SER REstoration reader

Richard J. Hobbs, and Margaret A. Palmer and Margaret J. Hobbs, Richard Editorial Board: Donald A. Falk, Donald Board: Editorial Associate Editor: Karen D. Holl D. Karen Editor: Associate Series Editor: James Aronson James Editor: Series

Part I: The Foundation Volumes I: The Foundation Part Ecological Restoration Series Series Restoration Ecological The Science and Practice of of Practice and Science The

Highlights from from Highlights Society for Ecological Restoration Ecological for Society Int r o d uct i on The SER Restoration Reader

It’s now or never. As , species, and ecological communities suffer accelerating decline as a result of hu- man activities—and human communities suffer from loss of services and impacts of —restoration is becoming an essential component of conservation and manage- ment approaches. Around the globe, restorationists are tackling difficult problems, working to repair rivers damaged by diversions and destruction, restore healthy forest ecosystems, repair grasslands whose ecological interactions have been severely disrupted . In rich and poor countries alike, restoration is a conduit for hope through local, -based projects as well as through strategies for global .

Why “The Science and Practice of Ecological Restoration” Book Series? In response to the exploding worldwide interest in restoration, the Society for Ecological Restora- tion International and Island Press created a book series, “The Science and Practice of Ecological Restoration.” As the title suggests, our aim is to create an international forum devoted to advanc- ing restoration science and practice, as well as promoting their integration with the conservation sciences. This series offers practical knowledge, field-tested solutions, inspiration, and scientific insight from experienced practitioners and scientists that will allow restoration to become the powerful healing tool and integrative science that the world so clearly needs.

Here is Your Free Sampler of the Series We’ve created this free Restoration Reader so that you can see the breadth and depth of the se- ries—and determine which books meet your needs. The Reader is organized in four separate easy-to-download files, like the sections of a book: Part I: Foundation Volumes If you are new to restoration, you will find a basic orientation to the field in these books. If you are an experienced restorationist, you will find invaluable reference and “big-picture” information here. Dip into these books for a glimpse of the scope, the scientific and philosophical underpin- nings, and the promise of restoration. Part II: Restoration of Damaged Ecosystems These books describe the nuts and bolts of restoration: the science, practice, and policy of repair- ing damaged ecosystems around the world, from arid lands to forests to river ecosystems. Ex- perienced practitioners and leading researchers share hands-on experience and accounts of both

 ISLAND PRESS Solutions that inspire change. Int r o d uct i on The SER Restoration Reader

success and failure, and offer recommendations for future research and effective applica- tion of the principles of this field. Part III: Valuable Tools and References Restoration is a multidisciplinary, multifaceted field, drawing on techniques and knowl- edge from a wide variety of other disciplines, including oral history, dendrochronology, wildlife , and many branches of . We invite you to sample these books to view the range and richness of information that may help you with your own projects or research. Part IV: Practitioner Volumes We’ve developed these books specifically in response to requests from those of you who spend your days out in the field. You asked for short books that focus on practical in- formation rather than theory—and that people without recent scientific training could understand. Please sample these “practitioner” books. We think you will find not only the how-to resources you need but also the inspiration and community that will help to keep your work moving forward.

This file (the one you are looking at) is Part I: Foundation Volumes Please take some time to browse the other three parts, as well. Together, these files rep- resent the multidisciplinary, multifaceted work of ecological restoration. As you peruse these samples of the emerging literature on restoration, we hope that you will find the science, how-to information, references, and companionship of purpose that will facilitate your current work. Please share this Reader with your colleagues and friends.

How To Use This Reader We’ve made these PDFs easy to navigate. Each file has its own table of contents, with links to excerpts from each book and the book’s table of contents. You can • Click the book image or title in the Reader’s contents to jump to that book’s excerpt. • Click from one excerpt to another in any order using the Reader’s contents as the navigation tool. • Click on the links at the beginning of each book’s excerpt to go to the Island Press Web site for more information or to buy the book.

islandpress.org/readers  • Click on one of the quick links on the upper right page of each book excerpt to buy the book, jump to that book’s contents, or jump back to the Reader’s table of contents. • Use the Bookmarks feature in Adobe Reader to jump between excerpts and the Reader’s contents. To access Bookmarks in Adobe 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 an e-mail attachment and/or pass on this link, where a free download is available: www.islandpress.org/ser. We believe that ecological restoration will become, as noted biologist and conservationist Edward O. Wil- son has predicted, one of the keystones of ecology and environmental protection for the twenty-first cen- tury. We hope you agree, and that you’ll share this Reader with your friends and colleagues.

Stay in Touch with Island Press—Let’s Work Together for Change When you visit our Web site—www.islandpress.org—you can sign up on our e-mail lists so that you’ll receive news and information about new books in the series other restoration developments. We welcome your feedback. You can contact us any time at . As part of the grow- ing worldwide restoration community, we want to support your good work with books on topics that will help you achieve your goals.

 ISLAND PRESS Solutions that inspire change. Part I: Foundation Volumes C ont e nt New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration 7 Edited by Richard J. Hobbs, Katharine N. Suding Excerpt taken from chapter 2, “Critical Transitions and Regime Shifts in Ecosystems: Consolidating Recent Advances,” by Ste- phen R. Carpenter and Marten Scheffer s

Ecological Restoration: Principles, Values, and Structure of an Emerging Profession 15 By Andre F. Clewell and James Aronson Excerpt taken from chapter 10, “Project Roles and Contexts”

Foundations of 22 Edited by Donald A. Falk, Margaret A. Palmer, and Joy B. Zedler Excerpt taken from chapter 9, “The Dynamic of Ecologi- cal Systems: Multiple States and Restoration Trajectories,” by Katharine N. Suding and Katherine L. Gross

islandpress.org/readers  Part I: Foundation Volumes cont e nt

Restoring Natural Capital: Science, Business, and Practice 27 Edited by James Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut s Excerpt taken from chapter 34, “Mainstreaming the Restoration of Natural Capital: A Conceptual and Operational Framework,” by Richard M. Cowling, Shirley M. Pierce, and Ayanda M. Sigwela

 ISLAND PRESS Solutions that inspire change. 1 3 22 33 50 63 2 5- 26-18 26-184-5 97 97

366 pages. 7 x 10 Application to Restoration Whisenant Elizabeth G. King and Steven Lawrence R. Walker and Roger del Moral Lawrence R. Walker and 4. Inference about Complex Ecosystem Dynamics in Ecological Research Restoration Practice Arne Schröder 5. Thresholds in Ecological and Linked Social–Ecological Systems: Recent Advances Advances Recent Stephen R. Carpenter and Marten Scheffer 3. Transition Dynamics in Succession: Implications for Rates, Trajectories, and Restoration 1. Models of Ecosystem Dynamics as Frameworks for Restoration Ecology 1. Models of Ecosystem Dynamics Hobbs Katharine N. Suding and Richard J. Shifts in Ecosystems: Consolidating 2. Critical Transitions and Regime

5 ISBN 978-1- loth, $90.00, I. Background: Concepts and Models Part Contents 2009. figures, case studies, index. Tables, C 5 ISBN 978-1- .00, $45 Paper,

Dynamics and Restoration and Dynamics Edited by Suding Katharine N. Richard J. Hobbs and New Models for Ecosystem Ecosystem for Models New new models for ecosystem dynamics and restoration SER Restoration Reader

6. Resilience Theory in Models of Rangeland Ecology and Restoration: The Evolution and Application of a Paradigm 78 Brandon T. Bestelmeyer, Kris M. Havstad, Bolormaa Damindsuren, Guodong Han, Joel R. Brown, Jeffrey E. Herrick, Caitriana M. Steele, and Debra P. C. Peters

Part II. Dynamics and Restoration of Different Ecosystem Types 97

Arid Ecosystems 7. Long-Term Dynamics and Rehabilitation of Woody Ecosystems in Dryland South Island, New Zealand 99 Susan Walker, Ellen Cieraad, Adrian Monks, Larry Burrows, Jamie Wood, Robbie Price, Geoff Rogers, and Bill Lee

