Cut large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance: freshwater marshes

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Source countries

Key messages

  • Four studies evaluated the effects, on vegetation, of cutting large trees/shrubs to maintain or restore disturbance in freshwater marshes. Three studies were in the USA. One was in Germany.

VEGETATION COMMUNITY

  • Community types (1 study): One study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany reported changes in the area of plant community types over four years after cutting trees/shrubs (along with grazing).
  • Community composition (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study aiming to restore freshwater marshes in the USA found that cutting trees (along with other interventions) significantly affected the overall plant community composition over the following five years.
  • Overall richness/diversity (1 study): One study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany reported that plant species richness increased over four years after cutting trees/shrubs (along with grazing).

VEGETATION ABUNDANCE

  • Overall abundance (2 studies): Of two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies in the USA, one found that cutting and removing woody plants from a degraded wet prairie had no significant effect on overall vegetation cover three years later. The other study was in wet patches of a pine forest and found that understory vegetation cover increased more, over one year, where trees were thinned than where they were not thinned.
  • Characteristic plant abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study of overgrown freshwater marshes in the USA reported that of 26 plant taxa that became more frequent after cutting trees (along with other interventions), 16 were obligate wetland taxa.
  • Herb abundance (1 study): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in wet patches of a pine forest in the USA found that cover of sedges Carex increased more, over one year, where trees were thinned than where they were not thinned.
  • Tree/shrub abundance (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study of a wet prairie in the USA found that woody plant cover declined, over three years, in plots where trees/shrubs were cut – but increased in plots where trees/shrubs were not cut. One study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany simply reported that some trees/shrubs regrew over four years after cutting trees/shrubs (along with grazing).
  • Individual species abundance (1 study): One study quantified the effect of this action on the abundance of individual plant species. The replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study of a wet prairie in the USA found, for example, that cutting trees and shrubs had no significant effect on cover of the dominant herbaceous plant, tussock grass Deschampsia cespitosa, three years later.

VEGETATION STRUCTURE

  • Height (1 study): One site comparison study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany reported that an area in which trees/shrubs were cut back (along with reinstating cattle grazing) contained shorter vegetation than an adjacent unmanaged area.

OTHER

  • Survival (2 studies): One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a wet prairie in the USA found that cutting woody plants did not significantly affect their survival in the following year. One study of a riparian wet meadow in Germany simply reported that 20% of black alder Alder glutinosa trees were still alive after being cut back and grazed for four years.

