The evolution of Society for Ecological Restoration's principles and standards—counter‐response to Gann et al.

In response to our recent article (Higgs et al. 2018) in these pages, George Gann and his coauthors defended the Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) International Standards, clarified several points, and introduced some new perspectives. We offer this counter‐response to address some of these perspectives. More than anything, our aims are in sharpening the field of restoration in a time of rapid scaling‐up of interest and effort, and support further constructive dialogue going forward. Our perspective remains that there is an important distinction needed between “Standards” and “Principles” that is largely unheeded by Gann et al. (2018). We encourage SER to consider in future iterations of its senior policy document to lean on principles first, and then to issue advice on standards that meet the needs of diverse conditions and social, economic, and political realities.     

Sand Dune Restoration in North Brittany, France: A 10-Year Monitoring Study

Dunes, which account for 13% of the Ille et Vilaine north Brittany coast, France, were degraded by high tourist pressure, and they were restored from 1988 onward. Ten years after commencing work an assessment of the restoration was made on three dunes: Les Chevrets, L'Anse Du Guesclin, and Le Verger. Annual monitoring of the vegetation and dune morphology provided an opportunity to study the restoration process. The dune front, which is similar to a reference pioneer dune, lies in front of the mobile dune. The highest part of the dune is an advanced stage of mobile dune. The restoration of the fixed rear dune was accomplished neither in terms of vegetation composition nor in terms of species richness. The vegetation parameter study allows differentiation between the dune front, the dune summit, and the rear dune. The variation in species richness and floristic composition from one zone to another can be explained by abiotic factors such as salinity and the accretion of sand. The restoration was satisfactory in terms of the geomorphology. Marram grass is a good tool for restoring the topography, but it will take a very long time to restore the conservation value of the dune.     

The SER Standards: a globally relevant and inclusive tool for improving restoration practice—a reply to Higgs et al.

In response to a critique by Higgs et al., this article clarifies the content and intent of the Society for Ecological Restoration's (SER) International Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration. Higgs et al. expressed concern that the SER Standards are not sufficiently underpinned by principles and risk disenfranchising some practitioners by narrowing what qualifies as ecological restoration. To demonstrate that these concerns are unfounded, we discuss the policy context and principles on which the Standards are based, its organizational structure, the innovative and inclusive approach used for development, and highlight significant errata by Higgs et al.     

Urban Grassland Restoration: A Neglected Opportunity for Biodiversity Conservation

Urbanization is one of the most severe threats to biodiversity, so why should not we use green space in cities to counteract the biodiversity loss as much as possible? Urban grasslands provide a large number of social, financial, recreational, and environmental ecosystem services but can also support high biodiversity. In this article, I describe the importance of urban grasslands for (local) biodiversity and recommend strengthening restoration ecological research and efforts to optimize these novel ecosystems for conservation purposes. The management intensity of a high proportion of urban grasslands decreased over the last decades. However, species richness of these grasslands is still low, although there is now a great potential for higher plant, but also animal diversity. While communal authorities are interested in cost‐efficient but at the same time biodiversity‐friendly management of urban grasslands, a well‐founded scientific basis for the restoration of urban grassland is still missing. I argue that besides all challenges associated with the restoration of urban habitats we should urgently proceed in the development of appropriate and effective restoration approaches and communicate knowledge gained to urban planners and stakeholders. Widening the scope of restoration ecological research to novel ecosystems such as urban grasslands is one of the most important recent challenges for biodiversity restoration and it gives urban habitats the significance they deserve .     

Insights from a Cross‐Disciplinary Seminar: 10 Pivotal Papers for Ecological Restoration

Restoration ecology is a deepening and diversifying field with current research incorporating multiple disciplines and infusing long‐standing ideas with fresh perspectives. We present a list of 10 recent pivotal papers exemplifying new directions in ecological restoration that were selected by students in a cross‐disciplinary graduate seminar at the University of California, Berkeley. We highlight research that applies ecological theory to improve restoration practice in the context of global change (e.g. climate modeling, evaluation of novel ecosystems) and discuss remaining knowledge gaps. We also discuss papers that recognize the social context of restoration and the coupled nature of social and ecological systems, ranging from the incorporation of cultural values and Traditional Ecological Knowledge into restoration, to the consideration of the broader impacts of markets on restoration practices. In addition, we include perspectives that focus on improving communication between social and natural scientists as well as between scientists and practitioners, developing effective ecological monitoring, and applying more integrated, whole‐landscape approaches to restoration. We conclude with insights on recurrent themes in the papers regarding planning restoration in human‐modified landscapes, application of ecological theory, improvements to restoration practice, and the social contexts of restoration. We share lessons from our cross‐disciplinary endeavor, and invite further discussion on the future directions of restoration ecology through contributions to our seminar blog site http://restecology.blogspot.com .     

Restoration Ecology's silver jubilee: innovation,debate, and creating a future for restoration ecology

At a time when the science and practice of restoration ecology is adapting to ongoing environmental and social change, innovations in both methods and concepts are essential. Encouraging innovation means allowing open debate about alternative approaches that may add to the toolbox available for restoration. Such approaches are usually being examined as additions to, rather than substitutes for, traditional restoration practices. Recent debate has focused on the scope and intent of restoration as defined in documents such as the Society for Ecological Restoration Standards. There is a mismatch between the default aim in the standards of full restoration to a native reference system and the goals of international restoration efforts that have a broader and more functional focus. The next generation of restoration scientists and practitioners will need to navigate these issues to ensure that restoration remains effective and relevant. This will require, amongst other things, ongoing learning, sharing information and insights, humility, objectivity, continuous examination of assumptions, and questioning current practices and perspectives.     

退化生态系统恢复与恢复生态学

恢复生态学起源于100a前的山地、草原、森林和野生生物等自然资源的管理研究,形成于20世纪80年代。它是研究生态整合性的恢复和管理过程的科学。恢复生态学的研究对象是在自然或人为干扰下形成的偏离自然状态的退化生态系统。生态恢复的目标包括恢复退化生态系统的结构、功能、动态和服务功能,其长期目标是通过恢复与保护相结合,实现生态系统的可持续发展。恢复生态学的理论与方法较多,它们均源于生态学等相关学科,但自我设计和人为设计是唯一源于恢复生态学研究和实践的理论。由于生态系统的复杂性,退化生态系统恢复的方向和时间具有不确定性,其恢复的机理可用临界阈值理论和状态跃迁模型进行解释。中国森林恢复中存在的问题包括：大量营造种类和结构单一的人工林忽视了生物多样性在生态恢复中的作用;大量使用外来种;忽视了生态系统健康所要求的异质性;忽略了物种间的生态交互作用;造林时对珍稀濒危种需要缺乏考虑;城镇绿化忽略了植被的生态功能等问题。此外,还介绍了生态恢复的方法、成功恢复的标准,并提出了恢复生态学的发展趋势：恢复生态学尚未形成理论和方法体系,要成熟还有很长的路要走;恢复生态学正在强调自然恢复与社会、人文的耦合;对森林恢复研究要集中在恢复中的障碍和如何克服这些障碍两个方面;鉴于生态系统复杂性和动态性,应停止期待发现能预测恢复产出的简单定律,相反,应该根据恢复地点及目标多样性而强调适应性恢复。     

On Sustainability, Estuaries, and Ecosystem Restoration: The Art of the Practical