8. Dryland Dynamics and Restoration: Perspectives for the Use of Climatic Swings 112 Milena Holmgren

Grassland, Woodland, and Savanna Ecosystems 9. Developing Data-Driven Descriptive Models for Californian Grasslands 124 James W. Bartolome, Randall D. Jackson, and Barbara H. Allen-Diaz 10. Management and Restoration in African Savannas: Interactions and Feedbacks 136 Mahesh Sankaran and T. Michael Anderson 11. Rapid Internal Plant–Soil Feedbacks Lead to Alternative Stable States in Temperate Australian Grassy Woodlands 156 Suzanne M. Prober, Ian D. Lunt, and John W. Morgan 12. A Revised State-and-Transition Model for the Restoration of Woodlands in Western Australia 169 Rachel J. Standish, Viki A. Cramer, and Colin J. Yates

Forest Ecosystems 13. A State-and-Transition Model for the Recovery of Abandoned Farmland in New Zealand 189 Rachel J. Standish, Ashley D. Sparrow, Peter A. Williams, and Richard J. Hobbs 14. Dynamics and Restoration of Australian Tropical and Subtropical Rainforests 206 John Kanowski, Robert M. Kooyman, and Carla P. Catterall

 New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration Quick Links: ▶ Buy New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration ▶ New Models TOC ▶ SER Restoration Reader TOC

Wetland Ecosystems 15. Interactions between Lesser Snow Geese and Arctic Coastal Vegetation Leading to Alternative Stable States 221 I. Tanya Handa and Robert L. Jefferies 16. Feedbacks That Might Sustain Natural, Invaded, and Restored States in Herbaceous Wetlands 236 Joy B. Zedler 17. Development of Conceptual Models for Ecological Regime Change in Temporary Australian Wetlands 259 Lien L. Sim, Jenny A. Davis, and Jane M. Chambers

Production Landscapes 18. State-and-Transition Models for Mining Restoration in Australia 280 Carl Grant 19. An Model for Landscape-Scale Restoration in South Australia 295 Peter Cale and Nigel Willoughby 20. Alternative Stable States for Planning and Implementing Restoration of Production Systems in Michoacán, Mexico 311 Roberto Lindig-Cisneros

Part III. Synthesis: Implications for Theory and Practice 323 21. Synthesis: Are New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics Scientifically Robust and Helpful in Guiding Restoration Projects? 325 Richard J. Hobbs and Katharine N. Suding

Editors 335

Contributors 337

Index 345

Chapter 2: Critical Transitions and Regime Shifts in Ecosystems: Consolidating Recent Advances  SER Restoration Reader

About This Excerpt 2008). Distinguishing and evaluating the many kinds of critical transitions is a topic of current This book arose from the perception that the and rapidly evolving research (Carpenter 2003; link between theory and practice in ecology Scheffer and Carpenter 2003; Scheffer 2008). and, in particular, restoration ecology, is not as strong as it could be. There are interesting Many important problems of new ideas about how ecosystems work com- involve instabilities of ecosystems driven by ing from both the theoretical and the practi- factors such as climate, hydrologic flows, fire cal side. This book brings people together regime, or nutrient input (Ives and Carpenter who have been working at the forefront of 2007). At a very general level, these phenomena developing new conceptual models for eco- may appear similar. Yet regime shifts that appear system dynamics with the people who are us- similar on the surface may have vastly different ing these models in applied settings, in order ecological explanations and require distinctly to examine them critically and, where pos- different kinds of models. To build knowledge sible, to test them to assess their applicabil- of any particular case, models must be brought ity in restoration practice. In this excerpt from into harmony with field observations, a process chapter 2, Stephen R. Carpenter and Marten that may take many years of research. Useful Scheffer take up recent advances in ways of models grounded firmly in data tend to be tai- evaluating large changes, or regime shifts, in lored for particular applications; general models ecosystems. lack the specificity needed to address the details of particular regime shifts or critical transitions. Excerpt taken from chapter 2, “Critical Tran- Thus, we can expect a diversification of models sitions and Regime Shifts in Ecosystems: as we develop more specific approaches for dif- Consolidating Recent Advances,” by Stephen ferent kinds of change in ecosystems. R. Carpenter and Marten Scheffer To illustrate the characteristics of some useful Concepts of are as complex kinds of models, this chapter summarizes two and changeable as the discipline of ecology it- case studies of regime shifts: eutrophication self. Even ecosystems that appear stable are and trophic cascades. A superficial initial glance dynamic: Carbon and nutrients are cycling, or- might suggest that each could be ganisms are going through their life cycles, and modeled as a simple externally forced switch. species are interacting. In this sense, ecosystems On closer examination, it becomes clear that can be stable for certain periods of time within something more complex is going on. For each specified spatial boundaries. At other space and case study, the more successful models are quite time scales, ecosystems change in the sense that different from a simple switch. species composition, species interactions, or eco- The models share some mathematical similari- system process rates have discernible trends or ties, but important details are different in each cycles. Some changes are gradual, incremental, case. This chapter focuses on ecological under- and predictable. Other changes are large, sud- standing and cites the primary papers for the den, and perhaps unexpected. details of the models. For each case, we address Here we are interested in large changes, or re- three questions that are important for ecological gime shifts, in ecosystems (Carpenter 2003). restoration. (1) Can the regime shift be antici- Some regime shifts may simply be due to a sud- pated and, if so, how specific is the forecast? (2) den large change in an external driver (such Can the regime shift be prevented or promoted? as the impact of volcanic eruption on nearby (3) Is the regime shift reversible and, if so, how vegetation). Other regime shifts involve critical do you do that? We close by comparing the cas- transitions in which the ecosystem gradually es and pointing to some frontiers. becomes more fragile until a relatively small triggers a regime shift (Scheffer

10 New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration Quick Links: ▶ Buy New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration ▶ New Models TOC ▶ SER Restoration Reader TOC

Eutrophication in Deep and Shallow Lakes tain situations, eutrophication is not reversible by input reductions alone; additional steps are From the earliest days of limnology, scientists needed to decrease recycling from sediments recognized that some lakes were clear (oligotro- (Cooke et al. 2005). phic) and others turbid and green from blooms of phytoplankton (eutrophic) (Schindler 2006). Eutrophication can be predicted with moder- Blooms of toxic cyanobacteria and deoxygen- ate precision because we now have quantitative ation in eutrophic lakes cause a host of problems, data from many different lakes. However, the such as fish kills, health problems for people and threshold for nonlinear behavior is uncertain livestock, increased costs of water treatment, and highly variable (Carpenter 2003; Carpen- and loss of recreational uses of lakes (Smith et ter and Lathrop in press). Model studies show al. 2006). Eutrophication is caused by excessive that concentrations of phytoplankton and wa- ter phosphorus become more variable at expo- nutrient inputs. With expanding urbanization nentially growing rates as the threshold is ap- and intensification of agriculture, eutrophic proached, and these changes can be discerned lakes have become more common. By about 1970, it was well established that phosphorus is the key driver of eutrophication in most lakes (Schindler 2006). Starting in the late 1960s, many governments began to curb inputs of phospho- rus and other nutrients to surface waters in or- der to reduce eutrophication. Responses to re- duced nutrient inputs were variable: Some lakes recovered rapidly, others recovered after some delay, and others did not recover over long pe- riods of time (National Research Council 1992; Carpenter et al. 1999; Carpenter 2003; Jeppesen et al. 2005). Variable responses of lakes to reduction of nu- trient inputs are explained by time lags in the phosphorus cycle (fig. 2.1). Two mechanisms are involved: recycling from sediments and erosion  Figure 2.1. Major pools and flows of phosphorus in lake of phosphorus-rich soils (Carpenter et al. 1999; eutrophication (boxes and black arrows) and key drivers (gray Carpenter 2003, 2005). Excessive use of fertiliz- arrows). Modified from Carpenter (2003). ers for agriculture increases phosphorus content of soils (Bennett et al. 2001). Because of the large mass and long residence time of phosphorus in in time-series data using relatively simple statis- watershed soils, a decrease in fertilizer use may tical models (Carpenter and Brock 2006). How- not decrease phosphorus runoff to surface wa- ever, managers would need to respond rapidly ters for several centuries (Carpenter 2005). Man- and effectively to block phosphorus transport agement must reduce transport of phosphorus, when an approaching threshold is detected. not just its use, to mitigate eutrophication. Re- Eutrophication can be prevented by treating cycling is related to buildup of phosphorus in municipal sewage to low phosphorus concen- lake sediment. At low phosphorus concentra- trations and adjusting agricultural phosphorus tions, phosphorus is retained by sediments, and applications (fertilizer plus manure) to match recycling rates are low. As phosphorus concen- crop demand. Lakes that have become eutro- trations build past a threshold, recycling rates phic can be treated by several existing technolo- become rapid enough to sustain eutrophication gies (Cooke et al. 2005). Typically, the reversal for a time even if inputs are decreased. In cer- of eutrophication requires decreasing the inputs

