Vegetational restoration techniques on reclaimed phosphate strip mines in Florida

  • Published source details Clewell A.F. (1981) Vegetational restoration techniques on reclaimed phosphate strip mines in Florida. Wetlands, 1, 158-170


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Transplant or replace wetland soil: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Directly plant trees/shrubs: freshwater wetlands

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Transplant or replace wetland soil: freshwater marshes

    A before-and-after study in the 1980s in a marsh developing on reclaimed mining land in Florida, USA (Clewell 1981) reported that following the addition of soil from a natural marsh, the number of plant species increased. Before soil was added, the marsh contained 45 plant species. One year after soil was added, the marsh contained 88 plant species, “many” of which occurred in the donor sites. Methods: In the early 1980s, a 5-cm-thick layer of topsoil from natural marshes was added to a developing marsh. The site had been planted with dry pasture grasses four years earlier, but had since developed marsh vegetation because it was kept wet by seepage from a settling pond. The study does not report precise dates and details of monitoring.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  2. Directly plant trees/shrubs: freshwater wetlands

    A study in 1979 of a swamp restoration project in Florida, USA (Gilbert et al. 1980) reported that 7–85% of planted tree seedlings survived over 4–5 months. Of the 16 planted species, survival was lowest for longleaf pine Pinus palustris (7%) and highest for green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica and baldcypress Taxodium distichum (both 85%). For all species, the survival rate varied between plots at different elevations. Statistical significance was not assessed. Methods: In January and February 1979, seedlings of native Florida tree species were planted into a wetland undergoing restoration. The site was historically a swamp, then mined for phosphate. It was modified before planting by levelling spoil piles, creating wet basins and installing inflow/outfall pipes. Most of the 10,400 seedlings were planted in 26 multispecies plots (4–5 species/plot; seedlings 1.5 metres apart) but some were planted randomly throughout the site. Survival of planted seedlings was recorded in June 1979.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust