Bridging Restoration Science and Practice: Results and Analysis of a Survey from the 2009 Society for Ecological Restoration International Meeting

Developing and strengthening a more mutualistic relationship between the science of restoration ecology and the practice of ecological restoration has been a central but elusive goal of SERI since its inaugural meeting in 1989. We surveyed the delegates to the 2009 SERI World Conference to learn more about their perceptions of and ideas for improving restoration science, practice, and scientist/practitioner relationships. The respondents' assessments of restoration practice were less optimistic than their assessments of restoration science. Only 26% believed that scientist/practitioner relationships were “generally mutually beneficial and supportive of each other,” and the “science–practice gap” was the second and third most frequently cited category of factors limiting the science and practice of restoration, respectively (“insufficient funding” was first in both cases). Although few faulted practitioners for ignoring available science, many criticized scientists for ignoring the pressing needs of practitioners and/or failing to effectively communicate their work to nonscientists. Most of the suggestions for bridging the gap between restoration science and practice focused on (1) developing the necessary political support for more funding of restoration science, practice, and outreach; and (2) creating alternative research paradigms to both facilitate on‐the‐ground projects and promote more mutualistic exchanges between scientists and practitioners. We suggest that one way to implement these recommendations is to create a “Restoration Extension Service” modeled after the United States Department of Agriculture's Cooperative Extension Service. We also recommend more events that bring together a fuller spectrum of restoration scientists, practitioners, and relevant stakeholders.     

Opinions Toward Using Volunteers in Ecological Restoration: A Survey of Federal Land Managers

Land managers use a variety of labor sources to implement ecological restoration projects. Reasons why these land managers decide to use or not use volunteer labor are not well known; yet, this decision can significantly shape ensuing social, psychological, and ecological benefits. To better understand how land managers' opinions influence their intentions toward using volunteers, we surveyed ecological restoration project decision makers (n = 176) from three U.S. land management agencies (the Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, and U.S. Forest Service) in Colorado, Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming using stratified random cluster sampling. Employing the Theory of Planned Behavior, we measured factors that likely influence intention to use volunteers, including land managers' attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control (PBC). We used multiple regression analysis to understand the relationships among constructs, which indicated PBC was the strongest predictor of intention. Based upon intention to use volunteers, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed differences among land managers in terms of (1) their opinions about building community support and accomplishing more work, (2) the influence of supervisors, coworkers, and environmental groups, and (3) their perceived barriers due to a lack of trained volunteers and a lack of tasks safe for volunteers. Our results suggest environmental stewardship organizations and others that want to increase the use of ecological restoration volunteers should find ways to alleviate employees' perceived barriers, encourage supervisors to advocate for using volunteers, and when possible provide tangible information demonstrating how using volunteers can generate community support for a restoration project.     

Restoration and Science: A Practitioner/Scientist's View from Rare Habitat Restoration at a Southern California Preserve

Researchers reexamining the relationship between restoration science and practice report a continuing scientist‐practitioner gap. As a land manager with scientific training, I offer my perspective of the chasm and describe a restoration practice infused with as much science as the realities of limited budget and time allow. The coastal sage scrub (CSS) restoration project at Starr Ranch, a 1,585 ha Audubon preserve in southern California, combines non‐chemical invasive species control, restoration, and applied research. Our practices evolve from modified scientific approaches and the scientific literature. Results from experiments with non‐optimum replication (on effects of seed rates, soil tamping, and timing of planting) nonetheless had value for management decisions. A critical practice came from academic research that encouraged cost‐effective passive restoration. Our passive restoration monitoring data showed 28–100% total native cover after 3–5 years. Another published study found that restoration success in semiarid regions is dependent on rainfall, a finding vital for understanding active restoration monitoring results that showed a range of 0–88% total native cover at the end of the first season. Work progresses through a combination of applied research, a watchful eye on the scientific literature, and “ecological intuition” informed by the scientific literature and our own findings. I suggest that it is less critical for academic scientists to address the basic questions on technique that are helpful to land managers but rather advocate practitioner training in methods to test alternative strategies and long‐term monitoring.     