Chapter 2: Critical Transitions and Regime Shifts in Ecosystems: Consolidating Recent Advances 11 SER Restoration Reader of phosphorus and sometimes additional inter- changes dramatically (fig. 2.2). Invertebrates that ventions to reduce recycling or increase outputs are associated with vegetation disappear along of phosphorus. with the birds and fishes that feed on them or on Shallow lakes are distinct from deep ones in some the plants. Importantly, vegetation also provides peculiar aspects of their functioning. Like their an important refuge against for many deep counterparts, they have a tendency to slip animals, and hence its disappearance causes cru- into one of two alternative stable states. Those cial shifts in many predator–prey relationships. states are so strikingly different that much work Large zooplankton use vegetation as a daytime has been done to unravel why this is so and what refuge against fish predation. In vegetated lakes explains the occasional dramatic shifts between they can contribute significantly to the control of them (Moss et al. 1996; Jeppesen et al. 1998; Schef- phytoplankton . In the absence of vegeta- fer 1998). The pristine state of the majority of shal- tion their numbers are strongly reduced. The lack low lakes is probably one of clear water and rich of large zooplankton and the increased nutrient submerged vegetation. Just as in deep lakes, an availability allow phytoplankton biomass to be over-load of nutrients has changed this situation higher in the absence of vegetation. In addition, in many cases. The lakes have shifted from clear wave resuspension of the unprotected sediment to turbid, and with the increase in turbidity, sub- can cause considerable additional turbidity once merged plants have largely disappeared. Restora- the vegetation has vanished. The fish communi- tion of nonvegetated turbid shallow lakes to the ty of unvegetated lakes becomes dominated by clear vegetated state is notoriously difficult. Nu- species that forage on sediment-dwelling, small trient recycling from the sediment, as described animals such as worms and various insect larvae. for deep lakes, plays a role in shallow lakes. How- Their activity promotes the nutrient flux from the ever, such internal loading is not the only reason sediment into the water and causes an extra re- why restoration of turbid shallow lakes is diffi- suspension of sediment particles, contributing to cult. With the disappearance of aquatic vegeta- the already high turbidity. tion, the structure of the shallow lake community Return of submerged plants in this situation is unlikely because their absence has allowed a further increase in turbidity. Also, because the frequent disturbance of sedi- ment by wind and by fish that forage on animals that live in the sediment hampers reset- tlement. Ecological feedback mechanisms are thus an im- portant reason why restora- tion of the vegetated clear wa- ter state is difficult. In many cases, nutrient reduction alone may be insufficient to restore the clear state in shallow lakes. Additional measures, how- ever, such as removal of part of the fish stock and alteration of the water level, have been  Figure 2.2. Feedbacks that may cause a vegetation-dominated state and a turbid state successfully used as a way to to be alternative equilibria. The qualitative effect of each route in the diagram can be break the feedback that keeps computed by multiplying the signs along the way. This shows that both the vegetated and the turbid state are self-reinforcing (inset). Modified from Scheffer (1998). such lakes turbid.

12 New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration Quick Links: ▶ Buy New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration ▶ New Models TOC ▶ SER Restoration Reader TOC

Trophic Cascades and Trophic Triangles to predator , whereas the shift in the North American lakes went in the opposite di- Fish communities sometimes undergo regime rection. The cases differ in numerous other eco- shifts with sharp increases in some species and logical details. Yet at a higher level of abstraction sharp decreases in others (Steele 1998; Walters the mechanism that explains the sharpness of the and Martell 2004; Mullon et al. 2005). When re- shifts and their potential irreversibility is rather gime shifts affect an entire or a key- similar. The idea has been dubbed “cultivation- stone species with a broad diet, changes 26 back- ” by Walters and Kitchell (2001): ground: concepts and models cascade through A forage fish species is preyed on by adults of multiple trophic levels to affect even ecosystem a piscivorous species of fish but preys itself on production, respiration, and nutrient cycling the juveniles of the piscivore. This trophic trian- (Carpenter and Kitchell 1993; Carpenter et al. gle (Ursin 1982) implies that the system can be 2001). driven toward dominance by either piscivores or A regime shift of current interest in the western forage fish through positive feedback. Once the Great Lakes region of North America is the inva- piscivore is dominant, it suppresses forage fish, sion of rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax) (Hrabik thereby releasing its own juveniles from preda- and Magnuson 1999). Rainbow smelt are plank- tion. By contrast, once forage fish are dominant tivores, but they also prey effectively on pelagic they may control piscivore , thereby larvae of other fish species, including larvae of ameliorating top-down control on themselves. piscivorous species such as walleye (Stizostedi- Different pressures may tip the balance between on vitreum). If densities of adult piscivores are a piscivore-dominated state and a forage fish– low, rainbow smelt can increase and dominated state. Walleye could tip the prevent recruitment of piscivores by consuming North American lakes to a rainbow smelt–domi- their larvae. By this mechanism even long-lived nated state (Walters and Kitchell 2001; Carpenter species such as walleye can eventually be elimi- and Brock 2004). Similarly, of cichlids nated from a lake (Carpenter et al. 2007). may have paved the way for a positive feedback Another well-known example of a drastic food toward Nile perch dominance of Lake Victoria web shift is the rise to dominance of Nile perch (Goudswaard 2006). However, other specific fac- (Lates niloticus) and the concomitant collapse of tors may play a crucial role in tipping the balance. haplochromine cichlids in Lake Victoria, Africa, For instance, lakes often lose fish refuge habitat in the 1980s. Although the Nile perch was intro- duced in 1954, an upsurge of its and distribution in the lake occurred around three decades later. The interaction between Nile perch and cichlids is comparable to that between wall- eye and rainbow smelt in the sense that the juve- niles of the predator (walleye and Nile perch) are vulnerable to predation by its forage fish (smelt and cichlids). It is thought that cichlids controlled Nile perch for decades until fisheries and eutro- phication suppressed cichlids enough to allow Nile perch to escape from control by predators (Goudswaard 2006).

There are striking similarities, as well as differ-  Figure 2.3. Changes in water quality, fish harvest, or habitat ences, between the regime shifts in Lake Victo- can cause regime shifts in the trophic triangle formed by adult ria and the North American lakes (fig. 2.3). An piscivores (fish that eat other fish), forage fish (fish that each obvious difference is that the regime shift in phytoplankton), and juvenile piscivores. Lake Victoria went from forage fish dominance

Chapter 2: Critical Transitions and Regime Shifts in Ecosystems: Consolidating Recent Advances 13 SER Restoration Reader through human modification of littoral zones (Sass et al. 2006; Carpenter et al. 2007), and this may lead to decline of piscivores such as walleye (Carpenter and Brock 2004). On the other hand, the demise of many cichlids in Lake Victoria may have been accelerated by eutrophication of the lake (Goudswaard 2006). Many regime shifts have been observed in fish communities, but often these are not predicted because monitoring data or models are not sufficient. Even fully controlled whole-lake manipulations of fish communities yield surpris- es (Carpenter and Kitchell 1993).

