Study

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Slow down input water to allow more time for pollutants to be removed

Action Link
Peatland Conservation

Clean waste water before it enters the environment

Action Link
Peatland Conservation

Divert/replace polluted water source(s)

Action Link
Peatland Conservation
  1. Slow down input water to allow more time for pollutants to be removed

    A before-and-after study in 1984–2013 in a floating rich fen in the Netherlands (Kooijman et al. 2016) found that after rerouting input water on a longer path (along with other interventions to reduce pollution), moss cover changed to species characteristic of lower nutrient levels, whilst vascular plant biomass decreased. Four of seven moss species characteristic of low nutrient levels increased in cover (from 1–62% four years before ditch extension to 11–83% eleven years after). Meanwhile, six of seven moss species characteristic of high nutrient levels decreased in cover (from 7–78% to 1–32%). Vascular plant biomass decreased from 1,123 g/m2 eight years before ditch extension to 287 g/m2 ten years after. In 1992, water entering the fen was rerouted on a longer path to allow more time for nutrient removal. The study does not distinguish between the effects of this intervention and the long term effects of two other interventions carried out since the 1970s: use of water purification facilities and switching the water source from a nutrient-rich river to a nutrient-poor lake. In 1988 and 2013, cover of every moss species was recorded in a 25 x 200 m area. In 1984 and 2012, above-ground vascular plant biomass was collected, dried and weighed.

  2. Clean waste water before it enters the environment

    A study in 1984–2013 in a floating rich fen in the Netherlands (Kooijman et al. 2016) found that after installing water purification facilities (along with other interventions to reduce pollution), moss cover changed to species characteristic of lower nutrient levels whilst vascular plant biomass decreased. Over 25 years following intervention, four of seven moss species characteristic of low nutrient levels increased in cover (from 1–62% to 11–83%). Meanwhile, six of seven moss species characteristic of high nutrient levels decreased in cover (from 7–78% to 1–32%). Over 28 years, vascular plant biomass decreased from 1,123 g/m2 to 287 g/m2. Since the 1970s, water purification facilities were built to treat the fen water source (no further details reported), the water source was changed from a nutrient-rich river to a nutrient-poor lake, and the water was rerouted to allow more time for nutrient reduction. The study does not distinguish between the effects of these interventions. In addition, there was a general reduction in nutrient input from urban areas. In 1988 and 2013, cover of every moss species was recorded in a 25 x 200 m area. In 1984 and 2012, above-ground vascular plant biomass was collected, dried and weighed.

  3. Divert/replace polluted water source(s)

    A study in 1984–2013 in a floating rich fen in the Netherlands (Kooijman et al. 2016) found that after replacing a nutrient-rich water source with lower-nutrient water (along with other interventions to reduce pollution), moss cover changed to species characteristic of lower nutrient levels and vascular plant biomass decreased. Over 25 years following intervention, four of seven moss species characteristic of low nutrient levels increased in cover (from 1–62% to 11–83%). Meanwhile, six of seven moss species characteristic of high nutrient levels decreased in cover (from 7–78% to 1–32%). Over 28 years, vascular plant biomass decreased from 1,123 g/m2 to 287 g/m2. Since the 1970s, the fen water source was changed from a nutrient-rich river to a nutrient-poor lake, the input water was rerouted on a longer path to allow more time for nutrient reduction, and water purification facilities were built. The study does not distinguish between the effects of these interventions. In addition, there was a general reduction in nutrient input from urban areas. In 1988 and 2013, cover of every moss species was recorded in a 25 x 200 m area. In 1984 and 2012, above-ground vascular plant biomass was collected, dried and weighed.

Output references
What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation assesses the research looking at whether interventions are beneficial or not. It is based on summarised evidence in synopses, on topics such as amphibians, bats, biodiversity in European farmland, and control of freshwater invasive species. More are available and in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
Our Journal: Conservation Evidence

Our Journal:
Conservation Evidence

A unique, free to publish open-access journal publishing research and case studies that measure the effects of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 16

Special issues: Amphibian special issue

Go to the Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet 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