Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Department of Forest Ecology
Individually directed course, 5 credits in Biology 2004
After use of cutaway peatlands
– an overview of options and
management planning
Stefanie Leupold
Supervisor: John Jeglum
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Faculty of Forestry Sciences
Department of Forest Ecology
SE-901 83 UMEÅ
Stencilserie No. 108
ISSN 1104-1870
ISRN SLU-SEKOL-STL-108-SE
Preface
‘After use of cutaway peatlands – an overview of options and management planning’ is a compendium
of literature reviewed on the topic of after use of cutaway peatlands in Sweden. It combines two
literature reviews, one which was written during the individually directed course ‘Management planning
for after use of cutaway peatlands’, a biology course by Prof. J. Jeglum at the Department of Forest
Ecology at the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU). This work comprises all suitable
restoration and reclamation options for cutaway peatlands in Sweden. Furthermore, it deals with
legislative and regulatory aspects and reviews peat cutting policies of some of the main peat
producing countries − USA, Canada, Finland, and Sweden.
The second literature review, ‘Afforestation and other after use options on cutaway peatlands in
Sweden’ was written as a thesis project for a Bachelor of Science Degree from the Faculty of Forestry
at the University of Applied Science in Eberswalde, Germany. This thesis was written under
examination of Prof. Dr. D. Murach Professor of Silviculture at the University of Eberswalde (also at
the Research Station of Brandenburg, Germany) and under supervision of Prof. J. Jeglum at SLU. It
reviews briefly the various after use options and goes into detailed description and evaluation of
afforestation as an after use option for cutaway peatlands in Sweden.
My sincere thanks are directed to both supervisors. I would like to confer special thanks to John
Jeglum for helping me whenever possible, providing me with literature and helping me develop my
interests in wetlands and related issues.
I. Rocks at the bottom
II. Afforestation
III. Grassland agriculture
IV. Education at the pond
V. Rewetting
VI. Spreading Sphagnum
VII. Peat cracking
VIII. Artificial lake
IX. Blocking a drain
2
“What is a cutaway bog?
Is it all the same [?]…, understanding the complexity of what is left behind is the key to
understanding what can be done.”
Gerry McNally, Development Manager with Bord na Móna
1. Abstract
Wetlands cover about 5 to 8% of the world’s land surface, and over 50% of the world's wetlands
are peatlands. These percentages extrapolate to between 386 to 409 million ha of peatlands.
Peatlands have traditionally long been utilized by humans through conversion into agricultural or
forested land. Peat has also been excavated to supply fuel for the last centuries. During the 20th
Century, peat extraction has become increasingly industrialized and mechanized and is
practiced today on a larger scale than ever before.
During the year 2000, about 10, 000 ha was under peat extraction in Sweden. Peat production
on this larger scale started during the 1980s. Usually, depending on the thickness of the peat
layer, production ceases after 20-25 years, leaving an area with a peat layer of varying thickness
and with great heterogeneity in site conditions. Bare peat in itself forms harsh and hostile
conditions for natural re-colonization of any kind. Without human intervention, it cannot be
expected that the site will return to some more valuable land use within a reasonable time frame.
There are several alternatives for after use of cutaway peatlands from which to choose. The
most often applied and economically desired after use option is to convert the former peat
cutting area into production forest. Other production activities that can be applied as after uses
are agriculture, biomass cultivation, and berry production. More oriented towards nature
conservation are wetland restoration and restoration of wildlife habitat functions. Whichever
alternative is decided upon, the process of management planning should start as early as the
peat extraction planning. This is because the peat production can then be adjusted to the future
after use so that the most suitable after use option for the site in particular can be found.
3
Table of Contents
1. Abstract ........................................................................................................................................3
2. Introduction...................................................................................................................................5
2.1 How much peat in the world? ................................................................................................6
2.2 Objectives...............................................................................................................................7
3. Definitions and varieties of peatlands ..........................................................................................8
4. After use options ........................................................................................................................10
4.1 Reclamation options.............................................................................................................10
4.1.1 Forestry .........................................................................................................................10
4.1.1.1 Drainage – water level ...........................................................................................12
4.1.1.2 Soil preparation and recommended peat depth ....................................................14
4.1.1.3 Fertilization .............................................................................................................14
4.1.1.4 Estimation of fertilization requirements..................................................................16
4.1.1.5 Re-fertilization ........................................................................................................17
4.1.1.6 Mixing peat with underlying subsoil .......................................................................18
4.1.1.7 Tree species selection ...........................................................................................18
4.1.1.8 Establishment of forest plantations........................................................................19
4.1.1.9 Potential problems .................................................................................................19
4.1.1.10 Forest management.............................................................................................21
4.1.2 Agriculture .....................................................................................................................21
4.1.3 Biomass cultivation .......................................................................................................24
4.1.3.1 Reed canary grass cultivation................................................................................25
4.1.3.2 Energy forests ........................................................................................................27
4.1.3.3 Other plant species for biomass production ..........................................................28
4.1.4 Other reclamations........................................................................................................29
4.1.4.1 Berry plantations ....................................................................................................29
4.1.4.2 Vegetable and herbs..............................................................................................31
4.2 Restoration options ..............................................................................................................31
4.2.1 Restoration of wetlands ................................................................................................32
4.2.1.1 Restoration of peat-accumulating function ............................................................32
4.2.1.2 Restoration of wildlife habitat function (artificial lakes) .........................................36
4.3 Complementary uses ...........................................................................................................37
4.3.1 Recreation .....................................................................................................................37
5. Policy Issues ..............................................................................................................................39
5.1 USA ......................................................................................................................................39
5.2 Canada .................................................................................................................................40
5.3 Finland..................................................................................................................................41
5.4 Sweden.................................................................................................................................42
6. Management planning for after use ...........................................................................................43
6.1 What information is required?..............................................................................................43
6.2 Which after use is suitable? .................................................................................................44
7. Conclusions................................................................................................................................45
8. Literature Cited...........................................................................................................................46
9. Annotated Citations....................................................................................................................54
4
2. Introduction
"Peat bogs are an integral part of the world's ecological heritage. It is our responsibility to exploit
them wisely. It is also our duty to work towards protecting and regenerating them ensuring the
diversity of fauna and flora, which live and reproduce therein. Furthermore, we have a mission to
rebuild living and dynamic ecosystems which will evolve naturally into new peat bogs." (Farrell
and Doyle, 1998)
Wetlands cover about 5 to 8% of the world’s land surface, and over 50% of the world's wetlands
are peatlands. That calculates to between 386 and 409 million ha. Peatlands are found on five
continents, but not in Antarctica. The development of peatlands depends on five main state
factors: climate, relief, parent material, biota, and time. However, the main factor determining
whether or not peat develops is the water supply. If conditions are such that water supply is
maintained close to the surface of the substrate and anoxic conditions are present a high
percentage of the time, peatlands will develop. The majority of the peatlands develop in boreal
and northern temperate climates. This may suggest that cool temperature is the main factor for
peatland development; however, temperature does not always assume the main role. Peatlands
can also occur in warm temperate and tropical areas such as the southern USA, Jamaica,
Africa, South America, and Southeast Asia. In these warmer areas, one or more of the other
state factors overweigh the temperature in importance.
For instance, a combination of high precipitation and level topography, or flat floodplains and
frequent flooding by large river systems, can outweigh the high temperatures. Sometimes one
sees the ratio P/ET (precipitation/evapotranspiration) used as an indicator; it should be greater
than 1 for peatlands to develop. In some literature the most important stated factor is landform,
that is, relatively flat relief and poor drainage, and this may indeed be true within a region if there
is enough humidity for the region. However, even the general rule of flat or weakly sloping relief
is not necessary where, in rugged hills or mountains, water supply from above can maintain wet
conditions on quite distinct slopes. So in the end we must return to the difficult-to-define, but
most fundamental requirement – water supply. If the combined influences of precipitation,
evapotranspiration, temperature, and topography are such that water is maintained above or
close to the surface of the substrate, peat will accumulate.
Whether or not to utilize peatlands for human benefit has two opposing viewpoints. From a
nature conservation perspective, peatlands and wetlands are preserved or rehabilitated for their
distinct biodiversity and carbon storage functions. Peatlands may also be actively utilized for the
benefit of the human society. This report approaches a balanced and clear-eyed viewpoint that a
part of the world’s wetlands should be put to use while other wetlands should be set aside for
nature conservation.
5
2.1 How much peat in the world?
National estimates of peatland areas are given in table 2.1. The magnitude of the estimates
depends on the criteria used to define peatland. For example the depth of peat used to define
peatland may vary from 30 cm to 1 m. As well, the quality and reliability of inventory methods
vary greatly. In more developed countries with high population densities, there is usually a high
degree of exploitation of natural resources. Indeed, some industrial countries have almost
completely exhausted their natural peatlands. This situation is acute in countries such as the
Netherlands, Germany, Belgium and Poland. In addition, several countries in Europe, for
examples, Scotland and Ireland, have very few undisturbed lowland raised bogs remaining.
Table 2.1 Peatland estimates throughout the world, taken from IPCC web site –
http://www.ipcc.ie/
Country
1 Finland
2 Canada
3 Republic of Ireland
4 Sweden
6 Northern Ireland
7 Scotland
8 Iceland
9 Norway
10 Wales
12 USSR
13 The Netherlands
14 Germany
15 Poland
17 USA
18 England
19 Austria
20 Denmark
21 Switzerland
22 Hungary
Peatland area (ha)
Peatland area (% of land area)
10, 000, 000
129, 500, 000
1, 178, 798
1, 500, 000
166, 860
821, 381
1, 000, 000
3, 000, 000
158, 770
71, 500, 000
250, 000
1, 618, 000
1, 500, 000
7, 510, 000
361, 690
22, 000
60, 000
55, 000
100, 000
33.5
18.4
17.2
17.1
12.4
10.4
9.7
9.4
7.7
6.7
6.0
4.6
4.4
3.3
2.8
2.8
2.8
1.3
1.1
Peatlands have had a great deal of degradation and damage, being drained for forestry,
agriculture, and peat harvesting. The situation of peatlands in Sweden, Finland and Estonia is
given in table 2.2. The remaining pristine mires as a percentage of the total mires are 47%, 40%,
and 32% for Sweden, Finland, and Estonia, respectively. Most European countries have much
lower percentages of remaining pristine mires.
6
Table 2.2 The total areas and areas of mire drained for agriculture, forestry, and peat harvesting
from Sweden, Finland, and Estonia. (After Vasander et al., 2003)
Sweden
Finland
Estonia
450. 0
323. 0
47. 2
10. 4
10. 4
1. 0
23. 1
32. 1
22. 5
1. 0
0. 7
0. 3
1. 5
5. 7
0. 3
15. 0
57. 0
18. 0
0. 3
3. 0
15. 0
5. 0
40. 0
18. 0
4. 9
4. 2
0. 3
2
Land area, 1, 000 km
Mire area, ha
Mire area, %
Mires drained for agriculture, Mha
Mires drained for forestry, Mha
Mire in peat harvesting, 1, 000 ha
Current abandoned cutaways, 1, 000 ha
Future (2010) expected cutaways, 1, 000 ha
Pristine mire, Mha
In Sweden, a peat layer of varying thickness covers about 10 million ha that is equivalent to onequarter of the total land surface area. Half of this area is productive forestland, and 6.4 million ha
of this area have a peat layer thicker than 30-40 cm. About 1.7 million ha of this area consist of
peatlands larger than 50 ha (of interest for commercial peat extraction) and that amounts to 9,
200 sites spread over Sweden.
In the year 2000, about 10, 000 ha were used for peat production (on 150 separate sites).
Usually, the production lasts for 20-25 years. Since most of the industrial peat extraction was
started in the 1980s, there are consequently many areas available for after use now and even
more in the near future (Larsson, 2001).
2.2 Objectives
The objectives of this report are:
•
•
•
•
to review and describe the different after use options existing and applied to cutover and
cutaway peatlands today based on a literature review,
to assess the suitability of the presented after use options for the different types of
cutaways in the world and Sweden,
to review the planning process and what information is required in order to successfully
implement the most appropriate after use alternatives, and
to review peat cutting and wetland policies from several of the main peat utilizing
countries and compare them with what is presently implemented in Sweden.
7
3. Definitions and varieties of peatlands
Cutaway peatland: Land area that is left after the major portion of the original peat deposit has
been removed by industrial means. There is no economically useful peat left. The peat layer that
is left can be of varying depths, from 1 m or more to nothing left over mineral subsoil (IPCC,
1996). Some countries set standards for minimum depths of peat to be left overlying the subsoil,
such as 50 cm.
Cutover peatland: Land area where there is still economically useful peat left because it was cut
by hand or by a variety of machines. The peat layer left is usually 1.5 m or more thick (IPCC,
1996).
Mire: Mire is a term for wet terrain dominated by peat-forming plants (e.g Sjörs 1948). In recent
years the concept has been broadened to mean sites where peat is currently being formed and
is accumulating (e.g., Joosten and Clarke 2002). Mire is narrower than wetland concept,
because all wetlands may not have peat-forming plants or conditions that allow peat to
accumulate. In one sense mire is a little broader concept than peatland because peat-forming
plants and peat accumulation can occur on sites that do not have the required depth of peat to
qualify as peatland. In another sense peatland is broader than mire; a site being used for peat
harvesting is still a peatland, but it has lost its peat-forming vegetation and is no longer a mire.
Some authors use peatlands and mires as more or less synonymous (e.g. Finland, Paavilainen
and Päivänen 1995), treating all peat-forming habitats, regardless of peat depth, as both mires
and peatlands. In Finland, a virgin or undisturbed peatland or mire is defined by the presence of
peat-forming plants, and is sometimes defined as having 75% or greater coverage of Sphagnum
moss.
Peat: Peat is the remains of plant and animal constituents accumulating under more or less
water-saturated conditions through incomplete decomposition. It is the result of anoxic
conditions, low temperatures, and other complex causes. Peat is organic material that has
formed in place, that is, as sedentary material in contrast with aquatic sedimentary deposits
(e.g., Joosten and Clarke 2002). Terms related to peat are turf and organic soil (Engl), torf (Ger),
torv (Sw, Nor), and tourbières (Fr).
Peatland: Peatland is a term used to encompass all peat-covered terrain. There are various
depths that have been used, for example, 30 cm in Finland and Sweden, 40 cm in Canada, 45
cm in Ireland, and 1 m in some Geological Surveys.
Reclamation: A planned series of activities designed to create another ecosystem different from
the ecosystem existing before disturbance (e.g., Dunster and Dunster 1996). See also
Restoration.
Restoration: A process of returning ecosystems or habitats to their original structure and species
composition. Restoration requires a detailed knowledge of the (original) species, ecosystem
functions, and interacting processes involved (e.g., Dunster and Dunster 1996; Lode 2001). See
also Reclamation.
Wetland: Land saturated with water, comprised of types such as marsh, swamp, fen, or bog. A
wetland is defined as land that is saturated with water long enough to promote wetland or
aquatic processes as indicated by poorly drained soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and various
kinds of biological activity which are adapted to a wet environment (National Wetlands Working
Group 1997).
8
Marsh: Grassy, wet area periodically inundated with standing or slowly moving water. The
substratum usually consists of mineral or organic soils with high mineral content, but there is
little peat accumulation (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995).
Fen: Fens are predominantly minerotrophic peatlands, and receive mineral soil influenced water
flowing from surrounding land as surface run-off or seepage through soil or rocks. They can be
found by springs and seepages, on river flood plains, in flat basins and glacial lake beds, in
sloping water tracks and unconfined gently sloping interfluves between river systems in areas of
rising coastlines. Fens vary widely in base and nutrient status from poor to extremely rich
according to their position and the local geology. They therefore support a wide range of
ecosystems with distinctive conservation needs (Patterson and Anderson, 2000).
Bog: Bogs are peat-forming mires that are supplied with water and nutrients only from rain,
snow, mist, and dust. The term ombrotrophic is used to signify this. They are therefore naturally
acidic and nutrient-poor systems (Patterson and Anderson, 2000).
Swamp forest: Well-wooded or forested, minerotrophic wetlands or mires, where the peat layer
thickness varies from rather deep to totally absent (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995).
Peat accumulates under specific physical and chemical conditions when the primary production
of peat-forming species and their deposition is higher than the rate of decay. Thus, peat
accumulation rates vary depending on the climatic and topographic conditions. The composition
of peat depends solely on the plant associations occurring in the peatland at the time of peat
formation. There are three main classes of peat, Sphagnum, sedge and woody peat. Bog peat
consists mainly of Sphagnum-remains, while fen peat consists of various mixtures of Sphagnum
peat, sedge peat, or woody peat (Lode, 2001).
Mires or peatlands can develop in a succession from aquatic towards terrestrial systems. Open
water bodies fill up and become drier owing to sediment build up, evapotranspiration, or
drainage. This process is called terrestrialization. When upland mineral soils become
waterlogged and develop wet peat-forming plants, which is frequently observed in the northern
hemisphere, the process of mire development is called paludification. This phenomenon is
usually based on a raise in the groundwater table. Primary peat formation occurs where mire
vegetation occupies the surface directly after the retreat of water or glacial ice, without any or
little development of a sedimentary deposit occurring (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995). This
process is common in coastline areas that are rising up out of the sea owing to isostatic
rebound.
9
4. After use options
Peatlands “are important ecosystems for a wide range of wildlife habitats supporting important
biological diversity and species at risk, freshwater quality and hydrological integrity, carbon
storage and sequestration, and geochemical and palaeo-archives. In addition they are
inextricably linked to social, economic and cultural values important to human communities
worldwide. Their carbon pool exceeds that of the world’s forests and equals that of the
atmosphere” (Joosten and Clark, 2002). Appropriate after use options for Sweden are described
and explained in this chapter.
4.1 Reclamation options
This section will review the after use options which alter the on-site land use compared to what it
was before and during peat production. Usually it involves active maintenance of drainage of the
site and cultivation of some form.
4.1.1 Forestry
Forests on abandoned cutaway peatlands can be established to produce quality timber, pulp
and fibre biomass as a substitute for fossil fuels, and for carbon storage (Hall and House, 1993).
There has been much research about forestry on peatlands and peat soils, especially in
Sweden, Finland, Russia, and in the British Isles, but less is known about afforestation of
abandoned peat production areas. However, already in the early 1900s, forest plantations on
cutaway peatlands were regarded as having commercial potential in Ireland, and currently largescale planting experiments and projects are being carried out.
Peatlands have been drained for production forestry for many centuries. The observation that
tree growth improves when peatlands have been drained dates back to at least the17th Century
but the first active drainage specifically for tree growth improvement happened only in the mid19th Century in the Baltic countries, Finland, Germany, Russia, and Sweden (Paavilainen and
Päivänen, 1995).
The period of most intensive drainage activity was during the economic depression in the 1920s
and 1930s (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995). At that time the private forest owners were
subsidized by the state to carry out forest drainage.
According to Hånell (1991) the peak of forest drainage in Sweden was reached in 1933 when
almost10, 000 km of ditches were dug and an area of about 50, 000 ha of drained land was
created A second peak occurred at the end of the 1980s when around 15% of all of Sweden’s
peatlands had been drained for forestry.
Almost 17% of the annual increment in Swedish forests came from peatland forests in 1995.
Drainage of peatlands has not been subsidized by the Swedish government since the late 1980s
and early 1990s (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995; Hånell, 1991). In Finland, maintenance
ditching (ditch cleaning and improvement ditching) of previously drained areas is presently
supported by government funds. However, the only permitted form of forest drainage in Sweden
today is remedial ditching. This means that ditches are dug after clear-felling of a site in order to
prevent the groundwater table from rising in basins and poorly drained flats (Paavilainen and
Päivänen, 1995).
10
The rather long tradition of forestry on drained peatlands in countries such as Sweden, Finland,
and Russia has led to a considerable amount of knowledge and information on forestry on
organic soils. Further information originates from the Baltic States, the British Isles, Germany,
and North America.
Owing to a shorter tradition of converting cutaway peatlands into timber production areas, there
are somewhat less information and study results available on afforestation of cutaway peatlands.
Experiences from afforestation of cutaway peatlands date back to the first peat excavation for
fuel by hand. However, these sites are usually small in size and have different features than peat
production areas coming out of production during recent years. Research and studies on
afforestation of cutaway peatlands have been carried out ever since peat was excavated in
larger scale. In Scandinavia, the first areas were released from industrial production in the
1970s. In Ireland forest plantations were already established on cutover and cutaway peatlands
in the early 1900s. Forestry on peatlands is still regarded as having commercial potential, and
currently large-scale planting experiments and projects on cutaway peatlands are being carried
out. Much more information will become available in the near future.
Experience and knowledge that has been gained from peatland forestry can be applied when it
comes to afforestation of former peat cutting areas. Adjustments will have to be made owing to
the rather special features and characteristics of cutaway peatlands. The fact that large areas
are to be released from peat production now and in the near future makes it even more urgent to
conduct research into appropriate afforestation techniques as well as other after uses.
During the production period, the different peat layers that have developed during the Holocene
are removed. The top layers that are less decomposed and consist mostly of poorly humified
Sphagnum-peat are removed first. These layers are mainly excavated for horticultural use and
are usually not used for energy production owing to their low energy values. The underlying peat
layers (depending on the development of the particular site) often consist of fen peat. In
comparison with the top layer of peat, fen peat is darker in colour, more decomposed, and more
compact owing to the overlying weight of the surface peat layers.
In the peat harvesting process, these peat layers are usually removed more or less completely.
The underlying mineral soil usually varies in elevation, as well as in physical and chemical
properties. The production can be forced to stop earlier, before the entire peat has been
removed from the site, by irregular surfaces, numerous stones, a layer of wood consisting of tree
trunks and stumps, drainage problems, or chemical contents of the peat, for example,
undesirable amounts of sulphur. Thus, cutaway peatlands are characterized by great contrasts
and variation in the type and depth of remaining peat, and in the mineral material beneath.
