Restore or create upland heath/moorland

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
  • Certainty
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

  • A small unreplicated trial of heather moorland restoration in northern England found that mowing and flail cutting along with grazing could be used to control the dominance of purple moor grass. The same study found moorland restoration benefited one bird species, with one or two pairs of northern lapwing found to breed in the area of restored moorland, where none had bred prior to restoration.
  • A review from the UK concluded that vegetation changes took place very slowly following the removal of grazing to restore upland grassland to heather moorland.


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.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A 1984 review of studies in the UK (Ball 1984) concluded that, after removal of grazing, reversion from upland grassland to heather Calluna vulgaris moorland happens very slowly. The review describes two long-term studies (1950s-1970s) that monitored botanical changes following exclusion of sheep from upland grassland plots in England (Welch & Rawes 1964, Rawes 1981, 1983) and Wales (Hughes et al. 1975, Hill 1983). By 1983, early vegetation changes were slow, mainly involving an altered balance of plant species already present on plots, and entry of heath species was limited. This may have been due to a lack of local seed sources or because seeds were unable to germinate in the close grass layer.

    Additional references

    Welch D. & Rawes M. (1964) The early effects of excluding sheep from high-level grasslands in the northern Pennines. Journal of Applied Ecology, 1, 281-300.

    Hughes R.E., Dale J., Lutman J. & Thomson A.G. (1975) Effects of grazing on upland vegetation in Snowdonia. Annual Report of Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, 1974, 46-50.

    Rawes M. (1981) Further results of excluding sheep from high level grasslands in the northern Pennines. Journal of Ecology, 69, 651-669.

    Hill M.O. (1983) Effects of grazing in Snowdonia. Annual Report of Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, 1982, 31-32.

    Rawes M. (1983) Changes in two high altitude blanket bogs after the cessation of sheep grazing. Journal of Ecology, 71, 219-235.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A small before-and-after study in 2004-2005 on an area of purple moor grass Molina caerulea-dominated moorland in northern England (Smith & Bird 2005) found that mowing and flail cutting along with livestock and wild red deer Cervus elaphus grazing could be used to control the dominance of purple moor grass and help restore heather Calluna vulgaris moorland. Mowing and flail cutting resulted in strong purple moor grass re-growth in spring, which was then heavily grazed, suppressing grass growth. The study also found one or two pairs of northern lapwing Vanellus vanellus bred on the area of restored moorland, whereas none had previously bred in the area. An area re-seeded with heather had heather seedlings from mid-June onwards. One hundred hectares of moorland were fenced to exclude livestock. Half of the grassland within the exclosure was burned on 9 March 2004 to reduce the dominance of purple moor grass, and 14 ha of the burned area was flail cut on 17 March 2004 to remove the burnt grass tussocks. A 3 ha area was sown with heather seed (40 kg/ha) in May 2004. In spring 2005 a further 4.5 ha area was flail cut and re-sown with heather at 40-60 kg/ha. In 2005, sheep grazed the exclosure until the beginning of June, following which the exclosure gates were opened until mid-June to allow free grazing. Cattle (63 livestock units) then grazed the area from late June. Sheep are now permanently excluded from the area.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Dicks, L.V., Ashpole, J.E., Dänhardt, J., James, K., Jönsson, A., Randall, N., Showler, D.A., Smith, R.K., Turpie, S., Williams, D.R. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Farmland Conservation. Pages 283-321 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.


Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Farmland Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Farmland Conservation
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust