Agricultural and urban management practices (MPs) are primarily designed and implemented to reduce nutrient and sediment concentrations in streams. However, there is growing interest in determining if MPs produce any unintended positive effects, or co-benefits, to instream biological and habitat conditions. Identifying co-benefits is challenging though because of confounding variables (i.e., those that affect both where MPs are applied and stream biota), which can be accounted for in novel causal inference approaches. Here, we used two causal inference approaches, propensity score matching (PSM) and Bayesian network learning (BNL), to identify potential MP co-benefits in the Chesapeake Bay watershed portion of Maryland, USA. Specifically, we examined how MPs may modify instream conditions that impact fish and macroinvertebrate indices of biotic integrity (IBI) and functional and taxonomic endpoints. We found evidence of positive unintended effects of MPs for both benthic macroinvertebrates and fish indicated by higher IBI scores and specific endpoints like the number of scraper macroinvertebrate taxa and lithophilic spawning fish taxa in a subset of regions. However, our results also suggest MPs have negative unintended effects, especially on sensitive benthic macroinvertebrate taxa and key instream habitat and water quality metrics like specific conductivity. Overall, our results suggest MPs offer co-benefits in some regions and catchments with largely degraded conditions but can have negative unintended effects in some regions, especially in catchments with good biological conditions. We suggest the number and types of MPs drove these mixed results and highlight carefully designed MP implementation that incorporates instream biological data at the catchment scale could facilitate co-benefits to instream biological conditions. Our study underscores the need for more research on identifying effects of individual MP types on instream biological and habitat conditions.