What do you think?
Rate this book
Restoration Ecology: A Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research
This book explores the ecological concepts and ideas involved in the practice of habitat restoration by taking a theoretical approach that will appeal to ecologists concerned with the structure and dynamics of communities. The contributors examine aspects of this new realization and its implications for both ecology and the practice of habitat restoration. What emerges is the outline of a new paradigm for ecological research and the basis for a stronger relationship between theory and practice in this area.
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1987
1 person is currently reading
32 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
March 15, 2013
I picked this up randomly from the 3rd floor of the Mudd (best floor) because I'm looking into performing restoration as part and parcel of my own Restoration Agriculture: Real-World Permaculture for Farmers project. I was hoping it'd be technical and practical, a sort of textbook on restoration. Instead, it's just a series of somewhat repetitive essays on the ways restoration projects are the perfect field study plots for ecologists. They make two nice points, again and again: restoration provides manipulable field sites, places ecologists can fuck with things and usually make them better no matter what; and successful restoration projects are the "acid test" of ecology as a predictive science.
They constantly make a watch analogy: you know you understand a watch when you can put it back together and tune it up to run at the right speed, and thus you know you understand an ecosytem when you can put it back together and have it function correctly, with all the appropriate levels of productivity, biological interactions, and ecosystem services. They point out that since ecosystems are self-healing, artificial systems are often better tests of knowledge. If you know what is important about each component of the system, you can replace each with another that fulfills the same functions. This is exciting, because it is the practice of restoration agriculture (eg, replacing bison with cows that are managed to graze like bison).
While they use the language of succession throughout but point out that the point of restoration is to speed up succession and that the science of succession has shown that it is not a linear process and it does not reach the same endpoint in all circumstances. Changing the nature of the disturbance, the rate of migration, and possibly altering the composition of key soil-influencing plants can shape the community towards desired conclusions. In my case, the desired conclusion is wildlife habitat that fills ecosystem services and produces truckloads and truckloads of nutritious food. There seems to be no moral issue with creating an intensive food-bearing ecosystem - after all, you're starting with a cornfield, so anything you do will improve it. As long as you aren't introducing exotics into the area, you're practicing restoration ecology!
The essays are repetitive and relatively simplistic, and in hindsight I'm not sure why I read the whole thing. Certainly none of it was helpful in practical terms. It did bring up several specific ideas for the farm - ensuring we have mound-building ants for prairie seed distribution; inoculating trees with MR fungi; planting in species-diverse clumps; creating a diverse age structure for the community; possibly encouraging hawks and owls with nests and perches until the trees are mature. It also inspired me to plan a trip to the UW Madison Arboretum later this spring and to try to meet with restoration ecologists there.
They constantly make a watch analogy: you know you understand a watch when you can put it back together and tune it up to run at the right speed, and thus you know you understand an ecosytem when you can put it back together and have it function correctly, with all the appropriate levels of productivity, biological interactions, and ecosystem services. They point out that since ecosystems are self-healing, artificial systems are often better tests of knowledge. If you know what is important about each component of the system, you can replace each with another that fulfills the same functions. This is exciting, because it is the practice of restoration agriculture (eg, replacing bison with cows that are managed to graze like bison).
While they use the language of succession throughout but point out that the point of restoration is to speed up succession and that the science of succession has shown that it is not a linear process and it does not reach the same endpoint in all circumstances. Changing the nature of the disturbance, the rate of migration, and possibly altering the composition of key soil-influencing plants can shape the community towards desired conclusions. In my case, the desired conclusion is wildlife habitat that fills ecosystem services and produces truckloads and truckloads of nutritious food. There seems to be no moral issue with creating an intensive food-bearing ecosystem - after all, you're starting with a cornfield, so anything you do will improve it. As long as you aren't introducing exotics into the area, you're practicing restoration ecology!
The essays are repetitive and relatively simplistic, and in hindsight I'm not sure why I read the whole thing. Certainly none of it was helpful in practical terms. It did bring up several specific ideas for the farm - ensuring we have mound-building ants for prairie seed distribution; inoculating trees with MR fungi; planting in species-diverse clumps; creating a diverse age structure for the community; possibly encouraging hawks and owls with nests and perches until the trees are mature. It also inspired me to plan a trip to the UW Madison Arboretum later this spring and to try to meet with restoration ecologists there.
November 5, 2015
Classical one! Subtitles are inspiring.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews