DOC PREVIEW
Recommendations for Integrating Restoration Ecology and Conservation Biology

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 7 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 7 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Recommendations for Integrating RestorationEcology and Conservation Biology inPonderosa Pine Forests of theSouthwestern United StatesReed F. Noss,1,8Paul Beier,2W. Wallace Covington,3R. Edward Grumbine,4David B. Lindenmayer,5John W. Prather,6Fiona Schmiegelow,7Thomas D. Sisk,6and Diane J. Vosick3AbstractOver the past century, ponderosa pine–dominated land-scapes of the southwestern United States have beenaltered by human activities such as grazing, timber har-vest, road building, and fire exclusion. Most forested areaswithin these landscapes now show increased susceptibilityto stand-replacing fires, insect outbreaks, and drought-related mortality. Recent large wildfires in the region havespurred public interest in large-scale fuel reduction andrestoration programs, which create perceived and realconflicts with the conservation of biodiversity. Conserva-tion concerns include the potential for larger road net-works, soil and understory disturbance, exotic plantinvasion, and the removal of large trees in treated areas.Pursuing prescribed burning, thinning, or other treat-ments on the broad scale that many scientists and manag-ers envision requires the reconciliation of ecologicalrestoration with biodiversity conservation. This studypresents recommendations from a workshop for integrat-ing the principles and practices of restoration ecology andconservation biology, toward the objective of restoringthe composition, structure, and function of dry ponderosapine forests. Planning on the scale of hundreds of thou-sands of hectares offers opportunities to achieve multipleobjectives (e.g., rare species protection and restorationof ecological structures and processes) that cannot easilybe addressed on a site-by-site basis. However, restorationmust be coordinated with conservation planning toachieve mutual objectives and should include strict guide-lines for protection of rare, declining, and sensitive habi-tats and species.Key words: biodiversity, conservation, ponderosa pine,restoration.IntroductionRestoration ecology and conservation biology are distinctdisciplines with somewhat different cultures, histories,norms, and methods (Young 2000). They are representedby two professional societies: the Society for EcologicalRestoration International (SERI) and the Society forConservation Biology (SCB). Although many scientistsand practitioners fit equally well within the conservationbiology or restoration ecology camps, many professionalsfrom the two disciplines do not interact regularly. Mem-bership surveys conducted by SCB in 2000 and 2004 foundthat, in both years, only 9% of SCB members were alsomembers of SERI (http://conbio.net/SCB/Information/).We summarize some typical attributes of conservationplanning and ecological restoration in Table 1. A compari-son of the two columns in Table 1 not only shows the areasof overlap between the two fields but also the substantialareas of divergence. In this study, we focus on the challengeof integrating ecological restoration with conservation plan-ning within landscapes dominated by dry ponderosa pine(Pinus ponderosa) forests in the southwestern UnitedStates.The roots of restoration ecology can be traced back to1938 when Aldo Leopold, John Curtis, and others at theUniversity of Wisconsin began developing restorationtreatments for establishing reference sites within the Uni-versity of Wisconsin Arboretum. Restoration ecology re-ceived a boost in 1964 with the founding of the field ofapplied ecology and its journal, Journal of Applied1Department of Biology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL32816-2368, U.S.A.2School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5018,U.S.A.3Ecological Restoration Institute, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ86011-15017, U.S.A.4Prescott College, 220 Grove Avenue, Prescott, AZ 86301, U.S.A.5Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, The Australian NationalUniversity, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia.6Center for Environmental Sciences and Education, Northern ArizonaUniversity, Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5694, U.S.A.7Department of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, Edmonton,Alberta, Canada, T6G 2H1.8Address Correspondence to R. F. Noss, email [email protected]Ó 2006 Society for Ecological Restoration International4 Restoration Ecology Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 4–10 MARCH 2006Ecology, by the British Ecological Society. The first issueincluded themes, such as land reclamation, that are withinthe domain of restoration ecology (Ormerod 2003). Thepublication of Restoration & Management Notes (nowcalled Ecological Restoration ) starting in 1981, the found-ing of SERI in 1987, and the inauguration of RestorationEcology in 1993 have established the field of restorationecology as a science (Davis & Slobodkin 2004). The grow-ing interest in the annual SERI conferences, the increas-ing number of papers with a restoration theme submittedto scientific journals (Ormerod 2003), and government-mandated restoration of disturbed sites demonstrate thatrestoration ecology has advanced rapidly in recent deca-des. Restoration ecology increasingly encompasses the‘‘human dimension,’’ placing value on societal decisionson what constitutes appropriate endpoints of restorationefforts (Allen 2003).The term ‘‘conservation biology’’ was first used in 1937,in the inaugural issue of the Journal of Wildlife Manage-ment (Errington & Hamerstrom 1937). Conservation atthat time was dominated by utilitarian objectives, such asproducing game for hunting. Yet, as early as 1917, ecolo-gists in the United States were involved in identifyingremaining, relatively pristine examples of ecosystem types,hoping to secure them in nature reserves for scientific useas reference sites and for their inherent values (e.g., Shelford1926). As noted, reference conditions were also recognizedas important in the early history of restoration ecology. TheSCB was founded in 1985 and, in 1987, initiated its journalConservation Biology. SCB currently has more than 8,000members organized into regional sections across the world.The mission of SCB includes the encouragement of ‘‘com-munication and collaboration between conservation biol-ogy and other disciplines (including other biological andphysical sciences, the behavioral and social sciences, eco-nomics, law, and philosophy) that study and advise on con-servation and natural resources issues’’ (http://conbio.net/SCB/Information/Mission/).Both restoration ecology and conservation


Recommendations for Integrating Restoration Ecology and Conservation Biology

Download Recommendations for Integrating Restoration Ecology and Conservation Biology
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Recommendations for Integrating Restoration Ecology and Conservation Biology and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Recommendations for Integrating Restoration Ecology and Conservation Biology 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?