ser restoration reader

8/11/2019 SER Restoration Reader

1/97

Society for Ecological Restoration International

Series Editor: James AronsonAssociate Editor: Donald A. Falk

Editorial Board: Margaret A. Palmer, Richard J. HobbsPublished by Island Press

Highlights from The Science and Practiceof Ecological Restoration

Series


2/972 SER Restoration Reader

N T R O D U C T O N

The SER Restoration Reader

Its now or never.

As ecosystems, species, and ecological communities continue to suffer accelerating decline, damage, anddegradation as a result of human activitiesand people suffer from loss of ecosystem services and otherimpacts of climate changerestoration is becoming a critical component of nature conservation, ecosystemmanagement, and sustainable local economic development. Restoration ecologists and practitioners aretackling difficult problems around the globe, working to repair rivers damaged by dams and diversions andhabitat destruction, restore healthy forest ecosystems in tropical and other regions, and repair grasslands, saltmarshes, and coral reefs whose ecological interactions have been severely disrupted by overgrazing or humanactivity. Moreover, in rich and poor countries alike, restoration is increasingly being attempted at all levels,from local, community-based projects to national and international strategies for sustainability. In coming

decades, restoration as a tool, community builder, and philosophy will continue to gain importance.

Why The Science and Practice of Ecological Restoration Book Series?

In response to the urgent need for reliable information and provocative discussion on restoration issues, theSociety for Ecological Restoration International and Island Press created a book series, The Science andPractice of Ecological Restoration. As the series name suggests, our aim is to create an international forumdevoted to advancing restoration science and practice, as well as promoting their integration with the con-servation sciences. The series offers practical knowledge, field-tested solutions, inspiration, and scientificinsight from experienced practitioners and scientists that will help ecological restoration to become thepowerful healing tool and integrative science that the world so clearly needs. As the series grows, we will

continue to provide the wide range of information and reports that people working on restoration projectsneedfrom scientific theory to practical hands-on advice to new ideas.

Here Is Your Free Sampler of the Series

Weve created this free Restoration Reader so that you can see the breadth and depth of the series. The workof ecological restoration is multidisciplinary and multifacetedand the series reflects these qualities. Wehave compiled this Reader of excerpts from the current volumes so that you can see which books will meetyour needs. We hope that restorationists, research ecologists, environmentalists, natural area managers, landand water resource policymakers, community leaders, environmental philosophers, and others will find real value and use in this Reader.

Please share this Reader with your colleagues and friends.


3/973

SER Restoration Reader

How To Use This Reader

Weve made this PDF easy to navigate. Its table of contents has links to excerpts from each book andits complete table of contents. You can

Click the book image or title in the SER Restoration Reader s table of contents to jumpto that books excerpt.Click from one excerpt to another in any order using the Readers contents as thenavigation tool.Click on the links at the beginning of each book excerpt to go to the Island Press Website for more information or to buy the book.

Click on one of the quick links on the upper right page of each book excerpt to buythe book, jump to that books contents, or jump back to the SER Restoration Reader stable of contents.Use the Bookmarks feature in Adobe Reader to jump between excerpts and the SERRestoration Reader s contents. To access Bookmarks in Acrobat Reader, choose View >Navigation Panels > Bookmarks.

Help Us Spread the Word

Please share this Reader with your colleagues and friends. You can forward this document as ane-mail attachment and/or pass on this link http://www.islandpress.org/readers where a freedownload is available.

We believe that ecological restoration will become, as noted biologist and conservationist EdwardO. Wilson has predicted, one of the keystones of ecology and environmental protection for thetwenty-first century. We hope you agree, and that youll share this Reader with your friends andcolleagues.

Stay in Touch with Island PressLets Work Together for Change

When you visit our Web site www.islandpress.org you can sign up on our e-mail list so thatyoull receive news and information about new books in the series and other restoration develop-ments. Just type in your email address in the Mailing List area at the upper right and click join.

We welcome your feedback. You can contact us any time at [email protected]. As part of thegrowing worldwide restoration community, we want to support your good work with books on top-ics that will help you achieve your goals.
http://www.islandpress.org/readershttp://www.islandpress.org/readershttp://www.islandpress.org/http://www.islandpress.org/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.islandpress.org/http://www.islandpress.org/readers



C O N T N T

Ecological Restoration: Principles, Values, and

Structure of an Emerging Profession 8By Andre F. Clewell and James Aronson

Excerpt taken from Project Roles and Contexts, by Andre F. Clewell andJames Aronson

Restoring Natural Capital:Science, Business, and Practice 20

Edited by James Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut

Excerpt taken from Mainstreaming the Restoration of Natural Capital:A Conceptual and Operational Framework, by Richard M. Cowling,Shirley M. Pierce, and Ayanda M. Sigwela

Foundations of Restoration Ecology 15

Edited by Donald A. Falk, Margaret A. Palmer, and Joy B. Zedler

Excerpt taken from The Dynamic Nature of Ecological Systems:Multiple States and Restoration Trajectories, by Katharine N. Suding andKatherine L. Gross

Foundation Volumes


5/975


Large-Scale Ecosystem Restoration:Five Case Studies from the United States 34

Edited by Mary Doyle and Cynthia A. Drew

Excerpt taken from Navigating the Shoals: Costs and Benefits of PlatteRiver Ecosystem Management, by Stephen Polasky

Old Fields: Dynamics and Restorationof Abandoned Farmland 38

Edited by Viki A. Cramer and Richard J. Hobbs

Excerpt taken from Old Field Vegetation Successionin the Neotropics, by Karen D. Holl

River Futures: An Integrative Scientific Approachto River Repair 27

Edited by Gary J. Brierley and Kirstie A. Fryirs

Excerpt taken from Social and Biophysical Connectivity ofRiver Systems by Mick Hillman, Gary J. Brierley, and Kirstie A. Fryirs

A Guide for Desert and Dryland Restoration:New Hope for Arid Lands 43

By David A. Bainbridge

Excerpt taken from Desertification: Crisis and Opportunity, byDavid A. Bainbridge

Restoration of Damaged Ecosystems



The Tallgrass Restoration Handbook:For Prairies, Savannas, and Woodlands 59

Edited by Stephen Packard and Cornelia F. Mutel

Excerpt taken from Orchards of Oak and a Sea of Grass, byVirginia M. Kline

Great Basin Riparian Ecosystems:Ecology, Management, and Restoration 65

Edited by Jeanne C. Chambers and Jerry R. Miller

Excerpt taken from Process-Based Approaches for Managing andRestoring Riparian Ecosystems, by Jeanne C. Chambers, Jerry R. Miller,Dru Germanoski, and Dave A. Weixelman

C O N T N T

Ecological Restoration of SouthwesternPonderosa Pine Forests 70

Edited by Peter Friederici

Excerpt taken from Ecological Restoration as Thinking Like a Forest,by Max Oelschlaeger

Restoring the Pacific Northwest: The Art andScience of Ecological Restoration in Cascadia 50

Edited by Dean Apostol and Marcia Sinclair

Excerpt taken from Traditional Ecology Knowledge and RestorationPractice, by Ren Senos, Frank K. Lake, Nancy Turner, andDennis Martinez

Restoration of Damaged Ecosystems


7/977


Ex Situ Plant Conservation:Supporting Species Survival in the Wild 88

Edited by Edward O. Guerrant Jr., Kayri Havens, and Mike Maunder

Excerpt taken from Population Responses to Novel Environments:Implications for Ex Situ Plant Conservation, by Brian C. Husband andLesley G. Campbell

Wildlife Restoration: Techniques forHabitat Analysis and Animal Monitoring 93

By Michael L. Morrison

Excerpt taken from Populations, by Michael L. Morrison

Assembly Rules and Restoration Ecology:Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice 77

Edited by Vicky M. Temperton, Richard J. Hobbs, Tim Nuttle,and Stefan Halle

Excerpt taken from Ecological Filters, Thresholds, and Gradientsin Resistance to Ecosystem Reassembly, by Richard J. Hobbs andDavid A. Norton

The Historical Ecology Handbook:

A Restorationists Guide to Reference Ecosystems 83

Edited by Dave Egan and Evelyn A. Howell

Excerpt taken from Using Dendrochronology to Reconstruct theHistory of Forest and Woodland Ecosystems, by Kurt F. Kipfmuellerand Thomas W. Swetnam

Valuable Tools and References


8/97

Contents

Dedication ixPreface xiIntroduction 1

PART I. Introduction and Essential Background 5

Chapter 1. Essence of Restoration 7

Virtual Field Trip 1. Restoring Desertified Vegetation in Australia 14David Tongway and John Ludwig

Chapter 2. Ecological Impairment and Recovery 19

Virtual Field Trip 2. Restoring Cultural Landscapes in Central Chile 33Carlos Ovalle and James Aronson

Chapter 3. Cultural Ecosystems, Fire, and Alternative States 38

PART II. Elements of Restoration Projects 53

Chapter 4. Ecological Attributes of Restored Ecosystems 55

Virtual Field Trip 3. Restoring Wet Prairie in Mississippi, USA 70George Ramseur Jr. and Andre F. Clewell

