Transcript Restoration Intro_2008

Intro to Restoration Ecology
ENSC 201 – Spring 2008
Why do we need restoration?
• 53 % of wetlands lost nationwide
• > 35 % of wetlands lost in Vermont
• 50-70% loss of brackish intertidal mudflats, shores, and
coastal plains
• 90 % loss of aquatic vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay
• 70 % loss of riparian forests nationwide
• 90 % loss of old-growth forests nationwide
• 99.5 % loss of old-growth forests in the eastern U.S.
• 97 % loss of pine-oak-heathland in the Lake Champlain
Basin
• 90 % loss of short and tall-grass prairie ecosystems
nationwide
• 90 % of shrub-steppe ecosystems degraded by livestock
grazing nationwide
Source: Noss et al (1995)
http://www.millenniumassessment.org//en/index.aspx
How do we prioritize areas for restoration?
1.
Need
•


•
•
2.
Ecological value
What is the relative importance of different sites for ecosystem
functioning?
Examples:
1. Riparian areas
2. Headwaters
3. Estuaries
4. Unstable uplands
5. Wetland complexes
6. Rare communities
7. Critical habitats for particular species
Degree of degradation?
Degree of threat  more applicable for identifying areas in need
of protection or conservation
Opportunity
How does restoration fit into an overall conservation or
sustainability strategy?
Matrix
The
Functional
Landscape
Approach
Large
Core
Reserve
Matrix
Riparian Corridor
Te
Buffer
rre
str
ial
Te
Re
sto
Co rre
ra
s
rri tri
tio
do al
n
r
Riparian
Restoration
Wetland
Restoration
Matrix
Large
Core
Reserve
Buffer
Small
Core
Reserve
But what about entire ecosystems that have been
severely degrade?
Answer: We need an ecosystem-level restoration
approach
Restoration as The Acid Test of
Ecology: Do we understand how
ecosystems work well enough to
reconstruct them?
It helps to have a conceptual model of the system
Ecosystem-Level Restoration
•
Focus on ecological processes
Examples:
1.
Soil productivity
2. Natural disturbance dynamics
3. Hydrology
4. Ecological succession!
Tiered Restoration
Ecosystem restoration: “Bringing
back an entire system or the
dynamics of that system”
Coordinated restoration of
critical areas as per an overall
ecosystem management plan
Site-specific
restoration,
remediation,
mitigation, etc.
Small-scale
Large-scale
Atlantic Rainforest Restoration
• The Atlantic rainforest
once covered 400,000
square miles
• Only 7% remains
• 450 tree species per
hectare
• 2.7% of world’s plant
species just in what is
left
• Testing innovative
funding mechanisms
 U.S. companies paying
for carbon sequestration
• How do we restore it?
Carbon Revenue
• Estimates of potential carbon credit values range
from $4 to $60 (or even $110) per ton of C.
• European market currently trading for $8 to $20
per metric ton.
• Future value could increase substantially as
international carbon markets develop.
Chicago Climate Exchange
• “Voluntary ‘Cap and Trade’ greenhouse gas emission reduction and
trading system.”
• One Mg Carbon trading for about $5
• Membership from the forest products industry includes:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Abitibi-Consolidated
Aracruz Celulose S.A.
Cenibra Nipo Brasiliera S.A.
International Paper
Klabin S.A.
MeadWestvaco Corp.
Stora Enso North America
Suzano Papel E Celulose SA
Temple-Inland Inc
Figure from Ingerson. 2007.
Live Tree Biomass (Mg/hectare)
700
Mature
Old-growth
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Northeastern USA
Pacific Northwest USA
Uholka, Carpathians,
Ukraine
Forest Cover Trends in New England
Since European Settlement
100
Percent of Landscape in
Closed-Canopy Forest
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1700
1750
1800
1850
Year
1900
1950
2000
Differences Between Pre-Settlement and Current
Forests in VT and NH
Forest Composition
Species:
Chestnut
Elm
Beech
Sugar Maple
Hemlock
White Pine
Red Spruce
White Birch
Cottonwood
Pin Cherry
Red Maple
Abundance:
Functionally
Extirpated
Communities:
Abundance:
Old-Growth Forest of All Types
Floodplain Silver Maple
and Sugar Maple
Rich Lowland Oak/Basswood/Ash
Forested Wetlands
Native Grasslands and Shrublands
Sources: Cogbill (2000); McLachlan et al. (2000);
Fuller et al. 1998; Foster 1992; Siccama (1971)
Prescribed Fire
Restoration as Experimentation
What are the elements of experimental design?
FACTORIAL EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Table 1. Number of Bare Root Seedlings per Treatment
Brush mats, no tubes, ½
watered periodically
6’ by 6’ Density
294
10’ by 10’ Density
106
Brush mats and tubes, ½
watered periodically
294
106
Seedling Mortality
100
Alive (Tubes)
Alive (No Tubes)
Dead (Tubes)
Dead (No Tubes)
90
80
Percent
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
At Planting
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Effectiveness of Tubes
100
90
80
Percent
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Girdled (Tubes)
Girdled (No
Tubes)
Browsed (Tubes)
Browsed (No
Tubes)