cropped clm - winter-2015-low res[1]

◆ Making Ennerdale ‘wild’ for the benefit of people

◆ Creation of Three Hagges Wood-Meadow

◆ Lessons learnt from restoration of shallow peatland

Winter 2015 Volume 13 Number 4

CONTENTS Volume 13 Number 4

4 Wild Ennerdale: looking forward to the ‘future natural’One of the longest running ecological restoration projects in the UK, Wild Ennerdale is reducing intense human intervention and giving natural processes freedom to mould the landscape. Gareth Browning

9 Three Hagges Wood-Meadow: a model project for the potential of wood-meadows for sustaining biodiversityCreating a diverse woodland ecosystem on fertile, formerly arable land, and vastly improving the natural capital as a result.Lin Hawthorne

15 Shallow peat, deep impact: lessons learnt from peatland restoration at Exmoor National ParkLessons learnt from work undertaken on Exmoor are shared for the benefit of other peatland restoration projects, and to increase the general understanding of the potential recovery of shallow peatlands following restoration. Emilie Grand-Clement, Morag Angus, David Smith and Richard Brazier

20 BriefingEvents, new publications and notice board

22 On the groundProduct updates and advice

We welcome your views on the land management issues discussed in Conservation Land Management and proposals for articles. Please send all editorial correspondence to: [email protected]

EDITORIALThe management approaches discussed in the articles in

this issue of CLM differ substantially, from considered and consistent at Three Hagges Wood-Meadow,

to opportunistic and diverse at Ennerdale, but all three demonstrate how sites have been managed both to improve biodiversity, and to enhance a range of other ecosystem services that are of benefit to people. The latter includes provisioning (hay and timber production at Three Hagges Wood-Meadow), regulating (carbon dioxide emissions and water quality in the shallow peatlands at Exmoor) as well as cultural (archaeological features and tourism at Ennerdale). The Hagge Woods Trust has even gone as far as commissioning an assessment of the natural capital of their newly created wood-meadow. The most significant elements in monetary terms are recreation and education, but provisioning of timber and hay, and carbon sequestration also add value. A method of planting trees that avoids the use of glyphosate means lower maintenance costs relative to more conventional woodland-creation projects, and there are other potential benefits such as pollination and soil-quality improvements that warrant further investigation.

The authors of all three of our articles share a common desire for the lessons they have learnt from their experiences to be made available to others. This is of course the rationale behind CLM, and we continue to welcome contributions from a wide array of land managers, which will go on to inspire others in the industry. Katy Roper, Editor

Editor: Katy Roper Commissioning Editor: Tony Robinson

The views expressed by contributors to Conservation Land Management are not necessarily those of British Wildlife Publishing Ltd.

We welcome contributions on land management issues from individuals and organisations. We reserve the right to shorten or modify articles, and regret that we cannot be liable for the safe custody or return of any material submitted.

© British Wildlife Publishing Ltd, part of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2015

ISSN 1479-9499

British Wildlife Publishing, Kemp House, Chawley Park, Cumnor Hill, Oxford OX2 9PH

Telephone 01865 811316; e-mail: [email protected]

Annual subscription rates: individual UK rate £14; organisational UK rate £16; student rate £12; all non-UK rates £18 (£s sterling drawn on UK bank). Remittance should be sent to Conservation Land Management, Subscriptions Department, British Wildlife Publishing, Kemp House, Chawley Park, Cumnor Hill, Oxford OX2 9PH Cheques should be payable to: British Wildlife Publishing Ltd

Back copies also from this address (£4 each).

See also: www.conservationlandmanagement.co.uk

Above: Herds of Galloway cattle have been recently introduced at Wild Ennerdale; they have freedom to roam large expanses of the landscape, which is already seeing benefits in terms of tree regeneration and the reappearance of marsh fritillary butterflies. Gareth Browning

Cover: Volunteers have a big part to play in the Wild Ennerdale project. Tasks include clearing informal pathways through areas of juniper planting. Gareth Browning

2 Conservation Land Management Autumn 2015

Countrys ide Jobs Service

ranger@ countryside-jobs.com 01947 896007

www.countryside-jobs.com

C J S

CJS is the Countryside Specialist

co

un

try

sid

e

wil

dli

fe

rig

hts

of

wa

y

ec

olo

gy

b

ird

s bio

div

ers

ity e

du

ca

tion

arb

oric

ultu

re

Jobs, Training, Information, Volunteering - since 1994

A New Year and a new resolution?

Weekly newsletters with details of current vacancies, voluntary opportunities, professional training courses and events plus all the news from across the countryside, conservation and wildlife sectors.

CJS is endorsed by the Countryside Management Association and the Scottish Countryside Rangers Association

New Start - New Job - New SkillsStart 2016 with CJS and your search is over.

Start with our website countryside-jobs.com packed with content waiting to be discovered.

Free recruitment advertising available, ask for information

The Wild Ennerdale PartnershipFormed: 2003

Partners: Forestry Commission, National Trust, United Utilities and Natural England.

Vision: To allow the evolution of Ennerdale as a wild valley for the benefit of people, relying more on natural processes to shape its land-scape and ecology.

Guiding Principles:

· Give freedom to natural processes allowing robust, functioning eco-systems to develop on a landscape scale

· Consider and respect the historical and cultural assets of the valley

· Protect and enhance the sense of wildness

· Develop greater public enjoyment, engagement and social benefit

· Establish sustainable business opportunities

· Monitor change on a large scale and over a long period of time

· Share results and information as a demonstration to others

· Only intervene where complementary to the vision or where a threat to the vision is posed

· Focus management and decision making more at the landscape scale

Website: www.wildennerdale.co.uk

The wild remote valley of Ennerdale is a spectacular upland landscape with rock outcrops, extensive woodland, dynamic natural rivers, a glacial lake and highly valued flora and fauna. For over a decade, a nature-first restoration approach by a partnership known as ‘Wild Ennerdale’ has been encouraging the evolution of a wild landscape for the benefit of people. Forester and founding partner Gareth Browning shares the partnership’s philosophy, achieve ments and future challenges.

ê The River Liza has been given the freedom to determine its own course – something it often does in response to heavy rainfall. Gareth Browning

Ennerdale: a remote Cumbrian valley on the western fringe of the Lake District National Park, where natural processes are being given the freedom to shape the local landscape. Gareth Browning

Wild Ennerdale: looking forward to the ‘future natural’

Lying in the north-west quarter of the Lake District National Park, Ennerdale valley is 14.5km long and 5.6km across at the

widest point, and extends to an area of 4,711ha. It narrows from west to east and is surrounded by dramatic ridges. The high fells are grazed by sheep and an increasing number of hardy cattle, which also roam much of the forest and valley bottom east of the lake. The mountains at the western end give way to farmland, which leads out to the Cumbrian coast. The River Liza shapes the valley bottom east of Ennerdale Water, a glacial lake that provides drinking water for communities on the west coast of Cumbria. To the west of the lake, the landscape is characterised by pastoral farmland and buildings, together with a mix of conifer and broadleaf woodland. The nearest settlement is the village of Ennerdale Bridge, located one mile west of Ennerdale Water. The valley is home to a wide range of habitats (over 70 National Vegetation Classification types have been recognised) that reflect its range in altitude from 100m beside the lake to nearly 900m on the mountain summits. Over 40% of the valley is protected by designation as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) or Special Areas of Conservation (SACs).

The historical record indicates that the landscape has been influenced and altered by people for over 3,500 years, and the valley continues to support livelihoods today, mostly through farming, forestry, conservation management and tourism. Over five hundred individual archaeological sites have been identified through surveys recently commissioned by the partners, and in 2014 English Heritage designated nine Scheduled Ancient Monuments. The valley’s rich historical record sets it aside as the best example of a settled medieval valley in the Lake District.

Visitor numbers are lower than at the neighbouring Lakeland valleys, primarily due to the remote location, restricted vehicle access and limited tourist facilities. Those who do visit the valley, whether from nearby local communities or from further afield, do so to enjoy the spectacular scenery, peace and tranquility that the valley has to offer. For although Ennerdale has been shaped by centuries of human influence, it can still be said to retain a sense of ‘wildness’ that is highly valued by many people who seek a sense of solitude there. Nevertheless, there are also some detracting features, as summarised in the box opposite.

A focus on natural processesThe Wild Ennerdale Partnership formed in 2003, when our work to release natural processes initially focused on reducing the dominance of sitka spruce in the forest and sheep on the fells, and introducing extensive year-round cattle grazing. In addition, we sought to give the River Liza more space to take a natural course by removing boundary fences and changing tenancy boundaries. The removal of fences across the valley and an old concrete pipe bridge at Woundell Beck have reduced detracting features and, in the case of the latter, also restored fish spawning – a natural process. We have also worked on encouraging people to experience the valley through communications via our website, social media and a quarterly newsletter distributed to the local community.

