Changing nature
By 1996, the Coquitlam Demonstration Site had been significantly altered from its historical trajectory through extensive land conversion for use as a utility right-of-way (BC MFLNRO, 2009). Within the right-of-way, the species composition had shifted from that of an old growth forest to one of low growing species fit for the purpose of an open utility corridor (Schaefer & Sulek, 1997a; BC MFLNRO, 2009). As such, this system would have fit the definition of a ‘hybrid ecosystem’, where abiotic or biotic factors have been altered to such an extent as to differ from historical conditions, but which can feasibly be restored to an historical trajectory (Hobbs, Higgs & Harris, 2009).
In theory, the Coquitlam Demonstration Site could have been restored in the traditional sense of the word, so as to operate within its historical range of variability, if devoid of economic, societal or structural constraints. One would simply be required to reintroduce historically present vegetation to the area. Often in urban areas, however, barriers exist, which prove to be prohibitive for traditional approaches to ecosystem management and restoration. In the case of the Coquitlam Demonstration Site, height restrictions ruled out the possibility of restoring to a ‘pre-urbanization’ historical baseline; trees are not permitted within BC Hydro utility corridors, so as to “ensure the safe and reliable transmission of electricity” (BC Hydro, 2010a). The project was thus required to use different types of historical knowledge in achieving alternative goals. In using what Higgs et al. define as ‘history as reference’ – that historical knowledge which “does not bind the restorationist to a particular course of action” (Higgs et al., 2014) – ecosystem functions could be restored through the establishment of a new vegetative structure and composition (Hallet et al., 2013). Such functions include meta-population dynamics, species dispersal, and other ecological relationships (Naujokaitis-Lewis & Schaefer, 2005). The success of the project was not measured against a historical baseline, but in comparison to the original state of the utility corridor in 1996 (Schaefer, 2003). As such, the end product was what some might call a ‘designer ecosystem’, one that does not closely follow a historical template, but which is constructed with other goals in mind (improved habitat, connectivity, and biodiversity, in this case) (Marris, 2011).
In theory, the Coquitlam Demonstration Site could have been restored in the traditional sense of the word, so as to operate within its historical range of variability, if devoid of economic, societal or structural constraints. One would simply be required to reintroduce historically present vegetation to the area. Often in urban areas, however, barriers exist, which prove to be prohibitive for traditional approaches to ecosystem management and restoration. In the case of the Coquitlam Demonstration Site, height restrictions ruled out the possibility of restoring to a ‘pre-urbanization’ historical baseline; trees are not permitted within BC Hydro utility corridors, so as to “ensure the safe and reliable transmission of electricity” (BC Hydro, 2010a). The project was thus required to use different types of historical knowledge in achieving alternative goals. In using what Higgs et al. define as ‘history as reference’ – that historical knowledge which “does not bind the restorationist to a particular course of action” (Higgs et al., 2014) – ecosystem functions could be restored through the establishment of a new vegetative structure and composition (Hallet et al., 2013). Such functions include meta-population dynamics, species dispersal, and other ecological relationships (Naujokaitis-Lewis & Schaefer, 2005). The success of the project was not measured against a historical baseline, but in comparison to the original state of the utility corridor in 1996 (Schaefer, 2003). As such, the end product was what some might call a ‘designer ecosystem’, one that does not closely follow a historical template, but which is constructed with other goals in mind (improved habitat, connectivity, and biodiversity, in this case) (Marris, 2011).