Zaki-ul-Zaman Asam

Since the 1950s, large areas of upland peat have been afforested in northern European countries. Due to the poor phosphorus (P) adsorption capacity and low hydraulic permeability in blanket peat soil and increased labile P sources, harvesting these blanket peat forests can significantly increase P concentrations in the receiving aquatic systems. This paper briefly reviews the current management practices on the control of P releases from forestry in Ireland and the UK, and proposes a possible novel practice—grass seeding clearfelled areas immediately after harvesting, which should reduce P release from blanket peat forest harvesting. The study was conducted in the Burrishoole Catchment in the west of Ireland. A field trial was carried out to identify the successful native grass species that could grow quickly in the blanket peat forest. The two successful grass species—Holcus lanatus and Agrostis capillaris—were sown in three blanket peat forest study plots with areas of 100, 360, and 660 m2 immediately after harvesting. Areas without grass seeding were used as controls. One year later, the P content in the aboveground vegetation biomass of the three study plots were 2.83, 0.65, and 3.07 kg P ha−1, respectively, which were significantly higher than the value of 0.02 kg P ha−1 in the control areas. The water extractable phosphorus in the three study plots were 8.44, 9.83, and 6.04 mg (kg dry soil)−1, respectively, which were lower than the value of 25.72 mg (kg dry soil)−1 in the control sites. The results indicate that grass seeding of the peatland immediately after harvesting can quickly immobilize significant amounts of P and warrants additional research as a new Best Management Practice following harvesting in the blanket peatland forest to mitigate P release.

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is an important legislative and scientific tool that may assist and improve the quality assistance for the decision-making process in sustainable development. Here, a comparison of EIAs from three cases of hydropower projects in Pakistan, Norway and Sweden is reported. A huge difference concerning the incorporation of environmental considerations into the decisionmaking process between developed and developing countries is observed. The EIA system of Pakistan appears to be less efficient in the application and review process. In addition, the appraisal of issues, the decision-making process and evaluation through post-monitoring is not as well performed in Pakistan as in cases of hydroelectric power plants in Sweden and Norway. The key reason for this shortcoming is misconceptions about the EIA process, which initially receives intense attention but becomes weakened by the time of implementation. This implies that there is a need to adopt simplified and flexible EIA techniques suitable for the infrastructure and resources of a specific country, taking into account institutional, technical and financial constraints. Improvements are required in public participation, awareness, as well as in environmental control and data system sectors in Pakistan, besides simply enacting legislation to achieve the goals of the EIA system.