Ecological RestorationPrinciples, Values, and Structureof an Emerging Profession

Andre F. Clewell and James Aronson

Cloth, $60.00, ISBN 978-1-59726-168-5

Paper, $30.00, ISBN 978-1-59726-169-2

2007. 275 pages. 7 x 10

Figures, appendix, glossary, index

C O

O G C A

R T O

R A T O N
http://www.islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261685http://www.islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261692http://www.islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261692http://www.islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261692http://www.islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261685


9/979

Chapter 10 : Project Roles and Contexts

Quick Links: SER Restoration Reader TOCEcological Restoration TOCBuy Ecological Restoration

Chapter 5. reference Models and Developmental Trajectories 75

Chapter 6. Project Planning and Evaluation 88

PART III. Values That Restoration Addresses 97

Virtual Field Trip 4. Restoring a Communal Savanna in South Africa 99 James Blignaut and Rudi van Aarde

Chapter 7. Values and Ecological Restoration 104

Virtual Field Trip 5. Restoring Forests and Peoples Well-Being in Southern India 112Narayanan Krishnakumar and T. S. Srinivasa Murthy

Chapter 8. A Four-Quadrant Model for Holistic Ecological Restoration 116

PART IV. Structure of an Emerging Profession 123

Virtual Field Trip 6. Restoring Drained Peatlands for Sustainable Use in Germany 125 Achim Schfer and Wendelin Wichtmann

Chapter 9. Relationship of Restoration to Related Fields 130

Virtual Field Trip 7. Restoring Dogleg Branch in Florida, USA 141 Andre F. Clewell

Chapter 10. Project Roles and Contexts 147

Virtual Field Trip 8. Setting Up a Long-Term Restoration Ecology Research Site in Southern France 158 James Aronson and Edouard Le Floch

Chapter 11. Recognizing the Profession and the Professional 163

PART V. Holistic Ecological Restoration 167

Chapter 12. The Concept of Holistic Ecological Restoration: A Synthesis 169

Appendix: Guidelines for Developing and Managing Ecological Restoration Projects 173 Andre F. Clewell, John Rieger, and John Munro

Glossary 191

References 199

About the Authors and Collaborators 209

Index 211
http://www.islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261692http://www.islandpress.org/bookstore/details.php?isbn=9781597261692


10/9710 Ecological Restoration


From chapter 10, Project Roles and

Contexts

In this chapter we describe ecological restorationprojects from the perspective of their organizationand structure. We begin with the roles various per-sonnel play in the development and execution of aproject. Then we provide an outline of project con-texts or circumstances in which projects are conduct-ed. The various contexts have different strengths andweaknesses, which we identify. We note how projectstend to change over time from being exploratory andexperimental at first to refined and standardized lat-er. This information will let students and entry-levelpersonnel know what they can expect and where theymay want to concentrate their talents as their careersbegin. As the chapter progresses, we will present ma-terial of broader interest.

Project Roles

Who sponsors restoration projects? Who administersthem? Who makes decisions, and who carries themout? Every ecological restoration project requires

personnel to fulfill certain roles, beginning with theproject sponsor and continuing with the restorationpractitioner, project director, restoration planner, andproject manager. In small or uncomplicated projects,the same person may assume two or more of theseroles. Organization charts may identify project per-sonnel with other titles; however, each of these roles isfilled by someone, regardless of his or her title. Everyproject has at least one practitioner and sometimes

many. Larger sponsoring organizations may add oth-er levels to the organizational table for a project, suchas an administrator to whom the project manager re-ports. Project organization becomes even more com-

plex as contractors and subcontractors are included,with their own hierarchies of personnel and depart-ments with project responsibility. We ignore thesecomplexities and describe the basic project roles inthis section.

Sponsor

The organization or entity that undertakes an ecolog-ical restoration project and assumes the responsibil-ity for its accomplishment is its sponsor. A sponsormay be a government agency or a transnational or-ganization; a for-profit firm or corporation; a non-government organization (NGO); a philanthropicfoundation; a school, university, or research institute;a public museum, arboretum, or zoological park; aprofessional association; a branch of the military; amonastery or other religious order; a tribal council ofelders; a womens self-help group, which are becomingincreasingly common in India and Latin America; an-other kind of community-based organization (CBO);or an individual landowner or manager. The sponsorapproves the restoration project, provides or attractsfunding, assembles personnel who will accomplishthe project, provides an administrative structure, andprovides oversight to ensure its satisfactory comple-tion. The project may be accomplished in house us-ing the sponsors own employees or members, orsome or all of the work can be delegated to outsideindividuals, consulting firms, or other organizationsunder contract, purchase order, or some other agree-ment to provide services. Labor can be provided bypaid personnel or by volunteers who work withoutmonetary compensation. To a restoration practitio-ner who is contracted, the sponsor is usually known

simply as the client.

Practitioner

A restoration practitioneris someone who personallyconducts or supervises ecological restoration in thefield at project sites. Specifically, practitioners engagein project implementation and aftercare. In manyprojects, practitioners additionally inventory a proj-

About This Excerpt

The field of ecological restoration is a rapidlygrowing discipline that encompasses a widerange of activities and brings together prac-titioners and theoreticians from a variety ofbackgrounds and perspectives. In EcologicalRestoration, Andre Clewell and James Aronsonoffer a long-awaited guide to the practice of thisambitious and promising new discipline. Thisexcerpt examines the roles, contexts, and insti-tutional structure of project work.


11/9711



ect site before the initiation of restoration activities,select and inventory reference sites, prepare projectplans, conduct or supervise site preparation activi-ties, and monitor project sites that have undergone

restoration. In other projects, sponsors delegate theseresponsibilities to others. A practitioner can be anemployee of an organization that is conducting eco-logical restoration, or a consultant, contractor, sub-contractor, or volunteer who is engaged by that orga -nization. A practitioner may also be the owner of theproperty that is undergoing restoration. A restorationproject may be accomplished by a single practitioner,or two or more practitioners who work collectivelyon all aspects or separately on different aspects of aproject. The chief practitioner, if one is appointed,supervises other practitioners and is responsible forthe overall conduct of on-site restoration activities. Apractitioner may assume broad responsibilities andauthority for conducting restoration or may serve asa technician who performs specific tasks assigned bya supervisor.

Project Director

The project director is the person who has a compre-hensive vision for the project, including its technical,social, economic, strategic, political, historical, andother cultural aspects and implications. The projectdirector is superior in rank to the project managerand is responsible for the overall technical directionand leadership of a project. The project director iscritically involved with the conception of a projectand the development of project plans. The projectdirector formulates or approves project goals and ob - jectives and selects or approves reference models andstrategies for accomplishing restoration. The projectdirector receives briefings from the project managerand evaluates project monitoring reports and other

technical documents that may be produced. Theproject director ensures that executive officers, ac-countants, legal counsel, and other administrative of-ficers of the sponsoring organization understand theproject and carry out their respective responsibilities.The project director represents the project before theboard of directors, philanthropic foundations, publicofficials, stakeholders, and the general public or del -egates these duties to others.

Restoration Planner

The restoration planner (or a planning staff) preparesproject plans, including maps, drawings, and writ-ten instructions as needed. Ideally, the practitionercontributes substantially to the planning process oreven serves as the planner, as commonly happens onsmaller projects that do not entail many governmentpermits or outside contractors. The degree of detailin project plans may vary widely between projects,depending on project size and complexity and on therequirements of the sponsoring organization. Muchdetail may be required by government agencies whoseapproval is needed before project implementation.Project plans typically are appended to permits andare carried out as a permit condition. Detailed plans

are also useful for preparing contract stipulations thatare to be followed by the firm that provides practitio-ner services to the sponsoring organization. Penaltiesthat affect monetary compensation are prescribed ifcontractors fail to comply with contract stipulations.In such instances, the planning function may includelegal as well as technical capacity.

Project Manager

In most projects, restoration practitioners are super- vised and report to a superior who is either the proj-ect manager or someone who fulfills that role. Theproject manager is responsible for ensuring that agiven restoration project is conducted satisfactorilyon behalf of the sponsoring organization. The proj-ect manager administers day-to-day operations suchas scheduling personnel, arranging for deliveries ofplanting stocks and equipment, ensuring adherenceto contract stipulations, and approving expenditures.Sometimes the practitioner does most of this work,and the project manager ensures that it is accom -plished. Another firm or organization that has been

engaged to provide restoration services under con-tract sometimes appoint its own project manager. Insuch instances, the two project managers may com-municate with each other, and practitioners receivedirections primarily from the project manager intheir own firm.

