Neotropical rainforest restoration: comparing passive,plantation and nucleation approaches

Neotropical rainforests are global biodiversity hotspots and are challenging to restore. A core part of this challenge is the very long recovery trajectory of the system: recovery of structure can take 20–190 years, species composition 60–500 years, and reestablishment of rare/endemic species thousands of years. Passive recovery may be fraught with instances of arrested succession, disclimax or emergence of novel ecosystems. In these cases, active restoration methods are essential to speed recovery and set a desired restoration trajectory. Tree plantation is the most common active approach to reestablish a high density of native tree species and facilitate understory regeneration. While this approach may speed the successional trajectory, it may not achieve, and possibly inhibit, a long-term restoration trajectory towards the high species diversity characteristic of these forests. A range of nucleation techniques (e.g., tree island planting) are important restoration options: although they may not speed recovery of structure as quickly as plantations, their emphasis on natural regeneration processes may enable greater and more natural patterns of diversity to develop. While more work needs to be done to compare forest restoration techniques in different environmental contexts, it appears that nucleation and, at times, passive restoration may best preserve the diverse legacy of these forested systems (both with lower costs). An integrated approach using both plantation productivity but also the natural functions associated with nucleation may develop composition and diversity trajectory desired in Neotropical conservation efforts.     

Passive restoration can be an effective strategy: a reply to Prach and del Moral (2015)

We agree with Prach and del Moral that passive recovery is often a desirable and effective restoration strategy. Passive and various active restoration approaches need to be weighed on a case‐by‐case basis and depend on the goals, relative rates of recovery desired, and various social and financial costs implicit in each option. That said, we stress that passive restoration has a unique set of challenges and costs, which we highlighted in our original article and briefly reiterate here.     

Balancing economic costs and ecological outcomes of passive and active restoration in agricultural landscapes: the case of Brazil

Forest restoration requires strategies such as passive restoration to balance financial investments and ecological outcomes. However, the ecological outcomes of passive restoration are traditionally regarded as uncertain. We evaluated technical and legal strategies for balancing economic costs and ecological outcomes of passive versus active restoration in agricultural landscapes. We focused in the case of Brazil, where we assessed the factors driving the proportion of land allocated to passive and active restoration in 42 programs covering 698,398 hectares of farms in the Atlantic Forest, Atlantic Forest/cerrado ecotone and Amazon; the ecological outcomes of passive and active restoration in 2955 monitoring plots placed in six restoration programs; and the legal framework developed by some Brazilian states to balance the different restoration approaches and comply with legal commitments. Active restoration had the highest proportion of land allocated to it (78.4%), followed by passive (14.2%) and mixed restoration (7.4%). Passive restoration was higher in the Amazon, in silviculture, and when remaining forest cover was over 50 percent. Overall, both restoration approaches showed high levels of variation in the ecological outcomes; nevertheless, passively restored areas had a smaller percentage canopy cover, lower species density, and less shrubs and trees (dbh > 5 cm). The studied legal frameworks considered land abandonment for up to 4 years before deciding on a restoration approach, to favor the use of passive restoration. A better understanding of the biophysical and socioeconomic features of areas targeted for restoration is needed to take a better advantage of their natural regeneration potential.     

A GIS‐based decision‐making approach for prioritizing seabird management following predator eradication

Given that 29% of seabird species are threatened with extinction, protecting seabird colonies on offshore islands is a global conservation priority. Seabirds are vulnerable to non‐native predator invasions, which reduce or eliminate colonies. Accordingly, conservation efforts have focused on predator eradication. However, affected populations are often left to passively recover following eradications. Although seabirds are highly mobile, their life history traits such as philopatry can limit passive recolonization of newly predator‐free habitat. In such cases, seabird colonies can potentially be re‐instated with active restoration via chick translocations or social attraction methods, which can be risky and expensive. We used biogeographic and species‐specific behavioral data in the Hauraki Gulf, New Zealand, a global hotspot of seabird diversity and predator eradications, to illustrate the use of geographic information systems multi‐criteria decision analysis to prioritize islands for active seabird restoration. We identified nine islands with low observed passive recovery of seabirds posteradication over a 50‐year timeframe, and classified these as sites where active seabird management could be prioritized. Such spatially explicit tools are flexible, allowing for managers to choose case‐specific criteria such as time, funding, and goals constrained for their conservation needs. Furthermore, this flexibility can also be applied to threatened species management by customizing the decision criteria for individual species' capacity to passively recolonize islands. On islands with complex restoration challenges, decision tools that help island restoration practitioners decide whether active seabird management should be paired with eradication can optimize restoration outcomes and ecosystem recovery.     