Key learning experiencesFocus on advocacy After nearly 15 years we consider Wild Ennerdale to have only just begun, yet during this time we have seen four changes of key partnership staff. In Scotland, ‘wild land’ is increasingly being recognised

4 Conservation Land Management Winter 2015 Winter 2015 Conservation Land Management 5


Ennerdale's character

‘Wild’ values

• Large scale and diversity of the landscape

• Absence of obvious human influence and control on the environment

• Remoteness from public roads and habitation

• Sense of solitude

• River Liza and other becks falling freely down the valley

• A stunning lake with natural lakeshore margins

• Plants and animals of special ecological value

• Rugged terrain and impressive geological features

• Large areas of fell with semi-natural woodland and heath

• Opportunity for unrestricted challenge and adventure

Detracting features

• Close-cropped and suppressed vegetation on the fells

• Stark boundaries between forest and fells

• Fences and signs which restrict the sense of wildness

• Large blocks of closely-planted spruce

• Areas of recently harvested forest

• Presence of intrusive man-made features and activities such as forest tracks, concrete bridges, revetments and vehicle movements

and valued for its importance, while in England this is still very much an emerging land-use concept that is still to be accepted as mainstream and has little policy context. Though funding is important on an annual basis, the long-term nature of developing wild land requires stability of management over many decades. We have focused (and continue to do this) on winning support from all stakeholders to secure opportunities for natural processes to operate and influence the direction of ecological restoration at Ennerdale. A key lesson learnt from the project is that it is essential to take time at the outset to agree a clear vision and philosophy, and to allow for developing partner relationships.

Benefits of cattle grazingWe now have three extensive grazing herds of cattle

covering over 1,700ha of the valley. Whilst they are still considered domestic, they roam large expanses of landscape, all year round, with limited tending. With choice in their daily foraging and the freedom to enjoy all that the Cumbrian weather throws at them, we would argue that they are some of the wildest ‘domestic’ animals in England.

The introduction of cattle has been one of the key drivers behind the successful reintroduction of

the marsh fritillary butterfly. Removing sheep from the fields at the base of the valley east of the lake and introducing extensive cattle grazing has seen a reappearance and increasing spread of devil’s-bit scabious - the food plant for the caterpillar stage of marsh fritillary. Three years after reintroducing many thousands of larvae, Ennerdale is now considered to be one of the best sites for this butterfly species in England.

Above the ancient woodland of Side Wood, the removal of sheep in 1999 and introduction of cattle in 2006 appear to be responsible for the recent birch and rowan regeneration across a 6-10ha area. This is very exciting, since natural up-slope expansion of trees is very rare across the Lake District.

The process of introducing extensive cattle grazing has also ‘rewilded’ our own thinking. We have had to let go of past concerns and traditions, such as excluding grazing animals from the forest, and we have gained the confidence to stand back and allow the cattle to decide their own routine. As a partnership, we continue to aspire to remove boundaries and give our cattle herds as large an area to roam across as possible. In effect, the experiment has only just begun; after nine years of cattle grazing, little glimpses of tangible change and benefit are just starting to appear. But these native animals have certainly lived up to their expectations for blurring the boundary between forestry and farming, open and wooded, to the benefit of Ennderdale’s treescape. Releasing natural processes The Wild Ennerdale approach involves reducing the scale and altering the nature of human intervention in the valley so that human processes (for example farming, forestry or recreation) do not come to dominate over the wide variety of natural processes that operate. Put another way, we are trying to place constraints on the way in which people operate in the valley, so that they become part of a ‘natural system’.

In the context of Wild Ennerdale, the words ‘natural’ and ‘natural system’ are not used in the purist sense. We are not attempting to re-create a set of landscapes and ecosystems that might once have existed at a particular point in time. Rather, by acknowledging that natural systems are dynamic and constantly changing, we are using the present as a starting point – a starting point that incorporates the effects of three millennia of human activity, and includes a variety of species that have been seriously constrained or alternatively introduced - Sitka spruce and sheep being perhaps the most obvious examples of the latter.

Our concession to the ‘un-naturalness’ of this starting point has been a key part of our philosophical approach to introducing some of the more obvious and significant ‘missing’ ecological processes (via extensive grazing by large herbivores and planting native tree seedlings), and gaining some control on processes humans have introduced in the past (by removing some Sitka spruce regeneration, continuing to thin the forest and reducing grazing by sheep).

We increasingly refer to this as a ‘future natural’ approach, where a broad range of natural processes determines the look and feel of the valley. The species may not all be native, but they are governed by natural processes. Our approach to ecological restoration is becoming increasingly opportunistic, to try and mimic a more natural system where habitat change and development are not entirely predictable, and depend on a number of undetermined circumstances rather than a set of pre-planned events.

Past and future challenges Full ecological restoration is a multi-decade process, and maintaining our vision, principles and momentum in the long term is crucial. Seeking out and being inspired by other like-minded projects is key to this, and we have hosted visits to Ennerdale and also visited other projects to re-energise our inspiration and vision. Finding time for both is a challenge, but the result is always enriching. On a recent visit to see the joint Forestry Commission Scotland/Trees for Life native pinewood restoration in Glen Affric near Loch Ness, Alan Watson Featherstone inspired the Wild Ennerdale partners with his words and 25-year vision. He shared the analogy of our landscape as a really good book with all the best pages torn out, which inspires us to think about what is missing, such as dead trees in the forest. We may not notice they are missing until we see stunning examples of their presence elsewhere – in the wonderful pinewoods of Glen Feshie, for example.

é Cattle introduced as part of the partnership project have the freedom to roam over forest, mountains and valley; these cattle are grazing the edge of Gillerthwaite mire, adjacent to the River Liza. Gareth Browning

ê Signs of woodland regeneration are beginning to appear within cattle-grazed areas. Gareth Browning

é Native woodland regeneration around the edge of a mire, with the Pillar mountain in the background. Pillar and Ennerdale Fells SSSI is important in exhibiting one of the best examples of altitudinal succession in England. Gareth Browning

ê Standing dead larch surrounding one of the first areas of larch infected with Phytophthora ramorum, felled in an attempt to reduce the spread of the disease. Gareth Browning


Wild Ennerdale: looking forward to the ‘future natural’ Wild Ennerdale: looking forward to the ‘future natural’

Management at the landscape scale raises challenging questions in terms of when to intervene and when to stand back and let nature take its own course. Being open to surprises is also testing; though many are easy to accept (the unexpected appearance of native woodland regeneration for example), others are more troublesome and cause tensions. We have experienced a few of the less welcome consequences already, such as high rainfall events that have washed away several weeks’ of river restoration work, twice destroyed a cattle enclosure fence, and are currently causing the erosion of a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

We have strived to avoid setting deterministic fixed-end points for how the valley should look and the biodiversity that would be desirable there, but it can be hard to resist the temptation. Species or habitat targets would make monitoring success much easier, but would also put a limit on letting natural processes take the lead. Instead, we endeavour to be opportunistic and diverse

in when and how we intervene, with the aim of providing natural processes with multiple directions of travel, some of which may lead to dead ends. In responding to the arrival of the larch disease Phytophthora ramorum for example, we have adopted a multi-strand approach, as opposed to applying a single remedy. Certain trees have been felled and we are planning to extract some of these, while others have been felled randomly across each other, to create places grazing animals cannot reach. Some larch trees have been stem treated with herbicide to kill them while standing, and one such area has been underplanted with 50,000 native broadleaves.

As the ecological restoration gains momentum, we hope that a series of naturally evolving and interacting ecosystems will develop across the valley, which have a degree of robustness in the face of stresses such as climate change. We will continue to manage the valley’s landscapes, forests, mountains and waters into the foreseeable future, although the level of intervention may change spatially and over time, as different parts of the valley develop at different rates and in different directions. Establishing a baseline of monitoring early on has been essential in enabling us to share the results of the restoration, and will enable future generations to measure the effects of change. We cannot predict exactly how biodiversity may develop as natural processes are given greater freedom, but being able to watch these processes at work and to learn lessons from these observations is one of the most profound outcomes of the project. The final challenge is to ensure that these lessons resonate far beyond the boundaries of the valley.

ê Extensive monitoring at all landscape levels is an important part of the project. Grazing pressure on Pillar and Ennerdale SSSI is monitored using upside-down garden baskets. Gareth Browning

Open areas incorporated into a newly designed wood-meadow at Three Hagges Jubilee Wood provide pollen, nectar and larval food source for invertebrates. The original seed mixes are enhanced by plug planting and direct sowing, using plants from locally collected wild seed. Lin Hawthorne

Inset: Common Blue is one of several species now recorded with a breeding population at the site. Pat and Jim Bone

Key achievements • Four different organisations – two government departments, a charity

and a private utility company – acting as one landowner for approaching 15 years

• 1500ha Pillar and Ennerdale Fells SSSI in ‘recovering’ condition

• Commended in UK Landscape Award 2010

• Significant community involvement, e.g. through quarterly partnership news-letter circulated to over 500 local households

• Wild Ennerdale volunteer group provides opportunities for local community involvement and contributes the equivalent of two full-time staff roles

• Introduction of three grazing herds of cattle allowed to roam year-round over 1,700ha of forest, mountain and valley has brought significant new business to valley farm tenants and established a new dynamic natural process

• Baseline monitoring programme completed

• Over 40,000 native broadleaf trees and 5,000 junipers planted

• 25ha of new heathland created and 6ha of bog in restoration

• Existing native woodlands are expanding, e.g. Side Wood has expanded uphill by over 10ha

• Following reintroduction, Ennerdale is now considered one of the best sites for the marsh fritillary butterfly in England

• Environment Agency have led the restoration of a rare Artic charr spawning population

• Original course of Ben Gill has been restored

• Cultural history has been mapped, shared and protected through online pho-tographic archive, historic sites guide and archaeology management plan

é An eight-year old planted juniper – one of 5,000 planted, along with native broadleaves, to provide an alternative seed source to spruce. Gareth Browning

The Hagge Woods Trust project at Three Hagges Wood-Meadow originated from a 2012 Woodland Trust campaign to

celebrate the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee by planting six million trees across Britain. It was obvious to the Trust at the planning stage, however, that simply planting trees alone would not achieve their own aim of creating healthy and biodiverse woodland that would measure up to the model of British ancient woodlands, where much biodiversity lies in the understorey and the vital but often overlooked ground flora.

