moorfield bog/farm cottage bog(nha 000221), co. …...raised bog monitoring and assessment survey...

Raised Bog Monitoring and Assessment Survey 2013-Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage NHA 000221

1

Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage

Bog(NHA 000221), Co.

Galway/Roscommon

Executive Summary

This survey, carried out in October 2012, aimed to assess the conservation status of habitats listed

on Annex I of the European Habitats Directive (92/43EEC) on the high bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm

Cottage. Vegetation was described and mapped based on Raised Bog ecotope vegetation

community complexes (Kelly and Schouten, 2002). The following Annex I habitats occur: Active

Raised Bog, Degraded Raised Bog and Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion.

Active Raised Bog covers 8.35ha (12.82%) of the high bog area. High quality Active Raised Bog

consists of central ecotope (0.74ha) present only in the northern lobe of the high bog and featuring

interconnecting Sphagnum pools and lawns dominated by S. cuspidatum and S. papillosum with the

Sphagnum cover ranging from 51 to 75% and with active hummocks of S. austinii and S. fuscum both

recorded. A linear shaped active flush (0.28ha) lies in a depression in the centre of the southern

lobe of high bog. The Sphagnum cover here ranged from 51 to 75% dominated mostly by lawns of

Sphagnum magellanicum with S. fallax and S. cuspidatum occurring in pools and with Vaccinium

oxycoccos, Aulacomnium palustre, Dicranum scoparium and Molinia caerulea also present. Sub-central

ecotope is more common (7.33ha), but is also restricted to the northern lobe. It is more variable in

quality with the Sphagnum cover ranging mostly from 34 to 50%.

Degraded Raised Bog covers 56.76ha (87.18%) of the high bog area. It is drier than Active Raised

Bog and supports a lower density of Sphagnum mosses. It has a less developed micro-topography

while permanent pools and Sphagnum lawns are generally absent.

Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion are found in both Active and Degraded

Raised Bog, but tend to be best developed and most stable in the wettest areas of Active Raised

Bog.

No restoration works have taken place at the site.


2

The current conservation objective for Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is to restore the area of

Active Raised Bog the area present when the Habitats Directive came into force in 1994. In the case

of Active Raised Bog, the objective also includes the restoration of all of the sub-marginal ecotope

present at the time as this represents the area of Degraded Raised Bog most technically feasible to

restore. The Area objective for Active Raised Bog is 42.75ha. The objective in relation to Structure

and Functions (S&Fs) is that at least half of the Active Raised Bog area should be made up of the

central ecotope and active flush (i.e. the wetter vegetation communities). These values have been

set as Favourable Reference Values or FRVs until more site specific values can be set based on

hydrological and topographical studies. The objective for Degraded Raised Bog is for the sub-

marginal area to be restored to active peat forming communities as stated above and that no loss or

degradation of any kind occurs. Although FRVs could not be established for the Rhynchosporion

depressions, the objectives are to increase its extent and improve its quality to values associated

with a favourable conservation status of Active Raised Bog. Therefore, the habitat’s objectives are

indirectly associated with Active Raised Bog objectives.

There has been a 0.50ha decrease in the area of Active Raised Bog (8.35ha) at Moorfield Bog/Farm

Cottage Bog in the 2005 to 2012 period. All of this loss has been from sub-central ecotope and has

occurred in the north-east of the northern lobe within Sc1. There have been two changes related to

vegetation interpretation with an area formerly mapped as flush now mapped as sub-central and

an area formerly mapped as sub-central now mapped as active flush. All other ARB boundary

differences are extremely minor and considered to be as a result of more comprehensive surveying

in 2012 which resulted in more accurate mapping.

The 2012 survey also noted that there is a possibility that Pinus contorta is spreading on the

southern lobe of high bog with numerous saplings recorded along the northern margin. A number

of Rhododendron ponticum were also recorded in the east of this lobe.

Drainage, both on the high bog and adjacent land, and peat cutting are the most threatening

current activities at the site. 0.35ha of high bog have been lost in the reporting period due to peat

cutting. 2.8km of drains remain functional or reduced functional. Cutover drainage (peripheral

drainage) also continues to impact on the high bog habitat and maintenance works have been

carried out in the reporting period on cutover drains to the mid-west and south-west of the high

bog. There are also three separate conifer plantations on the cutover measuring 8.15ha in the mid-

west and north-west of the high bog.

