Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

‘Like a Phoenix,’ A New Forest Emerges From the Destruction in Ukraine

News Feed
Tuesday, November 12, 2024

In the early hours of June 6, 2023, two large explosions reverberated across cities and small towns located on the banks of the Dnieper River in southern Ukraine. The Russian military had reportedly set off multiple bombs, destroying the three-kilometer-long Kakhovka Dam and draining its massive reservoir into nearby settlements. Water from the dam flooded the plains, killing hundreds of civilians and countless livestock, destroying farms, and displacing the residents of more than 37,000 homes. The bombing made headlines around the world. However, it’s the long-term impact of the attack on the local biodiversity that has scientists and experts concerned. In the weeks following the explosion, researchers from Ukrainian ministries and independent organizations carried out several assessments as best they could to the backdrop of the war. They found that the attack had flooded about 60,000 hectares (230 square miles) of forest in at least four national parks, threatening an estimated population of 20,000 animals and 10,000 birds. “Almost all aquatic vegetation had died, and much of the marine life had disappeared, including mollusks,” says Serhiiy Skoryk, director of Kamianska Sich National Park in Kherson, one of the regions affected. “Those that survived moved downstream,” says the scientist-turned-freedom fighter. The deluge also dislodged many landmines in the heavy conflict region, moving them downstream into farms and residential areas. The researchers found an equally deadly if less obvious threat: Industrial pollutants previously captured in the reservoir’s sediments had contaminated the flood zones and the Black Sea. Another report by the Ukrainian Scientific Center for Marine Ecology, published just months after the destruction of the dam, also showed high evidence of pollution in the Black Sea, including heavy metals such as copper, zinc, and arsenic compounds. “All that water from the reservoir contains contaminant particles, along with carcasses of the animals that died during the flood, most of which ended in the sea, which is now polluted,” says Oleksiy Vasyliuk, an environmental scientist from Ukraine who has been documenting the ecological impact of the war. One of the hardest hit groups of species was mussels, “filter feeders” who help purify water. With populations of these animals significantly reduced, Vasyliuk expresses worry that these pollutants could enter the human food chain. Satellite data shows the dramatic drying of the Kakhovka reservoir bottom that has been transforming the landscape in 2023-2024. Source: EOS Data Analytics The war has made an already bad situation for many species even worse. “Even before the war, the ecology of Ukraine was endangered, but the Russian invasion attacks have caused serious threats to Ukrainian biodiversity,” says Anastasia Drapaliuk, project coordinator at Tellus Conservation in Ukraine. In a paper for the Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group, Drapaliuk and other experts noted that wildlife across 5,000 square kilometers (1,930 square miles) faced catastrophic effects from the flood, including rare species of birds, mammals, reptiles, and insects. “Populations of some species were dealt a possibly greater blow in one day on June 6 than in the last 100 years,” they wrote. But amidst the destruction, something unexpected has emerged. Baby Forests “Despite the challenges, our colleagues have been making regular expeditions to the affected area,” says Vasyliuk. “Three months after the attack they were shocked to find vegetation and forests in part of the reservoir that was left dry after the dam collapse.” They documented a young willow forest making its way through the dry cracked soil left behind by the floods. “It was unbelievable; no one expected to see the greenery they found, or that such a thing could happen amidst these tragic events,” he adds, the thrill of the discovering still evident in his voice. Where they feared desertification, a thick forest of largely willow trees — Rumex aquaticus and Celtis occidentalis — some reaching as high as six meters, now occupies about 150,000 hectares (930 square miles) of land that had once been covered by the reservoir. New vegetation emerges. Photo: Serhiiy Skoryk Vasyliuk hypothesizes that despite the absence of fertile soil, the forest flourished because of the organic mass left behind by the lost animals and plants, including dead species such as the mollusks. “It is possible the organic particles from these mollusks and other materials fed and nourished the forests like fertilizers,” he says. “The entire mechanism [that led to the birth of a new forest] is yet to be studied, because what we found was a lot of cross-breaded seeds among indigenous trees.” Still, it seems a cause for celebration. “It was very great,” he says, adding that the forest was the “only good thing to happened since the Russian attacks have damaged much of the local environment.” Skoryk echoes that: “Nature was healing herself, and all we have to do is to not interfere and let her take charge. Like a phoenix, in the form of a new forest, was rising from this tragedy,” he says. Drapaliuk looks at the growth from a longer perspective. The way she sees it, the nature in the region has been given a bit