The Trust took the view that much new woodland planting in recent decades has been lacking, since more emphasis has been placed on increasing tree cover than on improving woodland ecosystems as a whole. Dismayed by the parlous losses in biodiversity during the past century, we decided that a methodology for new woodland creation should be formulated in response to some of the issues highlighted by the State of Nature (2013) – a report compiled by 25 wildlife organisations to take stock of all our native wildlife. Among other concerns, the report documented

declines in the area of managed coppice woodland (90% from 1900 to 1970) and lowland meadows in England and Wales (97% between the 1930s and 1984). Hedgerow losses are more difficult to quantify; the reduction in overall length of British hedgerows (from 624,000km to 477,000km between 1984 and 2007, Carey et al. 2008) is only part of the picture. The loss of species-rich ancient hedgerows pre-1984 is a more elusive figure. Much new planting was of single-species hawthorn/blackthorn – significantly less valuable to invertebrates, including pollinators.

Our opportunity to act arose in June 2012, when Charlie Forbes Adam offered a long-term lease at a peppercorn rent on a 10ha site on the Escrick Park Estate to his wife Rosalind, Project Director of Hagge Woods Trust. The creation of a biodiverse woodland ecosystem on fertile, formerly arable land was never going to be a simple undertaking, and we found no adequate literature to help achieve it. But, during the design and planning sequence, we had an epiphany. In describing our plan to the eminent woodland ecologist George Peterken, he commented that we

Gareth Browning is the Area Forester for the Forestry Commission; tel: 0771 2751060; e-mail: [email protected]

Three Hagges Wood-Meadow

a model project for the potential of wood-meadows for sustaining biodiversity

An ambitious project to mimic the ancient and rare land-management system of wood-meadow on formerly arable land has resulted in the creation of a large, thriving woodland ecosystem with benefits for the local Selby community. Lin Hawthorne of the Hagge Woods Trust explains how the project took shape and outlines its potential for contributing to conservation and to the greater understanding of woodland creation.



appeared to be creating a wood-meadow, and this typically perceptive observation has guided much of the subsequent development at the site.

What constitutes a wood-meadow?A type of managed ecosystem with an ancient history, wood-meadows probably originated in periods of early settlement around 7,000–8,000 years ago. They were once widespread in temperate Northern Europe in communities that depended on animal husbandry, and in Estonia they reached peak area at the end of the 19th/beginning of the 20th centuries. Typically, these Northern European ecosystems were multifunctional: sources of hay, medicines, wood, berries, mushrooms and nuts. Their decline in area reflects an increase in population density and agricultural intensification, but several of those in existence are still managed or have been restored, notably at Lailatu and Tagamõisa, in Estonia, and at Råshult, in Småland, Sweden. This last, emblematically for Hagge Woods, was the birthplace of that great ecologist and botanist, Linnaeus. It prompts the question: would he have grown into such an observant ecologist without access to this diversity on his doorstep? Our concerns have seldom been higher regarding our own disconnection from nature; how would it be if we could provide every child with similarly free and ready access to the natural world?

Wood-meadows are fairly sparsely wooded areas of mixed-species copses with a regularly cut and/or grazed herb layer. The species composition of the systems reflects longstanding agricultural activities of hay making and grazing, along with rotational coppice-with-standards management of wooded areas. It is this continuous management that sustains biodiversity. Especially pertinent to the thinking of the Hagge Woods Trust is the fact that wood-meadow ecosystems include some of the most diverse plant communities on the planet,

with over 70 plant species per m2 recorded in some systems (Peterken, 2013). They were also originally created and managed using a set of skills that are still familiar to farmers and land managers today, and are an excellent demonstration of how it is possible for humans to interact with ecosystems for their own benefit, whilst maintaining a high level of diversity (in terms of number of species). If we take lessons from one of the oldest forms of human land management, our attempt to recreate this ecosystem in the interests of biodiversity without significantly reducing productivity seems eminently achievable.

Creating a new wood-meadow ecosystemHagge Woods Trust’s aim has been to plant a combination of permanent grassland and woodland with meadow margins that transition through a graduated, light-demanding edge of flowering and fruiting small trees and understorey shrubs to a high canopy of forest trees. The transitions where wood and meadow meet, and the rides and glades incorporated into the design, offer a range of niches and potential doubling of floral diversity, and create a perfect set of pollinator habitats. Collectively, our native trees, grasses and meadow perennials are host to a wealth of invertebrate life.

In the wake of a comprehensive site and soil survey undertaken for the Escrick Park Estate in 2010, we began to plan the wood-meadow creation work around what we knew we eventually wanted to achieve: a ground layer of fine meadow grasses and perennials based on the lowland meadows that were once characteristic of our location on the Ouse-Derwent floodplain. Mixes based on National Vegetation Classification (NVC) ‘wet’ (MG4) and ‘dry’ (MG5) grassland were sown with a nurse crop of cornfield annuals. The density of the resulting sward reduced ingress of undesirable weed species during the slower establishment period of the perennials. We used the NVC assemblages as a guide only. Critically, our seed mixes were formulated in pursuit of competitive balance, without which we could not have hoped to achieve botanical richness. They excluded vigorous, deep-rooting grasses usually seen in lowland meadows, such as cock’s-foot, Yorkshire-fog and rye-grass. The concept of ‘matched vigour’ (as developed on our site, and based on Grime’s C-S-R Triangle theory, (1979, 2012)) is especially important on fertile soil, and vital when planting trees directly into the sward. The perennials, in contrast, were selected for robustness, based on observations of species that thrive in selected rural verges in the same part of North Yorkshire – they are often all that remains of meadows past.

It is worth noting that the soil fertility at the Hagges Wood-Meadow site, at 72ppm of phosphate (Index 5), far exceeded the upper limit that is

usually recommended for meadow establishment (26–45ppm (Index 3)), and that the site had been in arable use for decades (the last barley crop was harvested in the summer of 2012). If we had waited until phosphate levels had fallen to within ‘acceptable’ limits, the project could have been delayed by twenty years or more. Instead, after the last barley harvest, the site was ploughed and a seedbed prepared in the usual agricultural manner. At this point, we employed the ‘stale seedbed technique’, which is frequently used for sowing sugar beet in the area – a major weapon in our armoury. In essence, this involves allowing a flush of weed species to germinate before spraying them off (with glyphosate), and very shallow drilling of seed directly into the aftermath, with minimal soil disturbance. Any weed seed present is likely to be in the top 2–3cm of soil, but is usually unable to germinate unless exposed to light. The aim of this technique is to minimise any subsequent infestation of the meadow crop by common, vigorous and competitive weed species: the docks, creeping thistle, and nettle that would compromise both meadow and woodland and preclude the establishment of desirable and less robust wildflowers and grasses.

Continuous rain during the winter of 2012–13 prevented immediate sowing (and sorely tested our patience), but in early May 2013 the seed was eventually rolled in. Our first Lammas cut (late July 2013) produced 89 bales of material (each weighing 400kg), and was regarded as a sacrificial ‘crop’. It was inedible as hay for animals since it contained so much ‘arable weed’ – the conventional term for the cornfield annuals that we used as a nurse crop – but it did represent considerable biomass, and we suspect the removal of 35,600kg of material helped to reduce soil fertility. The regrowth between July and October 2013 was lush, and a second hay crop was taken in October 2013.

ç Far left: Copses were laid out in ‘lazy-S’ formation, with 2.5m between rows. Since meadow inevitably risks creating ‘vole heaven’, the trees are protected with 40cm wraps. Lin Hawthorne

ç Left: Simple and inexpensive deer and rabbit fencing surrounds the site. In a wood-meadow scenario it has the advantage of allowing low growth on trees that are to be coppiced, and costs are little more than for guarding individual trees. Lin Hawthorne

By December 2013, we had planted 10,000 native broadleaf trees (24 species of native tree, and 7 shrub species) into the close-mown sward, with some 40% planted by volunteers from the community. The trees have been planted in twelve mixed-species compartments, dispersed to form open glades and broad rides to maximise the area of woodland edge (the preferred habitat of up to 60% of woodland flora). We reserved 40% of open space as meadow. The disposition of open meadow and copses is designed for ease of access for hay cutting and baling with agricultural machinery; the irregularly shaped copses, rides and glades are wide and connected enough to allow for a tractor width. The areas within the copses are cut by brushcutter. We are confident that at maturity, and with sensitive thinning, we can achieve dual aims of naturalistic effect and practical management.