Tree growth depends on the fertility of the site, peat depth and peat type, drainage intensity, tree
species and tree age (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995). Cutaway peatlands differ greatly from
common peatland forest sites regarding their soil properties and suitability for forestry. The great
variation in peat thickness and depth to water table create much heterogeneity in soil conditions.
There is further variation in the underlying subsoil, which can vary from coarse sand to heavy
clays to aquatic sediments such as gyttja and marl (Kaunisto, 1997). Finally, abandoned
peatlands are characterized by low nutrient status, low pH and calcium, low available nitrogen
(despite high total concentrations), low phosphorus, and low potassium concentrations
(Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995; Kaunisto and Aro, 1996; Kaunisto, 1997; Jones et al., 1998;
Hytönen and Kaunisto, 1999). These conditions altogether have many negative impacts on tree
survival, growth, and form, which may lead to non-uniform, poor-quality timber production or
energy fuel wood production (Aro, 2000b).
11
The peatland type and the peat that it has laid down influences the nutrient supply for the
afforested trees on cutaway peatlands in the following ways. Bog peats which are Sphagnum
dominated are characterized by generally lower pH, alkalinity, corrected conductivity; lower
cations (Ca, Mg, Na, K, Al, Fe); lower total N and P; and higher C/N ratios than are fen peats.
Fen peats, having mixtures of Sphagnum, Carex, and woody peat, show increasing levels of all
the above-mentioned attributes (except for C/N which decreases) across the sequence, poor,
moderately rich, and extremely rich fen. Often a peatland develops with sequences of aquatic
sedimentary deposits, fen peat, and bog peat. Hence, the peats from top to bottom will show
increasing values for the above-mentioned attributes. If the peatland in its development changed
early to bog, the bog peat or poor fen peat will dominate the deposit. If the fen dominated for a
considerable time, the fen peat will comprise a higher proportion of the peatland deposit. If the
fen was wooded fen, or if the peatland has developed by paludification of a previous upland or
swamp forest, than woody peat will be important in bottom layers. This influences peat chemistry
because Ca, K and P contents are higher in woody peats.
Depending on the rate of conversion of fen to bog, and the relative richness of the bottom fen
layers, there is an increase in pH, Ca and most of the other electrochemical attributes mentioned
above. However, this can be modified by the degree of leaching of the lower layers of peat,
which can reduce the relative base richness of the bottom layers over time.
The nutrient status of the peat relative to N and P is difficult to generalize, because much N and
P is locked-up in organic form. It is the available forms of N (NO3–, NH4+), and P, that are
relevant to richness. Measures of these forms in peat pore water are probably a good indicator
of nutrient availability. Vitt et al. (1995) presented very detailed information about water
chemistry. In general, the nutrients N (NO3– and NH4+), P (soluble reactive and total dissolved),
and K, were not related to the bog – rich fen gradient, or showed slight decreases along it (Vitt et
al. 1995). However, NH4+ and P showed increasing concentrations at depths of 1.0 and 1.5 m in
a forested moderately rich fen, and increasing P in a poor fen, in the study in west-central
Alberta (ibid.). K showed similar trends with depth, but these were extremely weak.
Peat cutaway areas are suitable for commercial timber production if drainage and nutrition status
are taken care of (Aro, 2000b). The success of any commercial production on these sites very
much depends on appropriate soil preparations, fertilization and silvicultural practices. The
following issues have to be considered and addressed when applying afforestation as an after
use option.
4.1.1.1 Drainage – water level
The most important feature and the first to be addressed is the water level on site. During the
peat production period, the drainage ditch network may have reflooded or in other cases the
ditches may have been dug deeper than would be appropriate for forestry on peatlands.
Cutaway peatlands are usually located lower in the surrounding landscape and thus flooding can
occur where the drainage network is inadequate. As mentioned earlier existing drainage may not
be effective for quality timber production (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995; Kaunisto and Aro,
1996; Kaunisto, 1997). In this case ditch cleaning and complementary ditching will be necessary.
In peatland forestry in Sweden and Finland, the normal ditch depth is 90 to 100 cm, and the
collector ditches are deeper, 1.2 m up to 2.0 m (Paavilainen and Päivänen 1995). Operational
ditch spacing is normally 35 to 40 m. Hånell et al. (Unpubl. ms. 2003) recommended drainage
intensities of 20-, 30- and 40-m ditch spacings for forests on peatlands. This spacing is related to
12
the depth and the moisture content of the peat. Kaunisto and Aro (1996) recommended 14-18 m
spacing of the ditches, and Aro (2000b) recommended 40-m ditch spacing on coarse-textured
soils for adequate drainage on cutaway peatlands.
The distance between ditches, in combination with the type and hydraulic conductivity of the
peat, influences the depth to groundwater in the strip centres between the ditches. Rothwell
(1991) pointed out that optimum tree growth is achieved with narrower spacing, ‘biologically
optimum spacing’, compared to wider ‘economically optimum spacing’. More research is
required to give certain and safe recommendations for newly established forests on cutaway
peatlands. Paavilainen and Päivänen (1995) gave a generalized synthesis which suggested
arranging the water table to a depth lower than 35-55 cm below the soil surface depending on
the nutrient status and peat characteristics of the site (lower water table for minerotrophic than
for ombrotrophic sites). These given figures can be viewed as guidelines but have to be followed
with caution on cutaway peatlands.
At the other extreme, and more frequently, the drainage ditches in cutaway peatlands can be too
deep. This leads to insufficient water supply for tree growth and consequently to undesired
quality losses in timber. Depending on the amount of water available, ditch blocking will be
necessary in order to raise the water table and supply the tree plantation with enough water. The
actions to be carried out in each specific case will depend on a) the topography and disposition
of the cutaway site, b) the type of residual peat, and c) the climatic conditions (Lode, 2001). If
the water table has been lowered extensively, pumping of water into the tree plantation or
irrigation (at least during summer months) might be necessary.
The amount of water needed also depends on the underlying subsoil, the climatic conditions
(local and regional), and the tree species chosen. It is most important to establish the water
content of the soil to a level, which ensures sufficient aeration for economic tree growth
(Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995). To bring the water table as low as possible, while still
guaranteeing sufficient water supply for tree growth, can also be desirable for deeper rooting
that will make deeper-lying substrates and nutrients available and will prevent wind throw
(Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995). However, the choice of tree species is also a determining
factor concerning the adjustment of the groundwater table. Paavilainen and Päivänen (1995)
stated that there has never been found prove for the risk of overdrainage in the case of forest
drainage. But it has to be remembered that cutaway peatlands have been drained more
excessively than forested peatlands so that the situation is different (deeper drainage ditches
and consequently a lower water table). Drainage depth, that is the mean distance between the
soil surface and the water table, is dependent on such factors as climate, topography and
hydraulic conductivity (= indicates the flux of water per unit gradient of hydraulic potential,
usually expressed as cm s-1) and vegetation (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995).
To the present, there have been many different recommendations and definitions of drainage
norms and the optimum water table depth given. Scientists have still not found a consensus,
which is probably owing to the problem that every former peat cutting area is different in its
features and thus needs different adjustments.
Ditch cleaning can decrease magnesium, manganese and zinc amounts in the surface peat
(Lauhanen and Kaunisto, 1999). Nitrogen concentrations in the peat can be increased by
increasing the intensity of drainage maintenance (Lauhanen and Kaunisto, 1999). Drainage
maintenance aims at keeping the growth of a stand at a level achieved after the first drainage
and in studies from Finland it was indicated that better tree nutrition occurred in sites with
drainage maintenance periods of 10-14 years (Lauhanen and Kaunisto, 1999). The more intense
13
the drainage is, the more the groundwater table will be lowered, which enhances microbial
activity and nutrient mineralization (Lauhanen and Kaunisto, 1999). That serves for better tree
growth conditions on site. Mineralization and consequently nitrogen availability for trees is highly
influenced by the climatic conditions and the average temperature sum (Lauhanen and Kaunisto,
1999). Therefore, it is essential to consider the climatic conditions and nutrient status before
planting and before any work on the drainage network is carried out (Lauhanen and Kaunisto,
1999).
4.1.1.2 Soil preparation and recommended peat depth
The peat layer that is left usually varies greatly in cutaway peatlands from zero where the
mineral soil meets the surface, up to several metres depending on the stoniness of the subsoil
and its topography, the drainage conditions, and peat harvesting techniques (Aro, 2000b).
Because of newly developed techniques it is possible to utilize the complete peat layer, in
contrast to recommendations made by Aro (2000b) to leave a peat layer of at least 15 cm that
should serve as a nitrogen and nutrient source for the future tree plantations. Other sources from
Finland recommended leaving as little peat layer as possible to enable the roots to penetrate
through the peat layer and reach the mineral subsoil where they can take up nutrients
(Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995). Root penetration is in general deeper on cutaway peatlands
than compared with other peatland forests. Root penetration within cutaway peatlands does not
show great variations and according to trials from Finland does not depend on growth density,
fertilization, or peat depth (Aro and Kaunisto, 2003). As the concentrations of potassium,
phosphorus and boron in conifer needles decrease with increasing peat depth there is a
negative relationship between tree productivity (volume, basal area, mean height) and peat
thickness (Hartman and Kaunisto, 1998). Most negative effects on tree stand volume were found
in peat layers between 10-50 cm (Hartman and Kaunisto, 1998).
Contrary recommendations come from Ireland where coniferous trees species have been
planted on former peat cutting areas to a greater extent than in Scandinavia. Tree species very
often chosen are tamarack (Larix laricina K.Koch), black spruce (Picea mariana Britton, Sterns &
Poggenb.), Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.), and lodge pole pine (Pinus contorta
Dougl.) (Jones and Farrell, 2000). The peat layer for coniferous tree species should be at least
60 cm thick so that the calcareous underlying tills or marls which are frequently present will not
have negative impacts on the survival and well-being of the trees (Jones and Farrell, 2000). It is
further recommended to leave the site with a minimum peat layer of 60 cm. The implementation
of this advice in practice is hindered by the undulation of the underlying mineral soil (O’Riordan,
2000). For successful establishment of tree plantations, it should be considered to fertilize the
site before planting (broadcast or spot fertilization) (Kaunisto and Aro, 1996) to counteract
insufficient nutrient supply and the heterogeneity in the peat layer.
4.1.1.3 Fertilization
Further problems on peat cutaway sites derive from insufficient tree nutrition owing to variation in
peat thickness and dissimilarities in the underlying subsoil, which will hinder tree growth (Aro,
2000b). The imbalance of nutrients or their occurrence in unfavourable ratios can have a
negative impact on the timber quality (Kaunisto and Aro, 1996; Kaunisto, 1997; Jones et al.,
1998).
14
The underlying subsoil varies much in soil texture and the proportion of fine particles, thus the
nutrient contents in the peat layer and their availability for the trees will be influenced. The
concentrations of easily soluble phosphorus and potassium are lower in cutaway peatlands on
sandy subsoils than on mineral soils (Aro and Kaunisto, 1998; Aro, 2000b). The amount of
mineral nutrients in peat soils is in general low (Renou et al., 2000). Seedling quality and height
development of trees established on unfertilized and unprepared sites declines and will lead to
the death of the trees (Aro and Kaunisto, 1998; Aro, 2000b). Improvement can be achieved by
fertilization, by application of wood or peat ash, by spreading mineral soil (possibly spoil material
from the drainage ditches), or by mixing the overlying peat with the underlying soil (Paavilainen
and Päivänen, 1995) in places where there is a rather thin peat layer left.
As mentioned earlier the remaining peat layer is high in total nitrogen but low in potassium.
Studies on cutaway peatlands in Finland gave nutrient analysis of nitrogen with 2, 390-4, 027
kg/ha and potassium of 10-50 kg/ha in a 10 cm thick layer (Aro, 2000b). These are very low
potassium contents considering the fact that a 45-year-old Scots pine stand can bind potassium
60-96 kg/ha to a stand stem volume of 75-149 m3/ha on mineral soils (Aro, 2000b). Phosphorus
with a content of 95-310 kg/ha in the top layer (0-20 cm) of the residual peat is high or higher
than in pristine or drained peatlands. More limiting in this case is the N/P ratio, which is low with
100/2-4. Trees can bind in ratios of 100/10-13, thus there is a shortage of available phosphorus
in the upper peat layer in comparison to nitrogen. With increasing depth in the peat layer, the
phosphorus content increases after about 15 cm, while potassium concentrations increase at 510 cm above the mineral subsoil (Aro, 2000b).
Soil preparation and fertilization with PKB-fertilizers (P 2.7 and K 5.1 g per planting spot) are
recommended by Aro (2000b), and Paavilainen and Päivänen (1995) report satisfactory results
with NPK-fertilization on peatlands in Finland. Fertilization with NPK has a positive effect on
diameter and height growth as found in experiments carried out by Hånell et al. (Unpubl. ms.
2003). Rather interesting is that NPK-fertilization increased the yield but not the nutrient
concentration in the biomass in a study from Finland, which means that fertilization of birch does
not increase the amount of nutrients, which could be removed per unit biomass removed during
silvicultural actions (Hytönen and Kaunisto, 1999).
In comparison to artificial fertilizers with NPK and boron (B), wood ash is a waste product of the
forest industry and heating power plants. The nutrient content in wood ash positively influences
the biological/microbial activity and nitrogen mineralization in the peat (probably owing to a rise
in pH) and consequently has a positive effect on the nutrients available for tree growth (Hytönen
and Kaunisto, 1999). There is very good response to wood ash application in pine stands and
the response lasts longer compared to PK-fertilization (Hytönen and Kaunisto, 1999). Some
trials have shown that the effects of wood ash fertilization can last for up to 30-40 years
(Hytönen and Kaunisto, 1999). Wood ash application on young birch and willow stands shows
increased yield increment, but not on mature stands of the same tree species (Hytönen and
Kaunisto, 1999).
Peat ash can be applied as a fertilizer before the forest plantation is established Peat ash
usually does not include other nutrients than were available on site before, but increases
contents of the existing nutrients and seems to have positive effect on microbial activity and
mineralization processes, similar to wood ash. However, peat ash application on peatlands in
studies from Finland resulted in positive response in height development and radial growth
(especially in thinning-aged Scots pine stands) (Silfverberg and Issakainen, 1987). In the same
study there were not found the same responses to peat ash application on mineral sites, thus
the conclusion was that peat ash is a good fertilizer on peatlands of medium fertility (Silfverberg
15
and Issakainen, 1987). The application should be carried out during wintertime with an amount
of 40m3/ha. Best results are achieved on shallow peat layers (Silfverberg and Issakainen, 1987).
Nitrogen is the most important element for growth response in peatland forests (Hånell, 2004). N
is usually abundant in organic soils but mostly tied up in organic compounds and available in
only small amounts of NH4+ and NO3– for plants. The other main elements for good tree growth
on organic and peat soils are P and K as mentioned earlier. These are found in adequate
amounts in peat ash, which is similar to organic and peat soils low in N. Therefore, there were
found good results from experiments on tree growth response to peat ash application in
Sweden. Hånell (2004) suggests P requirements of 40-50 kg/ha for peatland forests and from
these values calculates a peat ash fertilization doze of 3-5 tonnes/ha.
During long-term afforestation experiments on cutaway peatlands in Sweden (described more in
detail later on) pre-planting fertilization with peat ash resulted in good tree survival as well as
good growth response after five vegetation periods (Svensson et al., 1998). The peat ash
applied in this experiment contained estimated amounts of 80 kg P and 104 kg K per hectare.
In other experiments on afforestation of cutaway peatlands in Sweden, seedlings were planted
extra deep into the peat with the idea that deeper planted seedlings will find positive influence
form the minerals in the underlying subsoil and can probably reach down into it and be supplied
with nutrients. There are benefits also of having the root systems deeper in moist cutover peats,
to avoid desiccation during initial establishment of new seedlings. In any case, deeper planting
resulted in superior effects on height growth compared to seedlings planted at normal depth
(Hånell et al., Unpubl. ms. 2003). In the same experiment seedling survival on unfertilized plots
was better than on fertilized plots, while in contrast there was a clear positive tree growth
response to fertilization (Hånell et al., Unpubl. ms. 2003).
Fertilization of cutaway peatlands can be carried out as broadcast, strip, or spot fertilization.
When applying spot fertilization it is more important than with other fertilization methods that the
right amounts of nutrients are applied, because trees can suffer from too high nutrient
concentrations. Physical and chemical damages can occur where one or more nutrients are
applied in too high concentrations in one spot. With strip fertilization it is crucial to apply
considerably smaller amounts than applied with broadcast fertilization; applying as broadcast will
reduce the amount of nutrients (especially N) leaching from the planted area.
4.1.1.4 Estimation of fertilization requirements
In peatland forestry the instructions for estimating the required amount of fertilizer are usually
based on site type classification and on results of fertilization experiments (Paavilainen and
Päivänen, 1995). These recommendations are, however, average values and will need to be
adjusted for every site. Nutritional diagnoses of peatland forests should be carried out by
employing supplementary methods, for example, foliar analysis (Paavilainen and Päivänen,
1995). Usually, there is no vegetation left on cutover peatlands directly after peat production
ceases. Obviously one cannot use foliar analyses in this case and it is recommended to analyze
the soil and the residual peat layer.
16
4.1.1.5 Re-fertilization
In order to keep the nutrient contents at a sufficient level for tree growth during the entire timber
production period, the application of fertilizers or ash will have to be repeated For re-fertilization,
PKB-fertilizer with phosphorus in the form of apatite can be used (Paavilainen and Päivänen,
1995; Kaunisto and Aro, 1996; Aro and Kaunisto, 2003).
It seems that nutrient cycling in tree stands on cutaway peatlands is improved by growing trees
at higher densities (Aro and Kaunisto, 2003), which leads to lower amounts of fertilizers needed
during re-fertilization or a longer time span until re-fertilization needs to occur for satisfactory tree
growth. It can be expected that there will be adequate, good, or even over-optimum N nutrition,
while P concentrations can be expected to be too low; thus trees will suffer from a severe
imbalance between N and P (Aro and Kaunisto, 2003).
Fertilizer amounts of N in well established and high yielding stands is small (about 30 kg/ha/year
owing to efficient recycling of N from litter as reported for forests on peatlands by Ericsson
(1993). Experiments from Finland have shown that re-fertilization will be required earlier on
thicker residual peat layers (Aro and Kaunisto, 2003). This is probably owing to the fact that the
roots will not be able to reach down into the underlying mineral soil.
K fertilization is recommended to be repeated about 15 years after planting, when broadcast
fertilization was applied at time of establishment (Aro and Kaunisto, 2003). Re-fertilization is
expected to increase DBH (diameter at breast height), basal area, height, stem volume, and total
yield as results from Scots pine plantation trials in Finland showed (Aro and Kaunisto, 2003).
The same trials showed that varying growth densities can also have an influence on the above
mentioned tree measures.
Silfverberg and Hartman (1998) concluded that K seems to be the most urgently deficient
nutrient for re-fertilization in peatlands. They further state that there usually is a strong
correlation of the total amount of P and the total amount of N in the peat, which leads to the
conclusion that the risk for P-deficiency can be diminished by choosing nitrogen-rich sites, which
cutaway peatlands usually become once the microbial activity is activated On the poorer peats,
the activation of N may require an initial NPK-fertilization, whereas on medium to rich sites N
may activate with only PK-fertilizer.
For estimating the re-fertilization needed, the ground vegetation, which will have established
itself by that time, and the planted trees can be used to indicate the site class and the soil’s
nutritional status. However, one should also use other more reliable methods such as soil or
foliar analysis (Paavilainen and Päivänen, 1995). Since these sites have been created artificially,
ground vegetation, and tree growth, might not have the same indicator value as under natural
conditions.
Estimating how much fertilizer, and especially actual nutrient requirements, will further help to
reduce leaching of nutrients from the site into watercourses. In Sweden, there is a debate on the
impact of forest fertilization on other ecosystems. The amount of fertilizer applied should be
balanced between optimum crop nutrition, weed vegetation growth (which is enhanced through
high fertility of the soil) and the risk of negative environmental impacts to other ecosystems.
The duration of appropriate nutrient availability is decreased on sites with thicker peat layers and
coarse underlying material. In general the duration seems to be shorter on cutaway peatlands
with about 15 years in comparison to drained peatlands with 25-30 years (Aro and Kaunisto,
17
2003). Therefore, re-fertilization is recommended after 4-5 years for spot fertilized and after 1015 years for broadcast fertilized sites (Aro, 2000b). According to preliminary results of studies
from Finland re-fertilization should be carried out as a broadcast application with P 45 and K 80
kg/ha (Aro, 2000b).
4.1.1.6 Mixing peat with underlying subsoil
Mixing the residual peat with the underlying mineral soil will help to provide the trees with
nutrients (Aro, 2000b) and higher pH, and possibly also better soil aeration. The proportion of
fine mineral particles less than 0.06 mm in diameter should be aimed at 15-20%. It seems
appropriate to choose sites with a peat layer of less than 30 cm thickness (Aro, 2000b). In this
case one can avoid fertilization, but to be sure a soil analysis should be carried out to check for
nutrient shortage. Mixing the peat layer with the underlying subsoil showed good results in
studies from Finland in sites where the peat layer was 15-30 cm in depth (Aro, 2000a). Similar
evidence was found in studies from Sweden where mixing the residual peat with the underlying
soil had similar positive effects on seedling survival and on tree growth as fertilizer application
(Svensson et al., 1998).