A framework for the practical science necessary to restore sustainable,resilient, and biodiverse ecosystems

Demand for restoration of resilient, self‐sustaining, and biodiverse natural ecosystems as a conservation measure is increasing globally; however, restoration efforts frequently fail to meet standards appropriate for this objective. Achieving these standards requires management underpinned by input from diverse scientific disciplines including ecology, biotechnology, engineering, soil science, ecophysiology, and genetics. Despite increasing restoration research activity, a gap between the immediate needs of restoration practitioners and the outputs of restoration science often limits the effectiveness of restoration programs. Regrettably, studies often fail to identify the practical issues most critical for restoration success. We propose that part of this oversight may result from the absence of a considered statement of the necessary practical restoration science questions. Here we develop a comprehensive framework of the research required to bridge this gap and guide effective restoration. We structure questions in five themes: (1) setting targets and planning for success, (2) sourcing biological material, (3) optimizing establishment, (4) facilitating growth and survival, and (5) restoring resilience, sustainability, and landscape integration. This framework will assist restoration practitioners and scientists to identify knowledge gaps and develop strategic research focused on applied outcomes. The breadth of questions highlights the importance of cross‐discipline collaboration among restoration scientists, and while the program is broad, successful restoration projects have typically invested in many or most of these themes. Achieving restoration ecology's goal of averting biodiversity losses is a vast challenge: investment in appropriate science is urgently needed for ecological restoration to fulfill its potential and meet demand as a conservation tool.     

The influence of floods and precipitation on <Emphasis Type="Italic">Tamarix</Emphasis> establishment in Grand Canyon,Arizona: consequences for flow regime restoration

Decoupling of climate and hydrology combined with introduction of non-native species creates novel abiotic and biotic conditions along highly regulated rivers. Tamarix, a non-native shrub, dominates riparian assemblages along many waterways in the American Southwest, including the Colorado River through Grand Canyon. We conducted a tree-ring study to determine the relative influences of climate and hydrology on Tamarix establishment in Grand Canyon. Riparian vegetation was sparse and annually scoured by large floods until completion of Glen Canyon Dam, which allowed pioneer species, including Tamarix, to expand. Post-dam floods in the mid-1980s were associated with high Tamarix mortality but also initiated a large establishment event. Subsequent establishment has been low but continuous with some exceptions. From 1984 to 2006 establishment increased during years of high, late-summer flows followed by years of low precipitation. This combination provided moist surfaces for Tamarix establishment and may have caused reduced erosion of seedlings or reduced competition from native plants. Attempts to mimic pre-dam floods for ecosystem restoration through planned flood releases also have affected Tamarix establishment. Early (March 1996) and late (November 2004) restoration floods limited establishment, but a small restoration flood in May 2000 followed by steady summer flows permitted widespread establishment. Flood restoration is not expected to prevent Tamarix spread in this system because historic flood timing in May–July coincides with seed release. To decrease future Tamarix establishment, river managers should avoid floods during peak Tamarix seed release, which encompasses the historic spring and early summer flooding period. Tamarix dominance may be reduced by early spring floods that initiate asexual reproduction of clonal shrubs (e.g., Salix exigua, Pluchea sericea).     

Tamarisk biocontrol,endangered species risk and resolution of conflict through riparian restoration

A long-standing debate between wildlife agencies and biological control researchers and practitioners concerns Diorhabda carinulata Desbrochers (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) introduced to suppress invasive Tamarix spp. (Tamaricaceae), and potential impacts of Tamarix defoliation on endangered southwestern willow flycatchers using this non-native plant as nesting habitat in some western riparian ecosystems. The conflict and ensuing legal actions are currently centered on the presence of D. carinulata within the breeding range of the flycatcher in the Virgin River watershed, which has led to APHIS termination of permits supporting the biocontrol development program and has also affected other programs to develop biocontrol agents against environmental weeds. Central to concerns over wildlife is the lack of rehabilitation of native vegetation where biocontrol is expected, so there are current and planned efforts to promote restoration of native cottonwood-willow habitat to mitigate the anticipation decline in Tamarix cover. A strategic approach to riparian restoration is outlined which could facilitate sustainable, and scientifically documented recovery of this iconic habitat type. While the results of these efforts will not be known immediately, the process which is leading to riparian restoration has brought specialists from both sides of the debate together in search of resolution via collaboration, and if successful, may allow re-initiation of the Tamarix biocontrol program attendant with habitat enhancement for wildlife species of conservation concern.     

