Novel Ecosystems

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

The global environment is changing at an increasingly rapid pace and human activity is influencing many (if not all) of Earth’s systems leading some to argue that we have entered a new geological epoch: the Anthropocene. Although most would consider that human well-being has benefited from this socio-economic growth, one pervasive change is the widespread loss of unique biodiversity through increasing urbanisation, agricultural expansion, and industrialisation; drivers which rank among the greatest threats to conservation and the subsequent delivery of some ecosystem services.

Traditionally, 'restoration' practitioners have targeted the reinstatement of pre-existing (or historical) ecosystems. However, given the rise of no-analogue environments and continued environmental change, there is increasing evidence that landscapes now contain new assemblies of abiotic and (or) biotic system components. It would then appear that environmental changes (both natural and non-natural) have resulted in the formation of stable alternative ecological states (given the short timescale of human appreciation) that are potentially irreversibly different than pre-existing ones − so called novel ecosystems.

Evidently, the recognition of novel ecosystems fundamentally challenges whether going back to the past is necessarily the most appropriate restoration outcome for all disturbed landscapes. Perhaps more importantly, we are challenged to investigate whether we should move away from traditional notions of restoration and revise the manner in which rehabilitation goals are addressed.

Novel Ecosystems & Post-Industrial/Agricultural Landscapes

In an effort to address expectations and realities of rehabilitating natural vs. novel ecosystems following highly assertive (and lucrative) mining activities, this module seeks to establish that the basis of any functioning ecosystem is the physical landscape and its characteristics that influence surface stability, the availability of water and essential nutrients, and the likelihood of plant growth and habitat development − as determined by the climate of the region, the lithology and placement of material from the mining operation. When addressing disturbance impacts that compromise essential landform elements, it may be more helpful to put aside theoretical considerations of idealised ecosystem development and to focus on the pragmatic requirement of securing environments that are safe, stable and non-polluting.

By first acknowledging that the target ecosystems may be more or less different from those that occupied the site prior to disturbance, setting rehabilitation goals in the 21st Century requires utmost care when analysing available evidence at each stage of planning and operations. This change in priorities − from attempting to "go back to the past" toward attaining the best possible outcome for post-industrial landscapes in the light of circumstances − then requires a willingness and capacity to adjust goals according to the best practice that can be achieved with the expectation that it will be overtaken in the future by something better. Therefore, it is vital that there is a free and early exchange of information between mining engineers and closure planners so that unreal expectations are not engendered and the highest standards of operation are maintained. Accordingly, we contend that the early identification and setting of the highest attainable practical objectives for rehabilitation will optimize business and engineering decision making, and allow for the most effective site management after mine closure.

Reclamation of Boreal Forest Following Oil Sands Mining

Boreal forests in northern Alberta have a growing anthropogenic footprint due to a rapidly growing oil sands mining industry. Although land reclamation is a necessary aspect of responsible industrial development, these activities nearly always affect higher order landscape components such as the broader landform, and its hydrology and biogeochemistry. Recent anthropogenic impacts are then believed to result in new environmental conditions and obstacles under which the boreal forest is developing, potentially leading to irreversibly different environments that could be characterized as novel ecosystems. Reflecting an emerging trend across the field of restoration ecology, these novel ecosystems are not necessarily undesirable. Instead, they are an unavoidable consequence of pervading anthropogenic effects on natural ecosystems. It is our view that successful reclamation outcomes can still be derived so long as policy and regulatory requirements are afforded the necessary scope and economic flexibility to account for the development of hybrid and novel ecosystems among highly disturbed mine sites. Hence, this analysis seeks to situate current and anticipated challenges affecting the reclamation of boreal forest following oil sands mining by describing (i) how regulatory criteria shape reclamation practices and targeted end goals and (ii) how these approaches embody latest trends and priorities in the area of restoration ecology.

For further details, refer to:

• Doley D, Audet P (2017) Mining and novel ecosystems – what has changed, why it matters and where do we go from here? In: From Start to Finish - A Life-of-Mine Perspective. Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy.

• Doley D, Audet P (2016) What part of mining are ecosystems? Defining success for the 'restoration of highly disturbed landscapes. In: Squires V (ed) Ecological Restoration: Global Challenges, Social Aspects and Environmental Benefits. Chapter 4.

• Audet P, Pinno BD, Thiffault E (2015) Reclamation of boreal forest after oil sands mining: Anticipating novel challenges in novel environments. Canadian Journal of Forest Research DOI:10.1139/cjfr-2014-0330

• Doley D, Audet P (2015) Changing restoration priorities in the 21st Century: Identifying natural and novel ecosystem goals for the rehabilitation of post-mining landscapes. In: Jarvie-Eggart M, Muga HE (eds) Responsible mining: Sustainable practices in the mining industry. Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, USA, pp.609-638.

• Perring MP, Audet P, Lamb D (2014) Novel ecosystems in ecological restoration and rehabilitation: Innovative planning or lowering the bar? Ecological Processes 3: 8

• Doley D, Audet P (2013) Adopting novel ecosystems as suitable rehabilitation alternatives for former mine sites. Ecological Processes. 2: 22

• Tibbett M, Mulligan D, Audet P (2012) Recent advances in restoration ecology: Examining the modern Australian agro-ecological and post-mining landscapes. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment. 163: 1-2.

• Doley D, Audet P, Mulligan D (2012) Examining the Australian context for post-mined land rehabilitation: Reconciling a paradigm for the development of natural and novel ecosystems among post-disturbance landscapes. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment. 163: 85-93.