Satisfactory restoration projects require that thepractitioner and the project manager remain in closecommunication, more so than in construction proj-




ects, where tasks with more predictable outcomes areconducted. The success of many restoration projectsdepends on manipulating living organisms of dif-ferent kinds, and the chances for surprise are much

greater. The practitioner must react to unanticipatedsituations to ensure the success of the project. Theproject manager is obliged to ensure adherence toschedules, budgets, and contract stipulations, whichmay not allow for contingencies. In such instances,the practitioners should educate project managersand provide succinct information and persuasivelogic that the managers can use effectively when in-teracting with people at higher administrative levels.We cannot overstate the importance of respectful andcordial relations between practitioner and projectmanager, particularly in ecological restoration proj-

ects of long duration.

Project Contexts

The context of a restoration project consists of the cir-cumstances under which it is conducted. The admin-istrative structure of a project is the most importantaspect of context. Other factors contributing to it arethe availability of funding, labor, equipment, and ma-terials such as planting stocks. Project site accessibil-ity and seasonal constraints (e.g., inclement weather)can also influence the context, as can regulatory andlegal constraints. We emphasize administrative struc-ture in the ensuing discussion.The ways in which different projects are administered vary widely. Project administration determines thedegree of responsibility that the restoration practitio-ner is given, the amount of authority that the prac-titioner is allotted, and ultimately the flexibility thatthe restoration practitioner can apply to solve prob-lems that arise. The North Branch Prairie project andthe Dogleg Branch project illustrate two extremesin project administration and context. The North

Branch Prairie project was described in Miracle Un-der the Oaksby William Stevens (1995) and critiquedby Peter Friederici (2006). The Dogleg Branch proj-ect is described in Virtual Field Trip 7.The North Branch Prairie project was initiated in1977 by Steve Packard and a small group of environ-mental activists near Chicago, Illinois. Packard ap-proached a public official in the Cook County ForestPreserve District and asked whether they could vol-

unteer to clean up trash, cut some brush, scatter someseeds, and generally refurbish degraded prairies thatthe district owned. District personnel had wanted tobegin such work themselves but were hampered by a

lack of funds, and they accepted Packards offer. Thework began and soon attracted other volunteers. Theidea of restoring Chicagos former ecosystems spreadlike a prairie wildfire. Soon, hundreds of citizens werespending their free time working alongside Packard,essentially without plans or administrative structure.By 1993, more than 3,000 volunteers had restoredmore than 6,700 hectares of degraded prairie and as-sociated oak savanna in an amazing display of altru-ism.

Compare the North Branch Prairie story to that ofthe restoration of forested wetlands in the headwa-ters of Dogleg Branch on surface-mined and physi-cally reclaimed land in Florida, described in the Vir-tual Field Trip 7. That project required two years ofwork simply to obtain the required government per-mits. Permits were eventually issued after the min-ing company had conducted a four-year pilot proj-ect to demonstrate that native trees could be grownand a two-year ecological inventory of local forestedwetlands that served as reference sites (Clewell et al.1982). Professionals who were involved in the projectincluded mining engineers, mine planners, environ-

mental consultants, native nurseries, project manag-ers, heavy equipment contractors, attorneys, top of-ficials in state government, and large support staffsthat produced many reams of paperwork. The projectwas a very costly and well-orchestrated production inwhich the actual restoration work at the project sireseemed like an afterthought.

The contrast between the North Branch Prairie andDogleg Branch projects could scarcely have beengreater. They demonstrate extreme examples of thecontexts in which restoration practitioners find them -

selves working. There is no preferred way to organize,plan, and implement restoration projects. The par-ticular circumstances for a project determine its con-text. The underlying difference between the NorthBranch Prairie and Dogleg Branch projects was thatthe former was an elective project, whereas the latterproject required prior government approval.

Lets look at these two projects from the perspec-tive of the restoration practitioner. At North Branch


13/9713



Prairie, almost everyone involved was a restorationpractitioner. Steve Packard assumed the role of proj-ect director, and he and several others assumed thecollective role of project manager as well. The Cook

County Forest Preserve District was nominally thesponsor, and its personnel provided skeletal adminis-tration. Packard referred to existing ecological litera-ture, a general knowledge of the few remnant patchesof prairie and oak savanna, and the species list of anearly naturalist as references and as an indication ofhistoric trajectory. They essentially developed proj -ect plans as they worked on site. Their administra-tive mode was collegial. In other words, Packard andthe other practitioners who worked most closely withhim made project decisions by consensus. They as -sumed almost total responsibility for all restoration

work. The Cook County Forest Preserve Districtretained basic authority for the project because theproject took place on lands under their jurisdiction.District personnel established the bounds for projectwork to ensure that it was legal and complied withthe districts overall mission. Otherwise, Packard andhis cadre assumed authority for project operations.In this context, the practitioners enjoyed broad flex-ibility to conduct the project as they saw fit (Packard1988, 1993).The North Branch Prairie project was a grassroots,bottom-up endeavor that was not mandated by a pub -lic agency. Instead, the Cook County Forest PreserveDistrict benefited from the broad public support ofhundreds of citizens who volunteered their free timeas restoration practitioners. This was a marvelousexample of people taking collective responsibility fortheir own concerns in a manner that nicely reflectsthe four-quadrant model of ecological restoration(see Chapter 8). Ecological values were fulfilled di-rectly by the restoration. The motivation for many volunteers was the fulfillment of individual valuessuch as reconnecting with nature and responding to

environmental crises, as described in Chapter 7. Pub-lic celebrations at the restored prairie were describedby Holland (1994) and are among the evidence of thefulfillment of cultural values. The restored prairiesand oak savannas represent natural capital and provide socioeconomic services.In great contrast, the Dogleg Branch project was con-ducted by only a few restoration practitioners, prin-cipally Andre Clewell and several colleagues. Because

of the safety and liability issues, no volunteers wereinvited or allowed on the property. The mining com-pany was the sponsor, and its employees assumedthe other roles of project administration, director,

and project manager. Most were engineers. Detailedproject plans were prepared by the company, whichincorporated specific conditions that were requiredby permit from the State of Florida. These conditions,in turn, were based in part on a restoration plan writ-ten by Clewell that identified restoration goals, objec-tives, performance standards, and the reference mod-el. The latter was embodied in the aforementioneddocument that described historic conditions andcontemporary changes in the historic trajectory thatwere attributable to land use (mainly fire suppressionthat allowed broadleaved forest typical of river valleys

to replace upland pine savannas). Much of the proj-ect work was conducted by earthmoving firms, treeplanting crews, and other subcontractors hired by themining company. The role of the restoration practi-tioner was largely to serve as a liaison with foremenof subcontracting companies, to test new restorationmethods such as interplanting undergrowth species,to monitor forest development, and to suggest im-provements to the restoration process for approval bymine managers.The Dogleg Branch project was required by the State

of Florida (primarily; other government entities werealso involved) and was administered from the topdown by the mining company. Stakeholder involve-ment was limited to formal hearings that were re-quired by law, in which citizens could express theirinterests. Comments were largely limited to local res-idents who were concerned about mining operationsnear their properties and environmental organiza-tions that were generally opposed to surface mining.The intent of the project was to repair environmen-tal damage that was an unavoidable result of miningrather than to cause net ecological improvements. No

fulfillment of the personal, cultural, and socioeco-nomic values described in Chapter 7 was intended.In other words, this was a compensatory mitigationproject. After this and other restoration projects onmine land were complete, the land was donated tothe State of Florida and became the Alafia River StatePark, which was a cultural improvement. However,negotiations for the donation of the land were initi-ated after Dogleg Branch was nearly restored, and the




restoration site has not yet been opened for public ac-cess. Dogleg Branch restoration is narrowly focusedas a flatland project in terms of the four-quadrantmodel in Chapter 8 in that it satisfies ecological andsocioeconomic elements that are expressed in statepolicy that presumably represents the sentiment ofthe electorate.However, a number of restoration techniques weretested during the course of Dogleg Branch restora-tion, some for the first time. The results were madeavailable for use by restoration practitioners whotoured the site, attended conferences where the proj-ect was described, and read public descriptions (e.g.,Clewell and Lea 1990; Clewell et al. 2000). Even moreimportantly, the Dogleg Branch restoration project,and several others that were initiated at the time(Clewell 1999), demonstrated that complex forestand stream restoration could be conducted on landthat had been literally turned upside down by min-ing. In this regard, the Dogleg Branch restorationproject changed the perceptions of people who hadnot previously realized the potential of ecological res-toration. This and similar restoration work has hadthe salubrious effect of hastening the era of ecologicalrestoration and providing jobs for many practitionersin Florida and elsewhere. However, it has also givenregulated interests a rationale for convincing govern-ment agencies to issue permits for development thatwill cause environmental damage with the promisethat the damage will be compensated by ecologicalrestoration as a form of mitigation. This strategycould be justified if regulated interests were requiredto successfully restore more than they damaged, butthis eventuality awaits documentation as a normallyoccurring outcome. We hope that restoration practi-tioners will be more than battlefield physicians in theenvironmental wars.

Excerpted from Ecological Restoration by Andre F. Clewell and JamesAronson. Copyright 2007 by Island Press. Excerpted by permissionof Island Press. All rights reserved. No par t of this excerpt may bereproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from thepublisher. Island Press grants permission to forward this unalteredelectronic document to friends, colleagues, and other interestedparties.