A review of the world's active seabird restoration projects

Within the past several decades, seabird populations have been actively restored in locales where they were reduced or extirpated. Chick translocation, acoustic vocalization playbacks, and decoys are now used widely to lure breeding seabirds to restoration sites. In this first worldwide review of seabird restoration projects we evaluate the factors affecting project success or failure and recommend future directions for management. We identified 128 active restoration projects that were implemented to protect 47 seabird species in 100 locales spanning 14 countries since active restoration methods were pioneered in 1973. Active seabird restoration can achieve conservation goals for threatened and endangered species, and for species affected by anthropogenic impacts (e.g., oil spills, invasive species, fisheries). It also can be used to relocate populations from undesired breeding locales to more favorable locations, and to establish multiple breeding locations to reduce risks posed by catastrophic events. Active restoration can help to restore ecological processes, as large seabird colonies function to cycle marine nutrients to terrestrial ecosystems and create habitats for commensal species. Active restoration is especially appropriate where the original causes of decline are no longer working to suppress colony establishment and growth. Successful restoration efforts require careful planning and long-term commitments. We introduce the different forms of active seabird restoration techniques, review their utility for different seabird species, and use case studies to suggest how to optimize this technique to restore seabird species globally. Wildlife managers can use this review to guide their seabird restoration projects in the planning, implementation, and monitoring stages; tailor their restoration to seabird-specific life histories; and identify areas for further research to improve restoration utility in the future. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.     

Plant invasions,restoration, and economics: Perspectives from South African fynbos

Restoration is gaining importance in the management of plant invasions. As the success of restoration projects is frequently determined by factors other than ecological ones, we explored the ecological and financial feasibility of active restoration on three different invaded sites in South Africa's Cape Floristic Region. The aim of our study was to identify cost-effective ways of restoring functional native ecosystems following invasion by alien plants. Over three years we evaluated different restoration approaches using field trials and experimental manipulations (i.e. mechanical clearing, burning, different soil restoration techniques and sowing of native species) to reduce elevated soil nutrient levels and to re-establish native fynbos communities. Furthermore we investigated the possibility of introducing native fynbos species that can be used for sustainable harvesting to create an incentive for restoration on private land.Diversity and evenness of native plant species increased significantly after restoration at all three sites, whereas cover of alien plants decreased significantly, confirming that active restoration was successful. However, sowing of native fynbos species had no significant effect on native cover, species richness, diversity or evenness in the Acacia thicket and Kikuyu field, implying that the ecosystem was sufficiently resilient to allow autogenic recovery following clearing and burning of the invasive species. Soil restoration treatments resulted in an increase of available nitrogen in the Acacia thicket, but had no significant effects in the Eucalyptus plantation. However, despite elevated available soil nitrogen levels, native species germinated irrespective whether sown or unsown (i.e. regeneration from the soil seed bank).Without active introduction of native species, native grasses, forbs and other shrubs would have dominated, and proteoids and ericoids (the major fynbos growth forms) would have been under-represented.The financial analysis shows that income from flower harvesting following active restoration consistently outweighs income following passive restoration, but that the associated increase in income does not always justify the higher costs. We conclude that active restoration can be effective and financially feasible when compared to passive restoration, depending on the density of invasion. Active restoration of densely invaded sites may therefore only be justifiable if the target area is in a region of high conservation priority.     

