Research ArticleResearch Articles

The Effect of Active versus Passive Interventions on Riparian Rehabilitation Success

Monique Van Zitters, Alanna J. Rebelo, Jason Mingo and Karen J. Esler
Ecological Restoration, September 2025, 43 (3) 195-212; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/er.43.3.195

References

  1. ↵
    1. Aronson, J.,
    2. C. Floret,
    3. E. Le Floc’h,
    4. C. Ovalle and
    5. R. Pontanier
    . 1993. Restoration and rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems in arid and semi‐arid lands. I. A view from the South. Restoration Ecology 1:8–17.
    OpenUrl
    1. Agenbag, L.,
    2. K. Esler,
    3. G. Midgley and
    4. C. Boucher
    . 2008. Diversity and species turnover on an altitudinal gradient in Western Cape, South Africa: Baseline data for monitoring range shifts in response to climate change. Bothalia 38:161–191.
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Atkinson, J. and
    2. S.P. Bonser
    . 2020. “Active” and “passive” ecological restoration strategies in meta-analysis. Restoration Ecology 28(5): 1032–1035.
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Bash, J.S. and
    2. C.M. Ryan
    . 2002. Stream restoration and enhancement projects: Is anyone monitoring? Environmental Management 29(6): 877–885.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Batchelor, J.L.,
    2. W.J. Ripple,
    3. T.M. Wilson and
    4. L.E. Painter
    . 2015. Restoration of riparian areas following the removal of cattle in the Northwestern Great Basin. Environmental Management 55:930–942.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Bates, D.,
    2. M. Maechler,
    3. B. Bolker and
    4. S. Walker
    . 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1): 1–48.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  7. ↵
    1. Bay, R.F. and
    2. A.A. Sher
    . 2008. Success of active revegetation after Tamarix removal in riparian ecosystems of theSouthwestern United States: A quantitative assessment of past restoration projects. Restoration Ecology 16(1): 113–128.
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Bechara, F.C.,
    2. S.J. Dickens,
    3. E.C. Farrer,
    4. L. Larios,
    5. E.N. Spotswood,
    6. P. Mariotte and
    7. K.N. Suding
    . 2016. Neotropical rainforest restoration: Comparing passive, plantation and nucleation approaches. Biodiversity and Conservation 25:2021–2034.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Bernhardt, E.,
    2. E. Sudduth,
    3. M. Palmer,
    4. J. Allan,
    5. J. Meyer,
    6. G. Alexander
    et al. 2007. Restoring rivers one reach at a time: Results from a survey of U.S. river restoration practitioners. Restoration Ecology 15(3): 482–493.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Blanchard, R. and
    2. P.M. Holmes
    . 2008. Riparian vegetation recovery after invasive alien tree clearance in the Fynbos Biome. South African Journal of Botany 74(3): 421–431.
    OpenUrl
    1. Brancalion, P.H.S.,
    2. D. Schweizer,
    3. U. Gaudare,
    4. J.R. Mangueira,
    5. F. Lamonato,
    6. F.T. Farah
    et al. 2016. Balancing economic costs and ecological outcomes of passive and active restoration in agricultural landscapes: The case of Brazil. Biotropica 48(6): 856–867.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Brudvig, L.
    2020. Rain plays a surprising role in making some restored prairies healthier than others. The Conversation 5 June 2020.
  13. ↵
    1. Chazdon, R.L.,
    2. D.A. Falk,
    3. L.F. Banin,
    4. M. Wagner,
    5. S.J. Wilson,
    6. R.C. Grabowski and
    7. K.N. Suding
    . 2021. The intervention continuum in restoration ecology: Rethinking the active–passive dichotomy. Restoration Ecology 32(8):e13535.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Cooke, G.