of a reset: It’s simply reviving its original biodiversity, “Before the Soviet Union, this was a historically significant region, not just for the Cossacks [indigenous Ukrainian tribes] but also for the biodiversity. It was the wetlands, a place for many rare birds and animals,” she explains. Rebuild or Restore? This new forest is a rare positive development in an otherwise tragic situation, considering an estimated 298,000 hectares (1,150 square miles) of forest fires — 50 times more than the annual average — have been reported across Ukraine since the start of the since 2022, according to the by the Kyiv School of Economics. The report, which took stock of Ukraine’s economic losses as of this past January, calculated forest damages “at more than 82.9 million cubic meters of timber with an estimated value of $4.5 billion.” As a result, many Ukrainian environmentalists and scientists have appealed to the government to withhold any reconstruction of the dam. “When the dam was first built [during the Soviet era], the damage to the regional ecology, culture and heritage were not taken into consideration,” says Vasyliuk. “As a result, so much of the natural and historical significant biodiversity was impacted, such as the Great Meadows,” referring to the historic steppe terrain of Ukraine that was submerged under the reservoir when the dam was built. In the early 1950s the Soviet Union pushed for widespread industrialization. During this period, this region and many others were razed to make way for infrastructure such as the dam. “The dam increased the salinity of the land, affecting soil quality, and that should be one of the reasons to not rebuild it,” Vasyliuk argues. “We need to plan strategically for the future and make decisions that are good for Ukrainian and not just because the dam was already there and someone gave us money to rebuild it.” Toll on Scientific Study Overall, though, scientific research in the region has been severely restricted since the Russian invasion. “From what we can gather, about 30% of the previously protected areas, such as wetlands and Ramsay sites in Ukraine, are now active warzones or occupied territories,” says Drapaliuk, who presented findings on that damage last year in a webinar for the EUROPARC Foundation. The Dnipro delta, the mouth of the Dnieper River, is included in the Ramsar Convention’s list of protected areas of international importance. According data published this past February by the Ukrainian Ministry of Environmental Protection, about 812 protected areas, spread over 1 million square kilometers, have been affected by different types of military operations since the beginning of the war. “So much of the area has been mined (with explosive land mines) that it becomes dangerous to even study the region even after it is liberated,” Drapaliuk says, adding that lack of resources, financial and human, has considerably slowed down data collection. “The damage by the war has put a lot of pressure on our work,” she adds. “For those working in the national parks, it is difficult to even access basic needs such as vehicles, fuel, electricity and equipment since much of it was destroyed during the Russian attacks.” Then there’s the effect on people. “To care about a forest, you have to care about people who work for it,” Drapaliuk says. But persistent Russian bombing of the region has prevented any normalcy in the work and life of the locals. “A lot of people from this area, a lot of forest rangers, are now in the army, making it difficult to continue work on protection and conservation.” Indeed, the war has blurred the lines of duty for those like Skoryk, who went from being an environmentalist to a combatant to a prisoner of war. Just days after the invasion began in February 2022, Skoryk was taken prisoner by Russian forces who had entered Ukraine. He eventually escaped when his captors “got drunk on too much vodka.” He went on to assist with the liberation of the national park. Photo courtesy Serhiiy Skoryk. Drapaliuk urges international environmental groups to invest in preserving Ukraine’s biodiversity. Much of the aid flowing into Ukraine today is for military support, and issues such as ecological destruction tends to take a backseat. “Of course, we all understand the priority and urgency; our country needs military support,” she says. “But in my opinion, we also really need international help to protect the ecological sector.” Skoryk calls attention to demining efforts in the region, a task to which he is personally devoting his time. “Gradually, we are clearing the area of mine and explosives, but it is a vast land mass encompassing nearly 12,000 hectares, and complex undertaking,” he says. Experts also emphasized the need to build policies and plans, not just for wartime but also to be implemented after victory. “There is a lot we can’t do now [in terms of conservation] but we can prepare an action plan for territories under war or occupation. They can be established as new protected areas so that we are ready to save the biodiversity in those territories soon after liberation,” Drapaliuk says. “We can’t afford to waste time,” she adds. Scroll down to find our “Republish” button Previously in The Revelator: War Threatens Ukraine’s Unique Red Seaweed Fields. Here’s How Scientists Monitor Them From Afar The post ‘Like a Phoenix,’ A New Forest Emerges From the Destruction in Ukraine appeared first on The Revelator.

