While avoidance is often advocated to prevent ecological harm during civil development near rivers, it is frequently deemed impractical by civil engineers. This constraint is contrasted to the priorities of many ecological managers who wish to minimize disruptions, even when developments aim for restoration. The absence of a standardized framework for in-river construction management decisions often leads to uncertainty. This can result in costly and overly burdensome mitigation measures, especially in regions with stringent environmental regulations. Public projects may therefore impose large taxpayer burdens with uncertain incremental benefit to ecosystems. Notably, there is a lack of peer-reviewed studies to test environmental management practices specific to in-river construction. In this study, assumptions are reviewed that underpin current practices and are contrasted to published research. The need for a structured framework to inform management decisions is identified. A particular focus is given to managing harmful suspended sediment releases, given its prominence in the literature. Findings highlight the often-overlooked importance of construction activity duration as a key management parameter for in-river construction policies that can be negatively impacted by commonly applied mitigation measures.
