Restoring Riparian Ecosystems: The Challenge of Accommodating Variability and Designing Restoration Trajectories

Hughes, Francine M. R.; Colston, Adrian; Mountford, J. O.

doi:10.5751/es-01292-100112

Cited by 154 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, the extent to which the spatial scale (area) of a restoration effort influences restoration success has not been extensively studied even though the failure of some projects has been attributed, at least in part, to the size of the project (Ehrenfeld and Toth 1997;Hughes et al 2005). In some cases, the area of restored habitat is simply too small compared to the size of nearby degraded habitat or the flux of water from upstream degraded habitat overwhelms efforts.…”

Section: Scale and Context Dependency Of Ecological Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Hughes et al (2005) have argued, using reference systems can give a false sense of predictability of ecological outcomes. Rather than selecting reference 'endpoints', a desired trajectory should be defined that takes into account a range of values for key system attributes that are inherently variable; e.g.…”

Section: Add Ecological Insurance To All Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rather than selecting reference 'endpoints', a desired trajectory should be defined that takes into account a range of values for key system attributes that are inherently variable; e.g. ranges of flow and sediment inputs, variability in the location and number of habitat types, and changes in the species composition of assemblages through time and space (Hughes et al 2005).…”

Section: Add Ecological Insurance To All Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reforming Watershed Restoration: Science in Need of Application and Applications in Need of Science

Palmer

2008

Estuaries and Coasts

192

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coastal and inland waters are continuing to decline in many parts of the world despite major efforts made to restore them. This is due in part to the inadequate role that ecological science has played in shaping restoration efforts. A significant amount of fundamental ecological knowledge dealing with issues such as system dynamics, state changes, context-dependency of ecological response, and diversity is both under-used by managers and practitioners and under-developed by ecologists for use in realworld applications. Some of the science that is being 'used' has not been adequately tested. Thus, restoration ecology as a science and ecological restoration as a practice are in need of reform. I identify five ways in which our ecological knowledge should be influencing restoration to a far greater extent than at present including a need to: shift the focus to restoration of process and identification of the limiting factors instead of structures and single species, add ecological insurance to all projects, identify a probabilistic range of possible outcomes instead of a reference condition, expand the spatial scale of efforts, and apply hierarchical approaches to prioritization. Prominent examples of restoration methods or approaches that are commonly used despite little evidence to support their efficacy are highlighted such as the use of only structural enhancements to restore biodiversity. There are also major gaps in scientific knowledge that are of immediate need to policy makers, managers, and restoration practitioners including: predictive frameworks to guide the restoration of ecological processes, identification of social-ecological feedbacks that constrain ecosystem recovery and data to support decisions of where and how to implement restoration projects to achieve the largest gains. I encourage ecologists to respond to the demand for their scientific input so that restoration can shift from an engineering-driven process to a more sustainable enterprise that fully integrates ecological processes and social science methods.

show abstract

Section: Scale and Context Dependency Of Ecological Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Add Ecological Insurance To All Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Add Ecological Insurance To All Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reforming Watershed Restoration: Science in Need of Application and Applications in Need of Science

Palmer

2008

Estuaries and Coasts

192

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moss (2008) insiste également sur le temps de réponse qui est parfois très long et rend difficile l'évaluation des interventions. Sur ces bases, Hughes et al (2005) concluent à l'impossibilité de définir des objectifs trop précis en matière de restauration.…”

Section: De L'évaluation à La Restaurationunclassified

Les conditions de référence de la directive cadre européenne sur l’eau face à la dynamique des hydrosystèmes et des usages

Bouleau

Pont

2014

Nat. Sci. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

À l'interface entre politiques de l'environnement et connaissances scientifiques écologiques, la directive cadre européenne sur l'eau (DCE) est un cas exemplaire sous de multiples aspects : une inscription claire dans le New Public Management (NPM) qui envahit nos appareils d'État, une traduction du « bon état écologique » en termes d'indicateurs mesurant l'éloignement à des conditions de référence par ailleurs objets de débat dans la recherche écologique, une opportunité pour définir et appliquer des itinéraires de restauration. Le travail à deux voix d'une sociologue et d'un écologue produit ici une analyse fine des conditions d'émergence et de mise en oeuvre de la DCE tout en identifiant les contours de futurs débats (restauration, appropriation citoyenne) au-delà même du terme prévu de la directive (en 2027). La RédactionRésumé -La directive cadre européenne sur l'eau (DCE) 1 impose une nouvelle forme de gestion des milieux aquatiques et la notion de conditions de référence est un point-clé pour la mise en oeuvre de l'évaluation (mesurée comme un écart à cette référence) et pour définir les objectifs de restauration. Cependant, de nombreuses critiques se sont élevées contre ce concept. Le contexte de « changement global 2 » ne fait que renforcer cette tendance. Dans cet article, coécrit par un écologue et une sociopolitiste, nous revenons sur la construction sociale et scientifique de cette notion, des indicateurs qui en découlent et de leur agrégation dans la DCE. En nous focalisant sur son application aux cours d'eau, nous expliquons son origine, son succès, ses limites et les questions que pose son institutionnalisation. Cela nous conduit à nous interroger sur l'avenir de cette politique, en particulier du point de vue de la restauration. Abstract -The reference conditions in the EU Water Framework Directive confronted with the dynamics of hydrosystems and their uses.The reference conditions are a key concept of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD). This directive holds that the ecological status of a particular water body shall be assessed by quantifying the deviation from the typical reference conditions which refer to a stable state of an ecosystem in the absence of significant human disturbance. This concept is subject to criticism from several authors, all the more since global change will deeply modify the functioning of aquatic ecosystems and their associated biocenosis, whatever the impacts of human activities at local scale. In this paper, an ecologist and a sociologist reconsider the social and scientific construction of the reference conditions concept and associated rules ("one out -all out"). We explain its origin, success and limits, as well as the questions it raises. We point out aspects not considered in this concept and why it challenges the WFD implementation and future management of rivers.

