CULTIVATION OF SPHAGNUM IN
NORTHEAST FRIESLAND
IDEAS, METHODS AND EXPERCIENCES FOR SPHAGNUM FARMING
I
ACADEMIC CONSULTANCY TRAINING
COURSE CODE: YMC-60809
APRIL 2016
CULTIVATION OF SPHAGNUM IN NORTHEAST FRIESLAND
PROJECT NO. 1636
BETTER WETTER
COMMISSIONER
RIANNE VOS, KENNISWERKPLAATS NOORDOOST FRIESLAND
ACADEMIC CONSULTANCY TEAM:
MANAGER
TARIC SCHRADER
SECRETARY
SILVIA DE LA ROSA MONTELONGO
CONTROLLER
ROY TOEVANK
MEMBER
MAGDALENA KULISCH
MEMBER
SJOERD POSTMA
MEMBER
SVEN VERWEIJ
Adapted image on the cover is taken by Erik Bethlehem, licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.
(https://www.flickr.com/photos/erikbethlehem/23498321669)
II
SUMMARY
Water management is a vital part of preserving the decaying peat layers in Northeast Friesland. These peat
layers are subsiding due to manual water drainage to facilitate agriculture. By elevating the water table, peat
layers will have less oxic conditions and the subsiding will be brought to a halt. To make this water
management solution more appealing to potential farmers, the provincial government has commissioned this
study to look at the possibilities of cultivating crops that can handle very high water tables. One of the more
interesting crops is peat moss (Sphagnum). This study focuses on the ecological value of Sphagnum, cultivation
and harvesting methods, including a map that displays potential locations for cultivation, and finally potential
product applications. A defining characteristic of Sphagnum is its ability to wet and acidify its own ecosystem;
this creates suitable habitats for a wide variety of rare plants and animal species. All of these factors add up to
Sphagnum’s ecological value. Sphagnum grows well in low nutrient environments, but some experiments
suggest that it can be grown on nutrient rich soils like in Northeast Friesland too. It has also the power to fixate
large amounts of atmospheric carbon, which could help to damp the increase of CO 2 in atmosphere.
The project evaluates the possibilities of cultivating Sphagnum, which is based on previous experiments and
restoration projects of bog areas. It has been shown that it is possible to cultivate Sphagnum in conditioned
areas for and with an efficient water management. Additionally, the provided harvesting method by multiple
year rotational scheme, has been previously studied. Most of the harvesting will be done manually. If
implemented, these methods will minimise the negative impact on wildlife living in this ecosystem and on peat
moss regeneration, which takes around 3 to 5 years to recover after harvesting. The created and included
suitability map at parcel level (most prominent parameters are soil type, groundwater table, land use and
nature areas) also displays sufficient potential locations for Sphagnum cultivation. A fair variety of product
applications already exist for Sphagnum, of which some are already on the market. Some of the potential uses
of Sphagnum include its use as growing substrate for both agriculture and horticulture, terrarium filling,
sanitary items, environmental control, food preservation, decorative material or even medicine. Although a full
market research is required to properly assess the viability of growing Sphagnum for commercial purposes, we
are overall optimistic about the prospect and opportunities of growing Sphagnum for agricultural purposes.
III
SAMENVATTING
Waterbeheer is van groot belang voor het behouden van veenbodems in noordoost Fryslân. Deze veenbodems
oxideren door het lage grondwaterpeil, omdat deze gebieden gedraineerd worden ten behoeve van de
landbouw, met als resultaat een verdere daling van de bodem. Door het grondwaterpeil op maaiveld te
brengen, is het mogelijk om de bodemdaling te stoppen. Dit heeft echter negatieve gevolgen voor de
landbouw, omdat de opbrengsten dalen. Om deze peilverhoging aanvaardbaarder te maken voor Friese
boeren heeft de provincie Fryslân dit onderzoek opgezet om alternatieve verdienmodellen te onderzoeken.
Een van de opties is het verbouwen van veenmos (Sphagnum). Deze studie richt zich op de mogelijkheden
voor het verbouwen en oogsten van Sphagnum inclusief een kaart waarop potentiële percelen te zien zijn in
noordoost Fryslân, de ecologische waarden van Sphagnum en als laatste nog de mogelijke producten die
gemaakt zouden kunnen worden van het verbouwde Sphagnum. Een interessante eigenschap van Sphagnum
is dat de plant zijn eigen ecosysteem creëert door de zuurgraad en het vochtigheidsgehalte van zijn omgeving
aan te passen. Hierdoor creëert Sphagnum een ideale leefomgeving voor een variëteit aan andere zeldzame
plant- en diersoorten. Dit zijn allemaal factoren die bijdragen aan de ecologische waarde van het verbouwen
van Sphagnum. Sphagnum groeit het best in een nutriëntarme bodem, maar recent onderzoek toont ook aan
dat de plant kan groeien op nutriënt rijke bodems, zoals in Fryslân het geval is. Sphagnum is ook in staat om
grote hoeveelheden CO2 op te slaan, wat zou kunnen bijdragen aan de wereldwijde klimaatverandering.
Met dit project onderzoeken we of het mogelijk is Sphagnum te verbouwen. Hiervoor baseren we ons op
eerdere onderzoeken en projecten die gericht zijn op het behouden van veenmoerassen. Uit deze resultaten is
gebleken dat het mogelijk is om Sphagnum te verbouwen in een gecontroleerd (waterbeheer-) systeem en dit
te gebruiken voor watermanagement. Ook wordt een teeltschema beschreven, met een meerjarige rotatie,
gebaseerd op een eerder onderzoek. Om het effect op het ecosysteem zo klein mogelijk te houden is het beter
om handmatig te oogsten, waarbij Sphagnum 3 tot 5 jaar de kans krijgt om aan te groeien. De kaart met
potentiële percelen waar Sphagnum verbouwd kan worden, geeft meerdere geschikte locaties aan. Deze kaart
is gebaseerd op een reeks relevante parameters waaronder: bodemsoort, grondwaterpeil, landgebruik en de
nabijheid van natuurgebieden. Een ruim assortiment aan Sphagnum producten is al te koop of wordt nog
ontwikkeld. Sphagnum kan bijvoorbeeld gebruikt worden als substraat voor het groeien van planten, maar ook
voor terrariumvulling, hygiëneproducten, waterzuiveringsproducten, levensmiddelingconservering, decoratief
materiaal en zelfs medische producten. Er is echter nog wel een volledig marktonderzoek nodig om te
bevestigen hoe rendabel het verbouwen van Sphagnum kan zijn in noordoost Fryslân.
IV
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary ................................................................................................................................................................ III
Samenvatting ......................................................................................................................................................... IV
Chapter 1: Introduction and background ............................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 2: Peat moss ecology ................................................................................................................................ 3
Ecology of Sphagnum plants............................................................................................................................... 3
Ecosystem services of peat moss ........................................................................................................................ 3
Nitrogen .............................................................................................................................................................. 6
Chapter 3: Implementation of Sphagnum farming ................................................................................................ 7
Peat moss cultivation design and growth requirements .................................................................................... 7
Harvest methods .............................................................................................................................................. 11
Subsidies ........................................................................................................................................................... 12
Locations ........................................................................................................................................................... 13
Chapter 4: Products .............................................................................................................................................. 16
Functional characteristics ................................................................................................................................. 16
Products ............................................................................................................................................................ 17
Chapter 5: discussion ............................................................................................................................................ 20
Chapter 6: Conclusion & Recommedations .......................................................................................................... 22
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................ 22
Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................ 22
References ............................................................................................................................................................ 23
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................... 26
Python script of the model ............................................................................................................................... 26
Extent of the dataset ........................................................................................................................................ 28
DISCLAIMER
This report is produced by students of Wageningen University as part of their MSc-programme. It is not an
official publication of Wageningen University or Wageningen UR and the content herein does not represent
any formal position or representation by Wageningen University.
Copyright © 2016 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form
or by any means, without the prior consent of the authors. Contact: [email protected]
V
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
During the past decades the water
management in the North of the
Netherlands has focused on optimising the
landscape for agricultural use. The original
peat landscapes in the Friesland region have
largely been artificially drained to make way
for mostly hay meadows (Figure 1) (Best &
Oosterhaven, 2012). This hay is commonly
used for dairy farming. Almost half of the Figure 1 Sketch of the current situation in the peat areas of Friesland. Altered
6000 farms in Friesland are specialised in from http://ca.water.usgs.gov/land_subsidence/california-subsidence-causeeffect.html
dairy (Venema et al., 2009). This type of
management
has
some
negative
consequences, especially in the context of climate change: desiccated soils have a higher decompositions rate
due to oxic conditions. This leads to further lowering of the surface, making the water management more
complex and thus more expensive. Furthermore, the increased metabolic activity enhances the emission of
greenhouse gases. Recent predictions about possible effects of climate change reveals an enhanced probability
of further desiccation, caused by an expected combination of longer summers and higher temperatures
(Brouns et al., 2015). In a modelling study, it was expected that peat meadow areas in this area within
Friesland can subside up to 5.8-6.7 mm per year (Brouns et al., 2015). Eventually, it is expected that the peat
will disappear completely if the current type of management is maintained (Osinga et al., 2014).
A new and more flexible management of the area is needed to improve the adaptation to environmental
changes. This includes a change of land use towards a system of higher resilience that can cope with extreme
weather events and improves the water availability of the area. With higher water tables, precipitation peaks
during winter and the subsequent increase in water flow can be better managed. One of the main challenges
for this aim will be to develop a plan that incorporates not only the environmental services, but also a plan
that provides income for the province, which is increasingly abandoned by the younger generations. This often
has economic reasons. The implementation of a new land use and product processing has the potential to
create new jobs for the people of the area and for farmers, whose livelihood depends on their direct
environment.
Due to their high water retention and organic
accumulation, peatlands have an important role
in this project. Peatlands are the most efficient
ecosystems at fixating and storing atmospheric
carbon; their conservation and sustainable use
are essential for long term climate change
mitigation and adaptation by fixating carbon
dioxide (Parish et al., 2008). In the past, the
Netherlands were covered with Sphagnum
(Figure 2), while today, there are only a few tiny
patches with living Sphagnum left. To
reintroduce living Sphagnum in the Netherlands,
peat areas can be restored and used for
commercial purposes.
