Evaluating restoration outcomes: trial of a community-based monitoring protocol

被引:1
作者
Jellinek, Sacha [1 ]
Haslem, Angela [2 ]
O'Brien, Tim [3 ]
Bennett, Andrew F. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Melbourne, Sch Ecosyst & Forest Sci, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[2] La Trobe Univ, Dept Ecol Environm & Evolut, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[3] Arthur Rylah Inst Environm Res, Heidelberg, Vic, Australia
关键词
conservation outcomes; habitat restoration; plant survival; practitioner; REVEGETATION; WOODLAND;
D O I
10.1111/emr.12503
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Restoration planting is undertaken widely in rural landscapes to promote more sustainable land use, such as reforesting agricultural land, and to enhance nature conservation. Land managers and community groups have a key role in delivering these actions and can also contribute to monitoring the outcomes. Here, we describe a monitoring protocol developed to assist practitioners to assess the survival of plant species in restoration plantings and report results of a trial of the protocol from 123 monitored plots at 62 sites across Victoria. On average, 61% of plants per site (all species combined) survived and 77% of the species planted persisted after the first summer post-planting. Rates of survival varied considerably among plant species, with differences in outcomes evident across bioregions. Overall, the survival of plantings (all species combined) was greater at sites with higher mean annual rainfall and where plants were protected by guards. Widespread adoption of monitoring will assist project managers to better understand how plants survive and grow, and to adaptively manage revegetation programmes under a changing climate. A co-ordinated monitoring effort will require resources for on-ground monitoring, as well as an online database for data storage, collation, analysis and reporting.
引用
收藏
页码:284 / 287
页数:4
相关论文
共 9 条
[1]  
Bennett, 2020, REVEGETATION MONITOR
[2]   Disentangling chronic regeneration failure in endangered woodland ecosystems [J].
Bennett, Ami ;
Duncan, David H. ;
Rumpff, Libby ;
Vesk, Peter A. .
ECOSPHERE, 2020, 11 (01)
[3]   Objectives versus realities: Spatial, temporal, financial and social deficiencies in Australia's public revegetation investment model [J].
Collard, Stuart J. ;
O'Connor, Patrick J. ;
Prowse, Thomas A. A. ;
Gregg, Daniel ;
Bond, Anthelia J. .
ECOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT & RESTORATION, 2020, 21 (01) :35-41
[4]   Matching effort to threat: Strategies to increase the scale and effectiveness of revegetation in southern Australia [J].
Freudenberger, David .
ECOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT & RESTORATION, 2018, 19 :6-10
[5]   Seedling emergence and summer survival after direct seeding for woodland restoration on old fields in south-western Australia [J].
Hallett, Lauren M. ;
Standish, Rachel J. ;
Jonson, Justin ;
Hobbs, Richard J. .
ECOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT & RESTORATION, 2014, 15 (02) :140-146
[6]  
Hobbs RJ, 2017, RANGELAND J, V39, P563, DOI [10.1071/rj17053, 10.1071/RJ17053]
[7]   Replanting agricultural landscapes: how well do plants survive after habitat restoration? [J].
Jellinek, Sacha ;
Harrison, Peter A. ;
Tuck, Jonathan ;
Te, Thai .
RESTORATION ECOLOGY, 2020, 28 (06) :1454-1463
[8]   Soil-vegetation type, stem density and species richness influence biomass of restored woodland in south-western Australia [J].
Perring, Michael P. ;
Jonson, Justin ;
Freudenberger, David ;
Campbell, Rebecca ;
Rooney, Michael ;
Hobbs, Richard J. ;
Standish, Rachel J. .
FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 2015, 344 :53-62
[9]   The Ridgefield Multiple Ecosystem Services Experiment: Can restoration of former agricultural land achieve multiple outcomes? [J].
Perring, Michael P. ;
Standish, Rachel J. ;
Hulvey, Kristin B. ;
Lach, Lori ;
Morald, Tim K. ;
Parsons, Rebecca ;
Didham, Raphael K. ;
Hobbs, Richard J. .
AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT, 2012, 163 :14-27