
How millions of trees brought a broken landscape back to life - mafro
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/07/national-forest-woodland-midlands-regeneration
======
flohofwoe
A similar transformation has been done in Eastern Germany since the wall came
down. The GDR was heavily dependent on brown coal for its energy production,
devastating large areas of countryside in northern Saxony (south of Berlin)
with open pit mines. Today these pit mines are flooded and have been turned
into lakes. The difference when traveling though this area in the mid-90's
couldn't be greater. Huge deep dirt holes with rusting machinery have been
replaced with blue lakes with white sailing yachts amidst green forest and
heathlands.

Here's a 2010 article (one of the few in english I found):
[http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/extreme-
makeover...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/extreme-makeover-the-
watery-future-of-east-germany-s-coal-mines-a-717855.html)

------
allendoerfer
Overall the situation of forests in Europe has been improving since the 90s
[0].

In Germany wolves are back [1], elks are beginning to come back [2] and
occasionally even a bear visits [3].

Of course this is only partly intended. Many effects - like the German Green
Belt [4] - are just a consequence of the fall of the Soviet Union or - like in
the article - dying industries. Still I find it very uplifting how fast nature
can recover.

[0]:
[http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.ZS](http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.ZS)

[1]:
[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/113...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/11384912/Wild-
wolves-westward-spread-continues-across-Europe-as-pack-spotted-in-
Germany.html)

(2): [http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/wild-elks-
return...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/wild-elks-return-to-
germany-a-853581.html)

[3]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_JJ1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_JJ1)

[4]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Green_Belt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Green_Belt)

------
rini17
One thing makes me curious. Here in Carpathians, if you leave unmaintained
plot of land, it will turn into forest by itself in 20 years. First it gets
grown over by blackberries, wild roses and other thorny bushes (birds
excrement the seeds everywhere). Few years later, between the bushes trees
(like maple) will grow from seeds brought in by wind. You can't plant trees
directly into the grass, they don't compete well with it and prefer growing
between the bushes instead. Why apparently noone in the UK realized that
there's easier more natural way?

~~~
douche
I've seen the same phenomenon in New England. If you stop mowing a field for
five years, within twenty you'll have a young wood lot. Clear-cut forest grows
back even faster - as you said, two-three years of blackberries, then hardwood
whips will come back from the seed dormant on the ground or the old stumps,
and grow up into harvestable timber again in short order. Unless the logging
companies are trying to grow a piece back with something that wouldn't
naturally grow, there's rarely a need to replant.

I would suppose that in this situation, the landscape is too devastated for
the natural process to quickly recolonize the area. With so much open
pit/strip mining, the old topsoil is stripped away,so all of that residual
seed that would otherwise spring up no longer is present, and the soil present
is far less welcoming to any wind-blown or animal-deposited seed.

------
matthjensen
I'd love to see the ecological models or decision making rules that were
applied to decide where to plant the trees, what kind and how many to plant,
and any other imporant factors that a lay person like myself might not think
of. Open sourcing the decision making process could spread these techniques to
many more locations.

------
XJOKOLAT
The UK is completely strong enough to invest in areas of need around the world
AND in the landscape/enviroment in the UK also.

It's a matter of priorities and political will (both by the UK and Indian
government), not ability nor lack of need by those aid is aimed at.

------
nicknackman
a really nice short movie about this subject:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTvYh8ar3tc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTvYh8ar3tc)

------
SeanDav
> _" Why would you not do this? It has cost just £2.5m a year..."_

This is is a real feel-good success story and all for 2.5 GBP a year. The
frustrating side of this is that the UK Government gives hundreds of millions
of GBP in aid _per year_ to nations like India, who have their own space
program. Just imagine how this money could be used to transform the landscape
and environment in the UK itself.

~~~
geon
In hn of all places, I'd expect people to appreciate the benefits of a space
program. Are you saying that should not be a priority because they recieve
aid?

I mean, there is valid criticism of any aid program, and you pick _that_?

~~~
omonra
His point is that if India can afford their space program, UK should not be
sending them aid.

Ie just like if your cousin decides to buy a Ferrari, you probably should not
have to to support him financially.

~~~
geon
And I disagree with that point. India is a large country. I believe having a
space program is a sensible long term investment.

A space program is not a luxury.

~~~
omonra
I guess the point is that _some_ benchmark should be used to determine whether
a country is rich enough to take care of it s citizens. You and the commenter
above disagree whether _space program_ can be considered such metric.