Russia’s bombing of Kakhovka Dam in 2023 killed hundreds of people and tens of thousands of animals, but it’s also provided a potential ecological reset. The post ‘Like a Phoenix,’ A New Forest Emerges From the Destruction in Ukraine appeared first on The Revelator.

In the early hours of June 6, 2023, two large explosions reverberated across cities and small towns located on the banks of the Dnieper River in southern Ukraine. The Russian military had reportedly set off multiple bombs, destroying the three-kilometer-long Kakhovka Dam and draining its massive reservoir into nearby settlements.

Water from the dam flooded the plains, killing hundreds of civilians and countless livestock, destroying farms, and displacing the residents of more than 37,000 homes.

The bombing made headlines around the world. However, it’s the long-term impact of the attack on the local biodiversity that has scientists and experts concerned. In the weeks following the explosion, researchers from Ukrainian ministries and independent organizations carried out several assessments as best they could to the backdrop of the war.

They found that the attack had flooded about 60,000 hectares (230 square miles) of forest in at least four national parks, threatening an estimated population of 20,000 animals and 10,000 birds.

“Almost all aquatic vegetation had died, and much of the marine life had disappeared, including mollusks,” says Serhiiy Skoryk, director of Kamianska Sich National Park in Kherson, one of the regions affected. “Those that survived moved downstream,” says the scientist-turned-freedom fighter.

The deluge also dislodged many landmines in the heavy conflict region, moving them downstream into farms and residential areas.

The researchers found an equally deadly if less obvious threat: Industrial pollutants previously captured in the reservoir’s sediments had contaminated the flood zones and the Black Sea.

Another report by the Ukrainian Scientific Center for Marine Ecology, published just months after the destruction of the dam, also showed high evidence of pollution in the Black Sea, including heavy metals such as copper, zinc, and arsenic compounds.

“All that water from the reservoir contains contaminant particles, along with carcasses of the animals that died during the flood, most of which ended in the sea, which is now polluted,” says Oleksiy Vasyliuk, an environmental scientist from Ukraine who has been documenting the ecological impact of the war.

One of the hardest hit groups of species was mussels, “filter feeders” who help purify water. With populations of these animals significantly reduced, Vasyliuk expresses worry that these pollutants could enter the human food chain.

Satellite data shows the dramatic drying of the Kakhovka reservoir bottom that has been transforming the landscape in 2023-2024. Source: EOS Data Analytics

The war has made an already bad situation for many species even worse. “Even before the war, the ecology of Ukraine was endangered, but the Russian invasion attacks have caused serious threats to Ukrainian biodiversity,” says Anastasia Drapaliuk, project coordinator at Tellus Conservation in Ukraine.

In a paper for the Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group, Drapaliuk and other experts noted that wildlife across 5,000 square kilometers (1,930 square miles) faced catastrophic effects from the flood, including rare species of birds, mammals, reptiles, and insects. “Populations of some species were dealt a possibly greater blow in one day on June 6 than in the last 100 years,” they wrote.

But amidst the destruction, something unexpected has emerged.

Baby Forests

“Despite the challenges, our colleagues have been making regular expeditions to the affected area,” says Vasyliuk. “Three months after the attack they were shocked to find vegetation and forests in part of the reservoir that was left dry after the dam collapse.” They documented a young willow forest making its way through the dry cracked soil left behind by the floods. “It was unbelievable; no one expected to see the greenery they found, or that such a thing could happen amidst these tragic events,” he adds, the thrill of the discovering still evident in his voice.

Where they feared desertification, a thick forest of largely willow trees — Rumex aquaticus and Celtis occidentalis — some reaching as high as six meters, now occupies about 150,000 hectares (930 square miles) of land that had once been covered by the reservoir.

New vegetation emerges. Photo: Serhiiy Skoryk

Vasyliuk hypothesizes that despite the absence of fertile soil, the forest flourished because of the organic mass left behind by the lost animals and plants, including dead species such as the mollusks.

“It is possible the organic particles from these mollusks and other materials fed and nourished the forests like fertilizers,” he says. “The entire mechanism [that led to the birth of a new forest] is yet to be studied, because what we found was a lot of cross-breaded seeds among indigenous trees.”

Still, it seems a cause for celebration. “It was very great,” he says, adding that the forest was the “only good thing to happened since the Russian attacks have damaged much of the local environment.”

Skoryk echoes that: “Nature was healing herself, and all we have to do is to not interfere and let her take charge. Like a phoenix, in the form of a new forest, was rising from this tragedy,” he says.

Drapaliuk looks at the growth from a longer perspective. The way she sees it, the nature in the region has been given a bit of a reset: It’s simply reviving its original biodiversity, “Before the Soviet Union, this was a historically significant region, not just for the Cossacks [indigenous Ukrainian tribes] but also for the biodiversity. It was the wetlands, a place for many rare birds and animals,” she explains.

Rebuild or Restore?