On being a (modern) scientist: risks of public engagement in the UK interspecies embryo debate

In 2006, a small group of UK academic scientists made headlines when they proposed the creation of interspecies embryos – mixing human and animal genetic material. A public campaign was fought to mobilize support for the research. Drawing on interviews with the key scientists involved, this paper argues that engaging the public through communicating their ideas via the media can result in tensions between the necessity of, and inherent dangers in, scientists campaigning on controversial issues. Some scientists believed that communicating science had damaged their professional standing in the eyes of their peers, who, in turn, policed the boundaries around what they believed constituted a “good” scientist. Tensions between promoting “science” versus promotion of the “scientist”; engaging the public versus publishing peer-reviewed articles and winning grants; and building expectations versus overhyping the science reveal the difficult choices scientists in the modern world have to make over the potential gains and risks of communicating science. We conclude that although scientists' participation in public debates is often encouraged, the rewards of such engagement remain. Moreover, this participation can detrimentally affect scientists' careers.     

Wilderness Restoration: The Paradox of Public Participation

Recent trends in ecological restoration complicate the job of wilderness managers. An emphasis on volunteer participation in restoration designed to foster human/nature relationships often conflicts with the mandate to leave land untrammeled. We frame this conflict as the “participation paradox.” Higgs’ (2003) Nature by Design contains a response to the paradox that includes a strong defense of participatory focal restoration and a related critique of wilderness. After identifying the limitations of Higgs’ arguments, we address the paradox by showing how an appeal to the moral virtues of humility, self‐restraint, and altruism supports a restrictive conception of wilderness and a healing metaphor for wilderness restoration. The virtue‐informed healing metaphor provides an argument for restricting volunteer participation and long‐term restoration projects in wilderness areas. It also identifies the general conditions in which damaged wilderness should be allowed to “heal itself.” The upshot of our approach to the paradox is that some standards for good restoration should be contextualized to land use designations. In particular, the emphasis on participatory restoration is appropriate in humanized landscapes but not in wilderness.     

Planning Riparian Restoration in the Context of Tamarix Control in Western North America

Throughout the world, the condition of many riparian ecosystems has declined due to numerous factors, including encroachment of non‐native species. In the western United States, millions of dollars are spent annually to control invasions of Tamarix spp., introduced small trees or shrubs from Eurasia that have colonized bottomland ecosystems along many rivers. Resource managers seek to control Tamarix in attempts to meet various objectives, such as increasing water yield and improving wildlife habitat. Often, riparian restoration is an implicit goal, but there has been little emphasis on a process or principles to effectively plan restoration activities, and many Tamarix removal projects are unsuccessful at restoring native vegetation. We propose and summarize the key steps in a planning process aimed at developing effective restoration projects in Tamarix‐dominated areas. We discuss in greater detail the biotic and abiotic factors central to the evaluation of potential restoration sites and summarize information about plant communities likely to replace Tamarix under various conditions. Although many projects begin with implementation, which includes the actual removal of Tamarix, we stress the importance of pre‐project planning that includes: (1) clearly identifying project goals; (2) developing realistic project objectives based on a detailed evaluation of site conditions; (3) prioritizing and selecting Tamarix control sites with the best chance of ecological recovery; and (4) developing a detailed tactical plan before Tamarix is removed. After removal, monitoring and maintenance as part of an adaptive management approach are crucial for evaluating project success and determining the most effective methods for restoring these challenging sites.     

The effects of riparian restoration following saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) biocontrol on habitat and herpetofauna along a desert stream

Amphibians and reptiles (herpetofauna) have been linked to specific microhabitat characteristics, microclimates, and water resources in riparian forests. Our objective was to relate variation in herpetofauna abundance to changes in habitat caused by a beetle used for Tamarix biocontrol (Diorhabda carinulata; Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) and riparian restoration. During 2013 and 2014, we measured vegetation and monitored herpetofauna via trapping and visual encounter surveys (VES) at locations affected by biocontrol along the Virgin River in the Mojave Desert of the southwestern United States. Twenty‐one sites were divided into four riparian stand types based on density and percent cover of dominant trees (Tamarix, Prosopis, Populus, and Salix) and presence or absence of restoration. Restoration activities consisted of mechanically removing non‐native trees, transplanting native trees, and restoring hydrologic flows. Restored sites had three times more total lizard and eight times more yellow‐backed spiny lizard (Sceloporus uniformis) captures than other stand types. Woodhouse's toad (Anaxyrus woodhousii) captures were greatest in unrestored and restored Tam‐Pop/Sal sites. Results from VES indicated that herpetofauna abundance was greatest in the restored Tam‐Pop/Sal site compared with the adjacent unrestored Tam‐Pop/Sal site. Tam sites were characterized by having high Tamarix cover, percent canopy cover, and shade. Restored Tam‐Pop/Sal sites were most similar in habitat to Tam‐Pop/Sal sites. Two species of herpetofauna (spiny lizard and toad) were found to prefer habitat components characteristic of restored Tam‐Pop/Sal sites. Restored sites likely supported higher abundances of these species because restoration activities reduced canopy cover, increased native tree density, and restored surface water.     