show abstract

“…Consequently, restoration of riparian areas 8 has become a global management priority (Hughes et al, 2005;Hughes and Rood, 2003; Webb and Erskine, 9 2003). 10 Soil ecosystem functioning is connected intimately to soil organic matter (SOM) turnover, a set of complex 11 and intertwined biological processes that recycle biotic residues (such as plant litter, dead organisms, etc.)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of carbon and nitrogen dynamics in riparian soils: Model development

Brovelli¹,

Batlle-Aguilar²,

Barry³

2012

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1The quality of riparian soils and their ability to buffer contaminant releases to aquifers and streams are 2 connected intimately to moisture content and nutrient dynamics, in particular of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N). 3A multi-compartment model -named the Riparian Soil Model (RSM) -was developed to help investigate 4 the influence and importance of environmental parameters, climatic factors and management practices on 5 soil ecosystem functioning in riparian areas. The model improves existing tools, in particular regarding its 6 capability to simulate a wide range of temporal scales, from days to centuries, along with its ability to predict 7 the concentration and vertical distribution of dissolved organic matter (DOM). It was found that DOM 8 concentration controls the amount of soil organic matter (SOM) stored in the soil as well as the respiration 9 rate. The moisture content was computed using a detailed water budget approach, assuming that within each 10 time step all the water above field capacity drains to the layer underneath, until it becomes fully saturated. A 11 mass balance approach was also used for nutrient transport, whereas the biogeochemical reaction network 12 was developed as an extension of an existing C and N turnover model. Temperature changes across the soil 13 profile were simulated analytically, assuming periodic temperature changes in the topsoil. Sustainable management of riparian soils is of primary importance to preserve natural ecosystem 3 functioning. Riparian zones are sources of ecosystem functions and services including biodiversity hotspots, 4 water quality enhancement, and recreation sites (Brinson et al., 1981;Naiman and Decamps, 1997). 5Throughout the world, the ecological condition of natural riparian systems has declined due to a number of 6 factors, including streamflow regulation, floodplain development, channelization, and the spread of non-7 native species (Naiman and Decamps, 1997;Naiman et al., 2005). Consequently, restoration of riparian areas 8 has become a global management priority (Hughes et al., 2005;Hughes and Rood, 2003; Webb and Erskine, 9 2003). 10 Soil ecosystem functioning is connected intimately to soil organic matter (SOM) turnover, a set of complex 11 and intertwined biological processes that recycle biotic residues (such as plant litter, dead organisms, etc.) to 12 inorganic molecules. Environmental and climatic factors affect decomposition rates, the biological activity of 13 the soil and ultimately SOM cycling (Laio et al., 2001;Porporato et al., 2003). Soil moisture has a direct 14 influence on the processes mediated by the soil biota (pedofauna, bacteria, fungi, etc.) because optimal 15 decomposition rates are achieved only in a narrow saturation range (Bell et al., 2008; Ju et al., 2006; 16 Porporato et al., 2003;Van Gestel et al., 1992). Owing to the strong dependence of ecological processes on 17 soil moisture, linear and non-linear interactions and feedbacks exist between hydrological processes and soil 18 ecosystem functionin...

show abstract

Restoring Riparian Ecosystems: The Challenge of Accommodating Variability and Designing Restoration Trajectories

Cited by 154 publications

References 47 publications

Reforming Watershed Restoration: Science in Need of Application and Applications in Need of Science

Reforming Watershed Restoration: Science in Need of Application and Applications in Need of Science

Les conditions de référence de la directive cadre européenne sur l’eau face à la dynamique des hydrosystèmes et des usages

Analysis of carbon and nitrogen dynamics in riparian soils: Model development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About