15/97

Foundations ofRestoration Ecology

Edited by Donald A. Falk, Margaret A. Palmer,and Joy B. Zedler

Foreword by Richard J. Hobbs

Cloth, $99.95, ISBN 1-59726-016-9

Paper, $49.95, ISBN 1-59726-017-7

2006. 384 pages. 7 x 10Tables, figures, index

Contents

Foreword ixRichard J. Hobbs

Acknowledgments xi

Chapter 1. Ecological Theory and Restoration Ecology 1 Margaret A. Palmer, Donald A. Falk, and Joy B. Zedler

PART I. Ecological Theory and the Restoration of Populations and Communities 11

Chapter 2. Population and Ecological Genetics in Restoration Ecology 14 Donald A. Falk, Christopher M. Richards, Arlee M. Montalvo, and Eric E. Knapp

Chapter 3. Ecophysiological Constraints on Plant Responses in a Restoration Setting 42 James R. Ehleringer and Darren R. Sandquist

Chapter 4. Implications of Population Dynamic and Metapopulation Theory for Restoration 59 Joyce Maschinski

Chapter 5. Restoring Ecological Communities: From Theory to Practice 88Holly L. Menninger and Margaret A. Palmer

Chapter 6. Evolutionary Restoration Ecology 113 Craig A. Stockwell, Michael T. Kinnison, and Andrew P. Hendry


16/9716 Foundations of Restoration Ecology


PART II. Restoring Ecological Function 139

Chapter 7. Topographic Heterogeneity Theory and Ecological Restoration 142 Daniel Larkin, Gabrielle Vivian-Smith, and Joy B. Zedler

Chapter 8. Food-Web Approaches in Restoration Ecology 165 M. Jake Vander Zanden, Julian D. Olden, and Claudio Gratton

Chapter 9. The Dynamic Nature of Ecological Systems: Multiple States andRestoration Trajectories 190 Katharine N. Suding and Katherine L. Gross

Chapter 10. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning in Restored Ecosystems:Extracting Principles for a Synthetic Perspective 210 Shahid Naeem

Chapter 11. A Modeling Framework for Restoration Ecology 238Dean L. Urban

PART III.Restoration Ecology in Context 257

Chapter 12. Using Ecological Theory to Manage or Restore Ecosystems Affected byInvasive Plant Species 260Carla M. DAntonio and Jeanne C. Chambers

Chapter 13. Statistical Issues and Study Design in Ecological Restorations: Lessons Learnedfrom Marine Reserves 280 Craig W. Osenberg, Benjamin M. Bolker, Jada-Simone S. White, Colette M. St. Mary,and Jeffrey S. Shima

Chapter 14. Ecological Restoration from a Macroscopic Perspective 303 Brian A. Maurer

Chapter 15. Climate Change and Paleoecology: New Contexts for Restoration Ecology 315 Constance I. Millar and Linda B. Brubaker

Chapter 16. Integrating Restoration Ecology and Ecological Theory: A Synthesis 341 Donald A. Falk, Margaret A. Palmer, and Joy B. Zedler

About the Editors 347

About the Contributors 349

Index 355


17/9717

Chapter 9 : The Dynamic Nature of Ecological Systems

Quick Links: SER Restoration Reader TOCFoundations of Restoration Ecology TOCBuy Foundations of Restoration Ecology

About This Excerpt

Restoration is the keystone strategy for conserv-ing biodiversity, and ecology has matured intoa central discipline of the biological sciences.This important work shows that their synergyoffers new hope for the future of life on Earth.Edward O. Wilson, University Research Pro-fessor Emeritus, Harvard University

Linking theoretical models of ecosystem andcommunity change with restoration ecology hasthe potential to advance both the practice of res-toration and our understanding of the dynam-ics of degraded systems. In the chapter fromwhich this excerpt is drawn, Katharine Suding

and Katherine Gross consider ecological theo-ries that address questions about how systemschange and may reduce the risk of unpredictedchange in restoration projects.

From chapter 9, The Dynamic Nature of EcologicalSystems: Multiple States and Restoration Trajectories, by Katharine N. Suding and KatherineL. Gross

One feature of ecological systems is that they areever-changing and dynamic. As ancient Greek phi-losopher Heraclitus claimed, You can never step inthe same river twice. Moreover, rates and directionsof change in systems are shaped increasingly by hu-man activities. These effects can be intentional or theconsequences of engineering of the systems and sur-rounding landscapes to provide specic services tohumans. The dynamics of an ecological system, par-ticularly of a system slated for restoration, is a func-

tion of many factors, some deterministic and somestochastic, working at several temporal and spatialscales.

In considering how systems change in restoration, weaddress several questions:

What types of trajectories characterize the recov-ery of degraded ecosystems? Is the pathway to re-covery similar to the pathway to degradation?

1.

Can we predict the end states of restoration path-ways? Are they similar to states prior to degrada-tion?

How will dynamics that occur on very different

scales of space and time relate to one another?What should be the scale of focus?

How much inherent variability does an ecologicalsystem require for adequate recovery and adaptivecapacity for change in the future?

In this chapter, we consider ecological theories thathelp address these questions and may reduce the riskof unpredicted or undesired change in restorationprojects. While theory can help guide restoration ef-forts, it does not provide simple or universal answersfor the challenges that confront restoration. Restora-

tion efforts that document species turnover and envi-ronmental attributes over time can help test and reneecological theory related to community dynamics.Links between restoration and community dynamicsadvance both the practice of restoration and theoriesof ecological dynamics. We survey the progress andthe further potential of this connection.

Major Theories and Connection to Restoration

Over the last one hundred years, extensive workhas documented how communities and ecosystemschange in response to disturbance. Despite the exten-sive documentation of patterns (Figure 9.1), a generalconceptual framework concerning the controls onspecies turnover and ecosystem development is stilldebated. Several contrasting views concerning themechanisms and predictive nature of these dynamicspersist today. In this chapter, we will focus on three views: equilibrium, multiple equilibrium, and non-equilibrium. We discuss each of these and relate themto the concept of fast and slow processes (sensu Rin -aldi and Scheffer 2000) as a way to evaluate mecha-

nisms of recovery.

Single Equilibrium Endpoint

Equilibrium systems are assumed to return to theirpredisturbance state or trajectory following distur-bance (Table 9.1). This theory predicts a classicalsuccessional trajectory: steady, directional change incomposition to a single equilibrium point (Clements

2.

3.

4.


18/9718 Foundations of Restoration Ecology


1916; Odum 1969) (Figure 9.2a). Recovery in an equi-librium framework is a predictable consequence of in-teractions among species with different life historiesand the development of ecosystem functions. Strong

internal regulation occurs through negative feedbackmechanisms, including competition and herbivore/predator interactions, as well as climate-ecosystemcouplings and life-history tradeoffs. Many of thesemechanisms are considered aspects of communityassembly rules (Weiher and Keddy 1999; Booth andSwanton 2002), although assembly rules do not nec -essarily assume single equilibrium dynamics.

In some cases, community development can proceedspontaneously, with little or no intervention, to

reach desirable target states (Prach et al. 2001; Khateret al. 2003; Novak and Prach 2003). Mitsch and Wil-son (1996) argue that nature has a self-design ca-pacity as species assemble themselves. However, theextent to which this capacity can be expressed in arecovery will depend on how degraded and isolatedit has become prior to restoration efforts (Bakker andBerendse 2001). Some restoration efforts are designedto accelerate natural succession so that the ecosystemdevelops along the same trajectory as it would in theabsence of intervention but reaches the goal endpointsooner. For instance, restoring a severely degradedriver back to its more natural ow regime via dam re-moval can enhance recovery of the surrounding plantcommunities (Rood et al. 2003; Lytle and Poff 2004).Similarly, prescribed burning of degraded grasslandscan promote restoration of native plant assemblages,particularly if the re management regime is appliedaccording to historical patterns (Baer et al. 2002; Co-peland et al. 2002). Thus, restoration of some com-munities can take a single equilibrium approach to

spur recovery along a successional trajectory.

Excerpted from Foundations of Restoration Ecology edited by DonaldA. Falk, Margaret Palmer, and Joy B. Zedler. Copyright 2006 by IslandPress. Excerpted by permission of Island Press. All rights reserved. Nopart of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permis-sion in writing from the publisher. Island Press grants permission toforward this unaltered electronic document to friends, colleagues, andother interested parties.

Figure 9.1: Dynamics of species replacement have been predicted totake many different forms. Four general patterns of trajectories, eachwith two starting points (assemblages A and B) are shown here: (1)Convergent trajectories where initial variability eventually converges

to similar species composition, often termed the (D) equilibriumclimax community. (2) Initially divergent trajectories that eventuallyconverge to one equilibrium state. (3) Divergent trajectories that neverconverge and never reach a permanent state. (4) Divergent trajectoriesthat go to two different stable states (C and D) and, in the case of C,experience an abrupt shift to a third state.


