Ecological restoration, continuity, and change: The role of history in the restoration of former U.S. military sites

Background/Question/Methods

As global climate change presses upon us, the role of history in mediating our relationship to the natural world is ever more complex and contentious.  For ecological restoration, the challenge is particularly acute, as restoration has always looked to the past in establishing goals and judging success.  Global environmental change calls traditional restoration goals -- such as fidelity to natural, pre-disturbance landscapes -- into question, because the magnitude and extent of human impacts on Earth make it difficult to sharply distinguish the natural from the cultural.  In navigating the complexity of setting restoration goals in this context, it may be helpful to examine restoration in landscapes with complex socio-ecological histories, where nature and culture have long been intertwined. Taking the conversion of U.S. military sites to national wildlife refuges as a case study, we report on the results of interview and survey research exploring how land managers, refuge visitors, volunteers, and local citizens understand restoration goals in relation to history at three sites (Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Assabet River, and Big Oaks National Wildlife Refuges).  We then discuss connections between this work and philosophical perspectives on restoration in “layered landscapes,” where human and natural histories significantly shape one another over time.

Results/Conclusions

Military-to-wildlife (M2W) refuge conversion sites offer the potential to creatively explore the relationships between nature, culture, and history in ecological restoration.  Our work shows that these sites have complex and often conflicting meanings for different constituencies.  Refuge managers at Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge, for example, embrace the traditional restoration goal of establishing conditions similar to those prior to European settlement.  Although members of a local historical society don’t dispute this aim, they see a stronger role for cultural preservation in the restored landscape. At another site, Assabet River National Wildlife Refuge, managers are exploring strategies that would creatively employ the site’s military legacy to protect wildlife by adapting former concrete bunkers as bat hibernacula.  This approach has the potential to integrate the site’s socio-political history with ecological goals.  We conclude that restoration and management at M2W refuges could provide a way to protect and restore wildlife while negotiating the complex meanings of these sites.  However, limited resources, narrow institutional frameworks, and conflicting goals constrain the possibilities for M2W refuges.  Nevertheless, the restoration and interpretation of these layered landscapes can help show how both natural and cultural histories remain relevant, even in the face of rapid environmental change.