The first few years of tropical forest restoration can be expensive, especially when applied to expansive areas. In light of this, passive restoration has been recommended as a considerably cheaper or even free alternative. There are, however, both direct and indirect costs associated with passive restoration. First, the longer recovery time that is typically required in passive restoration can be perceived as project failure, especially when compared with nearby active restoration efforts. In the worst-case scenario, this can lead to the premature termination of a project by a landowner who would like to see more rapid or visible results. Second, passive restoration may be viewed as land abandonment, and in developing nations where land tenure is not always strictly enforced this may invite unanticipated uses, such as ranchers who may unintentionally or intentionally allow livestock to take advantage of the "unused" forage grass, thus setting back recovery efforts. Lastly, passive restoration does have direct financial costs, including material costs for establishing fences and repairing them, and labor costs for site vigilance. These upfront investments may need to be made repeatedly in passive restoration efforts, and for a longer time period than for an active restoration project. Both the direct and indirect costs should be considered prior to choosing passive restoration as a strategy in a particular restoration project. © 2014 Society for Ecological Restoration.

Neotropical fruit bats (family Phyllostomidae) facilitate forest regeneration on degraded lands by dispersing shrub and tree seeds. Accordingly, if fruit bats can be attracted to restoration sites, seed dispersal could be enhanced. We surveyed bat communities at 10 sites in southern Costa Rica to evaluate whether restoration treatments attracted more fruit bats if trees were planted on degraded farmlands in plantations or island configurations versus natural regeneration. We also compared the relative influence of tree cover at local and landscape spatial scales on bat abundances. We captured 68% more fruit bat individuals in tree plantations as in controls, whereas tree island plots were intermediate. Bat activity also responded to landscape tree cover within a 200-m radius of restoration plots, with greater abundance but lower species richness in deforested landscapes. Fruit bat captures in controls and tree island plots declined with increasing landscape tree cover, but captures in plantations were relatively constant. Individual species responded differentially to tree cover measured at different spatial scales. We attribute restoration effects primarily to habitat structure rather than food resources because no planted trees produced fruits regularly eaten by bats. The magnitude of tree planting effects on fruit bats was less than previous studies have found for frugivorous birds, suggesting that bats may play a particularly important role in dispersing seeds in heavily deforested and naturally regenerating areas. Nonetheless, our results show that larger tree plantations in more intact landscapes are more likely to attract diverse fruit bats, potentially enhancing seed dispersal.

Large areas of tropical lands are being removed from agriculture and restored to address conservation goals. However, monitoring the ecological value of these efforts at the individual land-owner scale is rare, owing largely to issues of cost and accessibility. Traditional field-based measures for assessing forest recovery and habitat quality can be labour intensive and costly. Here we assess whether remote sensing measurements from lightweight unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) are a cost-effective substitute for traditional field measures. An inexpensive UAV-based remote sensing methodology, "Ecosynth", was applied to measure forest canopy structure across field plots in a 7-9-yr tropical forest restoration study in southern Costa Rica. Ecosynth methods combine aerial images from consumer-grade digital cameras with computer vision software to generate 3D 'point cloud' models of vegetation at high spatial resolutions. Ecosynth canopy structure measurements were compared to field-based measures and their ability to predict the abundance of frugivorous birds; key seed dispersers that are sensitive to canopy structure. Ecosynth canopy height measurements were highly correlated with field-based measurements (R²≥0.85), a result comparable in precision to LiDAR-based remote sensing measurements. Ecosynth parameters were also strongly correlated with above-ground biomass (R²≥0.81) and percent canopy openness (R²=0.82). Correlations were weaker with proportion-based measures such as canopy roughness (R²=0.53). Several Ecosynth metrics (e.g., canopy openness and height) predicted frugivore presence and abundance at levels of accuracy similar to those of field-based measurements. Ecosynth UAV remote-sensing provides an effective alternate methodology to traditional field-based measures of evaluating forest structure and complexity across landscapes. Furthermore, given the volume of data that can be generated in a single flight plan, as well as the ability to use the technology in remote areas, these methods could expand the scope of studies on forest dynamics and recovery when combined with field-based calibration plots.