19/9719

Chapter 9 : The Dynamic Nature of Ecological Systems

Quick Links: SER Restoration Reader TOCFoundations of Restoration Ecology TOCBuy Foundations of Restoration Ecology

Table 9.1: General theories that attempt to predict how the composition and function of systems change over time and/or behave following adisturbance.

Equilibrium Multiple Equilibrium Non-equilibrium

AssumptionsClimax equilibrium, unidirectional,continuous

Equilibrium, multidirectional,discontinuous

Persistent non-equilibrium, nondirec-tional, discontinuous

Permanent states One (climax) More than one None

Trajectories Convergent Regime shifts, collapses Divergent, arrested, cyclic

PredictabilityHigh; based on speciesattributes

Moderate; possible but difcult Low; chance and legacies important

Important factorsSpecies interactions, ecosystemdevelopment

Initial conditions, positivefeedbacks, landscape position

Chance dispersal, stochastic events

Figure 9.2 : Examples of dynamics predicted by single equilibrium, per-sistent non-equilibrium, and multiple equilibrium theories (AC). Foreach, the left frame shows predicted combinations of fast and slowvariables; arrows indicate direction of change if not at equilibrium. Theright frame shows a stylized example from the ecological literature thatis consistent with the ecological predictions. In A, changes in the slow

and fast variables are linear and unidirectional. Insect species diversityincrease linearly in a Minnesota old-eld with years since abandon-ment. Increases in aboveground productivity with time is likely theslow variable that drives the change in insect diversity (Siemann etal. 1999). In B, a persistent non-equilibrium exists with no predictabletrajectory. Total stem length of cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) shows highinterannual variability and no directional trends in time since restora-tion in San Diego Bay, CA (Zedler and Callaway 1999). In C, at a singlelevel of the slow variable there are two possible equilibrial states. Ex-amples of a pattern predicted by this dynamic, shown in Figure 9.1(4),are strong threshold effects as the slow variable changes. For instance,in a fragmented Eucalyptus forest in Australia, the probability that agecko species (Oedura retiulcata) persists decreases dramatically if theforest remnant contains less than 400 trees (Sarre et al. 1995).


20/97

R T

O R N G N A T U R A

C A

T A

Restoring Natural CapitalScience, Business, and Practice

Edited by James Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton,and James N. Blignaut

Foreword by Peter Raven

Cloth, $90.00, ISBN 1-59726-076-2

Paper, $45.00, ISBN 1-59726-077-0

2007. 400 pages. 7 x 10Tables, figures, index

Contents

Foreword xiPeter Raven

Preface xiii James Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut

PART I. Restoring Natural Capital: The Conceptual Landscape 1

Introduction James N. Blignaut, James Aronson, and Suzanne J. Milton

Chapter 1. Restoring Natural Capital: Definition and Rationale 3 James Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut

Chapter 2. Restoring Natural Capital: A Reflection on Ethics 9 James N. Blignaut, James Aronson, Paddy Woodworth, Sean Archer,Narayan Desai, and Andre F. Clewell

Chapter 3. Restoring Natural Capital: An Ecological Economics Assessment 17 Joshua Farley and Erica J. Brown Gaddis

Chapter 4. Restoring Natural Capital: A Mainstream Economic Perspective 28Eugenio Figueroa B.


21/9721

Chapter 34 : Mainstreaming the Restoration of Natural Capital

Quick Links: SER Restoration Reader TOCRestoring Natural Capital TOCBuy Restoring Natural Capital

Chapter 5. Assessing and Restoring Natural Capital Across Scales:Lessons from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 36 Richard B. Norgaard, Phoebe Barnard, and Patrick Lavelle

Chapter 6. Assessing the Loss of Natural Capital: A Biodiversity Intactness Index 44Reinette Biggs and Robert J. Scholes

PART II. Restoring Natural Capital: Experiences and Lessons 55

Introduction Suzanne J. Milton, James Aronson, and James N. Blignaut

TARGETS

Chapter 7. Setting Appropriate Restoration Targets for Changed Ecosystems

in the Semiarid Karoo, South Africa 57W. Richard J. Dean and Chris J. Roche

Chapter 8. Targeting Sustainable Options for Restoring Natural Capital in Madagascar 64Louise Holloway

Chapter 9. Landscape Function as a Target for Restoring Natural Capital in Semiarid Australia 76David Tongway and John Ludwig

Chapter 10. Genetic Integrity as a Target for Natural Capital Restoration:Weighing the Costs and Benefits 85Cathy Waters, Andrew G. Young, and Jim Crosthwaite

APPROACHES

Chapter 11. Restoring and Maintaining Natural Capital in the Pacific Northwest, USA 94 Andrew Carey

Chapter 12. Restoring Natural Capital Reconnects People to Their Natural Heritage:Tiritiri Matangi Island, New Zealand 103 John Craig and va-Terzia Vesely

Chapter 13. Restoring Forage Grass to Support the Pastoral Economy of Arid Patagonia 112 Martn R. Aguiar and Marcela E. Romn

Chapter 14. A Community Approach to Restore Natural Capital: The Wildwood Project, Scotland 122William McGhee

Chapter 15. An Adaptive Comanagement Approach to Restore Natural Capital inCommunal Areas of South Africa 129Christo Fabricius and Georgina Cundill

Chapter 16. Participatory Use of Traditional Ecological Knowledge forRestoring Natural Capital in Agroecosystems of Rural India 137P. S. Ramakrishnan


22/9722 Restoring Natural Capital


Chapter 17. Overcoming Obstacles to Restore Natural Capital:Large-Scale Restoration on the Sacramento River 146Suzanne M. Langridge, Mark Buckley, and Karen D. Holl

Chapter 18. An Approach to Quantify the Economic Value of Restoring Natural Capital:A Case from South Africa 154 James N. Blignaut and Christina E. Loxton

ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES: CASE STUDIES

Chapter 19. Capturing the Economic Benefits from Restoring Natural Capitalin Transformed Tropical Forests 162Kirsten Schuyt, Stephanie Mansourian, Gabriella Roscher, and Gerard Rambeloarisoa

Chapter 20. Restoring Natural Forests to Make Medicinal Bark HarvestingSustainable in South Africa 170Coert J. Geldenhuys

Chapter 21. Assessing Costs, Benefits, and Feasibility of Restoring Natural Capitalin Subtropical Thicket in South Africa 179 Anthony J. Mills, Jane K. Turpie, Richard M. Cowling, Christo Marais, Graham I. H. Kerley,Richard G. Lechmere-Oertel, Ayanda M. Sigwela, and Mike Powell

Chapter 22. Costs and Benefits of Restoring Natural Capital FollowingAlien Plant Invasions in Fynbos Ecosystems in South Africa 188Patricia M. Holmes, David M. Richardson, and Christo Marais

Chapter 23. Return of Natural, Social, and Financial Capital to the Hole Left by Mining 198 J. Deon van Eeden, Roy A. Lubke, and Pippa Haarhoff

Chapter 24. Protecting and Restoring Natural Capital in New York CitysWatersheds to Safeguard Water 208Christopher Elliman and Nathan Berry

Chapter 25. Making the Restoration of Natural Capital Profitable on Private Land:Koa Forestry on Hawaii Island 216Liba Pejchar, Joshua H. Goldstein, and Gretchen C. Daily

PART III.Restoring Natural Capital: Tactics and Strategies 225Introduction James Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut

VALUATION

Chapter 26. Valuing Natural Capital and the Costs and Benefits of Restoration 227William E. Rees, Joshua Farley, va-Terzia Vesely, and Rudolf de Groot


23/9723



Chapter 27. A Decision-Analysis Framework for Proposal Evaluation ofNatural Capital Restoration 237 Mike. D. Young, Stefan Hajkowicz, Erica J. Brown Gaddis, and Rudolf de Groot

LOCAL AND LANDSCAPE LEVELS Chapter 28. Overcoming Physical and Biological Obstacles to Restore Natural Capital 249Karen D. Holl, Liba Pejchar, and Steve G. Whisenant

Chapter 29. Overcoming Socioeconomic Obstacles to Restore Natural Capital 256Christo Marais, Paddy Woodworth, Martin de Wit, John Craig, Karen D. Holl, and Jennifer Gouza

GLOBAL LEVEL

Chapter 30. Overcoming Obstacles at a Global Scale to Restore Natural Capital 265Robert J. Scholes, Reinette Biggs, Erica J. Brown Gaddis, and Karen D. Holl

Chapter 31. Managing Our Global Footprint Through Restoration ofNatural Capital at a Global Scale 275 Joshua Farley, Erica J. Brown Gaddis, William E. Rees, and Katrina Van Dis

POLICIES AND INSTITUTIONS

Chapter 32. Making Restoration Work: Financial Mechanisms 286Rudolf de Groot, Martin de Wit, Erica J. Brown Gaddis, Carolyn Kousky,William McGhee, and Mike D. Young

Chapter 33. Making Restoration Work: Nonmonetary Mechanisms 294William McGhee, John Craig, Rudolf de Groot, James S. Miller, and Keith Bowers