One of the major problems in planting new woodland for naturalistic effect is that random placings and spacings make subsequent management difficult. We also wanted to avoid the grid pattern of plantation. So the woody species were categorised into ‘shrubby edge’, ‘light-demanding edge mix’, and ‘tall canopy species’, and they were planted in formations of ‘lazy-S’ rows, marked out by sports-field liner 2.5m apart, with in-row spacings varying between 2.5m for larger species and 1m for shrubs. The naturalistic appearance will be further enhanced at the stage of first thinnings, and when the coppice cycle commences (depending on species, 10-to-25-year rotational coppice cycles are projected).

The management mantra Whilst considerable attention was necessarily paid to the detail of design (from ground preparation to species selection), and clear communication of intent to practitioners, ultimately the key to the project’s success lies in how the site is managed

Hagge Woods Trust Hagge Woods Trust is a registered charity who aspire to the successful creation of woodland through more than the simple mass planting of trees.

Broadly, the objectives of the Trust are:

To research and practise the ecological and holistic creation of new native woodlands, properly structured from high canopy to shrub layer, including the establishment of a ground flora, thus addressing the threatened biodiversity of woodland and grassland wildflowers that once were typical of ancient woods and meadows.

To establish procedures and promote education in innova-tive practices in the creation and management of biodiverse woodlands on formerly arable land.

To provide open access for the benefit of the public, and to deliver woodland education by means of our website, and on site to schools, families and community groups.

Websites

Hagge Woods Trust: http://www.haggewoodstrust.org.uk

Three Hagges Wood-Meadow: http://threehaggeswood-meadow.org.uk


Three Hagges Wood-Meadow: a model project for the potential of wood-meadows for sustaining biodiversity

wood-meadows. Hagge Woods Trust’s ambition is to see a wood-meadow in every parish!

Three Hagges Wood-Meadow is our model and prototype, and in our long-term interests of contributing to conservation and understanding of woodland management, it has also become our research base. We seek to produce robust evidence for the techniques and methodologies we have used, and are committed to monitoring changes in biodiversity that result from our work over the next ten years, by means of annual botanical, entomological, and small mammal surveys (data from surveys undertaken so far are available at: http://threehaggeswoodmeadow.org.uk/resources). We have already seen, within two years, a plant species count of 200 (up from a baseline of zero), and have recorded breeding populations of significant numbers of dependent pollinators and small mammals.

We aim to publish all our findings relating to the creation and development of the new ecosystem, both in book form and by means of our websites – open access to data is part of our mission. Part of our ongoing research is to investigate the effect of the arable-to-woodland transition on a whole ecosystem, and this will be undertaken in conjunction with NERC and the universities of Liverpool and York. Our seed mixes are being assessed at Liverpool for their resilience to climate change, while with York we have embarked on two studies on below-ground ecology, to monitor the impact of transition on soil microbial communities, soil physical chemistry, and nutrient recycling. The combination of data from Hagge Woods Trust above-ground studies with the below-ground data gleaned by Dr Kelly Redeker’s team at York, will give a rounded whole-ecosystem set. This is leading-edge research; very few studies have ever incorporated these disparate analyses. We have also engaged with Defra/Natural Capital Committee and the Economics for the Environment Consultancy (Eftec) to establish a baseline for the ecosystem-services value of the project. The report was published in October 2015 (see References and further reading box).

Every stage of the development of Three Hagges Wood-Meadow has brought surprises. The most remarkable of these is how straightforward the establishment – within two years – of a botanically rich and diverse environment has been. In terms of our primary aim to increase biodiversity on site, the speed with which wildlife populations have moved in to take advantage of their new ecosystem is a big cause for optimism for the future.

References and further readingBurns, F, Eaton, M A, Gregory, R D, Al Fulaij, N, August, T A, Biggs, J, Bladwell, S, Brereton, T, Brooks, D, Clubbe, C, Dawson, J, Dunn, E, Edwards, B, Falk, S, Gent, T, Gibbons, D, Gurney, M, Haysom, K, Henshall, S, Hodgetts, N, Isaac, N J B, McLaughlin, M, Musgrove, A J, Noble, D, O’Mahony, E, Pacheco, M, Roy, D B, Sears, J, Shardlow, M, Stringer, C, Taylor, A, Thompson, P, Walker, K, Walton, P, Willing, M J, Wilson, J, Wynde, R, 2013 State of Nature report. The State of Nature partnership. Available at: www.rspb.org.uk/Images/stateof-nature_tcm9-345839.pdf

Carey, P D, Wallis, S, Chamberlain, P M, Cooper, A, Emmett, B A, Maskell, L C, McCann, T, Murphy, J, Norton, L R, Reynolds, B, Scott, W A, Simpson, I C, Smart, S M, Ullyett, J M 2008 Countryside Survey: UK Results from 2007. NERC/Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, 105pp. (CEH Project Number: C03259).

Available at: http://www.countrysidesurvey.org.uk/outputs/uk-results-2007

Economics for the Environment Consultancy Ltd (Eftec) 2015 Assessing the Natural Capital of Three Hagges Wood-Meadow. Eftec, London. Available at: http://threehaggeswood-meadow.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/THW_CNCA_final_eftec_051015.pdf

Grime J P 1979 Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes. Wiley, Chichester

Grime J P, Pierce S 2012 The Evolutionary Strategies that Shape Ecosystems. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester

Peterken, G 2013 Meadows. British Wildlife Publishing, Dorset

This article is based on a piece originally published by Lin Hawthorne (2015) in Woodland Heritage 2015: 88–90 (available to download from: www.woodlandheritage.org.uk)

é Pathways mown through the meadow allow examination of meadow species and their associates at close quarters. Lin Hawthorne

into the future. Considered, consistent, timely and responsive is our mantra.

In brief, open meadow areas are managed for hay, and an annual Lammas cut (late July) will be followed by aftermath grazing – probably with Shropshire Down sheep – when the trees form a canopy and are large enough to withstand the company of grazers. The rides and inter-rows in wooded areas are managed by brushcutting, rotating around the compartments, leaving arisings

in situ. This will ultimately increase the organic matter between the trees, and we are studying the effect of this on the development of woodland soil.

The brushcutting has two purposes: it controls the most competitive weed species around and between the trees (although by far the most effective tool in this respect is the clean start achieved by the ‘stale seedbed’ technique); it also prolongs the flowering period of the wood-meadow after the open areas are cut for hay. We have 60% of the site flowering on into October this year, to the benefit of invertebrate populations. It will take around 15–20 years before the canopy closes over and the flora beneath the trees changes significantly in

response to increasing shade; in the interim period, the differential cutting regime (between meadow and wood) ensures maximum provision of pollen, nectar and invertebrate host plants. We begin brushcutting in April, rotating round each copse in turn, with a final fairly close cut in late autumn, when grass growth has ceased.

The initial weed control – that is the spraying off of the stale seedbed before the meadow was sown – was the only time we applied glyphosate on site, other than spot treatment of occasional docks as necessary. Planting trees directly into the close-mown meadow that had been sown the previous May resulted in a very dense sward, its establishment much aided by the first-year nurse crop of annuals. This limited the ingress of weed species from seed. We chose not to spray the tree bases since this inevitably leaves bare soil into which ruderal/weed species will seed freely, and they compete far more strongly for light, water and nutrients than do the selected fine grasses in the seed mix. Our weed control is achieved by timely, consistent and responsive management rather than by chemical application.

Long-term tree growth will be monitored on selected 30×30m quadrats within the compartments. On such a small scale, our wood-meadow is unlikely ever to be hugely productive in terms of furniture-grade timber, but it will allow us to produce coppice products and provides a site for the teaching of this and other woodland skills. The project has open public access from dawn to dusk year round, and has been undertaken with the help of grants awarded in 2012, including a Farm Woodland Payment (FWPS) for land taken out of arable, and an English Woodland Grant Scheme (EWGS). The novel approach of undersowing with meadow flora carries a higher than usual establishment cost, but, based on our budget analyses and projections, is nevertheless possible within the grant award, indicating that it would be possible for other land managers and community projects to achieve wood-meadows elsewhere.

Research and the potential beyond Three Hagges WoodThe component parts of the wood-meadow ecosystem relate directly back to our concerns regarding the losses of meadow, hedgerow and ancient woodland in Britain during the last century. Recreating them offers an opportunity to start redressing those losses, and to leave the country’s natural capital in a better state. If applied in a tapestry across the rural landscape, the assemblage could help to create new nature networks and mosaics, and link existing isolated or fragmented habitats, without significant depletion of productive land. The methodology is also eminently suited to urban locations, pocket parks and community

The brushcutter, an AS-Motor Sherpa, is used to cut between tree rows; it mulches finely and litter is left in place. The machine is slow but manoeuvrable, and the spring cut of inter-rows takes approximately 16 hours. Lin Hawthorne

ê Ellie Mason, one of the young citizen scientists from the local community, took part in our small-mammal survey in the summer of 2014. Hagge Woods Trust have developed a site-specific educational programme in association with the Open Air Laboratories (OPAL) project at the Stockholm Environment Institute at the University of York. Paul Mason


Three Hagges Wood-Meadow: a model project for the potential of wood-meadows for sustaining biodiversity Three Hagges Wood-Meadow: a model project for the potential of wood-meadows for sustaining biodiversity

For centuries, blanket peatlands have provided society with raw materials, fuel and grazing land, and in doing so have

become an essential part of the local economy. To achieve this, considerable efforts were put into the management and ‘improvement’ of what was often considered a wet, bleak and unproductive wasteland. However, the overall benefits arising from intensive drainage and peat cutting were limited. The increase in food production was counterbalanced by a suite of detrimental consequences affecting ecosystem services well beyond the drained or exploited peatland area. It is now clear that such drainage dramatically affects the hydrological behaviour of peatlands, damaging the structure and vegetation of a normally waterlogged environment and leading to erosion and a loss in biodiversity. Other downstream consequences include irregular water supply, flood risk and poor water quality, thereby adding pressure on the treatment and delivery of drinking water. Some damaged peatlands have even switched status from carbon sink to carbon source through increased losses of carbon into rivers and the atmosphere.