Active Raised Bog has been given an overall Unfavourable Bad–Declining conservation status

assessment. Habitat Area has decreased while quality has remained unchanged in the reporting


3

period. However, both Area and S&Fs values are below favourable reference values. Future

Prospects are considered Unfavourable Bad-Declining as impacting activities (peat cutting and

drainage) continue to threaten the habitat.

Degraded Raised Bog has been given an overall Unfavourable Bad-Declining conservation

assessment and Rhynchosporion depressions has been given an Unfavourable Bad-Declining

conservation status assessment.

The overall raised bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog NHA has been given an Unfavourable

Bad-Declining assessment.

A series of recommendations have been also given, these include: cessation of peat cutting;

restoration works on the high bog and the cutover including the blocking of functional and

reduced functional drains; removal of conifer plantation from the cutover; further hydrological and

topographical studies to ascertain more accurate FRVs; and further botanical monitoring surveys.


4

Site identification

1 The current extent of the high bog is 65.11ha, while that reported in 2005 was 63.61ha (Fernandez et al., 2005). This discrepancy is

partially the result of more accurate mapping of the high bog edge by using the higher resolution 2010 aerial images compared to those

used in 2005. High bog area has also decreased by 0.35ha in the 2004/05-2010 period due to peat cutting. The actual high bog extent in

2004 was 65.46ha (see tables 8.1 and 8.3 2005 (amended) figures).

Site location

Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is located 5km north-west of Ballymoe in Co. Roscommon and the

Galway/Roscommon county boundary passes through the centre of the bog. It lies immediately to

the west of a complex of bogs: Corliskea, Trien and Cloonfelliv, which are all included within one

SAC (002110). Access to the bog can be made from a lane along the cutaway to the north. The

southern part can be accessed from a lane to the south-west.

Description of the survey

The survey was carried out in October 2012 and involved a vegetation survey of the high bog at

Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog and the recording of impacting activities affecting high bog

vegetation. A similar survey was carried out in 2005 by Fernandez et al. (2005). High bog vegetation

was described and mapped, based on raised bog ecotope vegetation community complexes

developed by Kelly and Schouten (2002). Detailed notes were taken on each community complex

and any flushed areas that were present. These included: species lists; estimation of % cover of

dominant species; percentage Sphagnum cover; evidence of damage (due to burning, peat cutting or

drainage); micro-topography; ground firmness; and presence of Cladonia species. A list of

photographical records is given in Appendix II. The survey aimed to assess the conservation status

of Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC) Annex I habitats on the high bog.

NHA Site Code 000221 6” Sheet: GY 29, RO26

Grid Reference: E 164500 / N 274000 1:50,000 Sheet: 39

High Bog area (ha): 65.11ha 1

Dates of Visit: 18 & 24/10/12

Townlands: Moorfield, Co. Galway & Creggameen, Co. Roscommon.


5

The entire high bog of Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog was re-surveyed. Sections mapped as sub-

marginal, sub-central and central ecotope in 2005 were surveyed in more detail. These are the areas

where changes were likely to have occurred. Quadrats, which describe the micro-topographical

features and indicator species, recorded in the 2005 project (Fernandez et al. 2005) were re-surveyed

and additional quadrats were recorded where necessary (see Appendix III). The size of quadrats

was 4m x 4m for Active Raised Bog.

A GeoExplorer handheld GPS minicomputer (Trimble GeoXT) was used in the field to record

quadrats, ecotope boundaries, location of vegetation complexes and other points of interest. The

GPS positions of these features were logged and stored on Terrasync software (Trimble). Additional

comments were stored as text fields in the device. Post processing of data was carried out, based on

the Active GPS Network from Ordnance Survey Ireland, to obtain sub-metre accuracy of the data.

A digital vector format ecotope vegetation map was produced based on the spatial data collected

during the survey using ArcGIS 9.3 and 2010 aerial photography. The Irish National Grid was used

as the co-ordinate reference system. Vegetation complex and ecotope maps are given in Appendix

IV.

Description of the high bog

This bog has been classified as a Ridge River raised bog (Douglas & Grogan 1985). The bog has two

main lobes connected by a narrow section of high bog on its eastern side. The two lobes are

separated by a narrow wedge of old cutover bog, extending west from the mid-eastern side. A ridge

occurs between the two lobes with the northern lobe having a northern aspect and the southern

lobe a mainly southern aspect. Some of the old cutover bog has been reclaimed for grassland, and

some has been planted with conifers. Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog has also been classified as

an Intermediate or Western raised bog (Cross 1990).

