Hi Anand,

The short answer is yes, it is possible to restore wasteland areas to ones that are more productive and /or biologically diverse. The amount of resources needed to succeed in the restoration efforts can sometimes be prohibitive though, and continuous running costs can be very high. For example, maintaining irrigation supply to arid areas where crops have been planted. A good article on the limits and goals of restoration ecology is:

Joan G. Ehrenfeld. 2000. Defining the Limits of Restoration: The Need for Realistic Goals. Restoration Ecology Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 2–9

There are also some very good articles on restoration of wasteland areas in the journal Restoration Ecology. I personally would be more keen on the restoration/redesign of anthropogenically-derived wastelands, rather than tampering with natural desert ecosystems. Desert reclaimation is however, becoming more common in places like China and Egypt. A quick Google search using the term 'desert reclamation' will bring up a lot of information for you.

Hi Anand,

The short answer is yes, it is possible to restore wasteland areas to ones that are more productive and /or biologically diverse. The amount of resources needed to succeed in the restoration efforts can sometimes be prohibitive though, and continuous running costs can be very high. For example, maintaining irrigation supply to arid areas where crops have been planted. A good article on the limits and goals of restoration ecology is:

Joan G. Ehrenfeld. 2000. Defining the Limits of Restoration: The Need for Realistic Goals. Restoration Ecology Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 2–9

There are also some very good articles on restoration of wasteland areas in the journal Restoration Ecology. I personally would be more keen on the restoration/redesign of anthropogenically-derived wastelands, rather than tampering with natural desert ecosystems. Desert reclaimation is however, becoming more common in places like China and Egypt. A quick Google search using the term 'desert reclamation' will bring up a lot of information for you.

Hi,

Aleksandra,

I got your point. You did explain nicely about limits and possibilities of restoration and more suggested me to read some good research papers which are published in the Restoration Ecology journal.

Dear Aleksandra, behind this question, I kept one hypothesis in the mind, that is: Suppose all productive systems have been destroyed by anthropogenic activities or by natural calamities is it possible to regain its original condition. As scope of Ecological Engineering is being expanded to see industrial and other activities with unprecedented rates.

I think that restoration of many (but not all) ecosystems is possible, but the timespans required to achieve this are likely very long, and it would be incredibly labour intensive. Having worked in the area of native forest restoration on islands in the Indian Ocean when I was in my 20s, I would certainly not expect to see fully mature stands of pristine native vegetation in my lifetime! Having said that, in the decade following the replanting native tree species, some functional aspects have been restored, e.g. endemic birds nesting in native tree species which are more resistant to cyclones than exotic tree species - hence increased productivity in the birds. The main problems to successful restoration in this case are with invasive species such as rats (which eat the native tree seeds and saplings), feral cats (which feed on the native birds) and a large number of invasive plants which form monotypic stands if given the chance. Even on small islands, it is very difficult to eradicate all these components entirely, and therefore on-going management of their populations is required to prevent them from disrupting restoration efforts. This is very expensive!

As the field of ecological engineering expands, it is likely that more and better solutions to these types of problems will be developed. But, given the cost and problems associated with restoring degraded areas of land, either for agriculture or for improving biodiversity, it should make us think harder about the damage we do in the first place. Prevention is always better than the cure.

Are you familiar with Dr. Alan Savory's work in reversing desertification and, subsequently, climate change using livestock and holistic planned grazing to mimic nature?

He has a great TED Talk, which you can watch here: http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_savory_how_to_green_the_world_s_deserts_and_reverse_climate_change.html

Many of his publications are readily accessible through Google Scholar and, if not, can likely be obtained through your institution.

Of course you can renature all kinds of nature, Anand. But it is always nature in your head. The nature, are you thinking as nature. It is no real nature, but ideology. In my view is better not to intervene in shaping the succession of the degraded mining lands e.g., but to allow a natural progression over a long, long time.