Fortunately, the view of peatlands has now changed, with the general consensus being that these fragile environments need protection from further degradation, and that rewetting can bring back a range of ecosystem services. In practice, the process of water and environmental management involves (1) slowing down the flow of water, using permeable blocks to minimise erosion, and (2)

retaining water by placing impermeable blocks in networks of drains to create small pools. Once some hydrological functioning of the peatland is restored, further benefits will follow, including carbon storage, the supply of cleaner water and the return of peat-forming species. This article presents the restoration work undertaken by the Exmoor Mires Project, and is intended to provide readers and land managers with practical advice on how to rewet shallow peatlands successfully.

Importance of shallow peatlandsThere are several reasons why shallow peatlands have largely been overlooked: they are often less visible because they are located on the margins of large expanses of deep peat; they may not suffer erosion or bare-peat problems to the same extent as deeper peatlands; and they also do not store as much carbon. But the shallowness of the peat is actually the reason why they might be less resilient to damage and change, and therefore more in need of protection.

There are now many restoration projects throughout the UK, working on a range of shallow and deep peatland types. Most of the restoration techniques employed have initially been developed and implemented in areas of deep peat to tackle extreme problems, such as deep erosive gullies and bare soil. However, restoration is not a straightforward process in which a ‘one size fits all’ approach can be applied. Instead, the local characteristics of a site – the geographical features or the type of damage encountered – will have an

important role to play in the success of any project. For instance, the techniques employed in the Peak District (dams of heather, bracken, stone, wood or plastic) are helpful for reducing deep peat erosion (Trotter et al. 2005); however, they might not be technically feasible in shallow peatlands due to the lack of peat material to support wooden structures, and are not an appropriate solution to carbon loss by subtle, fluvial and gaseous pathways. The main benefit of restoring shallow and heavily drained peatlands is generally enhanced water storage, which in turn leads to further benefits including increased water quality and biodiversity, and lower carbon-dioxide emissions.

The restoration processThe process of rewetting is complex because it involves planning the restoration of individual small units in order to achieve success over the scale of the whole landscape. Since 2010, work within Exmoor National Park has led to the successful restoration of over 1,000ha of shallow peatlands (0.33m deep on average) dominated by purple moor grass. Success has come from trial and error, but it is essential that the experience gained, in terms of the techniques and decisions made throughout the process, is shared to benefit project managers planning the restoration of other shallow peatlands.

The first stage is to decide which drains or areas should be restored. This will depend on the extent and nature of the damage, the purpose of the restoration, and also the impact of interventions on the surrounding landscape (see figure top right). Assessing peat depth is essential to prevent the exposure of bare peat or underlying mineral soil, which would encourage erosion. Restoration that would be likely to change the appropriate management practices on site or in the vicinity (such as conservation grazing or regular cutting and baling of purple moor grass) and might therefore have a financial impact for farmers (in terms of agricultural productivity or payment of single-farm payments under agri-environment schemes) should not be carried out; however, a site’s conservation status (for example, sites notified as Sites of Special Scientific Interest, or ‘SSSIs’) may mean that restoration has to be undertaken, to achieve favourable condition. Negotiations with the land manager will usually lead to mutually beneficial agreements. Other restrictions to restoration include access considerations (for example if restoration would block a public right of way or use of a main track for land managers), the presence of protected species, or the existence of archaeological features. All these issues have the potential to prevent restoration, but can usually be resolved by adapting the technique to be used, perhaps by manual ditch blocking rather than using heavy machinery, or doing the work at times that are more suitable for wildlife.

Once the area to be restored has been established, the next step is to decide which of the restoration techniques generally available – plastic piling, wood, bales, peat blocks and so on – is appropriate for each drain (see figure below). Local conditions (including slope and peat depth) will need to considered, as will the aim of restoration, budget, technology available and site accessibility. Blocks made out of peat are often the default solution as they are easy, fast and cheap to install, and these were particularly suited to the drainage system in the shallow peatlands of Exmoor: ditches measuring up to 1m deep and 3m wide can be blocked with a single scoop of peat, whereas wider

No

No

Should the drain be blocked? Is the drain causing hydrological

damage? Is the peat deep enough (i.e. > 10cm)?

Is the rewetting likely to affect/prevent: - the current and appropriate manag-ment practice by land manager in surrounding area?- the historical environment?-access to site?- the presence of sensitive species? - the landscape

Drain should not be blocked

Can issues be resolved by changing blocking methods?

Put ditch blocks by hand or use bales

Block

Does the ditch also need to be eradi-cated to reduce visual impact or reduce

risk for stock?

Are there any reasons that prevent profiling (i.e. costs, material,

archaeological features)?

Use of usual blocking techniques Bales Re-profiling of the ditch, bales backfilled

with spoil

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

No No

Is the flow continuous?

Is gradient high (i.e.>5%)?

Is the ditch depth >1m?

Is the dich >3m wide

Waterproof block: Wood + peat

(b)

Leaky block: spaced interlocking planks or

bales (e or f)

Peat block (a)

Is there enough peat to block without leaving mineral soil exposed?

Wood + peat, spoil on bales inside (b or c)

Is mineral soil at the bottom of

the ditch

Peat block (a)

Is it unstable?Wood +spoil

or bales (c or d)

Wood + peat (b), or plastic piling

(not represented)

Wood + peat (b)

Is the mineral soil visible?

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

NoNo

No

The value of peatlands is now increasingly being recognised, and many are actively being restored. The Exmoor Mires Project team are using sustainable methods, local materials and local contractors to block drainage ditches in order to ‘re-wet’ the local bog habitat and bring back a range of ecosystem services. David Smith

Shallow peat, deep impact lessons learnt from peatland restoration at Exmoor National Park

Britain has some of the most important peatlands in the world, and many are now in active restoration; drainage ditches are being blocked, and bare peat re-vegetated throughout the country. But why is this process particularly important in shallow peatlands, and how can it be done effectively? Emilie Grand-Clement and co-authors share the valuable lessons learnt and the techniques developed as part of the Exmoor Mires Project.

é Guide for the choice of ditch to be blocked (from Grand-Clement et al. 2015).

ê Ditch-blocking decision tree for the restoration of shallow peatlands (from Grand-Clement et al. 2015).


Shallow peat, deep impact: lessons learnt from peatland restoration at Exmoor National Park

(c) combination dam (wood, peat and bales)

(d) wooden dam

(e) leaky dam (wood and bales)

(f) leaky dam with peat and wood

Blocking techniques employed on Exmoor

(a) peat dam

(b) wood and peat (wood usually covered by peat although this is not represented)


Shallow peat, deep impact: lessons learnt from peatland restoration at Exmoor National Park

ditches require additional scoops and added wooden support to improve stability. Overall, 86% of the blocks on Exmoor are now made out of peat. Plastic piling is widely used in deep peatlands to retain water and stop erosion, but is not appropriate in shallow peatlands because of the risk of leakage if inserted in the mineral soil underneath the peat (as a result of the difference in water retention between the two media). It is also unsightly. Instead, wood and/or peat were found to be a better, more sustainable alternative in wide ditches on Exmoor. It is generally found that in conditions of high gradient (i.e. over 5%), permeable or ‘leaky’ dams are the most appropriate as they will slow down

the water. In order to avoid the extensive use of vegetation bales, which can be both problematic and costly due to the need for machinery, storage space and long periods of dry weather, the Exmoor Mires Project developed a technique of blocking involving a combination of spaced wooden blocks and peat. This acts as an impermeable dam at low flow, but lets water overtop at high flow and behaves as a permeable dam.

Ditch blocks have a limited influence on the storage of water upstream, so the overall success of rewetting will depend on the appropriate use and positioning of the entire network of dams. Their position in relation to one another, but also relative

AcknowledgmentsThis article is based on a paper published by Grand-Clement et al. (2015) in the Journal of Environmental Management. The project was funded by South West Water and the Natural Environment Research Council, with help from the Environment Agency. The authors would like to acknowledge Lee Bray (Exmoor National Park), the Exmoor Mires Project Team and the project partners (Natural England, Exmoor National Park, Exmoor Society and Exmoor Forest Farmers).

