A comment on “International principles and standards for the ecological restoration and recovery of mine sites”—useful but limited

Abstract

The Principles and Standards by Young et al. provide an international framework for ecological restoration of mine sites. Although useful, these Standards are limited as a basis for practice, especially in Europe, partly by neglecting the fact that semi‐natural habitats are often desirable restoration targets in anthropogenic cultural landscapes; intermediate and early successional stages are sometimes more ecologically valuable than terminal stages; spontaneous succession can be an effective restoration approach, or it may be combined with assisted restoration; and by a limited number of representative long‐term restoration case studies. Further efforts to create consensual guidelines require a broad discussion across biomes, regions and public and private sectors. Meanwhile, the Standards should be regarded as a tentative academic‐oriented framework with some substantial limitations for practice.