This new forest is a rare positive development in an otherwise tragic situation, considering an estimated 298,000 hectares (1,150 square miles) of forest fires — 50 times more than the annual average — have been reported across Ukraine since the start of the since 2022, according to the by the Kyiv School of Economics. The report, which took stock of Ukraine’s economic losses as of this past January, calculated forest damages “at more than 82.9 million cubic meters of timber with an estimated value of $4.5 billion.”

As a result, many Ukrainian environmentalists and scientists have appealed to the government to withhold any reconstruction of the dam.

“When the dam was first built [during the Soviet era], the damage to the regional ecology, culture and heritage were not taken into consideration,” says Vasyliuk. “As a result, so much of the natural and historical significant biodiversity was impacted, such as the Great Meadows,” referring to the historic steppe terrain of Ukraine that was submerged under the reservoir when the dam was built.

In the early 1950s the Soviet Union pushed for widespread industrialization. During this period, this region and many others were razed to make way for infrastructure such as the dam.

“The dam increased the salinity of the land, affecting soil quality, and that should be one of the reasons to not rebuild it,” Vasyliuk argues. “We need to plan strategically for the future and make decisions that are good for Ukrainian and not just because the dam was already there and someone gave us money to rebuild it.”

Toll on Scientific Study

Overall, though, scientific research in the region has been severely restricted since the Russian invasion.

“From what we can gather, about 30% of the previously protected areas, such as wetlands and Ramsay sites in Ukraine, are now active warzones or occupied territories,” says Drapaliuk, who presented findings on that damage last year in a webinar for the EUROPARC Foundation. The Dnipro delta, the mouth of the Dnieper River, is included in the Ramsar Convention’s list of protected areas of international importance.

According data published this past February by the Ukrainian Ministry of Environmental Protection, about 812 protected areas, spread over 1 million square kilometers, have been affected by different types of military operations since the beginning of the war.

“So much of the area has been mined (with explosive land mines) that it becomes dangerous to even study the region even after it is liberated,” Drapaliuk says, adding that lack of resources, financial and human, has considerably slowed down data collection.

“The damage by the war has put a lot of pressure on our work,” she adds. “For those working in the national parks, it is difficult to even access basic needs such as vehicles, fuel, electricity and equipment since much of it was destroyed during the Russian attacks.”

Then there’s the effect on people. “To care about a forest, you have to care about people who work for it,” Drapaliuk says. But persistent Russian bombing of the region has prevented any normalcy in the work and life of the locals. “A lot of people from this area, a lot of forest rangers, are now in the army, making it difficult to continue work on protection and conservation.”

Indeed, the war has blurred the lines of duty for those like Skoryk, who went from being an environmentalist to a combatant to a prisoner of war. Just days after the invasion began in February 2022, Skoryk was taken prisoner by Russian forces who had entered Ukraine. He eventually escaped when his captors “got drunk on too much vodka.” He went on to assist with the liberation of the national park.

Photo courtesy Serhiiy Skoryk.

Drapaliuk urges international environmental groups to invest in preserving Ukraine’s biodiversity. Much of the aid flowing into Ukraine today is for military support, and issues such as ecological destruction tends to take a backseat.

“Of course, we all understand the priority and urgency; our country needs military support,” she says. “But in my opinion, we also really need international help to protect the ecological sector.”

Skoryk calls attention to demining efforts in the region, a task to which he is personally devoting his time.

“Gradually, we are clearing the area of mine and explosives, but it is a vast land mass encompassing nearly 12,000 hectares, and complex undertaking,” he says.

Experts also emphasized the need to build policies and plans, not just for wartime but also to be implemented after victory.

“There is a lot we can’t do now [in terms of conservation] but we can prepare an action plan for territories under war or occupation. They can be established as new protected areas so that we are ready to save the biodiversity in those territories soon after liberation,” Drapaliuk says.

“We can’t afford to waste time,” she adds.

Scroll down to find our “Republish” button

Previously in The Revelator:

War Threatens Ukraine’s Unique Red Seaweed Fields. Here’s How Scientists Monitor Them From Afar

The post ‘Like a Phoenix,’ A New Forest Emerges From the Destruction in Ukraine appeared first on The Revelator.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Australia has new laws to protect nature. Do they signal an end to native forest logging?

What do Australia’s new nature laws mean for native forests? The reforms closed a loophole that stopped legal scrutiny of logging. But we need the full detail.

