Cover peatland with something other than mulch (without planting)

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 2
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

40%
Certainty

30%
Harms

5%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Peatland vegetation may be killed by hot, dry and bright conditions on bare peat surfaces (e.g. Harley et al. 1989; Sagot & Rochefort 1996). Covers (e.g. plastic sheets, fleece or fibre mats) can maintain more stable temperatures and humidity, and offer some shading. This may create a more hospitable environment for establishment and growth of peatland vegetation (Good et al. 2009). The precise effect (mainly affecting light and/or moisture) depends on the material and its height above the peatland.

This section considers the effect of adding covers without adding vegetation. The cover is intended to help existing vegetation e.g. remnant moss patches, or seedlings that germinate from seeds already in the peat. We use the term mesh to describe covers such as shade cloths, gauze and netting that are used to shade a peatland.

Key peatland types where this action may be appropriate: bogs, fens/fen meadows, tropical peat swamps.

_{Good R., Wright G., Whinam J. & Hope G. (2009) Restoration of mires of the Australian Alps following the 2003 wildfires. Pages 353–362 in: S.G. Haberle, J. Stevenson & M. Prebble (eds.) Altered Ecologies: Fire, Climate and Human Influence on Terrestrial Landscapes. Terra Australis 32, Australian National University e-press, Canberra, Australia.}

_{Harley P.C., Tenhunen J.D., Murray K.J. & Beyers J. (1989) Irradiance and temperature effects on photosynthesis of tussock tundra Sphagnum mosses from the foothills of the Philip Smith Mountains, Alaska. Oecologia, 79, 251–259.}

_{Sagot C. & Rochefort L. (1996) Tolérance des sphaignes à la dessiccation (Tolerance of Sphagnum mosses to desiccation; in French). Crytogamie, Bryology-Lichénologie, 17, 171–183.}

Study locations

Key messages

Two studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of covering a peatland with something other than mulch (without planting). Both studies were in bogs.
Vegetation cover (2 studies): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Germany reported that covering bare peat with fleece or fibre mats did not affect the number of seedlings of five herb/shrub species. One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in bogs in Australia reported that recently-burned plots shaded with plastic mesh developed greater cover of native plants, forbs and Sphagnum moss than unshaded plots.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in 1993–1995 in a historically mined raised bog in Germany (Sliva et al. 1999) reported that covering plots with fleece or fibre mat did not affect seedling numbers for five plant species. These results were not tested for statistical significance. After 1–2 years, covered and uncovered plots contained a similar number of seedlings. There were 3 seedlings/400 cm² for purple moor grass Molinia caerulea. There was <1 seedling/400 cm² for four other species: beaked sedge Carex rostrata, common cottongrass Eriophorum angustifolium, sheathed cottongrass Eriophorum vaginatum and heather Calluna vulgaris. In autumn 1993, fifteen 1 m² plots were established on bare rewetted peat (mined until 1986). Five plots were covered with synthetic fleece, five were covered with wide-meshed jute fibre mat and five were not covered. No seeds were added to these plots. Covers were removed and seedlings counted in summer 1994 (two plots/treatment) and 1995 (three plots/treatment).
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Sliva J. & Pfadenhauer J. (1999) Restoration of cut-over raised bogs in southern Germany – a comparison of methods. Applied Vegetation Science, 2, 137-148.
A replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in 2003–2007 in two in Australia (Whinam et al. 2010) found that plots shaded with plastic mesh developed greater vegetation cover than unshaded plots. After 40 months, shaded plots had significantly greater cover of native plants in general, and of forbs, than unshaded plots (data not reported). Sphagnum moss cover was 10% in shaded plots compared to 8% in unshaded plots (difference not tested for statistical significance). Immediately before shading, plots had 3% Sphagnum cover on average. In January 2003, the focal bogs were burned by a wild fire. In October 2003, ten burned plots (3 x 15 m; five plots/bog) were shaded with plastic mesh (blocking 70% of incoming light). Fifteen additional plots were left uncovered. Vegetation cover was recorded in 0.25 m²quadrats: five/bog in October 2003, and one/plot in March 2007.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Whinam J., Hope G., Good R. & Wright G. (2010) Post-fire experimental trials of vegetation restoration techniques in the peatlands of Namadgi (ACT) and Kosciuszko National Parks (NSW), Australia. Pages 363-379 in: Terra Australis 32. Australian National University e-press, Canberra.

Please cite as:

Taylor, N.G., Grillas, P. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Peatland Conservation. Pages 367-430 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Peatland Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Excavate pools (without planting) Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	2	Synopsis Link
Add inorganic fertilizer (without planting) Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	3	Synopsis Link
Introduce nurse plants (without planting peatland vegetation) Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link