Retain/restore/create vegetation around brackish/saline swamps

Overall effectiveness category No evidence found (no assessment)
Number of studies: 0
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Management of the watershed or catchment (the area of land which drains into a wetland) can be a critical part of wetland conservation.

Maintaining, restoring or creating vegetation in the watershed could reduce the amount of pollution reaching focal swamps (amongst other benefits; Ma 2016). Vegetated slopes or buffer zones may retain sediment and nutrients better than bare soil (Skagen et al. 2008; Smith et al. 2016). Perennial, deep-rooted plants in catchments can also soak up water and prevent salinization (due to rising water tables) in areas with salty soils (NSW Government 2019). Artificial wetlands may be built in the catchment of a focal marsh or swamp, and planted with vegetation that can remove or break down pollutants (Brix 2003). Vegetation could be retained around development, or could be introduced to degraded land around focal sites. Vegetation in watersheds could be carefully harvested, providing income to support conservation (Wantzen et al. 2006).

To be summarized as evidence for this action, studies must have reported the effect of vegetation near/around a focal swamp on the vegetation within the swamp. The surrounding vegetation may be permanent (e.g. planting forests) or temporary (e.g. planting cover crops in farmland). The scope of this action does not include (a) studies of water quality only, or (b) studies of the surrounding habitat, even if it is also a swamp, since this habitat is sacrificed to protect the focal site.

Related actions: Slow down polluted input water, other than with vegetation; Use artificial barriers to block pollution.

^{Brix, H. (2003) Plants used in constructed wetlands and their functions. Proceedings of the 1st International Seminar on the Use of Aquatic Macrophytes for Wastewater Treatment in Constructed Wetlands, 8–10 May 2003, Lisbon, Portugal, 81–109.}

^{Ma M. (2016) Riparian buffer zone for wetlands. In: C.M. Finlayson, M. Everard, K. Irvine, R.J. McInnes, B.A. Middleton, A.A. van Dam, N.C. Davidson (eds.) The Wetland Book I: Structure and Function, Management, and Methods. Springer, Dordrecht. Accessed 28 October 2019.}

^{NSW Government (2019) Type of Salinity and their Prevention. Available at https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/land-and-soil/soil-degradation/salinity/type-of-salinity-and-their-prevention. Accessed 30 December 2020.}

^{Skagen S.K., Melcher C.P. & Haukos D.A. (2008) Reducing sedimentation of depressional wetlands in agricultural landscapes. Wetlands, 28, 594–604.}

^{Smith C., DeKeyser E.S., Dixon C., Kobiela B. & Little A. (2016) Effects of sediment removal on prairie pothole wetland plant communities in North Dakota. Natural Areas Journal, 36, 48–58.}

^{Wantzen K.M., Siqueira A., da Cunha C.N. & de Sá M.d.F.P. (2006) Stream-valley systems of the Brazilian Cerrado: impact assessment and conservation scheme. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 16, 713–732.}

Key messages

We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on vegetation in brackish/saline swamps, of retaining/restoring/creating vegetation around them.

‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Please cite as:

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

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Add lime or similar chemicals: freshwater swamps Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link
Add lime or similar chemicals: brackish/saline swamps Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Retain/restore/create vegetation around freshwater swamps Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link