Figure 2 Close-up of Sphagnum. Retrieved from
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/Sphagnum.fle
xuosum.jpg
1
The plan is to come up with a way of agriculture on very wet soils. This form of agriculture is called
paludiculture. Peat mosses are a very interesting group of species, because they naturally grow under very wet
conditions. Currently, harvested peat and peat moss is mainly used for horticultural purposes. To obtain
economical value from this plant, it is necessary to set up water management plans and cultivation/harvesting
regulations to avoid affecting their water storage capacity and ecosystem damage that could lead to reduction
of biodiversity and high emissions of CO 2. Additionally, it is fundamental to investigate the harvestable
quantities and regeneration time of Sphagnum, if potential products derived from this plant are planned to be
produced. For this reason a feasibility study will be performed.
Peat products are already used globally.
In the European Union annually
3
20,000,000 m of peat is used in growing
media, with a yearly turnover of 1.3
billion Euro and creating roughly 11,000
jobs. Most of this peat is taken from peat
bog areas in the Baltic states, Scandinavia
and Canada (Joosten, 1995). The current
situation follows as a result of peat
removal from countries such as Germany,
England and The Netherlands in previous
centuries. Since this business is very
unsustainable and destructive (Figure 3)
an alternative is needed. Different crops
have been grown experimentally on fresh
peat moss as replacement for dried peat
with promising results. The fresh material
performed as well and sometimes even
better than the peat (Krebs et al., 2012).
Figure 3 Area where peat recently is extracted to use for horticultural purposes.
Retrieved form http://www.geograph.ie/photo/1390460
The overall goal of this project is to outline the ecological value, cultivation and harvesting methods, potential
harvesting locations and potential product applications of Sphagnum to get an early indication of the viability
of cultivating peat moss in combination with water management.
This research is divided into multiple parts. We will look at the ecological value of peat moss areas. Ways of
cultivation and harvesting will be evaluated and we will map suitable locations for peat moss cultivation in
Northeast Friesland. At the end, we will make an inventory of peat moss products existing on the market, as
well as potential product ideas.
2
CHAPTER 2: PEAT MOSS ECOLOGY
In this chapter we will research the overall ecology of Sphagnum plants. The habitats of peat moss areas, as
well as other rare species that flourish in this habitat are worth to consider when constructing a Sphagnum
farm. We will also explore the carbon fixation and emission ability of peat lands.
ECOLOGY OF SPHAGNUM PLANTS
Sphagnum is a plant genus consisting of 307 species (Catalogue of Life Partnership, 2016), which are
predominantly present in swampy, nutrient-poor and acidic lands with a relatively large influence of
precipitation. Peat moss has absorbing capabilities, storing twenty times their dry weight in water. At the same
time the dry weight per unit volume is low (Krebs et al., 2012). Peat bog areas represent a high ecological value
with lots of rare plants and can store large amounts of CO (Schofield, 1985).
2
In an ongoing experiment by Ivan Mettrop near Feanwâlden, a mix of three different Sphagnum species is
used; S. palustre, S. squarrosum and S. fimbriatum. If this mix of species proves to thrive under the
experimental setup, it is likely that these species are going to be used in future large-scale cultivation. If the
experiment fails with this mix, pilot studies with other, preferably native, Sphagnum species should be
performed to identify species with necessary characteristics (potential targets are discussed in chapter 3 and
4).
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES OF PEAT MOSS
The term ecosystem service describes supporting, regulating, providing and cultural ecosystem qualities. This
includes ecosystem functions as habitat provision, improving water quality and quantity, support nutrient
cycling, recreation, pollination, reducing greenhouse gas emission, providing fresh air and influencing microand local climate conditions. Peat mosses have many of these qualities, especially high values for biodiversity
conservation, climate regulation, human welfare (Joosten et al., 2015., Kimmel & Mander, 2010; Wichmann et
al., 2012) and a key role in carbon emission and fixation (Kimmel & Mander, 2010). The following sections
elaborate the importance for biodiversity and providing habitats, greenhouse gas emission and carbon
fixation.
BIODIVERSITY AND PROVIDING HABITATS
Peat moss has the capability of changing its environment for its own advantages. Sphagnum plants grow well
on acidic soils, where they have little competition of acidophobic plants. Peat moss can acidify the soil while
keeping conditions very wet, which has a positive feedback loop on its own growth and a negative feedback
loop on e.g. calcareous species of plants. These conditions provide a good habitat for several other plant
species that are adapted to an oligotrophic, wet and acid environment, which is a small niche. Natural peat
landscapes are a valuable habitat for all kinds of specialized organisms. Amongst them are a large number of
soil organisms that are functioning within the complex decomposition-web of peat (Turetsky et al., 2012).
Many plants grow naturally in peatlands, amongst them are beak-sedge (Rhynchospora), cotton grasses
(Eriophorum) and cross-leaved heath (Erica tetralix) (Wichmann et al., 2012). Plants of commercial value that
grow well on peat moss are cloudberries (Rubus chamaemorus) and cranberries (Vaccinium macrocarpon)
(Rochefort, 2000). A rare representative on peatlands is the genus of sundew (Drosera). With the decline of
suitable habitats in Europe, the plants became a threatened species. The cultivation of peat moss would create
potential new habitats. How valuable a commercially used peat moss area can be for conservation is not easy
to determine. So far only a few studies evaluated data that give information about the contribution of
3
Sphagnum farms to conservation issues. From the existing information it can be concluded that the valence
depends to a large extent on the management of the area, the rotation periods and harvest methods.
A three year study by Muster et al.
(2015) was carried out on a cultivation
site in northwest Germany to
determine the conservation value,
defined as: rarity, IUCN Red List status,
disturbance tolerance and peatland
association. As bio indicators served the
diverse groups of spiders and
harvestmen (Figure 4). The outcome of
the study showed that after three years
the value of conservation is almost as
high as in the semi-natural peat moss
control site. The communities were
changing from mostly general early
succession species to more specialized
Figure 4 Harvestmen (Species: Leiobunum rotundum) on peat moss. Retrieved
species of later succession states. The
from http://www.bryoecol.mtu.edu/chapters_2011/8Arthropods_Harvestmen.pdf
commonly used rotation system for
peat moss cultivation is three to five years. To ensure the establishment of late succession species long
rotation periods are needed.
Besides the rotation period, other factors have a major influence on the species assemblage. One is the
specific cultivated Sphagnum species, as some species seem to facilitate biodiversity more than other species.
A Sphagnum species that is recommendable in order to enhance the diversity of a site is the slow growing S.
papillosum. An even more fundamental factor is the colonization condition. Especially during the starting
period the species assemblage will depend mainly on the species that are migrating from surrounding areas. At
later stages, when more species have established the management of the area will play an important role. A
checkerboard arrangement with different succession states is recommendable to facilitate a fast colonization
of freshly harvested plots. When not all plots are harvested at the same time the populations will be less
affected and the connectivity between the plots ensures a high recolonization rate (Muster et al., 2015).
Further organisms that might benefit from cultivation sites are rare myxomycetes, mammals and birds
(Wichmann et al. 2012). For many bird species as lapwing, common snipe, curlew and golden plover to name
some, peatlands are suitable breeding habitats. The regular disturbances in cultivated areas will probably
lessen the value as nesting places for birds. To encourage them to accept the area as breeding habitat the
management has to be adapted to this goal. Again, long harvest periods are recommendable to minimize the
disruptions and enhance the amount of insects that are important as a food source. The harvesting should not
be done during the spring and summer months, when birds are breeding and raising their chicks. The
checkerboard/mosaic rotational harvesting would also for birds be the best management solution, mostly
because it provides more insects (Joosten et al., 2015). The disadvantage of harvesting in winter is that this will
only remove a minimum of the nutrients from the area, while harvesting fresh peat moss material in summer
can remove a high nutrient amount and thereby create more suitable conditions for habitat specialists
(Joosten et al 2015.). So, for harvesting period there is a trade-off between meadow bird welfare and nutrient
removal. Many rare plants, animals and fungi bog species are adapted to nutrient poor conditions. Due to
nutrient enrichment by (artificial) fertilisation, these nutrient poor conditions can hardly be found on sites of
former agricultural use.
4
In comparison, cultivation sites have some disadvantages that are detracting them from becoming as diverse
as (semi-)natural peatlands:



Cultivated landscapes are more homogeneous, partly because of the absence of plant diversity which
provide vertical structures and partly because the natural microhabitats of dry hummocks and wet
hollows are missing.
More anthropogenic disturbances, especially through harvesting.
No accumulation of dead plant material and creation of peat bogs occurs.
Even though these disadvantages could hamper the colonisation of rare species, peat cultivation sites are a
suitable habitat for many peat associated species and can function as stepping stones for dispersal, enhance
the habitat diversity on landscape scale and function as a refuge for habitat specialists (Muster et al., 2015).
CARBON FIXATION AND REDUCING EMISSIONS
In terms of CO2, peatlands can be both an opportunity to store carbon and a source of emission. When moss
-1
-1
and peat are able to grow they can take up and store large amounts of carbon up to 720 kg ha yr (Belyea
and Malmer, 2004). When desiccation occurs, soil mineralisation emits high levels of carbon dioxide. For the
-1
-1
Netherlands, non-irrigated peat soils can emit 2 824 kg C ha year and rewetting this area can reduce the
emission by 14% (Best & Jacobs, 1997). In a similar study, Moore & Knowles (1989) reported an increase in
-1
-1
-1
-1
average emission from 1 460 kg C ha year to 29 200 kg C ha year between flooded and dry (water level 70
cm below the surface). The emission rate depends on various factors, e.g. climatic conditions, peat type, soil
temperature, degree of decomposition and water table level. Higher soil temperatures support the
mineralisation and therefore the CO2 emission (Oleszczuk et al., 2008). Depending on the climate, dry peatland
subside from some millimetres up to several centimetres per year (Joosten et al., 2015). Regarding the
expected increase of temperature due to climate change, these rates will probably increase in the future. The
subsidence of the surface of commercially used sites results in the need for deeper ditches to keep the area
dry. This increases the oxidation of the soil and therefore enhances the metabolic processes, which speeds up
the subsiding of the surface. Again, to keep the land dry deeper ditches are needed and the process is
restarted. The phenomenon is called “the vicious cycle of peatland utilization”. Due to this, water management
with dykes, ditches, pumps, etc. becomes more costly and the flood risk will increase (Joosten et al., 2015).
If not harvested, peat accumulation is contributing highly to long-term soil carbon fixation (Turetsky et al.,
2012). Paludiculture allows the peat bog to persist and even support its own growth. When cultivated the
carbon exported through harvesting, the NECB (net ecosystem carbon balances) and GWP (global warming
potential) balances are near neutral. In order to achieve a low carbon emission a year round high water table is
required (Beyer & Höper, 2015). When a proper paludiculture is established, the biggest gain is probably not in
carbon fixation, but in the big reduction of emissions. However, both carbon fixation and reduction of
emissions add up to carbon credits.