    2005. Ecosystem rehabilitation. Lake and Reservoir Management 21(2): 218–221.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Cowles, J.,
    2. B. Boldgiv,
    3. P. Liancourt,
    4. P.S. Petraitis and
    5. B.B. Casper
    . 2018. Effects of increased temperature on plant communities depend on landscape location and precipitation. Ecology and Evolution 8(11): 5267–5278.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Crouzeilles, R.,
    2. M. Ferreira,
    3. R. Chazdon,
    4. D. Lindenmayer,
    5. J. Sansevero,
    6. L. Monteiro
    et al. 2017. Ecological restoration success is higher for natural regeneration than for active restoration in tropical forests. Science Advances 3(11): 1–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Cupertino, A.,
    2. S. Dufour
    and P.M. Rodríguez-González. 2024. Chasing success: A review of vegetation indicators used in riparian ecosystem restoration monitoring. Ecological Indicators 166:112371.
  18. DEA&DP (Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning). 2019. Final Report for Bid No. EADP5/2015. Implementation of the Berg Breede River Riparian Rehabilitation Programme.
  19. ↵
    1. Díaz, S.,
    2. J. Settele,
    3. E. Brondízio,
    4. H. Ngo,
    5. J. Agard,
    6. A. Arneth
    et al. 2019. Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change. Science 366(1327):1–33.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Dobkin, D.S.,
    2. A.C. Rich and
    3. W.H. Pyle
    . 1998. Habitat and avifaunal recovery from livestock grazing in a riparian meadow system of the Northwestern Great Basin. Conservation Biology 12:209–221.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  21. ↵
    1. Dominati, E.
    2013. Natural capital and ecosystem services of soils. Pages 132–142 in J. Dymond (ed.). Ecosystem Services in New Zealand—Conditions and Tends. Lincoln, New Zealand: Manaaki Whenua Press.
  22. ↵
    du Plessis, N., A. Rebelo, D. Richardson and K. Esler. 2022. Guiding restoration of riparian ecosystems degraded by plant invasions: Insights from a complex social-ecological system in the Global South. Ambio 51(6): 1552–1568.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Dzikiti, S.,
    2. M.B. Gush,
    3. D.C. Le Maitre,
    4. A. Maherry,
    5. N.Z. Jovanovic,
    6. A. Ramoelo and
    7. M.A. Cho
    . 2016. Quantifying potential water savings from clearing invasive alien Eucalyptus camaldulensis using in situ and high resolution remote sensing data in the Berg River Catchment, Western Cape, South Africa. Forest Ecology and Management 361:69–80.
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. Feld, C.K.,
    2. S. Birk,
    3. D.C. Bradley,
    4. D. Hering,
    5. J. Kail,
    6. A. Marzin
    et al. 2011. From natural to degraded rivers and back again. A test of restoration ecology theory and practice. Advances in Ecological Research 44:119–209.
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    1. Fick, S.E. and
    2. R.J. Hijmans
    . 2017. WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. International Journal of Climatology 37(12): 4302–4315.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. ↵
    1. Fill, J.,
    2. S. Kritzinger-Klopper,
    3. B. Van
    Wilgen, G. Forsyth and D. Le Maitre. 2017. An assessment of the effectiveness of a long-term ecosystem restoration project in a fynbos shrubland catchment in South Africa. Journal of Environmental Management 185:1–10.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Flitcroft, R.,
    2. M.S. Cooperman,
    3. I.J. Harrison,
    4. D. Juffe-Bignoli and
    5. P.J. Boon
    . 2019. Theory and practice to conserve freshwater biodiversity in the Anthropocene. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 29(7): 1013–1021.
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    1. Gaertner, M.,
    2. A.D. Breeyen,
    3. C. Hui and
    4. D.M. Richardson
    . 2009. Impacts of alien plant invasions on species richness in mediterranean-type ecosystems: A meta-analysis. Progress in Physical Geography 33(3): 319–338.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  29. ↵
    1. Gaertner, M.,
    2. R. Biggs,
    3. M. Te
    Beest, C. Hui, J. Molofsky and D.M. Richardson. 2014. Invasive plants as drivers of regime shifts: Identifying high‐priority invaders that alter feedback relationships. Diversity and Distributions 20(7):733–744.
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    1. Galatowitsch, S. and
    2. D.M. Richardson
    . 2005. Riparian scrub recovery after clearing of invasive alien trees in headwater streams of the Western Cape, South Africa. Biological Conservation 122:509–521.