Effects of Tamarix removal on the community dynamics of riparian birds in a semiarid grassland

Invasion of riparian habitats by non‐native plants is a global problem that requires an understanding of community‐level responses by native plants and animals. In the Great Plains, resource managers have initiated efforts to control the eastward incursion of Tamarix as a non‐native bottomland plant (Tamarix ramosissima) along the Cimarron River in southwestern Kansas, United States. To understand how native avifauna interact with non‐native plants, we studied the effects of Tamarix removal on riparian bird communities. We compared avian site occupancy of three foraging guilds, abundance of four nesting guilds, and assessed community dynamics with dynamic, multiseason occupancy models across three replicated treatments. Community parameters were estimated for Tamarix‐dominated sites (untreated), Tamarix‐removal sites (treated), and reference sites with native cottonwood sites (Populus deltoides). Estimates of initial occupancy (ψ₂₀₀₆) for the ground‐to‐shrub foraging guild tended to be highest at Tamarix‐dominated sites, while initial occupancy of the upper‐canopy foraging and mid‐canopy foraging guilds were highest in the treated and reference sites, respectively. Estimates of relative abundance for four nesting guilds indicated that the reference habitat supported the highest relative abundance of birds overall, although the untreated habitat had higher abundance of shrub‐nesters than treated or reference habitats. Riparian sites where invasive Tamarix is dominant in the Great Plains can provide nesting habitat for some native bird species, with avian abundance and diversity that are comparable to remnant riparian sites with native vegetation. Moreover, presence of some native vegetation in Tamarix‐dominated and Tamarix‐removal sites may increase abundance of riparian birds such as cavity‐nesters. Overall, our study demonstrates that Tamarix may substitute for native flora in providing nesting habitat for riparian birds at the eastern edge of its North American range.     

The Challenges of Alleviating Poverty through Ecological Restoration: Insights from South Africa's “Working for Water” Program

Public works programs have been posited as win–win solutions for achieving societal goals for ecological restoration and poverty alleviation. However, little is documented regarding the challenges of implementing such projects. A commonly cited example is South Africa's invasive alien plant control program “Working for Water” (WfW), which aims to create employment via restoring landscapes invaded with alien plants. Recent studies have raised questions over the effectiveness of this program in achieving both its restoration and poverty alleviation goals. This is the first study that we are aware of that synthesizes the knowledge of managers on both the poverty alleviation and environmental outcomes of a public works project. Herein, we sought to understand the challenges and constraints faced by 23 WfW managers in fulfilling the program's environmental and poverty alleviation objectives. We found that the challenges most frequently cited by managers related to the capacity and competence of managers and teams, followed by challenges relating to planning and coordination, specifically the challenges of being flexible and adaptive when constrained by operating procedures. In addition, the current focus on maximizing short‐term employment was perceived by some as limiting the efficiency and long‐term effectiveness of the WfW program in achieving its environmental and social goals. We suggest that improving the conditions and duration of employment could improve the effectiveness of invasive alien plant control and ecological outcomes. We also suggest that WfW measure the impacts of their interventions through an adaptive management approach so that it can learn and adapt to the challenges it faces.     