Ecological Information

Raised Bog Annex I (Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC)) habitats

The following Raised Bog EU Annex I habitats, are found in Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage:

• Active Raised Bog (EU code 7110),

• Degraded Raised Bog (EU code 7120),


6

• Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion (EU code 7150).

Active Raised Bog (7110)

The current area of Active Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is 8.35ha (12.82% of the

high bog). The bog was not surveyed by Kelly et al. (1995), but the Area of ARB has remained Stable

since 2005.

Active Raised Bog includes central and sub-central ecotope as well as active flush. The largest area

of the ARB was found on the northern lobe of high bog with only a relatively small active flush

being recorded on the southern lobe.

Central ecotope (0.74ha) was found at one location (C1) (see Appendix IV, Map 1) and only one

community complex type was described; complex 15. This was found in a depression with

interconnecting pools covering 11-25% and the Sphagnum cover ranging from 51 to 75%. The pools

had a good cover of Sphagnum cuspidatum (very little open water) with lawns and low hummocks of

S. papillosum dominating around the pool edges. The inter-pool areas, however, were quite dry and

relatively firm underfoot with very few tall hummocks. S. capillifolium dominated the hummocks

although S. austinii and S. fuscum were both present. The western indicator species Pleurozia

purpurea and Campylopus atrovirens were present as well as Andromeda polifolia, Sphagnum

denticulatum, Drosera anglica and Menyanthes trifoliata. Calluna vulgaris, Eriophorum vaginatum, E.

angustifolium and Rhynchospora alba were the most abundant vascular plants.

Two community complex types were recorded in sub-central ecotope (7.33ha). Complex 3/9A + P

was the most common, characterising most of Sc1 as well as Sc3. The Sphagnum cover ranged from

34 to 50% and the pool cover ranged from 11-25% (lower in places). S. cuspidatum dominated in

pools with open water present as well while the hummock layer was dominated by S. capillifolium

and S. papillosum. S. magellanicum replaced S. cuspidatum in places and S. austinii, S. fuscum and

S. tenellum were also recorded. Calluna vulgaris, Carex panicea and Eriophorum angustifolium were the

most abundant vascular plants. Eriophorum vaginatum was more abundant that E. angustifolium in

places and in these areas the complex was termed 3/9 + P. The cover of Cladonia portentosa was 34-

50% indicating that the area has not been burnt for some time. Complex 9/7/10 was found in the

northern section of Sc1. The Sphagnum cover again ranged from 34 to 50% but here pools were

absent. Hummocks of S. capillifolium dominated the Sphagnum layer while Calluna vulgaris and

Eriophorum vaginatum were the most abundant vascular plants. A wetter version of this complex

also occurs with Eriophorum angustifolium being much more abundant than E. vaginatum and here

the complex is termed 9a/7/10.


7

One active flush (0.28ha) was recorded on the southern lobe of Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage

Bog(Flush V). This was a narrow linear flush found in the centre of the southern lobe of high bog

that was aligned with the shape of that lobe, being elongated in a NW/SE direction. It lies in a

depression and while there were pools towards its north-western extent, these were absent towards

the south-east. The Sphagnum cover ranged from 51 to 75% (lower in the east) and towards the

north-west was dominated by lawns of Sphagnum magellanicum with S. fallax and S. cuspidatum

occurring in pools. Sphagnum capillifolium dominated the hummock layer (and the entire Sphagnum

layer towards the south-east) with S. papillosum, S. subnitens, S. austinii and S. fuscum also recorded.

Calluna vulgaris and Eriophorum vaginatum were the most abundant vascular plants with flush

indicators recorded including Vaccinium oxycoccos, Aulacomnium palustre, Dicranum scoparium and

Molinia caerulea.

Degraded Raised Bog (7120)

The current area of Degraded Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is 56.76ha (87.18% of

the high bog).

Degraded Raised Bog includes the sub-marginal, marginal and face bank ecotope, as well as

inactive flush. Although some areas of Degraded Raised Bog have a relatively well-developed

Raised Bog flora, they are affected by water loss to varying degrees, and are usually devoid of

permanent pools.

