Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Restoration Goals <br /> <br />The goals of environmental restoration projects can <br />vary widely and depend on many factors, Some have <br />limited objectives, such as the recovery of a single <br />endangered or threatened species, while others have <br />much broader goals, such as restoration of an entire <br />wafershed, <br /> <br />Over time, the emphasis in environmental restora- <br />tion has shifted from a narrow focus on rebuilding <br />populations of individual species to broader <br />approaches based on restoring larger ecosystems <br />such as watersheds, This shift recognized that the <br />survival of individual species is linked to complex <br />networks of relationships with the flora and fauna in <br />their habitats, The philosophy behind this approach <br />is that restoring <br />the functionality of <br />ecosystem pro- <br />cesses offers the <br />best opportunity <br />for encouraging <br />the return of <br />species. <br /> <br /> <br />State {{lid federal agencies, <br />along It'ith local <br />stakeholders, are lVorking <br />10 re\'erse the decline <br />ofLnke Tahoe (above), <br />The lake '.'I legendary <br />clarity has diminished in <br />recent decades. <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />The National Re- <br />search Council <br />(NRC), defines <br />environmental res- <br />toration as "return- <br />ing an ecosystem <br />to a close approxi- <br />mation of its condi- <br />tion prior to distur. <br />bance." The Soci- <br />ety for Ecological <br />Restoration has defined it as the "process of assist. <br />ing the recovery and management of ecological <br />integrity." Both organizations stress the need for a <br />holistic approach to restoration, one that goes <br />beyond isolated manipulation of individual environ. <br />mental elements (e,g" a single species) and instead <br />aims to emulate natural, self-regulating systems that <br />are integrated ecologically with the landscapes in <br />which they occur. <br /> <br />The ability to achieve environmental restoration goals <br />is influenced by the state of environmental resources <br />(their "restorability"), the extent of disturbance or <br />development in the target area, the resources <br />available for the restoration effort and political <br />realities. The starting point for most restoration goal- <br />setting is the condition of the target land area or water <br />body at some historical point in the past. For many <br />California projects that means conditions that existed <br />prior to European settlement, about 1750, Of course, <br />given the extent at development in most parts of the <br /> <br />state, restoration to conditions that existed two <br />centuries ago usually is unrealistic and impractical. <br /> <br /> <br />Recognizing the ecological changes that have <br />occurred in the last two centuries and current <br />resource uses, project planners must assess how <br />far they can reasonably go in restoring the environ. <br />mental values of a river system or segment, for <br />example, and the resources needed to reach the <br />project goals, For instance, it may be possible to <br />restore riparian habitat along some river segments, <br />but not others where levees have been built to protect <br />land uses adjacent to the river. <br /> <br />Each restoration project has its own distinct goals <br />derived from assessment of these and other factors <br />that may be unique to the project. That assessment <br />may lead to different choices of restoration strate- <br />gies and methods, But, what restoration projects have <br />in common is the need to build consensus among <br />many parties on broad objectives and to use sound <br />scientific methods in the pursuit of those objectives. <br />Building that consensus among sometimes fractious <br />constituencies - government agencies, conservation <br />groups, landowners and water users - is not always <br />easy, but examples have begun to emerge through- <br />out California of "win-win" strategies that benefit the <br />environment and a variety of stakeholders. <br /> <br />Proponents of environmental restoration draw a <br />distinction between restoration and rehabilitation. <br />Restoration focuses on whole ecosystems, and <br />benefits to any specific species are derivative rather <br />than direct. By contrast, activities such as rehabili- <br />tation or enhancement usually have more limited <br />goals than restoration, often focusing on a single <br />species or specific ecological value. However, <br />rehabilitation or mitigation projects conceived with <br />limited objectives can grow into broader restoration <br />projects, and rehabilitation and restoration can be <br />complementary goals, <br /> <br />Measuring the success of restoration efforts can be <br />ditficult because they often are long- range programs <br />with broad objectives, the results of which may not <br />be observed for many years. One way of measuring <br />progress is the use of "ecological indicators~ <br />attributes of an ecological system that serve as <br />markers for the overall health of that system, The <br />selection of indicators may vary, but examples might <br />include mean monthly flows (indicator for naturalistic <br />hydrograph), or the number of native plant or animal <br />species vs. the number of non-native species. Either <br />current conditions or historical conditions can be <br />used as benchmarks to track changes in ecological <br />indicators. <br />