Presentation Yadi Setiadi on restoration activities on former oil, gas or mining areas.

1. Restoring Degraded Land
After Oil/Gas and Mining Operation
Dr. Yadi Setiadi
Faculty of Forestry
Bogor Agricultural University
Campus IPB, Capus IPB Darmaga, Bogor. INDONESIA
ysetiad55@gmail.com, hp 08111102302

2. The Function of Tropical Rain Forest
§ Major habitat for flora and
fauna
§ Reservoir for gene pools
§ Conserve for soil, water,
nutrients
§ Maintain biodiversity
§ Resources for economical
development
§ Maintaining the balance of
local and global climatic
conditions
§ Water cycle

3. Factors for forest destruction
§ Poor Logging Operation
§ Illegal Logging
§ Forest Fire
§ Agriculture Development
§ Timber Plantation
§ Estate Crops Plantation
§ Shifting Cultivation
§ Transmigration
§ Mining Operation
§ Oil and Gas operation

4. Potential Resources Under Forest
• Nickel
• Gold and Cupper
• Coal
• Tin
• Oil
• Others

5. Impact on the Forest Ecosystem
§ Breaking forest canopy : reduced forest,
disturbed wildlife habitat
§ Fragmented forest : cut off migration routes of
dispersed seed arboreal mamals
§ Exposed areas : increase run off and soil erosion,
and sedimentation
§ Open access : enhance deforestation,invasion
occupancy of indigenous land

6. Degraded land after oil and mining operation
§ Exposed ( lost crown and root function)
§ No vegetation (Lost of biodiversity)
§ No top-sub soil (lost of land capability )
§ Erodable ( lost of land stability)
§ Marginal (lost option for development)

7. Impact of mining operation
§ Eliminate some part of
vegetation;
§ Destroy some of the original
ecosystem
§ Increase the rate of soil erosion
and run-off (sedimentation,
contamination)
§ Reduce of native species
biodiversity
§ Damage to wildlife habitat and
§ Degradation of watershed area
§ Change natural landscape

8. Benefit of Restoration
} Re-establishment of potential native species
} Protecting from erosion and surface run-off
} Improving wildlife habitat
} Improving native species biodiversity
} Improving soil productivity, and stability
} Improving environmental conditions and
aesthetically pleasing
} Producing refuges for native species and
genetic resources that might be lost

9. Government regulation for rehabilitation and reclamation
§ KEPMenHut, no:43/2008. Guide line for forest lend used
§ PP, no :76/2008. Rehabilitation and Forest reclamation
§ KepMenHut, no 146/1999. Guideline for Reclamation
} NO change the structure and function of forest
} Conduct reclamation and reforestation for impacted land
} Minimize forest destruction (foot print)
} Protect the forest from illegal logging, and land occupancy
§ AMDAL (EIA)
} Conduct mitigation measures, for significant impacts
} Pre planning, management monitoring

10. Soil problems
Soil Physical Properties
} Soil texture (grain size distribution)
} Porosity (aeration)
} Depth to hard-pand or impervious layer
} Soil Compaction (water-log, root inhibition)
} Soil moisture content, surface temperature
Soil Biology
} Vegetation cover and carbon content
} Microbial population and activities
Soil Chemical
} Poor of soil nutrients
} Soil reaction (pH)
} Low of cation exchange capacity (CEC)
} Mineral toxicity

11. SITES CHARACTERISTICS
Characteristics Block-1 Block-2 Bolock-3 Block-4
Materials Mixed of sub- Peat layer, cov. with Ultramafic rock Ultramafic rock
surface soil leached grayish
mineral soil layer
Nutrient Status N,P,K,Ca N, P, K, Ca, Mg N, K, Ca (low); P N, P, K, Ca, Mg
(deficient); Fe, Cu, (low); Fe, Cu, Zn, (low-very high); Mg (low); Fe, Cu,
Zn, Mn (low); C- Mn (sufficient); C- (high); Mg>Ca (3- Zn, Mn (suff.);
Org (very low) organic (low) 5); Fe, Cu, Zn, Mn C-org. (low)
(suff.)
Soil reaction 4.7-5.7 (strongly 4.6-5.2 (strongly 3.4-4.7 (extremely 4.6-4.9
(pH) acidic) acidic) acidic) (strongly acidic)
Al saturation 34%
72% (very high) 19.4% (low) 74% (very high)
(moderate)
CEC 5-12 (low) 19-28 (medium) 30 (high) 5-17 (low)
Texture Organic+Soil Loam-Silty
Clay Fine Clay
Fraction Loam
HC 0.23 cm/hr (very 2.34 – 8.09 cm/hr
0.62 cm/hr (low) low
low) (fast)
BD 0.43-0.97 gr/cc 0.97 gr/cc 1.12 gr/cc
1.45 gr/cc (high)
(low) (moderate) (moderate)
Compacted, poor
Drainage Poor drainage and Poor drainage, Moderate
aeration, water-
aeration aeration, water-log drainage
log