    OpenUrl
  31. ↵
    1. Gann, G.,
    2. T. McDonald,
    3. B. Walder,
    4. J. Aronson,
    5. C. Nelson,
    6. J. Jonsonet
    al. 2019. International principles and standards for the practice of ecological restoration. Second edition. Restoration Ecology 27(S1):S1–S46.
    OpenUrl
  32. ↵
    1. Geldenhuys, C.J. and
    2. L. Bezuidenhout
    . 2008. Practical Guidelines For The Rehabilitation of Fores-Related Streambank Vegetation with Removal of Invader Plant Stands Along The Berg River, Western Cape. Working for Water Report (FW - 02/08). South Africa.
    1. Goldblatt, P. and
    2. J.C. Manning
    . 2002. Plant diversity of the Cape region of southern Africa. Pages 281–302 in Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, Volume 89. St. Louis, MO: Missouri Botanical Garden.
  34. ↵
    1. Gonzabato, N.
    2021. manymodelr: Build and Tune Several Models. R package version 0.3.7. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=manymodelr.
  35. ↵
    González, E., A.A. Sher, E. Tabacchi, A. Masip and M. Poulin. 2015. Restoration of riparian vegetation: A global review of implementation and evaluation approaches in the international, peer-reviewed literature. Journal of Environmental Management 158(2015):85–94.
  36. ↵
    1. Gornish, E.S.,
    2. M.S. Lennox,
    3. D. Lewis,
    4. K.W. Tate and
    5. R.D. Jackson
    . 2017. Comparing herbaceous plant communities in active and passive riparian restoration. PLoS ONE 12(4): 1–12.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Groves, A.M.,
    2. J.T. Bauer and
    3. L.A. Brudvig
    . 2020. Lasting signature of planting year weather on restored grasslands. Scientific Reports 10(1): 1–10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Groves, A.M. and
    2. L.A. Brudvig
    . 2018. Interannual variation in precipitation and other planting conditions impacts seedling establishment in sown plant communities. Restoration Ecology 27(1): 128–137.
    OpenUrl
  39. ↵
    1. Hagger, V.,
    2. J. Dwyer,
    3. L. Shoo and
    4. K. Wilson
    . 2018. Use of seasonal forecasting to manage weather risk in ecological restoration. Ecological Applications 28(7): 1797–1807.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Hall, S.,
    2. P. Holmes,
    3. M. Gaertner and
    4. K. Esler
    . 2021. Active seed sowing can overcome constraints to passive restoration of a critically endangered vegetation type. South African Journal of Botany 138:249–261.
    OpenUrl
    1. Hassan, R. and
    2. S. Mahlathi
    . 2020. Evaluating the environmental and social net-worth of controlling alien plant invasions in the Inkomati catchment, South Africa. Water SA 46(1): 54–65.
    OpenUrl
  42. ↵
    1. Heger, T.,
    2. J.M. Jeschke,
    3. C. Febria
    ,, J. Kollman, S. Murphy, L. Rochefort et al. 2022. Mapping and assessing the knowledge base of ecological restoration. Restoration Ecology 32(8):e13676.
    OpenUrl
    1. Herron, C.,
    2. J. Jonas,
    3. P. Meiman and
    4. M. Paschke
    . 2013. Using native annual plants to restore post-fire habitats in western North America. International Journal of Wildland Fire 22(6): 815–821.
    OpenUrl
    1. Hoffman, M.,
    2. E. Moll and
    3. C. Boucher
    . 1987. Post-fire succession at Pella, a South African lowland fynbos site. South African Journal of Botany 53(5): 370–374.
    OpenUrl
  45. ↵
    1. Holl, K.D. and
    2. T.M. Aide
    . 2011. When and where to actively restore ecosystems? Forest Ecology and Management 261:1558–1563.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  46. ↵
    1. Holmes, P.M.,
    2. D.M. Richardson,
    3. K.J. Esler,
    4. E.T.F. Witkowski and
    5. S. Fourie
    . 2005. A decision-making framework for restoring riparian zones degraded by invasive alien plants in South Africa. South African Journal of Science 101(11–12):553–564.