Excerpted from New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restora- tion, edited by Richard J. Hobbs and Katharine N. Suding. Copyright © 2009 by Island Press. Excerpted by permission of Island Press. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher. Island Press grants permission to forward this unaltered electronic docu- ment to friends, colleagues, and other interested parties.

14 New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration e colog i c a l res Ecological Restoration Principles, Values, and Structure of 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 to ra Figures, appendix, glossary, index

t i on Contents Dedication ix Preface xi Introduction 1

PART I. Introduction and Essential Background 5

Chapter 1. Essence of Restoration 7

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

Chapter 2. Ecological Impairment and Recovery 19

Virtual Field Trip 2. Restoring Cultural Landscapes in Central Chile 33 Carlos 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 70 George Ramseur Jr. and Andre F. Clewell SER Restoration Reader

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 People’s Well-Being in Southern India 112 Narayanan 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 Schäfer 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 Floc’h

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

16 Ecological Restoration Quick Links: ˈ Buy Ecological Restoration ˈ Ecological Restoration TOC ˈ SER Restoration Reader TOC

ect personnel with other titles; however, each About This Excerpt of these roles is filled by someone, regardless of his or her title. Every project has at least one The field of ecological restoration is a rapidly practitioner and sometimes many. Larger spon- growing discipline that encompasses a wide range of activities and brings together prac- soring organizations may add other levels to titioners and theoreticians from a variety of the organizational table for a project, such as an backgrounds and perspectives. In Ecological administrator to whom the project manager re- Restoration, Andre Clewell and James Aronson ports. Project organization becomes even more offer a long-awaited guide to the practice of complex as contractors and subcontractors are this ambitious and promising new discipline. included, with their own hierarchies of person- This excerpt examines the roles, contexts, nel and departments with project responsibility. and institutional structure of project work. We ignore these complexities and describe the basic project roles in this section.

Sponsor Excerpt taken from chapter 10, “Project Roles The organization or entity that undertakes and Plans” an ecological restoration project and assumes the responsibility for its accomplishment is its sponsor. A sponsor may be a government In this chapter we describe ecological restora- agency or a transnational organization; a for- tion projects from the perspective of their orga- profit firm or corporation; a nongovernment nization and structure. We begin with the roles organization (NGO); a philanthropic founda- various personnel play in the development tion; a school, university, or research institute; and execution of a project. Then we provide an a public museum, arboretum, or zoological outline of project contexts or circumstances in park; a professional association; a branch of the which projects are conducted. The various con- military; a monastery or other religious order; texts have different strengths and weaknesses, a tribal council of elders; a women’s self-help which we identify. We note how projects tend group, which are becoming increasingly com- to change over time from being exploratory and mon in India and Latin America; another kind experimental at first to refined and standardized of community-based organization (CBO); or an later. This information will let students and en- individual landowner or manager. The sponsor try-level personnel know what they can expect approves the restoration project, provides or at- and where they may want to concentrate their tracts funding, assembles personnel who will talents as their careers begin. As the chapter accomplish the project, provides an administra- progresses, we will present material of broader interest. tive structure, and provides oversight to ensure its satisfactory completion. The project may be Project Roles accomplished in house using the sponsor’s own employees or members, or some or all of the Who sponsors restoration projects? Who ad- work can be delegated to outside individuals, ministers them? Who makes decisions, and who consulting firms, or other organizations under carries them out? Every ecological restoration contract, purchase order, or some other agree- project requires personnel to fulfill certain roles, ment to provide services. Labor can be provided beginning with the project sponsor and con- by paid personnel or by volunteers who work tinuing with the restoration practitioner, project without monetary compensation. To a restora- director, restoration planner, and project man- tion practitioner who is contracted, the sponsor ager. In small or uncomplicated projects, the same person may assume two or more of these is usually known simply as the client. roles. Organization charts may identify proj-

Chapter 10 : Project Roles and Contexts 17 SER Restoration Reader

Practitioner that may be produced. The project director en- A restoration practitioner is someone who per- sures that executive officers, accountants, legal sonally conducts or supervises ecological resto- counsel, and other administrative officers of the ration in the field at project sites. Specifically, sponsoring organization understand the project practitioners engage in project implementation and carry out their respective responsibilities. and aftercare. In many projects, practitioners The project director represents the project before additionally inventory a project site before the the board of directors, philanthropic founda- initiation of restoration activities, select and in- tions, public officials, stakeholders, and the gen- ventory reference sites, prepare project plans, eral public or delegates these duties to others. conduct or supervise site preparation activities, and monitor project sites that have undergone Restoration Planner restoration. In other projects, sponsors delegate The restoration planner (or a planning staff) these responsibilities to others. A practitioner prepares project plans, including maps, draw- can be an employee of an organization that is ings, and written instructions as needed. Ide- conducting ecological restoration, or a consul- ally, the practitioner contributes substantially to tant, contractor, subcontractor, or volunteer who the planning process or even serves as the plan- is engaged by that organization. A practitioner ner, as commonly happens on smaller projects may also be the owner of the property that is that do not entail many government permits undergoing restoration. A restoration project or outside contractors. The degree of detail in may be accomplished by a single practitioner, project plans may vary widely between projects, or two or more practitioners who work collec- depending on project size and complexity and tively on all aspects or separately on different on the requirements of the sponsoring organi- aspects of a project. The chief practitioner, if one zation. Much detail may be required by govern- is appointed, supervises other practitioners and ment agencies whose approval is needed before is responsible for the overall conduct of on-site project implementation. Project plans typically restoration activities. A practitioner may as- are appended to permits and are carried out as sume broad responsibilities and authority for a permit condition. Detailed plans are also use- conducting restoration or may serve as a techni- ful for preparing contract stipulations that are cian who performs specific tasks assigned by a to be followed by the firm that provides prac- supervisor. titioner services to the sponsoring organiza- Project Director tion. Penalties that affect monetary compensa- tion are prescribed if contractors fail to comply The project director is the person who has a with contract stipulations. In such instances, the comprehensive vision for the project, includ- planning function may include legal as well as ing its technical, social, economic, strategic, po- technical capacity. litical, historical, and other cultural aspects and implications. The project director is superior in Project Manager rank to the project manager and is responsible In most projects, restoration practitioners are su- for the overall technical direction and leader- pervised and report to a superior who is either ship of a project. The project director is critically the project manager or someone who fulfills involved with the conception of a project and that role. The project manager is responsible for the development of project plans. The project ensuring that a given restoration project is con- director formulates or approves project goals ducted satisfactorily on behalf of the sponsor- and objectives and selects or approves reference ing organization. The project manager admin- models and strategies for accomplishing restora- isters day-to-day operations such as scheduling tion. The project director receives briefings from personnel, arranging for deliveries of planting the project manager and evaluates project mon- stocks and equipment, ensuring adherence to itoring reports and other technical documents contract stipulations, and approving expendi-