Ecosystem restoration in highly complex, human‐dominated estuaries rests on a strong conceptual foundation of sustainability, ecosystems, and adaptive management of human‐induced environmental impacts. Successful application involves evaluating uncertainty, incorporating place‐based information, and engaging diverse constituencies in the planning process. That means integration of technical knowledge with an understanding of the “cultural milieu” inherent in all estuaries, that is, the intensity of human activity and impacts plus socioeconomic factors relevant to restoration goals. Operational definitions of what constitutes acceptable ecosystem conditions and current baselines are critical yet rest in large measure on cultural values and socioeconomic considerations. Resources for long‐term monitoring and research to assess performance and ecosystem condition are paramount. Unprecedented population growth promises additional stressors on estuarine environments worldwide, making maintenance of present conditions difficult. The art of good, practical ecosystem restoration as a management tool at multiple geographic scales promises to play a crucial role in sustainability goals.     

Restoration and management of riparian ecosystems: a catchment perspective

1. We propose that strategies for the management of riparian ecosystems should incorporate concepts of landscape ecology and contemporary principles of restoration and conservation. A detailed understanding of the temporal and spatial dynamics of the catchment landscape (e.g. changes in the connectivity and functions of channel, riparian and terrestrial components) is critical. 2. This perspective is based upon previous definitions of riparian ecosystems, consideration of functional attributes at different spatial scales and retrospective analyses of anthropogenic influences on river catchments. 3. Restoration strategies must derive from a concise definition of the processes to be restored and conserved, recognition of social values and commitments, quantification of ecological circumstances and the quality of background information and determination of alternatives. 4. The basic components of an effective restoration project include: clear objectives (ecological and physical), baseline data and historical information (e.g. the hydrogeomorphic setting and the disturbance regime), a project design that recognizes functional attributes of biotic refugia, a comparison of plans and outcomes with reference ecosystems; a commitment to long-term planning, implementation and monitoring and, finally, a willingness to learn from both successes and failures. 5. Particularly important is a thorough understanding of past natural disturbances and human-induced changes on riparian functions and attributes, obtained by a historical reconstruction of the catchment.     

The Semiglades: The Collision of Restoration,Social Values,and the Ecosystem Concept

Defining success targets in restoration and how social values affect them are two commonly discussed issues in restoration today. We believe that how success is commonly defined—with vague terms such as “healthy ecosystem” or cited as a return to a previous, historic state—needs to be reevaluated. With the increasing number of novel ecosystems, there is an increasing conflict between the ecosystem concept, social values, and restoration. This arises from the fact that ecosystems are defined by the values of the scientists describing them, necessarily constraining the ecosystem to a generally static concept. It is not directly the concept, but how it is perceived through our filter of social values that represses the creativity and innovation needed in restoration today. Within restoration, we feel that the ecosystem concept does a disservice by ignoring the increasing number of novel systems, and that hinders real progress in a time when hesitation can be costly. To best illustrate this, we offer the example of restoration of the Florida Everglades and how it has become a novel system in pattern and process. We suggest renaming the Everglades “The Semiglades” in hopes of opening a dialog to expose social/ecosystem biases and include novel landscapes in management and planning.     

恢复生态学——退化生态系统生物多样性恢复的有效途径

人类在改造和利用自然的过程中 ,伴随着对自然环境产生负面的影响 ,这种影响以不同的时空规模出现。某些工业上的突发性事件 ,如前苏联的切尔诺贝尔核电站事故 ,巨大油轮的泄油事件等 ,均可在较大的范围且往往是在有限的区域内引起剧烈的生态变动 ,这种灾难性的环境变化随即会对生物多样性产生影响 ;另一种规模的人类活动的影响所引起的变化 ,如长期的工业污染 ,大规模的森林砍伐以及将大范围的自然生境逐渐转变成农业和工业景观 ,则是逐年的、跨区域的、甚至波及整个大陆 ,但这种变化对生物多样性的影响会持续更长的时间 ,因为某些种类会由…     

From Reintroduction to Assisted Colonization: Moving along the Conservation Translocation Spectrum