Importance of low-flow and high-flow characteristics to restoration of riparian vegetation along rivers in arid south-western United States

1. Riparian vegetation in dry regions is influenced by low‐flow and high‐flow components of the surface and groundwater flow regimes. The duration of no‐flow periods in the surface stream controls vegetation structure along the low‐flow channel, while depth, magnitude and rate of groundwater decline influence phreatophytic vegetation in the floodplain. Flood flows influence vegetation along channels and floodplains by increasing water availability and by creating ecosystem disturbance. 2. On reference rivers in Arizona's Sonoran Desert region, the combination of perennial stream flows, shallow groundwater in the riparian (stream) aquifer, and frequent flooding results in high plant species diversity and landscape heterogeneity and an abundance of pioneer wetland plant species in the floodplain. Vegetation changes on hydrologically altered river reaches are varied, given the great extent of flow regime changes ranging from stream and aquifer dewatering on reaches affected by stream diversion and groundwater pumping to altered timing, frequency, and magnitude of flood flows on reaches downstream of flow‐regulating dams. 3. As stream flows become more intermittent, diversity and cover of herbaceous species along the low‐flow channel decline. As groundwater deepens, diversity of riparian plant species (particularly perennial species) and landscape patches are reduced and species composition in the floodplain shifts from wetland pioneer trees (Populus, Salix) to more drought‐tolerant shrub species including Tamarix (introduced) and Bebbia. 4. On impounded rivers, changes in flood timing can simplify landscape patch structure and shift species composition from mixed forests composed of Populus and Salix, which have narrow regeneration windows, to the more reproductively opportunistic Tamarix. If flows are not diverted, suppression of flooding can result in increased density of riparian vegetation, leading in some cases to very high abundance of Tamarix patches. Coarsening of sediments in river reaches below dams, associated with sediment retention in reservoirs, contributes to reduced cover and richness of herbaceous vegetation by reducing water and nutrient‐holding capacity of soils. 5. These changes have implications for river restoration. They suggest that patch diversity, riparian plant species diversity, and abundance of flood‐dependent wetland tree species such as Populus and Salix can be increased by restoring fluvial dynamics on flood‐suppressed rivers and by increasing water availability in rivers subject to water diversion or withdrawal. On impounded rivers, restoration of plant species diversity also may hinge on restoration of sediment transport. 6. Determining the causes of vegetation change is critical for determining riparian restoration strategies. Of the many riparian restoration efforts underway in south‐western United States, some focus on re‐establishing hydrogeomorphic processes by restoring appropriate flows of surface water, groundwater and sediment, while many others focus on manipulating vegetation structure by planting trees (e.g. Populus) or removing trees (e.g. Tamarix). The latter approaches, in and of themselves, may not yield desired restoration outcomes if the tree species are indicators, rather than prime causes, of underlying changes in the physical environment.     

Differences in stakeholder perceptions about native forest: implications for developing a restoration program

Ecological restoration is a global priority. Incorporating stakeholders' perceptions has been established as a critical factor to improve the success of restoration and conservation initiatives and decrease future social conflicts; however, it has barely been incorporated. Our objective was to analyze and compare the differences in the perceptions of Chilean dryland forest restoration of three groups: local community, experts, and government managers. We asked about: (1) what is the knowledge, importance, and uses that they have and give to the native forest and its restoration? (2) What is the willingness to restore the native forest? (3) What are the most valuable goods and services provided by the forest? (4) Where to begin to restore? (5) What criteria must be considered to prioritize areas to restore? To determine if the criteria selected were related to the stakeholder group, a semi‐parametric multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed. Semi‐structured interviews were carried out with 61 stakeholders. The community gave greater importance to restoring the ravines and creeks, the experts to restoring areas that increase landscape connectivity, and both experts and government managers to restoring areas of greater biodiversity and ecological value. The experts gave a lower value to both social and economic criteria compared to the local community and government managers. The differences among stakeholder perceptions must necessarily be considered in the restoration programs. Research on perceptions can contribute to decision‐making and will favor the social approval and long‐term success of restoration programs.     

Fish community composition and diversity at restored estuarine habitats in Tampa Bay,Florida, United States