18 Ecological Restoration Quick Links: ˈ Buy Ecological Restoration ˈ Ecological Restoration TOC ˈ SER Restoration Reader TOC tures. Sometimes the practitioner does most of restoration practitioner is given, the amount of this work, and the project manager ensures that authority that the practitioner is allotted, and it is accomplished. Another firm or organiza- ultimately the flexibility that the restoration tion that has been engaged to provide restora- practitioner can apply to solve problems that tion services under contract sometimes appoint arise. The North Branch Prairie project and the its own project manager. In such instances, the Dogleg Branch project illustrate two extremes in two project managers may communicate with project administration and context. The North each other, and practitioners receive directions Branch Prairie project was described in Miracle primarily from the project manager in their own Under the Oaks by William Stevens (1995) and firm. critiqued by Peter Friederici (2006). The Dogleg Satisfactory restoration projects require that the Branch project is described in Virtual Field Trip practitioner and the project manager remain in 7. close communication, more so than in construc- The North Branch Prairie project was initiated tion projects, where tasks with more predict- in 1977 by Steve Packard and a small group of able outcomes are conducted. The success of environmental activists near Chicago, Illinois. many restoration projects depends on manipu- Packard approached a public official in the lating living organisms of different kinds, and Cook County Forest Preserve District and asked the chances for surprise are much greater. The whether they could volunteer to clean up trash, practitioner must react to unanticipated situ- cut some brush, scatter some seeds, and gener- ations to ensure the success of the project. The ally refurbish degraded prairies that the district project manager is obliged to ensure adherence owned. District personnel had wanted to begin to schedules, budgets, and contract stipulations, such work themselves but were hampered by a which may not allow for contingencies. In such lack of funds, and they accepted Packard’s offer. instances, the practitioners should educate proj- The work began and soon attracted other vol- ect managers and provide succinct informa- unteers. The idea of restoring Chicago’s former tion and persuasive logic that the managers can ecosystems spread like a prairie wildfire. Soon, use effectively when interacting with people at hundreds of citizens were spending their free higher administrative levels. We cannot over- time working alongside Packard, essentially state the importance of respectful and cordial without plans or administrative structure. By relations between practitioner and project man- 1993, more than 3,000 volunteers had restored ager, particularly in ecological restoration proj- more than 6,700 hectares of degraded prairie ects of long duration. and associated oak savanna in an amazing dis- play of altruism. Project Contexts Compare the North Branch Prairie story to that The context of a restoration project consists of of the restoration of forested wetlands in the the circumstances under which it is conducted. headwaters of Dogleg Branch on surface-mined The administrative structure of a project is the and physically reclaimed land in Florida, de- most important aspect of context. Other factors scribed in the Virtual Field Trip 7. That project contributing to it are the availability of funding, required two years of work simply to obtain labor, equipment, and materials such as plant- the required government permits. Permits were ing stocks. Project site accessibility and seasonal eventually issued after the mining company constraints (e.g., inclement weather) can also in- had conducted a four-year pilot project to dem- fluence the context, as can regulatory and legal onstrate that native trees could be grown and a constraints. We emphasize administrative struc- two-year ecological inventory of local forested ture in the ensuing discussion. wetlands that served as reference sites (Clewell The ways in which different projects are ad- et al. 1982). Professionals who were involved ministered vary widely. Project administration in the project included mining engineers, mine determines the degree of responsibility that the planners, environmental consultants, native

Chapter 10 : Project Roles and Contexts 19 SER Restoration Reader nurseries, project managers, heavy equipment context, the practitioners enjoyed broad flexibil- contractors, attorneys, top officials in state gov- ity to conduct the project as they saw fit (Pack- ernment, and large support staffs that produced ard 1988, 1993). many reams of paperwork. The project was a The North Branch Prairie project was a grass- very costly and well-orchestrated production in roots, bottom-up endeavor that was not man- which the actual restoration work at the project dated by a public agency. Instead, the Cook sire seemed like an afterthought. County Forest Preserve District benefited from The contrast between the North Branch Prai- the broad public support of hundreds of citizens rie and Dogleg Branch projects could scarcely who volunteered their free time as restoration have been greater. They demonstrate extreme practitioners. This was a marvelous example of examples of the contexts in which restoration people taking collective responsibility for their practitioners find themselves working. There is own concerns in a manner that nicely reflects no preferred way to organize, plan, and imple- the four-quadrant model of ecological restora- ment restoration projects. The particular cir- tion (see Chapter 8). Ecological values were cumstances for a project determine its context. fulfilled directly by the restoration. The moti- The underlying difference between the North vation for many volunteers was the fulfillment Branch Prairie and Dogleg Branch projects was of individual values such as reconnecting with that the former was an elective project, whereas nature and responding to environmental crises, the latter project required prior government ap- as described in Chapter 7. Public celebrations at proval. the restored prairie were described by Holland Let’s look at these two projects from the per- (1994) and are among the evidence of the ful- spective of the restoration practitioner. At North fillment of cultural values. The restored prairies Branch Prairie, almost everyone involved was a and oak savannas represent natural capital and restoration practitioner. Steve Packard assumed provide socioeconomic services. the role of project director, and he and several In great contrast, the Dogleg Branch project was others assumed the collective role of project conducted by only a few restoration practitio- manager as well. The Cook County Forest Pre- ners, principally Andre Clewell and several col- serve District was nominally the sponsor, and leagues. Because of the safety and liability issues, its personnel provided skeletal administration. no volunteers were invited or allowed on the Packard referred to existing ecological litera- property. The mining company was the spon- ture, a general knowledge of the few remnant sor, and its employees assumed the other roles patches of prairie and oak savanna, and the of project administration, director, and project species list of an early naturalist as references manager. Most were engineers. Detailed project and as an indication of historic trajectory. They plans were prepared by the company, which essentially developed project plans as they incorporated specific conditions that were re- worked on site. Their administrative mode was quired by permit from the State of Florida. These collegial. In other words, Packard and the other conditions, in turn, were based in part on a res- practitioners who worked most closely with toration plan written by Clewell that identified him made project decisions by consensus. They restoration goals, objectives, performance stan- assumed almost total responsibility for all resto- dards, and the reference model. The latter was ration work. The Cook County Forest Preserve embodied in the aforementioned document that District retained basic authority for the project described historic conditions and contemporary because the project took place on lands under changes in the historic trajectory that were at- their jurisdiction. District personnel established tributable to land use (mainly fire suppression the bounds for project work to ensure that it was that allowed broadleaved forest typical of river legal and complied with the district’s overall valleys to replace upland pine savannas). Much mission. Otherwise, Packard and his cadre as- of the project work was conducted by earthmov- sumed authority for project operations. In this ing firms, tree planting crews, and other sub-

20 Ecological Restoration Quick Links: ˈ Buy Ecological Restoration ˈ Ecological Restoration TOC ˈ SER Restoration Reader TOC contractors hired by the mining company. The Dogleg Branch restoration project, and several role of the restoration practitioner was largely to others that were initiated at the time (Clewell serve as a liaison with foremen of subcontract- 1999), demonstrated that complex forest and ing companies, to test new restoration methods stream restoration could be conducted on land such as interplanting undergrowth species, to that had been literally turned upside down by monitor forest development, and to suggest mining. In this regard, the Dogleg Branch resto- improvements to the restoration process for ap- ration project changed the perceptions of people proval by mine managers. who had not previously realized the potential The Dogleg Branch project was required by the of ecological restoration. This and similar res- State of Florida (primarily; other government toration work has had the salubrious effect of entities were also involved) and was adminis- hastening the era of ecological restoration and tered from the top down by the mining com- providing jobs for many practitioners in Florida pany. Stakeholder involvement was limited and elsewhere. However, it has also given regu- to formal hearings that were required by law, lated interests a rationale for convincing govern- in which citizens could express their interests. ment agencies to issue permits for development Comments were largely limited to local resi- that will cause environmental damage with the dents who were concerned about mining opera- promise that the damage will be compensated tions near their properties and environmental by ecological restoration as a form of mitiga- organizations that were generally opposed to tion. This strategy could be justified if regulated surface mining. The intent of the project was to interests were required to successfully restore repair environmental damage that was an un- more than they damaged, but this eventuality avoidable result of mining rather than to cause awaits documentation as a normally occurring net ecological improvements. No fulfillment outcome. We hope that restoration practitioners of the personal, cultural, and socioeconomic will be more than battlefield physicians in the values described in Chapter 7 was intended. environmental wars. In other words, this was a compensatory miti- gation project. After this and other restoration projects on mine land were complete, the land was donated to the State of Florida and became the Alafia River State Park, which was a cultural improvement. However, negotiations for the donation of the land were initiated after Dogleg Branch was nearly restored, and the restoration site has not yet been opened for public access. Dogleg Branch restoration is narrowly focused as a flatland project in terms of the four-quad- rant model in Chapter 8 in that it satisfies eco- logical and socioeconomic elements that are expressed in state policy that presumably repre- sents the sentiment of the electorate. However, a number of restoration techniques were tested during the course of Dogleg Branch restoration, some for the first time. The results Excerpted from Ecological Restoration by Andre F. Clewell and were made available for use by restoration prac- James Aronson. Copyright © 2007 by Island Press. Excerpted by permission of Island Press. All rights reserved. No part of this titioners who toured the site, attended confer- excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in ences where the project was described, and read writing from the publisher. Island Press grants permission to public descriptions (e.g., Clewell and Lea 1990; forward this unaltered electronic document to friends, colleagues, Clewell et al. 2000). Even more importantly, the and other interested parties.