4.1.1.7 Tree species selection
Downy birch (Betula pubescens Ehrh.) and more seldom silver birch (Betula pendula Roth.) are
suitable species. Medium to rich natural treed peatlands are usually dominated by Norway
spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) and/or downy birch, and on cutaway peatland silver birch can
also regenerate naturally (Svensson et al., 1998). Natural seeding can be abundant, especially
on shallow-peated or fertilized cutaway sites (Hytönen and Aro, 2004). Scots pine (Pinus
sylvestris L.), Norway spruce, willow (Salix spp.), and aspen (Populus tremula) are other species
native to Sweden that can be established on organic soils. Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis
(Bong.) Carr.), black spruce (Picea mariana Britton, Sterns & Poggenb.), tamarack (Larix laricina
K.Koch), and lodge pole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl.) are exotic species that have been planted
with relative success in Finland, Ireland and Sweden. Willow and birch find good utilization as
short rotation cultivation coppice stands in Finland (Hytönen and Kaunisto, 1999) and other
countries. Birch and pine can tolerate rather low pH values, while willow requires higher pH,
more N (Hytönen and Kaunisto, 1999), and in general more nutrients. Thus establishment and
maintenance of willow, especially with fertilization, will be more expensive (Kaunisto and Aro,
1996).
Norway spruce does not find great application for afforestation on cutaway peatlands in
Scandinavia because of its frost sensitivity, and also its somewhat higher nutrient (especially P)
requirements compared to Scots pine and other species as mentioned earlier. Because Norway
spruce is more shade tolerant than pine species, it can be regarded as a tree species that will
follow in a later stage of forest succession following after pioneer species such as birch
(Päivänen, 1998). This can be of interest regarding the development of multilayered stand
structure of forest plantations.
However, Norway spruce is a preferred species for afforestation and reclamation on cutaway
peatlands in Ireland where the species shows good growth (Jones and Farrell, 2000). Sitka
spruce and lodge pole pine are North American species that also find more utilization in Ireland
and the UK than in Scandinavia. In Ireland and Scotland, the aforementioned North American
species have been planted on heath lands and bogs where good results have been achieved
18
Hence, they may be suitable species for afforestation of cutaway peatlands in these countries,
but thus far they have been little used in Sweden.
4.1.1.8 Establishment of forest plantations
Planting is a reliable method for afforestation and there has also been good tree establishment
achieved from sowing. In many cases afforestation will be easily achieved through natural
regeneration from seeds dispersed from adjacent uplands (Svensson et al., 1998). This is
especially successful for birch (better for downy than for silver birch) species and Scots pine on
peat ash treated or fertilized (N 0: P 40: K 80) sites where these tree species are found in nearby
the cutaway peatland (Svensson et al., 1998). Hilli et al. (2003) investigated the effect of nurse
crop density and fertilization on the height growth of Norway spruce seedlings on a drained
peatland. Even the thinned nurse crop slowed down the growth of the understorey. Height
growth was the best on the plots on which the nurse crop was removed and the plots fertilized.
Despite the better growth in the open, there is still the advantage of protection of the young
spruce seedlings from late spring frost.
The quality of the timber is influenced by the stocking rate or density at planting as mentioned
earlier. Kaunisto and Aro (1996) recommended the establishment of pine forests at a density of
at least 2, 500-3, 000 plants per ha, the same as recommended for mineral soils. High amounts
of nitrogen (as present in cutaway peatlands) will cause pine trees to grow thick branches, giving
rise to knot-rich lumber, which can be avoided by planting at higher densities of
6, 000-7, 000 plants per ha.
4.1.1.9 Potential problems
Mycorrhizae
Most plant species live and thrive better in symbiotic partnership with mycorrhizal fungi. These
fungi extract mineral elements from soil for their host plant, and live off the plant's sugars. Trees
growing with mycorrhizal unions are better able to survive and thrive better in stressful (often
man-made) environments. For the best tree growth, seedlings should be infested with
mycorrhizae. In Finland and Sweden, this is not found to be a problem, because there are
usually large adjacent forested areas which seem effectual for spreading of spores of the
mycorrhizal fungi. Non-mycorrhizal seedlings have been found to be infected within two years
after planting (Kaunisto, Comments to University College Dublin after an Excursion to Ireland in
2000). The infection occurs via air-spread spores from surrounding forests. Therefore, in wellforested countries such as Finland and Sweden, there does not seem to be as urgent need for
promoting the mycorrhizal infestation of newly established trees on cutaway peatlands as there
may be in countries like Ireland.
Frost
As mentioned earlier cutaway peat areas are usually situated lower than their surroundings, and
they can be frost pockets where cold air collects and stagnates. Surprisingly, studies on late
spring frost impact on Norway and Sitka spruce in Ireland showed that additional vegetation in
the tree plantation would not only result in more competition for light, space, and nutrients, but
may also create better conditions for more severe frosts (Smith, 2000). It seems that bare peat
surfaces, especially when wet, store more heat during the day and release more heat during the
19
night than vegetation-covered surfaces. Species such as Norway and Sitka spruce are very
susceptible to frost owing to their early dates of budburst (Smith, 2000). Even though the frost
might not kill the trees, it damages them and thus reduces the growth increment (Smith, 2000).
Competition
Competition from weeds and other ground vegetation can hinder establishment and growth of
seedlings. In Ireland, the competition from weeds was not found to be a problem in sites where
all other factors such as temperature, water, and nutrient supply were optimum (Smith, 2000).
Plants that could be competitive to tree seedlings were soft rush (Juncus effusus L.) and
rosebay willowherb (Chamaenerion angustifolium (L.)Scop.). In the Irish studies, competition
occurred more commonly in Sitka spruce stands than in Norway spruce stands, probably owing
to differences in light demands by the crop and its canopy development (Smith, 2000). It was
expected that vegetation competition was most likely to occur where forest plantations were
established after other vegetation had already invaded the area. This was the case when there
was a longer period between the end of peat production and the reclamation of the cutaway site
(Smith, 2000). It was suggested that spraying herbicides to control weedy vegetation can only be
used to a limited degree. The machinery used for herbicide application would be too heavy to be
used on cutaway peatlands, which have a rather low bearing capacity. Since cutaway peatlands
are usually situated in larger water catchment areas, the use of pesticides and herbicides could
have a major negative impact on other watercourses and ecosystems.
Peat cracking
Cracking is a rather poorly understood phenomenon that mostly occurs in Phragmites-peat
(Boyle, 2000) and in gyttja soils (Berglund, 1996). The causes are unclear, but one suggestion
could be that it is enhanced by the slits made during the planting of seedlings. Another possibility
is the occurrence of extreme shrinking and swelling caused by drying and wetting of the surface
peat. As afforestation trials in Ireland have shown, once the cracks occur they do not fill, not
even in mature tree stands where abundant tree litter develops over the ground surface (Boyle,
2000). However, up to the present there have been no severe occurrences or problems from
cracking reported in Sweden. This may be owing to the fact that Phragmites-peat is not very
abundant in Sweden.
Leaching of nutrients
Leaching can occur with suspended solids (SPS), total organic carbon (TOC), N, P, K, and P is
perhaps the most important nutrient to be addressed in this context. It can leach from sites,
especially sites with high organic content, and is the element most commonly deficient for
plantation growth (Paavilainen and Paivainen1995; Kaunisto, Comments to University College
Dublin after an Excursion to Ireland in 2000). The leaching of P is probably owing to the low P
adsorption capacity of organic soils. These soils tend also to be deficient in iron (Fe) and
aluminium (Al) (Nieminen, 1998). P leaching is of great importance because it can cause
eutrophication and other kinds of damage to lakes (especially small and shallow lakes) and other
aquatic ecosystems. How severe this problem can become depends on the location of the
former peat cutting area in relation to the surroundings, and the water catchment area in which it
occurs.
20
Increased leaching can occur after drainage maintenance. The drainage maintenance also
increases concentrations of NH4+, Na, K, Ca, Mg, and Al, and less clearly Fe and S (Ahti et al.,
1998).
4.1.1.10 Forest management
Owing to the low ground-bearing capacity of cutaway peatlands, harvesting with heavy
machinery can only be carried out during wintertime (Sirén, 2004). Ditches on site will set
limitations to thinning and harvesting operations, which means that thinning and maintenance of
the ditch network must be integrated. Transportation problems can occur owing to long
distances for movement of equipment. That may make timber production on cutaway peatlands
unprofitable, especially when the tree growth rate is low. In addition, if the quantity removed
during thinning operations is small (30-40 m3/ha) then it is even less profitable (Sirén, 2004).
This means that the main problems of harvesting on peatland forests are not technical but
economical. When medium-sized single-grip harvesters with a mass of 13-15 tonnes, and
forwarders with 11-13 tonnes are used during thinning operations, it is possible to use
appropriate thinning methods. Strip cutting is a reliable and reasonable method concerning the
rather narrow spacing between the ditches (Sirén, 2004). However, when it comes to the final
harvesting operations there is more concern owing to the larger and heavier machinery involved
According to Sirén (2004), there exist solutions for the problems with harvesting on peatlands,
but they depend on co-operation amongst forest owners, forest management associations, the
forest industry, and forest machinery contractors. Appropriate timing and choice of methods for
thinning operations will enable periodic returns on large investments done in peatland forestry
(Sirén, 2004). The same is expected for afforested cutaway peatlands where spacing of
drainage ditches, distance to access roads, and low bearing capacity are similar to forested
peatlands, and set the limits for technically and economically viable harvesting operations.
Further problems that can occur after thinning and final harvest are that the water table can rise
and thus growing conditions for the continuous tree cover or the planted forest will become too
wet (Päivänen, 1998). When afforested cutaway peatlands are clear-cut, the establishment of
new forests will face problems owing to high groundwater tables, frosts, and possibly
competition from field and bush vegetation (Lundin, 1998). Solutions to address these problems
will be to maintain the drainage network and apply other soil treatments such as mounding.
Mounding is conducted by digging shallow ditches at 12-15 m spacing, and placing the spoil
from the ditches in mounds along the ditches on which trees are planted (Nieminen, 1998).
4.1.2 Agriculture
After forestry, agriculture has been the most common rehabilitation option for cutaway
peatlands. “In Europe, the agricultural use of organic soils takes 14% of total peatland area.
Climatic factors limiting agricultural production on organic soils, a food production surplus and a
serious environmental crisis led to a European Union Directive . . . intended to exclude large
areas of peatlands from agricultural production.” (Ilnicki, 2003) Many countries like Sweden and
Finland have sufficient arable land already on mineral soils, so the after use of cutaways for
conventional cultivation of grain might only occasionally and in small-scale find application
(Selin, 1996). There have actually been decreasing demands for agricultural products, owing to
imports from outside Scandinavia (Vasander et al., 2003). These are probably the main reasons
why not much research has been done on agriculture on cutaway peatlands. Nonetheless,
knowledge about agriculture on peat soils comes from Russia, Germany, Belarus, and Poland,
as well as other countries, and this can be applied to cutaway peatlands.
21
Crops favourable for agricultural after use are winter rye, oats, timothy, vetch, foxtail, lupine,
potatoes and turnips (Kreshtapova, 2003). Okruszko (1996) lists carrots, onions, celery, and
lettuce. Virkajärvi and Huhta (1996) state further that cutaway peatlands are suitable for grass
production.
Cutaway peatlands, usually being large in size and with rather even topographies, have some
advantages for agricultural after use, such as the existence of drainage networks and road
networks. Often but not always cutaway peatlands are relatively free from stones. Shortly after
the peat field comes out of production, it is free of any vegetation and soil-borne diseases or
pests and therefore the cultivation and establishment of crops will be relatively trouble free. A
disadvantage is that peatlands are usually infertile and often located in rather remote locations
(far away from the farms) (Virkajärvi and Huhta, 1996). Also, a common problem is that peat
soils have low bearing capacity for vehicles (Berglund, 1996).
The costs for establishment of agricultural crops can be high, depending on how much work
needs to be done to level the site’s soil surface. To prepare the site can require more work
where open drains remain and the surface is very uneven. Usually the fields are higher on the
sides than in the middle, and also they are domed between the parallel drains (Virkajärvi and
Huhta, 1996). Costs during cultivation can be calculated for the maintenance of the drainage
system, further liming, and fertilizer applications. Liming is especially needed when bogs or
rather acidic sites are converted into agricultural fields (Virkajärvi and Huhta, 1996).
Organic soils vary greatly in their suitability for agricultural use. Hence, the characteristics of the
remaining peat play an important role in determining which crop to choose. Woody peat areas
where snags and wooden logs remain should not be considered because the removal can be
very expensive, but even though they require more labour, they usually have more highly
decomposed and more nutrient-containing peats and are more productive (Dachnowski-Stokes,
1926). Gyttja soils, which represent a transition from organic to mineral soils, are often found
underlying peat soils (Berglund, 1996). Usually, the drainage of peat soils causes them to
subside, and the subsequent reduction of macroporosity and increased bulk density reduces
permeability by air and water. The same characteristics are usually better on gyttja soils
(Berglund, 1996), but this is not always true. The suitability of gyttja soil depends very much on
its sulphur and carbonate content and also on pH, K, N and organic matter content (Berglund,
1996). The main problem with agricultural use of gyttja soils is owing to acid subsoils with high
contents of soluble Al, and soil water repellency in topsoils mixed with peat (Berglund, 1996).
Kreshtapova and Krupnov (1998) consider impermeable sub-soils (clays and loams) to be
unsuitable for agricultural after use because they have weak soil improvement characteristics.
The pH is usually less than 4, and thus the content of mobile Fe and Al is high. Organic soils
connected to aquifers are not recommended for agricultural after use (Kreshtapova et al., 2003).
More suitable cutaway areas for agricultural after use are those on more permeable parent
materials (sands and coarse loamy sands) usually found on ancient floodplains. They have a
high base saturation, optimal acidity, and low content of mobile Al and are higher in humic acids
and nitrogen. Other peatlands will require fertilization with micronutrients (Kreshtapova and
Krupnov, 1998). Cutaway peatlands overlying limnic materials lack a contact horizon. For peat
soil improvement, sapropel (10-30% organic matter) should be introduced. That will increase the
content in exchangeable Ca, K and mineral N and increase the nutrients, ash content, and bulk
density (Kreshtapova et al., 2003).
22
Areas that have been out of production for a longer time will have to be cleared of undesired
vegetation (grass and bushes) that may spread in from the ditches. For cutaway peatlands that
will be used for agricultural crops, the drainage network has to be reconstructed, all woody
material removed, the surface levelled, and depressions filled Factors that influence the quantity
and quality of the crop yield are as follows:
• abrupt transitions from waterlogged to water deficit soils;
• sharp temperature and moisture fluctuations during the growing period;
• varying thickness of the residual peat;
• spatial and temporal variations in the quality and yield of the crops;
• excessive contents of mobile forms of Al, Fe, and molybdenum (Mo);
• the imbalance of other macro- and micronutrients (Kreshtapova et al., 2003);
• fertilization with mineral N, P, and K (Kreshtapova and Krupnov, 1998).
The variation in the thickness of the peat layer can cause variations in soil conditions, fertility,
and carrying capacity that can have a negative impact on the harvest of agriculture crops
(Virkajärvi and Huhta, 1996). Homogeneity in crop yield is an important factor for economically
efficient harvesting and for obtaining high yields.
In general, the pH range is low in cutaway peatlands, between 4.0 and 5.4. Consequently,
Virkajärvi and Huhta (1996) recommended liming of the site with 8-15 tonnes/ha (amounts
exceeding 10 tonnes will have to be applied in two applications). Liming can also improve the
rooting depth of the cultivated crops (Berglund, 1996).
In Germany, the Netherlands, and Belarus it has been a practice for a long time to mix the
underlying substratum with the residual peat. This creates a completely new soil profile with
rather even conditions that is characterized by little depth of peat, which is waterlogged in the
spring and dry during the summer (Okruszko, 1996). In general, mixing the peat with the
underlying substratum will reduce wind erosion hazards and increase ash content, bulk density,
and amounts of available K and P (Ilnicki, 2003).
The water table depth for agricultural fields on peatlands is recommended to be 1.0-1.2 m
(Ilnicki, 2003). Macroclimatic factors that Ilnicki (2003) lists as limiting agricultural production on
organic soils are as follows:
• too short vegetation period;
• too low mean annual temperature;
• too large differences between mean temperature in July and January;
• too large temperature differences between day and night;
• frequent frost and not enough accumulated degree-days during the vegetation period.
Since organic soils are usually located in topographical depressions characterized by higher
temperature amplitude, higher frequency of frost, and higher relative air humidity, the
microclimate is more severe than in the surrounding mineral soils (Ilnicki, 2003). Organic soils
are cooler than mineral soils during the summer months and warmer during the winter (Ilnicki,
2003).
Criteria for soils being suitable for agricultural after use, developed from research in Russia by
Kreshtapova et al. (2003), are:
• thickness of the arable peat layer (<15 cm to 30-40 cm)
• degree of peat decomposition (<20% to >50%)
• C/N ratio (10-14 to >25)
23
•
•
•
•
ash content (<0.10 to > 0.40 kg/kg)
bulk density (<0.20 to > 0.40 g/cm3)
pH (< 4.5 to >6.0)
base saturation of the cation exchange capacity (< 20% to > 60%)
Based on these criteria, Kreshtapova et al. (2003) provided indicators to monitor the organic soil
quality of cutaway peatlands, such as thickness of the residual peat layer, degree of
decomposition, ash content, bulk density, pH, base saturation, content of NH4+–N, and C/N ratio
of the peat.
An important recommendation is that the peat layer should not be less than 30-40 cm. This is
because organic soils tend to subside at a rate of 1-1.5 cm/year (Kreshtapova et al., 2003).
Furthermore, the best yields are obtained from sites with a peat layer of 50-100 cm (ibid.).
Virkajärvi and Huhta (1996) recommend a residual peat layer thickness of 20-40 cm, and to mix
the peat with the underlying subsoil to improve the soil structure and nutrient holding capacity. It
has to be mentioned that subsidence is not spatially uniform and neither is the level of the
underlying subsoil (Virkajärvi and Huhta, 1996; Ilnicki, 2003). Peat subsidence is enhanced by
peat fires, and wind and water erosion. The thicker the peat layer, the lower the bulk density,
and the deeper the drainage ditches, the higher the rate of peat subsidence (Ilnicki, 2003).
The after use of agricultural production areas can be successful when carried out properly.
Usually, agricultural fields are monocultures and do not provide habitats for many species. From
a nature conservation point of view, and with worldwide wetland concerns and policies in mind,
restoration and other rehabilitation options should be considered for cutaway areas. Usually the
layer of peat left after peat production is shallow. Agricultural crop production has to be carried
out on aerated soil conditions, which at the same time enhances biological processes
(humification and decomposition); thus the peat subsides and shrinks away (Okruszko, 1996).
Because of mineralization of organic soils, and decreasing depths of residual peat, the area of
peatlands used in agriculture has been steadily decreasing worldwide (Berglund, 1996;
Okruszko, 1996; Vasander et al., 2003). As a result, the restoration of wetlands and even more
so mires, owing to their natural functions of peat accumulation, carbon-storing and uptake of
greenhouse gases should be given highest priority.
4.1.3 Biomass cultivation
“The important thing in science is not so much to obtain new facts as to discover new ways of
thinking about them.” (Sir William Bragg cited by Finell, 2003)
Pulp production from grasses, straw, agricultural by-products and other non-woody sources are
more and more being used in a worldwide context. Technologies and methods are developing
rapidly. By 2010, Western European countries are predicted to increase their pulp production
from non-woody materials by 300%. Today, up to 30% of the hardwood fibres in printing paper
and cartons could be obtained from non-woody material without loss of quality and without major
difficulties during the production process (Finell, 2003). Suitable plants for fibre production for
bio-fuel are reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea),
meadow fescue (Festuca pratensis), cocksfoot (Phleum pratense), and brome grass (Bromus
inermis) (Pahkala et al., 1996; Finell, 2003). In this section, the cultivation of reed canary grass
on cutaway peatlands and its suitability as a biomass crop for the production of energy and pulp
24
will be reviewed. Furthermore, this section covers biomass energy production from fast-growing
tree species, and lastly other plant species that are interesting from a bio-fuel perspective.
4.1.3.1 Reed canary grass cultivation
Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) is a perennial robust coarse grass that can grow up
to 2 m high. It is distributed widely across the temperate regions of Europe, Asia, and North
America, and is mostly found in wet places, along rivers, streams, lakes, and ponds. The plant
has excellent frost and drought tolerance (NRCS, 2002). It thrives on most soil types but shows
best annual biomass production on light organic-rich soils (Finell, 2003) with intermediate to rich
nutrient content and a pH around 6. The plant reproduces prolifically by both rhizomes and
seeds, and seeding has shown good results for the establishment of reed canary grass
cultivations. In Sweden, the annual yields can be up to 8-10 tonnes per hectare when harvested
during summer and 6-8 tonnes per hectare when harvested with the delayed harvest method (to
be explained later on) in the following spring (Finell, 2003). In Finland, trials have shown drymatter yields of reed canary grass of 6-10 tonnes per hectare (Selin, 1996). Leinonen et al.
(1998) report 8-10 tonnes dry matter per hectare, which according to them is equal to harvests
on mineral soils. As mentioned above, satisfactory yields can be achieved the second year after
planting and can last for up to 10-15 years (Leinonen et al., 1998; Finell, 2003).
Reed canary grass can be used both for the production of bio-energy fuel powder and for high
quality chemical pulp. It can be used to replace birch as a raw material in the pulp industry
(Selin, 1996; Finell, 2003). Finell (2003) shows that reed canary grass can produce double the
amount of pulp per year compared to birch and that the quantity of production is independent of
latitude, at least in Sweden and Finland. Selin (1996), in tests in Finland, reported yields of 4
tonnes/ha of short-fibred pulp. Reed canary grass can only be used as a supplementary fuel to
wood chips, wood waste, or sod or milled peat because of its low energy content (Leinonen et
al., 1998). During recent years, annual biomass production seems to increase with the
development of new breeding lines. Trials are still ongoing (Leinonen et al., 1998; Finell, 2003).
Aside from these economical benefits of reed canary grass for reclaiming former peat production
areas, this grass species can also be used for environmental protection such as evaporation and
in filtration of runoff waters from peat production areas. Water from peat production sites can be
diverted through reed canary grass fields where nutrients in the water will be absorbed, thus
reducing the impact on watercourses. During experiments in Finland it was found that reed
canary grass absorbed nutrients such as N, P, and K (Leinonen et al., 1998). In the USA, reed
canary grass fields are used for filtration of water from food processing industries, livestock
operations, and sewage treatment plants (NRCS, 2002).
Reed canary grass provides excellent erosion control. Additionally, it provides excellent nesting
and escape cover for many bird species which also readily eat the shattered seeds (NRCS,
2002). This can be of high interest for areas where restored wetland and waterfowl habitats are
chosen as alternatives for after use. It should be noted that reed canary grass may become
weedy or invasive in some regions or habitats and may displace desirable vegetation if not
properly managed (NRCS, 2002).
Reed canary grass can be harvested in large quantities once a year. Cutaway peatlands and
areas where the production has only partly ceased are therefore suitable for the cultivation of
reed canary grass because they are usually large in size and at least to some extent already
equipped with infrastructure. Large-scale machinery can be used on these fields and there is
usually space for storage of the machinery on site (Leinonen et al., 1998).
25
Some of the problems associated with the use of reed canary grass are on-site storage,
transport, and processing of the harvested crop. Reed canary grass always needs to be covered
with plastic sheets while stored and can be stored either pure or as a mixture with milled or sod
peat. Stored by itself, there will be no quality loss of the fibre if the moisture content is about 2024%. However, when stored as a mixture with milled or sod peat, which normally have average
moisture contents of 48% and 29%, respectively, reed canary grass absorbs moisture which
reduces its quality for burning (Leinonen et al., 1998).
Transport of reed canary grass tends to become unprofitable owing to long distances between
the fields and the handling locations. Also, reed canary grass is packed in bales, and these are
not as easy to transport as wood chips (Finell, 2003).
Major disadvantages are variations in yield per year and the fact that the crop can only be
harvested once a year. Pulp mills and burners require a steady supply, all year round. The
problem of variations can be counteracted by choosing suitable varieties of reed canary grass
for the particular site (adapted to the regional climate), by fertilization, proper storage, and by
mixing reed canary grass with other kinds of fibre materials.
During recent years, much experimental work on reed canary grass has come from Finland
where VTT Energy and Vapo Oy, two of the largest peat producers in Finland, have carried out
research on their production sites. Every year 1, 000-2, 000 ha are removed from production
from a total of 50, 000 ha of peat production in Finland (Leinonen et al., 1998).
Peat cutting areas have good features for the establishment of reed canary grass plantations
because they are weed free and usually flat. For successful establishment the seedbed needs to
be moist and firm, which in most cases can be arranged at the particular sites by blocking
drainage ditches, or in fewer cases by pumping and irrigation (NRCS, 2002; Finell, 2003).
According to the US Natural Resources Conservation Service, seeding should be done during
late fall or early spring with a rate of 5.6-7.8 kg/ha. After about two years the crop will be
available for a first harvest. It should be noted that in order to maintain the crop vigour and to
promote rapid regrowth, about 15 cm should be left after mowing (NRCS, 2002).
In Finnish trials, Leinonen et al. (1998) reported three possible times of harvest of reed canary
grass during one growing season: August to September (after plant growth stopped), late
autumn (just before snow), and spring (when snow had melted). Spring harvesting is also called
‘delayed harvest system’ and is carried out as follows: “The delayed harvest system for reed
canary grass was developed at the Swedish University of Agriculture Sciences in Umeå in the
mid-1980s. The aim of the method was to delay the harvest to a period when dry biomass could
be harvested in the field. For northern Sweden, where the fields in wintertime are covered with
snow, the harvest (once a year) is delayed until early spring when the snow has melted and just
before the new growth starts. Translocation of nutrients from the leaves and stem to the root
system will occur during autumn and winter, which enables good quality for bio-fuel and fibre
and lowers the need of fertilization. The crop is left in the field during the winter and harvested as
wilted material the following spring when the soil is dry enough to make harvest possible. It is
then possible to harvest under favourable weather conditions and to obtain storable dry material
directly from the field, which reduces production costs” (Finell, 2003). The delayed harvest
system has the advantage that the moisture content of the yield then is between 10-20% and
thus does not need more drying for storing. Furthermore, most nutrients have moved from the
plant into the roots, which is favourable for maintenance of nutrients in the crop and soil
(Leinonen et al., 1998).
26
Leinonen et al. (1998) divides the production costs into five factors: foundation of the growth,
annual fertilization, harvesting and storage, long-distance haulage to users, and productive value
of the field. Respectively, these factors account for 10%, 19%, 26%, 15%, and 31% of total
production costs. The costs usually cover the investment in machinery and the work carried out.
Those costs are reduced when some of the machinery used in agriculture is the same as used in
the peat harvesting operation.
Regarding pests and diseases of reed canary grass, most information available comes from the
USA. In Sweden and Finland, the crop is still only cultivated on a limited basis (Finell, 2003).
Infestations that could possibly occur may be caused by the gall midge (Epicalamus phalaridis)
whose larvae feed on the leaf sheaths of the grass. This predation reduces the dry matter yield
by about 50% and weakens the crop so that weeds can invade the plantations. So far, outbreaks
of the gall midge have only been a local phenomenon in Sweden (Finell, 2003) but gall midge
could become a serious pest with increasing use of the canary grass. In the US, canary grass is
also affected by the leaf disease Helmihosporium giganteum and the tawny blotch disease
(Stagonospora foliicola) (NRCS, 2002).
Before undertaking large scale production of reed canary grass or other energy plants, it is
necessary to find out how suitable different kinds of cutaway areas are for cultivation of the
various species.
The use of non-woody material in general can reduce deforestation in some countries and
reduce the amount of other fuels used for energy production. To mix the fibres of reed canary
grass with peat or other fuel can lead to additional reductions in deforestation. Since peatlands
are wetlands and these are the natural habitats for reed canary grass, using cutaway peatlands
for bio-fuel production is deemed by the author to be a very good after use option.
Reed canary grass together with bamboo makes up 18% for the world’s pulp capacity. But in
Sweden it is still only cultivated on the small scale (< 500 ha) (Finell, 2003). During the next
decades ever increasing areas will be removed from peat production and become available for
other land uses. The cultivation of reed canary grass combines particularly well with peat cutting,
creation of waterfowl habitats, and the restoration of wetlands. Further technological
developments in the processing and burning of bio-fuels will lead to an even larger demand for
alternative fuels in the near future. Reed canary grass, therefore, seems to be a most promising
crop.
4.1.3.2 Energy forests
“Biomass production for energy purposes through cultivating rapidly growing deciduous trees
can be ecologically interesting and economically sound.” (Christersson, 1998)
Research on energy forests has been conducted since the 1970s. By planting cuttings close
together (18, 000 ha), energy forest plantations utilize carefully chosen species (example birch
and willow) and clones with high growth potential (Christersson, 1998). During harvesting,
preferably done in wintertime when the ground is frozen, stumps are left from which new shoots
sprout the following year. Plantations are harvested every 3-5 years (Hörnsten, 1992) and some
plantations will provide up to six harvests during a period of about 25 years (Christersson, 1998).
These plantations can produce up to 10-12 tonnes of dry matter per hectare per year, equivalent
to the energy content of 4-5 m3 of oil. For every unit of energy input, 15-18 units of energy output
are produced (Christersson, 1998).
27
Energy forests can be established with tree species that are fast growing, and that are capable
of regenerating from coppicing or cuttings. The plant material of clones from willow coppices
(Salix viminalis and Salix dasyclados) is most suitable for short rotation energy-production
forests (Nilsson, 1988). However, alder (Alnus spp.) and poplar (Populus spp.) can also be used
(Hörnsten, 1992).
Grey alder (Alnus incana), a species with a high production of woody biomass, is more or less
self-sufficient for nitrogen (N-fixing) and is well adapted to Fennoscandian conditions (Rytter,
1996). Birch can be cultivated for the production of short fibres but since birch is very sensitive to
competition from neighbouring trees, it should be planted at lower densities (Elowson, 1995).
Birch, in comparison with clones from willow and poplar, is not as highly productive even though
it shows high juvenile growth rates (Elowson, 1995). Birch is a pioneer species, but so are willow
and poplar. Willows require soils with a pH of at least 4.5 otherwise root-development will be
hindered. Conversely, birch and alder are able to form roots in soils with a pH lower than 4.5
(Ericsson et al., 1983).
Before planting, the cutaway peat site must be prepared in the same way as timber plantations
and fertilized as recommended with 100 kg P, 160 kg K and 60 kg N (Hörnsten, 1992). Once the
plantation is established, it is recommended to fertilize annually according to nutrient analysis
(Ericsson et al., 1983). Fertilizing only with those nutrients which are lacking and according to
the requirement of each tree species will help to reduce nutrient leakage from plantations.
Energy forest plantations will have to be fertilized in order to achieve high biomass production.
Therefore, it is not crucial for the roots to reach down into the mineral soil as would be required
in timber production. As a consequence, the underlying mineral soil plays a less critical role and
the thickness of the residual peat layer could increase, or at least the variation in thickness of the
residual peat would play a smaller role (Hörnsten, 1992).
Owing to the high wood increment in these plantations, the evapotranspiration rates will be very
high. During very warm summers it might be necessary to irrigate to avoid increment stagnation
and possible economical losses. It is furthermore essential to keep the drainage system working
as suggested by Hörnsten (1992); in addition, Hörnsten recommends the water table to be
established at a depth of 30-40 cm below the soil surface.
In energy forest plantations, the most important factor influencing plant growth is the climate.
The above-mentioned tree species are all very susceptible to frost and do not thrive in harsh
climates. Since peat production areas are usually frost pockets they might not be the most
suitable areas for this form of cultivation, especially for frost susceptible species (Ericsson et al.,
1983). On the other hand, trials and experiments from Sweden, Finland, and Estonia seem
promising in finding clones that are able to cope with the prevailing climatic conditions and late
spring frosts.
Insects and diseases are other important factors concerning plantations. These are usually more
severe in monocultures, but there is very little available information on this topic.
4.1.3.3 Other plant species for biomass production
Turnip rape (Brassica rapa ssp. oleifeira DC) can be cultivated on cutaway peatlands for the
production of fuel (Virkajärvi and Huhta, 1996). Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) has, however,
shown discouraging performance in trials.
28
4.1.4 Other reclamations
4.1.4.1 Berry plantations
After ceasing peat production, another option is to use the area for the cultivation of cranberries
(Vaccinum oxycoccus [= Oxycoccus microcarpus]; Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait.). This crop is
commercially grown in the north-eastern and Midwest USA for berry production and as a form of
wetland rehabilitation (by re-establishment of Sphagnum cover). Since the late 1960s, many
trials with cranberry have been conducted in Estonia, in particular at Nigula State Nature
Reserve. The increasing interest in cranberry plantations originates from the conflict between the
conversion of ‘useless’ mires to forest and agricultural fields, and the understanding of the
importance of mires as beneficial for humans (the basis of food, clean water) and for wildlife
habitat.
The interest in berry plantations, especially in Estonia, originates from the loss of vast wetlands
all over Estonia and with them the unique cranberry habitats. Reasons for their destruction are
forestry melioration, peat cutting and extensive oil-shale mining. A preliminary analysis of an
inventory of valuable cranberry mires conducted during 1965 and 1972 in Estonia revealed that
40-50% of cranberry habitats have been lost (Nigula Nature Reserve Administration, 2003).
Cranberries grow best and are most productive on bog edges and in transitional bogs where
there is slight minerotrophy, rather than in the centres of the ombrotrophic bog where they are
much reduced in size and productivity. Cranberry plantations are especially promising where
afforestation or the conversion of peatland into arable land would not be successful owing to the
hydrological conditions of the former peat cutting area. For the successful cultivation of
cranberries it is indispensable to reconstruct hydrological conditions as close as possible to the
previous natural conditions. This includes eventually closing the drainage system and, if
necessary, pumping water onto the fields or even spray irrigation.
Because cranberries have good colonizing abilities, abandoned peat production areas will
quickly be covered. Eventually, other mire vegetation species such as peat moss or cotton grass
will re-colonize, which helps to re-establish a full plant cover. The plant cover will further
decrease aerial pollution from peat dust and turn ‘wasteland’ into economically useful wetland. If
all goes well, peat will accumulate again under the secondary plant cover.
For successful cultivation, areas with relatively high groundwater tables and weakly decomposed
(fibric) peat are most suitable for the establishment of cranberry cultures. Berry production areas
in North America are flooded to float the berries and facilitate harvesting. This also provides an
enrichment of nutrients from the flood water, thereby maintaining high levels of berry production.
In the 1970s, a method for establishing cranberry plantations was worked out in Estonia. After
the berries are harvested in autumn, the seeds are separated by washing and stored through
winter in a moist, cool environment. The following spring, seeds are soaked for about 12 hours in
a 10% Na2CO3 solution, washed carefully, and dried for 24 hours. Treated seeds will achieve 8090% germination rates, while only 2-5% of the untreated seeds germinate.
Before the seeds are sown onto the levelled and moist peat field, the seeds are mixed with
sawdust to disperse the seeds properly. For Estonia, the best time for sowing is late April or
early May. For good results the amount of seeds and sawdust applied to the field should be 20
29
kg/ha. After the sowing, the field should be fertilized with 300-400 kg/ha superphosphate and 10
kg/ha CuSO4.
Sown cranberry plantations will be ready to harvest after 5-6 years and satisfactory yields can be
achieved for about 20 years thereafter. A more time consuming and costly method for
propagating cranberries is using cuttings instead of seeds; however, cuttings bear fruits earlier
than plants originating from seeds. Cuttings should have 5-6 leaves, and they may either be
planted directly into the field, or first grown in greenhouses to produce hardier seedlings for later
transplantation.
New plantations, even though the plants may be fully frost hardened, are very susceptible to
frost heaving in winter time. During spring time, flooding can occur and cause damages. The
cultivations should be kept free from weeds and, most importantly, from invading bushes and
trees.
The highest yields harvested from natural cranberry habitats in Estonia were up to 1000 kg/ha,
but a more typical yield is about 250 kg/ha. Cranberry plantations established from cuttings
produced 2-3 tonnes/ha, while the output of sown cultivations only reached half of that amount.
The crop yield and the development of the plant coverage depends also very much on the
cranberry cultivars that are used Cranberry types from North America showed almost no
success in Estonia while types from Russia thrived well. Today there can be found an
astonishing 760 different varieties of cranberry in Estonia.
The success of cranberry farming very much depends on the conditions of the cutaway peatland
after harvesting ceases. The following major features have to be addressed: peat depth,
physical characteristics of the peat, water supply, water holding capacity of the peat, and
proximity to continuing peat production. It is advantageous if the former peat production area is
already equipped with infrastructure such as drainage network and roads. Disadvantages
include high capital investment requirements (initial or continuous) and lack of long-term returns
(Chiasson and Chiasson, 2000).
Cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus) production is mentioned as an after use option by Virkajärvi
and Huhta (1996). As mentioned above, cutaway peatlands have many characteristics which
enable berry production. Similar to cranberry, cloudberry grows best in transitional bogs and on
poor fens with slight minerotrophic influence. Some provenance trials have been done in Finland
but more research should be done on its ecological requirements as related to its cultivation.
Currently, there is demand in Scandinavian for cloudberry jam and for the specialty liquor ‘lakka’.
There is also a small demand in Newfoundland, Canada for handpicked ‘bake apples’, the local
common name for cloudberries. Demand for these products could grow with active marketing.
Highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) is grown commercially on Burns Bog near
Vancouver, British Columbia. For this purpose, the living bog surface is removed, and a field is
created on which Sphagnum does not necessarily re-establish. There are potentially other
species of berry producing shrubs that could be grown on cutaways, for example gooseberries
(Ribes oxycanthoides), red and black currents (Ribes rubrum and R. nigrum), shrubby
raspberries and blackberries (Rubus spp.), and arctic raspberry - dewberry (Rubus arcticus).
Another popular berry crop could be strawberries (Fragaria virginiana, F. vesca).
30
4.1.4.2 Vegetable and herbs
Because peat can provide suitable substrate for growing plants, and because the cutaway
peatlands provide open fields of bare peat that could be easily cultivated and regulated for
moisture content, there may be potential to use cutaway peat fields for vegetable crops,
medicinal or spice plants, and other herbs. Presently, climatic conditions and imports of
vegetables from warmer countries discourage the development of vegetable production in
Sweden. However, there is a local demand for freshly produced vegetables, particularly
organically and non-chemically grown, in markets in cities and towns throughout Scandinavia.
This kind of intensive vegetable farming is probably best suited to deep layers of dark
minerotrophic peat, moderately acid to circumneutral, which occur at the bottom of peatlands
overlying mineral soils. However, even poorer, acidic peats may have potential to be cultivated
with appropriate cultivation and choice of crops.
Cutaway peat fields may also be used to grow specialty crops of high value. For example
sundew (Drosera spp.), which grows naturally in peatlands, is collected regularly in large
quantities for pharmaceutical purposes. However, this depletes natural populations, and
collection is labour-intensive and hence expensive. Since the Drosera species originate from
peatland ecosystems, it may be possible to cultivate these species with controlled growing
conditions on cutaway peatlands. Experiments aimed at cultivation of Drosera species have
been carried out in Finland, and it has been found that compared with natural conditions, yields
up to 50 times higher can be achieved by cultivation. Further research is required to improve,
test, and evaluate the economics of larger-scale pilot production systems (Galambosi et al.,
2000).
4.2 Restoration options
As defined earlier, restoration aims to convert the mire back to a natural, functioning ecosystem,
either similar to what it was before, or another functioning wetland that represents an ecosystem
that occurs in the region. Usually, this involves blocking the drainage network in order to restore
the hydrological features as close to the initial conditions as possible.
31
4.2.1 Restoration of wetlands
4.2.1.1 Restoration of peat-accumulating function
“Cut-over peatlands provide surfaces, which are potentially amenable to regeneration to a
wetland habitat.” (Wheeler, 1997)
Wetland restoration is the process of restoring the ecological functions (the interaction between
hydrology, soil, and vegetation) until regeneration of natural peat and peat accumulation is reestablished (Lode, 2001). Indeed, both Money (1995) and Wheeler (1995) highlight the fact that
in practice the restoration of wetlands should aim at bringing a site back into its former
conditions in as many respects as possible. “In the case of peatlands, the goal of restoration is
to re-establish self-regulatory mechanisms that will lead back to functional peat accumulation.”
(Quinty and Rochefort, 2002)
The restoration process can take years or even centuries. It can be divided into three stages and
time frames:
1. rewetting, that is, re-establishment of surface-wet conditions, which could take about 3-5
years;
2. re-naturation, that is, the development of appropriate vegetation, could be up to several
decades;
3. regeneration, that is, renewed peat accumulation, could take up to centuries (Money,
1995; Vasander and Roderfeld, 1996; Lode, 1999; Price et al., 2002).
Before the first step, the site may have to be cleared of undesired species such as Molinia and
Betula spp., which might hinder the establishment process of peat-forming species. Then
rewetting is done by blocking the drainage ditches, building peat dams, and creating shallow
depressions or drains to retain precipitated water. It may even be necessary to pump or sprinkle
water onto the surface to provide moisture for the peat-forming species (Money, 1995). The
return of plant cover can either happen by itself in the best cases, or it might require human
intervention through transplantation of suitable species. The choice of species will depend on the
pH and calcium content of the water flooding the site. Marsh and fen species are preferred for
pH levels above 5.0 to 5.5, while wet-loving Sphagnums prefer lower pHs. Regarding water
levels, species such as S. cuspidatum and S. riparium are good choices for the wetter
depressions or drains, while S. fallax and S. magellanicum are good choices for less wet
locations. The last step when re-establishing the peat accumulation function is securing an
appropriate water table level suitable for the good growth of the newly established dominant
plants.
Before peat extraction: Undamaged mires are diplotelmic (dual layered) systems consisting of
an upper acrotelm and a lower catotelm layer (Money, 1995). The upper layer embodies the
peat accumulating plant material (Sphagnum mosses) and varies in depth from completely
lacking in small pools up to 50 cm deep beneath hummocks. The acrotelm has two features,
aeration to support the growth of roots and high capillary water content. This abundance is
important for the surface vegetation layer not to suffer from desiccation during dry periods
(Money, 1995). The underlying catotelm consists of the permanently waterlogged peat below the
lowest water table. It is usually more compact and humified (Money, 1995). The upper portion of
the catotelm and lower part of the acrotelm is where the large majority of CH4 production occurs
through methane-producing bacteria. Some Finnish authors have proposed that a mire may be
32
considered restored to natural mire function when the methane-producing function is reestablished
The vegetation on mires occurs in relation to the water table. Sphagnum species show a vertical
distribution along a hummock (dry) to hollow (wet) gradient. The genus Sphagnum is divided into
sections, which are arranged roughly in order of occurrence from wettest to dry habitats: Section
Cuspidata or Subsecunda, Section Palustria, Section Acutifolia (Money, 1995). Another group of
Sphagnum is also sometimes recognized, the ‘Eutrophic Sphagna’. This group includes species
such as Sphagnum contorta, S. subsecunda, and S. warnstorfii.
After peat extraction: The conditions in a terminated peat field are harsh and unfriendly. The
peat is dry, black and powder-like. The temperature, as well as the moisture content, can
change quickly. This environment usually lacks a seed bank for future vegetation. Recolonization very much depends on what finds its way into the area. All these characteristics
result in unfavourable conditions for re-vegetation (Vasander and Roderfeld, 1996).