The sub-marginal ecotope features the most developed micro-topography within Degraded Raised

Bog. Although pools are mostly absent from the high bog, they are found within the wettest sub-

marginal community complex (4/9A + P). This complex is found in the north-west of the southern

lobe and has some sub-central characteristics. The Sphagnum cover ranged from 34 to 50% and the

pool cover ranged from 11 to 25%. However, the cover of S. cuspidatum in the pools was variable

with very few pools having a high Sphagnum cover and hummocks of S. capillifolium dominating the

Sphagnum layer. The western indicators Campylopus atrovirens and Racomitrium lanuginosum were

recorded while Calluna vulgaris, Rhynchospora alba and Eriophorum angustifolium were the most

abundant vascular plants. The cover of Cladonia portentosa was low. Variants of complex 9/7

dominated the remainder of the sub-marginal ecotope. Complex 9/7 was dominated by Calluna

vulgaris and Eriophorum vaginatum and supported the best quality vegetation with a Sphagnum cover

of 34-50% dominated by hummocks of S. capillifolium. Complex 9/7/6 was similar but with a higher

cover of Narthecium ossifragum and a slightly lower Sphagnum cover; 9/7/3 was again similar but

with a higher cover of Carex panicea and an even lower Sphagnum cover; and 9/7/2 was also similar

but with a higher cover of Trichophorum germanicum and a Sphagnum cover of 11-25%. There are also


8

three small areas within 9/7/3 where pools are present. These pools have a poor cover of Sphagnum

and here the complex is termed 9/7/3 + P. A small very wet area of complex 9/7 is found on the

southern lobe that has some sub-central and flush characteristics. The cover of Eriophorum

vaginatum is particularly high here and Molinia caerulea and Vaccinium myrtillus are also present. A

number of small Rhododendron ponticum bushes are present close to this area of the high bog.

Marginal ecotope is slightly drier than sub-marginal ecotope and mainly occurs as a narrow band

near the margins of the high bog. Two community complex types were recorded in marginal

ecotope; complex 6/7/3 being the most common and complex 3/2 being restricted to parts of the

northern lobe. The micro-topography consists of Calluna vulgaris hummocks, low Sphagnum

hummocks, flats and very occasionally hollows and tear pools. The Sphagnum cover is even lower

here than in the sub-marginal ecotope (<10%) and the vegetation is characterised by a higher cover

of Carex panicea, Narthecium ossifragum, Trichophorum germanicum and Calluna vulgaris.

Face bank ecotope is characterised by firm ground, tall Calluna vulgaris, poor Sphagnum cover and a

flat micro-topography. This ecotope is found along drains and at the high bog edge.

The high bog also features several inactive flushes (flush U, W and Z). Flush U and W are found at

the high bog margin of the southern lobe and are dominated by Molinia caerulea with a Sphagnum

cover ranging from 11 to 25% composed mostly of S. capillifolium. At least parts of flush W appear

to be on old cutover. Flush Z is composed of a series of swallow holes on the northern lobe of the

high bog. These swallow holes contain Polytrichum strictum, Dryopteris dilatata, Blechnum spicant,

Eriophorum vaginatum and Calluna vulgaris.

Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion (7150)

Rhynchosporion vegetation is widespread on Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage. It is found in both

Active and Degraded Raised Bog, but tends to be best developed and most stable in the wettest

areas of Active Raised Bog. In these areas, the Rhynchosporion vegetation occurs within Sphagnum

hollows and along Sphagnum pool edges and on lawns. It was found to be most common on

Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog in complex 15 (central), 4/9A + P (sub-marginal) and 3/4/2

(marginal, but within run off channels). Typical plant species include Rhynchospora alba, Sphagnum

cuspidatum, S. magellanicum, S. papillosum, Drosera anglica and Eriophorum angustifolium.

R. alba was also found within Degraded Raised Bog, but always associated with wet features such

as hollows and run off channels.


9

Detailed vegetation description of the high bog

A detailed description of high bog vegetation recorded during the 2012 survey of Moorfield

Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is given in Appendix I. Vegetation is divided into a number of community

complexes, which are listed and described based on the dominant species. These community

complexes are grouped into ecotope types. The distribution of the ecotopes is shown on the ecotope

map (Appendix IV, Map 1). The community complexes are shown on the community complex map

(Appendix IV, Map 2) and the quadrat details are given in Appendix III and their location in

Appendix IV (Map 1).