Reforms to Australia’s nature laws have passed federal parliament. A longstanding exemption that meant federal environment laws did not apply to native logging has finally been removed from the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. Native forest logging will now be subject to national environmental standards – legally binding rules supposed to set clear goals for environmental protection. This should be a win for the environment, and some have celebrated it as an end to native forest logging in Australia. But the reality is such celebrations are premature. We don’t have all the details of the new standards, or know how they will be enforced and monitored. Business as usual? Federal Environment Minister Murray Watt has told the forestry industry, including in Tasmania, that native forest operations will continue as usual. In an interview with ABC Radio Hobart, he said the changes keep day-to-day forestry approvals with the state government, but introduce stronger federal oversight. If that is the case, the logging of habitat for endangered species, such as the swift parrot, will continue, pushing these species closer to extinction. The Tasmanian government has shown no signs of willingness to change its current approach. And if “business as usual” logging persists, the environment reforms will fall far short of what Australia’s forests – and their plants and animals – need. Uncertain standards We don’t yet know what the national forestry standards will contain. But the draft standards for some threatened and endangered forest species aren’t enough to arrest ongoing declines, based on drafts I’ve seen that are yet to be publicly released. Crucially, we can’t meet the habitat requirements for many forest-dependent species by simply replanting previously cleared land. This is because the trees in replanted forests won’t be mature for several hundred years. Many forest-dwelling species live in holes and hollows that occur only in mature trees. In other words, allowing loggers to “offset” the forests they damage by replanting other areas is broadly impossible. This reinforces longstanding concerns about the limitations of biodiversity offsets as a way to conserve endangered forests and animals. Swift parrots are fast-flying migratory parrots. They are critically endangered, partly because the forests they nest in are being logged. Thirdsilencenature/Flickr, CC BY-ND Industry pushback Parts of the forest industry are already seeking to rebrand damaging practices such as mechanical thinning (the removal of large numbers of trees), as forms of so-called “active management” to create healthy forests. The Australian government’s Timber Fibre Strategy makes extensive reference to the use of “active management”. However, the scientific evidence shows the opposite: such activities can degrade forest structure (by removing key understorey vegetation), facilitate the invasion of weed species, and undermine the ecological integrity of forests. Different forests Australia has a vast range of different forest types, and many support a variety of animals and plants threatened by forestry operations. Effective national standards therefore need to be detailed and sophisticated to deal with such complexity. This will take considerable time to design. And it’s possible each species and forest type will need a different set of standards. These will need to account not only for the direct impacts of logging – such as the death of animals when their habitat trees are felled – but also indirect impacts. For example, logging can increase fire risk, promote the spread of weeds and feral animals into disturbed areas, and trigger long-term changes in vegetation structure. Developing national standards is only part of the challenge. Implementing them will demand significant new resources, as well as robust monitoring to ensure governments and logging contractors actually stick to the rules. Better recovery Many of Australia’s threatened species don’t have up-to-date recovery plans that will guide the best way to prevent their extinction. And when plans do exist, there is often a lack of resourcing to put them into action. Without substantial investment, many plants and animals will fall between the cracks, and these new environmental standards will not deliver the change so desperately needed. They must be matched with careful monitoring of species in forests and properly-funded plans for their recovery. A simple solution There is a straightforward way to avoid the ecological, administrative, and financial problems created by native forest logging – stop it altogether. The evidence shows ending native forest logging would deliver significant benefits for biodiversity, forest ecosystems, and reduce fire risks. It also would benefit government finances because taxpayers would no longer need to subsidise an economically unviable industry that currently loses large amounts of money. The environment law reforms are to be welcomed. But the devil will be in the detail as to whether hopes for better environmental outcomes and improved forest conservation are realised. David Lindenmayer receives funding from the Australian Government, NSW Government and the Victorian Government. He is a Councillor with the Biodiversity Council and a Member of Birdlife Australia, the Ecological Society of Australia, and the Australian Mammal Society. He is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science, Fellow of the American Academy of Science, Fellow of the Ecological Society of America, and Fellow of Royal Zoological Society of NSW.

Mischievous Hands': Indonesians Blame Deforestation for Devastating Floods

By Ananda TeresiaSOUTH TAPANULI, Indonesia, Dec 2 (Reuters) - Indonesian Reliwati Siregar gestured angrily at deforestation around her home on the...

