Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Maintain/restore water flow across service corridors One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of restoring water flow across service corridors. The study was in a fen. Characteristic plants (1 study): One before-and-after study in a fen in the USA found that following restoration of water inflow across a road (along with general rewetting), cover of wet peatland sedges increased whilst cover of grasses preferring drier conditions decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1741https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1741Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:25:06 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide new technologies to reduce pressure on wild biological resources We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of providing new technologies (e.g. fuel-efficient stoves) to reduce pressure on wild biological resources. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1748https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1748Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:29:05 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically exclude vehicles from peatlands One study evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of physically excluding vehicles from peatlands. The study was in a fen. Vegetation structure (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, site comparison study in a floating fen in the USA reported that fencing off airboat trails allowed total and non-woody vegetation biomass to increase, recovering to levels recorded in undisturbed fen. Woody plant biomass did not recover. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): The same study reported that fencing off airboat trails allowed overall plant diversity to increase, recovering to levels recorded in undisturbed fen. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1750https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1750Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:31:38 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically exclude pedestrians from peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of physically excluding pedestrians from peatlands. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1752https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1752Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:32:15 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Install boardwalks/paths to prevent trampling We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of installing boardwalks to prevent trampling. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1753https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1753Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:32:35 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically remove problematic plants Three studies evaluated the effects on peatland vegetation of removing problematic plants. All three studies were in fens. Characteristic plants (1 study): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in a fen in Ireland reported that cover of fen-characteristic plants increased after mossy vegetation was removed. Herb cover (3 studies): Three replicated, controlled studies in fens in the Netherlands and Ireland reported mixed effects of moss removal on herb cover after 2–5 years. Results varied between species or between sites, and sometimes depended on other treatments applied to plots (i.e. drainage or isolation from the surrounding bog). Moss cover (3 studies): One replicated, randomized, controlled study in a fen in Ireland reported that removing the moss carpet reduced total bryophyte and Sphagnum moss cover for three years. Two replicated, controlled, before-and-after studies in fens in the Netherlands reported that removing the moss carpet had no effect on moss cover (after 2–5 years) in wet plots, but reduced total moss and Sphagnum cover in drained plots. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in a fen in the Netherlands reported that moss removal increased plant species richness, but only in a drained area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1768https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1768Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:41:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Physically damage problematic plants We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of physically damaging problematic plants. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1769https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1769Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:41:29 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce an organism to control problematic plants One study evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of introducing an organism (other than large vertebrate grazers) to control problematic plants. The study was in a fen meadow. Plant community composition (1 study): One controlled, before-and-after study in a fen meadow in Belgium found that introducing a parasitic plant altered the overall plant community composition. Vegetation cover (1 study): The same study found that introducing a parasitic plant reduced cover of the dominant sedge but increased moss cover. Overall plant richness/diversity (1 study): The same study found that introducing a parasitic plant increased overall plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1777https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1777Mon, 27 Nov 2017 21:44:50 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage fertilizer or herbicide application near peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of managing fertilizer or herbicide use in adjacent areas. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1784https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1784Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:16:21 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Limit the density of livestock on farmland near peatlands We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of limiting the density of livestock on farmland near peatlands. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1786https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1786Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:16:57 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Plant shelter belts to protect peatlands from wind We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of planting shelter belts to protect peatlands from wind. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1793https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1793Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:19:25 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Legally protect peatlands Five studies evaluated the effects on peatland habitats of legally protecting them: two of tropical peat swamp forest, two of unspecified peatlands and one of a bog. Peatland habitat (3 studies): Two studies in Indonesia reported that peat swamp forest was lost from within the boundaries of national parks. However, one of these studies was a site comparison and reported that forest loss was greater outside the national park. One before-and-after study of peatlands in China reported that peatland area initially decreased, but then increased, following legal protection. Plant community composition (1 study): One before-and-after study in a bog in Denmark reported that the plant community compositon changed over 161 years of protection. In particular, woody plants became more abundant. Vegetation cover (1 study): One site comparison study in a peatland in Chile found that a protected area had greater vegetation cover (total, herbs and shrubs) than an adjacent grazed and moss-harvested area. Overall plant richness/diversity (2 studies): One before-and-after study in Denmark reported that the number of plant species in a protected bog fluctuated over time, with no clear trend. One site comparison study in a peatland in Chile found that a protected area had lower plant richness and diversity (but also fewer non-native species) than an adjacent grazed and harvested area. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1796https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1796Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:26:41 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Pay landowners to protect peatlands One study evaluated the effects on peatland habitats of paying landowners to protect them. The study was of bogs. Peatland habitat (1 study): One review from reported that agri-environment schemes in the UK had mixed effects on bogs, protecting the area of bog habitat in three of six cases. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1799https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1799Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:27:33 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Increase ‘on-the-ground’ protection (e.g. rangers) One study evaluated the effects on peatland habitats of increasing ‘on-the-ground’ protection. The study was in tropical peat swamps. Behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in a peat swamp forest in Indonesia reported that the number of illegal sawmills decreased over two years of anti-logging patrols. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1800https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1800Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:27:48 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce nurse plants (without planting peatland vegetation) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of introducing nurse plants on naturally colonizing, focal peatland vegetation. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1816https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1816Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:44:02 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce seeds of peatland herbs Ten studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of introducing seeds of herbaceous peatland plants. Seven studies were in fens or fen meadows, two in bogs and one in unspecified peatland. Germination (2 studies): Two replicated studies reported that some planted herb seeds germinated. In a bog in Germany three of four species germinated, but in a fen in the USA only one of seven species germinated. Characteristic plants (3 studies): Three studies (two controlled) in fen meadows in Germany and a peatland in China reported that wetland-characteristic or peatland-characteristic plants colonized plots where herb seeds were sown (sometimes along with other interventions). Herb cover (4 studies): Three before-and-after studies (one also replicated, randomized, paired, controlled) in a bog in New Zealand, fen meadows in Switzerland and a peatland in China reported that plots sown with herb seeds developed cover of the sown herbs (and in New Zealand, greater cover than unsown plots). In China, the effect of sowing was not separated from the effects of other interventions. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a fen in the USA found that plots sown with herb (and shrub) seeds developed similar herb cover to plots that were not sown. Overall vegetation cover (3 studies): Of three replicated, controlled studies, one in a fen in the USA found that sowing herb (and shrub) seeds increased total vegetation cover. One study in a bog in New Zealand found that sowing herb seeds had no effect on total vegetation cover. One study in a fen meadow in Poland found that the effect of adding seed-rich hay depended on other treatments applied to plots. Overall plant richness/diversity (4 studies): Two replicated, controlled studies in fens in the USA and Poland found that sowing herb seeds had no effect on plant species richness (total or vascular). Two replicated, controlled, before-and-after studies in a bog in New Zealand and a fen meadow in Poland each reported inconsistent effects of herb sowing on total plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1823https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1823Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:46:08 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce seeds of peatland trees/shrubs Five studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of introducing seeds of peatland trees/shrubs to restore or create forested/shrubby peatland. Three studies were in bogs and two were in fens. Germination (2 studies): Two replicated studies in a bog in Germany and a fen in the USA reported germination of heather and willow seeds, respectively, in at least some sown plots. Survival (2 studies): One replicated study in a bog in Germany reported survival of some heather seedlings over two years. One replicated study in a fen in the USA reported that all germinated willow seedlings died within one month. Shrub cover (3 studies): Two studies (one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled) in bogs in New Zealand and Estonia reported that plots sown with shrub seeds (sometimes along with other interventions) developed greater cover of some shrubs than plots that were not sown: sown manuka or naturally colonizing heather (but not sown cranberry). One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a fen in the USA found that plots sown with shrub (and herb) seeds developed similar overall shrub cover to unsown plots within two years. Overall vegetation cover (3 studies): Two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled studies in a bog in New Zealand and a fen in the USA reported that plots sown with shrub (and herb) seeds developed greater total vegetation cover than unsown plots after two years. One site comparison study in bogs in Estonia reported that sowing shrub seeds (along with fertilization) had no effect on total vegetation cover after 25 years. Overall plant richness/diversity (3 studies): One site comparison study in bogs in Estonia reported that sowing shrub seeds (along with fertilization) increased plant species richness. However, one replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a bog in New Zealand reported that plots sown with shrub seeds typically contained fewer plant species than plots that were not sown. One replicated, randomized, paired, controlled study in a fen in the USA found that sowing shrub (and herb) seeds had no effect on plant species richness. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1824https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1824Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:46:23 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Introduce nurse plants (to aid focal peatland plants) Three studies evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of introducing nurse plants to aid focal peatland plants. Two studies were in bogs. One was in a tropical peat swamp. Survival (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled study in Malaysia reported that planting nurse trees had no effect on survival of planted peat swamp tree seedlings (six species). Cover (2 studies): Two replicated, randomized, paired, controlled, before-and-after studies in bogs in the USA and Canada found that planting nurse herbs had no effect on cover, after 2–3 years, of other planted vegetation (mosses/bryophytes, vascular plants or total cover). Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1830https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1830Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:52:11 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Irrigate peatland (before/after planting) One study evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of irrigating areas planted with peatland plants. The study was in a bog. Cover (1 study): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada found that irrigation increased the number of Sphagnum moss shoots present 1–2 growing seasons after sowing Sphagnum fragments. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1832https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1832Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:52:45 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Protect or prepare vegetation before planting (other interventions) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of protecting or preparing peatland vegetation before planting (other than by adding root-associated fungi). ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1842https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1842Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:56:10 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Raise awareness amongst the public (general) One study evaluated the effects of interventions to raise general public awareness about peatlands on knowledge, behaviour, peatland habitats or peatland vegetation. The study reported effects on unspecified peatlands.  Behaviour change (1 study): One before-and-after study in the UK reported that following awareness-raising activities, the percentage of the public buying peat-free compost increased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1844https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1844Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:57:18 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Raise awareness amongst the public (problematic species) We found no studies that evaluated the effects of interventions to raise awareness about problematic species on knowledge, behaviour, peatland habitats or peatland vegetation. ‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1846https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1846Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:58:04 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Provide education or training programmes about peatlands or peatland management Two studies evaluated the effects of peatland education/training programmes on knowledge, behaviour, peatland habitats or peatland vegetation. Both studies were in tropical peat swamps. Behaviour change (2 studies): One study in peat swamps in Indonesia reported that over 3,500 households adopted sustainable farming practices following workshops about sustainable farming. One before-and-after study in peat swamps in Indonesia reported that a training course on rubber farming increased the quality of rubber produced by local farmers. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1848https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1848Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:58:47 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Lobby, campaign or demonstrate to protect peatlands Two studies evaluated the effects of lobbying/campaigning/demonstrating for peatland protection on knowledge, behaviour, peatland habitats or peatland vegetation. Both studies reported effects, on unspecified peatlands, of the same campaign in the UK. Peatland protection (2 studies): Two studies in the UK reported that the area of protected peatland increased following pressure from a campaign group. Behaviour change (1 study): One study in the UK reported that following pressure from a campaign group, major retailers stopped buying compost containing peat from important peatland areas and horticultural companies began marketing peat-free compost. Attitudes/awareness (1 study): One study in the UK reported that following campaign pressure, garden centres and local governments signed peatland conservation agreements. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1849https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1849Tue, 28 Nov 2017 10:29:16 +0000Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Irrigate peatland (without planting) Two studies evaluated the effects of irrigation (without planting) on peatland vegetation. One study was in a bog and one was in a fen. Vegetation cover (2 studies): One replicated, paired, controlled, before-and-after study in a bog in Canada found that irrigation increased the number of Sphagnum moss shoots present after one growing season, but had no effect after two. One before-and-after study in Germany reported that an irrigated fen was colonized by wetland- and fen-characteristic herbs, whilst cover of dryland grasses decreased. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1859https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F1859Mon, 11 Dec 2017 15:05:17 +0000
What Works 2021 cover

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, 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 21

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 ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust
For a full list of, and information about, our champions:
All Evidence Champions
About our champions, why and how to become one:
Become an Evidence Champion

This website uses Cookies

We use limited Cookies to run the site and to analyse our traffic (none for site vendors). By using this site, you will be providing your consent to our use of Cookies.

Accept & continue