The breakout group included resource managers with responsibilities ranging from less than 10 acres to over 100,000 acres, which brought forth challenges in addressing restoration at such differing scales. While drought is a threat to dry forests, fire–and grass–were central concerns of the group, understandably given the recent wildfire disasters in Hawaiʻi.

 

The first part of the discussion focused on strategies for selecting and placing outplants into favorable microclimates in order to increase outplant performance. There are two primary approaches to using favorable planting sites:

1. Identifying naturally moist microclimates—These areas retain more moisture compared to their surroundings, and therefore may provide outplants with water during drought.

2. Creating favorable microclimates—This can involve clustering plants together, using shrub "islands" as planting zones, or planting low-lying species under protective canopies (whether native or non-native). The idea here is to use certain plants or species to facilitate the growth and survival of others.

 

Microtopography was also mentioned as a tool for sheltering plants from fire. An alternative approach discussed was choosing species that naturally thrive in harsh conditions, such as the native Portulaca sclerocarpa at Puʻuanahulu, which does well in exposed, hot, and dry environments in leeward Hawaii.

 

The group also emphasized sourcing seeds from drought- and heat-tolerant populations, with the acknowledgment that species selection varies both within and across islands. For example, Milo (Thespesia populnea) thrives in harsh conditions when outplanted in some areas but not in others. The conversation revealed different opinions on what traits are most important in a plant for restoration efforts, with local context, seed volume, and restoration goals all playing a role in decision-making. For many managers, sourcing seeds from “drier sites” seemed unobtainable, as they are all working in the driest conditions in their regions. Ultimately, the lack of knowledge about where to find populations with desirable traits limits the ability to implement these strategies effectively. 

 

The discussion also touched on fire resilience, noting that seed sourcing for fire-resistant species follows a similar thought process as selecting drought-tolerant species. It was agreed that species selection mostly happens as “tabula rasa” (i.e., an absence of preconceived ideas or predetermined goals; a clean slate), with species being chosen just because. The group discussed expanding selection criteria beyond climate-resiliency to include species that the community wants to see used for restoration. Common issues raised were the lack of information on large-scale propagation of both native and non-native species, and the challenge of managing competition between grass and outplants when trying to restore fire-resilient landscapes. Strategies to address these challenges could be facilitated by anticipating suitable habitat as temperature niches shift upslope, however, this potential is hindered by not knowing where to source seeds and then scatter/plant them.

 

During the second part, the group discussed three key steps to develop ability to use more fire-resilient, resistant, and tolerant species for restoration:

1. Identify seed stock—This involves determining which species are best suited for fire resilience, tolerance, or resistance. However, there is conflicting information, with managers having varied experiences with the same species (e.g., Milo). A major knowledge gap is knowing which native species are fire-tolerant and how non-natives could play a role in altering fire dynamics. The use of non-natives in restoration is a sensitive issue due to Hawaiʻi’s threatened native ecosystems and the high invasion potential of disturbed areas. However, members pointed out that there are no established frameworks for evaluating the suitability of using non-native species in restoration projects. The group agreed that while accessing existing information is relatively easy, addressing the knowledge gaps requires more thorough planning and coordination as well as communication. Key outcomes could include a knowledge bank in the form of a database of species performance in different conditions and a targeted list of fire-tolerant species. Establishing a hui (group) focused on seed-related restoration, supported by a facilitator with clear goals, was seen as a priority.

2. Generate seed sources—There is currently a low supply of seeds and a lack of infrastructure to meet restoration needs. As seed production scales up, a seed-sharing framework will need to be established— with a key decision point being whether a centralized or decentralized approach will be used. Another critical gap is in the understanding of genetics, which is necessary for ensuring adequate genetic diversity is present in large-scale seed production efforts. Developing seed quantity at scale will take complex coordination and key partners that span individuals, communities, “large” public and private entities and a labor force. This seed infrastructure would also include large-scale storage for seeds and will rely on shared, uniform collecting protocols. One large anticipated challenge is the logistics of seed sharing because many native species occur on private lands, or on public lands where permits are difficult to acquire. Ways of overcoming these seed-sharing barriers will need to be investigated and pursued.

3. Seed scattering—There is a need for more research on the success of seed scattering in Hawaiʻi's dry forests, especially at the landscape scale. While some projects are underway or have concluded, no published results are currently available. Synthesizing research and practitioner knowledge on the use and success of seed scattering as a tool for the restoration of Hawaii’s dry forests would be valuable for informing restoration practices.

​

The state of knowledge of the key steps described above is often fragmented, with participants expressing a desire for more syntheses and concise summaries of what is already known rather than new research papers. Effective collaboration with the scientific community and those with existing seed stock would be vital for addressing these gaps.

​

A fourth topic of discussion was controlled burns. The group highlighted the critical gap in understanding which native species can compete with invasive grasses and how grass could be managed, especially with fire. Controlled burns are a potential solution to reducing fire fuel loads and fire risk, but in Hawaiʻi, their use faces significant social, regulatory, and legal/liability barriers. Developing the capacity to use this tool would require complex coordination and key steps to move this forward are a better understanding of the wildfire-urban interface and changing values and perceptions around fire. 

 

A restoration vision    

A hui (group)–with coordinator/facilitator–and clear goals was seen as instrumental in moving these steps forward. Such a group could support the development of shared, uniform collecting protocols. Additionally, the variation in the members' experiences could support the development of context-specific (baseline specific) restoration metrics–to be able to evaluate when restoration is successful or complete.

 

The participants shared individual visions for dry forest restoration that we synthesized into a collective vision. They envisioned protected and restored, climate change- and fire-resilient native dry forests, with self-sustaining ecosystems and well-stocked seed banks to support post-fire restoration. In the event of wildfires, there would be clear post-fire response plans with effective restoration solutions, including established seed farms, processing facilities, and storage. Post-fire grass control would be easily implemented, allowing for successful seed scattering, especially of fire-resilient species. Additionally, dry forest restoration sites are integrated alongside neighborhoods for fire protection and fire-resistant properties can share seeds and knowledge with other properties in need. Effective, concise, and regionally appropriate standards for creating fire buffers around watersheds and native ecosystems exist and are implemented. This vision is further supported by public awareness and appreciation of the living skin of the planet.