9722 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. 'dDL'>5t-h tier b(t~.v\.c.l ~+ (A,\ " q1J2 Copyright <<':J 2005 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. Hildemrand, R. H., A. C. Watts, and A. M. Randle 2005. The myths of restoration ecology. Ecology and Society 10(1): 19. [online] URL: htto://www.ecolol!.Vandsocietv.om/vollO/issllartI9/ :e, .',--"d;! Perspective The Myths of Restoration Ecology ~t::::::~""' Robert H. Hilderbrand1, Adam C. Wattsl, and Avril M Randle3 Key Words: carbon copy; command and control; cookbook; ecological restoration;fastforward;field of dreams; myths; resilience; restoration ecology; Sisyphus complex INTRODUCTION Humanity's ever-increasing ability to effect environmental change on a number of spatial and temporal scales requires tough decisions about how we view, value, and manage ecosystems. For example, advances in agriculture that support vastly more people per unit area than hunting and gathering are clearly a positive outcome for society. However, many beneficial land-use practices, including agriculture, may ultimately degrade ecosystems. To function as a society, some amount of ecosystem alteration must occur to support the human population, but we are ultimately dependent on ecosystem services. Our actions both intentionally and unwittingly alter the goods and services of many ecosystems on which we rely, and by entering into this relationship of altering ecosystems, we incur responsibility to our neighbors and to future generations. However, the difficult decisions have largely been avoided by the expectations and confidence in conservation and, in particular, ecological restoration. Given the widespread alteration of natural systems, it is clear that conservation measures alone will not suffice to protect ecosystem functions, services, and habitat for a large number of species in the future. Conservation has traditionally been a rearguard measure to prevent further degradation rather than a means for increasing resources or natural capital. As such, simple maintenance as opposed to enhancement of ecosystems may often leave ecosystems and species vulnerable. Despite conservation policies such as roadless areas and the ''No Net Loss" concept for U.S. wetlands, losses continue to exceed gains (Dahl and Allord 1996), and gains are often not functionally equivalent to losses (Zedler 2000a, National Research Council 2001). Increasing human population growth and resource consumption continue to place additional stresses on systems and demands more capacity and services, rather than simple maintenance of current services. Thus, we must either alter consumption or rely on our ability to create, restore, and enhance ecosystems and their services. Despite our dependence on healthy ecosystems, society has made the decision to continue life as usual until a loss of valued goods and services is realized; then, society will expect and rely on science to clean up the mess and make it look natural. Many government policies concerning development and extractive resource use already assume the ability to mitigate ecosystem damage through the restoration of degraded land or creation of new habitats. However, many restorations are not successful either in structure (Lockwood and Pimm 1999) or function (Kentula 1996, Zedler and Callaway 1999) when compared with reference ecosystems. Such results underscore the need to evaluate our underlying beliefs and expectations in restoration. The incredible complexity of nature forces us to simplify the systems we study in order to develop theory and generalities by reducing them to understandable subsets. Although we cannot function without theory and conceptual models, their creation often ignores the variability that is so important to accurately describe, predict, and re- create current and future system attributes. In essence, restoration ecology strives to (re- )create complex systems from simplified guiding principles lUniversity of Maryland Center for Environmental Science Appalachian Laboratory, 'University of Florida, 'university of Pittsburgh