Chapter 10 : Project Roles and Contexts 21 foundations of restoration ecology

1 ix xi 14 42 59 88 113 7 9 26-017- 26-016- 97 97 Richard J. Hobbs Richard Ecophysiological Constraints on Plant Responses in a Restoration Setting Ecophysiological Constraints on Plant Evolutionary Restoration Ecology Implications of Dynamic and Theory for Restoration Implications of Population Dynamic and Metapopulation Theory Restoring Ecological Communities: From Theory to Practice Population and Ecological Genetics in Restoration Ecology Ecological Theory and Restoration Ecology Ecological Theory and Restoration . 5, ISBN 1-5 9.9

pages. 7 x 10 x 7 384 pages. . Chapter 6 Chapter 4. Chapter 5. Chapter 2. Chapter 3. Chapter 1. Foreword Acknowledgments

Donald A. Falk, Christopher M. Richards, Arlee M. Montalvo, and Eric E. Knapp A. Falk, Christopher M. Richards, Donald James R. Ehleringer and Darren R. Sandquist Joyce Maschinski A. Palmer Holly L. Menninger and Margaret Andrew P. Hendry and Kinnison, Michael T. A. Stockwell, Craig Richard J. Hobbs A. Falk, and Joy B. Zedler Donald A. Palmer, Margaret , ISBN 1-5 5 loth, $99.9 ables, figures, index figures, ables, I. Ecological Theory and the Restoration of Populations and Communities PART 11 Contents 2006 T C $4 Paper, Foreword by Foreword Edited by Donald A. Falk, Margaret A. Palmer, A. Palmer, A. Margaret Falk, Donald by Edited Zedler B. and Joy Restoration Ecology Restoration Foundations of of Foundations Quick Links: ˈ Buy Foundations of Restoration Ecology ˈ Foundations of Restoration Ecology TOC ˈ SER Restoration Reader TOC

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 and Restoration Trajectories 190 Katharine N. Suding and Katherine L. Gross

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

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

PART III. Restoration Ecology in Context 257

Chapter 12. Using Ecological Theory to Manage or Restore Ecosystems Affected by Invasive Plant Species 260 Carla M. D’Antonio and Jeanne C. Chambers

Chapter 13. Statistical Issues and Study Design in Ecological Restorations: Lessons Learned from 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

Chapter 9 : The Dynamic Nature of Ecological Systems 23 SER Restoration Reader

to recovery similar to the pathway to degrada- tion? About This Excerpt Can we predict the end states of restoration “Restoration is the keystone strategy pathways? Are they similar to states prior to for conserving biodiversity, and ecol- degradation? ogy has matured into a central discipline of the biological sciences. This impor- How will dynamics that occur on very different tant work shows that their synergy offers scales of space and time relate to one another? new hope for the future of life on Earth.” What should be the scale of focus? —Edward O. Wilson, University Research Pro- How much inherent variability does an ecologi- fessor Emeritus, Harvard University cal system require for adequate recovery and adaptive capacity for change in the future? Linking theoretical models of ecosystem and community change with restoration ecology In this chapter, we consider ecological theo- has the potential to advance both the practice ries that help address these questions and may of restoration and our understanding of the reduce the risk of unpredicted or undesired dynamics of degraded systems. In the chap- change in restoration projects. While theory can ter from which this excerpt is drawn, Katha- help guide restoration efforts, it does not pro- rine Suding and Katherine Gross consider vide simple or universal answers for the chal- ecological theories that address questions lenges that confront restoration. Restoration about how systems change and may reduce efforts that document species turnover and en- the risk of unpredicted change in restoration vironmental attributes over time can help test projects. and refine ecological theory related to commu- nity dynamics. Links between restoration and community dynamics advance both the practice Exceprt taken from chapter 9, “The Dynamic of restoration and theories of ecological dynam- Nature of Ecological Systems: Multiple States ics. We survey the progress and the further po- and Restoration Trajectories,” by Katharine N. tential of this connection. Suding and Katherine L. Gross Major Theories and Connection to Restora- tion One feature of ecological systems is that they are ever-changing and dynamic. As ancient Greek Over the last one hundred years, extensive work philosopher Heraclitus claimed, “You can never has documented how communities and ecosys- step in the same river twice.” Moreover, rates tems change in response to disturbance. Despite and directions of change in systems are shaped the extensive documentation of patterns (Figure 9.1), a general conceptual framework concerning increasingly by human activities. These effects the controls on species turnover and ecosystem can be intentional or the consequences of engi- development is still debated. Several contrasting neering of the systems and surrounding land- views concerning the mechanisms and predic- scapes to provide specific services to humans. tive nature of these dynamics persist today. In The dynamics of an ecological system, particu- this chapter, we will focus on three views: equi- larly of a system slated for restoration, is a func- librium, multiple equilibrium, and non-equilib- tion of many factors, some deterministic and rium. We discuss each of these and relate them some stochastic, working at several temporal to the concept of fast and slow processes (sensu and spatial scales. Rinaldi and Scheffer 2000) as a way to evaluate In considering how systems change in restora- mechanisms of recovery. tion, we address several questions: Single Equilibrium Endpoint What types of trajectories characterize the re- Equilibrium systems are assumed to return to covery of degraded ecosystems? Is the pathway their predisturbance state or trajectory follow-

24 Foundations of Restoration Ecology Quick Links: ˈ Buy Foundations of Restoration Ecology ˈ Foundations of Restoration Ecology TOC ˈ SER Restoration Reader TOC ing disturbance (Table 9.1). This theory predicts a classical successional trajectory: steady, direc- tional change in composition to a single equilib- rium point (Clements 1916; Odum 1969) (Figure 9.2a). Recovery in an equilibrium framework is a predictable consequence of interactions among species with different life histories and the development of ecosystem functions. Strong internal regulation occurs through negative feedback mechanisms, including and /predator interactions, as well as climate-ecosystem couplings and life-history tradeoffs. Many of these mechanisms are con- sidered aspects of community (Weiher and Keddy 1999; Booth and Swanton 2002), although assembly rules do not necessar- ily assume single equilibrium dynamics. In some cases, community development can proceed “spontaneously,” with little or no inter- vention, to reach desirable target states (Prach et al. 2001; Khater et al. 2003; Novak and Prach 2003). Mitsch and Wilson (1996) argue that na- ture has a “self-design” capacity as species as-  Figure 9.1. Dynamics of species replacement have been pre- semble themselves. However, the extent to dicted to take many different forms. Four general patterns of which this capacity can be expressed in a recov- trajectories, each with two starting points (assemblages A and ery will depend on how degraded and isolated B) are shown here: (1) Convergent trajectories where initial variability eventually converges to similar species composi- it has become prior to restoration efforts (Bak- tion, often termed the (D) equilibrium “climax” community. ker and Berendse 2001). Some restoration efforts (2) Initially divergent trajectories that eventually converge to one equilibrium state. (3) Divergent trajectories that never are designed to accelerate natural succession so converge and never reach a permanent state. (4) Divergent that the ecosystem develops along the same tra- trajectories that go to two different stable states (C and D) and, jectory as it would in the absence of interven- in the case of C, experience an abrupt shift to a third state. tion but reaches the goal endpoint sooner. For instance, restoring a severely degraded river back to its more natural flow regime via dam removal can enhance recovery of the surround- ing plant communities (Rood et al. 2003; Lytle and Poff 2004). Similarly, prescribed burning of degraded grasslands can promote restoration of native plant assemblages, particularly if the fire management regime is applied according to historical patterns (Baer et al. 2002; Copeland et al. 2002). Thus, restoration of some communities can take a single equilibrium approach to spur recovery along a successional trajectory.