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

  1. A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in 1994–1997 in an ephemeral wet prairie in Oregon, USA (Clark & Wilson 2001) found that cutting woody plants reduced their cover (but not their short-term survival) and affected cover of forbs – but not the dominant herb species or vegetation overall. Over three years, woody plant cover declined in plots where they were cut (by 79%), but increased in plots where they were not cut (by 20%). This is despite no significant effect on woody plant survival in the first year after cutting (cut: 60%; uncut: 83%). Changes in forb cover also significantly differed between cut and uncut plots, although the precise effect depended on whether forbs were native (cut: 167% increase; uncut: 77% decrease) or non-native (cut: 45% decrease; uncut: 28% increase). Plots under each treatment experienced statistically similar increases in overall vegetation cover (cut: 42%; uncut: 31%) and cover of the dominant herb species, tussock grass Deschampsia cespitosa (cut: 8%; uncut: 31%; see original paper for data on other individual plant species). Methods: In 1994, five pairs of plots (each 56–140 m2) were established in a degraded, seasonally flooded prairie. Woody plants had grown over 200 years of fire suppression. In autumn 1994 and 1996, all woody vegetation was cut with pruners or loppers, then removed, from one plot/pair. Vegetation was surveyed before (summer 1994) and after cutting. Survival of six tagged woody plants/plot was recorded in summer 1995. Cover of selected herb species was recorded in three 0.5-m2 quadrats/plot in summer 1997.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A site comparison study in 1996–2000 in a riparian wet meadow in southern Germany (Zahn et al. 2003) reported that in plots where woody vegetation was cut (along with reinstating grazing), there were changes in the area of plant community types, an increase in plant species richness, a reduction in vegetation height and growth of some woody vegetation. Statistical significance was not assessed. Over four years after intervention, there were slight increases in the area of reedbed/marsh vegetation (from 10 to 14%) and herbs typical of disturbed areas (from 45 to 50%) and a slight decrease in the area of meadow and pasture vegetation (from 45 to 36%). Total plant species richness increased in seven of seven plots, from 5–45 species/plot to 11–57 species/plot (increase of 3–22 species/plot). After four years, the cut/grazed area contained shorter vegetation than adjacent unmanaged land, including patches <10 cm tall not present in unmanaged land (data reported graphically). Finally, woody vegetation grew back despite grazing: up to 15 bushes/100 m2, reaching a height of >1 m after four years. Around 80% of 400 black alder (Alder glutinosa) trees that had been cut back died over the four years. Methods: The focal wetland had been abandoned for 20 years, becoming overgrown with tall herbs and, in places, woody plants. In 1996, woody vegetation was cut back, near ground level, from a 6-ha study area (details not reported). Annual summer grazing was also reinstated. The study does not distinguish between the effects of these interventions. Vegetation was surveyed each summer 1996–2000, in seven grazed 100-m2 plots. In 2000, vegetation height was measured along a 34-m transect spanning the cut/grazed and unmanaged areas.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. A replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in 2000–2005 aiming to restore ephemeral freshwater marshes within pine forest in Georgia, USA (Martin & Kirkman 2009) found that cutting trees (along with applying herbicide and prescribed burning) altered the overall plant community composition, favouring herbaceous and wetland-characteristic species. Over five years, the community composition of managed wetlands diverged significantly from that of unmanaged wetlands (data reported as a graphical analysis). This effect was stronger in the core of the wetlands than on the wetland-upland boundary. Of 26 plant taxa whose frequency increased in managed wetlands (statistical significance not assessed), 25 were herbs and 15 were obligate wetland taxa. Methods: In summer 2000, mature stands of oak Quercus spp. trees (that had developed following fire suppression) were removed from five depressional wetlands by cutting and/or applying herbicide. Then, the wetlands were then burned three times (once every two years). The study does not distinguish between the effects of cutting, applying herbicide and prescribed burning. Five additional wetlands were not managed (trees not removed and no burning). Plant species presence/absence was recorded before (2000) and after (2005) intervention, in three to seven 100-m2 plots/wetland.

    Study and other actions tested
  4. A replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in 2011–2012 aiming to restore marsh patches in a pine forest in North Carolina, USA (Aschehoug et al. 2015) found that thinning trees increased understory vegetation cover, including sedges. In plots where trees were thinned, there were increases in total understory vegetation cover (from 34% one month before thinning to 57% one year after) and total cover of sedges Carex spp. (from 7% to 22%). These increases were significantly larger than in plots where trees were not thinned (total understory cover: increase from 44% to 48%; sedge cover: decrease from 10% to 8%). The effect of tree thinning was statistically similar in dammed and undammed plots (reported as a statistical model result). Methods: In May 2011, sixteen 30 x 30 m plots were established (in four blocks of four) in wet patches of a pine forest. Development of sedge marshes in wet patches of the forest had been restricted by fire suppression and the extirpation of beavers Castor canadensis. In eight plots (two/block), 90% of the trees were manually removed. Trees were not thinned in the other plots. Four thinned and four unthinned plots were also dammed. Vegetation cover was visually estimated one month before (April 2011) and one year after (April 2012) intervention.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Taylor N.G., Grillas P., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2021) Marsh and Swamp Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions to Conserve Marsh and Swamp Vegetation. Conservation Evidence Series Synopses. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Marsh and Swamp Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marsh and Swamp Conservation
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Marsh and Swamp Conservation - Published 2021

Marsh and Swamp Synopsis

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