PART IV. Synthesis 303

Introduction Suzanne J. Milton, James Aronson, and James N. Blignaut

Chapter 34. Mainstreaming the Restoration of Natural Capital: A Conceptualand Operational Framework 305Richard M. Cowling, Shirley M. Pierce, and Ayanda M. Sigwela

Chapter 35. Restoring Toward a Better Future 313

Suzanne J. Milton, James Aronson, and James N. Blignaut Glossary 319

References 329

Editors 365

Contributors 367

Index 375




From chapter 34, Mainstreaming the Restorationof Natural Capital: A Conceptual and OperationalFramework, by Richard M. Cowling, Shirley M.Pierce, and Ayanda M. Sigwela

Protected areas alone will never achieve all of thegoals and targets required to ensure the persistenceof the worlds natural capital (e.g., Rosenzweig 2003)and the delivery of services that intact ecosystemssupply (Kremen and Ostfeld 2005). Consequently,the burden of conserving (and restoring) naturalcapital will have to fall increasingly on sectors suchas agriculture, transport, forestry, mining, and ur-ban development (e.g., Hutton and Leader-Williams2003). The mainstreaming of biodiversity concerns isone strategy used by the conservation community torespond to the challenge of ensuring the persistenceof natural capital and ecosystem services in utilizedlandscapes (Pierce et al. 2002; Petersen and Huntley

2005a). In essence, mainstreaming may be defined asthe process of creating awareness of the value of natu-ral capital in sectors that currently ignore or discountit, to the extent that they will incorporate conserva-tion actions into their routine activities.

A key conservation action in production landscapesis the restoration of degraded or transformed naturalcapital, as has been pointed out in many of the chap-ters in this book. Our aim here is to provide a con-

ceptual and operational framework for mainstream-ing the restoration of natural capital in productionlandscapes.

What Is Mainstreaming?

Although mainstreaming is a relative newcomer tothe biodiversity and natural capital lexicon, it is animportant one, since mainstreaming is a componentof the institutions and strategies of some major globalbiodiversity initiatives. For example, the concept isembedded in several articles of the Convention onBiological Diversity (ratified 1995). It also underpinsthe ecosystem service approach of the MillenniumEcosystem Assessment (MA) and is the explicit objective of the Strategic Priority 2 of the Global Envi-ronmental Facilitys GEF-3 (2004) Program of Work:Mainstreaming biodiversity in production land-scapes and sectorsto integrate biodiversity conservation into agriculture, forestry, fisheries, tourism,and other production sectors in order to secure na-tional and global environmental benefits (Petersenand Huntley 2005b). Undoubtedly mainstreaminginitiatives will attract considerable resources fromfunding agencies over the next decade.

According to Petersen and Huntley (2005b) the objective of mainstreaming is to internalize the goals

of biodiversity conservation and sustainable use ofbiological resources into economic sectors and devel-opment models, policies and programs, and thereforeinto all human behavior. Cowling et al. (2002) iden-tified the following list of desired outcomes of main-streaming:

The incorporation of biodiversity considerationsinto policies governing sectoral activities

The simultaneous achievement of gains in biodiversity and in the economic sector (the win-winscenario)

Sectoral activity being recognized as based on, ordependent on, the sustainable use of biodiversity

Situations where sectoral activities result in overallreversal of biodiversity losses

Viewed as a process, mainstreaming is a means tospread the responsibility and benefits of conservingbiodiversity and restoring natural capital across a di- verse range of sectors. This requires the identification

About This Excerpt

How can environmental degradation be stopp-ed? How can it be reversed? And how can thedamage already done be repaired? RestoringNatural Capital brings together social and natu-ral scientists from the developed and developingworlds to consider these questions and examinespecific strategies for restoring ecosystem goodsand services in natural and socioecological sys-tems. This excerpt from the final section of thebook focuses on the importance of mainstream-ing the restoration of natural capital, highlight-ing the fact that restoration is becoming an es-sential intervention.


25/9725



of scenarios that provide benefits for both the naturalcapital and the targeted sector, and the implementa-tion of actions (for example, the creation of institu-tions, including incentives) that enable responsible

bodies to accomplish these scenarios.Mainstreaming interventions may happen at allscales of organization and geography, from encour-aging backyard conservation of natural capital in aneighborhood to the impact of a multilateral envi-ronmental agreement on the global ocean-transportsystem. Furthermore, a wide range of actors will bearthe costs and enjoy the benefits, material and spiri-tual, associated with mainstreaming, and these willaccrue over short and long timescales (Petersen andHuntley 2005b).There are very few documented cases of effectivemainstreaming. Pierce et al. (2002) provide examplesfrom South Africa, and Peterson and Huntley (2005a)from elsewhere in the world. Others, although notexplicitly conceptualized as such, appear in Daily andEllison (2002), Swingland (2003), and Rosenzweig(2003). Pierce et al. (2005) provide a case illustrat-ing how conservation priorities can be mainstreamedinto land-use planning through interpretation of sci-entific products into user-friendly, user-useful mapsand guidelines. In addition, Knight et al. (2006) de-scribe how mainstreaming can be integrated into a

framework for implementing actions aimed at secur-ing conservation priorities. The latter two are exam-ples of conservation actions that enable or facilitatethe restoration of natural capital by identifying resto-ration priorities.

Conceptual Framework for Mainstreaming theRestoration of Natural Capital

A conceptual framework for restoration boils down toidentifying a model of the desired landscape; in otherwords, what mix of land uses and economic flows arerequired to meet the needs of different stakeholders(Salafsky and Wollenberg 2000)? Restoration imple-mented in an ad hoc manner is likely to fail in achiev-ing desirable outcomes (Hobbs and Norton 1996; seealso chapter 3), as has been shown for the ad hocimplementation of other conservation actions, suchas the location of protected areas (Pressey 1994).Therefore, prior to restoration intervention, stake-holders need to identify an appropriate landscape

model characterized by requirements for sustainingbiological patterns and processes, and for supportinghuman needs. Effective restoration requires explicitgoals and targets (e.g., Hobbs and Norton 1996) iden-

tified in a way that is consistent with a specific land-scape model.

For the mainstreaming of restoration to happen, thelandscape model must facilitate the identification ofplausible and compelling win-win scenarios. Thus,farmers must be convinced that the direct and op-portunity costs of restoring native, natural capital ontheir farms will be outweighed by the benefits of suchrestoration, for example, in enhanced productionthrough improved pollination services or reducedsoil erosion (e.g., Kremen and Ostfeld 2005). Simi-larly, restoration interventions aimed at achievingnature conservation goals should be guided by theachievement of explicit and defensible targets for bio -diversity features, which are set in the process of sys-tematic conservation planning (Pressey et al. 2003).

While there has been much written on conceptualframeworks, goals, and targets for restoration (e.g.,Hobbs and Norton 1996), the obvious link betweenrestoration and the systematic, target-driven, conservation planning of landscapes (Margules and Pressey2000) has only recently been made (e.g., Pressey etal. 2003; Crossman and Bryan 2006). Systematic con -servation assessments identify those areas of trans-formed or degraded natural capital that are requiredto achieve targets for the conservation of both biodiversity patterns (e.g., species, land classes) and pro-cesses (e.g., migration corridors). These areas thenbecome defensible priorities for restoration, as illus-trated by Crossman and Bryan (2006) for agriculturallandscapes in Australia.

A similar systematic approach is required for therestoration of natural capital for ecosystem servicedelivery (e.g., Kremen and Ostfeld 2005; Pierce et al.

2005). A few conservation assessments have targetedand incorporated the spatial components of eco -system services (e.g., Rouget, Cowling, et al. 2003).However, a great deal more research is needed beforewe can make significant progress in the restorationof natural capital: (1) the natural capital both in-tact and degradedin a particular planning domainneeds to be identified and mapped in consultationwith those stakeholders who are direct beneficiaries




of the services it delivers; (2) the benefits derivedfrom these services and their flows to specific ben-eficiaries need to be quantified and displayed in waysthat are meaningful to stakeholders; (3) targets need

to be set for each component of the regions naturalcapital in a way that is consistent with a landscapemodel (for example, a certain number of hectares ofhealthy watershed are required to ensure a sustain-able water supply over a specified period); (4) targetshortfalls should be identified as priorities for res-toration; and (5) mechanisms should be sought tomainstream the restoration of these areas into thosesectors that benefit from the services provided by thenatural capital.The major advantage of systematic restoration toachieve the goals for a specific landscape model is thatit is target driven and, therefore, defensible, efficient,and effective (Crossman and Bryan 2006). These at-tributes are likely to greatly facilitate mainstreaming,especially when the actors are cash-strapped govern -ment agencies or profit-motivated corporations.An Operational Framework for Mainstreaming theRestoration of Natural CapitalCowling et al. (2002) developed an operational frame-work for mainstreaming biodiversity, informed byeleven South African case studies presented in Pierceet al. (2002). The framework is sufficiently broad toaccommodate restoration interventions; along with

the establishment of protected areas and effective soiland water conservation, restoration is another toolfor conserving biodiversity. The framework compris-es four major components:

Prerequisites essential for mainstreaming to takeplace

Stimuli, external and internal to the sector, thatcatalyze awareness of the need for mainstreaming

Mechanisms that initiate, enable, or drive main-streaming

Outcomes that are measurable indicators of the ef-fectiveness of mainstreaming

In the framework, the mainstreaming process wasdescribed as follows: Given that certain prerequi-

sites are in place, a set of specific stimuli can catalyseactivities which then lead to the identification of ap-propriate mechanisms, with the net result that effec-tive mainstreaming, as measured by outcomes, willhappen (Cowling et al. 2002).

Excerpted from Restoring Natural Capital edited by James Aronson,Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut. Copyright 2007 by IslandPress. Excerpted by permission of Island Press. All rights reserved. Nopart of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permis-sion in writing from the publisher. Island Press grants permission toforward this unaltered electronic document to friends, colleagues,and other interested parties.

1.

2.

3.

4.


27/97

River Futures An Integrative Scientific Approachto River Repair

Edited by Gary J. Brierley andKirstie A. Fryirs

Cloth, $80.00, ISBN 978-1-59726-112-8

Paper, $40.00, ISBN 978-1-59726-113-5

2008. 365 pages. 8 x 10

Contents

Preface xiii

PART I. The Emerging Process of River Repair 1

Chapter 1. Moves Toward an Era of River Repair 3Gary J. Brierley and Kirstie A. Fryirs

The Emerging Process of River Repair 4The Emergence of Integrative River Science 8

Framing Our Goals in the Process of River Repair 11Structure of the Book 12

Chapter 2. Vision Generation: What Do We Seek to Achieve in River Rehabilitation? 16Darren Ryder, Gary J. Brierley, Richard Hobbs, Garreth Kyle, and Michelle Leishman

Using a Guiding Image to Set Rehabilitation Goals 17Scientific Considerations in Vision Generation 18Assessing Rehabilitation Success 18Socioeconomic Considerations: An Inclusive Approach to Vision Generation 20


28/9728 River Futures


Incorporating a Guiding Image into Successful River Rehabilitation Practice 22Conclusion 24

Chapter 3. Turbulence and Train Wrecks: Using Knowledge Strategies to theEnhance Application of Integrative River Science to Effective River Management 28 Andrew Boulton, Herv Pigay, and Mark D. Sanders

Sources of Turbulence 28Reducing Turbulence with Shared Beliefs: Tenets and Commitments 29Seeking Solvable Problems: Comparative Analysis of Knowledge Structures 31Four Logical Steps to Evaluate Knowledge Structures 34Strategies for Constructing Solvable Problems: Difficulties and Potential Solutions 34Conclusion 36

PART II. An Integrative Scientific Perspective to Guide the Process of River Repair 41

Chapter 4. The Spatial Organization of River Systems 43 Carola Cullum, Gary J. Brierley, and Martin Thoms

Perspectives on the Spatial Organization of River Systems 45An Integrated Perspective: Analyzing River Systems as Spatially Nested Hierarchies 53Challenges in Determining Scales and Patch Boundaries 55Biotic Implications of the Spatial Arrangement of Geomorphic Process Domains 58Management Implications 59Conclusion 61

Chapter 5. Working with Change: The Importance of Evolutionary Perspectives inFraming the Trajectory of River Adjustment 65

Gary J. Brierley, Kirstie A. Fryirs, Andrew Boulton, and Carola CullumContemporary River Dynamics in Their Evolutionary Context 66Scales and Forms of Geomorphic Adjustment 69Linkages between Abiotic and Biotic Adjustments along Rivers 71Conceptualizing River Evolution and Recovery as a Basis for

Management Planning and Action 74Examples of River Trajectories 75Place-Based Conceptual Modeling 77Conclusion 81

Chapter 6. Ecological Function in Rivers: Insights from Crossdisciplinary Science 85

Sarah Mika, Andrew Boulton, Darren Ryder, and Daniel Keating Interactions between Structure and Function 86Interactions between Structure and Function in Space and Time 87Connectivity within Riverine Ecosystems 90Examples of Crossdisciplinary Research on Ecological Function 92Conclusion 95

Chapter 7. Principles of River Condition Assessment 100 Kirstie A. Fryirs, Angela Arthington, and James Grove


29/9729

Chapter 8 : Social and Biophysical Connectivity of River Systems

Quick Links: SER Restoration Reader TOCRiver Futures TOCBuy River Futures

Purposes of River Condition Assessments 101Ecosystem Integrity as a Basis for Assessing Biophysical River Condition 101Integrating Abiotic and Biotic Factors in Assessments of River Condition 103What Is Natural or Expected? Defining Reference Conditions 106

Indicators That Provide a Reliable and Relevant Measure of theBiophysical Condition of Rivers 108Considerations in the Design and Application of Integrative Frameworks for

Assessing Biophysical Condition 110Integrating Tools for Assessing River Condition 111Conclusion 118

Chapter 8. Social and Biophysical Connectivity of River Systems 125 Mick Hillman, Gary J. Brierley, and Kirstie A. Fryirs

Connectivity and River Health 126Forms, Patterns, and Changes to Physical (Dis)Connectivity 127

Social (Dis)Connectivity 129Contrasting Sub-Catchments from the Hunter Valley, New South Wales 133Interbasin Transfers: The Snowy Hydro Scheme 137(Dis)Connectivity: Themes for Integrative River Management 138Synthesis: Sustainability, Health, Justice, and Policy in Addressing (Dis)Connectivity 140Conclusion 142

PART III. International Rerspectives on the Process of River Repair 147

Chapter 9. The Australian River Management Experience 149

Kirstie A. Fryirs, Bruce Chessman, Mick Hillman, David Outhet, and Alexandra SpinkSetting the Scene: The Australian Landscape and Historical Setting 149Biophysical Themes in Australian River Management Practice: What Is Achievable? 153The Organizational Context of Australian River Management Practice:

The Capacity to Do Something 155Social Themes in Australian River Management Practice:

Community Will to Do Something 164Integration and Future Challenges 165Conclusion 169

Chapter 10. River Management in the United States 174

Ellen Wohl, Margaret Palmer, and G. Mathias Kondolf How Healthy Are Rivers in the United States? 174Policy and Legal Framework 176Contemporary Pressures and Constraints on Water Resources 177Likely Future Influences on River Management 180Strategies for River Protection and Rehabilitation 180Examples of River Rehabilitation 186Conclusion 197




Chapter 11. Integrative River Science and Rehabilitation: European Experiences 203 Herv Pigay, Larissa A. Naylor, Gertrud Haidvogl, Jochem Kail, Laurent Schmitt,and Laurent Bourdin

The Emergence of Integrative River Science in European Countries 205Integrative Sciences in Pioneer Rehabilitation Programs 207Challenges Approaching Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive 214Conclusion 219

Chapter 12. The Light and Dark of Sabo-Dammed Streams in Steepland Settings in Japan 222 Tomomi Marutani, Shun-ichi Kikuchi, Seiji Yanai, and Kaori Kochi

Why Have We Developed the Sabo Dam Country? 222Discontinuity of Geoecological Interactions along River Courses 226Management of Dammed Streams 234Conclusion 236

Chapter 13. Application of Integrative Science in the Management of South African Rivers 239 Kate M. Rowntree and Leanne du Preez

South African Water Legislation, Agenda 21, and South African River Management 240The Reserve as an Example of South African Management Frameworks 241Future Fluvial Geomorphologies 246Integrative Science and the Future of South African River Management 250Conclusion 253

PART IV. Managing the Process of River Repair 257

Chapter 14. Restoring Uncertainty: Translating Science into Management Practice 259 Mick Hillman and Gary J. Brierley

Sources of Uncertainty in the Management of River Systems 262The Assessment of Condition in River Management: Characteristics and Uncertainty 266Uncertainty and Sustainability 268Living with Uncertainty in the Era of River Repair 270Conclusion 270

Chapter 15. River Futures 275 Gary J. Brierley, Kirstie A. Fryirs, and Mick Hillman

The Emerging Process of River Repair 275Using Coherent Scientific Information to Guide the Process of River Repair 277Managing the Process of River Repair 278Conclusion 284

About the Contributors 287

Index 299


31/9731



From chapter 8, Social and Biophysical Connec-

tivity of River Systems, by Mick Hillman, Gary J.Brierley, and Kirstie A. Fryirs

Place is the location . . . where the social and thenatural meet.

Dirlik 2001, 18

Successful integrative river management requires anunderstanding of the links between natural and cul-tural landscapes, ensuring that institutional and com-munity values are meaningfully incorporated in theprocess of environmental repair (Harris 2006). Co-herent approaches to the assessment of river healthintegrate biophysical and social dimensions of environmental condition, building on the relationshipbetween healthy rivers as products of, and in turnpromoting, healthy societies. Understanding andworking with the concept of connectivity across boththe biophysical and social dimensions is a core com-

ponent of this relationship. A connected approachto integrative river management aims for a dialoguebetween scientific understanding and community values. Applying this principle therefore means un-derstanding both catchment-scale biophysical link-ages and community perceptions of what constitutesa healthy river. Such understandings are specific totime and place, militating against the application ofgeneric models and assumptions.

