Hampton-Seabrook Estuary Habitat Restoration Compendium

The goal of this report is to identify restoration opportunities within the watershed derived from data on habitat change. Many other factors exist that are important in the identification and selection of restoration projects, including water quality and non-point source pollution, water withdrawal, harbor maintenance, recreational impacts, human history, and socioeconomic factors, among others. Although information regarding these factors is not explicitly included in this analysis, these factors must be considered and addressed as they may limit the potential for success in specific restoration effort

Habitat Restoration as a Key Conservation Lever for Woodland Caribou: A review of restoration programs and key learnings from Alberta

The Recovery Strategy for the Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou), Boreal Population in Canada (EC, 2012), identifies coordinated actions to reclaim woodland caribou habitat as a key step to meeting current and future caribou population objectives. Actions include restoring industrial landscape features such as roads, seismic lines, pipelines, cut-lines, and cleared areas in an effort to reduce landscape fragmentation and the changes in caribou population dynamics associated with changing predator-prey dynamics in highly fragmented landscapes. Reliance on habitat restoration as a recovery action within the federal recovery strategy is high, considering all Alberta populations have less than 65% undisturbed habitat, which is identified in the recovery strategy as a threshold providing a 60% chance that a local population will be self-sustaining. Alberta’s Provincial Woodland Caribou Policy also identifies habitat restoration as a critical component of long-term caribou habitat management. We review and discuss the history of caribou habitat restoration programs in Alberta and present outcomes and highlights of a caribou habitat restoration workshop attended by over 80 representatives from oil and gas, forestry, provincial and federal regulators, academia and consulting who have worked on restoration programs. Restoration initiatives in Alberta began in 2001 and have generally focused on construction methods, revegetation treatments, access control programs, and limiting plant species favourable to alternate prey. Specific treatments include tree planting initiatives, coarse woody debris management along linear features, and efforts for multi-company and multi-stakeholder coordinated habitat restoration on caribou range. Lessons learned from these programs have been incorporated into large scale habitat restoration projects near Grande Prairie, Cold Lake, and Fort McMurray. A key outcome of our review is the opportunity to provide a unified approach for restoration program planning, best practices, key performance indicators, and monitoring considerations for future programs within Canada

Restoration Returns: The Contribution of Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program and Coastal Program Restoration Projects to Local U.S. Economies

The Partners for Fish and Wildlife (PFW) Program and Coastal Program are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s premier conservation delivery tools for voluntary, citizen and community-­‐based fish and wildlife habitat restoration activities across the matrix of public and privately owned land. The programs work directly with partners to implement vital o-­‐the -­‐ground habitat restoration projects across the nation and in U.S. territories

Behavioural Responses of Varanids to Mine Site Restoration

Animals play critical roles in ecosystems, yet they are often overlooked in assessments of habitat restoration success. I mapped habitat usage and used camera trapping and VHF/GPS tracking to assess the ecological and behavioural responses of varanids to habitat restoration. Although restored habitats were in use, these areas were used less frequently and with altered behaviour in comparison to reference sites. Providing increased fauna refuges to areas undergoing restoration may aid in returning varanid populations

Cost-benefit analysis of ecological networks assessed through spatial analysis of ecosystem services

1.The development of ecological networks could enhance the ability of species to disperse across fragmented landscapes and could mitigate against the negative impacts of climate change. The development of such networks will require widespread ecological restoration at the landscape scale, which is likely to be costly. However, little information is available regarding the cost-effectiveness of restoration approaches. 2.We address this knowledge gap by examining the potential impact of landscape-scale habitat restoration on the value of multiple ecosystem services across the catchment of the River Frome in Dorset, England. This was achieved by mapping the market value of four ecosystem services (carbon storage, crops, livestock and timber) under three different restoration scenarios, estimating restoration costs, and calculating net benefits. 3.The non-market value of additional services (cultural, aesthetic and recreational value) was elicited from local stakeholders using an online survey tool. Flood risk was assessed using a scoring approach. Spatial Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) was conducted, incorporating both market and non-market values, to evaluate the relative benefits of restoration scenarios. These were compared with impacts of restoration on biodiversity value. 4.Multi-Criteria Analysis results consistently ranked restoration scenarios above a non-restoration comparator, reflecting the increased provision of multiple ecosystem services. Restoration scenarios also provided benefits to biodiversity, in terms of increased species richness and habitat connectivity. However, restoration costs consistently exceeded the market value of ecosystem services. 5.Synthesis and applications. Establishment of ecological networks through ecological restoration is unlikely to deliver net economic benefits in landscapes dominated by agricultural land use. This reflects the high costs of ecological restoration in such landscapes. The cost-effectiveness of ecological networks will depend on how the benefits provided to people are valued, and on how the value of non-market benefits are weighted against the costs of reduced agricultural and timber production. Future plans for ecological restoration should incorporate local stakeholder values, to ensure that benefits to people are maximised. © 2012 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2012 British Ecological Society