Impacting activities

Table 6.1 below provides a list of activities impacting high bog vegetation at Moorfield Bog/Farm

Cottage Bog, according to their occurrence on the high bog or adjacent to the high bog; area or

length affected, and whether they influence negatively (i.e. drainage, peat extraction) or positively

(i.e. restoration works):

Table 6.1 Impacting activities

Code Activity Ranking Influence Area (ha) /Length(km)

Location Habitat affected

C01.03 Peat extraction H -1 0.35ha of the high bog cut

away

Inside High Bog: 7

different locations

7120

C01.03 Peat extraction L -1 0.35ha of the high bog cut

away

Inside High Bog: 7

different locations

7110/7150

J02.07 Drainage H -1 2.833km 1 Inside High Bog

7110/7120/7150

J02.07 Drainage H -1 n/av Outside High Bog 7110/7120/7150

I01 Invasive alien species

L -1 <0.1ha 3 Inside High Bog

7110/7120/7150

B01.02 Artificial planting on open ground (non-

native trees) L -1 8.15ha Outside

High Bog 7110/7120/7150

HB: High Bog; Ranking: H: High importance/impact; M: Medium importance/impact; L: Low importance/impact.

1 This figure only includes functional and reduced-functional drains.

2 This figure includes blocked drains on high bog.

3 This figure is estimated and represents the extent of trees across entire high bog

n/a: not applicable, n/av: not available


10

Peat cutting

This activity has taken place at 7 locations along the south (5 locations (plots)), west (1 location) and

middle (1 location) sections of high bog in the 2004/05-2010 period. This has reduced the area of

high bog by 0.35ha. The loss of high bog is calculated using GIS techniques on aerial photography

from 2004/05 and 2010. As aerial photography is not available post 2010, it cannot be ruled out that

cutting may have taken place in additional locations in the 2011-2012 period. Further high bog may

therefore have been lost and the figure quoted should be considered a minimum value.

The continuation of these peat cutting will prevent the recovery of the high bog, and the recovery of

ARB towards FRVs as restoration works cannot be employed until such activities stop. It should

also be borne in mind that peat cutting has already had a serious negative impact over a long

period at this site, indicated by the fact that ARB covers only a very small area (8.35ha or 12.82% of

the high bog) and is 80.47% below the FRV target.

Habitat losses associated with peat cutting in the current reporting period have been confined

mostly to the marginal ecotope (0.28ha), but have also occurred within facebank ecotope (0.07ha).

Thus, the activity is assessed as having a negative impact of high importance on Degraded Raised

Bog. No direct losses of Active Raised Bog from peat cutting took place in the reporting period, thus

this activity is considered to have a low impact/importance on ARB and Rhynchosporion

depressions.

In addition to the impact of turf cutting in the current reporting period, old face banks and high bog

and cutover drainage associated with cutting also continue to cause negative impacts on the high

bog habitats.

Fernandez et al. (2005) reported that close to 57.9% of the high bog had been cut away since the

1800’s, and estimated that 9.1% of the high bog margin was actively cut in 2003. The turf plots

identified at the time were all thought to be hopper cut and associated with domestic usage.

Drainage

High bog drainage

Table 6.2 shows very little change on the status of high bog drains (0.185km decrease in functional

drains and a 0.185km increase in reduced functional drains). The majority of drains in the high bog

remain functional (0.856km) or reduced functional (1.977km). Reduced functional drains are still

impacting on high bog habitats and will continue to do so until they are blocked and become

completely in-filled and thus non-functional.


11

High bog drainage is considered to have high importance/impact on high bog habitats. Impact from

high bog drains to the southeast of Sc1 (d1, d3, d14-17) are likely to have caused further localised

dying out and subsidence and to be directly connected with the decline on ARB habitat along the

north-eastern section of high bog.

No blockage of drains has occurred to date.

Table 6.2 High bog drainage summary

Status 2005 (km) 1 2012 (km) Change

NB: functional 1.041 0.856 (-)0.185

NB: reduced functional 1.792 1.977 (+)0.185

NB: non- functional 0.204 0.204 0.000

B: functional 0.000 0.000 0.000

B: reduced functional 0.000 0.000 0.000

B: non- functional 0.000 0.000 0.000

B: Blocked; NB: Not blocked n/a: not applicable

1 High bog drainage has been revised (e.g. re-digitised in cases) and figures above may vary slightly from those given by Fernandez et al. (2005)

Table 6.3 below provides a more detail description of the drainage present on the high bog at

Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog including any change in their functionality in the 2005 – 2012

reporting period (see Map 3).