References and further readingArmstrong, A, Holden, J, Kay, P, Foulger, M, Gledhill, S, McDonald, A T, Walker, A, 2009 Drain-blocking techniques on blanket peat: A framework for best practice. Journal of Environmental Management 90:3512–3519

Bain, C G, Bonn, A, Stoneman, R, Chapman, S, Coupar, A, Evans, M, Gearey, B, Howat, M, Joosten, H, Keenleyside, C, Labadz, J, Lindsay, R, Littlewood, N, Lunt, P, Miller, C J, Moxey, A, Orr, H, Reed, M, Smith, P, Swales, V, Thompson, D B A, Thompson, P S, Van de Noort, R, Wilson, J D, Worrall, F 2011 IUCN UK Commission of Inquiry on Peatlands. Project Report. IUCN UK Peatland Programme, Edinburgh

Bray, L S 2015 The past and the peat: Archaeology and peatland restoration on Exmoor. Exmoor National Park Authority, Dulverton

Chapman, S, Thomson, K, Matthews, R 2012 AFOLU accounting: implication for implementing peat-land restoration – costs and benefits. CXC Enquiry Number 1208-01, Edinburgh, p. 14

Grand-Clement, E, Anderson, K, Smith, D M, Luscombe, D, Gatis, N, Ross, M, Brazier, R E 2013 Evaluating ecosystem goods and services after restoration of marginal upland peatlands in South-West England. Journal of Applied Ecology 50:324–334

Grand-Clement, E, Anderson, K, Smith, D, Angus, M, Luscombe, D J, Gatis, N, Bray, L S, Brazier, R E 2015. New approaches to the restoration of shallow marginal peatlands. Journal of Environmental Management 161:417–430

Trotter, S, Hodson, S, Lindop, S, Milner, S, McHale, S, Worman, C, Flitcroft, C, Bonn, A, 2005 Gully blocking techniques. In: Evans, M G, Allott, T E H, Holden, J, Flitcroft, C, Bonn, A (eds.) 2005 Understanding gully blocking in deep peat. Moors for the future, Castleton, p. 105

Dr Emilie Grand-Clement is an Associate Research Fellow at the University of Exeter (e-mail: [email protected]) and South West Water’s ‘Upstream Thinking’ monitor-ing and research manager (website: http://upstreamthinking.org); Morag Angus is the Exmoor Mires Project manager; Dr David Smith is the Environment and Upstream Thinking manager at South West Water; and Richard E. Brazier is Professor of Earth Surface Processes in the Geography Department at the University of Exeter.

Summary of the technical characteristics of the dam types used on shallow peatlands (from Grand-Clement et al. 2015)

Dam type Technique Requirements Application on shallow peat Positive aspects Negative aspects

Impermeable

Peat block (a) Used in areas of damaged peat

Dam needs to be higher than surrounding area to be effective

Turf placed on top for stability and to prevent drying of peat

Material can be sourced from bottom of ditch (if depth >1m) or within 2m of bankside

Ditch width: <3m

Prior removal of vegetation from bottom and sides of ditch to create a stronger block

Low cost and easy to install

Encourages revegetation

Creates small pool and decreases erosion

Potential visual impact (if peat is taken from a distance)

Inefficient on very dry or wet conditions, steep slopes, intense erosion, exposure to mineral soil

Wood and peat (b) Ditch depth: >1m

Ditch width: >3m

Effective in conditions of substantial gradient, strong flow or eroding peat

Most effective when peat is placed on both sides and over the top of the wood; use on the upper side only if peat availability is limited

Easy and fast

Wood is concealed by peat

Time consuming and expensive

Combination of wood, peat and bales (c)

Slows flow of water

Traps sediments

Can be held in place by wood

Use of purple moor grass for bales, but avoided if possi-ble, due to baling process

Quick to install Little maintenance

Expensive Involves challenging baling process

Impermeable /Permeable

Wood (interlocking planks) (d)

Peat depth: medium to deep (>1m) Ditch width: >2m

Peat added at the back to make watertight

Traps sediments and holds water Low visual impact Watertight if doubled with peat

Wood can split, bow or distort Possibility of under or side cutting of grips and sedi-ment loss

Permeable Bales (soft rush, purple moor grass or heather) (e)

Used as sediment trap in high flow and high sediment supply conditions

Supported by wood in high flow system

Sufficient peat depth to hold supporting stakes

Size of the ditch depends on the number of bales used to fit in the full width of the channel

Best in conditions of poorly humified peat and dry con-ditions where peat would degrade

Use of purple moor grass for narrow and deep ditches covered with spoil for a shallow and safer feature

Use on top of dams to com-pensate for compaction of peat blocks over time, or to cover any bare peat exposed in dam building

Use of local vegetation that is not a source of nutrients but provides seed bank

Traps vegetation Helps revegetation Creation of small pools Prevention of under and side cutting

Can be washed away

Requires maintenance to add height as pool fills up with sediment

Involves challenging baling process

Soft rush shorter lasting compared to other species

Leaky wood and peat dam (f)

Continuous flow

Steep gradient

Interlocking planks (lower part) covered by peat on both sides

Gap between planks in the upper parts for the release of high flow water

Lets water through at high flow without creat-ing eroding waterfall downstream of the block

Visual aspect (wooden plank is left visible)

to the landscape, is of paramount importance. It is difficult to draw general rules, but dam spacing will generally depend on the slope angle and the volume of water to be retained (Armstrong et al. 2009). In theory, the top of the lower dam should be constructed level with the bottom of the upstream dam (Trotter et al. 2005) so the water flowing over the upper dam can be held by the downstream dam. On the shallow peatland in Exmoor, the minimum spacing is approximately 7m to avoid disturbance to the bankside vegetation, whereas in deep peat the average spacing of blocks on steep slopes varies between 3 and 4m, but can sometimes be as little as 2.5m. Spacing of more than 12m has been associated with higher failure rates, mostly when peat blocks have been used (Armstrong et al. 2009).

Lessons learnt from ExmoorTo assist the restoration planning, the Exmoor Mires Project used remote sensing technologies, including airborne Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR), airborne thermal imagery, and lightweight Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). The resulting datasets were used to map ditches and identify potential archaeological features, determine surface wetness, and understand the distribution of major ecological communities (e.g. purple moor-grass tussocks). These technologies do not replace field visits as any identified features need to be checked on the ground, but they can be of great help in understanding the ecohydrological characteristics of the catchment and in targeting further restoration interventions for areas with higher drainage density or low surface wetness.

Making the historical environment an important part of the restoration has also been one of the great successes of the project. Together, remote sensing and walkover surveys have helped to identify 26 new archaeological features – such as prehistoric standing stones, routeways and even occupation sites pre-dating peat formation – that were of sufficient significance to be included in the Exmoor National Park Authority Historic Environment Record. This represents a major contribution to our knowledge of Exmoor’s historic environment; the full effect is only likely to become apparent as future research is undertaken (e.g. Bray et al. 2015).

Is restoration financially viable? Considering the increasing amount of money spent on restoration, whether it comes from public bodies, charities or water utilities, the quantification of its long-term benefits is becoming increasingly important. However, cost:benefit evaluations are challenging for several reasons. They involve quantifying change in processes that are spatially and temporally variable (e.g. carbon emissions) or subjective (e.g. recreational benefits). The costs of restoration are difficult to appraise and compare between projects, as they vary according to the aim of restoration, and the techniques used on site, themselves depending on local conditions such as peat depth, drain size, slope, vegetation, erosion status, and access to the site. As a guide, the overall cost of the restoration of the shallow peatlands of Exmoor, for an average drainage density of 112m per ha, reached £306 per ha. This is substantially lower than the median cost across the UK (£880 per ha, Chapman et al. 2012), but was also highly variable between sites due to the local differences in the drainage density and restoration required. For instance, two small catchments with a drainage density of 418m and 176m per ha required a total of 47 blocks and 22 blocks per ha, incurring spending of £811 and £473 per ha, respectively. This illustrates the importance of considering peat depth and the characteristics of the drainage network (length, depth and width of the ditches) in the context of the technique to be used, and therefore on the overall cost. Summary statistics from the restoration of Exmoor’s shallow peatlands (from Grand-Clement et al. 2015)

Ditch characteristics 0.2 to 1.5m deep

0.2 to 3m wide

5 to 300m long

Total area restored since 2010

1,152ha

Average drainage density

112m per ha

Blocking technique Costs

Peat blocks (86%) £2 per m of ditch

Wooden blocks (13.8%)

£6 per m of ditch

Leaky wooden dams (0.2%)

£6.5 per m of ditch

Average cost per ha £306 per ha


Shallow peat, deep impact: lessons learnt from peatland restoration at Exmoor National ParkShallow peat, deep impact: lessons learnt from peatland restoration at Exmoor National Park

BriefingBriefingBriefing9–10 January 2016Training course: Hedge-laying course for beginnersVenue: Egleton Visitor Centre, Rutland WaterCost: £75 Contact: Rutland Water Nature Reserve, Egleton, Oakham, Rutland, LE15 8BT; tel: 01572 770651; e-mail: [email protected]: www.rutlandwater.org.uk

Run by experienced hedge-layer John Shone, this two-day course will provide an introduction to this ancient art: what it involves, when to hedge-lay and how. Hand tools such as axes and billhooks will mainly be used, though some modern tools such as bow saws and loppers may be implemented occasionally; these will all be provided (although participants are also encour-aged to bring their own hedge-laying tools along if they have them). Stout footwear, rough gardening clothes and waterproofs are recommended.

26–27 January 2016Training course: Developing practical skills in Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) Venue: LondonCost: £375 CIEEM members; £425 non-membersContact: CIEEM, 43 Southgate Street, Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 9EH; tel: 01962 868626; e-mail: [email protected]: www.cieem.net

A two-day practical course aimed at practitioners who already have existing experience of undertaking EcIAs and wish to develop those skills further. The focus will be on delivering teaching through a combination of powerpoint presentations and workshops, with attendees working through a variety of relatively straightforward case-study examples. The course will cover all aspects of EcIA, including the basic concepts of scoping and baseline. Attendees will therefore be expected to have some knowledge of the legisla-tion and policy drivers behind EcIA, and practical experience of undertak-ing ecological surveys. A brief session on how to present the outcomes of EcIAs in a report will be included. The course is also available as a bespoke in-house training tailored to the needs of individual organisations.