Deciding when to lend a helping hand: a decision-making framework for seabird island restoration

Following the removal of an introduced species, island restoration can follow two general approaches: passive, where no further intervention occurs and the island is assumed to recover naturally, and; active, where recovery of key taxa (e.g. seabirds) is enhanced by manipulating movement and demography. Steps for deciding between these techniques are: (1) outlining an explicit restoration goal; (2) building a conceptual model of the system; (3) identifying the most effective management approach; and (4) implementing and monitoring outcomes. After decades of island restoration initiatives, retrospective analysis of species’ responses to active and passive management approaches is now feasible. We summarize the advantages of incorporating these analyses of past restoration results as an initial step in the decision-making process. We illustrate this process using lessons learned from the restoration of seabird-driven island ecosystems after introduced vertebrate eradication in New Zealand. Throughout seven decades of successful vertebrate eradication projects, the goals of island restoration have shifted from passive to active enhancement of island communities, which are heavily dependent on burrow-nesting petrel population recovery. Using a comparative analysis of petrel response to past predator eradications we built a conceptual model of petrel recovery dynamics and defined key site and species characteristics for use in a stepwise decision tree to select between active or passive seabird population management. Active restoration techniques should be implemented when seabird populations are absent or declining; and on islands with no nearby source colony, small remnant colonies, highly altered habitat with shallow soil and slopes, and with competitive species pairs. As we continue to restore complex island communities, decision-making tools using a logical, step-wise framework informed by previous restoration successes and failures can aid in increasing understanding of ecosystem response.     

Quandaries of a decade‐long restoration experiment trying to reduce invasive species: beat them,join them,give up,or start over?

We evaluate the outcomes and consequences of a decade‐long restoration project in a Hawaiian lowland wet forest as they relate to long‐term management actions. Our initial study was designed both to promote native biodiversity and to develop knowledge that would enable land management agencies to restore invaded forests. Our premise of success followed the prevalent perception that short‐term management, such as removal of invasive species, ideally translates into long‐term and sustainable restoration. We were therefore disappointed and perhaps discouraged in our results—little recovery of native biodiversity despite ongoing and labor‐intensive management. Not only did we fail to return the invaded forest to a native‐dominated system but also our efforts lead to recruitment of new non‐native species assemblages. The sobering truth of many restoration projects in Hawaii and elsewhere is that we can never completely walk away and “consider the job finished,” or we have to accept that some ecosystems cannot be returned to an all‐native state. Essentially, costs of restoration may outweigh the accomplishment. This setback gave us an opportunity to reconsider and modify our initial approach. By starting over with a new direction using both native and non‐invasive but non‐native species, we have adopted a new philosophy of “join them.” In our revision, we changed the players in the game by following invasive species removal with outplantings of native and non‐invasive non‐native species that will functionally fill missing roles in the ecosystem. We link social interest in the new experiment to changing attitudes about naturalness.     

The Need for Strategic Planning in Passive Restoration of Wildlife Populations

There are two reasons for strategic planning in passive wildlife restoration: first, to maximize the potential for colonization of restoration sites in challenged landscapes, and second, to maximize the contribution of each restoration project to regional, management area, ecosystem, or target species goals. Landscape configuration and the demographic/dispersal characteristics of target species can govern the level of wildlife response to habitat restoration projects. This is particularly true for fragmented habitats in rapidly suburbanizing areas, where the widely held notion that wildlife can colonize any restored habitat is challenged by barriers to dispersal. Because habitat restoration is a passive means of restoring wildlife populations, equal weight needs to be given to the context (likelihood of site colonization by target species) as well as the content (habitat) of restoration projects. Defining spatial patterns of demography, dispersion, and dispersal allows restorationists to place projects where they can have the greatest impact on the threats and sensitivities of target species, and the greatest contribution to the persistence and/or recovery of populations. Further, it provides a means of evaluating the relative potential worth of different restoration sites. If passive wildlife restoration is to be successful, the constraints to colonization need to be interpreted with regional goals of ecosystem and species management in mind.     

Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology

There is increasing interest in developing better predictive tools and a broader conceptual framework to guide the restoration of degraded land. Traditionally, restoration efforts have focused on re-establishing historical disturbance regimes or abiotic conditions, relying on successional processes to guide the recovery of biotic communities. However, strong feedbacks between biotic factors and the physical environment can alter the efficacy of these successional-based management efforts. Recent experimental work indicates that some degraded systems are resilient to traditional restoration efforts owing to constraints such as changes in landscape connectivity and organization, loss of native species pools, shifts in species dominance, trophic interactions and/or invasion by exotics, and concomitant effects on biogeochemical processes. Models of alternative ecosystem states that incorporate system thresholds and feedbacks are now being applied to the dynamics of recovery in degraded systems and are suggesting ways in which restoration can identify, prioritize and address these constraints.     