About 2% of the emitted carbon from peatlands comes from methane. This seems low in comparison, but the
GWP of methane is up to 34 times the one of carbon dioxide. The total amount varies between 4 and 500 mg
Cm / day, depending on the status of the peatland (Harpenslager et al., 2015). Increasing temperature, a high
water table and little vegetation are factors that enhance the emission from peat soils (van Winden et al.,
2012). The result of a greenhouse emission study on three experimental sites showed almost no methane
4
−2
fluxes when the water table is low and up to 24.2 CH -C m / year when sites were inundated. Flooding the
area and harvesting Sphagnum therefore increases the methane production and can lead to an overall slightly
positive GWP of the peatland (Beyer and Höper, 2015).
5
In contrast to CO2 and CH4 the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide (N2O) does not seems to play an important role
for the GWP of peatlands. The emission under inundated circumstances are only little higher and the fluxes are
generally low (Beyer and Höper, 2015).
NITROGEN
Sphagnum is adapted to an environment of low nutrients, therefore also to low nitrogen and phosphorous
conditions (Van Der Heijden et al., 2000). Naturally peat bogs are ombrotrophic, which means they are
supplied by the small amount of nutrients that enter the system with rainfall. Therefore the little nitrogen that
would be available under unfertilized circumstances is used efficiently by the peatland communities (Kivimäki
et al., 2013). In this case, the low lying area also receives both ground and surface water. In contrast to
vascular plants, peat mosses do not take up nutrients from the soil via roots. They assimilate essential
components from the surrounding medium mainly through the surface of their leaves (Gunnarsson & Rydin,
2000; Kivimäki et al., 2013). This makes the atmospheric deposition to a major source of nitrogen. An amount
2
of 1 mg / m / year seems to be the saturation value for Sphagnum species. A higher input results in the
leaching of Magnesium, Calcium and other cations (Aerts et al., 1992). Because of this, and the high
concentration in soils through fertilization, it is fundamentally important to know how peat moss can grow on
fertilized soils and what long term effects can be expected.
Multiple studies have been carried out (comp. Aerts et al., 1992; Bragazza et al., 2004; Kivimäki et al., 2013;
Gunnarsson & Rydin, 2000; Heijden et al., 2000) to investigate to what extent a higher nutrient content,
especially nitrogen (N) is affecting the growth of peat moss and its ability to fixate carbon. The results vary,
suggesting that not all influencing and interacting factors are fully determined at this point. The tendency goes
towards an increase in productivity of Sphagnum mosses at an intermediate nitrogen level. The nitrogen is
accumulating in the plant tissue. When the level becomes too high the productivity is decreasing again and the
Sphagnum plants respond with a decrease in longitudinal growth (Kivimäki et al., 2013; Gunnarsson & Rydin,
2000). How much nitrogen can be tolerated, is depending on the interplay of abiotic factors, like the
temperature, the amount of water and the availability of other components. Bragazza et al. (2004) defined the
critical nitrogen amount for peatlands as the status of nutritional imbalance. For Sphagnum species a N:P ratio
between 10-14 is recommended (Gunnarsson & Rydin, 2000; Heijden et al., 2000). A high nitrogen content
within the plant (> 15 mg / g dry weight) in combination with a high N:P ratio (> 16) affect the Sphagnum
plants, decreasing photosynthesis rate and fresh weight (Van Der Heijden et al., 2000). The ability of
Sphagnum to fixate CO2 is as well affected by this. Several studies concluded that a high amount of nitrogen
leads to a decreasing carbon accumulation (Kivimäki et al., 2013; Heijden et al., 2000). There might even be the
possibility that the carbon that is emitted as CO2 by decompensation exceeds the amount of fixated CO2 by the
peat moss. (Aerts et al., 1992; Gunnarsson & Rydin, 2000).
6
CHAPTER 3: IMPLEMENTATION OF SPHAGNUM FARMING
PEAT MOSS CULTIVATION DESIGN AND GROWTH REQUIREMENTS
Sphagnum growth is mainly influenced by its own intrinsic properties depending on the species, its
interactions with other plant species as well as the water levels (Pouliot et al., 2015). First of all, all the
conditions of the site need to be identified to plan resources and time required for cultivation operations.
Information required previously includes hydrologic environment, chemical aspects, existing vegetation,
surrounding landscape, topography, and identification of the donor plant material (Chirino et al., 2006).
CULTIVATION SITE PREPARATION
After the identification of field conditions, preparation of the cultivation site starts with the removal of surface
crust that could impede diaspore germination. A fresh surface is needed to allow a better contact between the
introduced material (diaspores) and the damp soil substrate. To reduce evapotranspiration and plant
competition it is important to remove the existing vegetation in the area (Chirino et al., 2006).
After crust removal, fields have to
be adapted to stop the drainage
and provide the desired wet
conditions,
while
evading
extensive
flooding.
Field
adaptation starts with blocking of
ditches and levelling crowned
fields (Figure 5) (Rochefort et al.,
2003).
An important aspect to consider,
especially during the first year
after basin creation, is the control
of water table near the surface by
Figure 5 Site preparation (Krebs, 2014)
irrigation. This will enhance
Sphagnum growth and reduce
competition of undesirable species (Pouliot et al., 2015). Shallow basins raise the water table and provide
water availability (Rochefort et al., 2003). Water retention in basins is higher in flat topographic areas, which
can help during dry summers. Moreover, cultivating Sphagnum in peat block-cut trenches benefits the
development of moss carpets in dry periods and avoids negative effects during the wet seasons (Campeau et
al., 2004). This is especially important because flooding events can harm the establishment of newly
introduced Sphagnum mosses (Rochefort & Lode, 2006).
Rochefort (2001) improved Sphagnum growth by maintaining water availability. This is done by pumping water
into a ditch to keep Sphagnum basins humid for at least three growing seasons. This system of irrigation
through open ditches around culture basins is an efficient water management option also mentioned by
Gaudig et al. (2013).
7
INTRODUCING OF SPHAGNUM MOSS
To create a Sphagnum peatland, plant fragments such as diaspores should be collected from other bog areas.
These Sphagnum moss fragments are capable of regenerating into new individuals (Rochefort et al., 2003).
Regeneration of plant fragments depends highly on the method used for collecting; manually collected
Sphagnum fragments have a better establishment than the ones collected mechanically with the aid of a
rototiller (as they cope with stress) (Boudreau & Rochefort, 1999). Regarding the bogs used for the starting
plant material collection, it is important to mention that only the upper 10 cm should be harvested in order to
minimize disturbances to its regenerative potential (Rochefort et al., 2003). Spreading Sphagnum fragments of
5 to 10 cm long leads to a better establishment as they increase in length and cover more efficiently than small
fragments (Gaudig et al., 2013).
Collected fragments are spread on
large surfaces in a short period of
time using a lateral manure spreader
(Figure 6); to have a better coverage
and Sphagnum establishment, it is
recommended to spread a thin and
even layer (1-3 cm) of this material
instead of spreading high quantities
(Rochefort et al., 2003). The
recommended ratio of introduction
is 1:10, which is 1 m2 of diaspores
from donor places, spread over a
2
surface of 10 m (Rochefort et al.,
2013; Pouliot et al., 2015).
Another way of introducing Sphagnum is by
using BeadaMoss® (Figure 7) from the company
Micropropagation Services. These are beads
with a Sphagnum plant, of which several species
are available, inside a cover with life sustaining
gel. According to the company they can be
sowed very easily by hand or machinery and will
start growing with a survival rate of 69% if the
right conditions are met. Projects where they
used it are: Moors for the Future
(http://moorsforthefuture.org.uk/), where large
peat lands (blanket bogs) in England are
restored and in the Province North-Holland with
the project of the peat restoration around
Ilperveld (Riet, van de, et al., 2013). A good
overview of the project in England can be found
in Carroll et al. (2009).
Figure 6 Diaspore spreading (Rochefort & Lode, 2006)
Figure 7 The BeadaMoss® beads that are used in some peat restoration
projects to introduce Sphagnum (retrieved from:
http://www.beadamoss.co.uk/page19.html)
8
POTENTIAL SPHAGNUM SPECIES
Apart from the species used in the ongoing experiment, based on previous experiments, we can suggest the
following species for cultivation (Table 1)
Table 1 Potential Sphagnum species
Sphagnum
species
Characteristics
Reference
S. fuscum
High regeneration capacity. Acutifolia genus (favourable
in Sphagnum farming). Very resilient to drought and
resistant to periods of shallow inundation. Optimum to
recolonize bare peat substrates.
High regeneration capacity. Acutifolia genus (favourable
in Sphagnum farming). Optimum to recolonize bare peat
substrates.
Chirino et al., 2006
Rochefort & Lode, 2006
High regeneration capacity.
High productivity, used previously in Germany. High
biodiversity.
Higher productivity than S. papillosum, used previously in
Germany. Very promising for Sphagnum farming.
Chirino et al., 2006
Gaudig et al., 2014
Muster et al., 2015
Gaudig et al., 2014
S. rubellum
S. angustifolium
S. papillosum
S. palustre
Chirino et al., 2006
Rochefort & Lode, 2006
Instead of cultivating one single species, it has been mentioned that cultivation of a mixture of Sphagnum
species can have an effect on their establishment either by competition or facilitation (Rydin, 1993). Successful
establishment of moss carpet does not depend on the number of species; it depends on the presence of
certain species (Chirino et al., 2006).
DIASPORE PROTECTION AND GROWTH ENHANCEMENT
Previous experiments use straw mulch as
a protective layer during establishment
-1
phase to a density of 3 000 kg ha ; this
straw mulch reduces water tension and
daytime temperature, and increases the
relative humidity at the surface (Rochefort
et al., 2003). It is cheap and simply applied
with a straw spreader (Figure 8). It is
recommended to also introduce the moss
Polytrichum strictum, a nurse plant
commonly used for bog restoration,
aiming a favourable microclimate for
Sphagnum establishment and growth
(Boudreau & Rochefort, 1999; Groeneveld
& Rochefort 2005). It is also suggested to
-2
fertilize with phosphorus (15 g m ) to
optimize the establishment of nursing bog
plants such as P. strictum (Rochefort et al.,
2003; Graf, 2012).