    OpenUrl
    1. Holmes, P.M.,
    2. K.J. Esler,
    3. D.M. Richardson and
    4. E.T.F. Witkowski
    . 2008. Guidelines for improved management of riparian zones invaded by alien plants in South Africa. South African Journal of Botany 74(3): 538–552.
    OpenUrl
  48. ↵
    1. Holmes, P.M.,
    2. K.J. Esler,
    3. B.W. Van Wilgen and
    4. D.W. Richardson
    . 2020. Ecological restoration of ecosystems degraded by invasive alien plants in South African Fynbos: Is spontaneous succession a viable strategy? Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 75(2): 1–929.
    OpenUrl
  49. ↵
    1. Hough-Snee, N.,
    2. B.B. Roper,
    3. J.M. Wheaton,
    4. P. Budy and
    5. R.L. Lokteff
    . 2013. Riparian vegetation communities change rapidly following passive restoration at a northern Utah stream. Ecological Engineering 58:371–377.
    OpenUrl
  50. ↵
    1. Jacobsen, A.L.,
    2. K.J. Esler,
    3. R.B. Pratt and
    4. F.W. Ewers
    . 2009. Water stress tolerance of shrubs in mediterranean‐type climate regions: Convergence of Fynbos and succulent Karoo communities with California shrub communities. American Journal of Botany 96(8): 1445–1453.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  51. ↵
    1. Josefsson, J.,
    2. M. Hiron,
    3. D. Arlt,
    4. A. Auffret,
    5. A. Berg,
    6. M. Chevalier
    et al. 2020. Improving scientific rigour in conservation evaluations and a plea deal for transparency on potential biases. Conservation Letters 13(5): 1–8.
    OpenUrl
  52. ↵
    1. Kauffman, J.B.,
    2. R.L. Beschta,
    3. N. Otting and
    4. D. Lytjen
    . 1997. An ecological perspective of riparian and stream restoration in the western United States. Fisheries 22:12–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  53. ↵
    1. Kemper, J.,
    2. R.M. Cowling and
    3. D.M. Richardson
    . 1999. Fragmentation of South African renosterveld shrublands: Effects on plant community structure and conservation implications. Biological Conservation 90(2): 103–111.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  54. ↵
    1. Kirchner, J.,
    2. J.H. Moolman,
    3. H.M. Du
    Plessis and A.G. Reynders. 1997. Causes and management of salinity in the Breede River Valley, South Africa. Hydrogeology Journal 5(1): 98–108.
    OpenUrlGeoRef
  55. ↵
    1. Lynch, S.D.
    2003. Development of a raster database of annual, monthly and daily rainfall for southern Africa. WRC Report 1156/1/03. Pretoria, South Africa: Water Research Commission.
  56. Le Maitre, D., A. Görgens, G. Howard and N. Walker. 2019. Impacts of alien plant invasions on water resources and yields from the Western Cape Water Supply System (WCWSS). Water SA 45(4): 568–579.
    OpenUrl
  57. ↵
    1. Marchand, L.,
    2. B. Castagneyrol,
    3. J.J. Jiménez,
    4. J.M.R. Benayas,
    5. M.L. Benot,
    6. C. Martínez-Ruiz
    et al. 2021. Conceptual and methodological issues in estimating the success of ecological restoration. Ecological Indicators 123:107362.
    OpenUrl
  58. ↵
    1. Matzek, V.,
    2. D. Lewis,
    3. A. O’Geen,
    4. M. Lennox,
    5. S. Hogan,
    6. S. Feirer
    et al. 2020. Increases in soil and woody biomass carbon stocks as a result of rangeland riparian restoration. Carbon Balance and Management 15(1): 1–15.
    OpenUrl
  59. ↵
    1. Mclean, E.
    1982. Soil pH and lime requirement. Pages 199–223 in A. Page (ed.). Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd edition. Wisconsin, USA: American Society of Agronomy and Soil Science Society of America.
    1. Mclean, P.
    2018. Patterns and processes of alien plant invasions in small urban areas in South Africa: The Berg River Catchment as a case study. Master of Science thesis, Stellenbosch University, Western Cape, South Africa.