Restoration of Petroleum-Contaminated Soil Using Phased Bioremediation

A conceptual approach is presented for the restoration of petroleum-contaminated sites by combining bioremediation with revegetation using native plants. Phased bioremediation includes active and passive treatment options for soil containing greater than 1% total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHs). Phase I is used when initial soil TPH exceeds 1%. Phase I utilizes either active land treatment, with regular soil tillage, or passive bioremediation to attain a treatment endpoint of 1% soil TPH. Passive treatment utilizes static soil and TPH-tolerant plants. Phase II is utilized when soil contains 1% TPH or less. It combines passive bioremediation with revegetation using native plants to complete the site restoration process. The phased approach to bioremediation was developed from results of full-scale field bioremediation and laboratory treatability studies. This approach assumes that the kinetics of TPH biodegradation are initially rapid, followed by a much slower second stage. It provides active initial treatment, followed by lower-cost passive treatment. The selection of either active or passive treatment in Phase I depends on whether total cost or time of treatment is more important. Passive treatment, although less costly than active treatment, generally requires more time. Phased bioremediation may provide a flexible, cost-effective, and technically sound approach for restoration of petroleum-contaminated sites.

Vegetation used with passive bioremediation has several benefits. Plants stabilize soil, preventing erosion and thereby minimizing exposure to soil contaminants. Phytoremediation may also occur within the rhizosphere. The use of native plants has a strong ecological basis. They provide ecological diversity, are aesthetically pleasing and beneficial to wildlife, while requiring little maintenance. Phased bioremediation can provide a flexible, cost-effective, and technically sound approach for the restoration of petroleum-contaminated sites.     

Reclaiming Degraded Rainforest: A Spatial Evaluation of Gains and Losses in Subtropical Eastern Australia to Inform Future Investment in Restoration

Forest restoration is expected to play a pivotal role in reducing extinctions driven by deforestation and climate change over the next century. However, spatial and temporal patterns of restoration (both passive and active) are likely to be highly variable depending on degree of land use change as well as levels of forest and soil degradation and residual vegetation. Uncertainties regarding the spatial and temporal reinstatement of forest on degraded land make it difficult to determine where future investment in active restoration should be targeted. We used satellite data to quantify change in the extent and foliage projection cover (FPC) of woody vegetation returning to land previously cleared of subtropical rainforest in eastern Australia. We show a modest recovery of woody vegetation but document high variability in this trend between local areas, expanding by over 5% in some situations but declining by up to 2% in others over the last decade (1999–2009 period). This was accompanied by minor change in average FPC (?0.2 to 4.2%). Overall, decadal expansion in woody vegetation was most apparent in local areas with intermediate levels of existing forest reestablishment and was most likely to occur on steep terrain near existing vegetation. These results provide a valuable first evaluation of where restoration is occurring and the likely time frame required to meet conservation objectives under a business as usual scenario. This knowledge enables returns from current investment to be quantified and can be used to better allocate funds for restoration in the future.     

From marine deserts to algal beds: Treptacantha elegans revegetation to reverse stable degraded ecosystems inside and outside a No‐Take marine reserve

Canopy‐forming algae play a key role in temperate coastal ecosystems sustaining complex habitats that provide food and refuge for rich associated biotic communities. These macroalgae are in decline in many coastal areas, where overgrazing by herbivores can lead to the loss of these highly structured and diverse habitats toward less complex sea urchin barren grounds. Once established, low productive barren grounds are considered stable states maintained by several positive feedback mechanisms that prevent the recovery of marine forests. To revert this global decline, restoration efforts and measures are being encouraged by EU regulations and local actions. Here, we tested the success of active revegetation techniques as a tool to promote functional and productive Treptacantha elegans forests in sea urchin barren grounds under different restoration strategies (active, and combined active with passive strategies). Active revegetation was performed in 6 barren grounds, 3 located inside a Mediterranean No‐Take marine reserve (active and passive strategy) and 3 outside (active strategy alone), following a three‐step protocol: (1) sea urchin population eradication, (2) seeding with Treptacantha elegans, and (3) enhancement of T. elegans recruitment. Revegetation success was assessed 1 year later in the six barren grounds, but was only achieved after combining active with passive restoration strategies. Our results encourage revegetation of barren grounds to shift from less productive habitats to complex T. elegans forests, highlight the potential of the combined passive and active restoration strategies, as well as the important role of marine reserves not only in conservation but also in ecological restoration.     