In addition, the more time has passed since drainage was first conducted, the more difficult it will
be to fully restore the wetland or peatland to its original function. Often the restoration leads to a
‘new natural state’, which is not the original one but nevertheless recognizable as another
peatland or wetland habitat (Vasander et al., 2003). It is not always true that re-wetting reverses
the effects of drainage in cutaway areas, because the soil conditions are completely different
after peat extraction (Lode, 2001).
Factors influencing re-colonization: The desired re-colonization of Sphagnum mosses may
be absent even after many decades, and often weedy species, for example, Rumex acetosella,
Epilobium angustifolium, Eriophorum spp., Calluna vulgaris, and Betula shrubs, have colonized
the site and are not improving the conditions for Sphagnum regrowth (Money, 1995). The water
regime seems to have a major influence on re-vegetation and Sphagnum species favour damp
or wet peat and shallowly inundated conditions for their re-establishment (Money, 1995).
Another factor influencing re-colonization of Sphagnum mosses is the peat depth. However, the
peat composition is not uniform with increasing peat depth. The deeper-lying peats in a peatland
are commonly of different origin, possibly fen peat, and are often more humidified and compact
(Money, 1995; Price et al., 2002). This in turn influences the water regime (Money, 1995).
Furthermore, it might be expected that peat surfaces which lie closer to the groundwater table
may be easier to re-wet (Money, 1995). Where cutting exposes the deeper lying fen peat, the
conditions might be less acidic and more basic. This will allow a different vegetation type to find
its way into the area and most likely not the Sphagnum species that favour more acidic
conditions (Money, 1995). However, one might predict that the eutrophic Sphagna and brown
mosses could perform better in these conditions, along with richer occurring sedges and
emergents. Finally, it must be mentioned that the availability of plant propagules also plays a big
role in re-colonizing peat fields. Even though all other conditions may be adequate, recolonization might still be limited by the lack of nearby plants for dispersion of propagules
(Money, 1995).
“Cutover and cutaway peatlands may be classed into three general conditions relative to peat
formation and mire restoration: a) areas with still normal or not significantly lowered peat
formation rate, that is, peat accumulation is occurring, b) areas with very slow formation of peat,
that is, peat accumulation is significantly reduced, and c) areas where formation of peat is
interrupted, that is, there is no peat accumulation.” (Lode, 2001) Clearly, the most difficult
condition is c). There is much to learn about re-vegetation from abandoned peat excavation sites
that have been spontaneously re-colonized (Money, 1995).
33
Stabilization of water tables: It is recommended to raise the water table as close as possible to
the surface, since harvested peatlands have lost their natural ability to store water (Money,
1995). The water fluctuations have to be managed to reduce water losses and to provide water
for the desired plants (Quinty and Rochefort, 2002). Both flooding and droughts need to be
avoided, most commonly by blocking the drainage ditches. This may be done by filling the
ditches with peat material in 2-3 m long sections and then compacting. This should be repeated
every 100 m, or at an interval that brings the water level sufficiently close to the surface (Quinty
and Rochefort, 2002). Sometimes wooden dams have proved effective. In some cases the
blockage of drainage ditches might not be enough. Because drainage could have caused peat
subsidence, very compact conditions could have been created (Price et al., 2002). If water is
then led into the drainage ditches for rewetting purposes, it stays in the ditches instead of
penetrating the peat and spreading throughout the area (Vasander et al., 2003). It may be
necessary to level the surfaces between the ditches in order to promote re-wetting close to the
surface or it may be necessary to pump water from the outside, preferably from an area that is
still in production. The desired conditions should not be too dry, rather too wet and regulated
according to the vegetation that is being promoted to decrease runoff from inundated peat fields,
Lode (2001) advises the use of hydrotechnical facilities, for example, dikes, dams, etc.
Furthermore, Lode suggested the development of microtopography, that is, hummocks and
ridges, which may increase the permissible mire groundwater level fluctuation by up to 20-25 cm
in dry periods (Lode, 2001; Quinty and Rochefort, 2002). Money (1995) recommends ‘ploughing’
a series of longitudinal hummocks and hollows to produce a fine network of open water instead
of earlier recommended larger lagoons. The distance between pools should be minimized
(Money, 1995).
Topography: Water distribution is highly influenced by topography. Under ideal conditions,
water would be evenly distributed throughout an area. This helps avoid deep and permanent
flooding which might cause the desired plants to be swept away by flowing water. Most
excavation sites have irregularly shaped surfaces. Sometimes these are sloping, convex or
slightly dome-shaped between parallel ditches. Such variations may need to be re-profiled in
order to create gentle gradients for vegetation colonization (Quinty and Rochefort, 2002).
Peat characteristics: It is essential to base the planning of restoration on the type of peat and
the degree of decomposition. If the remaining peat layer is thin, there may be influences from the
underlying mineral soil or enriched groundwater. This would favour marsh emergents and tall
sedge species and lead to development of marsh followed by fen types of ecosystems. Marsh
emergents and tall sedge fen species are likewise capable of forming peat, and this kind of peat
is often at the bottom of peatlands as the first, telmatic peat. This peat usually is more
decomposed and has low water storage capacity, and thus could form surfaces that are too dry
for re-colonization of Sphagnum species (Quinty and Rochefort, 2002). Regarding wetland and
mire restoration, there has not been any absolute depth proposed for the minimum peat
thickness, although Quinty and Rochefort (2002) recommended a thickness of 50 cm. It is
further stated in the ‘Peatland Restoration Guide’ that “it is better to rely on peat chemistry and
botanical composition of the peat (sedge fen vs Sphagnum peat)” to decide what vegetation to
favour.
Some other difficulties concerning the peat surface are frost heaving (freezing and thawing that
loosens the top centimetres of peat) and the phenomenon of crust formation (lichens or algae)
that discourages seeding of plants and colonization of Sphagnum and other mosses (Quinty and
Rochefort, 2002).
34
Existing vegetation: Where plants have already colonized the entire area, it is probably better
to leave them alone. However, on sites where only a few trees or other plants exist, the removal
will be necessary for successful restoration. The plant species that are present may indicate the
chemical properties of the peat (Quinty and Rochefort, 2002).
Inoculation of damaged mire with Sphagnum: In order to establish rapid regrowth of
Sphagnum, plant material can be collected from natural sites (often located nearby). Collecting
is done with tractors and special buckets and the material is placed into manure spreaders
(Rochefort et al., 2002). The plant tops (usually 10 cm) of the living vegetation are collected
along with any herbs, sedges, and shrubs on site. In some restoration work, the first material
scraped off the surface of the mire prior to peat cutting, called 'bunkerde' in German, was
intended to be spread back on the surface to inoculate the cutaway surface with the original
moss and vegetation (Wheeler and Shaw 1995). This is not a very effective way to re-establish a
Sphagnum surface in comparison to the approach of Rochefort et al. (2002).
Site characteristics: According to ‘The Peatland Restoration Guide’, it is advised to restore
large areas at a time because it gives better results. Lode (2001) recommends that areas should
not be larger than 10 ha in order to keep costs for man-made ecohydrological management low
and to promote natural self-restoration capability. In that context, increasing the variety of
microhabitats is an important option (Price et al., 2002). Sites in-between areas where
production is still underway should be postponed for restoration until the whole area has been
harvested The desired hydrological conditions cannot be established as long as the main ditch is
still functioning.
Spreading of plant material: Rochefort et al. (2002) recommend application of 1m2 (20 cm
deep) of collected Sphagnum to 10-15 m2 of area to be restored. This rate was chosen as a
compromise between the potential harmful impacts on donor ecosystem and rapid establishment
of Sphagnum on the restoration target area. The plant material is evenly spread in a thin layer
over the bare peat by using a manure spreader (low costs, easy access, ibid.) or by hand in
smaller areas. During experiments Rochefort et al. (2002) found that the different Sphagnum
species possess varying abilities to regenerate from fragments according to distance along the
stem from the capitula.
Protection of plant material: Soon after the plant material has been spread over the site,
mulch, perforated polyethylene sheets, or shade screens should be spread (installed) to protect
the plant material from desiccation (Price et al., 2002; Rochefort et al., 2002). Best results have
been recorded from the coverage of straw mulch cover with 3, 000 kg/ha. Straw mulch is
available almost everywhere at low cost (Rochefort et al., 2002). Dikes can also help as
windbreaks to prevent mulch and Sphagnum from drying out (Rochefort et al., 2002). Where
companion species (e.g. Eriophorum) are used, the spreading of mulch or other sheltering
material can be disregarded (Price et al., 2002).
Rafting on open water: Research on re-colonization with open water as a starting point comes
from the UK (Money, 1995). “Rafting refers to the growth of plants floating in or on supra-surface
water and therefore requires inundation. Floating rafts are favourable environments for the
development of Sphagnum bog vegetation as they are able to move up and down with the water
table guaranteeing permanent water logging of the Sphagnum layer” (Money, 1995). In this way,
created pools can serve two functions: 1) water storage and reduction of water table fluctuations
and 2) provision of conditions for Sphagnum rafts.
35
Monitoring of the restoration work is very important. Progress should be monitored so that
actions can be adjusted and new actions can be initiated if required Monitoring should start
within two years (Rochefort et al., 2002).
WWF and Sveaskog, the largest forest owner in Sweden (state-owned forest) are conducting a
unique Swedish pilot project for the restoration of wetlands and to create natural aquatic
landscapes. Ditches dug for agriculture and forestry have changed watercourses and millions of
hectares of wetlands have become drier. One of the Swedish environmental goals and the EU
water directive require forest companies to address these issues. The aim of this project is to
find appropriate restoration methods, which can be understood and applied by forest owners.
4.2.1.2 Restoration of wildlife habitat function (artificial lakes)
Creation of artificial lakes can go together very well with wetland restoration but may require
further considerations and additional actions. Lake creation is frequently accompanied by the
development of marsh vegetation and open water habitats which provide food, nesting sites, and
protection for fish, waterfowl and wetland animals. Artificial lakes can also serve as refuges for
endangered bird species and as resting and feeding sites for migrating birds (Kavanagh, 1998).
These areas are much appreciated by bird watchers. Lakes serve as habitats for fish species
sought after by fishermen, and at the same time are very attractive for recreational purposes.
The best post-harvest features for the establishment of open water bodies are found where the
underlying soil is impermeable (heavy loam and clay soils). Clay and silt soils, as well as fine
gyttja and marl layers, form impermeable layers underneath lakes (Utter and Lundmark, 2003).
The creation of the lake should start by leaving a 30-60 cm layer of peat to support invading
aquatic vegetation. It is desirable to create an uneven surface on the bottom of the lake in order
to create islands and variations in water depth (Vikberg, 1996). Islands can also be established
by leaving mounds and uneven topography (Utter and Lundmark, 2003). The islands should be
at least 10 m2 in size and need to be protected against erosion using stones or woody debris or
by sowing grass species onto them, for example, Calamagrostis or Agrostis species (Hörnsten,
1992). In natural conditions, depending on the steepness of the shores, the water depth, and the
size of open water, vegetation will come in from the shores and fill up the water until the lake
disappears. In the long run, the water table has to be regulated in order to keep the water body
open and avoid ‘terrestrialization’ (Utter and Lundmark, 2003). Pumping might be needed in
sites where there is not enough water available either to create the lake and/or to maintain it
during drier periods.
The depth of the lake should be adjusted according to the bird species one would like to favour.
Mallards (Anas spp.) are able to find food in depths between 30-50 cm while diving ducks
(Bucephala clangula, Aythya fuligula) and mergansers (Merganser spp.) are able to seek food at
depths of more than 1 m (Vikberg, 1996).
Areas that have been abandoned for a longer period of time may have been invaded by birch
and willow bushes. These bushes may give shelter and nesting opportunities for birds (Vikberg,
1996). It is recommended to leave 3-4 different uniform bushy islands between 5-15 ha for a 30ha lake (Vikberg, 1996). Channels created in-between islands and bushes will keep away foxes
and racoons that prey on young waterfowl.
It has to be considered that newly established vegetation could be eaten and destroyed by
waterfowl and muskrats during the first years. Therefore, there should be many vegetation
patches established right from the beginning. From these patches the vegetation will colonize
36
the area. Where there are small streams or flows associated with the cutaways, one may
promote the establishment of beaver colonies by providing plantations of Populus tremula, the
preferred food and material for construction of dams and lodges.
A supplementary management practice is to construct and place nest boxes for bird species that
need them (Bucephala clangula). The boxes should be placed at a height of 1-1.5 m in trees or
on posts along the shoreline (5-10/100 ha) (Vikberg, 1996).
Ducks Unlimited, a charitable organization in the USA and Canada, has carried out very much
research and active work. They are one of the most important groups for wetland restoration in
Canada. Their work has been initiated by the desire to promote high populations of waterfowl for
hunters, and this in turn requires restoration and creation of suitable habitats for many different
bird species.
Lakes intended mainly for fishing should be deep. Thus, it is recommended to excavate as much
peat as possible. This will expose the underlying calcareous soil and create better water
conditions for the growth and productivity of aquatic plants and subsequently better habitats for
fish (Caffrey, 1998). Aquatic plants produce directly and indirectly food for algae, macroinvertebrates, fish, and avifauna. Further, they provide shelter, cover, and spawning substrate
for many macro-invertebrate and fish species (Caffrey, 1998). The average depth of fish lakes
should be 1.5-2 m with some deeper holes in places, possibly under overhanging trees. These
can provide cooler places for fish during warm weather (Caffrey, 1998). Shade trees and tall
shrubs should be located on the lake margins as groups and patches, but openings should be
left on the shoreline to allow fisherman, hunters, and naturalists access to the lake.
4.3 Complementary uses
Complementary uses or secondary after use options can be viewed as any land use that
complements the applied restoration or reclamation. These subsequent land use options depend
on the success of the primary after use alternatives, yet can add even more value to the area.
4.3.1 Recreation
Cutaway peatlands could be suitable for recreational purposes. As soon as the wetland
restoration or lake creation is functioning satisfactorily, recreation could be considered as a
secondary or complementary form of after use. Depending on the size and the location of the
cutaway peatland, lakes that have been created can be used for fishing, swimming, and water
sports, while restored wetlands are suitable for walking routes, bird and wildlife watching, and
educational trails. It is very important to clearly delineate and properly design the area because
there are different kinds of requirements for the various types of recreation. For example, fishing
lakes will need to be designed so that fishing is possible either from the shore or from platforms.
This will also require the creation of suitable paths for the fisherman with their equipment to
reach the lake.
When planning a network of walking routes, signs with information about the site should
complement the paths. The trail could be made to lead along a virgin mire, then continue along a
site still in production site, and lastly visit a reclaimed or restored site. In this way, the flora and
the fauna of the area can be demonstrated Education about peat harvesting and peatland
utilization as a viable land use will increase the public’s knowledge and acceptance for peatland
37
utilization. Additionally, information about peatland ecology, succession, and development could
be displayed
The success of diverse outdoor pursuits depends on how well conflicts are avoided and which
different interests are involved (Kavanagh, 1996). Some of these recreation forms might not
work together satisfactorily; for example, walkers and picnickers might disturb bird watchers, and
swimmers might disturb fishermen. Hence, it is recommended to plan zones for the different
forms of recreation in order to avoid conflicts. Carefully chosen zones can also help to minimize
disturbances to wildlife.
A positive effect of recreation on cutaway peatlands is that visitors could help to contribute
financially to the area. The visitors can either be asked to leave a donation in a box or pay a fee
for visiting and receiving information about the site. Furthermore, some visitors might stay
overnight in local establishments and/or eat in local restaurants. Infrastructure that has been
established during peat production can continue to be used and could easily be complemented
with other facilities, like toilets, car parks, benches, etc. Since this sort of recreation requires
administration and maintenance, this form of after use would be most suitable for areas that
belong to the local government, commune, or county.
38
5. Policy Issues
“Efterbehandling och skötsel hänger ihop. – After use and management belong together”
(translated quotation of Anki Weibull, Naturvårdsverket, 2003)
5.1 USA
On the national level, strong demands to preserve undamaged wetlands and to restore
damaged or destroyed wetlands led to a federal ‘no-net-loss’ wetland policy during recent years.
This policy demands that damages to wetlands are to be avoided, but if unavoidable, they must
be mitigated by replacement or enhancement of wetlands elsewhere. The research and
conservation interest comes from the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) while the implementation
is the responsibility of the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). This includes permitting peat harvesting operations and is carried out
by the permit process referred to as ‘404 permit’. It focuses on examining the proposed peatland
disturbance or loss in terms of a three-tiered system of avoidance, minimization, and
compensation. Since 1990, the EPA has the responsibility for taking legal action against
companies that develop peatlands without permit, or that fail the requirements (Malterer et al.,
2000; Malterer et al., 2002).
This trend in the policies concerning peat was initiated after many large peatlands were
considered for peat extraction during the 1970s (at the height of the energy crisis). This resulted
in research mainly concentrating on: 1) returning the mined peatlands to a useful purpose and 2)
mitigating the continuing environmental impacts associated with peat production. The Mining
and Reclamation Regulations cover peatlands harvested for horticultural peat. Peat companies
generally have two options 1) to reclaim the site for another end use (forestry, agriculture, or
biomass cultivation) or 2) to stabilize the surface with wetland or typical peatland vegetation and
meet a 5-year cover standard. Peatlands harvested for energy peat are furthermore covered by
the Wetland Conservation Act, which is administered by the Board of Soil and Water Resources
(Malterer and Johnson, 1998). For any peatland utilization the regulations claim compensation
for wetland losses and usually have a strong preference for peatland restoration (Malterer et al.,
2002).
In the USA, every state has always had its own regulations for peat harvesting which were
acceptable to national regulation requirements (Malterer et al., 2000). Moreover, individual
states may require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in addition to all regular
requirements when the proposed site is considered to be more sensitive to the impacts of peat
cutting (Malterer et al., 2002).
In Minnesota, management policies for peatlands were developed by the Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources. Parallel regulations to the national wetland policy have been developed
Minnesota, a major peat-producing state, had its own Wetlands Conservation Act (WCA) since
1990. It complements the national policy on wetlands except that peat harvesting is not
considered by the WCA as a loss of wetlands because drained peatlands are considered to
retain wetlands' physical properties. Terminated peat cuttings must at least be returned to
wetland status (Malterer et al., 2002).
39
5.2 Canada
Canada has about 153 million ha of wetland, of which 90% are classified as peatlands (Rubec
and Thibault, 1998). Peatlands have been converted into other land use forms, mostly owing to
agriculture (85%), urbanization (5%), hydroelectric development (4%) and ports/harbours (2%)
since the earliest human settlement (Rubec and Thibault, 1998).
Peat extraction for horticultural uses is taking place on about 16, 000 ha, which is equal to
0.01% of Canada's total wetland area (Rubec and Thibault, 1998). Because the production in
many of these areas is going to cease within the next decades, appropriate after use options
have to be found. Thus, the research on restoration and reclamation after peat production is
becoming more and more important. Furthermore, wetland conservation is becoming of ever
increasing importance in the public’s eye. Therefore, in 1991 the Canadian Government adopted
the Federal Policy on Wetland Conservation (the first of its kind at that time). It aims to promote
the conservation of Canada's wetlands and to sustain their ecological and socio-economic
functions, for the present and in the future. In addition, four of Canada's provinces were in 1998
in the process of implementing provincial wetland and peatland conservation and management
policies (Rubec and Thibault, 1998).
One of the provinces developing such policies is New Brunswick. The province’s two main
objectives for its peatland conservation policy are to ensure maximum contribution to the longterm economic development of the province, and to ensure that peat extractions are conducted
in a manner that will not jeopardize future utilization or rehabilitation of the land. Of a total of 140,
000 ha of peat-covered land (2% of New Brunswick’s total area of 7.3 million ha), 70, 000 ha of
New Brunswick’s peatlands are considered suitable for peat production (Daigle and Lamarche,
1998). In 2002, 16, 000 ha were leased for peat production with about 4, 500 ha actually being in
production (Thibault, 2002). Thus, peat mining is an important contribution to the province’s
economy. In New Brunswick, peat and the right to extract peat is dealt with under the ‘Quarriable
Substance Act’, which is the responsibility of the Department of Natural Resources and Energy
(Daigle and Lamarche, 1998; Thibault, 2002).
In the past, peat production companies were actively encouraged to establish operations in New
Brunswick. Today, the industry has stabilized and matured and the mining policy adheres to the
province’s two main objectives as previously mentioned. Additionally, the provincial government
in 1999 reviewed its policy concerning the following issues: “(1) allocation of mining rights, (2)
promotion of value-added peat products, (3) royalty regime, and (4) site abandonment” (Thibault,
2002). Consequently, in 2001 a new policy was adopted under which the “commercial peat
deposits are allocated through a formal bidding process initiated by the Department of Natural
Resources and Energy. Proposals are examined according to several criteria, including: financial
capability of applicants, the need to replace land coming out of production, and intent to
undertake value-added peat activities.”(Thibault, 2002) In case of approval, a licence is issued
and is valid for one year with the provision for a single, one-year renewal (Thibault, 2002).
For the extraction of peat on public land, there is furthermore required both a lease (the issuance
of which depends on the approval of the site development and restoration plan) and the approval
of the Department of Environment and Local Government under the Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) regulation (Daigle and Lamarche, 1998; Thibault, 2002).