On the other hand, the country will be recultivated for various land uses, with opportunities spontaneous nature development, eg weeds.

Afforestation on mining dumps - sorry, but only in German

Article Reise in eine Gegend ohne Geschichte - Haldenbegrünungen nac...

The famous example of the Haller park near Mombasa, Kenia, comes to my mind, that was created on the desertlike wasteland of a cement quarry. Check out http://www.haller.org.uk/ and go to research, there are lots of documents that may be downloaded from there.

I think that it is possible and you will can to redesign and restore any unproductive natural ecosystems.

Regards,

Kiro Mojsov

I have uploaded a research technical paper regarding this topic "Reclamation of land........" in RG. this will be useful to you

with regards

Siva

Hi Anand,

I would like to agree very much with Bernd Sauerwein. For sure there are a lot of technical possibilities to reforming ecosystems. I guess you can reform every ecosystem if you have enough time and funding.

The question is: What is an unproductivity ecosystem?

It is very simple to blame a dessert as unproductive but that means not productive from a human point of view. But ecology has not a normative value. “—and if the world is an ocean of H2SO4 it would be an ecological perfect world of a sulfur bacterium”

Sometimes biological diversity seem to be such a normative value, but I guess this works only in a general approach. Cause you don´t know if in a so called empty dessert isn´t one species living with- for example- a two axis hinge wing you never find on earth again. So what do you like to prefer? Calling the greening up of the dessert with corn and soja more ecological than having a habitat with seldom species?

Maybe that sounds inhuman facing million people dying of hunger, but you should name the things as they are. Re-nature industrialized landscape might be a re-naturing, but argue with un-productivity of ecosystems is not re-naturing. From my point of view it sound just like a new way of agriculture in the framework of scarcity of farmland.

I beg your pardon if hurting your feelings

Dear Volker Handke Sir,

I am really glad to get your so clear and nice explanation pertaining to ecological thoughts in subject to my question. I am agree with you and also agreed by Bernd Sauerwein's answer.

However, many people answered me so nicely on about possibilities and limitations of restoring of any degraded ecosystems. I still focus my research idea to restore a degraded ecosystem.

Yes, related to restoration/reclamation and rehabilitation, lots of research papers, technical articles and case studies are available, it is no matter. I have read many articles and got experiences after done commendable research on restoration here.

But my question was related with the Ecological Engineering which is a new discipline right now and is a new birth of Ecology. If ecological engineering have all possibilities then biodiversity depletion from various tropics can be resolved.

I have read some articles in peer reviewed journal such as Nature and Science, where in the article one sentence is mentioned about degradation and desertification. The sentence is: Desertification is still ongoing in the various part of the globe and no one can stop it. To my knowledge, if desertification process switch is on then one day whole earth would be converted into unproductive form. This situation will be more painful for humans and humanity when agricultural lands will completely lost fertility and will have no sense for food production. If it becomes true, then hopefully we must have some solution from restoration ecology and from Ecological Engineering!!

Regards,

Anand

disturbed and degraded desert in the Middle East are difficult to restore if the original soil and hydrological conditions are not restored; in Jordan, we found that disturbed arid lands can be even invaded by introduced species like Prosopis juliflora, where as the native acacias apparently have less chance to recover at the same disturbed sites..

The resilient plant communities of deserts degraded by overgrazing alone may be restored if grazing is controlled over a long period of time as has been observed in reserves. If you mean replacing the disturbed or degraded ecosystem with a totally new, more productive ecosystem, then an input of treated waste water for the irrigation of certain crops has proved to be quite productive - and has lead to high abundance of invertebrates in addition to being attractive to birds, and in particular as stop-over sites for migratory birds

correction.. in the first sentence (which sounds circular and is not well formulated) I meant that natural productivity (which is naturally low but may still vary in deserts considerably) and native plant and animal communities / biodiversity - including the few characteristic species well adapted to desert conditions, in degraded and disturbed deserts are difficult to restore if the original soil and hydrological conditions are not restored....

the above is of course an ecological point of view

Dear Fares Khoury,

I have seen geographical areas of Israel twice a time and seen also your country. You are very right in your point that desert ecosystems like from Israel and Jordan or from Middle East are very difficult to replace into full functional form. However, many good answers came out by several experts on this question. Together of all, I am agree with you.

