South East Queensland, man love the coast. But we love it too much, so much so that we have destroyed valuable coastal habitat – in the case of some types of habitat, much of it.
Pollution, coastal development, climate change and many other human impacts have destroyed mangrove forests, salt marshes, sea grass plains, macroalgae (seaweed) forests and large portions of coral and shellfish reefs. We have lost an astonishing 85 percent of shellfish reefs worldwide and bleached coral reefs globally.
When healthy, these coastal habitats help feed the world by supporting fisheries.They are home to over 100 species of charismatic marine megafauna, from sharks to dugongs. They absorb carbon, thus helping to slow climate change. The list goes on. Restored wetlands provide important habitat for waders such as red-necked stints and curlew sandpipers, which are in rapid decline.
Healthy coastal habitats are the gift that keeps on giving.We need them back so there is a lot of enthusiasm to restore these habitats. For example, we can plant mangroves to help seagrass regrow, create new shellfish reefs, and reduce pollution.
But we want to recover more than just housing. We also want to support animals. We need to know whether restoration is helping the animals.We analyzed restoration projects around the world to assess how animals are benefiting. Compared to degraded sites, restored habitats have much larger and more diverse animal populations. Overall, the number and types of animals in restored habitats are similar to those in natural habitats.
So the restore works. But the consequences for animals vary from project to project. No, all projects deliver the goods.As a result, resources are wasted and humanity is deprived of the enormous benefits of healthy coastal habitats.
Animals may respond well to restoration We collected more than 5,000 data points from 160 studies of coastal restoration projects around the world.
Interestingly, animal populations and communities were remarkably similar to those of comparable undisturbed natural sites. For example, restoring seagrass off the coast of Adelaide brought back invertebrates that are food for many species caught by Australians, such as Australian snapper. The number of invertebrates here was comparable to that of the surrounding natural seagrass meadows.Overall, our review found that animal populations in restored coastal habitats were 61% larger and 35% more diverse than those in unrestored, degraded sites. S restoration produces serious gains. Some projects recorded dramatic increases. For example, after oyster reefs were restored in Pumicestone Passage, Queensland, fish numbers increased more than tenfold. The number of fish species increased almost four times.And animals can occupy newly restored sites surprisingly rapidly. Populations of fish and invertebrates in restored seagrass and mangroves may equal those in natural sites within a year or two. This occurs even when restored areas have little vegetation.
Our study shows that efforts to restore coastal habitat can certainly help animals thrive. Results are not guaranteed
Although restoration generally helped animals, good outcomes are not guaranteed, we found several projects where animal numbers or diversity barely increased.It was not clear to me why some projects were very good for animals and others had poor results.
Some restoration sites may be in places where animals cannot easily find them. In other cases, actions to restore habitat probably will not work. Despite your best efforts, we failed to create a suitable environment.
It may be that animals are returning to restored habitats, but we are not catching them with our monitoring.We desperately need more consistent recovery results. For example, if it does not keep promises to improve fisheries, we may lose community support for restoration. We are still working on how to effectively restore shorelines. Clearly, more work is needed to improve techniques and monitor animal numbers.
Global coalitions and groups are developing standardized frameworks to guide restoration practice and report on project design and outcomes.Such strategies and coordination promise to yield more consistent benefits.
New technologies can improve monitoring and restoration of animals in coastal habitats The results of monitoring and restoration are challenging. These aquatic habitats are structurally complex, often impermeable and difficult to navigate, and can be dangerous.
New technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and environmental DNA (eDNA) allow us to collect more and better data about which animals are present and how they use these habitats. We are becoming increasingly less reliant on hauling in nets or diving down to count animals.For example, artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to extract information from underwater cameras. We can monitor animals more often, in more places, at lower cost. AI algorithms were recently used to automatically identify, size and count fish in videos taken on restored oyster reefs in Port Phillip Bay, Melbourne. Was done for. This data was used to calculate increased fish productivity due to restoration efforts. And what an increase it was – more than 6,000 kilograms of fish per hectare per year!
Combining underwater video with automated data extraction provides a new reliable and cost-effective way to survey animals ethically and efficiently.We still face major obstacles in scaling up restoration to get anywhere close to reversing our environmental impact on the coasts. Main concerns include ongoing climate change and policies and laws that hinder restoration efforts. For example, with a complex system involving multiple organizations and arms of government, obtaining permits to restore habitat can be difficult. Nevertheless, our synthesis shows some light at the end of the tunnel. Animals around the world are greatly benefiting from Costa restoration efforts.Evidence supports ambitious restoration goals and action. (Conversation)
GSP
Pollution, coastal development, climate change and many other human impacts have destroyed mangrove forests, salt marshes, sea grass plains, macroalgae (seaweed) forests and large portions of coral and shellfish reefs. We have lost an astonishing 85 percent of shellfish reefs worldwide and bleached coral reefs globally.