Ninety percent of the peat produced is exported from the province and 80% leaves Canada and
is mainly imported by the US (40% of the horticulture peat produced in Canada is exported to
the US) (Daigle and Lamarche, 1998). Since most of the peat produced in New Brunswick is
40
packaged and shipped, with minimal processing, to professional growers and other consumers
located outside the province, the objective of the new policy, as with other natural resources
(wood for example), is to encourage the resource industry to add value to the natural resource
before shipping it out of the province. In the case of peat, that means customizing growing
mixtures by adding perlite, vermiculite, fertilizers, etc. Adding value to the peat, results in more
benefits to the province – more and better quality employment, higher wages, new product
research, and more economic activity. As a result, the annual peat production may not increase
but it will make a longer lasting contribution to the economy of New Brunswick (Email
correspondence with J. Thibault).
Moreover, under the new peat mining policy, all holders of peat leases are required to have a
site restoration and reclamation plan before peat harvesting begins. In most cases, restoring the
site to a functioning natural wetland habitat will be the favoured option (Thibault, 2002).
As everywhere else in Canada, land ownership in New Brunswick can mainly be divided into
private and Crown land. Thus there are two existing policies. While the ‘Crown Peat Resource
Management Policy’ only deals with peat on Crown land, there is a management policy applying
separately to privately owned land (Daigle and Lamarche, 1998). “However, the regulations from
the Department of the Environment apply to all peat operations” (Daigle and Lamarche, 1998).
On the national scale, the Canadian Sphagnum Peat Moss Association (CSPMA), an industry
group, adopted the Peatland Preservation and Reclamation Policy in 1990 to encourage its
members to: “Reduce the impact of their operations on the environment; undertake ecological
studies of sites representative of new development areas to provide benchmarks for reclamation
projects; leave areas of significant environmental interest undisturbed; and cooperate with
governments and other interested groups to designate protection areas” (Rubec and Thibault,
1998).
Ongoing collaboration with groups such as Environment Canada, North American Wetlands
Conservation Council, and Ducks Unlimited, as well as with provincial and federal government
representatives, will ensure that the policies will continuously be reviewed and adjusted as
required
5.3 Finland
The peat production area in Finland encompasses 55, 000 ha (Uosukainen, 2000). Usually,
production is running for 20-30 years owing to thinner peat layers in Finnish peatlands (average
of 1.5 m). If the utilization of peat and its production continues at current level, then 25, 000 ha
will come out of production by 2010 in addition to 10, 000 ha that have already been released
since the 1970s.
The majority of the production land is rented from private owners, the state or communities. Only
a small fraction is actually owned by any of the few peat production companies in Finland. The
land owner makes the final decision of which after use to apply, thus restoration and reclamation
is of rather large importance to the whole of Finnish society. Which after use is chosen depends
very much on the landowner’s economic or environmental preference. The rehabilitation option
chosen (forestry, biomass production) by peat cutting companies is influenced by economical
considerations and market trends. However, on rented land, the rental agreement usually
includes a condition that after production ceases, the land should be returned in suitable
condition for forestry. The renting companies have the duty to prepare the area to meet the
conditions demanded in the rental agreement. The infrastructure that has been built during the
41
time of production remains on site. Infrastructure increases the value of the area and can
eventually be used advantageously depending on the future land use form.
Peat production areas are usually large in size and there can be several landowners involved in
the decision making process. The more stakeholders involved, the longer it takes to find a
consensus.
In Finland, ‘drying’ permissions are required prior to peat production. Very often problems are
caused by authorities during the interpretation of this permit, as well as the termination of the
required pre-harvest water quality controls. There are also difficulties when it comes to the
question of who has the responsibility for future water quality control.
Even though the Finnish timber resources are more sustainable than ever, the Finnish State
supports afforestation financially. The private owner can apply for financial aid for ditching,
fertilizing, and reforestation. Agricultural after use is not promoted in any way. Although there are
already many watercourses and lakes found in Finland, the creation of artificial lakes is viewed
as an appropriate after use option and is promoted by authorities. Further after use options that
find application in Finland are berry farming (strawberry, cranberry, and bush blueberry), herb
farming and biomass cultivation. In some areas of Lapland, the cultivation of reindeer fodder
might be interesting. There are unlimited after use possibilities in tourism, recreational and
sporting areas, for example, golf courses or light aeroplane fields according to Uosukainen
(2000).
5.4 Sweden
Peat producing companies are responsible for the implementation of reclamation or restoration
options on sites. In order to receive a concession for peat production, no matter if on their own
land or land leased from private owners or municipalities, the peat producing company requires
a ‘Miljökonsekvens beskrivning’ (MKB) (=Environmental Impact Assessment). This procedure
will analyze and evaluate the effects of the peat production on the environment and associated
impacts. The company itself can carry out this evaluation but is responsible for doing it in an
objective way. This evaluation and the application for peat extraction are handed in together to
‘Länsstyrelsen’, the County Administrative Board, for approval. Normally, the County
Administrative Board makes a decision in the first instance, but in more complicated cases and
applications for bigger areas, ‘Naturvårdsverket’, the National Environmental Protection Board,
and ‘Energiverket’, the County Administrative Board for Energy Consumption, will be called in for
decision-making.
It can take several (3-5) years before the peat producing company will finally receive their
concession. Very often this long time is owing to the problem that there are many players –
authorities, private owners (more than just one), municipalities, and the public – involved in the
planning process. The peat producing company has to plan and carry out the after use of the
peat production area (Hörnsten, 1992), but it is the land owner to whom the land will revert after
production ceases who will make the final decision as to which after use should be applied
(Östlund, Råsjö Torv, Pers. Comm., 20. Feb. 2004).
42
6. Management planning for after use
For the successful restoration or reclamation of a site, it is essential to develop an after use plan
even before harvesting begins (Joosten and Clarke, 2002). The production site needs to be
investigated for peat depth, peat characteristics, water table depth, subsoil, etc. (DachnowskiStokes, 1926). It seems to be appropriate to put all this information together onto one or more
maps. As the area is harvested, the maps should be updated as periodically as deemed
necessary for implementing the after use plan. In many cases, the land on which peat production
takes place is leased. From the beginning of the planning process, it has to be realized that
some of the alternatives might need modification. As harvesting proceeds, the potentials and
opportunities for more effective and beneficial after uses will become clearer. Also from the
beginning, management should consider who will carry out and have responsibility for all
necessary actions.
Considering the mire formation processes and mire origins in mind, every cutaway peatland is
different owing to its physiographic and hydromorphic settings, the physical and chemical
characteristics of the residual peat, and the underlying subsoils. In addition, the physical layout
of the drainage ditches and harvesting operations will vary from site to site. Thus every site has
different conditions to be dealt with and every restoration and reclamation will be more or less
applicable only to the peatland site in question.
The characteristics of the peat will determine the kinds of crops (trees, grasses, vegetables, etc.)
which are appropriate for cultivation. Richer fen and woody peat indicates that such after use is
a better choice, whereas poorer acid peats may indicate that wetland restoration is an
appropriate use. The underlying material could call for certain careful measures. For example,
the presence of marl or gyttja may offer both problems and opportunities. The problems are
related to the potential for site damages and poor growing conditions for crops if one attempts to
cultivate the gyttja or the marl. If there are concerns about this, peat should not be harvested too
deeply and enough peat should be left over the aquatic sediments to provide a stable substrate
for growing corps. On the other hand, one might wish to harvest and use the marl or gyttja, thus
obtaining full benefit from the whole deposit. This may provide economic benefit for the company
or the private landowner. Of course, after such extractions it would still be necessary to restore
or reclaim the site, and this may be more difficult than restoring with some peat left over the
aquatic sediments.
In many cases, the site will be suitable for more than just one after use option. Sometimes the
different options can or will complement each other, sometimes they might work against each
other and need to be adjusted to each other.
6.1 What information is required?
As mentioned earlier, the management planning for after use should be done as early as
possible, preferably at the same time as the harvesting operations are planned Investigations
carried out simultaneously will save both money and time. Both in the near future and in the
long-term, the success of the restoration or reclamation is dependent on the quality of the
planning. The usual measurements required for the harvesting plan are as follows:
• depth of the peat layer and aquatic sediment layer(s) if present,
• type of peat and its degree of humification,
• type of aquatic sediment,
• depth of the water table,
• hydrological drainage features of the catchment area,
43
• and drainage capabilities.
It is clear that these are also important to the after use planning.
As the peat harvesting nears completion, it will be possible to obtain as deemed important
additional information about the residual peat and aquatic sediments. For instance, if making
decisions about various crops to cultivate, information about the decomposition, bulk density,
pH, and chemistry will be particularly important.
Because every mire and peat production area is different, no two after use plans will be alike. In
some areas there is a choice depending on the site characteristics, in other sites there is not and
the options will be limited (McNally, 2001).
When planning to restore a wetland, it is recommended by the ‘Peatland Restoration Guide’
(Quinty and Rochefort, 2002) to refer to ‘reference ecosystems’. These will serve as models for
the conditions to be achieved Comparing the conditions in the site to be restored with a natural
mire will provide guidelines for successful reconstruction of peat accumulation functions. Also,
when turning the site into wildlife habitat the ‘natural’ features can be good benchmarks to aim
for during restoration.
6.2 Which after use is suitable?
All of the after use options in this review seem to be more or less suitable for Swedish cutaway
peatlands. Since Sweden stretches over 1500 km from south to north, climatic conditions vary
greatly. Afforestation might be more successful in southern Sweden, where the climate is
somewhat milder, but it is not impossible in other parts of the country. The same applies to
energy forest plantations, some agricultural crops and some berry species.
Energy forests, just as agricultural fields, are not desirable from an environmental perspective
because they are monocultures. However, the areas that might be monocultures on peatlands
are quite small in comparison to ordinary production forests. On the other hand, if parts of
peatland cutovers are allowed to evolve from open fields to forests naturally, this will create a
sequence of secondary communities supporting a diverse range of meadows and mixed age
and density forests during the succession development.
There is a surplus of agricultural land presently in Sweden. Indeed, a rather big conservation
issue at this point in time is how to deal with abandoned peatlands that have been used for
agricultural crop production in the past.
One should not consider blanketing areas with trees that are not suitable for reforestation. Small
wetland areas could be established in locations where drainage is a problem. Initial stages of the
wetland could include richer marshes, meadows, and thickets, which are rather limited in area
nowadays in some countries, and which would increase the diversity of vegetation, plants, and
animals in the landscape. From a timber production point of view cutaway peatlands were low
productive sites before peat excavation began, and new managed plantations on the cutaways
will undoubtedly be more productive. In this aspect peat production results in a new forested
ecosystems that is more productive. However, northern countries like Sweden, Finland, and
Canada already have huge forested areas, and here the small increase in production forest on
cutaways would not result in much change to the wood producing capacities.
44
Energy forests in this context imply reducing the use of fossil fuels. This applies also for biomass
cultivation with grass species such as reed canary grass. However, reed canary grass cultivation
on abandoned peat production areas requires knowledge about cultivation methods and the
development of an economically viable enterprise that could be interesting to farmers or peat
harvesting companies. As well it would require developing planting, harvesting, storage, and
transportation methods. Thus reed canary grass cultivation can be deemed risky and may be
difficult to ‘sell’ to potential entrepreneurs, especially land owners.
Agricultural after use of peat production areas can be of success when carried out properly.
Usually, agricultural fields are monocultures and do not provide habitats for many species. From
a nature conservation viewpoint and with global concerns in mind, a more desirable after use
option should be considered for cutaway areas. Usually the layer of peat left after peat
production is shallow. Agricultural crop production has to be carried out in aerobic soil
conditions. With this increase in oxygen biological processes (humification and decomposition)
are enhanced thus the peat subsides. The area of peatland used in agriculture has steadily
decreased worldwide because of mineralization of organic soils. Because of this, the restoration
of wetlands and mires, and especially the peat-accumulating function, should be given priority.
Other benefits of wetlands and mire restoration are the re-establishment of gas fluxes and
greenhouse gas emissions, hydrological regulation, enhancement of natural biodiversity, and
recreation and amenity functions.
Restoration of the peat accumulating function is an important alternative, certainly in areas
where the ditch network has deteriorated Once the restored site is stabilized, different forms of
recreation, for example, walking, fishing, or bird watching can be performed This can help to
create public awareness of nature conservation. However, as it is today, the landowner plays a
major role in the decision-making process but might only have limited knowledge about which
after use options to implement. Some of the landowners may only know about afforestation,
usually the easiest and most economically attractive solution. Yet that might not always be the
best and most suitable solution. Therefore, it is essential that right from the beginning of the
planning for peat production, all the various after use options are considered and evaluated for
their suitability on the particular site. This will increase successful rehabilitation of cutaway
peatlands and contribute to a variety of beneficial alternatives.
7. Conclusions
The decision and the final implementation of after use alternatives depend on many factors such
as climate, geographical location, site conditions, drainage system, and harvesting operation
layout. Related socio-economic aspects are market trends, economic return, personal
preferences, and legal requirements.
Successful peatland conservation and rehabilitation of cutaway peatlands require a holistic view
and sound decision-making. Fundamentally, the success of the restoration and reclamation of a
particular site depends on:
• the quality of the planning,
• how well the particular cutaway features are considered, and
• the goodness of the decision(s) concerning the most suitable option(s).
45
8. Literature Cited
Ahti, E., Vuollekoski, M., and Joensuu, S., 1998. The effects of drainage maintenance on the
load of supended solids and nutrients from peatland forests. pp. 93-94 in Sopo, R. (ed),
1998. The Spirit of Peatlands – Proceedings of the International Peat Symposium, 1998,
Jyväskylä, Finland. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Aro, L., 2000a. Root penetration of Scots pine and silver birch on cutaway peatlands. pp. 932936 in Rochefort, L. and Daigle, J.-Y. (eds), 2000, Proceedings of the 11th International
Peat Congress, 2000, Quebec, Canada. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Aro, L., 2000b. Afforestation of cutaway peatlands in Finland. pp. 43-45 in Åman, P. (ed), 2000,
Re-use of peat production areas. EU’s Northern Periphery Programme project: Re-use of
peatland areas. Proceedings from the 1st International Seminar, 2000, Oulu, Finland.
Aro, L. and Kaunisto, S. 2003. Jatkolannoituksen ja kasvatustiheyden vaikutus muorten
mäntymetsiköiden ravinnetilaan sekä puuston ja juuriston kehitykseen paksuturpeisella
suonpohjall (Effect of re-fertilization and growing density on the nutrition, growth and root
development of young Scots pine stands in a peat cutaway area with deep peat layers, In
Finn, Engl summ). Suo – mires and peat 54(2):49-67. Finnish Peatland Society,
Vammala, Finland.
Aro, L. and Kaunisto, S., 1998. Forestry use of peat cutaway areas in Finland. pp. 185-186 in
Sopo, R. (ed), 1998, The Spirit of Peatlands – Proceedings of the International Peat
Symposium, 1998, Jyväskylä, Finland. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Berglund, K., 1996. Cultivated Organic Soils in Sweden: Properties and Amelioration. PhD
Thesis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Soil Science.
Uppsala, Sweden.
Boyle, G.M., 2000. Cracking in Phragmites peat. pp 94-99 in Jones, S. and Farrell, E.P. (eds),
2000. Research programme to develop a forest resource on industrial cutaway peatland
in the Midlands, BOGFOR 3 project, final report. Report No. 52, Forest Ecosystem
Research Group, Department of Environmental Resource Management, University
College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Caffrey, J., 1998. A new fishing resource for the Midlands. pp. 28-33 in Tom Egan (Conf.
Coord.), 1998. The future use of cutaway bogs. Lough Boora Parklands. Cutaway Bogs
Conference, 1998. Brosna Press Ltd., Ferbane, Co. Offaly, Ireland.
Chiasson, L. and Chiasson, G., 2003. Cranberry culture as a reclamation option (Abstract).
pp.782-788 in Rochefort, L. and Daigle, J.-Y. (eds) 2000. Proceedings of the 11th
International Peat Congress, 2000, Quebec, Canada. International Peat Society,
Jyväskylä, Finland.
Christersson, L., 1998. Theoretical background to and practical utilization of short-rotation and
energy forestry. pp. 5-19 in Christersson, L. and Ledin, S. (eds), 1998. Short-rotation
crops for energy purposes. Proceedings of the first meeting of IEA, Bioenergy, Task No.
17, 1998, Swedish University for Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Dachnowski-Stokes, A.P., 1926. Factors and problems in the selection of peatlands for different
uses. USDA Dep. Bull. No. 1419. 23 pp.
Daigle, J-Y. and Lamarche, R., 1998. Evolution and the socio-economic impact of the New
Brunswick (Cananda) Peat Industry. pp. 39-40 in Sopo, R. (ed), 1998. The Spirit of
46
Peatlands – Proceedings of the International Peat Symposium, 1998, Jyväskylä, Finland.
International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Dunster, J. and Dunster, K. 1996. Dictionary of natural resource management. UBC Press,
Vancouver, BC. 363 pp.
Elowson, S., 1995. Birch – a high producing species?. pp. 107-112 in Perttu, K and Koppel, A.,
(eds) 1995. Short rotation willow coppice for renewable energy and improved
environment. Proceedings of a joint Swedish-Estonian seminar on energy forestry and
vegetation filters. Swedish University for Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Ericsson, T., 1993. Nutrient cycling in energy forest plantations. pp. 115-121 in Biomass and
Energy, Volume 6, Issues 1-2, 1994. Elsevier Science Ltd., London, United Kingdom.
Ericsson, T., Grip, H., Pertty, K., Wiklander, G., 1983. Etablering av engergiskog på Högmosse I
Jädraås (Establishment of energy forest on raised peat bog). Teknisk rapport/Projekt
Energiskogsodling – ESO. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala,
Sweden. 91 pp.
Galambosi, B., Galambosi, Z., and Repcák, M., 2000. Growth, yield and secondary metabolite
production of Drosera species cultivated in peat beds in Finland. Suo – mires and peat
51(2):47-57. Finnish Peatland Society, Vammala, Finland.
Farrell, C. and Doyle, G., 2001. Rehabilitation of industrial cutaway Atlantic blanket bog in
County Mayo, North-West Ireland. Wetlands Ecology and Management, No.
11(2003):21-35. Kluwer Acadamic Publishers, the Netherlands.
Finell, M., 2003. The use of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinaceae) as a short fibre raw
material for the pulp and paper industry. pp. 7-24. Doctoral diss., Unit of Biomass
Technology and Chemistry, SLU. Acta Universitatis agriculturae Sueciae. Agraria Vol.
424:7-24. Uppsala, Sweden.
Hall, D.O. and House, J.I., 1993. Trees and biomass energy: carbon storage and/or fossil fuel
substitute? pp. 11-30 in Biomass and Energy, Volume 6, Issues 1-2, 1994. Elsevier
Science Ltd., London, United Kingdom.
Hartman, M. and Kaunisto, S., 1998. Effects of nutrient application in tree stand and peat
nutrient properties along an oligotrophic-ombrotrophic peat thickness gradient. pp. 95-96
in Sopo, R. (ed), 1998. The Spirit of Peatlands – Proceedings of the International Peat
Symposium, 1998, Jyväskylä, Finland. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Hilli, A., Päätalo, M.-L., Moilanen, M., Piiroinen, M.-L., Issakainen, J., and Tillman-Sutela, E.
2003. The effect of nurse crop density and fertilization on the height growth of Norway
spruce seedlings on a drained peatland. Suo –- mires and peat 54(2):69-79. Finnish
Peatland Society, Vammala, Finland.
Hytönen, J. and Aro, L., 2004. Management of naturally regenerated birch on cutaway
peatlands: pulp, veneer or energy wood?. pp. 1219-1224 in Päivänen, J. (ed), 2004.
Wise use of peatlands – Proceedings of the 12th International Peat Congress, 2004,
Tampere, Finland. International Peat Society, Saarijärvi, Finland.
Hytönen, J. and Kaunisto, S., 1999. Effect of fertilization on the biomass production of coppiced
mixed birch and willow stands on a cutaway peatland. Biomass and Energy 17(6):455469. Elsevier Science Ltd., London, United Kingdom.
47
Hånell, B., 2004. Möjligheter att använda torv-och träaska för skogsgödling på organogena
jorder i Sverige – The potential of utilizing peat ash and wood ash as forest fertilizer on
organic soils in Sweden. Department of Foresty, Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences. 26 pp.
Hånell, B. Jeglum, J., and Singh, S., 2003 (Unpubl. ms.). Long-term field experiments in
peatland forestry at the Department of Forestry, Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences, Sweden. 8 pp.
Hånell, B., 1991. Peatland forestry in Sweden. pp.19-25 in Jeglum, J.K. and Overend, R.P.
(eds). Symposium '89, Peat and Peatlands: Diversification and Innovation, Vol I Peatland
Forestry, Quebec City, 7-11, 1989. Can. Soc. for Peat and Peatlands, Can. Natl. Comm
of Internalt. Peat Soc.
Hörnsten, L., 1992. Efterbehandling av torvtäkter utbrutna med djupbrytningsteknik –-en
literaturstudie. (Treatments of peat bogs harvested by deep digging technique). Rapport
1992:36, Vattenfall Research, Värmeteknik. Vällingby, Sweden. 64 pp.
Ilnicki, P., 2003. Agricultural production systems for organic soil conservation. pp. 187-199 in
Parent, L.-E. and Ilnicki, P. (eds), 2003. Organic soils and peat materials for sustainable
agriculture. CRC Press LLC.
IPCC. 1996. Facts and information – bogs around the world. Official homepage of the Irish
Peatland Conservation Council – http://www.ipcc.ie/
Jones, S. and Farrell, E.P. (eds), 2000. Research programme to develop a forest resource on
industrial cutaway peatland in the Midlands, BOGFOR 3 project, final report. Report No.
52, Forest Ecosystem Research Group, Department of Environmental Resource
Management, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. 145 pp.