Putting it back: Woody debris in young restoration plantings to stimulate return of reptiles

Despite active investment in restoration, some habitat features can be slow to develop on formerly degraded land and can consequently pose persistent barriers to the re‐establishment of specialist species. Coarse woody debris (CWD) is a critical resource for a whole suite of animal taxa but remains an underappreciated component of some forest ecosystems and restoration activities. The extent to which recovery of animal communities can be accelerated through artificial supplementation of woody debris is poorly understood especially for highly diverse tropical forest systems. Here, we report early results from an experiment designed to manipulate CWD in young restoration plantings (0–7 year old) in tropical north‐east Australia for the purposes of facilitating re‐establishment of rainforest reptiles. After 1 year, we demonstrate that CWD addition within restoration plantings adjacent to remnant forest can increase the local abundance of reptiles and promote colonisation of the log‐specialist Prickly Skink (Gnypetoscincus queenslandiae). These preliminary results, however, are based on observations of just 44 individual reptiles encompassing seven species. Ongoing monitoring will elucidate longer‐term outcomes to enable a proper evaluation of when and where CWD addition might be most beneficial in realising restoration goals.     

Passive Recovery of Vegetation after Herbivore Eradication on Santa Cruz Island,California

Understanding how insular ecosystems recover or are restructured after the eradication of an invasive species is crucial in evaluating conservation success and prioritizing island conservation efforts. Globally, herbivores have been removed from 762 islands, most with limited active restoration actions following eradication. Few studies have documented the effects of invasive herbivore removal after multiple decades of passive recovery. Here we evaluate recovery of vegetation on Santa Cruz Island, California, after the removal of feral sheep (Ovis aries) in 1984. We repeat a study conducted in 1980, and examine vegetation changes 28 years after the eradication. Before eradication, grazed areas were characterized by reduced plant cover, high exposure of bare ground, and erosion. After 28 years of passive recovery, transect data showed a 23% increase in woody overstory, whereas analysis of photographs from landscapes photographed pre‐ and post‐eradication showed a 26% increase in woody vegetation. Whole island vegetation maps similarly showed a transition from grass/bare ground (74.3% of cover) to woody plants (77.2% of cover), indicating the transition away from predominantly exotic annual grassland toward a community similar to the overstory of coastal scrubland but with an understory dominated by non‐native annual grasses. We estimate that replacement of grasses/bare ground by native woody vegetation has led to 70 and 17% increases in the stored carbon and nitrogen pools on the island, respectively. Our results demonstrate that these island ecosystems can experience significant recovery of native floral communities without intensive post‐eradication restoration, and results of recovery may take decades to be realized.     

Increase in nonnative understorey vegetation cover after nonnative conifer removal and passive restoration

Nonnative conifers are widespread in the southern hemisphere, where their use as plantation species has led to adverse ecosystem impacts sometimes intensified by invasion. Mechanical removal is a common strategy used to reduce or eliminate the negative impacts of nonnative conifers, and encourage native regeneration. However, a variety of factors may preclude active ecological restoration following removal. As a result, passive restoration – unassisted natural vegetation regeneration – is common following conifer removal. We asked, ‘what is the response of understorey cover to removal of nonnative conifer stands followed by passive restoration?' We sampled understorey cover in three site types: two‐ to ten‐year‐old clearcuts, native forest and current plantations. We then grouped understorey species by origin (native/nonnative) and growth form, and compared proportion and per cent cover of these groups as well as of bare ground and litter between the three site types. For clearcuts, we also analysed the effect of time since clearcut on the studied variables. We found that clearcuts had a significantly higher average proportion of nonnative understorey vegetation cover than native forest sites, where nonnative vegetation was nearly absent. The understorey of clearcut sites also averaged more overall vegetation cover and more nonnative vegetation cover (in particular nonnative shrubs and herbaceous species) than either plantation or native forest sites. Notably, 99% of nonnative shrub cover in clearcuts was the invasive nonnative species Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius). After ten years of passive recovery since clearcutting, the proportion of understorey vegetation cover that is native has not increased and remains far below the proportion observed in native forest sites. Reduced natural regeneration capacity of the native ecosystem, presence of invasive species in the surrounding landscape and land‐use legacies from plantation forestry may inhibit native vegetation recovery and benefit opportunistic invasives, limiting the effectiveness of passive restoration in this context. Abstract in Spanish is available with online material.     