Figure 8 Straw mulch application ( Krebs, 2014)
9
According to Malmer and colleagues (2003) Sphagnum growth can be enhanced by the presence of certain
vascular plants that create an adequate microclimate as they provide physical supports, stabilize the water
table and soil surface. One suitable plant is the ericaceous shrubs or Eriophorum species. However there is still
more knowledge needed to use these plants effectively, as they could be invasive and increase evaporation in
the site (Rochefort & Lode, 2006).
CULTIVATION THREADS
Some of the cultivation threats that could be present are: insufficient water availability, expansion of parasitic
fungi and some vascular plants. Regarding fungal infections, fungicide applications have been used in
greenhouse experiments without affecting Sphagnum growth (Landry et al., 2011). Talking about harmful
vascular plants, it is important to keep high water levels to avoid their proliferation
REWETTING
An optimal hydrological regime is important to establish Sphagnum vegetation, nutrient cycling and
enhancement of energy capture rates of wetlands (Mitsch and Gosselink, 2000).
Peat extraction leads to alteration on essential soil properties such as hydrology; this special property cannot
only be restored by rewetting; additional techniques compiled by Graf et al., 2012 are described as follows:





Retaining surface water and elevating
groundwater levels by blocking drainage
ditches.
Construction of wastewater wetlands by
building depressions
Using retention basins (<20 cm) to enhance
the establishment and growth of Sphagnum
moss, these basins rise soil moisture and
water table.
Increasing
moisture
levels
in
the
microclimate by using nurse plants.
Border and pipe irrigation as an option to
maintain water levels (Figure 9)
Figure 9 Pipe irrigation (Krebs, 2014)
RESTORATION
According to Rochefort & Lode (2006), restoration projects of peatlands can be done at a relatively low cost;
from US $900 to 1400 per hectare. However, there is still research needed to see if it is possible to revegetate
and restore large peatland areas.
10
HARVEST METHODS
Sustainable harvesting of Sphagnum is highly dependent on its growth rate. This growth rate depends on
climatic variables such as water availability, temperature or light (Diaz and Silva, 2012). To ensure moss
regeneration, the same authors suggest harvesting no more than 12 cm of the top layer. Other factors should
be also taken into account. If all Sphagnum is harvested, its regeneration rate is very low or zero. This creates
space for other invasive species to grow (Tapia, 2008).
Previous reports show that Sphagnum regeneration is aided by reseeding after harvesting instead of leaving a
bare peat surface (Whinam and Buxton, 1996). In order to decrease the harvesting impacts on peatlands,
Whinam and Buxton suggest the following steps:







Restrict harvesting only to sites where Sphagnum grows vigorously and where the water table does
not fluctuate considerably.
Natural shelter (shadow) should be maintained to provide protection from desiccation and frost.
Reseeding to aid the regeneration time and rapid restoration of Sphagnum cover. Leaving 30% moss
cover actively growing close to the water table enhances rapid regrowth.
Avoid the use of machinery that could cause rutting on bog surfaces. As a result of heavy machinery
use, small drains could be formed.
The remaining Sphagnum of harvested sites should be in close contact with the watertable in order to
enhance regeneration and avoid desiccation or ponding.
To minimize weed formation that could compete with Sphagnum, low rates of fertiliser should be
applied.
A considerable amount of time should be given to allow the harvested sites to regenerate.
Another protocol based on the previous steps by Whinam and Buxton and the Chilean Association of
Sphagnum Producers for the sustainable use of Sphagnum is the following (Tapia, 2008):






Patch harvesting, dividing the field in small plots and harvest plot by plot. Let the harvested section
grow enough for the next harvesting period.
Leave intact Sphagnum sites. It is important to protect spore producing plants for sexual
reproduction.
Disperse spores over harvested patches.
Sow and flatten harvested zones, this will allow water availability in all sites, not only in low zones.
Delay harvested zones between 3 and 5 years to allow Sphagnum regeneration before harvesting
again. Avoid transit in these areas to prevent peat moss damage.
Avoid using heavy machinery that could lead to irreversible damage of Sphagnum. Facilitating
drainage could stop its growth.
11
In the case of New Zealand, harvesting is commonly
done by hand, clearing the covering vegetation with a
scrub cutter and rake (Whinam & Buxton, 1997). After
harvesting, the moss is deposited in nylon wool bales
(Figure 10) which are dragged by hand, using tramways,
motorcycles or bulldozers (Whinam & Buxton, 1997).
From the experiments carried out in Germany
-1
-1
productivities ranged from 3.6 t dry mass (DM) ha yr
-1
-1
to 6.9 t DM ha yr at locations with high water levels;
these results belong to S. papillosum after an initial
establishment of 3.5 years. For S. palustre the
-1
-1
productivities varied between 3.4 t DM ha yr and 6.8
-1
-1
Figure 10 Sphagnum moss in nylon wool bales after harvesting (The
t dry mass DM ha yr after an initial establishment of
Encyclopaedia of New Zealand)
one year. That indicates that S. palustre is more
productive than S. papillosum (Gaudig et al., 2014).
According to the same source, regeneration of moss plants was 15% after six months, 80% after one year and
100% after two years. However, these numbers may vary with species composition and climatic conditions.
Farming Sphagnum biomass is already economically profitable for niche markets, such as soilless media
market, with high revenues, but more research is recommended to upscale the production(Gaudig et al. 2014).
SUBSIDIES
To compensate landowners for loss of income if the water table in their parcels is raised and to support
landowners that are actively contributing to nature conservation on their parcels, the Province of Friesland has
subsidies available. In 2015, farmers with lands within designated meadow bird landscapes could get a subsidy
of €1981.43 per hectare per year if they flooded the land for five months, starting from the 15th of February
(Provincie Fryslan, 2016). This management is mostly focused on the four well-known Dutch meadow birds
(black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa), northern lapwing (Vanellus vanellus), oystercatcher (Haematopus
ostralegus) & redshank (Tringa totanus)), but a positive effect on other grassland animals also expected. To be
able to apply for subsidies, farmers have to comply with certain conditions set by the Province. These
conditions might constrain for example harvesting period, to not disturb local wildlife. The focus of the
Province with these subsidies is on wildlife, but in Sphagnum farming there has to be some balance point
where farmers are able to harvest and get revenue, while still keeping the animal welfare in mind. Comparing
the subsidies with the average net income of dairy farmers of €2000 per hectare (Venema, 2009), farmers
would actually make more money combining peat moss cultivation with nature conservation. Of course, these
subsidies will not be the answer to the problem for the whole of Friesland, or even other parts of the
Netherlands. In 2015, the total budget for the rewetting of meadow bird areas was roughly €350.000
(Provincie Fryslan, 2016), enough for roughly 175 hectares. However, these subsidies can ‘ease the pain’ for
farmers that have a loss of income, especially in the transition phase between these two different forms of
agriculture.
12
LOCATIONS
To determine potential locations for cultivating Sphagnum in Northeast Friesland, we have decided to look at
parcel level. We chose this, because this is the most useful when implementing the cultivation on a short term.
This will result in a map that can be used by policy makers, farmers, residents and other stakeholders as an
objective criterion to have a clear view on which field is potentially interesting. We think a global overview will
not give policymakers a practical tool to make a proper decision. With this approach, we hope to have created
something that fits more to their demands.
We defined fields that are close to an existing nature area, with grassland as land use, a texture of peat or
peat/sandy and a groundwater table of class I or II (see Table 2 for explanation of the different classes) as
suitable for cultivation of peat moss on short term. Within these suitable fields, we made a distinction
between fields that are within an area that is planned to be nature conservation area, or already is a nature
conservation area, and between fields with different ground water tables. This is based on that we think that
these fields are most suited for short term implementation of the project.
Table 2 Groundwater tables (GWT) and their levels
Groundwater Table (GWT)
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
Average highest groundwater level
<20
<40
<40
>40
<40
40-80
>80
>140
Average lowest groundwater level
<50
50-80
80-120
80-120
>120
>120
-
As input for the project we used the datasets listed below:




Natuurmeting Op Kaart 2014:
This dataset included both the Ecological Main Structure (Ecologische Hoofdstructuur, EHS) areas that
already exist and those which are planned.
http://www.nationaalgeoregister.nl/geonetwork/srv/dut/search#|bcc8ed51-0660-4937-b874d3b590e1ea3a
Grondsoortenkaart 2006:
This dataset included the textures of the soil.
http://www.wageningenur.nl/nl/show/Grondsoortenkaart.htm
TOP10NL Terrein:
From this dataset we took the parcel boundaries and the landuse.
https://www.pdok.nl/nl/producten/pdok-downloads/basis-registratie-topografie/topnl/topnlactueel/top10nl
Grondwatertrappenkaart 1:50.000 (Steur en Heijink, 1991)
This dataset includes the groundwater tables.
http://www.wageningenur.nl/nl/ExpertisesDienstverlening/Onderzoeksinstituten/Alterra/Faciliteiten-Producten/Software-enmodellen/Grondwaterdynamiek/Overzicht-methoden.htm
13
In ESRI’s ArcMap 10.3.1 we pre-processed the data and created the model to look for the suitable parcels.
More details on the extent are in the appendix.
With the model, we first selected the existing nature conservation areas and created an outside buffer around
it of 100 meters. This arbitrary boundary was chosen, because it is not too small (we still have sufficient
parcels), but still falls in a close range within nature conservation areas. We then selected in the buffer parcels
that had the correct texture (peat or peat/sandy) and landuse (grassland). Since Carroll et al. (2009) state that
very wet conditions enhance the production, we erased parts of the parcels that had a too low groundwater
table (everything above II) and added to the parcels which groundwater tables are in the field and whether it
was planned to be part of the EHS. We assumed that for groundwater tables above II, too much extra water
would be needed to flood the parcel. For groundwater tables I and II, the difference between the current state
and the flooded state would be much smaller and much easier to achieve. With these extra added data we
classified the parcels in different categories. This resulted in the suitability map that can be seen on next page
(Figure 11).