12. Soil amendment
§ Top soil, Fertilizer,
§ Compost active, lime,
§ Mycorrhizae
§ Humic acid, Bio-enzim,
§ Improve root development
§ Solubilize fixed mineral (phosphate)
§ Increase cation exchange capacity
§ Increase water-holding-capacity
§ Chelating heavy metal
§ Improve nutrient uptake
§ Improve potential microbes
§ Provide macro-nutrients

13. Restoration Objectives
§ Protection
• Stabilize land
• Cover the exposed land
• Reduce the erosion and surface run-off
§ Conservation
• Stimulate native plant species (biodiversity)
• Conserve potential native species
• Improved wild life habitat
§ Production
• Improved soil fertility (long term)
• Produce non woody products
• Benefit for local people

14. Restoration Activities
§ Native potential trees selection
§ Planting stock production
§ Site preparation
§ Soil amendments
§ Planting techniques
§ Maintenance
§ Monitoring
§ Training
§ Management commitment

15. Species selection
1. Select adapted local
species
2. Relatively fast growing
3. Light demanding and low
nutrient demand
4. Produce abundance litter
and its litter decomposed
5. The species can perform
or function as “catalytic”
6. Easy to propagate and to
culture
7. Low cost for planting and
maintenance
8. Easy to manage

16. Oil operation

17. Heavily degraded site

18. Abandoned Well

19. Tree growth performance 13 Mo

20. Wild life habitat Improvement

21. Sandy tailing-1

22. Coal overburden

23. Post Nickel Mining

24. Rehabilitation post nickel mine site

25. Criteria for sustained restored degraded land
1. The rate of seedling survival is high
2. Plant growth performance normal and continuous
3. Root extension can pass on the original soil
4. Crown closure is fast, stratified and diverse
5. The system produce abundance litter and
decomposed
6. The system diverse and naturally regenerate native
species re-colonization
7. The system create habitat suitable for different wild-
life
8. Land-form (safe, stabile and limited erosion)
Setiadi (2006)

26. Success criteria
§ Adaptability
} Survival >80%
} Growth performance (progressive)
} Root development (across mine land)
§ Sustainability
} Biodiversity (shannon, Spec richness)
} Natural colonization (abundance)
} Nutrient retention (decomposed litter)
} Wild life status (spec richness)
§ Stand structure
} Plant density (800-1000/ha)
} Crown structure (3-5 layer)
} Crown coverage (60-70%)
} Spec composition (Pioneer (40 %),Primer (50%), Wildlife (10%)
§ Land Form
} Slope (leveling <30o)
} Erosion status (below threshold level)
} Land stabilization (controlled)
Setiadi (2006)

27. 1. Species used
No exotic species, preferable using native species
Identified no pest and endemic diseases
Planting stock (seeds) easily to provide
2. Seed sources
Healthy seed (no carried pathogen)
Purity (no mixed with a weeds)
High germination value
3.Chemical fertilizer used
Ensure the original product
Used based on optimum recommended dosage
Apply following standard recommendation
No contained heavy metals
4.Organic fertilizer
No contained pathogen
No contained seed of weed
Ensure the quality ( low C/N ratio)
No toxic materials
5.Soil amendment materials
No contained exotic microbes
Apply following the standard recommendation
6.Site preparation
Minimize using herbicide for weeds control
Conserve soil condition and prevent soil erosion
7.Planting methods
Conducted on the right time
Suitable with specific site conditions
8.Maintaining
Minimize using pesticide and herbicide
Quick response when plants sowing deficiency or abnormality
9.Monitoring
Assess the growth performance regularly
Made improvement for unsuccessful performance
10.Safety
Follow the standard procedure

28. Lesson Learned
• Degraded land can be recovered
• Avaiable information of frame work sepcies for
restoring degraded land
• Avaiable information for soil amendment
• Avaiable information for revegetation model
• Avaiable information for monitoring tool and
succsesfull criteria
• Guide line for restoring degraded post mine land

29. The challenge
• The action limited on site level
• Focus on ecosystem recovery
• Limited involving stakholder
• No social and economical consederation
§ Challenge to link from site level to landcape level
§ Promote the FLR as alternative post mining land use

30. THANK YOU
and
LETS KEEPS OUR PLANET
GREEN
good for planet, good for us