  61. ↵
    1. Meli, P.,
    2. K.D. Holl,
    3. J.M.R. Benayas,
    4. H.P. Jones,
    5. P.C. Jones,
    6. D. Montoya and
    7. D.M. Mateos
    . 2017. A global review of past land use, climate and active vs. passive restoration effects on forest recovery. PLoS ONE 12:1–17.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  62. ↵
    1. Muller, I.,
    2. M. Delisle,
    3. M. Ollitrault and
    4. I. Bernez
    . 2016. Responses of riparian plant communities and water quality after 8 years of passive ecological restoration using a BACI design. Hydrobiologia 781:67–79.
    OpenUrl
  63. ↵
    1. Naiman, R.J.,
    2. H. Décamps and
    3. M.E. McClain
    . 2005. Riparia: Ecology, Conservation, and Management of Streamside Communities. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Inc.
    1. Naiman, R.J. and
    2. H. Décamps
    . 1997. The ecology of interfaces: Riparian zones. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 28(102): 621–658.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  65. ↵
    The Non-Affiliated Soil Analyses Work Committee. 1990. Handbook of Standard Soil Testing Methods for Advisory Purposes. Pretoria, South Africa: Soil Science Society of South Africa.
    1. Nsikani, M.M.,
    2. A. Novoa,
    3. B.W. Van
    Wilgen, J.H. Keet, and M. Gaertner. 2017. Acacia saligna’s soil legacy effects persist up to 10 years after clearing: Implications for ecological restoration. Austral Ecology 42(8): 880–889.
    OpenUrl
  67. ↵
    1. Nsikani, M.M.,
    2. S. Geerts,
    3. S. Ruwanza and
    4. D.M. Richardson
    . 2020. Secondary invasion and weedy native species dominance after clearing invasive alien plants in South Africa: Status quo and prognosis. South African Journal of Botany 132(2020):338–345.
    OpenUrl
  68. ↵
    1. Ntshotsho, P.,
    2. B. Reyers and
    3. K.J. Esler
    . 2011. Assessing the evidence base for restoration in South Africa. Restoration Ecology 19(5): 578–586.
    OpenUrl
  69. ↵
    1. Nunes, A.,
    2. G. Oliveira,
    3. T. Mexia,
    4. A. Valdecantos,
    5. C. Zucca,
    6. C., E. Costantini
    et al. 2016. Ecological restoration across the Mediterranean Basin as viewed by practitioners. Science of The Total Environment 566:722–732.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  70. ↵
    1. Oksanen, J.,
    2. G. Simpson,
    3. F. Blanchet,
    4. R. Kindt,
    5. P. Legendre,
    6. P. Minchin
    et al. 2022. _vegan: Community Ecology Package_. R package version 2.6–4, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
  71. ↵
    1. Pearson, A.L.,
    2. K.A. Pfeiffer,
    3. J. Gardiner,
    4. T. Horton,
    5. R.T. Buxton,
    6. R.F. Hunter
    et al. 2020. Study of active neighborhoods in Detroit (StAND): Study protocol for a natural experiment evaluating the health benefits of ecological restoration of parks. BMC Public Health 20(63): 1–14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  72. ↵
    1. Perkins, K.,
    2. J. Nimmo,
    3. A. Medeiros,
    4. D. Szutu, and
    5. E. von
    Allmen. 2014. Assessing effects of native forest restoration on soil moisture dynamics and potential aquifer recharge, Auwahi, Maui. Ecohydrology 7(5): 1437–1451.
    OpenUrl
    1. Perosa, F.,
    2. S. Fanger,
    3. A. Zingraff-Hamed and
    4. M. Disse
    . 2021. A meta-analysis of the value of ecosystem services of floodplains for the Danube River Basin. Science of the Total Environment 777:146062.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  74. ↵
    1. Pretorius, M.R.,
    2. K.J. Esler,
    3. P.M. Holmes and
    4. N. Prins
    . 2008. The effectiveness of active restoration following alien clearance in fynbos riparian zones and resilience of treatments to fire. South African Journal of Botany 74(3): 517–525.
    OpenUrl
  75. ↵
    R Core Team. 2019. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria.
