Why experiment with success? Opportunities and risks in applying assessment and adaptive management to the Emiquon floodplain restoration project

Richard E. Sparks, K. Douglas Blodgett, Andrew Fowler Casper, Heath Hagy, Michael J. Lemke, Luiz Felipe Machado Velho, Luzia Cleide Rodrigues

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

The Nature Conservancy’s wetland restoration at the Emiquon Preserve has been a success to date, but there are warning signs of undesirable change if left unmanaged. A water control structure built in 2016 will increase management capabilities, but periodic connection to the river, which has experienced human alterations typical of rivers in eastern North America and Europe, also introduces risks. The Conservancy’s planning process has identified (1) management targets (e.g., diverse native fish populations); (2) Key Ecological Attributes (KEAs) that maintain the targets (e.g., relatively deep over-wintering habitats for fishes); (3) measurable indicators for the KEAs (e.g., depth in winter); and (4) desirable ranges for the indicators (e.g., 10% of the aquatic area has depths of 2–3 m and dissolved oxygen levels of 4–6 mg/l). Assessments and experiments completed to date have focused on documenting the restoration, evaluating effects of the record flood of 2013, and predicting outcomes of management actions. Simulation models of hydrology, hydraulics, and vegetation response developed during the planning process allayed some concerns of stakeholders, but not all outcomes are predictable from either current theory or management experience. Therefore, each action can be considered not only as an adaptive management experiment focused on sustaining targets, but also contributing to ecological theory and restoration practice on a broader scale.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)177-200
Number of pages24
JournalHydrobiologia
Volume804
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2017

Fingerprint

adaptive management
floodplains
risk assessment
floodplain
planning process
planning
experiment
hydraulic structures
rivers
ecological theory
fish
river
stakeholders
hydrology
dissolved oxygen
preserves
simulation models
fluid mechanics
stakeholder
wetlands

Keywords

  • Adaptive management
  • Conflict
  • Floodplain
  • Large river
  • Restoration
  • Uncertainty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aquatic Science

Cite this

Sparks, R. E., Douglas Blodgett, K., Casper, A. F., Hagy, H., Lemke, M. J., Velho, L. F. M., & Rodrigues, L. C. (2017). Why experiment with success? Opportunities and risks in applying assessment and adaptive management to the Emiquon floodplain restoration project. Hydrobiologia, 804(1), 177-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2785-8

Why experiment with success? Opportunities and risks in applying assessment and adaptive management to the Emiquon floodplain restoration project. / Sparks, Richard E.; Douglas Blodgett, K.; Casper, Andrew Fowler; Hagy, Heath; Lemke, Michael J.; Velho, Luiz Felipe Machado; Rodrigues, Luzia Cleide.

In: Hydrobiologia, Vol. 804, No. 1, 01.12.2017, p. 177-200.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Sparks, RE, Douglas Blodgett, K, Casper, AF, Hagy, H, Lemke, MJ, Velho, LFM & Rodrigues, LC 2017, 'Why experiment with success? Opportunities and risks in applying assessment and adaptive management to the Emiquon floodplain restoration project', Hydrobiologia, vol. 804, no. 1, pp. 177-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2785-8
Sparks, Richard E. ; Douglas Blodgett, K. ; Casper, Andrew Fowler ; Hagy, Heath ; Lemke, Michael J. ; Velho, Luiz Felipe Machado ; Rodrigues, Luzia Cleide. / Why experiment with success? Opportunities and risks in applying assessment and adaptive management to the Emiquon floodplain restoration project. In: Hydrobiologia. 2017 ; Vol. 804, No. 1. pp. 177-200.
@article{947b576040544b5e856fb6b0812adede,
title = "Why experiment with success? Opportunities and risks in applying assessment and adaptive management to the Emiquon floodplain restoration project",
abstract = "The Nature Conservancy’s wetland restoration at the Emiquon Preserve has been a success to date, but there are warning signs of undesirable change if left unmanaged. A water control structure built in 2016 will increase management capabilities, but periodic connection to the river, which has experienced human alterations typical of rivers in eastern North America and Europe, also introduces risks. The Conservancy’s planning process has identified (1) management targets (e.g., diverse native fish populations); (2) Key Ecological Attributes (KEAs) that maintain the targets (e.g., relatively deep over-wintering habitats for fishes); (3) measurable indicators for the KEAs (e.g., depth in winter); and (4) desirable ranges for the indicators (e.g., 10{\%} of the aquatic area has depths of 2–3 m and dissolved oxygen levels of 4–6 mg/l). Assessments and experiments completed to date have focused on documenting the restoration, evaluating effects of the record flood of 2013, and predicting outcomes of management actions. Simulation models of hydrology, hydraulics, and vegetation response developed during the planning process allayed some concerns of stakeholders, but not all outcomes are predictable from either current theory or management experience. Therefore, each action can be considered not only as an adaptive management experiment focused on sustaining targets, but also contributing to ecological theory and restoration practice on a broader scale.",
keywords = "Adaptive management, Conflict, Floodplain, Large river, Restoration, Uncertainty",
author = "Sparks, {Richard E.} and {Douglas Blodgett}, K. and Casper, {Andrew Fowler} and Heath Hagy and Lemke, {Michael J.} and Velho, {Luiz Felipe Machado} and Rodrigues, {Luzia Cleide}",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10750-016-2785-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "804",
pages = "177--200",
journal = "Hydrobiologia",
issn = "0018-8158",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why experiment with success? Opportunities and risks in applying assessment and adaptive management to the Emiquon floodplain restoration project