Translocation, the intentional movement of living organisms from one area to another is increasingly being used as a conservation tool to overcome barriers to dispersal. A dichotomy exists for conservation‐oriented translocations: on one hand, there are those that release plants or animals into known historic ranges and on the other hand, there are releases outside historic distributions. Misuse of or attempts to redefine established terms and a proliferation of variants of new terms such as assisted colonization, confuse and hamper communication. The aim of this opinion article is to describe and define a conservation translocation spectrum, from species reintroductions to assisted colonization, and beyond, and in so doing provide a standard framework and terminology for discussing translocation options. I suggest that we are moving along this spectrum, away from the dictates of historical species distribution records, toward the inclusion of more risky interventions that will be required to respond to habitat shifts due to anthropogenic impacts. To some extent rapid climate change changes everything, including how we should view introductions versus reintroductions. We need to seriously consider adding other approaches to our conservation toolbox. Assisted colonization will start us along this path, acknowledging as it does the accelerated rate of habitat change and the problems of attempting to preserve dynamic systems. The next step along the conservation translocation spectrum may be for reintroduction biology and restoration ecology to more comprehensively join forces on carefully selected projects to use species introductions to create novel ecosystems through active ecological community construction.     

新型生态系统理论及其争议综述

澳大利亚Richard J Hobbs教授等近年提出的新型生态系统(Novel Ecosystems)理论认为,由于人类作用,地球生态系统经历了前所未有的变化,很多生态系统已经越过不可逆转的阈值,不可能恢复到原有状态,形成了新的生态系统,其生物要素、非生物要素和系统功能等都发生了显著改变;人类应该面对现实,必须反思传统生态保护和生态恢复的行为、政策和思维;应该致力新型生态系统的特征、属性和演替规律的研究,在管理、规划、政策、组织和技术等方面的创新。新型生态系统理论引起了很大争议。质疑者认为,由于自然作用力和人类的持续扰动,地球生态系统一直在不断变化,所以一直都是"新"的,根本没必要贴上"新型"标签;该理论基本概念模糊,理论模型不精确,缺乏严密的逻辑推理,还很不成熟;该理论无助于生态保护和生态恢复的实践,会扰乱人们的思想,没有实践价值。不过,支持者和质疑者都承认地球上很多生态系统的确遭到严重破坏,已经发生深刻演替,极有必要对这类系统的非线性机制、系统阈值、恢复力、新范式,以及破坏后的所有特征等开展研究,应该理性选择合适的修复方法,理性分析人工干预的程度及其成功的可能性,科学制定行动方案和优选标准。跟踪国际前沿,开展新型生态系统理论研究有助于丰富我国恢复生态学理论以及创新工程实践。     

Restoration of fen ecosystems in the Vecht River plain: cost-benefit analysis of hydrological alternatives

In the Vecht river plain, the vegetation diversity has been diminished during recent decades, due to hydrological changes and resulting eutrophication. Different options are discussed for hydrological management aimed at abating the eutrophication and at stimulating the characteristic mesotraphent succession phases of the fen vegetation. The ecological impact of the management plans are estimated with the hydro-ecological model ICHORS; this model takes into account the relations between the non-biotic environment and the presence of hydrophytes and phreatophytes. The impact of the hydrological options is assessed, after rearrangement of the predicted values of the species to values of the required fen vegetation. These results are incorporated in the management options with the water balances of the polders. Information on the costs of the options is used as a basis for a cost-benefit analysis. Technical hydrological solutions such as purification of the supplied water might contribute to the eutrophication abatement, but they are on their own unlikely to restore the ecosystems. Contrastingly, options involving the restoration of the original hydrology would probably lead to the characteristic mesotraphent fen vegetation once more, and the financial implications of this are likely to be the more favourable in the long-term.     