Chapter 9 : The Dynamic Nature of Ecological Systems 25 SER Restoration Reader

◀ Figure 9.2. Examples of dynamics predicted by single equilibrium, persistent non-equilibrium, and multiple equilibrium theories (A–C). For each, the left frame shows predicted combinations of “fast” and “slow” variables; arrows indicate direction of change if not at equilibrium. The right frame shows a stylized example from the ecological literature that is consistent with the ecological predictions. In A, changes in the slow and fast variables are linear and unidirectional. Insect increase linearly in a Minnesota old-field with years since abandonment. Increases in aboveground with time is likely the slow variable that drives the change in insect diversity (Siemann et al. 1999). In B, a persistent non-equilibrium exists with no predictable trajectory. Total stem length of cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) shows high interannual variability and no directional trends in time since restoration in San Diego Bay, CA (Zedler and Callaway 1999). In C, at a single level of the slow variable there are two possible equilibrial states. Examples 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 a gecko species (Oedura retiulcata) persists decreases dramatically if the forest remnant contains less than 400 trees (Sarre et al. 1995).

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

Equilibrium Multiple Equilibrium Non-equilibrium

Climax equilibrium, unidirectional, Equilibrium, multidirectional, Persistent non-equilibrium, Assumptions continuous discontinuous nondirectional, discontinuous

Permanent states One (climax) More than one None

Trajectories Convergent Regime shifts, collapses Divergent, arrested, cyclic

High; based on species Predictability Moderate; possible but difficult Low; chance and legacies important attributes

Species interactions, ecosystem Initial conditions, positive Important factors Chance dispersal, stochastic events development feedbacks, landscape position

Excerpted from Foundations of Restoration Ecology edited by Donald A. Falk, Margaret Palmer, and Joy B. Zedler. Copyright © 2006 by Island Press. Excerpted by permission of Island Press. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher. Island Press grants permission to forward this unaltered electronic document to friends, colleagues, and other interested parties.

26 Foundations of Restoration Ecology

1 3 9 xi 17 28 xiii

0 2 6- 26-077- 26-07 97 97 Restoring Natural Capital: Definition and Rationale Restoring Natural Capital: A Mainstream Economic Perspective A Mainstream Economic Perspective Restoring Natural Capital: Restoring Natural Capital: An Assessment An Ecological Economics Restoring Natural Capital:

. Restoring Natural Capital: A Reflection on Ethics . Restoring Natural Capital:

00 pages. 7 x 10 x 7 400 pages. Chapter 4. Chapter 2 Chapter 3. Introduction Aronson, and Suzanne J. Milton James N. Blignaut, James Chapter 1. Foreword

James Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut Aronson, Suzanne James Archer, Woodworth, Sean Aronson, Paddy James N. Blignaut, James Andre F. Clewell Desai, and Narayan Joshua Farley and Erica J. Brown Gaddis Eugenio Figueroa B. Peter Raven Peter Preface Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut James N 1-5 ISB loth, $90.00, ables, figures, index figures, ables, I. Restoring Natural Capital: The Conceptual Landscape PART Contents 2007. T C ISBN 1-5 .00, $45 Paper, Foreword by Peter Raven Peter by Foreword James Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, J. Milton, Suzanne Aronson, James by Edited N. Blignaut and James

Science, Business, and Practice and Business, Science, Restoring Natural Capital Natural Restoring Restoring Natural Capital SER Restoration Reader

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 44 Reinette 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 57 W. Richard J. Dean and Chris J. Roche

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

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

Chapter 10. Genetic Integrity as a Target for Natural Capital Restoration: Weighing the Costs and Benefits 85 Cathy 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 Éva-Terézia Vesely

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

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

28 Restoring Natural Capital Quick Links: ˈ Buy Restoring Natural Capital ˈ Restoring Natural Capital TOC ˈ SER Restoration Reader TOC

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

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

Chapter 17. Overcoming Obstacles to Restore Natural Capital: Large-Scale Restoration on the Sacramento River 146 Suzanne 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 Capital in Transformed Tropical Forests 162 Kirsten Schuyt, Stephanie Mansourian, Gabriella Roscher, and Gerard Rambeloarisoa

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

Chapter 21. Assessing Costs, Benefits, and Feasibility of Restoring Natural Capital in 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 Following Alien Plant Invasions in Fynbos Ecosystems in South Africa 188 Patricia 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 City’s Watersheds to Safeguard Water 208 Christopher Elliman and Nathan Berry

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

Chapter 34 : Mainstreaming the Restoration of Natural Capital 29 SER Restoration Reader

PART III. Restoring Natural Capital: Tactics and Strategies 225

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

VALUATION

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

Chapter 27. A Decision-Analysis Framework for Proposal Evaluation of Natural 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 249 Karen D. Holl, Liba Pejchar, and Steve G. Whisenant

Chapter 29. Overcoming Socioeconomic Obstacles to Restore Natural Capital 256 Christo 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 265 Robert J. Scholes, Reinette Biggs, Erica J. Brown Gaddis, and Karen D. Holl

Chapter 31. Managing Our Global Footprint Through Restoration of Natural 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 286 Rudolf de Groot, Martin de Wit, Erica J. Brown Gaddis, Carolyn Kousky, William McGhee, and Mike D. Young

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

30 Restoring Natural Capital Quick Links: ˈ Buy Restoring Natural Capital ˈ Restoring Natural Capital TOC ˈ SER Restoration Reader TOC

PART IV. Synthesis 303

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

Chapter 34. Mainstreaming the Restoration of Natural Capital: A Conceptual and Operational Framework 305 Richard 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

Chapter 34 : Mainstreaming the Restoration of Natural Capital 31 SER Restoration Reader