When healthy, these coastal habitats help feed the world by supporting fisheries.They are home to over 100 species of charismatic marine megafauna, from sharks to dugongs. They absorb carbon, thus helping to slow climate change. The list goes on. Restored wetlands provide important habitat for waders such as red-necked stints and curlew sandpipers, which are in rapid decline.
Healthy coastal habitats are the gift that keeps on giving.We need them back so there is a lot of enthusiasm to restore these habitats. For example, we can plant mangroves to help seagrass regrow, create new shellfish reefs, and reduce pollution.
But we want to recover more than just housing. We also want to support animals. We need to know whether restoration is helping the animals.We analyzed restoration projects around the world to assess how animals are benefiting. Compared to degraded sites, restored habitats have much larger and more diverse animal populations. Overall, the number and types of animals in restored habitats are similar to those in natural habitats.
So the restore works. But the consequences for animals vary from project to project. No, all projects deliver the goods.As a result, resources are wasted and humanity is deprived of the enormous benefits of healthy coastal habitats.
Animals may respond well to restoration We collected more than 5,000 data points from 160 studies of coastal restoration projects around the world.
Interestingly, animal populations and communities were remarkably similar to those of comparable undisturbed natural sites. For example, restoring seagrass off the coast of Adelaide brought back invertebrates that are food for many species caught by Australians, such as Australian snapper. The number of invertebrates here was comparable to that of the surrounding natural seagrass meadows.Overall, our review found that animal populations in restored coastal habitats were 61% larger and 35% more diverse than those in unrestored, degraded sites. S restoration produces serious gains. Some projects recorded dramatic increases. For example, after oyster reefs were restored in Pumicestone Passage, Queensland, fish numbers increased more than tenfold. The number of fish species increased almost four times.And animals can occupy newly restored sites surprisingly rapidly. Populations of fish and invertebrates in restored seagrass and mangroves may equal those in natural sites within a year or two. This occurs even when restored areas have little vegetation.
Our study shows that efforts to restore coastal habitat can certainly help animals thrive. Results are not guaranteed
Although restoration generally helped animals, good outcomes are not guaranteed, we found several projects where animal numbers or diversity barely increased.It was not clear to me why some projects were very good for animals and others had poor results.
Some restoration sites may be in places where animals cannot easily find them. In other cases, actions to restore habitat probably will not work. Despite your best efforts, we failed to create a suitable environment.
It may be that animals are returning to restored habitats, but we are not catching them with our monitoring.We desperately need more consistent recovery results. For example, if it does not keep promises to improve fisheries, we may lose community support for restoration. We are still working on how to effectively restore shorelines. Clearly, more work is needed to improve techniques and monitor animal numbers.
Global coalitions and groups are developing standardized frameworks to guide restoration practice and report on project design and outcomes.Such strategies and coordination promise to yield more consistent benefits.
New technologies can improve monitoring and restoration of animals in coastal habitats The results of monitoring and restoration are challenging. These aquatic habitats are structurally complex, often impermeable and difficult to navigate, and can be dangerous.
New technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and environmental DNA (eDNA) allow us to collect more and better data about which animals are present and how they use these habitats. We are becoming increasingly less reliant on hauling in nets or diving down to count animals.For example, artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to extract information from underwater cameras. We can monitor animals more often, in more places, at lower cost. AI algorithms were recently used to automatically identify, size and count fish in videos taken on restored oyster reefs in Port Phillip Bay, Melbourne. Was done for. This data was used to calculate increased fish productivity due to restoration efforts. And what an increase it was – more than 6,000 kilograms of fish per hectare per year!
Combining underwater video with automated data extraction provides a new reliable and cost-effective way to survey animals ethically and efficiently.We still face major obstacles in scaling up restoration to get anywhere close to reversing our environmental impact on the coasts. Main concerns include ongoing climate change and policies and laws that hinder restoration efforts. For example, with a complex system involving multiple organizations and arms of government, obtaining permits to restore habitat can be difficult. Nevertheless, our synthesis shows some light at the end of the tunnel. Animals around the world are greatly benefiting from Costa restoration efforts.Evidence supports ambitious restoration goals and action. (Conversation)
GSP