Contemporary perceptions of river health are con-tingent upon present and past connections betweenpeople and their river. They encompass a range ofpotential uses and values. However, in the large body

of literature influenced by Eurocentric ideas of land-scape, healthy rivers are often romanticized as single,continuous, constantly flowing channels (Kondolf2006). Postcolonial societies have afforded rivers alimited range of uses, and systems are expressed ashealthy only if conditions suitable for these uses aremaintained. Disconnection in a river system, wheth -er it is the presence of isolated pools in river chan -nels or ephemeral tributaries, has been portrayed asan undesirable and unsustainable state (Kondolf et al.2006). This contrasts with the recognition of variableand changing forms of connection and disconnection

in many indigenous cultures (Smolyak 2001; James2006). Recognition of the variable and changing pat-terns of connectivity across time and space, and be-tween social and biophysical dimensions, is a corecomponent of integrative river management.Whether appraised in biophysical or social terms,landscapes, ecosystems, and communities can berelatively connected or disconnected. For river man-agement to be successful and relevant it is importantto recognize that biophysical disconnection may benatural and healthy at a given time and place. For this

reason we use the term (dis)connectivity to refer todynamic patterns of connection and disconnection.For example, disconnected and isolated parts of riv-er systems may shelter distinct genetic populationsof species and unique floristic and faunal attributes(Sheldon et al. 2002; Bunn et al. 2006). Likewise, hu-man (dis)connectivity with rivers has often been me-diated by cultural factors, particularly in indigenoussocieties through taboos, totems, and sacred sites thatare the result of co-evolution with landscapes overmany generations (Rose 1999; Townsend et al. 2004).However, in more recent history, biophysical discon-

nection has often been imposed through the con-struction of barriers, while social disconnection hasresulted from appropriation and enclosure of ripar-ian land or in response to rapidly developing percep-tions by local communities of the river as polluted,unhealthy, or as bringer of damaging floods. Presentday disconnection is often the legacy of an earlierfocus on narrow and exclusive uses of the river forirrigation, discharge of effluent, or navigation. This

About This Excerpt

River Futures provides a holistic overview ofconsiderations that underpin the use of sciencein river management, emphasizing cross-disci-plinary understanding. This excerpt from chap -ter 8 introduces the notion of connectivity asan integrating theme, relating biophysical no-tions of landscape and ecosystem connectivity(or disconnectivity) to social relationships toplace.




type of disconnection is referred to by Ward (2001)as geo-environmental disconnection, the product oftechnocentric efforts to forge landscapes for agricul -ture, industry, and recreation. Conversely, biophysi -

cal and social connections may have been imposedthrough the development of irrigation systems insemi-arid landscapes.

In this chapter, we argue that imposed, arbitrary(dis)connectivity based on a narrowly defined or ex-clusive use of water is unhealthy in river managementand is ultimately unsustainable and unjust. Such(dis)connectivity reduces community understandingof, and concern for, our rivers, while allowing domi-nant and environmentally damaging uses and prac-

tices to continue. It also promotes feelings of inequity,distributing costs and benefits through top-downdecisions or decrees. On the other hand, broad andholistic (dis)connectivity in its many forms stronglyimplies the convergence of social and biophysicalperspectives and acknowledgment of a wider rangeof values as a vital step in the process of river repair.Transdisciplinary work on links between ecologicaland community health and well-being indicates thatthe healthy appreciation of the inherent diversity and variability of river systems is an integral part of heal-ing our relationship to the natural world (Costanzaand Mageau 1999; Connor et al. 2004). Based onthese guiding principles, this chapter uses a transdis-ciplinary and place-based analysis of biophysical andsocial (dis)connectivity to:

Examine the broad links between connectivity andriver health.

Describe the biophysical and social forms andchanging patterns of connection and disconnec-

tion within a river system and between people andthat system.

Analyze key themes in the interrelationship be-tween the biophysical and social dimensions of(dis)connectivity through case examples.

Highlight implications of these themes in the development of just and sustainable approaches tothe management of healthy rivers.

1.

2.

3.

4.

Connectivity and River Health

The view of river health outlined in chapter 7 focuseson external, biophysical, and verifiable indicators ofriver condition. Often such indicators are specific toparticular disciplines and scales. However, given thatrivers epitomize the links between landscapes andecosystems (Jungwirth et al. 2002), a practical un-derstanding of biophysical linkages is crucial in pro-ducing the mature knowledge that is increasinglyrequired for effective integrated ecosystem manage-ment (Lake 2001; Dunn 2004). This is in itself a major challenge, since complex indicators of river condi-tion, such as connectivity itself, have proved difficultto quantify both for conceptual reasons and becauseof scientific concern over valid descriptors and rigorof resultant data (Dunn 2004).A complementary but distinct view of river health isone based on the idea of social connection, in whichhealth is about people developing, maintaining, orlosing interaction with the river. Integral to thinkingabout the way people connect and disconnect withrivers is the broad geographical notion of place as so-cially constructed (Massey 2005), and of a sense ofplace as individually interpreted rather than havingone particular essence. The notion of place-identi-ty has been used to describe this social dimension ofconnection: it can be said to represent the physicalsettings importance for a persons identity. Researchin place-identity suggests that an individual has morecomplex relations to the environment than simplyliving in it (Wester-Herber 2004, 111).

Connection through place-identity is fundamental tocommunity engagement in river management pro-grammes, fostering a sense of commitment, buildingsocial capital, and allowing local knowledge a role inplanning (Hillman et al. 2003; Thompson and Pep-perdine 2003). Place-identity also highlights the needto think of health in terms of both biophysical indica-

tors and human-nature relationships (Brierley et al.2006b). However, the establishment of place-identityis a necessary prerequisite rather than an inherentlysufficient condition for river healththere is no rea-son to argue that some good use-values create place-identity and others do not. Our point here is thatwithout such connection, the relationships that sus-tain integrative river management cannot be forgedand that narrow and exclusive values will prevail.


33/9733



The nexus between biophysical and community healthin major river rehabilitation strategies has been ex-pressed in practice in several forms. For instance, theLoire Vivante (Living Loire) program aims to lead

people back to the river, while the Mersey BasinCampaign includes in its vision the goal of increasingthe valuing of the river by its community. The Dutchpolicy of Space for the River aims to maintain floodprotection in the face of increased design discharges,while at the same time conserving landscape, ecolog-ical, and historical features (Cals and van Drimmelen2000). The Victorian River Health Strategy includesthe objective of maintaining the rivers place in ourcollective history with the overall aim that our com-munities will be confident and capable, appreciating

the values of their rivers, understanding their depen-dency on healthy rivers and actively participating indecision-making (Victorian Government 2002, 3).The next sections develop a conceptual frame-

work for exploring forms of biophysical and social(dis)connectivity in river systems, providing a lenson this integrative approach and on a condition-con-nection notion of health.

Excerpted from River Futures: An Integrative Scientific Approach to Riv-er Repair edited by Gary J. Brierley and Kirstie A. Fryirs. Copyright 2008 by Island Press. Excerpted by permission of Island Press. All r ightsreserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprintedwithout permission in writing from the publisher. Island Press grantspermission to forward this unaltered electronic document to friends,colleagues, and other interested parties.


34/97

A R G

C A C O Y T M

R T O

R A T

O N

Large-Scale EcosystemRestorationFive Case Studies from the United States

Edited by Mary Doyle and Cynthia A. Drew

Cloth, $70.00, ISBN 978-1-59726-025-1

Paper, $35.00, ISBN 978-1-59726-026-8

2008. 352 pages. 6 x 9

Maps, figures, index

Contents

Introduction: The Watershed-Wide, Science-Based Approach to Ecosystem Restoration xi Mary Doyle

PART I. The Everglades 1

Chapter 1. The Challenges of Restoring the Everglades Ecosystem 5Terrence Rock Salt, Stuart Langton, and Mary Doyle

Chapter 2. Everglades Ecology: The Impacts of Altered Hydrology 33Thomas L. Crisman

Chapter 3. Rivers of Plans for the River of Grass: The Political Economy of Everglades Restoration 44Stephen Polasky

PART II. The Platte River 55Chapter 4. Negotiating for Endangered and Threatened Species Habitat in the Platte River Basin 59 David M. Freeman

Chapter 5. Platte River Basin Ecology: A Three-Dimensional Approach to Adaptive Management 89Thomas L. Crisman

Chapter 6. Navigating the Shoals: Costs and Benets of Platte River Ecosystem Management 100Stephen Polasky


35/9735

Chapter 6: Navigating the Shoals: Costs and Benefits of Platte River Ecosystem Management

Quick Links: SER Restoration Reader TOCLarge-Scale Ecosystem Restoration TOCBuy Large-Scale Ecosystem Restoration

PART III. T

ser restoration reader

Documents