Estuary restoration in Tampa Bay, Florida, United States, is an ongoing focus of natural resource managers because of pressure from an increasing coastal population, historic habitat loss, and restoration's importance to economic development, recreational activities, and fish habitat. A growing population can also limit future large‐scale restorations due to associations with cost and land availability. This limitation might be overcome by applying the habitat mosaic approach to restoration, which creates distinct habitat types at small spatial scales. This approach was applied to create three types of estuarine habitat, reconnected tidal creek, salt marsh, and tidal pond. The objectives of this study were to (1) initiate monitoring of a restored wetland mosaic and (2) determine how fish diversity and community structure vary among restored habitat types. Replicated sampling using a 3‐mm mesh seine was used to characterize the fish communities. Our results indicate that the habitat mosaic approach creates suitable habitat for a variety of fish species where 37% of fish species were captured in just one habitat type. In particular, the recreationally important Centropomus undecimalis (common snook) was more common in the mangrove‐lined creek and the non‐native Sarotherodon melanotheron (blackchin tilapia) was common in the tidal pond. Greater emphasis should be placed on applied restoration research to identify how habitat types within a larger restoration mosaic contribute to local species diversity and recreationally and commercially important fishes, while limiting non‐natives. This emphasis could reveal how restoration approaches can be modified to include habitat mosaics, maximizing their contribution to productive fish habitat.     

Scientists’ Prioritization of Communication Objectives for Public Engagement

Amid calls from scientific leaders for their colleagues to become more effective public communicators, this study examines the objectives that scientists’ report drive their public engagement behaviors. We explore how scientists evaluate five specific communication objectives, which include informing the public about science, exciting the public about science, strengthening the public’s trust in science, tailoring messages about science, and defending science from misinformation. We use insights from extant research, the theory of planned behavior, and procedural justice theory to identify likely predictors of scientists'' views about these communication objectives. Results show that scientists most prioritize communication designed to defend science from misinformation and educate the public about science, and least prioritize communication that seeks to build trust and establish resonance with the public. Regression analyses reveal factors associated with scientists who prioritize each of the five specific communication objectives. Our findings highlight the need for communication trainers to help scientists select specific communication objectives for particular contexts and audiences.     

Science Driven Restoration: A Candle in a Demon Haunted World—Response to Cabin (2007)

Cabin (2007) asks whether formal science is an effective framework and methodology for designing and implementing ecological restoration programs. He argues that beyond certain ancillary benefits, restoration science has little of practical value to offer the practice of restoration. He goes on to suggest that restoration science most often represents an impediment to restoration practice because an “ivory tower” mentality limits the utility of experiments and diverts research dollars away from answering practical questions. His conclusion is that a nonscientific gardening approach may be more effective at restoring degraded ecosystems. We disagree with this perspective because: (1) restoration science has moved beyond exclusively using “square grids” placed on small patches of land to examine treatment effects on species representation; (2) Cabin’s critique greatly undervalues the contribution of science to restoration practice even where the input of restoration scientists is not directly evident; and (3) the practice of restoration is unlikely to advance beyond small‐scale and truly haphazard successes without well‐designed studies that can provide peer‐reviewed and widely accessible published information on the mechanisms underlying both successes and failures. We conclude that through integration with other disciplines, restoration science increasingly will provide novel approaches and tools needed to restore ecosystem composition, structure, and function at stand to landscape scales. As with the broader role of science in the human enterprise ( Sagan 1996 ), the contribution of restoration science to restoration practice can only grow as the discipline matures.     

A conceptual framework for understanding the perspectives on the causes of the science–practice gap in ecology and conservation

Applying scientific knowledge to confront societal challenges is a difficult task, an issue known as the science–practice gap. In Ecology and Conservation, scientific evidence has been seldom used directly to support decision‐making, despite calls for an increasing role of ecological science in developing solutions for a sustainable future. To date, multiple causes of the science–practice gap and diverse approaches to link science and practice in Ecology and Conservation have been proposed. To foster a transparent debate and broaden our understanding of the difficulties of using scientific knowledge, we reviewed the perceived causes of the science–practice gap, aiming to: (i) identify the perspectives of ecologists and conservation scientists on this problem, (ii) evaluate the predominance of these perspectives over time and across journals, and (iii) assess them in light of disciplines studying the role of science in decision‐making. We based our review on 1563 sentences describing causes of the science–practice gap extracted from 122 articles and on discussions with eight scientists on how to classify these sentences. The resulting process‐based framework describes three distinct perspectives on the relevant processes, knowledge and actors in the science–practice interface. The most common perspective assumes only scientific knowledge should support practice, perceiving a one‐way knowledge flow from science to practice and recognizing flaws in knowledge generation, communication, and/or use. The second assumes that both scientists and decision‐makers should contribute to support practice, perceiving a two‐way knowledge flow between science and practice through joint knowledge‐production/integration processes, which, for several reasons, are perceived to occur infrequently. The last perspective was very rare, and assumes scientists should put their results into practice, but they rarely do. Some causes (e.g. cultural differences between scientists and decision‐makers) are shared with other disciplines, while others seem specific to Ecology and Conservation (e.g. inadequate research scales). All identified causes require one of three general types of solutions, depending on whether the causal factor can (e.g. inadequate research questions) or cannot (e.g. scientific uncertainty) be changed, or if misconceptions (e.g. undervaluing abstract knowledge) should be solved. The unchanged predominance of the one‐way perspective over time may be associated with the prestige of evidence‐based conservation and suggests that debates in Ecology and Conservation lag behind trends in other disciplines towards bidirectional views ascribing larger roles to decision‐makers. In turn, the two‐way perspective seems primarily restricted to research traditions historically isolated from mainstream conservation biology. All perspectives represented superficial views of decision‐making by not accounting for limits to human rationality, complexity of decision‐making contexts, fuzzy science–practice boundaries, ambiguity brought about by science, and different types of knowledge use. However, joint knowledge‐production processes from the two‐way perspective can potentially allow for democratic decision‐making processes, explicit discussions of values and multiple types of science use. To broaden our understanding of the interface and foster productive science–practice linkages, we argue for dialogue among different research traditions within Ecology and Conservation, joint knowledge‐production processes between scientists and decision‐makers and interdisciplinarity across Ecology, Conservation and Political Science in both research and education.     

