Pattern: Process metaphors for metropolitan landscapes

Introduction: A broad-based consensus exists among the experts in the ecological, design and planning disciplines that the conservation and restoration of riparian landscapes and watersheds is one of the most important strategies for maintaining regional biodiversity, watershed health and landscape character (e.g. visual quality and sense of place) in the United States (e.g. Naiman et al., 1993; Smith and Hellmund, 1993; Beatley 1994; Forman, 1995; Naiman and Décamps, 1997; Noss et al., 1997; Beatley, 2000; Poiani et al., 2000). Yet this conservation and restoration still represents a unique situation because of the limited scientific research into urban ecosystems and the unique land-use and land-cover issues of metropolitan regions (Guntenspergen et al., Chapter 29). For example, riparian landscapes are part of floodplain systems, which have unique human-induced landscape transformation characteristics that involve regulation, infrastructure demands, stakeholders' environmental values, land-use patterns and recreational activities. The metropolitan region is a perfect opportunity for linking conservation science to the design and planning of urban riparian landscapes and watersheds. Yet, experts in these disciplines have not reached consensus about the best approach for balancing concerns for regional biodiversity, water quality and quantity, landscape character and recreational use. At times, these disciplines have conflicting perspectives about which of these goals is most important in the urban environment. Many scholars attribute this problem to a lack of a holistic vocabulary that aids translation of disciplinary theories and concepts (McIntyre et al., 2000; Musacchio and Wu, 2004; Pickett et al., 2004, Chapter 3).