

Results of Remote Monitoring of the Ecological State of Mining Landscapes at Spent Nickel Ore Deposits in the Chelyabinsk Region
https://doi.org/10.18412/1816-0395-2021-1-44-48
Abstract
The results of remote monitoring of the state of disturbed lands during the development of deposits of nickel-containing ores from the Ufaleisk group are presented. An ecologically acceptable rate of formation of the plant ecosystem on waste dumps and in mined-out pits was recorded. Currently, more than 90% of disturbed lands are covered with resistant species of vegetation.
About the Authors
I.V. Zen’kovRussian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Eng.), Professor
Yu.A. Anischenko
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Economics), Associate Professor
A.V. Agalakova
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Economics), Associate Professor
E.M. Sycheva
Russian Federation
Senior Lector
P.M. Kondrashov
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Eng.), Professor
V.N. Konov
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Eng.), Associate Professor
P.L. Pavlova
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Eng.), Associate Professor
Yu.A. Maglinets
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Eng.), Professor
S.N. Skornyakova
Russian Federation
Senior Lector
References
1. Eric L. Bullock, Christoph Nolte, Ana L. Reboredo Segovia, Curtis E. Woodcock. Ongoing forest disturbance in Guatemala's protected areas. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation. 2020. Vol. 6. Iss. 2. Р. 141—152.
2. Julian Oeser, Marco Heurich, Cornelius Senf, Dirk Pflugmacher, Elisa Belotti, Tobias Kuemmerle. Habitat metrics based on multi‐temporal Landsat imagery for mapping large mammal habitat. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation. 2020. Vol. 6. Iss. 1. Р. 52—69.
3. Javier Lopatin, Klara Dolos, Teja Kattenborn, Fabian E. Fassnacht. How canopy shadow affects invasive plant species classification in high spatial resolution remote sensing. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation. 2019. Vol. 5. Iss.4. Р. 302—317.
4. Paul Glover‐Kapfer, Carolina A. Soto‐Navarro, Oliver R. Wearn. Camera‐trapping version 3.0: current constraints and future priorities for development. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation. 2019. Vol. 5. Iss. 3. Р. 209—223.
5. Natasha K. Nahirnick, Luba Reshitnyk, Marcus Campbell, Margot Hessing‐Lewis, Maycira Costa, Jennifer Yakimishyn, Lynn Lee. Mapping with confidence; delineating seagrass habitats using Unoccupied Aerial Systems (UAS). Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation. 2019. Vol. 5. Iss. 2. Р. 121—135.
6. Matthew S. Van Den Broeke. Radar quantification, temporal analysis and influence of atmospheric conditions on a roost of American Robins (Turdus migratorius ) in Oklahoma. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation. 2019. Vol. 5. Iss. 2. Р. 193—204.
7. Haidi Abdullah, Andrew K. Skidmore, Roshanak Darvishzadeh, Marco Heurich. Sentinel‐2 accurately maps green‐attack stage of European spruce bark beetle (Ips typographus, L.) compared with Landsat‐8. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation. 2019. Vol. 5. Iss. 1. Р. 87—106.
8. Caitlin E. Jacobs, David E. Ausband. An evaluation of camera trap performance — What are we missing and does deployment height matter? Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation. 2018. Vol. 4. Iss. 4. Р. 352—360.
9. https://www.google.com/earth/ (дата обращения 09.06.2020).
10. https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/ (дата обращения 09.06.2020).
11. http://mining-enc.ru/ (дата обращения 09.06.2020).
Review
For citations:
Zen’kov I., Anischenko Yu., Agalakova A., Sycheva E., Kondrashov P., Konov V., Pavlova P., Maglinets Yu., Skornyakova S. Results of Remote Monitoring of the Ecological State of Mining Landscapes at Spent Nickel Ore Deposits in the Chelyabinsk Region. Ecology and Industry of Russia. 2021;25(1):44-48. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18412/1816-0395-2021-1-44-48