formed natural capital, as has been pointed out About This Excerpt in many of the chapters in this book. Our aim How can environmental degradation be stopp­ here is to provide a conceptual and operational ed? How can it be reversed? And how can the framework for mainstreaming the restoration of damage already done be repaired? Restoring natural capital in production landscapes. Natural Capital brings together social and What Is Mainstreaming? natural scientists from the developed and de- Although mainstreaming is a relative newcomer veloping worlds to consider these questions to the biodiversity and natural capital lexicon, and examine specific strategies for restoring it is an important one, since mainstreaming is a ecosystem goods and services in natural and component of the institutions and strategies of socioecological systems. This excerpt from some major global biodiversity initiatives. For the final section of the book focuses on the importance of mainstreaming the restoration example, the concept is embedded in several ar- of natural capital, highlighting the fact that ticles of the Convention on Biological Diversity restoration is becoming an essential inter- (ratified 1995). It also underpins the ecosystem vention. service approach of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) and is the explicit objective of the Strategic Priority 2 of the Global Envi- ronmental Facility’s GEF-3 (2004) Program of Excerpt taken from chapter 34, “Mainstreaming Work: “Mainstreaming biodiversity in produc- the Restoration of Natural Capital: A Concep- tion landscapes and sectors—to integrate biodi- tual and Operational Framework,” by Richard versity conservation into agriculture, forestry, M. Cowling, Shirley M. Pierce, and Ayanda M. fisheries, tourism, and other production sectors Sigwela in order to secure national and global environ- mental benefits” (Petersen and Huntley 2005b). Undoubtedly mainstreaming initiatives will at- Protected areas alone will never achieve all of tract considerable resources from funding agen- the goals and targets required to ensure the cies over the next decade. persistence of the world’s natural capital (e.g., Rosenzweig 2003) and the delivery of services According to Petersen and Huntley (2005b) the that intact ecosystems supply (Kremen and Ost- objective of mainstreaming is “to internalize the feld 2005). Consequently, the burden of conserv- goals of biodiversity conservation and sustain- ing (and restoring) natural capital will have to able use of biological resources into economic fall increasingly on sectors such as agriculture, sectors and development models, policies and transport, forestry, mining, and urban develop- programs, and therefore into all human behav- ment (e.g., Hutton and Leader-Williams 2003). ior.” Cowling et al. (2002) identified the follow- The mainstreaming of biodiversity concerns is ing list of desired outcomes of mainstreaming: one strategy used by the conservation commu- • The incorporation of biodiversity consider- nity to respond to the challenge of ensuring the ations into policies governing sectoral ac- persistence of natural capital and ecosystem ser- tivities vices in utilized landscapes (Pierce et al. 2002; Petersen and Huntley 2005a). In essence, main- • The simultaneous achievement of gains in streaming may be defined as the process of cre- biodiversity and in the economic sector (the ating awareness of the value of natural capital win-win scenario) in sectors that currently ignore or discount it, to • Sectoral activity being recognized as based the extent that they will incorporate conserva- on, or dependent on, the sustainable use of tion actions into their routine activities. biodiversity A key conservation action in production land- • Situations where sectoral activities result in scapes is the restoration of degraded or trans- overall reversal of biodiversity losses

32 Restoring Natural Capital Quick Links: ˈ Buy Restoring Natural Capital ˈ Restoring Natural Capital TOC ˈ SER Restoration Reader TOC

Viewed as a process, mainstreaming is a means an ad hoc manner is likely to fail in achieving to spread the responsibility and benefits of desirable outcomes (Hobbs and Norton 1996; conserving biodiversity and restoring natural see also chapter 3), as has been shown for the capital across a diverse range of sectors. This ad hoc implementation of other conservation requires the identification of scenarios that pro- actions, such as the location of protected areas vide benefits for both the natural capital and the (Pressey 1994). Therefore, prior to restoration targeted sector, and the implementation of ac- intervention, stakeholders need to identify an tions (for example, the creation of institutions, appropriate landscape model characterized by including incentives) that enable responsible requirements for sustaining biological patterns bodies to accomplish these scenarios. and processes, and for supporting human needs. Mainstreaming interventions may happen at Effective restoration requires explicit goals and all scales of organization and geography, from targets (e.g., Hobbs and Norton 1996) identified encouraging backyard conservation of natu- in a way that is consistent with a specific land- ral capital in a neighborhood to the impact of scape model. a multilateral environmental agreement on the For the mainstreaming of restoration to happen, global ocean-transport system. Furthermore, the landscape model must facilitate the identi- a wide range of actors will bear the costs and enjoy the benefits, material and spiritual, associ- fication of plausible and compelling win-win ated with mainstreaming, and these will accrue scenarios. Thus, farmers must be convinced that over short and long timescales (Petersen and the direct and opportunity costs of restoring na- Huntley 2005b). tive, natural capital on their farms will be out- weighed by the benefits of such restoration, for There are very few documented cases of effec- example, in enhanced production through im- tive mainstreaming. Pierce et al. (2002) provide proved pollination services or reduced soil ero- examples from South Africa, and Peterson and Huntley (2005a) from elsewhere in the world. sion (e.g., Kremen and Ostfeld 2005). Similarly, Others, although not explicitly conceptualized as restoration interventions aimed at achieving such, appear in Daily and Ellison (2002), Swing- goals should be guided by land (2003), and Rosenzweig (2003). Pierce et al. the achievement of explicit and defensible tar- (2005) provide a case illustrating how conserva- gets for biodiversity features, which are set in tion priorities can be mainstreamed into land- the process of systematic conservation planning use planning through interpretation of scientific (Pressey et al. 2003). products into user-friendly, user-useful maps While there has been much written on concep- and guidelines. In addition, Knight et al. (2006) tual frameworks, goals, and targets for restora- describe how mainstreaming can be integrat- tion (e.g., Hobbs and Norton 1996), the obvious ed into a framework for implementing actions link between restoration and the systematic, tar- aimed at securing conservation priorities. The get-driven, conservation planning of landscapes latter two are examples of conservation actions (Margules and Pressey 2000) has only recently that enable or facilitate the restoration of natural been made (e.g., Pressey et al. 2003; Crossman capital by identifying restoration priorities. and Bryan 2006). Systematic conservation as- Conceptual Framework for Mainstreaming the sessments identify those areas of transformed Restoration of Natural Capital or degraded natural capital that are required A conceptual framework for restoration boils to achieve targets for the conservation of both down to identifying a model of the desired land- biodiversity patterns (e.g., species, land classes) scape; in other words, what mix of land uses and processes (e.g., migration corridors). These and economic flows are required to meet the areas then become defensible priorities for res- needs of different stakeholders (Salafsky and toration, as illustrated by Crossman and Bryan Wollenberg 2000)? Restoration implemented in (2006) for agricultural landscapes in Australia.

Chapter 34 : Mainstreaming the Restoration of Natural Capital 33 SER Restoration Reader

A similar systematic approach is required for serving biodiversity. The framework comprises the restoration of natural capital for ecosys- four major components: tem service delivery (e.g., Kremen and Ostfeld • Prerequisites essential for mainstreaming to 2005; Pierce et al. 2005). A few conservation as- take place sessments have targeted and incorporated the spatial components of ecosystem services (e.g., • Stimuli, external and internal to the sec- Rouget, Cowling, et al. 2003). However, a great tor, that catalyze awareness of the need for deal more research is needed before we can mainstreaming make significant progress in the restoration of • Mechanisms that initiate, enable, or drive natural capital: (1) the natural capital— both mainstreaming intact and degraded—in a particular planning • Outcomes that are measurable indicators of domain needs to be identified and mapped in the effectiveness of mainstreaming consultation with those stakeholders who are In the framework, the mainstreaming process direct beneficiaries of the services it delivers; was described as follows: “Given that certain (2) the benefits derived from these services and prerequisites are in place, a set of specific stim- their flows to specific beneficiaries need to be uli can catalyse activities which then lead to the quantified and displayed in ways that are mean- identification of appropriate mechanisms, with ingful to stakeholders; (3) targets need to be set the net result that effective mainstreaming, as for each component of the region’s natural capi- measured by outcomes, will happen” (Cowling tal in a way that is consistent with a landscape et al. 2002). model (for example, a certain number of hect- ares of healthy watershed are required to ensure a sustainable water supply over a specified pe- riod); (4) target shortfalls should be identified as priorities for restoration; and (5) mechanisms should be sought to mainstream the restoration of these areas into those sectors that benefit from the services provided by the natural capital. The major advantage of systematic restoration to achieve the goals for a specific landscape model is that it is target driven and, therefore, defen- sible, efficient, and effective (Crossman and Bry- an 2006). These attributes are likely to greatly facilitate mainstreaming, especially when the actors are cash-strapped government agencies or profit-motivated corporations. An Operational Framework for Mainstream- ing the Restoration of Natural Capital Cowling et al. (2002) developed an operational framework for mainstreaming biodiversity, in- formed by eleven South African case studies presented in Pierce et al. (2002). The framework Excerpted from Restoring Natural Capital edited by James is sufficiently broad to accommodate restora- Aronson, Suzanne J. Milton, and James N. Blignaut. Copyright © tion interventions; along with the establishment 2007 by Island Press. Excerpted by permission of Island Press. of protected areas and effective soil and water All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher. Island conservation, restoration is another tool for con- Press grants permission to forward this unaltered electronic document to friends, colleagues, and other interested parties.

34 Restoring Natural Capital