Anand

By taming the annual Pakistan-Arabia Dust Cloud that causes floods and droughts in the India-Pakistan region, you could go far in restoring all the ecosystems of the area. By leaving even a very thin layer of vegetation on the desert lands between India and Pakistan, to keep the soil from getting airborne, would help both countries to revegetate naturally. See http://www.ecoseeds.com/floods.html

Before seeking large research projects watch the trailer:

The Man Who Stopped the Desert

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dzah_5y65AU

Just look at what is been happening in arid areas like Saudi Arabia and Emirates in the last few decades to realize that technology is available but it requires money , vision and will to achieve it .

Yes, most of the natural ecosystems are destroyed, damaged or degraded by human activities. So the civilisation needs more resources to survive. To increase the size of the productive sites, we need reclaim, rehabilitate or restore unproductive sites like mining sites, contaminated sites by industrial activities, and some natural sites like dunes, deserts, marshlands etc. But in the past wetlands were considered as to reclaim to gain some productive sites by drainage systems. Today; this activity is considered as a wrong job, because scientists and experts warn to us these wetlands and salt marshes are important habitats for wildlife. Therefore, we must be careful to choose sites to reclaim, rehabilitate or restore.

We have examples right in India,where Indira Gandhi canal was made to go through the northern & western totally arid Rajasthan districts & today, those areas are slowly but steadily prospering.We have another example of Ralegaon Siddhi near Pune where every drop of water is harnessed to increase productivity of the village & its neighbourhood.Arid lands of Kutch & northern Gujarat were sprayed with seeds of Prosopis juliflora which has now become a good fodder for milch animals & is increasing carbon content of arid lands.It has now stopped sand cover from expanding to fertile lands. For e.g.degraded mining lands can be used as water reservoir if it has water holding capacity - if it doesn't have various types of sealants are available to correct the situation.Once this is done & with some amount of planting trees suitable to that area,various types of flora & fauna will crop up,though it may take time to flourish.If the reservoir can hold water,aquaculture is quite a possibility.

Dear Chandravadan, very nice example and nice comments. It is a part of reclamation not a part of ecological restoration. Yes, if water and nutrients are available in the soil, some desirable plant can be established but no guarantee for tradeoff between ecosystem function and ecosystem service like a self designed ecosystem of our nature providing us enormous services. Definetely we can not measure its values in money.

Thanks

Dear Anand Singh your question was "Is it possible to redesign and restore any unproductive natural ecosystem, like desert and severely degraded mining lands, into a productive one?". So your colleague Trivedi has given some examples from your country India. Redesign and restore is different activities. For example redesign a prairie to a crop field or plantation forest is not same a degraded forest ecosystem to productive and fully functional forest ecosytem.

Dear Hidayet Karakurt Sir,

I got your point. Many thanks for that. In fact, what is the spirit of my question, I would like to share with you. As we are top class fruit of the animal tree, therefore, every day we are exploiting nature's resources with unprecedented rates. Thus, degradation of naturally built earth ecosystems are going to replace or reformatted in undesirable shape and size. It is true; functioning of nature is itself by nature's science. And, we are doing science in our own domain according to our own thoughts and action, that is why some times we faced nature's cruelty which many times reduced human population from the earth.

We never do our science in conformity with nature's science, therefore, we are facing natural calamity. My nation India has recently faced an indigestible havoc by nature in the mountainous region of Uttarakhand state (Formerly, it is the part of Uttar Pradesh). I do not have data how much casualties were there, and, how much wealth has been lost. I don’t have any answer how much it will take in rebuilt but in brief, we cannot compensate our humanities in terms of money and metals. Life is life.

