Search

Summary: We synthesise the findings from 10 years of ecological restoration in the Midlands of Tasmania, Australia, captured in the series of 14 papers in this special issue of Ecological Management and Restoration. The papers illustrate how expertise from disciplines as diverse as law, economics, social sciences, the arts, education, zoology, botany, genetics, climate modelling, agriculture, spatial sciences and fire ecology are necessary to address the complex social, ecological and financial questions that underpin restoration ecology. We highlight the complexity of the task, the multi‐disciplinary and collaborative approach needed, the importance of science to inform restoration practice and the problem of achieving functional connectivity. We also outline steps that need to be taken in the next 10 years. Together, the outcomes and recommendations from these studies provide a template for restoration in similar highly cleared and degraded agricultural landscapes affected by climate change in Australia and internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] • Wildfires are becoming more severe and frequent and their effects increasingly expose water resources to stress. • Climate, wildfire, streamflow records (1975 to 2018), topography, and landcover data from 92 catchments were combined to quantify the contribution of wildfire to streamflow variability across Australian temperate forests. • On average wildfire regimes relatively results in 8.8% increases in streamflow across Australian temperate forests. • Wildfire effects on regional streamflow varied spatially depending on hydroclimate factors, particularly precipitation. As wildfires become more frequent and severe, there are concerns regarding their impacts on water yield from forested catchments. While there are many studies in Australia about the effects of individual wildfires on streamflow at fine scales (<1 km2) in specific geographic settings, the effects of wildfire regimes on streamflow at broad spatial scales across temperate forests in Australia are not well understood. In this paper, we combined climate, wildfire, streamflow records (1975 to 2018), topographic, and landcover data from 92 catchments (74 – 4740 km2) in the Australian temperate zone to quantify the contribution of wildfire regimes over time to streamflow variability in different hydroclimatic settings (humid, dry sub-humid, and semi-arid) and geographic regions (Southeast Australia (SEA), Southwest Western Australia (SWWA), and Tasmania (TAS)). Wildfire regimes were represented by two metrics: the burnt area to drainage area (BDA) ratio for wildfire events in each year and a spatially averaged metric of Time Since Fire (TSF), which is a spatial average of time since the last wildfire in the catchment. By comparing prefire and postfire runoff ratios our study found that on average there was a short-term increase in runoff ratio (∼3% in year 1 and ∼6% in year 2 post-fire) after wildfires with BDA > 25%. No influence of fire was found in the long-term (15–20 years after the wildfire) runoff ratio. We found that wildfire regime, measured by TSF, explained ∼8.8% of the variation in annual streamflow across the Australian temperate zone, and that with decreasing TSF (i.e., increased wildfire impact), the average streamflow increased. Streamflow variation explained by wildfire regimes varied with hydroclimate. The explained variance of streamflow by wildfire regimes in semi-arid catchments (23%) and dry sub-humid catchments (13%) were higher than humid catchments (5%). Our results provide a broad-scale understanding of how wildfire regimes influence streamflow variability at broad temporal and spatial scales, and provided important context and baseline information for determining the implications of changes in climate and fire regimes for regional water availability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]