Saturday 30 January 2016Training course: Woodland coppicingVenue: Maidenhead and Cookham Commons, Winter Hill woodlandsCost: £45 Contact: Maidenhead and Cookham Commons National Trust, Pinkneys Green, Pinkneys Drive, Maidenhead, Berkshire, SL6 6QD; tel: 07584 267955; e-mail: [email protected]: www.nationaltrust.org.uk/maidenhead-and-cookham-com-mons/things-to-see-and-do/events/

Learn how to coppice hazel the traditional way, using different tools such as billhooks and axes, with National Trust’s rangers. Participants will also discuss woodland manage-ment, coppice history and products and biodiversity, and will have the opportunity to make peasticks and beanpoles to take home. BBQ lunch and hot drinks provided.

1–3 February 2016Training course: Managing and delivering access for allVenue: Plas Tan y Bwlch/Snowdonia National Park CentreCost: £360Contact: Plas Tan y Bwlch, Snowdonia National Park Centre, Maentwrog, Blaenau Ffestiniog, LL41 3YU; tel: 01766 772600; e-mail: [email protected]: www.eryri-npa.gov.uk

This course aims to challenge countryside professionals to deliver access to all their facilities and services to disabled people. Participants will gain an improved knowledge and understanding of: the issues concerning disabled people visiting and enjoying the countryside; relevant legislation; how to produce access surveys and audits; the use of ‘health check’ tools for the review of policies, practices and procedures on individual sites; and examples of accessible facilities and services.

2–3 February 2016Training course: Veteran tree management course Venue: Hatfield ForestCost: £260 + VATContact: Hatfield Forest National Trust, Takeley, Bishop’s Stortford, Essex, CM22 6NE; tel: 01279 874045; e-mail: [email protected]: www.nationaltrust.org.uk/hatfield-forest

This course is designed for country-side managers, arborists and advi-sors – anyone with veteran trees in their care. It will provide participants with the necessary toolkit for effec-tive management of veteran tree populations.

Thursday 4 February 2016Training course: Veteranisation course Venue: Hatfield ForestCost: £140 + VATContact: Hatfield Forest National Trust, Takeley, Bishop’s Stortford, Essex, CM22 6NE; tel: 01279 874045; e-mail: [email protected]: www.nationaltrust.org.uk/hatfield-forest

This course is designed to complement Veteran tree management above, and covers management for deadwood habitat in living trees. If both courses are taken, a reduced rate of £360 + VAT will be charged.

Friday 19 February 2016 (morning only)Event: Managing heathland habitat – an insightVenue: Rodborough Common, SurreyCost: Donation Contact: Surrey Wildlife Trust, School Lane, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey, GU24 0JN; tel: 07817 166730Website: www.surreywildlifetrust.org

Suitable for all audiences, join Surrey Wildlife Trust for a walk through the habitats of Rodborough Common, observing the sights of the late winter period and focusing on some of the techniques used to manage lowland heathland.

19–21 February 2016Training course: Managing woodland for wildlife – a practical introductionVenue: Rhyd-y-creuau, SnowdoniaCost: £275 resident, sole occu-pancy; £220 resident, shared room; £175 non-resident Contact: Rhyd-y-creuau, The Drapers’ Field Centre, Betws-y-Coed, Conwy, LL24 0HB; tel: 01690 710494; e-mail: [email protected]: www.field-studies-council.org

This course will provide basic training and skill development in a range of traditional woodland management techniques, using hand tools. It will explore the role of traditional wood-land management in the development of British habitats, as well as wildlife conservation, habitat creation and improvement. The course will be active and hands on, requiring partici-pants to be fully involved in a range of tasks.

Saturday 27/Sunday 28 February 2016Training course: Introduction to horse loggingVenue: Centre for Alternative Technology, MachynllethCost: £70 Contact: Centre for Alternative Technology, Machynlleth, Powys, SY20 9AZ; tel: 01654 704952; e-mail: [email protected]: www.cat.org.uk

This course will take place in CAT’s sustainably managed woodland Coed Gwern, and will demonstrate horse logging as an ecologically sound and environmentally considerate process of managing woodland. It will begin by looking at general horse care and the different harness and equipment nec-essary for working horses. Participants will then have a brief discussion about the background to working horses in the UK, their pros and cons, and the scope for using horses as part of a low-carbon, environmentally sensitive economy. The majority of the day will be devoted to offering a hands-on opportunity to have a go at driving a horse and to gain experience with horse logging in the woodland.

1–3 March 2016Workshop: Good practice stake-holder participation... with a focus on the environmentVenue: Wye, KentCost: £1,191+VAT corporate rate; £1,013+VAT standard rate (see website for details) Contact: dialogue matters ltd, 55 Scotton Street, Wye, Ashford, Kent, TN25 5BU; tel: 01233 813875; e-mail: [email protected]: www.dialoguematters.co.uk

When it comes to the environment, integrated thinking and wide agree-ment are crucial. To achieve this, key stakeholders need to be involved in agreeing plans, policies or prac-tice – whether at a strategic or local level, or even within an organisation. Good practice in participation means that people are not just informed or consulted, but have a genuine oppor-tunity to influence the outcome and agree the best way forward. By the end of this three-day course, the aim is for participants to be able both to under-stand good practice and, crucially, to deliver it as well.

Friday 4 March 2016Training course: Reedbeds and waste water managementVenue: Centre for Alternative Technology, MachynllethCost: £60 Contact: Centre for Alternative Technology, Machynlleth, Powys, SY20 9AZ; tel: 01654 704952; e-mail: [email protected]: www.cat.org.uk

This course explores the technicali-ties, design and implementation of reedbeds and alternative waste water treatment systems at a domestic level. Participants will learn about the various options for low-impact sewage treatment systems and nutrient recovery, and there will be a session on water efficient devices. The course will include a tour of the various systems in operation at CAT, and an explanation of the main design features.

7–10 March 2016Training course: Building new nature networks – working with trees and woodsVenue: Plas Tan y Bwlch/Snowdonia National Park CentreCost: £435Contact: Plas Tan y Bwlch, Snowdonia National Park Centre, Maentwrog, Blaenau Ffestiniog, LL41 3YU; tel: 01766 772600; [email protected]: www.eryri-npa.gov.uk

Aimed at public and private sector staff involved with landscape-scale initiatives and environmental plan-ning (especially where this involves woodland and forestry management), this four-day event aims to provide a practical introduction to wood-land habitat networks, and covers ecological and theoretical back-

ground, policy context and drivers, design methodology, planning, and application.

7–8 March 2016Discussion meeting: Tackling emerging fungal threats to animal health, food security and ecosystem resilienceVenue: The Royal Society, LondonCost: Free Contact: tel: 020 7451 2500 e-mail: [email protected]: www:royalsociety.org

An unprecedented number of new pathogenic fungi and variants of extant strains are emerging to cause disease in animals and plants, putting the resilience of wild and managed ecosystems in jeopardy. This meeting will unite researchers sharing a common aim – to exploit advances in biology to understand the drivers causing the emergence of fungi and to forge a research agenda to miti-gate their impact. Recorded audio of the presentations will be available on the Royal Society website after the event.

Wednesday 9 March 2016Event: All things WILDVenue: BattlebyCost: Free Contact: Battleby Conference Centre, Redgorton, Perth, PH1 3EW; tel: 01738 444177; e-mail: [email protected]: www.snh.gov.uk

This Sharing Good Practice event will focus on the recent significant pieces of work related to wild land, and how they all fit together. It is suitable for a range of people, including those who work in the renewables and landscape indus-tries, local authorities, SNH staff, John Muir Trust, Mountaineering Council of Scotland, and land managers.

Sunday 20 March 2016Training course: Value of the urban forestVenue: Epping Forest Field CentreCost: £39 Contact: Epping Forest Field Centre, Paul’s Nursery Road, High Beach, Loughton, Essex, IG10 4AF; tel: 020 8502 8500; e-mail: [email protected]: www.field-studies-council.org

NOTICE BOARDNew app for recording spread of leaf-mining moths that are threatening horse-chestnut trees

Cameraria ohridella, a leaf-mining moth that damages the UK’s iconic horse-chestnut trees, has been recorded for the first time in Ireland and Scotland. In response, a team of scientists have launched ‘LeafWatch’ – a mobile phone app – and are asking for help from the public to map the northwards spread of the species. Records of presence or absence can be submitted via the LeafWatch app (available for Apple and Android devices) or via the Conker Tree Science website (www.conkertreescience.org.uk), where people can also record the fungal leaf blotch and the presence of bird attacks to the leaf-mining moth. Take care not to confuse the damage caused by the leaf-mining moth with fungal leaf blotch however; the irregular brown blotches of the latter are always ringed with yellow, something that is never seen on the leaf-miner blotches.

