4.7 Article

Surface structure on abandoned upland blanket peatland tracks

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 325, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116561

Keywords

Wetlands; Bog; Nanotope; Erosion; Sward height; Roads

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Temporary permissions are often granted for track use on peatlands, but even with mesh systems, linear disturbances may still have persistent impacts on peatland structure. In a study conducted in northern England, the surface peatland structure of five abandoned tracks was evaluated, and it was found that all tracks showed a simplification of the surface nanotopography compared to surrounding control areas. The frequency of previous usage was not a significant factor in determining nano-topographic loss.
Temporary permissions are often granted for track use on peatlands. However, even when peatland track designs attempt to minimise environmental impacts via use of mesh systems, such linear disturbances may have persistent impacts. We evaluated the surface peatland structure of five abandoned tracks (four with a mesh surface, one unsurfaced) with varying past usage frequencies, at an upland site in northern England. Simplification of the surface nanotopography was found on all tracks compared to surrounding control areas, with increased micro-erosion patterns in rutted areas, and invasive species on some treatments. The frequency of previous usage was not found to be a significant factor controlling nano-topographic loss. Edge effects and hillslope position were influential in places, but these effects were not consistent across treatments. Nanotopographic recovery was found to be inhibited when track usage commenced within a short time frame after track construction. Mesh tracks appear to create a spatial constraint leading to poor development of plants and a reduced ability to form characteristic structures which are integral to mire function.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available