  76. ↵
    1. Rebelo, T.,
    2. C. Boucher,
    3. N. Helme,
    4. L. Mucina,
    5. M. Rutherford,
    6. W. Smit
    et al. 2006. Fynbos biome. Pages 53–219 in L. Mucina and M. Rutherford (eds.). The Vegetation of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland, Strelitzia-19. South African National Biodiversity Institute Publishing.
  77. ↵
    1. Rebelo, A.,
    2. P. Holden,
    3. K. Esler and
    4. M. New
    . 2021. Benefits of water- related ecological infrastructure investments to support sustainable land-use: A review of evidence from critically water-stressed catchments in South Africa. Royal Society Open Science 8(4).
  78. ↵
    1. Reinecke, M.K.,
    2. A.L. Pigot and
    3. J.M. King
    . 2008. Spontaneous succession of riparian fynbos: Is unassisted recovery a viable restoration strategy? South African Journal of Botany 74(3): 412–420.
    OpenUrl
  79. ↵
    1. Richardson, D.M.,
    2. P. Pyšek,
    3. M. Rejmánek,
    4. M.G. Barbour,
    5. F. Dane Panetta and
    6. C.J. West
    . 2000. Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: Concepts and definitions. Diversity and Distributions 6(2): 93–107.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  80. ↵
    1. Richardson, D.M.,
    2. P.M. Holmes,
    3. K.J. Esler,
    4. S.M. Galatowitsch,
    5. J.C. Stromberg,
    6. S.P. Kirkman
    et al. 2007. Riparian vegetation: Degradation, alien plant invasions, and restoration prospects. Diversity and Distributions 13(1): 126–139.
    OpenUrl
  81. ↵
    1. Rivaes, R.
    , P. Rodríguez-González, A. Albuquerque, A. Pinheiro, G. Egger and M. Ferreira. 2012. Riparian vegetation responses to altered flow regimes driven by climate change in Mediterranean rivers. Ecohydrology 6(3): 413–424.
    OpenUrl
  82. ↵
    1. Rohal, C.,
    2. C. Cranney and
    3. K. Kettenring
    . 2019. Abiotic and landscape factors constrain restoration outcomes across spatial scales of a widespread invasive plant. Frontiers in Plant Science 10:481.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  83. ↵
    1. Ruwanza, S.,
    2. M. Gaertne,
    3. K.J. Esler and
    4. D.M. Richardson
    . 2013a. The effectiveness of active and passive restoration on recovery of indigenous vegetation in riparian zones in the Western Cape, South Africa: A preliminary assessment. South African Journal of Botany 88:132–141.
    OpenUrl
  84. ↵
    1. Ruwanza, S.,
    2. M. Gaertner,
    3. D. Richardson and
    4. K. Esler
    . 2013b. Soil water repellency in riparian systems invaded by Eucalyptus camaldulensis: A restoration perspective from the Western Cape Province, South Africa. Geoderma 200–201:9–17.
    OpenUrl
  85. ↵
    1. Ruwanza, S.,
    2. M. Gaertner,
    3. K.J. Esler and
    4. D.M. Richardson
    . 2018. Medium-term vegetation recovery after removal of invasive Eucalyptus camaldulensis stands along a South African river. South African Journal of Botany 119:63–68.
    OpenUrl
  86. ↵
    1. Salinas, M.,
    2. G. Blanca and
    3. A. Romero
    . 2000. Evaluating riparian vegetation in semi-arid Mediterranean watercourses in the south-eastern Iberian Peninsula. Environmental Conservation 27(1): 24–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  87. ↵
    1. Skead, C.J.
    2009. Historical Plant Incidence in Southern Africa: A Collection of Early Travel Records in Southern Africa, Strelitzia 24. South African National Biodiversity Institute Publishing.
  88. ↵
    Society for Ecological Restoration. 2004. The SER International Primer on Ecological Restoration. Society for Ecological Restoration International, Science and Policy Working Group.
  89. ↵
    1. Sprenkle-Hyppolite, S.,
    2. A. Latimer,
    3. T. Young and
    4. K. Rice
    . 2016. Landscape factors and restoration practices associated with initial reforestation success in Haiti. Ecological Restoration 34(4): 306–316.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  90. ↵
    1. Steynor, A.C.,
    2. B.C. Hewitson and
    3. M.A. Tadross
    . 2009. Projected future runoff of the Breede river under climate change. Water SA 35(4): 433–440.
