ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

Restoration Ecology

Restoration Ecology

Volume 15 Issue 3, Pages 472 - 481

Published Online: 26 Jul 2007

© 2010 Society for Ecological Restoration International



< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 634K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

River Restoration in the Twenty-First Century: Data and Experiential Knowledge to Inform Future Efforts
Margaret Palmer, 1,2 J. David Allan, 3 Judy Meyer, 4 Emily S. Bernhardt 5
  2 University of Maryland Center for Environmental Sciences, Solomons, MD 20688, U.S.A.
  3 College of Natural Resources, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, U.S.A.
  4 Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, U.S.A.
  5 Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, U.S.A.
  1 Address correspondence to M. Palmer, email mpalmer@umd.edu
Copyright 2007 Society for Ecological Restoration International
KEYWORDS
mitigation • monitoring • restoration • rivers • streams

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionMethodsResultsDiscussionLITERATURE CITED

Despite some highly visible projects that have resulted in environmental benefits, recent efforts to quantify the number and distribution of river restoration projects revealed a paucity of written records documenting restoration outcomes. Improving restoration designs and setting watershed priorities rely on collecting and making accessible this critical information. Information within the unpublished notes of restoration project managers is useful but rarely documents ecological improvements. This special section of Restoration Ecology is devoted to the current state of knowledge on river restoration. We provide an overview of the section's articles, reflecting on lessons learned, which have implications for the implementation, legal, and financing frameworks for restoration. Our reflections are informed by two databases developed under the auspices of the National River Restoration Science Synthesis project and by extensive interactions with those who fund, implement, and permit restoration. Requiring measurable ecological success criteria, comprehensive watershed plans, and tracking of when and where restoration projects are implemented are critical to improving the health of U.S. waters. Documenting that a project was put in the ground and stayed intact cannot be equated with ecological improvements. However, because significant ecological improvements can come with well-designed and -implemented stream and river restorations, a small investment in documenting the factors contributing to success will lead to very large returns in the health of our nation's waterways. Even projects that may appear to be failures initially can be turned into success stories by applying the knowledge gained from monitoring the project in an adaptive restoration approach.


Received: 25 May 2007; Accepted: 23 July 2007;
DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1111/j.1526-100X.2007.00243.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member


REC
REC
Sign up here