The map shows which parcels are suitable for the cultivation of peat moss. However, this is mainly based on
factors we think are important, because there is no standard protocol in doing this type of research. There are
maybe other ways of assessing the suitability, but we think this is the best way of doing this on a short term of
implementing the cultivation. Also the quality of the data that we used as input is important for the quality of
the resulted map. For example, the Grondwaterkaart is supposed to be used at a scale of 1:50.000, but the
map with the potential fields for Sphagnum is at a higher detail level, so this has to be taken into account. If
the Grondwaterkaart would be zoomed in too much, a higher resolution than the supposed 1:50.000 could be
assumed, because it is vector data. The EHS data that is used is from 2014 and since then, there has been a
policy change where the EHS-structure was changed into Natuurnetwerk Nederland, so the nature areas could
also be outdated at some locations. Still we think that the locations of the EHS would largely overlap to
Natuurnetwerk Nederland, as the qualifications for important nature conservation sites are expected to not
have changed a lot. To conclude, we think this map is appropriate to have first insights where potential fields
are located, but for the implementation of peat moss at such a parcel more (field) data is needed to have a
better understanding of the suitability at a higher detail level.
The printed map (Figure 11) is only for visualisation purposes, not all suitable fields are visible, so for the
complete dataset we refer to the included zip folder with the geodatabase, model, shapefile and KML file. An
interactive visualisation of the data is available through the following link:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zU_0_T5Ho5M0.k8k8g0MXFc0c&usp=sharing
If this link does not work anymore, it is possible to recreate the map. To do this, upload the attached KML file
from the zip folder through Google Maps, Google Earth or other map reproducing programs.
Figure 11 Next page: Map with the visualization of the GIS model outcome
14
15
CHAPTER 4: PRODUCTS
FUNCTONAL CHARACTERISTICS
Sufficient practical applications are essential in the process of making money out of cultivating Sphagnum.
Fortunately, Sphagnum possesses several interesting properties that could lead to potential products or that
are already being utilized in a wide variety of products. One of the most defining characteristics of Sphagnum
is its water retention capability. Sphagnum can retain up to 20 times its own weight in water, which can be
utilized in a wide variety of ways. Sphagnum also shows potential in holding air and a variety of organic
substances.
Sphagnum may also have a series of hygienic or medical application due to its ability to suppress a variety of
microbes. It mainly owns this characteristic to its acidifying properties. The active compound sphagnan
(Stalheim, 2009) is able to suppress the growth of several bacteria and fungi by acidifying the surrounding
environment. However, some acidophilic bacteria were still able to grow in the presence of sphagnan. The
acidifying properties are mainly obtained through its cation-exchanging capabilities. This ability in itself might
also have potential uses outside of simply acidifying compound or killing microbes.
Besides its antimicrobial functioning, a series of other medicinal benefits might also be obtained from
Sphagnum based products. A wide variety of compounds was discovered in Sphagnum, some of which are
known to have medicinal applications (Black et al., 1955). Table 3 summarizes these active compounds and
their functions. Alpha-amyrin is known to have analgesic effects (Aragao, 2008). Taraxerol and Lupeol are
known to have anti-inflammatory properties (Yao 2013, Saleem 2009). Besides being anti-microbial and antiinflammatory, Lupeol is also known to have chemo-preventive and even anti-tumor properties (Saleem 2009).
Beta-sitostanol, beta-sitosterol, and Brassicasterol are known to lower LDL-cholesterol and potentially prevent
prostate swelling in middle-aged men (Christiansen 2001, Kamal-Eldin 2009). Beta-sitosterol was also shown to
potentially prevent or slow down the formation of baldness (Upadhyay 2012). These compounds are however
all present in relatively low concentrations, and some don’t appear in all varieties of Sphagnum. Also should be
noted that the main sterol in Sphagnum, Ursolic acid, has no known medicinal properties, other than those
related to its acidifying properties.
Table 3 Various compounds present in Sphagnum and their medical applications
Compound
Type
Potential medical application
References
alpha-amyrin
triterpenoid
analgesic
Aragao, 2008
taraxerol
triterpenoid
anti-inflammatory
lupeol
triterpenoid
beta-sitostanol
phytosterol
beta-sitosterol
phytosterol
anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, antitumor
LDL-cholesterol lowering, prevention of
prostate swelling
LDL-cholesterol lowering, prevention of
prostate swelling
brassicasterol
phytosterol
ursolic acid
triterpenoid
Yao 2013,
Saleem 2009
Yao 2013,
Saleem 2009
Christiansen 2001,
Kamal-Eldin 2009
Christiansen 2001,
Kamal-Eldin 2009,
Upadhyay 2012
Christiansen 2001,
Kamal-Eldin 2009
-
LDL-cholesterol lowering, prevention of
prostate swelling, baldness prevention
no proven medical benefits
16
PRODUCTS
HORTICULTURAL SUBSTRATE
Probably the currently most wide spread use of fresh Sphagnum is as a
growing medium or additive to standard growing media in specialised
horticulture, most notably in the cultivation of orchids and various
carnivorous plants (Emmel 2008, Oberpaur et al. 2010, Blievernicht et
al. 2012). However, research also shows its potential application as a
more general growing medium (Figure 12) (Emmel 2008, Risto 2012).
What makes Sphagnum a good substrate for plant cultivation is its high
water retention (Heiskanen 1995, Heiskanen 1993), in combination
with its high aeration characteristics. Some sites selling Sphagnum as a
Figure 12 Flower pot with Sphagnum
horticultural substrate also praise its ability to inhibit the formation of
substrate retrieved from
fungi and other microbial infections. Its acidifying nature however http://www.newhousenewhomenewlife.com
makes the substrate less suitable for plant species that do not cope
/2014/01/caring-for-orchids.html
well under acid conditions. According to Altmann (2008), in the
3
European Union around 20,000,000 m of peat per year are used for the horticulture industry, with profits of
€1.3 billion.
TERRARIUM FILLING
For many of the same reasons that make Sphagnum a good horticultural
substrate, it also functions well as a terrarium filling for amphibians and reptiles
(Figure 13). Due to its high water retention, Sphagnum is able to create a humid
micro climate inside the terrarium. This helps amphibians and reptiles that
originate from the tropics. Once again, the antimicrobial properties are praised
for keeping the animals healthy, as few microbes and fungi are able to grow.
Fresh Sphagnum is also very soft, so this is safer for delicate animals than woody
or rocky substrates. The acidification is less of a problem, as long as the terrarium
and the Sphagnum itself are regularly cleaned.
Figure 13 Terrarium decorated with
Sphagnum, retrieved from
http://www.aquariumlife.com.au/showthr
ead.php/58959-Moss-Terrarium-20cmcube-Fairy-theme
17
SUNDEW AND CRANBERRY
Next to cultivating Sphagnum with the intention of creating a product out it, there is also another option for
making growing Sphagnum economically viable. A wide variety of plants grow well on a soil of Sphagnum and
therefore Sphagnum could also be grown with the intention of providing a substrate to other crops. Two
plants with an economical application that grow well on a Sphagnum soil are Cranberries and Sundew
(Rochefort 2000, Greifswald Paludikultur website, 2015). The University of Greifswald in Germany set up a PhD
project aiming to investigate the viability of growing Sundew as an agricultural crop. Unfortunately, no results
have been published about the outcome of this study as of yet. Rochefort et al. (2000) described the prospect
of cultivating cranberries as promising for both ecological preservation and potentially profitable agriculture.
Growing crops on Sphagnum, rather than growing Sphagnum for the plant itself may have several advantages,
including:



Sundew can be used commercially for medicinal application. Due to the drastic species decline,
collecting wild plants is threatening the population and is illegal in most countries. Locations where
the amount of habitat allows wild collection are Scandinavia, East-Africa and Madagascar. Growing
commercially interesting sundew species on cultivated peat moss could ensure a regional supply and
become a profitable alternative for farmers (Greifswald Paludikultur, 2015).
Cranberries are already demanded due to their food application. Little further research would be
needed into cultivating this plant, as information on it is already widely available.
By generating income through harvesting and commercial use of these crops, longer harvest periods
for Sphagnum could be considered. This would positively affect the conservation value of the
paludiculture. There would be only little influence from the harvest, because they have to be picked
by hand (Greifswald University, 2015).
DECORATIVE ITEMS
Bagged dried Sphagnum is also sold at various hardware stores for decorative
purposes. It can be used for garden design, flower pieces or as filling for hanging
basket, as shown in (Figure 14). Another use for processed Sphagnum is
biodegradable flower pots. These pots are not only more sustainable than plastic
flower pots, but once the plant grows large enough to be moved to a larger pot, it
can simply be transferred to the new soil while still in the pot, as the roots will
simply grow through it.
Figure 14 Hanging basket with Sphagnum,
retrieved from
http://www.hometalk.com/8616757/rusticsphagnum-moss-hanging-planter
SANITARY ITEMS
More recently, the company ‘Johnson & Johnson’ managed to produce an absorbent board, which can be
utilized in a wide variety of ways, including disposable nappies, sanitary towels and germination beds
(Rochefort 2000). Here, both the great absorbing and antimicrobial properties are used to turn Sphagnum into
an eco-friendly biodegradable product that can be cultivated in a sustainable way. A patent for the idea is
owned by the company ‘Johnson & Johnson’ (Brassington, 1985).
18
INSULATION
So far, dried Sphagnum has mainly been described as a makeshift insulation material. Its excellent aeration
characteristics make it a suitable biodegradable insulation material. Current applications do however use the
fossilized peat, rather than the fresh Sphagnum, and further research will have to prove the viability of fresh
Sphagnum for use as insulation material. Fresh sphagnum is known to have better aeration characteristics
than the fossilized variant, which is important for proper insulation. This is however still speculation at this
point, as it is not known if the Sphagnum will not degrade more easily than peat at one point.
WATER PURIFYING
Activated peat fibres have the ability to absorb and encapsulate various compounds.
The company ‘Earth Care Products’ is the manufacturer and distributer of a line of
products known as ‘Sphag Sorb’ (Figure 15). The company takes fossilised peat from
the Canadian peat bogs, and after adding some additives uses it to clean up oil spills
and various other chemical spills. Although fossilized peat is used here, using fresh
Sphagnum might achieve similar results, as it also shares many of the absorbing
characteristics with its fossilized counterpart. This is however at this point purely
speculative.
Figure 15 A Sphag Sorb product by
Earth Care Products, retrieved
from
http://www.earthcareproducts.co
m/Products/PromoSupplies.aspx
PRESERVATIVES
Several biopolymers in Sphagnum were shown to have antimicrobial properties, and may therefore have an
application as preservatives. Stalheim et al. (2009) suggests the use of Sphagnum in the development of
antimicrobial pads or cloths that can inhibit microbial growth and extend the shelf-life of products or surfaces
in the food industry by lowering the pH.