SOUTH TAPANULI, Indonesia, Dec 2 (Reuters) - Indonesian Reliwati Siregar gestured angrily at deforestation around her home on the island of Sumatra, where landslides and floods brought by a tropical storm killed more than 700 people in its deadliest disaster since a cataclysmic tsunami in 2004."Mischievous hands cut down trees ... they don't care about the forests, and now we're paying the price," Siregar said at a temporary shelter near her home in Tapanuli, the worst-hit area, with about a quarter of the death toll, government data shows.The landslides buried homes and crippled rescue and relief efforts, while floodwaters washed ashore dozens of logs, Siregar said."The rain did cause the flood, but it's impossible for it to sweep away this much wood," the 62-year-old added, her voice rising in disgust. "Those raindrops do not cause wood to fall."Environmental experts and regional leaders said the tropical storm in the Malacca Strait that hit Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand last week, killing more than 800 people, was just one of many worsened by climate change.But deforestation in Sumatra led to a disproportionately deadly toll, they said.  "Yes, there were cyclonic factors, but if our forests were well-preserved ... it would not have been this terrible," Gus Irawan Pasaribu, a local government leader in Tapanuli, told Reuters by telephone.Pasaribu said he had already protested to the forestry ministry over licences issued for the use of forest area for projects, but it ignored his pleas.Indonesia's forestry and environment ministries did not reply to Reuters requests for comment.Media said the attorney general's office is leading a task force to check if illegal activities contributed to the disaster, and that the environment ministry would query eight companies in industries such as logging, mining and palm plantations, after logs washed ashore in some areas of Sumatra.They did not identify the companies or projects.Masinton Pasaribu, another local government official in Tapanuli, blamed the clearing of natural forests to make way for palm plantations, which yield palm oil, one of Indonesia's main exports.Authorities in the archipelago, home to many dense tropical forests, have looked to reverse some of the destruction but lean heavily on its vast natural resources to fuel economic growth.Monitoring group Global Forest Watch says North Sumatra lost 1.6 million hectares of tree cover over the period from 2001 to 2024, or the equivalent of 28% of the tree-covered area.From 2001 to 2024, Sumatra as a whole has lost 4.4 million hectares (11 million acres) of forest, an area bigger than Switzerland, said David Gaveau, founder of deforestation monitor Nusantara Atlas."This is the island of Indonesia that has had the most deforestation," he said, adding that global warming was the biggest factor in the deadly floods, though deforestation had a secondary role.Environment-focused group JATAM said its analysis of satellite imagery showed construction for the China-funded 510MW Batang Toru hydropower plant, planned to begin operating in 2026, contributed to the destruction."This situation can no longer be explained merely by the narrative of 'extreme weather,' but must be understood as a direct consequence of upstream ecosystem and watershed destruction by extractive industries," it said in a statement.Reuters could not reach North Sumatra Hydro Energy, which runs the plant, to seek comment. Its parent, China's SDIC Power Holdings, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Another environment-focused non-government group, Walhi, sought revocation of a government permits for the hydropower plant in a 2018 lawsuit in a state administrative court, but the court rejected the suit in 2019, media say."This disaster was caused not only by natural factors but also ecological factors, namely mismanagement of natural resources by the government," Walhi said.JATAM said legal permits to convert forests into extraction zones covered about 54,000 hectares (133,000 acres), a majority of them for mining.Among the permit holders is PT Agincourt Resources, which operates the Martabe gold mine in the Batang Toru ecosystem.In a statement to Reuters it said making a direct link between the floods and the mine's operations was "a premature and inaccurate conclusion". Instead, it pointed to extreme weather, the overflowing river, and a blockage of logs at one point in its course."Usually just a few ... but now, there's more than ever," said Yusneli, 43, a resident of the West Sumatran city of Padang, who goes by one name, as she described the alarm caused by the number of logs washing ashore. (Reporting by Yudhistira in Tapanuli, Ananda Teresia, Fransiska Nangoy, Stanley Widianto, Zahra Matarani and Heru Asprihanto in Jakarta and Johan Purnomo, Willy Kurniawan and Aidil Ichlas in Padang; Writing by Gibran Peshimam; Editing by Josh Smith and Clarence Fernandez)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

European Parliament Supports Year-Long Deforestation Law Delay

BRUSSELS (Reuters) -The European Parliament on Wednesday voted in favour of delaying the implementation of the European Union's deforestation law...

