Study

Creating temporary pools as wetland mitigation: how well do they function?

  • Published source details Kolozsvary M.B. & Holgerson M.A. (2016) Creating temporary pools as wetland mitigation: how well do they function?. Wetlands, 36, 335-345.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Excavate freshwater pools

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Excavate freshwater pools

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2013–2014 of 13 pools within forests in the northeast USA (Kolozsvary & Holgerson 2016) found that excavated pools and natural pools had similar abundance of some – but not all – vegetation types and taxa. Seven-year-old excavated pools and natural pools supported statistically similar cover of submerged vegetation, overall emergent vegetation, shrubs and loosestrife Lythrum sp. (all vegetation cover data reported as categories). Excavated and natural pools also contained a statistically similar biomass of surface-coating algae and phytoplankton after seven years (also true for phytoplankton after eight years; data not reported). However, 7-year-old excavated pools had greater cover than natural pools of duckweed Lemna sp., cattail Typha spp. and common reed Phragmites australis. The study also reported differences in some physical characteristics of the pools. For example, excavated pools were smaller, warmer, less acidic and received more light than natural pools (see original paper). Methods: In 2013–2014, plants, algae and phytoplankton were surveyed in seven excavated pools (326 m2 on average; created in 2006) and six natural pools (588 m2 on average). Most of the pools were seasonally flooded, but two excavated pools were permanently flooded. The excavated pools were in New York and the natural pools in Connecticut, but all were within similar mature forests. Algal and phytoplankton biomass were estimated from chlorophyll on glass slides or in the water column, respectively.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

Output references
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