Study

Long-term consequences of grazing and burning on northern peatland carbon dynamics

  • Published source details Ward S.E., Bardgett R.D., McNamara N.P., Adamson J.K. & Ostle N.J. (2007) Long-term consequences of grazing and burning on northern peatland carbon dynamics. Ecosystems, 10, 1069-1083

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use prescribed fire to control problematic plants

Action Link
Peatland Conservation

Exclude or remove livestock from degraded peatlands

Action Link
Peatland Conservation
  1. Use prescribed fire to control problematic plants

    A replicated, paired, controlled study in 1954–2004 in a blanket bog in England, UK (Ward et al. 2007) found that repeatedly burned plots contained less total vegetation, shrub and bryophyte biomass than once-burned plots, but more biomass of grass-like plants. After 50 years, repeatedly burned plots contained less above-ground vegetation biomass (134 g/m2) than once-burned plots (297 g/m2). This included less biomass of shrubs (repeatedly burned: 236; once-burned: 116 g/m2) and bryophytes (repeatedly burned: 5; once-burned: 53 g/m2). In contrast, biomass of grass-like plants was significantly higher in repeatedly burned plots (13 g/m2) than once-burned plots (8 g/m2). In 1954, sixteen 1,000 m2 plots were established, in four blocks of four, in a historically grazed bog. All plots were burned once in 1954. Thereafter, eight plots (two plots/block) were burned every 10 years. The other plots were not burned again. Additionally, half of the plots were fenced to exclude sheep. In 2003–2004, live above-ground vegetation was cut from one 25 cm2 quadrat/plot, then dried and weighed. Samples were taken in spring, summer, autumn and winter. This study was based on the same experimental set-up as (1), (2) and (6).

  2. Exclude or remove livestock from degraded peatlands

    A replicated, paired, controlled study in 1954–2004 in a grazed and recently burned blanket bog in England, UK (Ward et al. 2007) found plots fenced to exclude sheep contained more total vegetation, shrub and bryophyte biomass than grazed plots, but similar biomass of grass-like herbs. After 50 years, above-ground vegetation biomass was greater in exclusion plots (240 g/m2) than grazed plots (192 g/m2). This included greater biomass of shrubs (mainly heather Calluna vulgaris; exclusion: 194; grazed: 161 g/m2) and bryophytes (mainly red-stemmed feather moss Pleurozium schreberi; exclusion: 37; grazed: 18 g/m2). However, exclusion and grazed plots contained similar biomass of grass-like herbs (mainly sheathed cottongrass Eriophorum vaginatum; exclusion: 10; grazed: 13 g/m2). In 1954, sixteen 1,000 m2 plots were established (in four blocks of four) on a grazed bog. Eight plots (two plots/block) were fenced to exclude sheep. The other eight plots remained open to summer grazing (0.04 sheep/ha). All plots were burned once in 1954, with half also burned every 10 years thereafter. In 2003–2004, live above-ground vegetation was cut from one 25 cm2 quadrat/plot, then dried and weighed. Samples were taken in spring, summer, autumn and winter. This study was based on the same experimental set-up as (2) and (8).

Output references

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