Does river regulation increase the dominance of invasive woody species in riparian landscapes?

Aim A regional analysis was used to explore the influence of river regulation on the dominance of non‐native, invasive shrubs and trees. We addressed the following questions: (1) How do large dams affect hydrological parameters that influence riparian vegetation? (2) How do flow regimes affect the dominance of non‐native woody species? (3) How do changes in flow regimes affect the dominance of non‐native woody species? Location South‐western USA. Methods We sampled the canopy cover of woody species on 179 point bars along seven non‐dammed and thirteen dammed river segments. Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to determine differences between flow parameters in dammed and non‐dammed rivers. We used correlation analyses and generalized linear model comparisons to examine associations of flow parameters and canopy cover of native (Populus and Salix) and non‐native (Tamarix and Elaeagnus) taxa. An index of flow alteration that was created using principal components analysis was regressed with vegetation cover. Results Tamarix cover was positively related to drainage area, flow constancy, August and May median flow and flow recession rate, but Elaeagnus cover was unrelated to flow variables. River segments with peak flows in late summer or high constancy had the highest Tamarix cover. Populus cover was positively influenced by low maximum temperatures and frequent high pulses. Flow alteration was negatively related to Populus cover and positively related to Tamarix cover. Total non‐native, Elaeagnus and Salix covers were not correlated with flow alteration. Main conclusions Rivers with a large drainage area and low flow variability are inherently more vulnerable to invasions. River regulation does not necessarily increase the cover of non‐native, invasive species. Instead, changes in flow allow proliferation of species that have life‐history traits suited to modified flow regimes. River restoration projects that aim to reinstate natural flow regimes should be designed with knowledge of native and non‐native species' life history strategies.     

Promoting ecological restoration in France: issues and solutions

Ecological restoration has developed greatly over recent decades. Promoting harmonious relationships between scientists and practitioners, between restoration ecology and ecological restoration, is essential to improving restoration projects. These relationships are difficult to achieve at a global scale, although international action remains essential. Therefore, regional and national networks are attempting to take up the challenge. With several European countries planning to create their own network in the coming years, insights from current practice are helpful. Here, we (1) describe the context in which ecological restoration is developing in France and (2) present the French restoration network, Réseau d'Echanges et de Valorisation en Ecologie de la Restauration (REVER). Most public policies related to restoration in France are derived from European Union (EU) directives, such as those on water, ecological networks, biodiversity, and protected species and natural habitat. Restoration can also be undertaken through Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or subsequent to damage. Following the model of the International Society for Ecological Restoration, the French network for ecological restoration (REVER) aims at accompanying and promoting restoration by facilitating relationships between the various stakeholders: practitioners, scientists, site managers, etc. To encourage exchange of knowledge and experience, REVER manages a website, organizes workshops, and provides links with SER‐Europe and Society for Ecological Restoration International (SERI). This article provides information that will be of interest to other countries trying to meet the Aichi targets of the convention on biological diversity: the restoration of 15% of degraded ecosystems by 2020.