PHARMACEUTICALS
Biologically active antifungal substances can be obtained from Sphagnum. It is reported that a high source of
these substances is provided by S. fuscum compared to other Sphagnum species. It has been found that
antifungal activity is correlated with the content of coumarins in the raw material (Podterob and Zubets,
2002). Besides that, a variety of triterpenoids with known medical benefits have been found in various
concentrations in many of the known Sphagnum varieties (Black et al., 1955). Some of these functions include:
anti-inflammation, anti-sceptic, LDL cholesterol lowering, baldness prevention, prevention of prostate swelling,
and even chemo preventive capabilities. The concentration in which these compounds appear varies greatly
between different Sphagnum species, and further market research and comparison with other species will
have to determine its economic viability.
19
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION
The choice of the Sphagnum species you cultivate is important, because they vary a lot in plant material
compounds and environmental conditions. Some of these compounds have potential medical benefits when
they are isolated. It is preferable to cultivate species that contain these compounds at high concentrations in
the plant material. The acidification rate, influenced by the compound sphagnan, could influence the choice of
Sphagnum variety. Additionally, absorbing properties can also be a factor to choose certain Sphagnum species
if they are aiming to produce absorbent products, like dishcloths. Although this study indicated a variety of
potential applications for Sphagnum, further study of the various defining properties of Sphagnum could also
reveal new or previously overlooked product applications. Some of the suggested products in this report exist
only as an idea or patent. Further product designing could help turning these ideas into potential new
products. This will increase the overall value of Sphagnum. Another factor to take into account when choosing
the species to cultivate, is the regeneration time. Currently, three species are already chosen to be tested in an
ongoing experimentation site near Feanwâlden. However, we can recommend also other species that have
shown to have high regeneration capacity and high productivity in previous experiments carried out in
Germany and North America. Although ongoing projects are already working on cultivating Sphagnum for
commercial use, further testing is required to properly assess the viability of growing it in Northeast Friesland.
Conditions of the field need to be assessed to carry out specific and required preparations to enhance water
availability to Sphagnum.
The map with the suitable fields for growing Sphagnum shows that there is quite some area favourable for
2
growing peat moss on short term to do experimental set-ups. The suitable area covers 17 km and is mainly
2
concentrated around Feanwâlden, from this area 13 km is placed in fields that are planned to be part of or
already are inside the EHS. This shows that Northeast Friesland has enough suitable places to start with
experimenting on larger scale.
With respect to harvesting, it is currently done by hand. But, if the size of the cultivated area will be too big to
maintain manual labour, the use of machinery could be considered. Motorized transport from the harvesting
site to the transport vehicle might be needed. The consequences of this for conservation matters have to be
determined in the future. One of the main negative impacts on biodiversity is the harvesting of the Sphagnum.
It can be lessened by the application of a suitable management. A three to five year rotational harvesting of
mosaic patches with different successions states are recommended to allow colonization between the
patches. This recommendations match with those for the cultivation of peat moss. Three to five years between
harvesting are necessary to ensure Sphagnum regeneration. The mosaic structure enables the spread of spores
that leads to a faster regeneration. By harvesting no more than 12 cm of the upper layer of Sphagnum, there is
no additional carbon emission from desiccation of bare soils. The remaining plants still provides habitat for the
unique species assemblage that is associated with Sphagnum. To prevent damaging the underlying layers of
Sphagnum, which are required for a faster regeneration, manual harvesting by patches seems to be the
preferred method.
20
Another possible negative environmental aspect that has to be considered when implementing a Sphagnum
farm, is the increase of methane emissions when the land is inundated. According to the literature, the overall
annual carbon emission is low, because of the fixation of carbon as CO 2. Also the Global Warming Potential
(GWP) of CO2 emission of drained peatlands exceeds the GWP from methane by inundated land.
Regarding the information about market revenues and the most profitable application, further research is
recommended. This is necessary to estimate if the revenue of the product peat moss is sufficient to provide a
sustainable income for the region. The market research also helps to indicate how much Sphagnum can
actually be sold in the Netherlands or exported elsewhere. This will provide information to see how much
Sphagnum can be cultivated and consequently the required area for cultivation. There is a large potential for
fresh peat moss, as an alternative for the unsustainable excavation of peat bogs. For information about
revenues and the most profitable application further research is recommended. This is necessary to estimate if
the revenue of the product peat moss is sufficient to provide a sustainable income. Further studying of the
various defining properties of Sphagnum could also reveal new, previously overlooked product applications.
21
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSION
The report focuses on the feasibility of Sphagnum cultivation in the Northeast of Friesland. To review the
problems and opportunities of this as a land use option, we focused on the aspects; peat moss ecology, the
implementation of Sphagnum farming (with the cultivation, potential locations and harvesting methods) and
peat moss products. The given information is a realistic assessment of the current knowledge about Sphagnum
as a plant for cultivation. Within all aspects we found supporting arguments for Sphagnum farming under the
given circumstances. When a rotational harvesting management is used, the cultivation site can enhance the
biodiversity of the landscape. The inundated area is more climate friendly than the drained peatland since the
carbon dioxide emission is largely reduced. Existing information from other peat moss restoration projects and
cultivation sites is available and can be used as historical practical experience for the cultivation and the
harvesting process. This information inquires on required characteristics of the land, donor material,
establishment enhancers, water management and harvesting specifications. A number of applications already
exist for fresh peat moss as a commercial product. An analysis of the area characteristics on parcel level
revealed sites that are suitable for peat moss cultivation based on factors that are relevant for successful
cultivation and for proper water management.
RECOMMENDATIONS
What we recommend:













Do more experiments under natural conditions in Friesland
Make contact with the projects in Noord-Holland and Germany
Conduct a market research for Sphagnum products that already exists or need to be developed
Inquire about interest among farmers for growing Sphagnum.
Analyse field characteristics such as nutrient content, before starting cultivation activities
Consider to farm Sphagnum in combination with other commercially valuable plants (e.g. cattail,
sundew or duckweed) to increase the revenues
Prepare cultivation field by blocking ditches, use overflow outlets as flood prevention
Construct shallow basins or trenches in order to raise the water table.
When necessary, use border and pipe irrigation as an option to maintain water levels
Avoid nutrient water contamination by controlling drainage from agricultural fields and livestock
waste in surrounding areas
Implement Sphagnum cultivation during spring and fall to avoid risks such as drought and plant
desiccation
Use diverse Sphagnum species for previous experimentation and select the best performing
Monitor key species (e.g. sundew and meadow birds) to get data on the conservation value of
Sphagnum farms
22
REFERENCES
Aerts, R., Wallen, B., & Malmer, N. (1992). Growth-limiting nutrients in Sphagnum-dominated bogs subject to low and high atmospheric nitrogen supply.
Journal of Ecology, 131-140.
Altmann, M. (2008) Socio-economic Impact of the Peat and Growing Media Industry on Horticulture in the EU. Report for EPAGMA by Co Concept,
Luxembourg, 119 pp.
Aragao, G. F., Pinheiro, M. C. C., Bandeira, P. N., Lemos, T. L. G. & Viana, G. S. D. B. (2008). Analgesic and anti-inflammatory activities of the isomeric mixture of
alpha-and beta-amyrin from Protium heptaphyllum (Aubl.). Journal of herbal pharmacotherapy, 7(2), 31-47.
Belyea, L. R. & Malmer, N. (2004). Carbon sequestration in peatland: patterns and mechanisms of response to climate change. Global Change Biology, 10(7),
1043-1052.
Best, E. P. & Jacobs, F. H. H. (1997). The influence of raised water table levels on carbon dioxide and methane production in ditch-dissected peat grasslands in
the Netherlands. Ecological Engineering, 8(2), 129-144.
Best, P. H. & Oosterhaven, J. (Eds.). (2012). Netherlands-Wetlands: Proceedings of a Symposium Held in Arnhem, the Netherlands, December 1989 (Vol. 88).
Springer Science & Business Media.
Beyer, C., & Höper, H. (2015). Greenhouse gas exchange of rewetted bog peat extraction sites and a Sphagnum cultivation site in northwest
Germany.Biogeosciences, 12(7), 2101-2117.
Black, W.A.P., Cornhill, W.J., Woodward F.N. (1955). A preliminary investigation of the chemical composition of Sphagnum moss and peat. Journal of Applied
Chemistry, 5, 484–492.
Blievernicht, A., Irrgang, S., Zander, M., & Ulrichs, C. (2012). The youngest peat− sustainable production of peat moss and its use as growing medium in
professional horticulture. In 14th International Peat Congress Extended abstract, (No. 247), 1-7.
Boudreau, S. & Rochefort, L. (1999) Etablissement de sphaignes réintroduites sous diverses communautés végétales recolonisant les tourbieres apres
léxploitation. Ecologie, 30, 53-62.
Bragazza, L., Tahvanainen, T., Kutnar, L., Rydin, H., Limpens, J., Hájek, M., Grosvernier, P., Hájek, T., Hajkova, P., Hansen, I., Iacumin, P. & Gerdol, R. (2004).
Nutritional constraints in ombrotrophic Sphagnum plants under increasing atmospheric nitrogen deposition in Europe. New Phytologist, 163(3), 609-616.
Brassington, N. J. (1985). U.S. Patent No. EP0151018A2. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Brouns, K., Eikelboom, T., Jansen, P. C., Janssen, R., Kwakernaak, C., van den Akker, J. J. & Verhoeven, J. T. (2015). Spatial Analysis of Soil Subsidence in Peat
Meadow Areas in Friesland in Relation to Land and Water Management, Climate Change, and Adaptation. Environmental management, 55(2), 360-372.
Campeau, S. Rochefort, L. & Price, J. S. (2004). On the use of shallow basins to restore cutover peatlands: Plant establishment. Restor. Ecol. 12: 471-482
Carroll, J., Anderson, P., Caporn, S., Eades, P., O’Reilly, C. & Bonn, A. (2009). Sphagnum in the Peak District Current Status and Potential for Restoration (Moors
for the Future Report No 16). Accessed via
http://www.moorsforthefuture.org.uk/sites/default/files/MFF%20RR16%20Carroll%20J%202009%20Sphagnum%20in%20the%20Peak%20District;%20current
%20status%20and%20potential%20for%20restoration.pdf on 19-04-2016.
Catalogue of Life Partnership: Catalogue of Life, 2016-01-14. Accessed via http://www.gbif.org/species/117894772 on 13-04-2016.
Chirino, C., Campeau, S. & Rochefort, L. (2006). Sphagnum Establishment on Bare Peat: The Importance of Climatic Variability and Sphagnum Species Richness.
Applied Vegetation Science, 9(2), 285-294.
