-
preservation paradigm (and virtues)
- protecting nature involves setting aside nature preserves and keeping them untrammeled by man
- virtues: moderation, humility, fairness
-
restoration paradigm (and virtues)
- emergent, attempts to restore degraded nature; if it is to continue, nature must be actively restored
- virtues: engagement, competency ("we are smart, we can fix it"), taking responsibility
-
strengths of restoration (from Hettinger 2012)
- restoration can help nature
- hands off preservation is not enough
- full human participation
- positive role for humans
-
weaknesses of restoration (from Hettinger 2012)
- restoration as grandiose and hubristic
- ignores the value of wildness
- restoraiton is not a net benefit
- restoration presupposes a destructive nature
-
malicious restorations
when restoration is used to justify past harms or potential harms to nature
-
benevolent restoration
when restoration is undertaken to remedy a past harm done, but not offered as a justification for the harm
-
definition of ecological restoration that Light came up with at the end of his article?
a form of environmental intervention which attempts to recreate some aspect of the prior function of an ecological reference site
-
the two moving targets for ecological restoration described by Light
- species and systems that restorationists want to restore are on the move, usually to cooler places
- what defines restoration ecology is being challenged
-
historical fidelity
loyalty to predisturbance conditions (or at least minimally that projects have a "historically motivated goal")
-
How does Higgs define ecological restoration?
- as having
- 1. structural or compositional replication of a reference ecosystem
- 2. functional success
- 3. durability
- critique: very few restoration projects in real life achieve these three criteria
-
neoliberalism
- a laissez-faire free-market capitalism
- freeing up the conditions for the accumulation of capital
-
commodifiation of nature
how natures structures and functions become subject to market forces, monetized, traded
-
metrical technology
- science of quantifying ecosystem services
- ex. environmental assessment processes
-
forums of articulation
- there are communities of knowledge that exist (ex. government, capitalism/markets, science) and these independent knowledge systems need to move information between these spheres
- the "forum" translates information from one state to another
- ex. science assessing and quantifying ecological areas to translate into capital, banks, etc
-
wetland mitigation banking
the process by which wetland credits are certified as providing wetland functions and the subsequent monitoring which ostensibly guarantees their continued provision
-
problems in quantifying ecosystem function
- chasing the vegetation
- conventions of identification
- setting baselines
- hierarchies of identification
-
what does translating ecosystem services to the market relate to earlier in class?
- the linear model of science
- more science -> less uncertainty -> market action
-
what does the challenge of taxonomy relate to earlier in class?
- post-normal science
- movement from applied science to professional consultancy in the professional giving their opinion on a plant ID
-
what does rapid assessment and ecological information relate to earlier in class?
- excess of objectivity
- obstacle to achieving a shared understanding isn't a lack of scientific knowledge but a huge body of knowledge that can be assembled and interpreted to yield competing view of fa problem and how society should respond
-
the four discourses on wetlands in AB in the Clare, Krogman, Caine paper
- public good
- government - business as usual
- government - concerned conservationist
- incentive-based conservation
-
environmental offsets
activities undertaken to counterbalance unavoidable adverse environmental impacts with the objective of achieving a net beneficial outcome
-
through economic incentive structures, offsetting is expected to:
- 1. correct market failures by putting a value (through a price) on biodiversity or environmental losses
- 2. encourage sustainable land development practices
- 3. foster new sources for funding of biodiversity conservation
-
wetland mitigation hierarchy that leads to 'net gain'
- avoid, mitigate, restore, offset to avoid net loss
- then contribute to add net gain
-
key offsetting mechanisms
- 1. direct permittee responsibilities (on or off-site)
- 2. banking: a third party manages offsets and sells 'credits'
- 3. in-lieu payments: compensatory payment made to a third party or trust fund
-
BBOP
Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme
-
key groups of issues with offsetting
- ethical
- social
- technical
- governance
-
key ethical issues with offsetting
- what values are important?
- what is the ethical basis for conservation?
-
key social issues with offsetting
- what should offsetting achieve?
- what substitutions are acceptable? at what exchange rates?
-
key technical issues with offsetting?
- how is the mitigation hierarchy applied?
- are there appropriate surrogates for biodiversity?
- can you capture the uncertainty and time lags?
- what accounting approach is best?
-
key governance issues with offsetting
- how are decisions made?
- how are ILF payments handled?
- is there monitoring, evaluation, and auditing?
-
goal of AB's 2013 wetland policy
to conserve, restore, protect, and manage alberta's wetlands to sustain the benefits they provide to the environment, society, and the economy
-
policy outcomes of the AB 2013 wetland policy
- 1. wetlands of the highest value are protected for the long term benefit of all Albertans
- 2. wetlands and their benefits are conserved and restored in areas where losses have been high
- 3. wetlands are managed by avoiding, minimizing, and if necessary compensating for impacts
- 4. wetland management considers regional context
-
wetlands: key factors in the failure to AVOID wetland loss
- 1. lack of agreement on what constitutes 'avoidance'
- 2. poor planning in advance of development
- 3. economic undervaluation of wetlands
- 4. 'techno-arrogance' abounds in the view of wetland restoration
- 5. inadequate enforcement and compliance
-
ABWRET
- Alberta Wetland Rapid Evaluation Tool - Actual Guide
- field protocol
- must be completed by practioners that meet 'competency' criteria defined by the GoA
- meant to be rapid and standardized, but many of the metrics are highly subjective
-
"out-of-kind" wetland replacement
- 1. restorative replacement (replacement through restoration, enhancement, or construction of another wetland)
- 2. 'non-restorative' replacement (activities that support the maintenance of wetland value, ex. supporting research or education about wetlands)
-
continuous stocking
- simplest system of grazing management
- usually under light or very light stocking rates over growing season (June-Oct)
- no rotation
-
slow rotations
- moving animals between every 10 days and 2 months
- most common system of management
-
fast rotation
- system with many names
- moving animals every 3-10 days
- similar in execution to HM
-
holistic management
- arrived in north america in the 1980s
- emphasis on high stocking rate and herd impact to increase productivity
- planning and monitoring
|
|