Shari Clare

TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluated the government's policy capacity to manage wetlands in Alberta, Canada, by measuring and evaluating three policy metrics: (1) no net change of wetland area; (2) permitted versus unpermitted wetland loss; and (3) an information tracking system that provides credible regulatory oversight.

TL;DR: This paper found that there is a strong consensus amongst key policy actors that a more robust wetland policy will not unduly impact the economy and that the disagreement between policy actors instead lies in the process for governing wetlands.

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors quantified wetland compensation outcomes in Alberta, Canada, and compared these outcomes to statements made in government-issued compensation guidelines, and found a strong tendency to skip over wetland avoidance in favor of compensatory payments for wetland loss, and that compensation sites are frequently located outside the watershed of impact.

Abstract: Restoration efforts are being implemented globally to mitigate the degradation and loss of wetland habitat; however, the rate and success of wetland vegetation recovery post‐restoration is highly variable across wetland classes and geographies. Here, we measured the recovery of plant diversity along a chronosequence of restored temporary and seasonal prairie wetlands ranging from 0 to 23 years since restoration, including drained and natural wetlands embedded in agricultural and natural reserve landscapes in central Alberta, Canada. We assessed plant diversity using the following structural indicators: percent cover of hydrophytes, native and non‐native species, species richness, and community composition. Our findings indicate that plant diversity recovered to resemble reference wetlands in agricultural landscapes within 3–5 years of restoration; however, restored wetlands maintained significantly lower species richness and a distinct community composition compared to reference wetlands located within natural reserves. Early establishment of non‐native species during recovery, dispersal limitation, and depauperated native seed bank were probable barriers to complete recovery. Determining the success of vegetation recovery provides important knowledge that can be used to improve restoration strategies, especially considering projected future changes in land use and climate.