Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Stream experiments at the catchment scale: the challenges and rewards of collaborating with community and government to push policy boundaries

2015; University of Chicago Press; Volume: 34; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1086/682394

2161-9565

Christopher J. Walsh, Tim D. Fletcher,

Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies

Previous articleNext article FreeBridges*Stream experiments at the catchment scale: the challenges and rewards of collaborating with community and government to push policy boundariesChristopher J. Walsh and Tim D. FletcherChristopher J. Walsh1School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, University of Melbourne, 500 Yarra Boulevard, Burnley, Victoria 3121 Australia2E-mail addresses: [email protected] Search for more articles by this author and Tim D. Fletcher1School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, University of Melbourne, 500 Yarra Boulevard, Burnley, Victoria 3121 Australia3[email protected] Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmailPrint SectionsMoreAs large areas of global landscapes become increasingly urbanized, the world’s rivers and streams degrade, with resultant alarming losses of biodiversity and capacity to provide ecosystem services (Dudgeon et al. 2006). This widespread degradation has spurred large investments in urban stream restoration programs that usually involve increasing in-stream habitat complexity or replanting riparian vegetation (Bernhardt et al. 2005). This approach is a fundamental mismatch with the scale and cause of such degradation: alteration of land cover and drainage pathways across catchments (Bernhardt and Palmer 2011). Assessment of the ecological effectiveness of such reach-scale stream modification projects has been rare (Palmer et al. 2005), but recent studies suggest that resulting improvements in in-stream ecological structure and function are rare and, at best, marginal (Louhi et al. 2011, Violin et al. 2011). Effective restoration probably requires actions at the catchment-scale to directly redress degrading processes.The dispersed, land-based causes of stream degradation present a major challenge for stream ecologists who seek to understand the interactions of stream ecosystems with their catchments. To achieve such understanding, stream ecologists must work with the human community and natural resource managers who inhabit and work in the socioecological systems that constitute catchments (Collins et al. 2010). Projects aiming to achieve measurable restoration of stream ecosystems through catchment-scale actions are rare, particularly within an experimental framework. Catchment-scale experimentation requires collaboration among research disciplines and with a diverse range of actors in socioecological systems.In this cluster of papers, we report on a catchment-scale stream restoration experiment in Melbourne, Australia. The project was instigated by a stream ecologist (CJW) and a hydrologist (TDF). The task of garnering support for the project from funders, policy makers, stream managers, urban land managers, and the community of the experimental catchment has spanned a decade and has taken us well outside the comforts of our disciplines.Our experiences are no doubt unique in many ways, but we report here the approaches taken, mistakes made, and lessons learned to inform the future catchment-scale studies that are required to arrest the global decline of the world’s rivers. We begin with a paper outlining the rationale, experimental design, history of the project, and perspectives on our relationships and interactions with the diverse group of people involved in the project (Walsh et al. 2015). The following 3 papers in the cluster present project reviews from the perspective of 3 important collaborators: the catchment community (Bos and Brown 2015); the local government authorities who regulate, implement, and manage the drainage infrastructure of the catchment (Burns et al. 2015); and the regional waterway management authority that was the primary funder of the project (Prosser et al. 2015). Each of these papers comes from a social science discipline that is unusual for Freshwater Science, but we think this disciplinary perspective is necessary to examine the important social dimensions of undertaking manipulative experiments in socioecological systems.Notes*BRIDGES is a recurring feature of FWS intended to provide a forum for the interchange of ideas and information relevant to FWS readers, but beyond the usual scope of a scientific paper. Articles in this series will bridge from aquatic ecology to other disciplines, e.g., political science, economics, education, chemistry, or other biological sciences. Papers may be complementary or take alternative viewpoints. Authors with ideas for topics should contact BRIDGES Co-Editors, Ashley Moerke ([email protected]) and Allison Roy ([email protected]).Literature CitedBernhardt, E. S., and M. A. Palmer. 2011. River restoration: the fuzzy logic of repairing reaches to reverse catchment-scale degradation. Ecological Applications 21:1926–1931.First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle ScholarBernhardt, E. S., M. A. Palmer, J. D. Allan, G. Alexander, K. Barnas, S. Brooks, J. Carr, S. Clayton, C. Dahm, J. Follstad-Shah, D. Galat, S. Gloss, P. Goodwin, D. Hart, B. Hassett, R. Jenkinson, S. Katz, G. M. Kondolf, P. S. Lake, R. Lave, J. L. Meyer, T. K. O’Donnell, L. Pagano, B. Powell, and E. Sudduth. 