We are upgrading the repository! A content freeze is in effect until December 6th, 2024 - no new submissions will be accepted; however, all content already published will remain publicly available. Please reach out to repository@u.library.arizona.edu with your questions, or if you are a UA affiliate who needs to make content available soon. Note that any new user accounts created after September 22, 2024 will need to be recreated by the user in November after our migration is completed.
General attributes and practice of ecological restoration in Arizona and California, U.S.A., revealed by restoration stakeholder surveys
Affiliation
Univ Arizona, Sch Nat Resources & EnvironmIssue Date
2020-09-02
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
WileyCitation
Li, Y.M. and Gornish, E.S. (2020), General attributes and practice of ecological restoration in Arizona and California, U.S.A., revealed by restoration stakeholder surveys. Restor Ecol, 28: 1296-1307. doi:10.1111/rec.13221Journal
RESTORATION ECOLOGYRights
Copyright © 2020 Society for Ecological Restoration.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Ecological restoration has become increasingly important in conservation. Yet, synthesized statistics are scarce with respect to essential characteristics of restoration activities. We surveyed restoration stakeholders in the U.S. states of Arizona and California to evaluate key attributes in restoration activities including ecosystems of focus, goals, size, cost, duration, and the prevalence of recommended restoration practices. We also examined how some of the attributes varied with size of restoration, ecosystem type, and state identity. While enhancing biodiversity and increasing plant cover were common goals in the two states, restoration in California also focused more on wildlife habitat re-establishment and weed control. Restoration in Arizona was implemented more in arid/semiarid systems, larger in size, shorter in duration, used more passive restoration, spent more on equipment, and was less likely to source plants from native plant nurseries. Labor was the most expensive restoration component regardless of state identity and ecosystem type. Per unit area cost of restoration decreased with increasing size of restoration. Yet, the decline in this cost was more strongly explained by moving from mesic to arid/semiarid ecosystems. Duration of restoration projects increased with size of restoration and in more mesic ecosystems. Overall, restoration in mesic ecosystems, compared to arid/semiarid systems, was smaller in size, higher in cost, and longer in duration. These results confirmed that ecological and socio-political conditions impact restoration goals and practice, with implications of how research can further support practitioners to achieve restoration success under practical constraints revealed by these results.Note
12 month embargo; first published: 10 June 2020ISSN
1061-2971EISSN
1526-100XVersion
Final accepted manuscriptae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1111/rec.13221