Immediate response of fish communities and water chemistry to causeway breaching and bridge installation in the Kaouk River estuary, British Columbia, Canada

Gerwing, Travis G.; Plate, Elmar; Kidd, Jess; Sinclair, Jesse A.; Burns, Christopher W.; Johnson, Shane; Roias, Steven; McCulloch, Cameron; Bocking, Robert C.

doi:10.1111/rec.13110

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, breaching a coastal embankment to enhance juvenile Pacific salmon access to isolated estuary rearing habitat must take into consideration interactions between freshwater, marine, and terrestrial habitats. However, including landscape level considerations into a project that only breaches an embankment does not constitute Landscape Restoration (Gerwing et al 2019;Gerwing et al 2020b). Instead, we posit that Landscape Restoration would entail restoration in multiple ecosystems or landscape units and (or) restoration of interactions between them.…”

Section: Landscape Restoration--activities That Seek To Recover Lands...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Speaking the same language: Aligning project designations to clarify communication in restoration ecology

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As we enter the United Nations Decade of Ecosystem Restoration, the need to engage in restoration activities has never been greater. Included within this need is a requirement for clear communication between researchers, practitioners, policymakers, stakeholders, and community members. To facilitate the discussion and assessment of restorative activities, we propose two decision trees to differentiate between key restoration terms (Reclamation, Rehabilitation, Ecological Restoration, Rewilding, Landscape Restoration, Intra-Ecosystem Restoration, Reference Condition Restoration, and Ecological Reclamation) and to clarify how they relate to each other, based upon project scope and desired/intended project outcomes. Continued use of unclear terminology impedes practitioners or researchers from using the literature efficiently, to find precedents that could assist their current efforts. As such, increasing clarity of communications will ensure restoration is discussed within a framework of well-defined and agreed upon terms. It is our hope that this suggested framework will contribute to the ongoing and much needed terminology debate and help enhance cohesion on the use of key terms within the restoration focused literature. Given the increased focus upon restoration projects of any kind, especially during the UN's decade of ecosystem restoration, it is more important than ever that restoration practitioners speak the same language.

show abstract

Section: Landscape Restoration--activities That Seek To Recover Lands...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Speaking the same language: Aligning project designations to clarify communication in restoration ecology

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is often assumed, if not implicitly stated, that increasing similarity is desirable, especially between reference and restored habitats. However, similarity targets are seldom quantified or discussed (Roman et al 2002; Moir et al 2005; Hobbs et al 2007; Gerwing et al 2017 b ; Campbell et al 2019; Gerwing et al 2019; Gerwing et al 2020 a ; Gerwing et al 2020 b ), an issue that could have substantial impacts upon restoration success or failure for two important reasons. First, all biological communities vary through space and time, and no two communities will ever be identical in species composition or density.…”

Section: Achievable Community Similarity As Restoration Targetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The appeal of measuring community similarity in restoration studies is obvious, as by simply measuring community composition and density/abundance, contrasts can be made between restored/impacted and reference sites. However, restoration studies that use community similarity measures often only assess community similarity, and do not go on to examine ecosystem function (Gerwing et al 2017 b ; Campbell et al 2019; Cox et al 2019; Gerwing et al 2020 b ). Habitat functionality is difficult to define, and we will not summarize this debate here (Schwartz et al 2000; Jax 2005).…”

Section: Relationships Between Community Similarity and Ecosystem Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Similarity analyses in restoration ecology and how to improve their utility

Gerwing

Hawkes

2021

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use of multivariate and nonparametric statistical analyses such as similarity percentages analysis has increased in the past decade within restoration studies. While very useful to compare community composition of restored habitats to reference areas, the ease in which these analyses can be applied, coupled with their power, can result in interpretation errors that could have negative ramifications upon restoration projects. Primarily, similarity measures are often used without stipulating similarity or dissimilarity targets. Despite these drawbacks, the benefits of these methods far outweigh the risks, especially if practitioners take care to specify their community similarity targets a priori and base these targets upon a representative range of reference conditions. However, restoration practitioners should remain focused on fulfilling the objectives of ecological restoration, by ensuring the development of functional habitat that is informed, but not dictated by, statistical analyses. As such, practitioners should take steps to ensure that meaningful univariate trends (e.g. an important species at risk or invasive species) and the overall functionality of the habitat should not be neglected, in favor of these methods of data analysis.

show abstract

“…The central premise of the SER Standards' definition is making severely degraded land useable by humans. However, many practitioners and other professionals focus instead on reclamation outcomes other than direct human use, such as the establishment of productive wildlife habitat or biological communities comprised primarily of native species (Matter & Ney 1981; Parmenter & MacMahon 1992; McCarthy et al 2008; Burger 2011; Song et al 2012; Almeida et al 2014; Audet et al 2014; Foster et al 2017; Chen et al 2018; Campbell et al 2019; Hawkes & Gerwing 2019; Lupardus et al 2019; Wilson & Bayne 2019; Gerwing et al 2020 a , 2020 b ; Hawkes et al 2020, in press). As such, the anthropogenic focus of this definition in the SER standards does not conform well with how the term is often used.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Restoration, reclamation, and rehabilitation: on the need for, and positing a definition of, ecological reclamation

Gerwing

Hawkes

Gann

et al. 2021

Restoration Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within the burgeoning field of restoration ecology, defining the concept of reclamation relative to rehabilitation and ecological restoration is important to enhance comparability between studies, as well as to enable clear communication of project specific methods and goals. The Society for Ecological Restoration's international standards (SER Standards), second edition, defines reclamation as “the process of making severely degraded land fit for cultivation or a state suitable for some human use.” However, we posit that this definition, and its anthropogenic focus, does not well match how the term is often used by practitioners, and in some legal or agency documents. Further, the relationship between restoration, rehabilitation, and reclamation is unclear. We propose a more specific term and definition, ecological reclamation: “the process of assisting the recovery of severely degraded ecosystems to benefit native biota through the establishment of habitats, populations, communities, or ecosystems that are similar, but not necessarily identical to surrounding and naturally occurring ecosystems.” This definition emphasizes that the objective of a reclamation project may not be direct human use, and begins to better distinguish between ecological reclamation, rehabilitation, and ecological restoration; however, more work and discussion on these relationships is required. Distinguishing these terms will result in better comparisons between studies, improving current and future literature reviews. Further, this term will also enable practitioners to better define project goals, and enhance communication to stakeholders, practitioners, and researchers.

show abstract

Immediate response of fish communities and water chemistry to causeway breaching and bridge installation in the Kaouk River estuary, British Columbia, Canada

Cited by 7 publications

References 45 publications

Speaking the same language: Aligning project designations to clarify communication in restoration ecology

Speaking the same language: Aligning project designations to clarify communication in restoration ecology

Similarity analyses in restoration ecology and how to improve their utility

Restoration, reclamation, and rehabilitation: on the need for, and positing a definition of, ecological reclamation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About