    OpenUrl
  91. ↵
    1. Taylor, J.P. and
    2. K.C. McDaniel
    . 2004. Revegetation strategies after saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) control in headwater, transitional, and depositional watershed areas. Weed Technology 18:1278.
    OpenUrl
  92. ↵
    1. Tererai, F.,
    2. M. Gaertner,
    3. S.M. Jacobs and
    4. D.M. Richardson
    . 2013. Eucalyptus invasions in riparian forests: Effects on native vegetation community diversity, stand structure and composition. Forest Ecology and Management 297:84–93.
    OpenUrl
  93. ↵
    1. Trujillo-Miranda, A.L.,
    2. T. Toledo-Aceves,
    3. F. López-Barrera and
    4. P. Gerez-Fernández
    . 2018. Active versus passive restoration: Recovery of cloud forest structure, diversity and soil condition in abandoned pastures. Ecological Engineering 117:50–61.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  94. ↵
    UN General Assembly. 2019. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 1 March 2019—United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030). A/RES/73/284. https://undocs.org/A/RES/73/284 (accessed March 2025).
  95. ↵
    1. Valliere, J.,
    2. J. Ruscalleda
    Alvarez, A. Cross, W. Lewandrowski, F. Riviera, J. Stevens et al. 2022. Restoration ecophysiology: An ecophysiological approach to improve restoration strategies and outcomes in severely disturbed landscapes. Restoration Ecology 30:e13571.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
    1. Van Rensburg, L.D.,
    2. W.P. de Clercq,
    3. J.H. Barnard and
    4. C.C. du Preez
    . 2011. Salinity guidelines for irrigation: Case studies from Water Research Commission projects along the Lower Vaal, Riet, Berg and Breede Rivers. Water SA 37(5): 739–750.
    OpenUrl
  97. ↵
    1. Vaughn, K.J. and
    2. T. P. Young
    . 2010. Contingent conclusions: Year of initiation influences ecological field experiments, but temporal replication is rare. Restoration Ecology 18(s1):59–64.
    OpenUrl
  98. ↵
    1. Vosse, S.,
    2. K. Esler,
    3. D. Richardson and
    4. P. Holmes
    . 2008. Can riparian seed banks initiate restoration after alien plant invasion? Evidence from the Western Cape, South Africa. South African Journal of Botany 74(3): 432–444.
    OpenUrl
  99. ↵
    1. Warton, D.I.,
    2. S.T. Wright and
    3. Y. Wang
    . 2012. Distance-based multivariate analyses confound location and dispersion effects. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3(1): 89–101.
    OpenUrl
  100. ↵
    1. Witkowski, E.T.F. and
    2. D.T. Mitchell
    . 1987. Variations in soil phosphorus in the fynbos biome, South Africa. The Journal of Ecology 75(4): 1159.
    OpenUrl
  101. ↵
    1. Woodworth, P.
    2017. Can ecological restoration meet the twin challenges of global change and scaling up, without losing its unique promise and core values? Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 102:266–281.
    OpenUrl
  102. ↵
    1. Wortley, L.,
    2. J.M. Hero, and
    3. M. Howes
    . 2013. Evaluating ecological restoration success: A review of the literature. Restoration Ecology 21(5): 537–543.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  103. ↵
    1. Yang, Y.,
    2. D. Tilman,
    3. G. Furey and
    4. C. Lehman
    . 2019. Soil carbon sequestration accelerated by restoration of grassland biodiversity. Nature Communications 10:1–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  104. ↵
    1. Yelenik, S.G.,
    2. W.D. Stock and
    3. D.M. Richardson
    . 2004. Ecosystem level impacts of invasive Acacia saligna in the South African fynbos. Restoration Ecology 12(1): 44–51.
    OpenUrl
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
The Effect of Active versus Passive Interventions on Riparian Rehabilitation Success
Monique Van Zitters, Alanna J. Rebelo, Jason Mingo, Karen J. Esler
Ecological Restoration Sep 2025, 43 (3) 195-212; DOI: 10.3368/er.43.3.195
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

Keywords