Jones, S.M., Boyle, G.M., and Farrell, E.P., 1998. Forestry on milled cutaway peatland. pp.22-26
in Tom Egan (Conf. Coord.), 1998. The future use of cutaway bogs. Lough Boora
Parklands. Cutaway Bogs Conference, 1998. Brosna Press Ltd., Ferbane, Co. Offaly,
Ireland.
Joosten, H. and Clarke, D., 2002. Wise Use of Mires and Peatlands –- Background and
principles including a framework for decisionmaking. International Mire Conservation
Group and International Peat Society. Saarijärvi, Finland.
Kaunisto, S., 1997. Peatland Forestry in Finland: problems and possibilities from the nutritional
point of view. pp. 387-401 in Trettin, C. et al. (eds), 1997. Northern Forested Wetlands –Ecology and Management. CRC Press, Inc. Lewis Publishers, New York.
Kaunisto, S. and Aro, L., 1996. Forestry use of cutaway peatlands. pp. 130-134 in Vasander H.
(ed) 1996. Peatlands in Finland. Finnish Peatland Society, Helsinki, Finland
Kavanagh, B., 1996. The potential development of nature conservation and outdoor pursuits. pp.
26-29 in Egan, T. (Co-ordinator), 1996. Lough Boora Parklands – Pre-Feasibility Study
by Boora Enterprise Group. Bord na Móna, Ireland.
Kavanagh, B. 1998. Cutaway Boglands: A new landscape for birdlife. pp 34-44 in Tom Egan
(Conf. Coord.), 1998. The future use of cutaway bogs. Lough Boora Parklands. Cutaway
Bogs Conference, 1998. Brosna Press Ltd., Ferbane, Co. Offaly, Ireland.
Kreshtapova, N. and Krupnov, R. A., 1998. Genetic percuiarities and basics of reclamation of
cutover peatlands in Central Russia. pp. 115-119 in Malterer, T., Johnson, K. and
Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland restoration and reclamation – Techniques and Regulatory
48
Considerations. Proceedings from the 1998 International Peat Symposium, Duluth,
Minnesota. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Kreshtapova, V. N. et al., 2003. Quality of organic soils for agricultural use of cutover peatlands
in Russia. pp. 175-186 in Parent, L.-E. and Ilnicki, P. (eds), Organic soils and peat
materials for sustainable agriculture. CRC Press LLC.
Larsson, L.-E., 2001. Peat in Sweden-Cutaway peatlands to be restored pp. 34-41 in
Uosukainen, H. (ed), Re-use of peat production areas. EU’s Northern Periphery
Programme project: Re-use of peatland areas. Proceedings from the 3rd international
seminar, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK, 70 pp.
Lauhanen, R. and Kaunisto, S., 1999. Effect of drainage maintenance on the nutrient status on
drained Scots pine mires. Suo –- mires and peat 50 (3-4):119-132. Finnish Peatland
Society, Vammala, Finland.
Leinonen, A., Lindh, T., Paappanen, T., Kallio, E., Flyktman, M., Hakkarainen, J., Käyhkö, V.,
Peronius, P., Puuronen, M., and Mikkonen, T., 1998. Cultivation and production of reed
canary grass for mixed fuel as a method for reclamation of a peat production area. pp.
120-124 in Malterer, T., Johnson, K. and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland restoration and
reclamation-Techniques and Regulatory Considerations. Proceedings from the 1998
International Peat Symposium, Duluth, Minnesota. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä,
Finland.
Lode, E. 2001. Natural mire hydrology in restoration of peatland functions. Acta Universitatis
Agriculturae Sueciae, Silvestria 234. Doctoral Thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences, Uppsala 2001. 38 pp
Lode, E. 1999. Wetland restoration: a survey of options for restoring peatlands. Studia Forestalia
Suecica No. 205. 30 pp.
Lundin, L., 1998. Alternative peatland forestry; impacts on hydrology and surface water
chemistry. pp. 76-78 in Sopo, R. (ed), 1998. The Spirit of Peatlands – Proceedings of the
International Peat Symposium, 1998, Jyväskylä, Finland. International Peat Society,
Jyväskylä, Finland.
Malterer, T.J., Johnson, K.W. and Grubich, D.S. 2002. Wise Use of Peatlands in the USA: Policy
and Regulatory Aspects. pp. 309-312 in Schmilewski, G. and Rochefort, L. (eds) Peat in
Horticulture. Proceedings on the International Peat Symposium, 2002, Pärnu, Estonia.
International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Malterer, T.J., Johnson, K.W. and Valpuu, S.H. 2000. New federal (national) wetlands
regulations and their impact on the peat industry in the U.S.A. pp.802-805 in Rochefort,
L. and Daigle, J.-Y. (eds) 2000. Proceedings of the 11th International Peat Congress,
Quebec, Canada. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Malterer, T.J. and Johnson, K.W. 1998. Perspective on Peatland Restoration and Reclamation in
the United States. pp. 9-12 in Malterer, T., Johnson, K. and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland
restoration and reclamation – Techniques and Regulatory Considerations. Proceedings
from the 1998 International Peat Symposium, Duluth, Minnesota. International Peat
Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
McNally, G. 2001. Designating the Future Use/Uses for each cutaway bog unit. pp.4 in Irish
Raised Bogs-Conservation, Utilization and After-Use. Irish Peat Conservation Council,
Ireland.
49
Money, R.P. 1995. Restoration of cut-over peatlands: the role of hydrology in determining
vegetation quality. pp. 383-400 in Hughes, J. and Heathwaite, L. (eds) Hydrology and
hydrochemistry of British wetlands, 1995. John Wily & Sons Ltd., Chichester.
National Wetlands Working Group. 1997. The Canadian wetland classification system. (ed B. G.
Warner and C. D. A. Rubec), 2 edn., pp. 1-68, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario,
Canada.
Nieminen, M., 1998. Effect of clearcutting and site preparation on leaching from drained
peatland forests. pp. 99-101 in Sopo, R. (ed), 1998. The Spirit of Peatlands –
Proceedings of the International Peat Symposium, 1998, Jyväskylä, Finland. International
Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Nigula Nature Reserve 2003. Cranberry-the grape of the north.
http://www.nigula.ee/kuremari/index_e.html 7 pp.
Nigula Nature Reserve 2003. Cranberry cultures to peatlands exhausted by peat industry.
Leaflet/Handout 2 pp.
Nigula Nature Reserve 2003. Inventory of the valuable Cranberry mires in 1965-1972.
Leaflet/Handout 2 pp.
Nigula Nature Reserve 2003. Rehabilitation of exhausted peat milling areas with help of the
Cranberry (Oxycoccus palustris) in Estonia. Leaflet/Handout
NRCS (Natural Resource Conservation Service) United States Department of Agriculture 2002.
Reed Canary Grass-Fact Sheet. 2 pp.− http://plants.usda.gov/
O’Riordan, D., 2000. Norway spruce demonstration areas. pp. 128-132 in Jones, S. and Farrell,
E.P. (eds), 2000. Research programme to develop a forest resource on industrial
cutaway peatland in the Midlands, BOGFOR 3 project, final report. Report No. 52, Forest
Ecosystem Research Group, Department of Environmental Resource Management,
University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Okruszko, H. 1996. Agricultural use of peatlands. pp. 303-309 in Lappalainen, E. (ed). Globel
peat resources. International Peat Society, Jyskä, Finland.
Pahkala, K., Mela, T., Hakkola, H. and Järvi, P., 1996. Agrokuidun tuotanto ja käyttö Suomessa.
Tutkimuksen loppuraportti, I osa. Maatalouden tutkimuskeskus (MTT), Jokioinen,
Finland.
Paavilainen, E. and Päivänen, J. 1995. Peatland Forestry-Ecology and Principles. Ecological
Studies 111. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Patterson, G. and Anderson, R., 2000. Forests and Peatland Habitats: Guideline Notes. Forestry
Commission, HMSO, London, United Kingdom16 pp.
Price, J. S., Heathwaite, A.L., and Baird, A.J., 2002. Hydrological processes in abandoned and
restored peatlands: An overview of management approaches. pp. 65-83 in Wetlands
Ecology and Management No. 11-2003. Kluwer Acadamic Publisher, the Netherlands.
Päivänen, J., 1998. Tree stand structure of peatlands – before and after forest drainage. pp. 8283 in Sopo, R. (ed), 1998. The Spirit of Peatlands – Proceedings of the International Peat
Symposium, 1998, Jyväskylä, Finland. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Quinty, F. and Rochefort, L., 2002. Peatland restoration guide. (Second edition). Canadian
Sphagnum Peat Moss Association, New Brunswick, Canada. 106 pp.
50
Renou, F., Jones, S. and Farrell, E.P., 2000. Leaching of phosphorus fertilizer applied on
cutaway peatland forests recently established in central Ireland. pp. 984-990 in in
Rochefort, L. and Daigle, J.-Y. (eds) 2000. Proceedings of the 11th International Peat
Congress, Quebec, Canada. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Rochefort, L., Quinty, F., Campeau, S., Johnson, K., Malterer, T., 2002. North American
approach to the restoration of Sphagnum dominated peatlands. pp. 3-20 in Wetlands
Ecology and Management No. 11-2003. Kluwer Acadamic Publisher, the Netherlands.
Rothwell, R.L. 1991. Substrate environments on drained and undrained peatlands, Wally Creek
Experimental Drainage Area, Cochrane, Ontario. Pp.103-114 in Jeglum, J.K. and
Overend, R.P. (eds). 1991. Symposium '89, Peat and Peatlands: Diversification and
Innovation, Vol I - Peatland Forestry, Quebec City, 7-11, 1989. Can. Soc. for Peat and
Peatlands, Can. Natl. Comm of Internatl. Peat Soc.
Rubec, C. and Thibault, J.J., 1998. Managing Canadian Peatlands: status of the resource and
restoration approaches. pp. 13-17 in Malterer, T., Johnson, K. and Stewart, J. (eds).
Peatland restoration and reclamation – Techniques and Regulatory Considerations.
Proceedings from the 1998 International Peat Symposium, Duluth, Minnesota.
International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Rytter, L., 1996. The potential of grey alder plantation forestry. pp. 89-94 in Short rotation willow
coppice for renewable energy and improved environment − Proceedings of a Joint
Swedish-Estonian Seminar on Energy Forestry and Vegetation Filters, Tartu, Estonia 2426 September 1995. SLU, Institutionen för Lövträdsodling Rapport No. 57.
Selin P., 1996. Many uses for peatland cutaway areas. pp. 128-129 in Vasander H. (ed) 1996.
Peatlands in Finland. Finnish Peatland Society, Helsinki, Finland
Silfverberg, K. and Hartman, M., 1998. Long-term effects of different phosphorus fertilizers in
finnish pine mires. pp. 73-75 in Sopo, R. (ed), 1998. The Spirit of Peatlands –
Proceedings of the International Peat Symposium, 1998, Jyväskylä, Finland. International
Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Silfverberg, K. and Issakainen, J., 1987. Growth and foliar nutrients in peat ash fertilized stands.
Suo – mires and peat 38(3-4):53-62. Finnish Peatland Society, Vammala, Finland.
Sirén, M., 2004. Harvesting on peatlands – a challenge. pp. 514-520 in Päivänen, J. (ed), 2004.
Wise use of peatlands – Proceedings of the 12th International Peat Congress, 2004,
Tampere, Finland. International Peat Society, Saarijärvi, Finland.
Smith, E., 2000. Pilot study into late spring frost damage. pp. 105-113 in Jones, S. and Farrell,
E.P. (eds), 2000. Research programme to develop a forest resource on industrial
cutaway peatland in the Midlands, BOGFOR 3 project, final report. Report No. 52, Forest
Ecosystem Research Group, Department of Environmental Resource Management,
University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Svensson, J., Hånell, B. and Magnusson, T., 1998. Naturlig beskogning av utbrutna torvmarker
genom insådd från omgivande skog-Tree and shrub colonization of abandoned peat
winning fields by seeding from adjacent forests. Rapport 78. Rapporter i skogsekologi
och skoglig marklära, institution för skoglig marklära, Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden. 45 pp.
Thibault, J.J., 2002. New Initiatives in Managing peatland Resources in New Brunswick,
Canada. pp. 222-227 in Schmilewski, G. and Rochefort, L. (eds) Peat in Horticulture.
Proceedings on the International Peat Symposium, 2002, Pärnu, Estonia. International
Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
51
Uosukainen, H., 2000. Peatland re-use strategy in Finland. pp. 7-11 in Åman, P. (ed), 2000. Reuse of peat production areas. EU’s Northern Periphery Programme project: Re-use of
peatland areas. Proceedings from the 1st international seminar, Oulu, Finland. 55 pp.
Utter, A. and Lundmark, L., 2003. Efterbehandling av Kauppisennuoma torvtäktsområde –
förslag på lämpliga alternativ samt kostnader för detta. Kemiska institutionen/tekniska
högskolan, Umeå Universitet. 40 pp.
Vasander, H. and Roderfeld, H., 1996. Restoration of peatlands after harvesting. pp. 143-147 in
Vasander H. (ed) 1996. Peatlands in Finland. Finnish Peatland Society, Helsinki, Finland.
Vasander, H. et al., 2003. Status and restoration of peatlands in northern Europe. P. 51-63 in
Wetlands Ecology and Management No. 11-2003. Kluwer Acadamic Publishers, the
Netherlands.
Vikberg, P., 1996. Converting cutaway peatlands for game management purposes. pp. 138-142
in Vasander H. (ed) 1996. Peatlands in Finland. Finnish Peatland Society, Helsinki,
Finland.
Virkajärvi, P. and Huhta, H., 1996. Agricultural utilization of cutaway peatlands. pp. 135-137 in
Vasander H. (ed) 1996. Peatlands in Finland. Finnish Peatland Society, Helsinki, Finland.
Wheeler, B.D, 1995. Restoration and wetlands. pp. 1-19 in Wheeler, B.D. et al., (eds).
Restoration of temperate wetlands. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, U.K.
Wheeler, B.D. and Shaw, S.C., 1995. Restoration of damaged peatlands. Department of the
Environment. London:HMSO. 211 pp.
Wheeler, B.D, 1997. Peat bogs – their life after peat extraction. pp. 126-135 in Schmilewski,
G.(ed). Proceedings of the International Conference on peat in horticulture, Amsterdam,
the Netherlands.
Interet Links
Board na Móna Group – http://www.bnm.ie/index.htm
Canadian Sphagnum Peat Moss Association – http://www.peatmoss.com/
International Peat Society – http://www.peatsociety.fi/
Irish Peatland Conservation Council – http://www.ipcc.ie/
Lough Boora Parklands – http://www.loughbooraparklands.ie/
Naturvårdsverket – http://www.naturvardsverket.se/
Stiftelsen Svensk Torvforskning – http://www.torvforsk.se/
Svenskt Torvproducentförening – http://www.torvproducenterna.se/
Nigula Nature Reserve – http//www.nigula.ee
Ducks Unlimited – http://www.ducks.org/index.asp
References
Bélanger, B. 2003. Restoration of peat bogs and wetland areas: Premier Tech's long-term vision
(abstract). pp.771-775 in Rochefort, L. and Daigle, J.-Y. (eds) 2000. Proceedings of the
11th International Peat Congress, Quebec, Canada. International Peat Society,
Jyväskylä, Finland
Cassidy, A., 2000. Survey of mycorrhiza. pp. 100-104 Jones, S. and Farrell, E.P. (eds), 2000.
Research programme to develop a forest resource on industrial cutaway peatland in the
Midlands, BOGFOR 3 project, final report. Report No. 52, Forest Ecosystem Research
52
Group, Department of Environmental Resource Management, University College Dublin,
Dublin, Ireland.
Collins, T. 1998. The economic importance of agriculture on the cutaways. pp. 17-20 in Tom
Egan (Conf. Coord.), 1998. The future use of cutaway bogs. Lough Boora Parklands.
Cutaway Bogs Conference, 1998. Brosna Press Ltd., Ferbane, Co. Offaly, Ireland.
Egan, T. 1999. A landscape uncloaked: Lough Boora Parklands the national centre of cutaway
boglands rehabilitation in Ireland. The Heritage Council
Finér, L. and Kaunisto, S., 1998. The effect of harvesting method and fertilization on the quality
of fuel wood and the nutrient status of peatlands. pp. 67-69 in Sopo, R. (ed), 1998. The
Spirit of Peatlands – Proceedings of the 11th International Peat Symposium, 1998,
Jyväskylä, Finland. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Larsson, L.-E., 1992. Peat in Sweden – Cutaway peatlands to be restored The Swedish Peat
Research Foundation, Northern Periphery Program. 5 pp.
Lode, E., 2001. Natural mire hydrology in restoration of peatland functions. Ph. D. Thesis,
Department of Forest Soils, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Acta
Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae, Silvestria 234. 38 pp. + 4 papers
Lode, E. and Lundin, L., 2001. Seasonal climate variation reflected in peatland discharge: A
methodological approach to experimental data. In Lode, E., 2001, Doctoral Thesis, Acta
Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae, Silvestria 234. Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences, Uppsala 2001. 31 pp.
McNally, G., 1998. Optimising the return to Bord na Móna. pp. 13-16 in Tom Egan (Conf.
Coord.), 1998. The future use of cutaway bogs. Lough Boora Parklands. Cutaway Bogs
Conference, 1998. Brosna Press Ltd., Ferbane, Co. Offaly, Ireland.
Piirainen, S. and Finér, L., 2000. Leaching from wood ash fertilization drained peatlands. pp 977983 in Rochefort, L. and Daigle, J.-Y. (eds) 2000. Proceedings of the 11th International
Peat Congress, Quebec, Canada. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Quinty, F. and Hood, G., 1998. Peatland restoration guide. pp. 79-81 in Malterer, T., Johnson, K.
and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland restoration and reclamation – Techniques and Regulatory
Considerations. Proceedings from the 1998 International Peat Symposium, Duluth,
Minnesota. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Renou, F., 2000. Fertilizer trials. pp. 87-92 in Jones, S. and Farrell, E.P. (eds), 2000. Research
programme to develop a forest resource on industrial cutaway peatland in the Midlands,
BOGFOR 3 project, final report. Report No. 52, Forest Ecosystem Research Group,
Department of Environmental Resource Management, University College Dublin, Dublin,
Ireland.
Selin, P. and Nyrönen, T. 1998. The Use of Cutaway areas in Finland. pp. 18-22 in Malterer, T.,
Johnson, K. and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland restoration and reclamation – Techniques
and Regulatory Considerations. Proceedings from the 1998 International Peat
Symposium, Duluth, Minnesota. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Veijalainen, H., Reinikainen, A., and Kolari, K., 1984. Nutritional growth disturbances of forest
trees. (In Finn, Engl summ). Folia Forestralia 601. 41 pp.
Vitt, D.H., Bayley, S.E., and Jin, T.L. 1995. Seasonal variation in water chemistry over a bog-rich
fen gradient in continental western Canada. Can. J. Fish. and Aquat. Sci. 52:587-606.
53
9. Annotated Citations
1
Malterer, T.J. and Johnson, K.W. 1998. Perspective on Peatland Restoration and Reclamation in
the United States. pp. 9-12 in Malterer, T., Johnson, K. and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland
restoration and reclamation – Techniques and Regulatory Considerations. Proceedings from the
1998 International Peat Symposium, Duluth, Minnesota. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä,
Finland.
Keywords:
Peatlands, restoration, reclamation, public policy.
Summary:
The main aim of the paper is to discuss and evaluate the restoration and
reclamation of cutaway peatlands. The paper reviews the regulatory and legislation conditions at
the time at the national, as well as at the state (Minnesota) state level. Peatland reclamation is
defined as the management of harvested peatlands to achieve a beneficial end use, often with
the potential for economic return. Peatland restoration is defined as the managed restoration of
harvested peatlands to their original wetland vegetation and functional wetland status.
(Peatlands are included in wetlands).
Every site has different conditions, thus every restoration work is different and will only
be of success to different extents because there are variable scales of repair, interactions of key
environmental factors during the 'healing' process, interaction of the colonizing organisms,
hydronomics, etc. Additionally, has to be considered that scientific 'needs' do not always go
along with social or economic benefits; therefore, solutions only exist when policy makers,
scientists of the various disciplines, and land managers work together.
At the national level, strong pressure to preserve undamaged wetlands and to restore
damaged and destroyed wetlands led to a federal "no-net-loss" wetland policy which demands
that damage to wetlands are to be avoided, but if unavoidable, they must be mitigated by
replacement or enhancement of wetlands elsewhere. Research and conservation interest comes
from the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). The implementation lies on behalf of the US Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EAP).
At the state level, management policies for Minnesota's peatlands were developed by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Peat Programme, after many large areas were
considered for peat extraction during the late 1970s (at the height of the energy crisis). This
resulted in research being mainly concentrated on 1) return the mined peatlands to a useful
purpose and 2) mitigation of the continuing environmental impacts associated with mined peat
areas. Mining and Reclamation Regulations cover peatlands harvested for horticultural peat.
Peat companies generally have two options 1) to reclaim the site to another end use (forestry,
agriculture or biomass cultivation) or 2) to stabilize the surface with wetland or typical peatland
vegetation and meet a 5-year cover standard. Furthermore, peatlands harvested for energy peat
are covered by the Wetland Conservation Act that is administered by the Board of Soil and
Water Resources.
2
Malterer, T.J., Johnson, K.W. and Grubich, D.S. 2002. Wise Use of Peatlands in the USA: Policy
and Regulatory Aspects. pp. 309-312 in Schmilewski, G. and Rochefort, L. (eds) Peat in
54
Horticulture. Proceedings on the International Peat Symposium, 2002, Pärnu, Estonia.
International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Keywords:
USA, peatlands, policy, regulations, "no-net-loss".
Summary:
This paper focuses mainly on industrial utilization of peatlands and after use of
those areas and discusses the USA wetland policies and regulations.