The Benefits of Harvesting Wetland Invaders for Cellulosic Biofuel: An Ecosystem Services Perspective

The emerging interest in cellulosic biofuel production has led the call for alternative cropping systems that maximize production along with the accompanying regulating, supporting, and cultural ecosystem services. We evaluate the potential for biomass harvested from invaded wetlands to achieve these goals. The ecosystem service trade‐offs associated with a wetland invader harvest are evaluated followed by a case study estimating the energy production and nutrient removal of harvesting Phalaris arundinacea from invaded wetlands in Wisconsin, United States. Estimates for energy production from this single species harvest dwarf current renewable energy sources for the state of Wisconsin and offer the potential to recapture approximately 50–200% of the excess nitrogen and phosphorus annually applied as fertilizer. This restoration technique would not only generate income from biomass sales to subsidize the cost of restoration, but also has the potential to shift the system toward more desirable environmental conditions by removing nutrients annually, reducing downstream eutrophication, and enhancing the ability of more desirable vegetation to establish by removing the litter layer created by the invasive species.     

Ecological Values of Shallow-Water Habitats: Implications for the Restoration of Disturbed Ecosystems

A presumed value of shallow-habitat enhanced pelagic productivity derives from the principle that in nutrient-rich aquatic systems phytoplankton growth rate is controlled by light availability, which varies inversely with habitat depth. We measured a set of biological indicators across the gradient of habitat depth within the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta (California) to test the hypothesis that plankton biomass, production, and pelagic energy flow also vary systematically with habitat depth. Results showed that phytoplankton biomass and production were only weakly related to phytoplankton growth rates whereas other processes (transport, consumption) were important controls. Distribution of the invasive clam Corbicula fluminea was patchy, and heavily colonized habitats all supported low phytoplankton biomass and production and functioned as food sinks. Surplus primary production in shallow, uncolonized habitats provided potential subsidies to neighboring recipient habitats. Zooplankton in deeper habitats, where grazing exceeded phytoplankton production, were likely supported by significant fluxes of phytoplankton biomass from connected donor habitats. Our results provide three important lessons for ecosystem science: (a) in the absence of process measurements, derived indices provide valuable information to improve our mechanistic understanding of ecosystem function and to benefit adaptive management strategies; (b) the benefits of some ecosystem functions are displaced by water movements, so the value of individual habitat types can only be revealed through a regional perspective that includes connectedness among habitats; and (c) invasive species can act as overriding controls of habitat function, adding to the uncertainty of management outcomes.     

Sampling Techniques Influence Understory Plant Trajectories After Restoration: An Example from Ponderosa Pine Restoration

Abstract Although there is no one correct technique for sampling vegetation, the sampling design chosen may greatly influence the conclusions researchers can draw from restoration treatments. Considerations when designing vegetation sampling protocol include determining what sampling attributes to measure, the size and shape of the sampling plot, the number of replicates and their location within the study area, and the frequency of sampling. We installed 20 point‐intercept transects (50‐m long), 8 belt transects (10 × 50 m), 10 adapted Daubenmire transects (four 0.5 × 2‐m plots), and 4 modified‐Whittaker plots (20 × 50 m with smaller nested plots) in treatment and control units to measure understory herbaceous response in a forest restoration experiment that tested different treatments. Point‐intercept transects on average recorded at least twice as much plant cover as did adapted Daubenmire transects and modified‐Whittaker plots taken at the same location for all control and treatment units. Point‐intercept transects and adapted Daubenmire plots on average captured fewer rare and exotic species in the control and treatment units in comparison with the belt transects and modified‐Whittaker plots. Modified‐Whittaker plots captured the highest species richness in all units. Early successional understory response to restoration treatments was likely masked by the response of the herbaceous community to yearly climatic variation (dry vs. wet years). Species richness and abundance were higher in wet years than dry years for all control and treatment units. Our results illustrate that sampling techniques can greatly influence perceptions of understory plant trajectories and therefore the interpretation of whether restoration goals have been achieved. In addition, our results suggest that restoration monitoring needs to be conducted for a sufficient length of time so that restoration treatment responses can be detected.