Download to read offline
Uploaded byAberdeen CES
Gully blocking & revegetation of bare and eroding peat: exploring the evidence
The document discusses the effects of gully blocking and revegetation on ecosystem services as part of peatland code projects. It presents evidence related to water quality, greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity, and the management of peatland, emphasizing the need for targeted actions and best practices. The document also outlines the importance of ongoing evidence generation and collaboration with landowners for effective peatland restoration.
More Related Content
Similar to Gully blocking & revegetation of bare and eroding peat: exploring the evidence
Gully blocking & revegetation of bare and eroding peat: exploring the evidence
- 1. Gully blocking &revegetation: Exploring the evidence Mark Reed, Jim Rouquette and Dylan Young
- 2.
- 3. Purpose • Explore evidencere: effects of undertaking Peatland Code projects on different ecosystem services • Stimulate discussion and inform decisions about what might be a fair price to charge for undertaking Peatland Code projects
- 4. Types of peatlandcondition addressed by Peatland Code (and this talk):
- 5. 2 Changes inecosystem services (based on perceptions of previous workshop participants)
- 6. -20 -15 -10-5 0 5 10 15 20 Increase drink water qual Peat in carbon code WFD Safeguard zones Decreased AE payments More droughts More storm events Increased wildfire Cumulative indicator score Agricultural produce Wild produce Water provision Climate regulation Natural hazard regulation Water purification Erosion prevention Recreation and tourism Aesthetic value Intellectual, scientific etc. Provision of habitat Impact on most important ecosystem services
- 7. -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 Agricultural produce Wild produce Fibreand fuel Water provision Genetic resources Biochemicals etc. Ornamental resources Energy harvesting Air quality regulation Climate regulation Natural hazard regulation Water purification Erosion prevention Pollination Pest and disease control Noise and light regulation Recreation and tourism Aesthetic value Inspiration Intellectual, scientific etc. Spiritual, ethical, religious Cultural heritage Social relations Provision of habitat Adoption of peat in carbon code Predicted impact of adopting peat in carbon code on ecosystem services
- 8. 3 Effects ofgully blocking & revegetation (based on perceptions of previous workshop participants)
- 9. Managed burning Grouse numbers Stream ecology Heather cover Water Framework Directive Sphagnum cover Water storage Depth of peat Extent of gulleying Water- table Wildlife abundance Peat accumulatio n Water movement Palatable grasses Vegetation diversity Erosion Gulley blocking Water quality Bare peat Access Drainage Increase Decrease Alittle Some A lot Relationships related to managed burning and gulley blocking Note: preliminary data. Direct relationships Heather cutting
- 10. Managed burning Grouse numbers Stream ecology Heather cover Water Framework Directive Sphagnum cover Water storage Depth of peat Extent of gulleying Water- table Wildlife abundance Peat accumulatio n Water movement Palatable grasses Vegetation diversity Erosion Gulley blocking Water quality Bare peat Access Drainage Increase Decrease Alittle Some A lot Relationships related to managed burning and gulley blocking Note: preliminary data. Including indirect strong relationships. Heather cutting Pipe networks
- 11. 4 Other evidence (basedon published literature)
- 12. A brief overview Basedon: • Recent evidence reviews: IUCN Commission of Inquiry; Natural England Upland Evidence Review • Peak District projects: Defra’s Ecosystem Services of Peat project; Sustainable Uplands project; Making Space for Water • Other peer-reviewed sources of evidence
- 13. A brief overview Evidencefor effects of peatland restoration on ecosystem services • Greenhouse Gas emissions • Water • Biodiversity • Other benefits Note: contested evidence over effects of burning
- 14. Burning Greenhouse Gas Emissions Baresoil & revegetation Drains Cutting Gullies Courtesy of Fred Worrall, University of Durham
- 15. Greenhouse Gas Emissions HeatherGrasses Mosses Forest Sedge Courtesy of Fred Worrall, University of Durham
- 16. Greenhouse Gas Emissions CurrentGHG emissions 2030 emissions with- 2030 emissions with out grazing/burning targeted burning/grazing cessation, gully blocking and revegetation Reed et al. (2013) Anticipating and managing future trade-offs and complementarities between ecosystem services. Ecology & Society 18(1): 5 http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-04924-180105
- 17.
- 18. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Takehome message: • Look over appropriate time-horizons • Targeted action, following best practice – different measures in different places
- 19. Water • Gully block/revegetationreduces sediment production and loss of Particulate Organic Carbon • Reduces export of heavy metals • Evidence for reduction in Dissolved Organic Carbon is patchy/contradictory – Data collection too site-specific and short-term Courtesy of Mike Billet, Centre for Ecology & Hydrology
- 20. Water Revegetation slows rate atwhich water runs off and reduces flood peaks 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0.001 0.01 0.1 depth, m velocity,m.s-1 Unvegetated Eriophorum Sphagnum Holden et al (2008) Water Resources Research Green = Bare peat Red = Sphagnum
- 21.
- 22. Biodiversity • Depends what“bit” of biodiversity you’re interested in • Healthy bogs support a range of important bird, plant and moss species • Both intensifying and extensifying management is likely to be bad for biodiversity – need a healthy balance, which includes active management
- 23. Other benefits • Accessibilityand aesthetic benefits of blocking gullies and revegetating bare and eroding peat for recreation/tourism • Protecting archaeological artefacts Bronze age axe found during peat cutting in Orkney
- 24. Burning • All agree:no need for burning on true blanket bog – questions over dry heath vegetation on deep peat • "Weight of evidence” against burning on deep peat • Contradictory evidence exists
- 25. Next steps • Bestpractice restoration guidelines being developed as part of Peatland Code pilot phase – online consultation later this year – Menu approach, avoiding being too prescriptive where possible – Will include guidance on burning • Need to work with the landowning community • Need to generate evidence – e.g. experimental track under Peatland Code? – e.g. in this workshop on the effects of proscribing burning on likely prices charged by landowners