You are right redesigning or refurbishing of any type of ecosystem either productive or unproductive is different thing. It is entirely different with restoration of degraded or unproductive ecosystem. Many experts opinion are in favour of possibilities even my also but it is very complicated and challenging job. You cannot down five mangos from one heat.

My Indian colleague has given good examples of the replacement. In the Ecological restoration, replacement is one kind of partial restoration not a full ecological restoration just like nature has s maintained self designed ecosystems (waterfall, river, ocean forest) that are providing enormous services. Yes, we can make artificial river, we can restructure any unproductive ecosystem, but it is possible subject to the availability of required basic factors. For example, for vegetation, five factors (Rainfall, soil quality, climate, soil nutrients and soil microorganisms) are compulsory. Suppose in the degraded or in desert areas, one water channel has been constructed, here one important factor (water) is available. Now, due to presence of water, some aquatic microorganisms may enter in the system then a systematic function will automatically start. But exception is exception, In desert soil water and nutrients both are essential , without water and nutrients plants cannot survive.

Dear Anand Singh,

Though Utterakhand had heavy rains,the calamity could have been avoided.Take one example-the passing of vehicles on roads of that state was 3 to 5 times that seen in Bombay-that too on mountain roads.Such skewed development activities cannot be called development-for that all natural resources will have to pay a price.There is a saying-"God has given for every one's need but not for greed." Natural resources are to be used with utmost caution & it is a known fact that in India they are blatantly used without any thought.Hence restoration has to be made,which takes time. The purpose of Indira Gandhi Canal was to harness excess waters of river Sutlej & route them in arid districts of Rajasthan,so that human habitations can come up,as all these districts are border districts with Pakistan,our neighbor.Another e.g is that of Isreal where they are cultivating vegetables in desert regions with the help of fresh water made from sea water & export of these vegetables to Europe is the biggest source of their foreign exchange.If a small country like Isreal can do it,why not a vast country like India,where we boast of having the services of the 3rd largest number of scientists in the world- in fact we should have done even better.There is a difference between having knowledge & implementing it for common good-this is where we lack. India still has the problem of utilizing government waste lands,whereas prime agricultural lands are converted into non-agricultural use. Is this not a blantant use of natural resource.Being a tropical country,our farmers have the possibility of using compost manure,but still they make use of inorganic fertilizers,which actually kills the biota in agricultural soil on one hand & we want to increase the number of plants making these inorganic fertilizers. The fact is we refuse to understand the basic tenets of science & then face the wall.

Dear Trivedi, you are right. India will have highest skilled human power across the world by 2050. most possibly India will shine in future. But challenges are challenges like food security, soil degradation, employment, environmental contamination, all these will be together. I hope that coming and standing generation of India can understand the problems in real way not in virtual way. Looking and solving ecological problems of your nature on computer screen definitely can not break your wall!

I have been Israel twice a time for one month so I understand very well how functioning and flowing of metal and energy is going on there. I can not say, we people are unable to reach to the level of our solution. Can you think global climate change is directly related with India? Certainly not, not a single country like to accept it this is my fault, but, rising level of CO2 in the atmospheric environment is creating some unusual things that is experiencing by whole nations.

Another problem, desertification which causes a significant geographical areas of the world into unproductive form. Roughly speaking about 50 percent of the geographical areas of the earth is experiencing some kind of desertification. So land degradation is some times natural but most of by anthropogenic activities.

I worked in Northern part of China to restore semi-arid land. I have seen there what kind of problems and solutions are facing by the local Chinese people.

If you think, nature will provide you all goody goody things always, it will be wrong because changing, replacement and reorientation is the natural law.