AU - Sparks, Richard E.

AU - Douglas Blodgett, K.

AU - Casper, Andrew Fowler

AU - Hagy, Heath

AU - Lemke, Michael J.

AU - Velho, Luiz Felipe Machado

AU - Rodrigues, Luzia Cleide

PY - 2017/12/1

Y1 - 2017/12/1

N2 - The Nature Conservancy’s wetland restoration at the Emiquon Preserve has been a success to date, but there are warning signs of undesirable change if left unmanaged. A water control structure built in 2016 will increase management capabilities, but periodic connection to the river, which has experienced human alterations typical of rivers in eastern North America and Europe, also introduces risks. The Conservancy’s planning process has identified (1) management targets (e.g., diverse native fish populations); (2) Key Ecological Attributes (KEAs) that maintain the targets (e.g., relatively deep over-wintering habitats for fishes); (3) measurable indicators for the KEAs (e.g., depth in winter); and (4) desirable ranges for the indicators (e.g., 10% of the aquatic area has depths of 2–3 m and dissolved oxygen levels of 4–6 mg/l). Assessments and experiments completed to date have focused on documenting the restoration, evaluating effects of the record flood of 2013, and predicting outcomes of management actions. Simulation models of hydrology, hydraulics, and vegetation response developed during the planning process allayed some concerns of stakeholders, but not all outcomes are predictable from either current theory or management experience. Therefore, each action can be considered not only as an adaptive management experiment focused on sustaining targets, but also contributing to ecological theory and restoration practice on a broader scale.

AB - The Nature Conservancy’s wetland restoration at the Emiquon Preserve has been a success to date, but there are warning signs of undesirable change if left unmanaged. A water control structure built in 2016 will increase management capabilities, but periodic connection to the river, which has experienced human alterations typical of rivers in eastern North America and Europe, also introduces risks. The Conservancy’s planning process has identified (1) management targets (e.g., diverse native fish populations); (2) Key Ecological Attributes (KEAs) that maintain the targets (e.g., relatively deep over-wintering habitats for fishes); (3) measurable indicators for the KEAs (e.g., depth in winter); and (4) desirable ranges for the indicators (e.g., 10% of the aquatic area has depths of 2–3 m and dissolved oxygen levels of 4–6 mg/l). Assessments and experiments completed to date have focused on documenting the restoration, evaluating effects of the record flood of 2013, and predicting outcomes of management actions. Simulation models of hydrology, hydraulics, and vegetation response developed during the planning process allayed some concerns of stakeholders, but not all outcomes are predictable from either current theory or management experience. Therefore, each action can be considered not only as an adaptive management experiment focused on sustaining targets, but also contributing to ecological theory and restoration practice on a broader scale.

KW - Adaptive management

KW - Conflict

KW - Floodplain

KW - Large river

KW - Restoration

KW - Uncertainty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84966715983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84966715983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10750-016-2785-8

DO - 10.1007/s10750-016-2785-8

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:84966715983

VL - 804

SP - 177

EP - 200

JO - Hydrobiologia

JF - Hydrobiologia

SN - 0018-8158

IS - 1

ER -