Literature DB >> 10982725

Integrating environmental restoration and ecological restoration: long-term stewardship at the department of energy.

J Burger1.   

Abstract

With the ending of the Cold War, several federal agencies are reclaiming land through remediation and restoration and are considering potential future land uses that are compatible with current uses and local needs. Some sites are sufficiently contaminated that it is likely that the responsible federal agency will retain control over the land for the foreseeable future, providing them with a stewardship mission. This is particularly true of some of the larger Department of Energy (DOE) facilities contaminated during the production of nuclear weapons. The use of the term "restoration" is explored in this paper because the word means different things to the public, ecologists, and environmental managers responsible for contaminated sites, such as Superfund sites and the DOE facilities. While environmental restoration usually refers to remediation and removal of hazardous wastes, ecological restoration refers to the broader process of repairing damaged ecosystems and enhancing their productivity and/or biodiversity. The goals of the two types of restoration can be melded by considering environmental restoration as a special case of ecological restoration, one that involves risk reduction from hazardous wastes, and by broadening environmental restoration to include a more extensive problem-formulation phase (both temporal and spatial), which includes the goal of reestablishing a functioning ecosystem after remediation. Further, evaluating options for the desired post remediation result will inform managers and policy-makers concerning the feasibility and efficacy of environmental restoration itself.

Year:  2000        PMID: 10982725     DOI: 10.1007/s002670010105

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  7 in total

1.  Assessing ecological resources for remediation and future land uses on contaminated lands.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Mary Anne Carletta; Karen Lowrie; K Tyler Miller; Michael Greenberg
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004-06-29       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Selecting species for marine assessment of radionuclides around Amchitka: planning for diverse goals and interests.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; Stephen Jewett
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2006-11-15       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  A Methodology to Evaluate Ecological Resources and Risk Using Two Case Studies at the Department of Energy's Hanford Site.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; Amoret Bunn; Janelle Downs; Christian Jeitner; Taryn Pittfield; Jennifer Salisbury; David Kosson
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 3.266

4.  Environmental management: integrating ecological evaluation, remediation, restoration, natural resource damage assessment and long-term stewardship on contaminated lands.

Authors:  Joanna Burger
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2008-08-06       Impact factor: 7.963

5.  Perceptual indicators of environmental health, future land use, and stewardship.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; O Myers; C S Boring; C Dixon; J C Jeitner; J Leonard; C Lord; M McMahon; R Ramos; S Shukla; Michael Gochfeld
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.513

6.  Collaboration versus communication: The Department of Energy's Amchitka Island and the Aleut Community.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Gochfeld; Karen Pletnikoff
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 6.498

7.  Ground beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) of the Hanford Nuclear Site in south-central Washington State.

Authors:  Chris Looney; Richard S Zack; James R Labonte
Journal:  Zookeys       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 1.546

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.