In brief, materialistic development for human civilization can not be stop in the world. Development and nurturing are the passion of human, nature and nurture are the gift of god, how much and what do you want by nature you already mentioned it in the answer very rightly. So we have to think it!!

Dear Anand Singh Nature by its own doesn't go against human civilizations.Only Humans on this earth has the capacity to go against nature & they will have to pay high price for that. The problems that you said about food security etc. are all man made & those of them could have been averted,if proper mind was applied.By the way forget 2050,currently India is placed 3rd with a mighty army of scientists & technocrats & in spite of them we are still in the developmental stage. Causalities due to flood were due to reasons which could have been averted.Houses right on encroached banks of rivers can't be safe. Water released from Nepal dam & flooding some northern districts of Bihar could have been avoided,if a number of check dams along the course of the water flow were made. Regarding rising level of CO2,a tropical country like India is better placed as it increases food production,as India is a cereal grains exporter every year,hence the problem of food security doesn't arise.40% of our food grains are lost before it reaches the consumer- our overseas friends will not believe this- even though it is true.Whose fault. In spit of having the benefit of 5 rivers in Punjab, Fazilka & Abohar regions are still arid,while the rest of the Punjab state is fertile & is Indian grannery. Why this skewed development - just because these regions are to be given to Haryana when bifurcation of the composite state had taken place.Even today their fate hangs in balance. Do you mean to say that the administrators purposely go on making mistakes after mistakes & the scientists has to find solutions to correct these mistakes. In such a case, even 24 hours in a day will be insufficient.

Dear Chandravadan.

Only disagreement of a sentence "Only Humans on this earth has the capacity to go against nature ...", this assertion has no scientific support. For example, the megafauna, when he came to South America there are signs that much has changed in the environment, but this is not taken into consideration, as we consider how action nature. This seems more of a religious than scientific principle, if we consider men as animals that HAVE CAPACITY TO INFLUENCE MORE THE NATURE, we can say that human activity is a natural action. Now as humans pay dearly for wrong interventions I totally agree.

Dear Rogerio Maestri, Only human population is not responsible for all. There are many other determinants too. By the way, thank you for good comments.

Anand

Anand Singh

Here is a good article about increasing plant growth on mining wast using zeolites and compost 'Enhancing the Growth of Plants on Coal Waste Using a Biological Fertilizer' is available at http://www.ij-er.org/paperInfo.aspx?ID=2302. Elvis Shukla is working with zeolites as soil additives to degrees plant uptake of heavy metals. His research is on Resurchgate. This is an inexpensive way to treat mining wast with most of the materials produced locally.

Bruce Kraft

Many thanks Mr. Bruce Kraft for providing a research article on coal mine spoil.

In the Cape Verde Islands there are some big extensions of Prosopis juliflora planted in arid lands from the 70s. In some cases they are producing charcoal, and it is a locally important economic resource, e.g. in Maio Island. 

Skip Holistic grazing.  It does not include five very important issues about domesticated animal grazing--

1.) Mining by the animals of soil nutrients.  When you slaughter the animals or remove their milk, you take those nutrients out of the ecosystem, in effect doing soil nutrient mining. 

2.) Selection and truncation of the grassland ecosystem.  Grasslands world-wide are losing their other half, the wildflowers and other dicots.  For example, the wildflowers in California are 99.99% spatially extinct, after only 250 years of grazing.  See my paintings at http://www.ecoseeds.com/

3.) Soil nutrient mining drawing down the levels below which native grassland plant seedlings need for survival.  See http://www.ecoseeds.com/good.example.html where the grazing/nutrient mining of the soil caused the seedlings to sprout then die from starvation when 4 cm. tall.

4.) Removal by the animals of the local Pseudomonas host plants, which is the bacteria that help create rain clouds for that area.

5.) Native animals including carnivores are usually excluded from grazing areas, further narrowing the areas where those animals have habitat to survive. 

Sincerely,  Craig Carlton Dremann - Restoring native grasslands for 45 years.