Managing urban riverscapes: An assessment framework to integrate social-ecological values and physical processes.

The services that rivers provide and how they affect the landscape plays a dominate role in urban planning and development. Urban riverscapes, which consist of stream channels, their floodplains, biotic communities, and manmade features, are complex social-ecological and hydrogeomorphic systems. Yet, despite recognition of their place and value, rivers are often degraded in urban settings. Successfully managing urban riverscapes requires improved methods to assess them and to more effectively link stressors to values, and to incorporate these considerations in planning. Assessment of urban riverscapes' physical condition and function-a hydrogeomorphic assessment-is necessary to make these links, and inform more appropriate management strategies for sustainable and valued riverscape systems. The framework and methods used for such an assessment should be appropriate to the urban context, insofar as they are applicable to a range of streams from lightly degraded to highly utilized or constructed. Above all, the framework must prioritize the connection of human communities to riverscapes. In this article, we outline a framework for urban riverscape assessment which considers four facets of urban riverscapes: human values, hydrology, geomorphology, and ecology. The four facets, assessed across multiple nested scales, provide a flexible basis for context-driven hydrogeomorphic assessment, which is vital to informing better planning and management of urban riverscapes. The framework can be integrated with other facets (e.g. geochemical, aquatic ecology) depending on the scope of the assessment. By linking intrinsic, relational, and use-based values to physical conditions, watershed managers can select relevant and measurable indicators that directly inform interventions in the riverscape, catchment, or urban zones to improve riverscape function and urban vitality through planning mechanisms. This assessment framework facilitates dialogue between managers, practitioners, scientists, and the community; enabling technical and non-technical inputs to the development of assessment criteria, and a shared vision to inform targets and goals.

Upgrading Marine Ecosystem Restoration Using Ecological-Social Concepts.

Conservation and environmental management are principal countermeasures to the degradation of marine ecosystems and their services. However, in many cases, current practices are insufficient to reverse ecosystem declines. We suggest that restoration ecology, the science underlying the concepts and tools needed to restore ecosystems, must be recognized as an integral element for marine conservation and environmental management. Marine restoration ecology is a young scientific discipline, often with gaps between its application and the supporting science. Bridging these gaps is essential to using restoration as an effective management tool and reversing the decline of marine ecosystems and their services. Ecological restoration should address objectives that include improved ecosystem services, and it therefore should encompass social-ecological elements rather than focusing solely on ecological parameters. We recommend using existing management frameworks to identify clear restoration targets, to apply quantitative tools for assessment, and to make the re-establishment of ecosystem services a criterion for success.

Visual field information in the face perception of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).

Evidence for a visual field advantage (VFA) in the face perception of chimpanzees was investigated using a modification of a free-vision task. Four of six chimpanzee subjects previously trained on a computer joystick match-to-sample paradigm were able to distinguish between images of neutral face chimeras consisting of two left sides (LL) or right sides (RR) of the face. While an individual's ability to make this distinction would be unlikely to determine their suitability for the VFA tests, it was important to establish that distinctive information was available in test images. Data were then recorded on their choice of the LL vs. RR chimera as a match to the true, neutral image; a bias for one of these options would indicate an hemispatial visual field advantage. Results suggest that chimpanzees, unlike humans, do not exhibit a left visual field advantage. These results have important implications for studies on laterality and asymmetry in facial signals and their perception in primates.