Christiansen, L. I., Lähteenmäki, P. L. A., Mannelin, M. R., Seppänen-Laakso, T. E., Hiltunen, R. V. K. & Yliruusi, J. K. (2001). Cholesterol-lowering effect of
spreads enriched with microcrystalline plant sterols in hypercholesterolemic subjects. European journal of nutrition, 40(2), 66-73.
Diaz, M. & Silva, W. (2012). Improving Harvesting Techniques to Ensure Sphagnum Regeneration in Chilean Peatlands. Chilean journal of agricultural research.
72(2): 296-300.
Emmel, M. (2008) Growing ornamental plants in Sphagnum biomass. Acta Horticulturae, 779, 173–178.
Gaudig, G., Fengler, F., Krebs, M., Prager, A., Schulz, J., Wichmann, S. & Joosten H. (2013). Sphagnum farming in Germany - a review of progress. Mires and
Peat, 13: Article 8.
Graf, M., Bérubé, V. & Rochefort, L. (2012). Restoration of peatlands after peat extraction. Restoration and Reclamation of Boreal Ecosystems, ed. Dale Vitt
and Jagtar Bhatti. Published by Cambridge University Press.
Greifswald Paludikultur. 2015. Sonnentau. (n.d.). Accessed via http://www.paludiculture.uni-greifswald.de/de/projekte/drosera/index.php on 19-04-2016.
23
Groeneveld, E. & Rochefort, L. (2005). Polytrichum strictum as a solution to frost heaving in disturbed ecosystems: a case study in milled peatlands. Restor Ecol
13:1-9
Gunnarsson, U., & Rydin, H. (2000). Nitrogen fertilization reduces Sphagnum production in bog communities. New Phytologist, 147(3), 527-537.
Harpenslager, S. F., Dijk, G. V., Kosten, S., Roelofs, J. G., Smolders, A. J., & Lamers, L. P. (2015). Simultaneous high C fixation and high C emissions in Sphagnum
mires. Biogeosciences, 12(15), 4739-4749.
Heijden, Van Der, E., Verbeek, S. K. & Kuiper, P. J. (2000). Elevated atmospheric CO2 and increased nitrogen deposition: effects on C and N metabolism and
growth of the peat moss Sphagnum recurvum P. Beauv. var. mucronatum (Russ.) Warnst. Global Change Biology, 6(2), 201-212.
Heiskanen, J. (1993). Variation in water retention characteristics of peat growth media used in tree nurseries. Silva Fennica, 27(2), 77-97.
Heiskanen, J. (1995). Water status of sphagnum peat and a peat–perlite mixture in containers subjected to irrigation regimes. HortScience, 30(2), 281-284.
Joosten, J. H. J. (1995). The golden flow: the changing world of international peat trade. Regional variation and conservation of mire ecosystems. Gunneria, 70,
269-292.
Joosten, H., Gaudig, G., Krawczynski, R., Tanneberger, F., Wichmann, S. & Wichtmann, W. (2015). Managing Soil Carbon in Europe: paludicultures as a new
perspective for peatlands. Soil Carbon: Science, Management and Policy for Multiple Benefits (eds S.A. Banwart, E. Noellemeyer and E. Milne). 297-306. CAB
International.
Kamal-Eldin, A. & Moazzami, A. (2009). Plant sterols and stanols as cholesterol-lowering ingredients in functional foods. Recent patents on food, nutrition &
agriculture, 1(1), 1-14.
Khela, S. 2012. Drosera rotundifolia. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2012: e.T168798A1233285. Accessed on 13-04-2016.
Kimmel, K. & Mander, Ü. (2010). Ecosystem services of peatlands: Implications for restoration. Progress in Physical Geography.
Kivimäki, S. K., Sheppard, L. J., Leith, I. D. & Grace, J. (2013). Long-term enhanced nitrogen deposition increases ecosystem respiration and carbon loss from a
Sphagnum bog in the Scottish Borders. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 90, 53-61.
Krebs, M. (2014). Sphagnum farming, experiences from Germany. Best Experiences in Conservation and Restoration of Habitats in Raised Bogs and Mires.
Exchange of Knowledge Transfer to Aukstumala. Silute, Lithuania.
Krebs, M., Gaudig, G. & Joosten, H. (2012). Sphagnum farming on bog grassland in Germany—first results. In Proceedings of the 14th International Peat
Congress, Stockholm.
Malmer, N., Albinsson, C., Svensson, B.M. & Wallén, B. (2003). Interferences between Sphagnum and vascular plants: effects on plant community structure
and peat formation. Oikos, 100(3): 469-482.
Mitsch, W.J. & Gosselink, J.K. (2000). Wetland restoration in Central Europe: aims and methods. Applied Vegetation Science, 2, 95-106.
Moore, T. R. & Knowles, R. (1989). The influence of water table levels on methane and carbon dioxide emissions from peatland soils. Canadian Journal of Soil
Science, 69(1), 33-38.
Muster, C., Gaudig, G., Krebs, M. & Joosten, H. (2015). Sphagnum farming: the promised land for peat bog species?. Biodiversity and Conservation, 24(8),
1989-2009.
Oberpaur, C., Puebla, V., Vaccarezza, F. & Arévalo, M. E. (2010). Preliminary substrate mixtures including peat moss (Sphagnum magellanicum) for vegetable
crop nurseries. Ciencia e investigación agraria, 37(1), 123-132.
Oleszczuk, R., Regina, K., Szajdak, L., Höper, H. & Maryganova, V. (2008). Impacts of agricultural utilization of peat soils on the greenhouse gas balance.
Peatlands and climate change, 70-97.
Osinga, T., Terwisscha Van Scheltinga, W., Medemblik, J., Jansen, P. C. & Kwakernaak, C. (2014). Effecten van klimaatverandering op maaivelddaling en
grondwaterstanden in Friesland. Vakblad H2O. Chicago.
Parish, F., Sirin, A., Charman, D., Joosten, H., Minayeva, T., Silvius, M. & Stringer, L. (Eds.) (2008). Assessment on Peatlands, Biodiversity and Climate Change:
Main Report. Global Environment Centre, Kuala Lumpur and Wetlands International, Wageningen.
Podterob, A. P. & Zubets, E. V. (2002). A History of the Medicinal Use of Plants of the Genus Sphagnum. Pharmaceutical Chemistry Journal. 36(4): 192-194.
Pouliot, R., Hugron S. & Rochefort, L. (2015). Sphagnum farming: A long-term study on producing peat moss biomass sustainably. Ecological Engineering, 74,
135-147.
Provincie Fryslan. 2016. Weidevogels. Accessed via http://www.fryslan.frl/weidevogels on 18-04-2016.
24
Riet, B. V., Elzen, E. V., Lammers, L., & Hogeweg, N. (2013). Werk in uitvoering: Omhoog met het veen: Herstel van veengroei in Ilperveld. De Levende Natuur,
144(4), 134-137. Accessed via http://www.landschapnoordholland.nl/sites/default/files/download/onderzoek & databeheer/artikel omhoog met het veen in
de levende natuur.pdf on 26-04-2016.
Rochefort, L. (2000). Sphagnum-A keystone genus in habitat restoration. The Bryologist, 103(3), 503-508.
Rochefort, L. & Lode, E. (2006). Restoration of Degraded Boreal Peatlands. In R. K. Wieder & D. H. Vitt (Eds.), Boreal Peatland Ecosystems (pp. 381-423). Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Rochefort, L., Quinty, F., Campeau, S., Johnson, K. & Malterer, T. (2003). North American approach to the restoration of Sphagnum dominated peatlands.
Wetlands Ecology and Management, 11(1), 3-20.
Rydin, H. (1993). Interspecific competition between Sphagnum mosses on a raised bog. Oikos 66: 413-423.
Saleem, M. (2009). Lupeol, a novel anti-inflammatory and anti-cancer dietary triterpene. Cancer letters, 285(2), 109-115.
Schofield, W.B. (1985). Introduction to Bryology. Macmillan Publishing Co. New York, NY. 32-48.
Sparrius, L., Odé, B. & Beringen, R. (2012). Rode Lijst Vaatplanten 2012.
Stalheim, T., Ballance, S., Christensen, B. E. & Granum, P.E. (2009). Sphagnan- a pectin-like polymer isolated from Sphagnum moss can inhibit the growth of
some typical food spoilage and food poisoning bacteria by lowering the pH. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 106(3), 967-976.
Steur, G.G.L. & Heijink, W. (1991). Bodemkaart van Nederland, schaal 1:50 000. Algemene begrippen en indelingen. Wageningen, Staring Centrum.
Tapia, C. (2008). Crecimiento y productividad del musgo Sphagnum magellanicum Brid. En turberas secundarias de la provincia de Llanquihe, Chile.,
Universidad Austral de Chile.
Turetsky, M. R., Bond‐Lamberty, B., Euskirchen, E., Talbot, J., Frolking, S., McGuire, A. D. & Tuittila, E. S. (2012). The resilience and functional role of moss in
boreal and arctic ecosystems. New Phytologist, 196(1), 49-67.
Upadhyay, K., Gupta, N. K. & Dixit, V. K. (2012). Development and characterization of phyto-vesicles of β-sitosterol for the treatment of androgenetic alopecia.
Archives of dermatological research, 304(7), 511-519.
Venema, G. S., Prins, H., de Bont, C. J. A. M., Ruijs, M. N. A., Durksz, D. L. & Posthumus, J. (2009). Landbouwverkenning provincie Fryslan tot 2020 (No. 2009045, p. 148). LEI Wageningen UR.
Wichmann, S., Gaudig, G., Krebs, M., & Joosten, H. (2012). Paludiculture–Ecosystem services of Sphagnum farming on rewetted bogs in NW Germany.
Proceedings of the 14th International Peat Congress. Stockholm.
Wanapat, M., Sommart, K., Wachirapakorn, C., Uriyapongson, S. & Wattanachant, C. (1994). Recent advances in swamp buffalo nutrition and feeding. In
Proceedings: 1st Asian buffalo association congress. Khon Kaen, Thailand. 155-187.
Whinam, J. & Buxton, R. (1997). Sphagnum peatlands of Australasia: An assessment of harvesting sustainability. Biological Conservation, 82(1), 21-29.
Yao, X., Li, G., Bai, Q., Xu, H. & Lü, C. (2013). Taraxerol inhibits LPS-induced inflammatory responses through suppression of TAK1 and Akt activation.
International immunopharmacology, 15(2), 316-324.