Selecting Species for Passive and Active Riparian Restoration in Southern Mexico

In revegetation projects, distinguishing species that can be passively restored by natural regeneration from those requiring active restoration is not a trivial decision. We quantified tree species dominance (measured by an importance value index, IVI_i) and used abundance–size correlations to select those species suitable for passive and/or active restoration of disturbed riparian vegetation in the Lacandonia region, Southern Mexico. We sampled riparian vegetation in a 50 × 10–m transect in each of six reference (RE) and five disturbed (DE) riparian ecosystems. Those species representing more than 50% of total IVI in each ecosystem were selected, and Spearman rank correlation between abundance and diameter classes was calculated. For eight species, it was determined that passive restoration could be sufficient for their establishment. Another eight species could be transplanted by means of active restoration. Five species regenerate well in only one ecosystem type, suggesting that both restoration strategies could be used depending on the degree of degradation. Finally, two species were determined to not be suitable for restoration in the RE (based on the above selection criteria) and were not selected during this initial stage of our restoration project. The high number of tree species found in the RE suggests that the species pool for ecological restoration is large. However, sampling in both ecosystem types helped us reduce the number of species that requires active restoration. Restoration objectives must guide the selection of which methods to implement; in different conditions, other criteria such as dispersal syndrome or social value could be considered in the species selection.     

Success of active restoration in grasslands: a case study of birds in southern Brazil

Grasslands in southeastern South America have been extensively converted to various land uses such as agriculture, threatening regional biodiversity. Active restoration has been viewed as a management alternative for recovery of degraded areas worldwide, although most studies are conducted in forests and none has evaluated the effect of active restoration of grasslands in southeastern South America. From 2015 through 2017 we monitored a federally owned tract of grassland from the beginning of the active‐restoration process. We compared the bird community in this active‐restoration area (AR) with a reference area (NG) in Pampa grasslands in southern Brazil. We sampled birds by point counts and surveyed vegetation structure in plots. Over the 3 years of active restoration, bird species richness and abundance were higher in AR (30 species, 171 individuals) than NG (22 species, 154 individuals). The species composition also differed between the two habitats. Grassland bird species were present in both AR and NG. The vegetation structure differed between AR and NG in five attributes: height, short and tall grasses, herbs, and shrubs. Since it has been found that active restoration is useful in promoting species diversity, we encourage studies of the use of long‐term restoration efforts. Our study, even on a local scale, showed a rapid recovery of the bird community in the active‐restoration compared to native grassland, and suggests the potential for recovery of the degraded grasslands of the Brazilian Pampa biome.     

Habitat Loss,Fragmentation, and Restoration

The loss and fragmentation of habitat is a major threat to the continued survival of many species. We argue that, by including spatial processes in restoration management plans, the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation can be offset. Yet few management plans take into account spatial effects of habitat conservation/restoration despite the importance of spatial dynamics in species conservation and recovery plans. Tilman et al. (1997) found a “restoration lag” in simulations of species restoration when randomly selecting habitat for restoration. Other studies have suggested that the placement of restored habitat can overcome effects of habitat loss and fragmentation. Here we report the findings of simulations that examine different regional management strategies, focusing on habitat selection. We find that nonrandom restoration practices such as restoring only habitat that is adjacent to those occupied by the target species can dramatically reduce or negate any restoration lag. In fact, we find that the increase in patch occupancy of the landscape can be greater than two-fold in the adjacent versus the random scenarios after only two restoration events, and this increase can be as great as six-fold during the early restoration phase. Many restoration efforts have limitations on both funds and available sites for restoration, necessitating high potential success on any restoration efforts. The incorporation of spatial analyses in restoration management may drastically improve a species' chance of recovery. Therefore, general principles that incorporate spatial processes and sensible management are needed to guide specific restoration efforts.