Evaluating where and how habitat restoration is undertaken for animals

Robin Hale, Ralph Mac Nally, Daniel T. Blumstein, Stephen E. Swearer

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Habitat restoration is vital to ameliorate the effects of anthropogenic disturbances on animal habitats. We reviewed the peer-reviewed literature to examine where and how habitat restoration is undertaken. Our aim was to identify key knowledge gaps as well as research and monitoring needs that can inform future restoration actions. We found: (1) marine and terrestrial actions focus most commonly on restoring vegetation, and freshwater actions focus on restoring the in-channel habitat; (2) arthropods are the most common focal group; (3) there is often no collection of pre-restoration data, so certainty in attributing environmental changes to restoration actions is limited; and (4) population and community measures are most commonly used in monitoring programs, which only show if animals are present at restored sites and not whether they are able to grow, survive, and reproduce. We highlight three important considerations for future restoration actions. First, more integration of knowledge among freshwater, marine, and terrestrial systems will help us to understand how, and why, restoration outcomes might vary in different contexts. Second, where possible, restoration projects should be assessed using before-after-control-impact designs, which will provide the strongest evidence if desired restoration responses occur. Third, if the goal of restoration is to develop self-sustaining breeding populations of target animals, then measures of fitness (i.e. breeding, survival) should be collected. These recommendations will hopefully help guide more effective restoration practices and monitoring in the future.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)775-781
Number of pages7
JournalRestoration Ecology
Volume27
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2019

Fingerprint

habitat restoration
habitat conservation
monitoring
animal
animals
breeding
peers
habitats
anthropogenic activities
arthropods
vegetation
restoration
breeding population
arthropod
environmental change
fitness
disturbance

Cite this

Hale, Robin ; Mac Nally, Ralph ; Blumstein, Daniel T. ; Swearer, Stephen E. / Evaluating where and how habitat restoration is undertaken for animals. In: Restoration Ecology. 2019 ; Vol. 27, No. 4. pp. 775-781.
@article{b0949e5d738c4b8b83458f93314d1587,
title = "Evaluating where and how habitat restoration is undertaken for animals",
abstract = "Habitat restoration is vital to ameliorate the effects of anthropogenic disturbances on animal habitats. We reviewed the peer-reviewed literature to examine where and how habitat restoration is undertaken. Our aim was to identify key knowledge gaps as well as research and monitoring needs that can inform future restoration actions. We found: (1) marine and terrestrial actions focus most commonly on restoring vegetation, and freshwater actions focus on restoring the in-channel habitat; (2) arthropods are the most common focal group; (3) there is often no collection of pre-restoration data, so certainty in attributing environmental changes to restoration actions is limited; and (4) population and community measures are most commonly used in monitoring programs, which only show if animals are present at restored sites and not whether they are able to grow, survive, and reproduce. We highlight three important considerations for future restoration actions. First, more integration of knowledge among freshwater, marine, and terrestrial systems will help us to understand how, and why, restoration outcomes might vary in different contexts. Second, where possible, restoration projects should be assessed using before-after-control-impact designs, which will provide the strongest evidence if desired restoration responses occur. Third, if the goal of restoration is to develop self-sustaining breeding populations of target animals, then measures of fitness (i.e. breeding, survival) should be collected. These recommendations will hopefully help guide more effective restoration practices and monitoring in the future.",
keywords = "biodiversity, ecological restoration, fitness, habitat loss, monitoring",
author = "Robin Hale and {Mac Nally}, Ralph and Blumstein, {Daniel T.} and Swearer, {Stephen E.}",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1111/rec.12958",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "775--781",
journal = "Restoration Ecology",
issn = "1061-2971",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

Evaluating where and how habitat restoration is undertaken for animals. / Hale, Robin; Mac Nally, Ralph; Blumstein, Daniel T.; Swearer, Stephen E.

In: Restoration Ecology, Vol. 27, No. 4, 07.2019, p. 775-781.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating where and how habitat restoration is undertaken for animals

AU - Hale, Robin

AU - Mac Nally, Ralph

AU - Blumstein, Daniel T.

AU - Swearer, Stephen E.

PY - 2019/7

Y1 - 2019/7

N2 - Habitat restoration is vital to ameliorate the effects of anthropogenic disturbances on animal habitats. We reviewed the peer-reviewed literature to examine where and how habitat restoration is undertaken. Our aim was to identify key knowledge gaps as well as research and monitoring needs that can inform future restoration actions. We found: (1) marine and terrestrial actions focus most commonly on restoring vegetation, and freshwater actions focus on restoring the in-channel habitat; (2) arthropods are the most common focal group; (3) there is often no collection of pre-restoration data, so certainty in attributing environmental changes to restoration actions is limited; and (4) population and community measures are most commonly used in monitoring programs, which only show if animals are present at restored sites and not whether they are able to grow, survive, and reproduce. We highlight three important considerations for future restoration actions. First, more integration of knowledge among freshwater, marine, and terrestrial systems will help us to understand how, and why, restoration outcomes might vary in different contexts. Second, where possible, restoration projects should be assessed using before-after-control-impact designs, which will provide the strongest evidence if desired restoration responses occur. Third, if the goal of restoration is to develop self-sustaining breeding populations of target animals, then measures of fitness (i.e. breeding, survival) should be collected. These recommendations will hopefully help guide more effective restoration practices and monitoring in the future.

AB - Habitat restoration is vital to ameliorate the effects of anthropogenic disturbances on animal habitats. We reviewed the peer-reviewed literature to examine where and how habitat restoration is undertaken. Our aim was to identify key knowledge gaps as well as research and monitoring needs that can inform future restoration actions. We found: (1) marine and terrestrial actions focus most commonly on restoring vegetation, and freshwater actions focus on restoring the in-channel habitat; (2) arthropods are the most common focal group; (3) there is often no collection of pre-restoration data, so certainty in attributing environmental changes to restoration actions is limited; and (4) population and community measures are most commonly used in monitoring programs, which only show if animals are present at restored sites and not whether they are able to grow, survive, and reproduce. We highlight three important considerations for future restoration actions. First, more integration of knowledge among freshwater, marine, and terrestrial systems will help us to understand how, and why, restoration outcomes might vary in different contexts. Second, where possible, restoration projects should be assessed using before-after-control-impact designs, which will provide the strongest evidence if desired restoration responses occur. Third, if the goal of restoration is to develop self-sustaining breeding populations of target animals, then measures of fitness (i.e. breeding, survival) should be collected. These recommendations will hopefully help guide more effective restoration practices and monitoring in the future.

KW - biodiversity

KW - ecological restoration

KW - fitness

KW - habitat loss

KW - monitoring

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85066031107&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/evaluating-habitat-restoration-undertaken-animals

U2 - 10.1111/rec.12958

DO - 10.1111/rec.12958

M3 - Review article

VL - 27

SP - 775

EP - 781

JO - Restoration Ecology

JF - Restoration Ecology

SN - 1061-2971

IS - 4

ER -