25
APPENDIX
PYTHON SCRIPT OF THE MODEL
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
-*- coding: utf-8 -*--------------------------------------------------------------------------Percelenzoeker.py
Created on: 2016-04-18 11:19:09.00000
(generated by ArcGIS/ModelBuilder)
Description:
Authors: Sjoerd Postma & Sven Verweij
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
# Set the necessary product code
# import arcinfo
# Import arcpy module
import arcpy
# Local variables:
Terrein = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-products.gdb\\Terrein"
GrondsoortenNOFR = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-products.gdb\\GrondsoortenNOFR"
Grondsoort_terrein_join = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\Grondsoort_terrein_join"
veengraslanden = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\veengraslanden"
EHS_verwerving_inrichting_NOFR = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\actproducts.gdb\\EHS_verwerving_inrichting_NOFR"
geschikte_EHS = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\geschikte_EHS"
Buffer_rond_EHS = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\Buffer_rond_EHS"
veengraslanden_EHS = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\veengraslanden_EHS"
grondwatertrappen_NOFR = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\grondwatertrappen_NOFR"
grondwatertrappen_NOFR_Disso = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\acttemp.gdb\\grondwatertrappen_NOFR_Disso"
slechte_grondwatertrappen = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\slechte_grondwatertrappen"
natte_veengraslanden_EHS = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\natte_veengraslanden_EHS"
grondwatertrappen_NOFR_IenII = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\acttemp.gdb\\grondwatertrappen_NOFR_IenII"
geschikte_velden_GWT = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\geschikte_velden_GWT"
EHS_planologisch = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\EHS_planologisch"
Potentiele_percelen_veenmos = "D:\\ACT\\workspace\\actproducts.gdb\\Potentiele_percelen_veenmos"
Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__2_ = Potentiele_percelen_veenmos
Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__4_ = Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__2_
Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__3_ = Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__4_
Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__5_ = Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__3_
Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__6_ = Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__5_
# Process: Spatial Join
arcpy.SpatialJoin_analysis(Terrein, GrondsoortenNOFR, Grondsoort_terrein_join,
"JOIN_ONE_TO_ONE", "KEEP_ALL", "tdnCode \"tdnCode\" true true false 4 Long 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-products.gdb\\Terrein,tdnCode,-1,-1;typeLandgebruik
\"typeLandgebruik\" true true false 254 Text 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\actproducts.gdb\\Terrein,typeLandgebruik,-1,-1;SHAPE_Length \"SHAPE_Length\" false true true 8
Double 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-products.gdb\\Terrein,SHAPE_Length,-1,1;SHAPE_Area \"SHAPE_Area\" false true true 8 Double 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\actproducts.gdb\\Terrein,SHAPE_Area,-1,-1;OBJECTID \"OBJECTID\" true true false 4 Long 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-products.gdb\\GrondsoortenNOFR,OBJECTID,-1,-1;AREA \"AREA\"
true true false 8 Double 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\actproducts.gdb\\GrondsoortenNOFR,AREA,-1,-1;PERIMETER \"PERIMETER\" true true false 8 Double 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-products.gdb\\GrondsoortenNOFR,PERIMETER,-1,-1;GRONDS
\"GRONDS\" true true false 2 Short 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\actproducts.gdb\\GrondsoortenNOFR,GRONDS,-1,-1;OMSCHRIJVI \"OMSCHRIJVI\" true true false 50 Text
0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-products.gdb\\GrondsoortenNOFR,OMSCHRIJVI,-1,1;Shape_Length_1 \"Shape_Length_1\" false true true 8 Double 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-products.gdb\\GrondsoortenNOFR,Shape_Length,-1,1;Shape_Area_1 \"Shape_Area_1\" false true true 8 Double 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\actproducts.gdb\\GrondsoortenNOFR,Shape_Area,-1,-1", "INTERSECT", "", "")
# Process: Select
arcpy.Select_analysis(Grondsoort_terrein_join, veengraslanden, "(OMSCHRIJVI = 'Veen' OR
OMSCHRIJVI = 'Moerig op zand') AND tdnCode = 521")
26
# Process: Select (2)
arcpy.Select_analysis(EHS_verwerving_inrichting_NOFR, geschikte_EHS, "LEGENDA IN( 'EHS Functieverandering SN - Ingericht', 'EHS - Ingericht', 'EHS - Verworven door BBL', 'EHS Verworven door TBO')")
# Process: Buffer
arcpy.Buffer_analysis(geschikte_EHS, Buffer_rond_EHS, "100 Meters", "OUTSIDE_ONLY", "ROUND",
"LIST", "LEGENDA", "PLANAR")
# Process: Spatial Join (2)
arcpy.SpatialJoin_analysis(veengraslanden, Buffer_rond_EHS, veengraslanden_EHS,
"JOIN_ONE_TO_ONE", "KEEP_COMMON", "Join_Count \"Join_Count\" true true false 4 Long 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\veengraslanden,Join_Count,-1,-1;tdnCode \"tdnCode\"
true true false 4 Long 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\veengraslanden,tdnCode,1,-1;typeLandgebruik \"typeLandgebruik\" true true false 254 Text 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\veengraslanden,typeLandgebruik,-1,-1;GRONDS
\"GRONDS\" true true false 2 Short 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\acttemp.gdb\\veengraslanden,GRONDS,-1,-1;OMSCHRIJVI \"OMSCHRIJVI\" true true false 50 Text 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\veengraslanden,OMSCHRIJVI,-1,-1;LEGENDA \"LEGENDA\"
true true false 254 Text 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\acttemp.gdb\\Buffer_rond_EHS,LEGENDA,-1,-1;Shape_Length_12 \"Shape_Length_12\" false true true 8
Double 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\Buffer_rond_EHS,Shape_Length,-1,1;Shape_Area_12 \"Shape_Area_12\" false true true 8 Double 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\Buffer_rond_EHS,Shape_Area,-1,-1", "INTERSECT", "",
"")
# Process: Dissolve (2)
arcpy.Dissolve_management(grondwatertrappen_NOFR, grondwatertrappen_NOFR_Disso, "GWT", "",
"MULTI_PART", "DISSOLVE_LINES")
# Process: Select (4)
arcpy.Select_analysis(grondwatertrappen_NOFR_Disso, slechte_grondwatertrappen, "GWT IN (
'III', 'IIIb', 'IV', 'V', 'Vb', 'VI', 'VII')")
# Process: Erase
arcpy.Erase_analysis(veengraslanden_EHS, slechte_grondwatertrappen, natte_veengraslanden_EHS,
"")
# Process: Select (5)
arcpy.Select_analysis(grondwatertrappen_NOFR_Disso, grondwatertrappen_NOFR_IenII, "GWT IN ( '', 'I', 'II')")
# Process: Spatial Join (3)
arcpy.SpatialJoin_analysis(natte_veengraslanden_EHS, grondwatertrappen_NOFR_IenII,
geschikte_velden_GWT, "JOIN_ONE_TO_ONE", "KEEP_COMMON", "tdnCode \"tdnCode\" true true false 4
Long 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\natte_veengraslanden_EHS,tdnCode,-1,1;typeLandgebruik \"typeLandgebruik\" true true false 254 Text 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\natte_veengraslanden_EHS,typeLandgebruik,-1,1;OMSCHRIJVI \"OMSCHRIJVI\" true true false 50 Text 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\acttemp.gdb\\natte_veengraslanden_EHS,OMSCHRIJVI,-1,-1;GWT \"GWT\" true true false 100 Text 0 0
,Join,\",\",D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\grondwatertrappen_NOFR_IenII,GWT,-1,-1",
"INTERSECT", "", "")
# Process: Spatial Join (4)
arcpy.SpatialJoin_analysis(geschikte_velden_GWT, EHS_planologisch,
Potentiele_percelen_veenmos, "JOIN_ONE_TO_ONE", "KEEP_ALL", "tdnCode \"tdnCode\" true true
false 4 Long 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\geschikte_velden_GWT,tdnCode,-1,1;typeLandgebruik \"typeLandgebruik\" true true false 254 Text 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\geschikte_velden_GWT,typeLandgebruik,-1,1;OMSCHRIJVI \"OMSCHRIJVI\" true true false 50 Text 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\acttemp.gdb\\geschikte_velden_GWT,OMSCHRIJVI,-1,-1;GWT \"GWT\" true true false 100 Text 0 0
,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\act-temp.gdb\\geschikte_velden_GWT,GWT,-1,-1;LEGENDA \"LEGENDA\"
true true false 254 Text 0 0 ,First,#,D:\\ACT\\workspace\\acttemp.gdb\\EHS_planologisch,LEGENDA,-1,-1", "INTERSECT", "", "")
# Process: Add Field
arcpy.AddField_management(Potentiele_percelen_veenmos, "PLANOLOGISCHE_EHS", "TEXT", "", "",
"", "", "NULLABLE", "NON_REQUIRED", "")
# Process: Calculate Field
arcpy.CalculateField_management(Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__2_, "PLANOLOGISCHE_EHS",
"Reclass(!LEGENDA!)", "PYTHON_9.3", "def Reclass(LEGENDA):\\n if LEGENDA == \"Planologische
EHS\":\\n return \"Ja\"\\n else:\\n return \"Nee\"")
# Process: Delete Field
arcpy.DeleteField_management(Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__4_, "LEGENDA")
27
# Process: Add Field (2)
arcpy.AddField_management(Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__3_, "Kleurcode", "DOUBLE", "", "", "",
"", "NULLABLE", "NON_REQUIRED", "")
# Process: Calculate Field (2)
arcpy.CalculateField_management(Potentiele_percelen_veenmos__5_, "Kleurcode", "kleur(!GWT!,
!PLANOLOGISCHE_EHS!)", "PYTHON_9.3", "def kleur(gwt,ehs):\\n if ehs == \"Ja\":\\n if (gwt ==
\"-\"):\\n
return 0\\n elif (gwt == \"-,I\") or (gwt == \"-,I,II\") or (gwt == \"I\") or
(gwt == \"I,II\"):\\n
return 1\\n elif (gwt == \"-,II\") or (gwt == \"II\"):\\n
return
2\\n elif ehs == \"Nee\":\\n if (gwt == \"-\"):\\n
return 3\\n elif (gwt == \"-,I\") or
(gwt == \"-,I,II\") or (gwt == \"I\") or (gwt == \"I,II\"):\\n
return 4\\n elif (gwt == \",II\") or (gwt == \"II\"):\\n
return 5")
EXTENT OF THE DATASET
The extent of the suitability map in projected coordinate system Rijksdriehoekstelsel (ESPG:28992).
North
East
South
West
601182.5 m
206491.6 m
573268.9 m
172691.0 m
28