Browse Units


Contact Information

Southern
Research Station

200 W.T. Weaver Blvd.
Asheville, NC
28804-3454
(828) 257-4832
(828) 259-0503 TTY

Publication Information

 Evaluate this publication
How Do You Rate This Publication?
  Bookmark and Share       Mail this page

Title: Ecological outcomes and evaluation of success in passively restored Southeastern depressional wetlands
Author(s): De Steven, Diane; Sharitz, Rebecca R.; Barton, Christopher D.
Date: 2010
Source: Wetlands 30:1129-1140
Station ID: JRNL--30
Description: Depressional wetlands may be restored passively by disrupting prior drainage to recover original hydrology and relying on natural revegetation. Restored hydrology selects for wetland vegetation; however, depression geomorphology constrains the achievable hydroperiod, and plant communities are influenced by hydroperiod and available species pools. Such constraints can complicate assessments of restoration success. Sixteen drained depressions in South Carolina, USA, were restored experimentally by forest clearing and ditch plugging for potential crediting to a mitigation bank. Depressions were assigned to alternate revegetation methods representing desired targets of herbaceous and wet-forest communities. After five years, restoration progress and revegetation methods were evaluated. Restored hydroperiods differed among wetlands, but all sites developed diverse vegetation of native wetland species. Vegetation traits were influenced by hydroperiod and the effects of early drought, rather than by revegetation method. For mitigation banking, individual wetlands were assessed for improvement from pre-restoration condition and similarity to assigned reference type. Most wetlands met goals to increase hydroperiod, herb-species dominance, and wetland-plant composition. Fewer wetlands achieved equivalence to reference types because some vegetation targets were incompatible with depression hydroperiods and improbable without intensive management. The results illustrated a paradox in judging success when vegetation goals may be unsuited to system constraints.
View and Print this Publication (1.11 MB)     Evaluate this publication
Publication Notes: We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain. Our on-line publications are scanned and captured using Adobe Acrobat. During the capture process some typographical errors may occur. Please contact the SRS Webmaster, srswebmaster@fs.fed.us if you notice any errors which make this publication unuseable. You may send email to pubrequest@fs.fed.us to request a hard copy of this publication. (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)
 [ Get Acrobat ] Get the latest version of the Adobe Acrobat reader or Acrobat Reader for Windows with Search and Accessibility