Much effort, little success: causes for the low ecological efficacy of restoration measures in German surface waters

BackgroundFor more than 20 years, restoration measures have been conducted on watercourses in Germany to increase habitat diversity and thus promote biodiversity. However, their ecological efficacy often proved to be limited. While some studies report an increase in species diversity, others show little evidence of improvement even many years after the implementation of restoration measures. In general, ecological efficacy of hydromorphological restoration measures is highest for terrestrial and semiaquatic groups of organisms such as floodplain vegetation and ground beetles. According to the literature, macrophytes responded most strongly to in-stream restoration measures, while fish stocks showed little improvement and macroinvertebrates showed little or no effect in terms of species richness and diversity. These findings raise the question of reasons for the low ecological efficacy of hydromorphological restoration measures, especially for macroinvertebrate communities. The following literature review and a case study for the river Horloff will provide possible indications for failing success of intensive restoration measures.ResultsOne reason for the inadequate ecological status of many restored river stretches is the inappropriate scaling of restoration measures. Often, small-scale restoration measures are planned, although the respective water bodies exhibit stressors at the catchment scale that impair the ecological efficacy of restoration measures. In particular, chemical contamination of running waters is often insufficiently addressed in the planning and implementation of restoration measures and hampers efficacy of hydromorphological restoration measures. For a holistic water resource management, the planning and implementation of measures should therefore be more closely coordinated and harmonized between federal states and neighboring countries. For this purpose, the establishment of so-called river basin communities is suitable, as they already exist today on the rivers Rhine, Danube, Meuse, Weser, Elbe, Ems, Eider, Schlei/Trave, Warnow/Peene.ConclusionThe literature review indicated that for a successful recolonization of restored river stretches by macroinvertebrates and the enhancement of the ecological status, large-scale stressors, i.e., stressors acting at the catchment scale, should be eliminated initially by restoration measures focusing on the chemical contamination and the surrounding land use. Structural restoration measures acting on the reach or local scale should ideally be implemented contemporarily to the removal of large-scale stressors like chemical contamination.

Automated summary

Restoration measures in Germany have been conducted for over 20 years to promote biodiversity by increasing habitat diversity in watercourses. However, their ecological efficacy is often limited. While some studies show an increase in species diversity, others show little improvement even after many years. The ecological efficacy of restoration measures is highest for floodplain vegetation and ground beetles, while fish stocks and macroinvertebrates show little or no improvement. The inadequate ecological status of restored river stretches may be due to the inappropriate scaling of restoration measures and insufficient consideration of chemical contamination.