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

178 Richard J. Hobbs et al.
unprecedented test of a host of ecological ideas by providing experimental manipulations,
often on a scale only dreamt of by experimental ecologists. Careful
use of restoration activities, past and present, by ecologists can help inform
continuing debates over key processes and drivers of succession and other important
ecological phenomena.
Successful integration of theory and practice is an ongoing challenge that
faces many hurdles, as indicated previously. Succession has been, and still
mostly remains, a conceptual construct that aids in the understanding of how
systems change over time. Restoration is primarily a practical activity that seeks
to achieve outcomes in the most effective and efficient way possible. Many
restoration practitioners remain unconvinced that they need a more general
body of theory to guide their work because much of what they do is driven by
the local idiosyncrasies of the site and system they are working on. And yet
our ability to build on local activities and transfer knowledge from one project
to another depends on our ability to set each individual activity in a broader
context—and this demands a set of concepts which can act as reference points
against which particular activities can be compared.
The field of succession has much to offer in this direction, as we have tried to
elaborate in this book. However, the successful transfer of successional knowledge
into the practical realm of restoration demands a willingness of scientists
and practitioners to engage in effective dialogue: that involves both talking and
listening on both sides. Scientists have to get their own house in order and decide
which concepts are useful, which overlap, and which are redundant. They then
need to translate these concepts into practical tools that can be readily picked
up and used by practitioners. The history of research in succession spans well
over a century and we are still debating concepts and models. The history of
restoration is much shorter, but the need for effective restoration is rapidly increasing.
While debate on concepts and models is necessary and important, the
time is ripe for the effective transfer of these concepts to the practicalities of
restoration so that we can ensure that restoration efforts are as effective and
efficient as they need to be.
Acknowledgements: Comments by Tadashi Fukami, Truman Young, and Joy
Zedler greatly improved this chapter. Lawrence Walker acknowledges sabbatical
support from the University of Nevada Las Vegas and from Landcare Research,
Lincoln, New Zealand.
References
Arnold, G., ed. 2006. After the Storm: Restoring America’s Gulf Coast Wetlands. Washington,
D.C.: Environmental Law Institute, pp. 62.
Bradshaw, A. D. 1987. Restoration: An acid test for ecology. In: Restoration Ecology:
A Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research. W. R. Jordan, M. E. Gilpin, and J. D.
Aber (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 23–30.
Cramer, V. A., and Hobbs, R. J. 2002. Ecological consequences of altered hydrological
regimes in fragmented ecosystems in southern Australia: Impacts and possible
management responses. Austral Ecology 27:546–564.
Egan, D., and Howell, E. A. (eds.). 2001. The Historical Ecology Handbook: A Restorationist’s
Guide to Reference Ecosystems. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.