21.12.2012 Views

Linking Restoration and Ecological Succession (Springer ... - Inecol

Linking Restoration and Ecological Succession (Springer ... - Inecol

Linking Restoration and Ecological Succession (Springer ... - Inecol

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 3 Aboveground–Belowground Linkages, Ecosystem Development, <strong>and</strong> Ecosystem <strong>Restoration</strong> 53<br />

As discussed, restoration of New Zeal<strong>and</strong> forests, <strong>and</strong> promotion of successional<br />

changes in these forests to a less human-modified condition, would in the<br />

first instance require the removal of browsing mammals. Studies such as those<br />

described above enable us to predict, at both the community- <strong>and</strong> ecosystemlevels,<br />

the likely consequences of removing these mammals over the order of<br />

a few decades, <strong>and</strong> therefore the extent to which these forests can be restored.<br />

However, if restoration goals are to be focused on restoring these forests to<br />

their “natural” prehuman state, then the situation becomes more complex. This<br />

is because, prior to human settlement ca. 1000 years ago, New Zeal<strong>and</strong> was<br />

dominated by moas—a guild of large browsing native birds that were hunted to<br />

extinction a few hundred years ago <strong>and</strong> for which no contemporary substitutes<br />

exist. This effectively makes the goals of ecosystem restoration (i.e., reversion<br />

of these forests to a prehuman state) unattainable. Our knowledge of what<br />

effects moas had in these forests relative to those currently exerted by browsing<br />

mammals is far from clear (Atkinson <strong>and</strong> Greenwood 1989, McGlone <strong>and</strong><br />

Clarkson 1993), although the effects of moas were probably less than the current<br />

impacts of introduced mammals (McGlone <strong>and</strong> Clarkson 1993). Further, deer<br />

probably exert greater soil disturbance per unit body mass (<strong>and</strong> therefore have<br />

more adverse effects on litter dwelling invertebrates) than did moas, because<br />

of the relative shapes of their feet (Duncan <strong>and</strong> Holdaway 1989). In any case,<br />

it is apparent that deer <strong>and</strong> goats can exert important effects in natural forests<br />

at both the community- <strong>and</strong> ecosystem-levels, <strong>and</strong> both aboveground <strong>and</strong> belowground,<br />

through altering successional pathways in the ecosystem. Although<br />

goals to strictly restore these forests to prehuman conditions are unattainable<br />

because moas are extinct, it is apparent from the above example that significant<br />

restorative benefits to these forests are likely to result from targeted reductions<br />

in the densities of introduced mammals.<br />

3.4 Fire Regime <strong>and</strong> Swedish Boreal Forests<br />

Wildfire is the primary natural disturbance regime in boreal forests worldwide<br />

(Bonan <strong>and</strong> Shugart 1989), including those in Sc<strong>and</strong>inavia (Niklasson <strong>and</strong><br />

Granström 2000). Fire arrests forest successional development <strong>and</strong> prevents the<br />

system from entering long-term retrogressive phases by enabling greater availability<br />

of nutrients to rejuvenate the system (Zackrisson et al. 1996, De Luca<br />

et al. 2002a). Underst<strong>and</strong>ing the ecological influence of fire is therefore critical<br />

for underst<strong>and</strong>ing secondary succession in a wide range of ecosystems globally.<br />

Over the past 200 years, human activities have increased in the boreal forest<br />

zone of Sc<strong>and</strong>inavia, <strong>and</strong> interrupted the natural fire cycle through fire suppression.<br />

Prolonged suppression of wildfire may have important effects on global<br />

carbon storage patterns, through promoting greater sequestration of carbon in<br />

the ecosystem. This may help to partly explain the so-called “missing carbon”<br />

sink, or that carbon that is evolved as CO2 by fossil fuel burning but remains<br />

unaccounted for in global carbon budgets (Schimel 1995, Hurtt et al. 2002).<br />

Underst<strong>and</strong>ing these kinds of effects are highly relevant to restoration, because<br />

restoration of natural fire regimes in these forests, <strong>and</strong> the consequences of<br />

this for ecosystem succession, are likely to be very important as determinants<br />

of whether they act as net sources or sinks of carbon not just locally but also<br />

globally.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!