At present, there are regulatory agencies at the federal as well as at the state level. Their
requirements are very similar and usually complement each other. At the federal level, authority
and implementation of nation-wide wetland regulations, which include permitting of peat
harvesting operations is hold by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) since the 1980s.
Implementation of the nation-wide "no-net-loss" of wetlands policy is carried out by the
permitting process referred to as "404 permit". It focuses on a decision-making process, which
involves examining the proposed peatland disturbance or loss in terms of a three-tiered system
of avoidance, minimization, and compensation.
Since 1990, the Environments Protection Agency (EPA) has responsibility for enforcement
action against companies that develop peatlands without permit or fail the requirements.
At the state level, various parallel regulations to the national wetland policy have been
developed Minnesota, a major peat producing state, has its own Wetlands Conservation Act
(WCA) since 1990, which complements the national policy with the exception that peat
harvesting is not considered a loss of wetlands because the WCA considers drained peatlands
to retain physical properties of a wetland. Mined peatlands must be returned to wetland status
after extraction ceases.
Additionally, individual states may require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on top of all
regular requirements when the proposed site is considered to be more susceptible to the
impacts.
For each case of peatland utilization the regulation claims compensation for wetland losses, and
usually there is a strong preference for peatland restoration.
3
Rubec, C. and Thibault, J.J. 1998. Managing Canadian Peatlands: status of the resource and
restoration approaches. pp. 13-17 in Malterer, T., Johnson, K. and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland
restoration and reclamation – Techniques and Regulatory Considerations. Proceedings from the
1998 International Peat Symposium, Duluth, Minnesota. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä,
Finland.
Keywords:
Peatlands, Canada, policy, utilization. Conservation.
Summary:
Conversion of peatlands into other land use forms in Canada since the earliest
human settlement has been owing to mostly agriculture (85%), urbanization (5%), hydro
development (4%) and ports/harbours (2%). In this context peat extraction taking place on about
16, 000 ha, equal to 0.01% of Canada's wetlands seems to be of minor importance. But since in
many of these areas the production is going to cease within the next decades and there have to
be found appropriate after uses, the restoration and reclamation issue is becoming more and
55
more important. Furthermore, wetland conservation is steadily becoming more of an issue of
public issue. Therefore, in 1991, the Canadian Government adopted the Federal Policy on
Wetland Conservation, which aims to promote the conservation of Canada's wetlands and at
sustaining their ecological and socio-economic functions, now and in the future. In addition, four
of Canada's provinces are in the process of implementing provincial wetland and peatland
conservation and management policies.
4
Thibault, J.J. 2002. New Initiatives in Managing peatland Resources in New Brunswick, Canada.
pp. 222-227 in Schmilewski, G. and Rochefort, L. (eds) Peat in Horticulture. Proceedings on the
International Peat Symposium, 2002, Pärnu, Estonia. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä,
Finland.
Keywords:
Peat, Canada, policy, utilization, conservation.
Summary:
New Brunswick has a total of 142, 000 ha of peatlands of which 11% are under
peat mining lease agreements. About 65% of the peatland area occurs on public land and
almost all peat companies operate on public land. In 2001, a new policy on peat mining was
adopted and the authority lies with the Department of Natural Resources and Energy who will
together with the Department of Environment and Local Government approve applications after
and Environmental Impact Assessment. Under the new policy, all holders of peat leases are
required to have a site restoration and reclamation plan, before peat harvesting begins. In most
cases, site restoration to a functioning natural wetland habitat will be the favoured objective.
5
Selin, P. and Nyrönen, T. 1998. The Use of Cutaway areas in Finland. pp. 18-22 in Malterer, T.,
Johnson, K. and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland restoration and reclamation – Techniques and
Regulatory Considerations. Proceedings from the 1998 International Peat Symposium, Duluth,
Minnesota. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Keywords:
Cutaway area, after use, restoration, peat production.
Summary:
In this article the current after use forms in Finland are reviewed and described
Vapo Oy is a state company and produces 75-80% of Finland's total peat production volume.
During the next decade a large area of 45, 000-50, 000 ha of cutaway peatlands will come out of
production. Therefore, much research and work is done in order to find the best suitable after
use alternatives, as well as new options. Afforestation was in the past and is still at present the
best known and most conducted form of after use. Since also Finland has large areas of arable
land that are used for food production, agriculture as a form after use is considered not
appropriate any longer. Much more interesting, also from an economical point of view, is the
cultivation of biomass like reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), which occurs naturally in
Finland. Instructions are given for the creation of bird sanctuaries. The advantages and
disadvantages of growing berries and herbs on former peat cutting areas are considered. This
article emphasizes the need for identification of the underlying substrate and the natural
drainage depth prior to any after use activities. Many ideas and research data are available but
there is relatively little knowledge about impacts of the various forms of after use.
6
56
Leinonen, A., Lindh, T., Paappanen, T., Kallio, E., Flyktman, M., Hakkarainen, J., Käyhkö, V.,
Peronius, P., Puuronen, M., and Mikkonen, T., 1998. Cultivation and production of reed canary
grass for mixed fuel as a method for reclamation of a peat production area. pp. 120-124 in
Malterer, T., Johnson, K. and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland restoration and reclamation –
Techniques and Regulatory Considerations. Proceedings from the 1998 International Peat
Symposium, Duluth, Minnesota. International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Keywords:
Peat production, reed canary grass, biomass crop, harvesting, storage,
combustion, bio energy.
Summary:
Among the alternatives for after use of cutaway peatlands, the cultivation of reed
canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) for bio fuel is promising and carries along several positive
side effects during peat production is still going on and after is ceased Vapo Oy and VTT Energy
together conducted research on the cultivation and technology and methods of harvesting reed
canary grass in Finland. This report gives an overview about where technology stands at the
time of writing and reviews the economical and environmental advantages and disadvantages of
the cultivation of reed canary grass for bio fuel by itself and as a mixture with wood chips and
peat. In Finland up to that time, reed canary grass was not competitive to other alternative fuels
but the improvement of the applied technology, use of alternative fertilizers, and plant breeding
for higher yields may improve its potential for application.
7
Utter, A. and Lundmark, L., 2003. Efterbehandling av Kauppisennuoma torvtäktsområde –förslag
på lämpliga alternativ samt kostnader för detta. Kemiska institutionen/tekniska högskolan, Umeå
Universitet. 40 pp.
Keywords:
Cutaway peatland, after use alternatives, costs, management plan.
Summary:
Kauppisenvuoma is a former peat cutting area just outside of Kiruna, North
Sweden where peat harvesting was carried out between 1983-1996. Four peatland cutover
sites, one in Ireland, one in Finland, and three in Sweden, are reviewed for examples of kinds of
after use. The main goals for the after use included 1) establishment of forest plantations, 2)
creation of lakes and wetlands, which is connected to waterfowl and other aquatic diversity, and
3) restoration to a condition of peat accumulation, as defines functioning mire ecosystems.
Examples are given from Sweden, Finland and Ireland. The investigated site of this thesis
project is evaluated for the potential for implementation of the existing options and appropriate
options are proposed. The site is not conducive to some of the existing reclamation options
because of its geographical location (harsh climate, short vegetation period, low temperature
sum). Suggestions given are the creation of a lake, restoration of wetland and conversion into
forestry use.
8
Farrell, C. and Doyle, G. 2001. Rehabilitation of industrial cutaway Atlantic blanket bog in County
Mayo, North-West Ireland. pp. 21-35 in Wetlands Ecology and Management No. 11, 2003.
Kluwer Acadamic Publishers, The Netherlands.
Keywords:
Sphagnum-regrowth, cutaway peatland, colonisation, plant communities, site
manipulations, Atlantic blanket bog.
57
Summary:
Bellacorick is a milling production site of Bord na Mòna, the Irish Peat Board.
Around 1, 200 ha have already come out of production and are now investigated for the changes
that have already taken place at the site for the most appropriate after use options to be applied
Among the various aspects to be looked at, factors influencing colonization the already
happened natural colonization (plant communities with the present habitats) were examined in
order to reveal the best management strategies. More monitoring of development is going to be
carried out during the next years, mainly on the vegetation establishment and habitat
development after site manipulations like the manipulation of hydrology and surface area of the
cutaway peatland and planting of birch.
9
Hörnsten, L., 1992. Efterbehandling av torvtäkter utbrutna med djupbrytningsteknik – en
literaturstudie – Treatments of peat bogs harvested by deep digging technique. Rapport
1992:36, Vattenfall Research, Värmeteknik. Vällingby, Sweden. 64 pp.
Keywords:
After use, peat bog, deep digging harvesting technique.
Summary:
In this paper it is described how cutaway peatlands that have been harvested with
deep digging harvesting technique can be treated after production has ceased. The author
reviews the various after use options for cutaway peatlands such as afforestation, plantations of
energy forests and biomass cultivation, and creation of lakes. The main focus of this literature
study, which is based on Swedish literature, maps and oral references available at the time of
writing, is on the practicality and suitability for Sweden on the basis of three main locations
(Southern Swedish Highlands and the provinces of Dalecarlia and Norrbotten). Further, the
costs for each reclamation alternative are given. It is concluded that forest cultivation and
establishment of ponds are possible in all locations. Because of the climate neither energy wood
nor energy grass seem to be appropriate in any of the mentioned regions.
10
Finell, M. 2003. The use of reed canary-grass (Phalaris arundinacea) as a short fibre raw
material for the pulp and paper industry. pp. 7-24. Doctoral diss.. Unit of Biomass Technology
and Chemistry, SLU. Acta Universitatis agriculturae Sueciae. Agraria vol. 424, Uppsala,
Sweden.
Keywords:
Non-woody, pulp properties, raw material preparation, TCF bleaching, paper
properties, multivariate data analysis, PLS.
Summary:
This thesis describes the use of non-woody material as a source for bio-fuel and
to replace wood material as a short fibre raw material in the pulp and paper industry with a focus
on reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea). This study examines the following aspects of reed
canary-grass: quality, transportation, storage, refining of the raw material by dry fractionation,
chemical pulping, bleaching and paper production.
Reed canary grass seems to be a promising crop as an alternative to birch and other wood
material and as presented in the thesis work the plant seems to be very suitable for biomass
cultivation on former peat cutting areas. The proposed management, harvesting and processing
of reed canary grass given in this paper are based on the ecology of the crop and seem to be
congruent with the conditions and situation in peat cutting areas and their features.
58
11
Vasander, H. et al., 2003. Status and restoration of peatlands in northern Europe. P. 51-63 in
Wetlands Ecology and Management No. 11, 2003. Kluwer Acadamic Publishers, The
Netherlands.
Keywords:
Sweden.
Cut-away peatlands, Estonia, Finland, forest drainage, mires, monitoring,
Summary:
The paper review natural environmental conditions for mire formation, different
utilization of peatlands, and different and common approaches to the restoration of peatlands in
Estonia, Finland and Sweden. The main focus in this paper lies on restoration of drained
forested peatlands to promote landscape diversity, restoration of drained peatlands as buffer
zones between forests and waterways, and restoration of cut-away peatlands to carbon
sequestering systems. Results and theories from experimental sites in Sweden and Finland are
pointed out and evaluated for their success and status today. Vegetation recovery on drained
peatlands occurs quicker than on cutaway peatlands. Some species seem to need longer than
others to colonize a site again, or may never come back. The successful restoration is usually
not only depending on biotic factors such as hydrology or colonization capability, but furthermore
the question after the ownership and who will be responsible in the future seems to have a
rather large impact.
12
Jones, S.M., Boyle, G.M., and Farrell, E.P., 1998. Forestry on milled cutaway peatland. pp.22-26
in Tom Egan (Conf. Coord.), 1998. The future use of cutaway bogs. Lough Boora Parklands.
Cutaway Bogs Conference, 1998. Brosna Press Ltd., Ferbane, Co. Offaly, Ireland.
Keywords:
Milled-peat production, afforestation, weed competition, frost damage, nutrient
deficiency, research programme.
Summary:
The peat production process at Bord na Móna, in Ireland is described Peat is
harvested in two different ways, sod and milled peat cutting. Both are very different processes
and each of them leads to distinctive site conditions after peat production ceases. The residues
left are very different, both chemically and physically. After sod peat cutting a rather thick layer of
basal fen peat is left. Milled peat cutting leaves a layer of well-decomposed, basal fen peat of
varying thickness, frequently very shallow subsequently in close contact to the mineral soil. Very
often, where it is economically sound, milled peat cutting follows, thus many of the available
cutaway peatlands have similar conditions. Afforestation seems to be a suitable after use.
Therefore, since 1988, 4, 000 ha have been planted with Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.)
Carr.), lodge pole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. Var. contorta), Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.)
Karst.) and oak (Quercus spp.) to test them for their vigour and health. In 1994, the plantations
were surveyed for their main causes of tree mortality and/or poor growth. The main causes were
frost, competition from weed vegetation and nutrient deficiencies. Even though the results from
this survey concerning tree health and vigour were not satisfactory, the individual tree growth
and the stand growth seem to be promising. However, afforestation on cutaway peatlands can
definitely be satisfactory if the reasons for failure, such as frost, weed competition and nutrient
deficiencies, can be eliminated. To improve the plantations and to obtain more knowledge for
future actions, a research programme was developed to address these problems.
59
13
Collins, T. 1998. The economic importance of agriculture on the cutaways. pp. 17-20 in Tom
Egan (Conf. Coord.), 1998. The future use of cutaway bogs. Lough Boora Parklands. Cutaway
Bogs Conference, 1998. Brosna Press Ltd., Ferbane, Co. Offaly, Ireland.
Keywords:
Peat production, policy, reform, reclamation, agriculture, re-structuring.
Summary:
The current situation and the economy of farming in County Offaly, Ireland are
presented with a focus on future use of reclaimed areas from peat production. To convert former
peat cutting areas into agricultural fields seems contradictory to recent developments and trends
at present. Since the 1970s, when agricultural policies were production-led to secure the food
supply in Europe, the policies have undergone a reform in 1992. The orientation changed
towards less intensive and more extensive farming. This paper does not favour the increase of
percentage of land used for agriculture, and it points out the need for re-structuring the holdings
in County Offaly, where there is found the highest proportion of peat production in relation to
other land uses. In these parts of the County, farms are smaller, the systems of production are
poorer and the economic size structure is weaker. Therefore, these farmers should be supported
through the re-structuring of farm size, and cutaway peatlands should be reclaimed as
agricultural fields.
14
McNally, G. 1998. Optimising the return to Bord na Móna. pp. 13-16 in Tom Egan (Conf.
Coord.), 1998. The future use of cutaway bogs. Lough Boora Parklands. Cutaway Bogs
Conference, 1998. Brosna Press Ltd., Ferbane, Co. Offaly, Ireland.
Keywords:
Reclamation, value, policy, conflicts.
Summary:
Ireland’s land area is 17% covered by peat. In County Offaly peat makes up 34%
of the land cover. The Irish Government policy promotes the use of mixed fuels with emphasis
on indigenous resources. Except for a very small amount of hydro, peat is the only indigenous
resource and the value of a properly developed peatland is calculated to be £25 000 per ha per
m of peat. There is a great potential for employment and subsequently economic improvement.
Bord na Móna’s production policy is to remove as much peat as is economically sound. That
does not equate to total peat extraction and moreover, depending on what reclamation is
decided upon, the residual peat can have a negative impact on the success of the after use.
Also, from the economical perspective, regarding the value of a peatland, from an economical
perspective there is no reason to leave these values unused As a result, peat producers have to
deal with the following conflicts. Peat production destroys unique ecosystems, which should be
preserved, wildlife habitats are destroyed where potential wasteland is created, and lastly, peat
burning contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. In the remaining text of this paper it is
described how Bord na Móna views these issues and to some extent what they have planned to
do to fulfil their requirements for considering the mentioned conflicts adequately.
15
Quinty, F. and Hood, G., 1998. Peatland restoration guide. pp. 79-81 in Malterer, T., Johnson, K.
and Stewart, J. (eds). Peatland restoration and reclamation – Techniques and Regulatory
60
Considerations. Proceedings from the 1998 International Peat Symposium, Duluth, Minnesota.
International Peat Society, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Keywords:
Restoration, peatland, top spits, chopping spreading, mulch
Summary:
Techniques for the restoration of functioning peatlands are given in a step-by-step
guide. A restored peatland bears characteristic vegetation inter alia Sphagnum spp.. Before any
actions take place the restoration has to be planned well. The remaining peat layer should be at
least 50 cm thick. Plant material that will be spread onto the bare peat has to be collected from a
undamaged mire. The collection area should be 10% of the area that is to be re-vegetated. The
first step during this restoration process is to prepare the surface of the peat field and rewet the
site by blocking the drainage ditches. This will help the moss establish more easily, since it does
not have roots and it will bring back the hydrological functions. Since Sphagnum mosses have a
great potential to regenerate satisfactorily from fragments, the second step will be to collect top
spits, at least the first 10 cm. The material will be spread evenly on the prepared field. It has to
be mentioned that this layer of plant fragments should not be too thick and not too thin for
successful establishment. The last and most important step will be to cover the field with mulch,
for example, straw. Mulch will shade the moss fragments and help the moss to keep its
moisture.
16
Ericsson, T., Grip, H. Pertty, K., Wiklander, G., 1983. Etablering av engergiskog på Högmosse I
Jädraås – Establishment of energy forest on raised peat bog. Teknisk rapport/Projekt
Energiskogsodling – ESO. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.91 pp.
Keywords:
raised peat bog, energy forest, afforestation, water chemistry, fertilization.
Summary:
This report is the result of research on the effects of energy forest cultivation on
the hydrological chemistry. The requirements on peat bogs afforested with willow concerning
water, energy and nutrient budget are given as follows: 1) the water catchment area needs to be
cleary defined, 2) uncontrolled groundwater leakage should be negligible, 3) there should be
found a suitable reference area nearby, and 4) it should be possible to measure the runoff from
the area. During the conducted experiments it was concluded that the performance of willow
species was correlated to the soil pH and the moisture content. The growth of grey alder and
birch was not affected by the pH. The measurements of runoff waters, lead to the conclusion
that fertilization, owing to the low nutrient-holding capacity of the peat, should be carried out in
small doses and the amount of nutrients applied should be adjusted to the present uptake
capacity of the crop during the growing season.
17
Dachnowski-Stokes, A.P. 1926. Factors and problems in the selection of peatlands for different
uses. USDA Dep. Bull. No. 1419. 23pp.
Keywords:
peatland, utilization, stratigraphy, mire development, economic use
Summary:
The chief hazards in agriculture and industry were grouped into three classes: 1)
differences between peatlands in their distinction structural framework (peat types and
stratigraphy), 2) lack of a proper method of controlling the supply of soil moisture, and 3) the
61
accumulation in the root zone of crops of excessive quantities of soluble salts from the mineral
subsoil. Understanding of the nature and the effects of these problems will lead to better basis
for operations and will avoid economical losses and encourage the conservation of peatlands,
which are essential for water-storage, afforestation and reforestation and for wild-life reserves.
18
Sopo, R., Tuomanen, S., Selin, P., Väyrynen, T., Rinttilä, R., Marja-aho, J., Mäkikorttila, P.,
Peronius, P. And Suutari, E., 2002. Environmetal Impact Assesment of Peat Production –
Instructions for evaluating the effects on nature and neighbour relations of peat production. The
Association of Finnish Peat Industry, Jyväskyla, Finland. 7 pp.
Keywords:
environmental impact, peat harvesting, instructions, social impact.
Summary:
This paper reviews direct and indirect environmental impacts of peat harvesting
on 1) the living conditions, health and comfort, 2) nature and natural diversity, 3) the landscape,
cultural heritage and communal structure and, 4) the utilization of natural resources.
19
Miller, D.R., Robertson, R.A., Gauld, J., and Malcolm, A., 2000. pp. 29-38 in Åman, P (ed), 2000.
Re-use of peat production areas. EU’s Northern Periphery Programme project: Re-use of
peatland areas. Proceedings from the 1st international seminar, Oulu, Finland. 55 pp.
Keywords:
peatland, hand-cutting, mechanized peat extraction, after use, GIS.
Summary:
On the Ilse of Islay, peat has been harvested traditionally by hand-cutting for
domestic fuel supply and commercial purposes (whiskey production) for many centuries. There
are competing interests on the use of peatlands for wildlife conservation, afforestation, and peat
extraction (mechanized) and on the after use for or re-use. This paper lists the advantages and
disadvantages of both hand-cutting and mechanical production on the above-mentioned
background. In order to properly plan peat production and the rehabilitation of cutaway
peatlands and to make the right decisions, data collection and progression is most important.
The collected and analyzed data can then be compiled into a spatial database used by the GIS.
This will enable modelling and help as a planning tool in the decision making process.
20
Larsson, L.-E., 2001. Peat in Sweden – Cutaway peatlands to be restored pp. 34-41 in
Uoskuainen, H. (ed), 2001. Re-use of peat production areas. EU’s Northern Periphery
Programme project: Re-use of peatland areas. Proceedings from the 3rd international seminar,
Aberdeen, Scotland. 70 pp.
Keywords:
after use, cutaway peatland, restoration
Summary:
This report gives a good overview on the current situation of the peat producing
industry in Sweden. It highlights the importance finding appropriate alternatives for rehabilitation
of cutaway peatlands regarding that there will be a rather large area being released from
production. The main after use options being applied in Sweden at present are: 1) planting of
new forest or energy forest, 2) using land for agriculture, pasture, or crop cultivation, 3)
62
constructing a shallow lake, or new wetland, 4) special measure, such as using the area for golf
courses, fishing lake, or to filter sewage water. The implementation can lead to conflicts because
while many private landowner would prefer the land to be afforested while the public would
desire a new wetland.
The author points out the importance of getting documentation on the original flora and
fauna to analyze the development and learn which parameters interfere and which are important
for biodiversity.
63