Temporary rivers are prevalent yet often under-protected and overlooked. This may be because society holds them in low esteem, combined with inadequate understanding of their ecosystem services. Evidence of such perceptions, however, is scant, rendering this assumption largely untested. We investigated the validity and extent of this assumption by surveying undergraduate students from Australia, the UK and USA on their agreement or disagreement with positive statements about perennial and temporary rivers, and specifically temporary rivers when they cease flow.
Survey statements concerned perceptions of the aesthetic value, recreational amenity and biodiversity of rivers, and their provisioning of ecosystem services; levels of concern over water removal and using rivers for human activities; desires for conservation and restoration action; moral obligations to maintain river condition; and reactions to harming rivers. Students were surveyed at the start and end of teaching units, which covered general ecology and biology or focused on freshwater ecosystems.
Disagreement with statements was uncommon and perceptions of temporary rivers were mostly positive. However, perennial rivers were valued more highly than temporary rivers, especially when the latter cease flow and regarding their aesthetic and recreational provisioning. Results were similar between repeated surveys, teaching units and countries.
The overall positive response to statements, regardless of river type or survey round, may reflect underlying, environmentally aware attitudes of students studying ecological and environmental science and management programs, but not necessarily specific knowledge of temporary rivers or education in freshwater ecology. This suggests some general environmental or ecological education across the wider community could improve the (assumed low) public perception of temporary rivers and support positive protection measures and innovative, inclusive management of these ecosystems.