BRUSSELS (Reuters) -The European Parliament on Wednesday voted in favour of delaying the implementation of the European Union's deforestation law by one year.Companies will have an additional year to comply with new EU rules to prevent deforestation, the European Parliament said in a statement.Large operators and traders must respect the obligations of this regulation as of December 30, 2026, and micro and small enterprises from June 30, 2027.The ban on imports of cocoa, palm oil and other commodities linked to forest destruction is a key pillar in the EU's green agenda.The world-first policy aims to end the 10% of global deforestation fuelled by EU consumption of imported soy, beef, palm oil and other products, but has become a politically contested part of Europe's green agenda.But it faces pushback from some industries and countries that say the measures are costly and logistically challenging.Critics have previously warned of environmental setbacks.Food majors such as Nestle, Ferrero and Olam Agri back the law. They warned last month that delaying it endangers forests worldwide and is contrary to the EU's aim of simplifying business rules.Advocacy group Business For Nature called the delay "a profound failure of political courage".(Reporting by Charlotte Van Campenhout, editing by Bart Meijer and Ed Osmond)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Two College Students Are Building a Robot to Replant Burned Forests

Marta Bernardino and Sebastião Mendonça invented Trovador, a six-legged, A.I.-powered robot that can plant trees in hard-to-reach, wildfire-damaged terrain

