Use of geographical information system-based hydrological modelling for development of a raised bog conservation and restoration programme

Abstract

Use of Geographical Information System-based Hydrological Modelling for Development of a Raised Bog Conservation and Restoration Programme.

Rewetting degraded peatlands for climate and biodiversity benefits: Results from two raised bogs

“…Site-specific evaluations (micro-habitat and vegetation assessment), regardless of land use category, prior to the initiation of restoration actions, would also be valuable for the decision making process. In this regard, hydrological modelling (Mackin et al, 2017) and remote sensing techniques (e.g. Connolly and Holden, 2017) would also provide critical information to allow for targeted conservation, rewetting or restoration efforts but these approaches must be backed up by appropriate fiscal instruments either through direct funding from government or from carbon/biodiversity offset schemes, such as in operation in other jurisdictions (Tanneberger and Wichtmann, 2011).…”

Carbon and climate implications of rewetting a raised bog in Ireland

“…Peatland rewetting has been widely espoused as a pragmatic climate change mitigation measure (FAO, 2014 ; Parish et al, 2008 ; United Nations Environment Program, 2019 ) and aims to reverse the hydrological changes brought about by drainage (Ahmad et al, 2020 ) and to establish the requisite conditions for the establishment of typical peatland plant communities (Richert et al, 2000 ; Tuittila et al, 2000 ). Practical management actions, such as drain blocking, the installation of berms and the construction of peat cells (Mackin, Barr, et al, 2017 ), can have a profound effect on peatland C dynamics (Günther et al, 2020 ; Strack et al, 2016 ; Wilson, Farrell, et al, 2016 ), and also on local air temperatures (Worrall et al, 2019 , 2020 , 2022 ). The rise in the water table that results from these management actions leads to an exclusion of oxygen from the peat below the water surface (Estop‐Aragones et al, 2012 ), which in turn inhibits the activity of aerobic microorganisms (Rydin & Jeglum, 2006 ), thereby reducing CO 2 production.…”

“…Clearly, there is an incentive to increase the area of the sub‐central and sub‐marginal ecotopes at the expense of the marginal ecotope. For example, under current best restoration practice for raised bogs in Ireland, the main marginal ditch around peatland sites tends to remain open (and therefore active) to prevent accidental flooding of adjacent farmland (Mackin, Barr, et al, 2017 ). Marginal bunds located close to that ditch could be employed to facilitate a rise in the water level on the peatland side of the bund (Mackin, Barr, et al, 2017 ), thereby decreasing the area of the marginal ecotope with a subsequent positive impact on C dynamics.…”

“…A 2‐m resolution Digital Terrain Model (DTM) with vertical resolution of ±0.25 m was acquired for the site. Ecohydrological modelling was completed following the methods outlined in Mackin, Barr, et al ( 2017 ). This metric assumes that surface/near‐surface hydrological processes are dominant and that there is a close relationship between topography (local surface slope, contributing catchment area), meteorological conditions and ecohydrology (hydrological regime and associated vegetation communities).…”

“…The ecohydrological modelling developed by Mackin, Flynn, et al ( 2017 ) provides an indication of the ecotopes that may develop in the short to medium term (10–30 years). A description of the biotic and abiotic characteristics of raised bog ecotopes can be found in Regan et al ( 2020 ).…”