to evaluate the ecological, social, and economic consequences and tradeoffs of enhancing connectivity for migratory fishes in the Boardman River, Michigan. We describe efforts to engage a diverse group of stakeholders to elicit their objectives under various fish passage alternatives. We used multi‐attribute tradeoff methods to help stakeholders weigh the costs and benefits of enhancing connectivity for several fish species with varying life history traits and initial distributions. We found that the optimal alternative was passage of native fishes only; however, the optimal alternative varied based on the weight stakeholders might place on each objective. We created four objective weighting scenarios to evaluate the sensitivity of the optimal alternative to changes in objective weights. This research will help inform decision‐makers on fish passage alternatives that are preferred by stakeholders and that are likely to achieve their objectives.