Two College Students Are Building a Robot to Replant Burned Forests Marta Bernardino and Sebastião Mendonça invented Trovador, a six-legged, A.I.-powered robot that can plant trees in hard-to-reach, wildfire-damaged terrain Nineteen-year-olds Marta Bernardino and Sebastião Mendonça are developing a robot capable of reaching and reforesting areas where humans have been unable to. Trovador For 19-year-olds Marta Bernardino and Sebastião Mendonça, the forest was the intimate, untamed backdrop of their childhood. “It was a living playground where we built worlds, a sanctuary where the concepts of ‘importance’ were felt instinctively rather than taught,” says Bernardino. As children growing up near Lisbon, the two always believed that the forest would remain a constant in their lives. But with each year, they watched as fires ravaged the forests not far from their homes, leaving behind scorched gray hillsides. Desperate to revive these forests, the two then-high school students set out to create Trovador—a robot capable of reaching and reforesting areas where humans have been unable to. The state of Portugal’s forests A 2024 study by Carlos C. DaCamara, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Lisbon, revealed that between 1980 to 2023, over 1.2 million acres burned in wildfires across mainland Portugal, equivalent to 54 percent of its territory. In 2017, the country recorded 32,000 acres of tree cover loss, with wildfire accounting for 75 percent of that destruction, the highest in a year to date. Moreover, Portugal is the southern European nation most affected by wildfires, based on the scale of burned areas and the sharp rise in recent wildfires. To begin their project, Bernardino and Mendonça set out to understand the current methods used for reforestation and the reasons behind the forests’ slow recovery. “The initial, passive hope that nature would heal itself was shattered when we learned the soil was too damaged and the fires too frequent for recovery,” Bernardino adds. Though volunteers and community members strived to revive the burned forests, it was physically impossible to reach the most vulnerable parts, which happened to be on steep, treacherous slopes. “The defining moment came,” Bernardino says, “when a project leader articulated the brutal truth: the terrain itself was the enemy, making manual replanting a dangerous and often impossible task.” She continues, “The inspiration was no longer a feeling of loss, but a cleareyed recognition of a flawed system. We saw that existing solutions—from volunteer planting to drone seed-dropping—were failing to meet the scale and complexity of the problem.” Quick facts: The impact of climate change on wildfires Between 2003 and 2023, extreme wildfire activity worldwide increased by 2.2-fold. Wildfire seasons are lengthening too, starting earlier in the spring and lasting longer into the fall. Over 60 percent of forests in Portugal lie on steep, rugged terrain, where planting is unsafe and labor is scarce, Bernardino explains. Tractors can’t handle slopes, and they compact the soil. Using heavy vehicles for reforesting can disturb the oxygen and water supply to plants and soil microorganisms. Such disturbances can cause substantial damage to the soil systems, which in certain cases can be long-lasting and even irreversible, harming the productivity of the forest and the overall functionality of the ecosystem. Drone-based aerial seeding is one viable alternative highly considered today for reforestation. However, the technique has its own challenges. While it’s competent in precision identification of suitable locations for reforestation, the method typically uses thousands of seeds per acre (at least 4,000) for blanket seedings, making it less economical. “Drones, while flexible, scatter seeds with low precision—wasting one of the most scarce natural resources,” Bernardino adds. One pilot project focusing on certain conifer species found their survival rate when dropped from drones fell between 0 and 20 percent. “Since the early 2000s, Portugal has lost over half of its forest cover, triggering erosion, water loss and biodiversity collapse,” Bernardino explains. “This crisis hits rural communities hardest: places like Fundão and Alentejo, where forests provide food, water, income and cultural identity. As ecosystems vanish, so do livelihoods.” And the rapid loss of forest cover isn’t limited to Portugal—it extends around the globe. Recent data from the University of Maryland’s Global Land Analysis & Discovery (GLAD) lab, reported in the World Resources Institute’s “Global Forest Review,” found that an unprecedented 16.6 million acres of primary rainforest was lost in the tropics in 2024. Researchers at the GLAD lab estimate that tropical primary forests vanished at an accelerated pace of 18 soccer fields every minute last year. The loss—largely caused by massive forest fires—is almost double that of 2023. “The problem itself became our blueprint,” recounts Bernardino, “and we dedicated ourselves to creating a solution that embraced all the constraints: steep terrain, high survival rates and autonomy.” A firefighter tackles the flames next to a road as vegetation burns during a wildfire in Vila Real, Portugal, this past August. David Oliveira/Anadolu via Getty Images Designing a solution In 2023, Bernardino and Mendonça set out to create Trovador—a six-legged robot able to walk on rugged slopes and plant trees. Their first €15 ($17) prototype, built from recycled parts, planted 28 percent faster than humans with a 90 percent survival rate. The saplings also thrived without any post-planting care. The two are currently working to improve the efficiency of the robot and hope that their current prototype is able to handle longer operations on steeper terrains. “We build all-terrain robots that carry baby trees on their backs and plant them autonomously across difficult terrain,” says Bernardino. The innovators didn’t expect the wave of interest that followed their initial prototype. As a top finalist for National Geographic’s 2024 Slingshot Challenge, they won a grant of $10,000, and the invention was also featured in the magazine as one of the world’s most promising youth-led climate solutions. “On the tech side, the robotics world took notice, too—we became the youngest ever to receive Europe’s top award for Robotics for Sustainability,” says Bernardino. The hexapod robot is capable of climbing slopes of up to 45 degrees while detecting and simultaneously avoiding any boulders in its way. Trovador is also equipped to carry and plant up to 200 saplings per hour. Unlike a tractor, it barely makes an indent on the ground thanks to its light movement, preserving pore space for air and water in the soil. A depth camera attached to it maps any obstacles and allows it to slightly adapt its trajectory in real time. It also uses artificial intelligence and sensors to analyze the pH and humidity of the soil, after which Trovador will follow a three-step dig-place-tamp sequence to plant rooted saplings instead of seeds. “The sequence is validated to hit up to 85 to 90 percent survival in field trials and literature,” says Bernardino. With built-in sensors, Trovador uploads real-time data like GPS coordinates of each plant, soil humidity and battery life to a cloud, allowing the team to monitor the robot remotely. Moreover, during future soil analysis, the robot will be trained to skip the dry ground and steer planting to micro-niches with better odds. Bringing a viable product to market Miguel Jerónimo, a landscape architect and coordinator of Renature projects at the Group for Studies on Spatial Planning and the Environment, an independent environmental organization in Portugal, is optimistic about the tool. “Trovador appears to be an innovative project with potential, particularly as it was developed by two young students who turned a low-cost prototype into a possible approach to one of Portugal’s environmental challenges,” says Jerónimo. “The concept of a six-legged robot designed to move across steep slopes and dense vegetation offers a practical framework for reforestation in areas that are unsafe or difficult for people to access.” While Jerónimo is hopeful about the success of Trovador, he’s equally apprehensive about the robot’s durability in the actual field. “Moving from an experimental prototype to a reliable field-ready tool will require robust testing to ensure it can handle the rough, humid and heavily vegetated conditions typical of Portuguese forests,” he says. “Operational endurance, mobility in dense vegetation and ease of maintenance are areas that need further exploration before the system can be considered ready for broad use.” Additionally, the price tag on the tool also needs to be taken into account. “Keeping production costs low will be essential,” the landscape architect points out. “The robot must be affordable if it is to become a useful and accessible instrument in large-scale reforestation efforts rather than a one-off innovation.” However, Bernardino and Mendonça already have some ideas on how to make it affordable. Instead of selling the Trovador robot itself, the team plans to first market it as a platform that they operate as a service, selling “trees-in-the-ground.” By 2026, they hope to make the robot robust and user-friendly enough to deploy it in large-scale plantations. “Clients [like] municipalities, insurers, forestry firms or NGOs can open our app, outline a polygon, choose native species and receive a quote,” Bernardino elaborates. “Pricing is expected to be a big step up from the current methods, up to six times cheaper than manual crews and four times more cost‑effective than drones once seed wastage is factored in.” The innovators are narrowing in on a minimum viable product. For the next few months, the Trovador team intends to improve the tool based on feedback they received after field testing it in Lisbon this past summer. Both Bernardino and Mendonça’s hopes and ambitions remain high. With the robot, they aspire to make “reforestation that is fast, precise, audit-ready and scalable to the millions of hectares climate models say we must restore this decade,” says Bernardino. Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.