Evaluation of impacts of management in an anthropogenic peatland using field and remote sensing data
-
Published source details
Cabezas J., Galleguillos M., Valdés A., Fuentes J.P., Pérez C. & Perez-Quezada J.F. (2015) Evaluation of impacts of management in an anthropogenic peatland using field and remote sensing data. Ecosphere, 6, 1-24.
Published source details Cabezas J., Galleguillos M., Valdés A., Fuentes J.P., Pérez C. & Perez-Quezada J.F. (2015) Evaluation of impacts of management in an anthropogenic peatland using field and remote sensing data. Ecosphere, 6, 1-24.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
| Action | Category | |
|---|---|---|
|
Legally protect peatlands Action Link |
 |
|
|
Exclude or remove livestock from degraded peatlands Action Link |
|
-
Legally protect peatlands
A site comparison study in 2014 in a peatland in Chile (Cabezas et al. 2015) found that a protected area had greater vegetation cover and taller vegetation, but lower vascular plant richness and diversity, than an adjacent grazed and harvested area. The protected area had greater cover than the unprotected area of total vegetation (87 vs 62%), herbs (68 vs 51%) and shrubs (19 vs 11%) and contained taller vegetation (65 vs 13 cm). The protected area had lower vascular plant species richness than the unprotected area (7 vs 11 species/4 m2) and lower diversity (reported as a diversity index), but also contained fewer non-native species (<0.1 vs 1.9 species/4 m2). In 2014, vegetation cover and height were recorded in forty-four 2 x 2 m quadrats. Fifteen quadrats were in a protected part of a peatland (5.5 ha owned by a research station, fenced to exclude livestock for eight years and with no moss harvesting for at least 20 years). Twenty-nine quadrats were in an unprotected part (10.5 ha, grazed by four oxen and harvested every month).
(Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)
-
Exclude or remove livestock from degraded peatlands
A site comparison study in 2014 in a peatland in Chile (Cabezas et al. 2015) found that a protected area (fenced to exclude livestock and where moss harvesting was prohibited) had greater vegetation cover and taller vegetation, but lower vascular plant richness and diversity, than an adjacent unprotected (grazed and harvested) area. The protected area had greater cover than the unprotected area of total vegetation (87 vs 62%), herbs (68 vs 51%) and shrubs (19 vs 11%) and contained taller vegetation (65 vs 13 cm). The protected area had lower vascular plant species richness than the unprotected area (7 vs 11 species/4 m2) and lower diversity (reported as a diversity index), but also contained fewer non-native species (<0.1 vs 1.9 species/4 m2). In 2014, vegetation cover and height were recorded in forty-four 2 x 2 m quadrats. Fifteen quadrats were in 5.5 ha of protected peatland, fenced to exclude oxen for eight years and with no moss harvesting for at least 20 years. The study does not distinguish between the effects of these interventions. Twenty-nine quadrats were in 10.5 ha of unprotected peatland, grazed by four oxen and harvested monthly.
(Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)
)_2023.JPG)