Environmental factors are changing our woodlands, say UK owners and forestersResults of the British Woodlands Survey on Resilience, announced in October, revealed that 9/10 woodland owners and other forestry profession-als have observed at least one form of impact in the past 10 years. Woodland owners reported increases in verte-brate pests while among professional managers and agents, pathogens and pests were the most commonly reported impact. There is also an indication of a lack of awareness of the importance of provenance, and tree genetic diversity in general, when planning resilient woodlands. The information from the survey will be used by organisations, policymakers and researchers to help improve the resilience of the country’s forests, and to determine how better support can be provided to woodland owners and managers. The results will also inform the government’s national adapta-tion programme. A full report will be published before the end of the year, at www.sylva.org.uk/bws.

New films showcase economic, social and environmental benefits of Wales’ Natura 2000 sitesNatural Resources Wales (NRW) have produced a series of new films, each concentrating on a different pro-tected habitat or species. They focus on the importance of the protected sites of Wales – the Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas – and highlight the benefits that these sites provide in addition to biodiversity, such as recreation

PUBLICATIONSWhat works in conservation

Edited by William J. Sutherland, Lynn V. Dicks, Nancy Ockendon, Rebecca K. SmithPublished by Open Book PublishersJuly 2015 (paperback, hardback, ebook)340 pagesISBN: paperback 9781783741571; hardback 9781783741588; digital (PDF) 9781783741595; ebook (epub) 9781783741601; ebook (mobi) 9781783741618Price: paperback £19.95; hardback £29.95; digital (PDF) £0.00; ebook (epub) £2.95; ebook (mobi) £2.95

Is planting grass margins around fields beneficial for wildlife? Which management interventions increase bee numbers in farmland? Does helping migrating toads across roads increase populations? How do you reduce predation on bird populations? What Works in Conservation has been created to provide practitioners with answers to these and many other questions about practical conservation. It

is published in partnership with the Conservation Evidence project and is fully linked to the project’s website where more detailed evi-dence and references can be freely accessed.

Managing scrub for nightin-gales – A BTO guide for land managers and conservation practitionersPublished by British Trust for Ornithology April 201516 pages

Available to download at: www.bto.org/research-data-services/publica-tions/conservation-advice-notes

The nightingale is a very well known, yet rarely seen, bird that is found across parts of southern England. It favours scrub and woodland habitats for breeding and its populations are known to be particularly sensitive to changes in the structure of wood-land vegetation. This guide draws on BTO research to highlight the requirements of this scarce bird for nesting habitat and provides advice on how to manage scrub habitats appropriately.

This course is suitable for those inter-ested in the important characteristics of urban forests and their future role in communities. Using Loughton’s urban forest as an example, there will be an opportunity to appreciate the range of trees on the forest’s edge, its main streets and front gardens, and to consider their value and cultural significance within the landscape.

22–24 March 2016Conference: 2016 Student con-ference on conservation scienceVenue: University of CambridgeCost: £80 Contact: Student Conference on Conservation Science, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 3EJ; e-mail: [email protected]: www.sccs-cam.org

This conference is designed for young conservation researchers from bio-logical, environmental and geography departments of universities as well as conservation and resource manage-ment agencies. The three-day pro-gramme will include poster sessions and fifteen-minute talks by students

on any aspect of conservation science. Besides these, there will also be work-shops, presentations by conservation NGOs and agencies, and social events designed to give participants the opportunity to make new contacts in their own and related disciplines.

Wednesday 23 March 2016Event: Improving ecological coherence Venue: BattlebyCost: tbc Contact: Battleby Conference Centre, Redgorton, Perth, PH1 3EW; tel: 01738 444177; e-mail: [email protected]: www.snh.gov.uk

‘Ecological coherence’ is an often-referred to, though poorly understood term. This Sharing Good Practice event is designed to bring together a range of policymakers, researchers, land-use advisors, managers and others, to share knowledge of what ecological coherence is, how it relates to land-use policy and practice, how it can be identified, and how it can be improved whilst also achieving other environ-mental and socio-economic benefits.


Tornado Quote Builder app

Fencing-materials supplier Tornado have been busy developing the support elements of their business. Last year they launched a Professional Contractors Network, and on the back of the feedback they have since received, have developed the Tornado Quote Builder app. Whilst primarily aimed at fencing contractors, the app will also be useful for site man-agers specifying works for either in-house teams or contractors.

The Quote Builder tool greatly reduces the time and effort needed to work out the requirements for fencing jobs. Based around a GPS-mapping tool combined with a series of built-in calculations, the app provides a product selection system to the user, allowing them to automatically create a smart, pro-fessional and customisable invoice or estimate. Once an account has been created, users are able to save quotations, templates and product prices to save time with future quotations.

The tool is simple to use, and the estimate and/or quotation created is highly customisable. Jobs can be quoted in their entirety, or specific products (such as gates, for example) can be itemised separately. Contact: Tornado Wire LtdTel: 01789 778766Website: www.tornadowire.co.uk

Seed harvester

This machine was built for the North Pennines AONB Partnership’s Nectarworks project and was introduced last year. It cuts and collects seed on a telescopic arm that can reach up to 6m away from the power unit. The machine can then tip the seed into bags, a trailer, or straight into a spreader. It enables wild-flower seed to be collected from previously unreachable locations, such as steep bank sides, grass verges and boggy ground, which are often the best source of wildflower seeds, as they have not been intensively managed. Contact: Tom KristensenE-mail: [email protected]: www.northpennines.org.uk/Pages/Nectarworks.aspx

On the [email protected]@naturalengland.org.uk

‘On the ground’ contains product updates and handy tips; in fact, anything that will help you get work done on the ground. If you have information about a new product or a good idea for improving the management of land for conservation, then ‘On the ground’ is the place to share it with other land managers. Joe Alsop and Chris Evans

Powertraveller Crankmonkey

Designed to give users instant power wherever they are, the Crankmonkey is an instant back-up power system that allows users to charge devices instantly, and makes carrying spare batteries unnecessary. An emergency call from flat phones can be made after two minutes of ‘cranking’, and a Petzl head lamp will have power for an hour from one minute’s crank-ing. The Crankmonkey will work with virtually any 5V device, including GPS products, satellite phones, avalanche transceivers, smart-phones, hand-held video cameras, and so on. The 32:1 gearing system enables users to generate power at a comfortable speed. Made from aluminium, the Crankmonkey is strong and robust, and comes with a lifetime guarantee, making it well worth considering as part of your lone working/remote sites kit.Contact: Powertraveller LtdTel : 01420 542980E-mail: [email protected]: www.powertraveller.com

Armorgard SSR Strimmersafe Rack

Storing expensive machinery such as brush-cutters and chainsaws is often a compromise between positioning them safely and securely, whilst still having easy access. Armorgard’s unique upright storage system (dimensions 2055 × 365 × 2085mm) ticks all those boxes and, whilst it is primarily designed for storing brush-cutters, it is also suitable for securing chainsaws, and can be used to hold up to five machines at one time.

The Strimmersafe Rack has a heavy-duty construction, and comes equipped with twin 5-lever deadlocks and a hinged heavy-duty

welded lid, fitted with two hydraulic gas rams for easy lifting. The base of the rack is fitted with a bunded drip tray to contain accidental spills of fuel or oil, and the unit can be bolted to a wall for additional security.Contact: ArmorgardTel: 023 9238 0280E-mail: [email protected]: www.armorgard.co.uk/download.php?file=armorgard-catalogue.pdf

PRODUCT UPDATEThis section is compiled from information provided by the products’ manu-facturers, suppliers, distributors and users. It should not be interpreted as an independent evaluation and endorsement of the products or methods by Conservation Land Management.

Mechanised Tree and Vegetation Clearance

Practicality Brown offer 30 years of experience and unrivalled compliant resources to tackle any tree and vegetation project.We offer fixed price project management or daywork hire to suit your needs and our machine fleet includes All terrain Whole Tree

Chipper, Chip removal by bin lorry, lightweight 8WD forwarder , AHWI Tracked Mulcher(2014), Fendt Tractor with AhwiMulcher(2015), 3 x Excavator mounted Mulchers, Tree Shears and Limb Shear (8, 14 & 21t), experienced chainsaw teams, etc

We cover the Southern, Eastern and Midland Regions from 2 offices and also buy whole tree chip suitable for biomass fuel.

PRACTICALITY BROWN LTDIver Stud, Swan Road, Iver, Bucks. SL0 9LA. Tel: 01753 652022 Fax: 01753 653007 Email: [email protected]

Find more information at: www.pracbrown.co.uk

200x143mm PB Advert_Layout 1 11/02/2015 18:07 Page 1


To discuss advertising rates and availability please contact Julie Gribben, British Wildlife Publishing (an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc)

t: 01865 811 332 or email: [email protected] www.britishwildlife.com

Advertise your service or products with British wildlife magazines

◆ Using Unmanned Aerial

Vehicles to capture

aerial imagery

◆ Site visit: Attenborough,

Nottinghamshire

◆ Restoring lost mosses

at Delamere Forest

Autumn 2015 Volume 13 Number 3 BRITISHWILDLIFEVolume 27 Number 1 October 2015

Grey Seals · Conserving the Aspen Hoverfly · Sheep Grazing

Illustrating Bees · Consultants Portal · Livestock Biodiversity

Special rateS

available

for booking in both magazines!

cropped clm - winter-2015-low res[1]

Documents

Transcript of cropped clm - winter-2015-low res[1]