2005. Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts. Science 308:636–637.First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle ScholarBos, D. G., and H. L. Brown. 2015. Overcoming barriers to community participation in a catchment-scale experiment: building trust and changing behavior. Freshwater Science 34:1169–1175.First citation in articleLinkGoogle ScholarBurns, M. J., E. Wallis, and V. Matic. 2015. Building capacity in low-impact drainage management through research collaboration. Freshwater Science 34:1176–1185.First citation in articleLinkGoogle ScholarCollins, S. L., S. R. Carpenter, S. M. Swinton, D. E. Orenstein, D. L. Childers, T. L. Gragson, N. B. Grimm, J. M. Grove, S. L. Harlan, and J. P. Kaye. 2010. An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social–ecological research. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 9:351–357.First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle ScholarDudgeon, D., A. H. Arthington, M. O. Gessner, Z. I. Kawabata, D. J. Knowler, C. Lévêque, R. J. Naiman, A. H. Prieur-Richard, D. Soto, M. L. J. Stiassny, and C. A. Sullivan. 2006. Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biological Reviews 81:163–182.First citation in articleCrossref MedlineGoogle ScholarLouhi, P., H. Mykrä, R. Paavola, A. Huusko, T. Vehanen, A. Mäki-Petäys, and T. Muotka. 2011. Twenty years of stream restoration in Finland: little response by benthic macroinvertebrate communities. Ecological Applications 21:1950–1961.First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle ScholarPalmer, M. A., E. S. Bernhardt, J. D. Allan, P. S. Lake, G. Alexander, S. Brooks, J. Carr, S. Clayton, C. N. Dahm, J. Follstad Shah, D. L. Galat, S. G. Loss, P. Goodwin, D. D. Hart, B. Hassett, R. Jenkinson, G. M. Kondolf, R. Lave, J. L. Meyer, T. K. O’Donnell, L. Pagano, and E. Sudduth. 2005. Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology 42:208–217.First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle ScholarProsser, T., P. J. Morison, and R. A. Coleman. 2015. Integrating stormwater management to restore a stream: perspectives from a waterway management authority. Freshwater Science 34:1186–1194.First citation in articleLinkGoogle ScholarViolin, C. R., P. Cada, E. B. Sudduth, B. A. Hassett, D. L. Penrose, and E. S. Bernhardt. 2011. Effects of urbanization and urban stream restoration on the physical and biological structure of stream ecosystems. Ecological Applications 21:1932–1949.First citation in articleCrossrefGoogle ScholarWalsh, C. J., T. D. Fletcher, D. G. Bos, and S. J. Imberger. 2015. Restoring a stream through retention of urban stormwater runoff: a catchment-scale experiment in a social–ecological system. Freshwater Science 34:1161–1168.First citation in articleLinkGoogle Scholar Previous articleNext article DetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Freshwater Science Volume 34, Number 3September 2015 Published on behalf of the Society for Freshwater Science Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/682394 Views: 867Total views on this site Citations: 5Citations are reported from Crossref HistoryPublished online August 08, 2015Received July 15, 2014Accepted March 31, 2015 © 2015 by The Society for Freshwater Science.PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Jeremie Bonneau, Tim D. Fletcher, Justin F. Costelloe, Peter J. Poelsma, Robert B. James, Matthew J. Burns The hydrologic, water quality and flow regime performance of a bioretention basin in Melbourne, Australia, Urban Water Journal 17, no.44 (May 2020): 303–314.https://doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2020.1769688Aïda M. Farag, Diane L. Larson, Jenny Stauber, Ralph Stahl, John Isanhart, Kevin McAbee, Christopher J. Walsh Restoration of contaminated ecosystems: adaptive management in a changing climate, Restoration Ecology 25, no.66 (Nov 2017): 884–893.https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12583Christopher J. Walsh, Tim D. Fletcher, Geoff J. Vietz Variability in stream ecosystem response to urbanization, Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment 40, no.55 (Oct 2016): 714–731.https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133316671626Craig P. Paukert, Bob A. Glazer, Gretchen J. A. Hansen, Brian J. Irwin, Peter C. Jacobson, Jeffrey L. Kershner, Brian J. Shuter, James E. Whitney, Abigail J. Lynch Adapting Inland Fisheries Management to a Changing Climate, Fisheries 41, no.77 (Jun 2016): 374–384.https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2016.1185009Asal Askarizadeh, Megan A. Rippy, Tim D. Fletcher, David L. Feldman, Jian Peng, Peter Bowler, Andrew S. Mehring, Brandon K. Winfrey, Jasper A. Vrugt, Amir AghaKouchak, Sunny C. Jiang, Brett F. Sanders, Lisa A. Levin, Scott Taylor, Stanley B. Grant From Rain Tanks to Catchments: Use of Low-Impact Development To Address Hydrologic Symptoms of the Urban Stream Syndrome, Environmental Science & Technology 49, no.1919 (Sep 2015): 11264–11280.https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01635