The mesic pasture to forest group reviewed seven restoration strategies related to climate resiliency and explored five of them in more detail: planting in favorable microclimates, developing successional planting plans, group/clump planting, timing of restoration actions, and developing seed and seedling knowledge and supply. 

 

Most participants already plant in favorable microclimates and articulated methods currently used to identify or create such sites. The discussion about microclimates led to consideration of broader scale site selection, using mapping tools versus in-site decision making, noting that shapefiles can lack the finer context of environmental conditions where planting actually occurs. Thus, there is value in using both mapping tools and within-site observations to inform final decisions about where to plant. Regardless, it is necessary to balance site selection with funding constraints and plant needs. While formal successional planting plans are rare, many follow an intuitive approach, but timing for seed collection and access to propagules are challenges. Group/clump planting of single and multiple species was discussed as a way to improve survival and the rate of native vegetation cover. Utilizing a multi-site approach with this strategy would allow restoration practitioners to hedge survival across variable conditions. 

​

The strategy of timing restoration actions in pasture to mesic forest restoration was about maximizing benefit while minimizing effort. The discussion included consideration of short notice, post-event restoration opportunities such as fire, and longer-term, observational planning such as identifying areas of natural regeneration, and strategizing to protect restoration areas from prospective threats or challenges (e.g., (re)spraying persistent non-native grasses, secondary invasions) before starting a new project.  

Practitioners recognized that the occurrence of fire, while devastating for native forest, can be advantageous in a pasture to mesic forest restoration setting, clearing the grass and enabling rapid forest restoration efforts to commence. The need for post-fire planning was important here, to ensure the line-up of funds, personnel, and resources (i.e., plants) so that action occurs before invasive species (re)colonize the burn area. 

​

When planning a new restoration project, the group pointed out that using knowledge and observations of the existing landscape are important. For example, if there are areas along forest edges where forest expansion is naturally occurring, a project might choose to build upon that expansion with additional plantings. Another advantage of taking time to plan restoration projects in mesic areas was the ability to identify and plan for threats and challenges. Having to re-treat persistent non-native grasses is typical in this type of restoration, takes time and funding, and slows restoration progress. Still, this is an issue that has not been resolved and varies in difficulty depending on the site. Once grasses are removed, secondary invasions can easily occur by non-native plants such as thistle (Cirsium spp.) and blackberry/raspberry (Rubus spp.), so restoration planning should consider how to minimize impacts of those species and include time and funds to address impacts, should they occur. This strategy connects to the need for longer-term plans that incorporate/outline restoration response to natural disasters. However, there is a lack of a sustainable infrastructure design to support development of this type of management strategy, particularly regarding seed/plant supply. There is also a need for more research and development for fire-related restoration.

​

Developing seed and seedling knowledge and supply was important to those working on mesic pasture to forest restoration. Some people in the group spoke of participating in resource and local (within island) information sharing with fellow restoration practitioners while others were in search of that connection.  The group identified a need to develop a support structure to share information and capacity (to the extent possible/practical), and to create a reforestation pipeline to reduce common restoration supply barriers. Those in the group that have been doing restoration for a long time discussed wanting to see more formal organization and sharing of restoration knowledge–discussed as “collective communication.” Examples of successful restoration supply chains included the Willamette Valley Model and the California Restoration Pipeline (funded by American Forests).

 

Two additional strategies mentioned, though not discussed at length, were fog capture screens and multi-site planning. Fog capture screens are employed to facilitate moisture collection and have been used at several mesic locations in Hawai‘i to benefit water-limited seedlings. Multi-site planning, or distributing restoration of one or more species across sites, was noted as a strategy to prevent loss of species due to climate changes and natural disasters. 

​

In the second part of the conversation, the group focused on the implementation of multi-site planning for variable climate conditions and identified three steps toward that goal: leveraging existing data, gathering new information, and creating shared goals.

 

1) Existing Data: Climate maps, species ranges, fog data, land use history, and ʻŌlelo resources are key but their use as an integrated resource is hindered by time and capacity constraints. Therefore, addressing this step may take more planning to develop the capacity to do so. Collaborating with researchers and archivists could lead to open-source data sharing.

 

2) New Information: Knowledge gaps, such as weather data, soil assessments, and how community members interact with sites, need addressing. In determining a restoration location, there is also a need to  identify the communities that interact with the spaces being managed/used, development (as it exists and any intended), fencing status/potential and public interest.. ilo, the application of observing one's surroundings, and the relationships between spaces can also provide important information to better understand any place. These new data sets will require complex coordination to produce and ultimately are constrained by funding and time.

 

3) Shared Goals: Clear, shared goals will foster collaboration and ensure long-term sustainability. Partnerships with landowners, hunters, communities, and other partners are crucial. A Restoration Alliance may facilitate pooling of resources, securing funding, and increasing community engagement.