Figure 1: Examples of ecological modifications possible at restoration sites: (Top, left) Soil Amendment treatments with added organic matter in the foreground and stream channel modifications in the background; (Top, right) Topographical changes to modify the hydrology as well as plantings to design the desired plant community; (Bottom, Left) Hydrological changes such as a new stream channel; (Bottom, right) Plant community manipulations such as species diversity treatments (1, 4, or 8 species). Photos by A.E. Sutton-Grier

Nevertheless, given that a significant portion of my research program has focused on wetland and stream restoration sites, I have a great appreciation for the limitations and challenges of doing research within a restoration context. Ecological research is often constrained by project budgets, timing constraints and the physical, spatial extent of restoration projects. There can also be issues with lack of replication or pseudo-replication. Finally, there can be a frustrating lack of control over the research site, which can at the very least slow research progress and at the worst ruin entire projects (Figure 2).  Based on my experiences, below are lessons learned from doing research at active restoration sites.

When you live a couple of hours away from a restoration site, it is difficult to be present during all of the site construction. And yet, if you are not present, changes in the restoration plan can occur that can have important impacts on your research. The types of modifications that occurred at the restoration sites at which I worked included 1) stream depths were modified from the original plans changing the flooding frequency of the adjacent riparian wetlands; 2) plans to fill sections of old stream channel were canceled leaving “ponds” in unplanned areas; 3) vegetation was planted at different densities than specified in the original plans; and 4) planned soil modifications were not implemented as designed. None of these issues ended up being a major problem for my study, but there were a lot of modifications and frustrations that might have been avoided if I had been present to observe and discuss changes to the restoration plans.

Lesson 2: Get to know the construction crew manager as well as the project manager and communicate clearly with all involved parties. Also, be on site during restoration construction and treatment application.
I met and spoke on the phone several times with the project manager for the city at one of my field sites. He was completely supportive and excited that I wanted to do research at his restoration site. He eagerly discussed my research design plans and understood what needed to be implemented in the field for me to ask my research question: “How do different levels of soil amendments impact soil processes and plant community development?” However, the details about my carefully designed, replicated, and balanced soil amendment study and the importance of following the exact design were not passed on to the construction manager. As a result, when the soil amendment treatments were applied, they were not applied as had been specified in my research design. Due to cost-constraints, the construction manager decided to cut back the amount of organic matter added to two of the three “high organic matter” treatments. This resulted in me having one very large “outlier” plot with much higher soil organic matter than any of my other plots which meant I no longer had the replicated study design I had planned.  As a result, I had to change my research design and statistical analysis. If I had been in better contact with both the project manager and the construction manager and had been on site the day the treatments were applied, I could have made sure they both understood the importance of following my research design and that my treatments were properly applied.

Lesson 3: Be creative, flexible, patient, and prepared.
Because restored ecosystems are disturbed, doing ecological research at these sites is more challenging than in natural ecosystems. Therefore, one needs to be creative, patient, and ready to handle problems that arise. For example, one of the restoration sites I worked at was in an urban area and had previously had houses built on the site. But because the houses were in the floodplain, they kept flooding. So, as part of the restoration, the houses were removed as well as six feet of fill soil, which was added to the site when the houses were constructed. As a result, the soils remaining at the site were very disturbed, high in clay, and low in organic matter. This made them very difficult to sample. At times it felt as if we were trying to extract bricks (Figure 3). Sampling these soils was hard on our soil sampling equipment which would often seize up or even break during our sampling. Therefore, it became critical to have extra samplers with us and tools to help loosen the samples when they got stuck. We also had to plan extra time for sampling due to these common problems with our equipment.

Lesson 4: Enjoy the bonuses of working at a restoration site!
The rewards from doing research in restoration sites are great, too. Restoration is something that really interests people. It is fun to give tours of my research plots to students and adults where I discuss how urban stream and wetlands become degraded and how to mitigate some of these problems (Figure 4). There was also the occasional perk of being involved in large projects, such as having aerial photographs taken of my research plots (Figure 5).
Overall, I would definitely recommend to others, if you have the opportunity to do research in a restored ecosystem, DO! The challenges I faced were largely logistical and could have been avoided if I had been more pro-active and more involved in the construction phase of the restoration. So, my advice to anyone thinking of doing restoration research is to make sure you know the people in charge, communicate well and frequently with them, and be involved in the whole process as much as possible. You will surely find your experiences both challenging and rewarding. Good luck!

---

References

• Bradshaw, A. D. 1987. Restoration: an acid test for ecology. Pages 23-29 in W. R. Jordan, M. E. Gilpin, and J. D. Aber, editors. Restoration Ecology:A Synthetic Approach to Ecological Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Ehrenfeld, J. G., and L. A. Toth. 1997. Restoration ecology and the ecosystem perspective. Restoration Ecology 5:307-317,
• Wheeler, B. D. 1995. Introduction: Restoration and Wetlands. Pages 1-18 in B. D. Wheeler, W. J. Fojt, and R. A. Robertson, editors. Restoration of Temerate Wetlands. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.