Table 6.3 High bog drainage detail

Drain Name

Length (km) 2005 status 2012 status Change Comment

d1 0.227 NB: functional NB: functional No Eastern section of drain

d1 0.526 NB: reduced functional

NB: reduced functional No Western section of

drain


NB: reduced functional

No

d3 0.165 NB: functional NB: functional No This drain was wrongly

classified as reduced functional in 2005

d4 0.430 NB: reduced

functional NB: reduced

functional No Double drain



functional No

d6a 0.160 NB: reduced functional

NB: reduced functional No

d6b 0.069 NB: functional NB: functional No This drain was wrongly





12

d8 0.185 NB: functional NB: reduced functional

Yes

d9 0.050 NB: functional NB: functional No

d10 0.113 NB: functional NB: functional No

This drain was wrongly classified as reduced

functional in 2005; slow flow noted during 2012

visit



No



functional No



d14 0.036 NB: functional NB: functional No Drain already present in 2005 but not mapped



No

d16 0.052 NB: functional NB: functional No This drain was wrongly


d17 0.037 NB: functional NB: functional No Drain already present

in 2005 but not mapped


NB: reduced functional No Drain already present

in 2005 but not mapped

d19 0.049 NB: non-functional

NB: non-functional No This drain was wrongly




x1 0.035 NB: functional NB: functional No Drain already present in 2005 but not mapped

x2 0.155 NB: non-

functional NB: non-functional No This drain was wrongly


x3 0.037 NB: functional NB: functional No

x4 0.035 NB: functional NB: functional No

Bog margin drainage

The cutover areas were not surveyed for drains during 2012.

There are numerous drains associated with either currently active or no longer active peat cutting

along the entire cutover, but they are particularly frequent in the north, north-east and mid-west.

These drains continue to drain the high bog and impact on high bog habitats.


13

Recent drainage maintenance is evident on the 2010 aerial photograph in the south-west of the site

along the southern margin of high bog (E163869/N273989; drain ca. 90m long). Fast flowing water

was recorded as running to the north-west in this drain during the 2012 survey. Two further

examples of drainage maintenance (re-excavation) works are evident to the north of the southern

lobe; one running along the track (E163958/N274200; drain ca 300m long) that leads to the forestry

plantation and the other running parallel to the track but lying closer to the southern lobe of the

high bog (E163945/N274147; drain ca. 200m long). Another re-excavated drain (E163973/N273755) is

also evident on the 2010 AP on the cutover in the mid-south of the southern lobe of high bog. This is

likely to be associated with agricultural improvements.

A small river lies close to the eastern and northern margin of the high bog. Drainage works on the

river are likely to impact on the hydrology of the high bog but it is not known if any works have

been carried out recently.

Bog margin drainage is considered to have a high importance/impact on high bog habitats.

Peripheral drainage and its maintenance along the north-east of the site are likely to be connected to

the ARB habitat losses within the northeast section of Sc1.

Fire history

No fire events have been reported on the high bog in the 2005-2012 reporting period and the

abundance of Cladonia portentosa suggests that most of the high bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage

Bog has not been burnt for some time. The most recent burn recorded at the site affected the south-

western lobe of high bog and occurred in 1982/83 while an area located in the south-east section of

the northern lobe was burnt in 1980/81 (Douglas & Grogan 1985).

Invasive species

Five separate small Rhododendron ponticum bushes (all ca. 0.5m) were recorded on the east of the

southern lobe of the high bog in 2012. Only one of these was recorded in 2005, but this may be

explained by the fact that the 2012 survey was a more comprehensive one. Fernandez et al. (2005)

also reported that Pinus sp. were spreading onto the western side of the high bog from the conifer

plantation. These Pinus contorta trees were again noted in 2012 along with some Picea sitchensis. The

northern margin of the southern lobe had a particularly high density of these in the area of high bog

that lies immediately adjacent to the conifer plantation lying on the cutover. An estimated 25

saplings <2.0m tall were recorded in this immediate area.


14

Invasive species are currently considered to have low importance/impact on high bog habitats.

However, there is potential for these to have a higher impact in the near future considering the

amount of Pinus saplings recorded. Thus a monitoring and possibly eradication programme of

Pinus contorta and Picea sitchensis as well as Rhododendron ponticum needs to be developed.

Afforestation and forestry management

Fernandez et al. (2005) noted a conifer plantation (Pinus contorta) on the cutover adjacent to the

western side of the northern lobe of high bog. This plantation measures 6.9ha and is still present. A

second smaller plantation (0.9ha) is also found 80m to the west of the northern lobe of high bog and

a third even smaller plantation (0.35ha) lies adjacent to the northern margin of the southern lobe of

high bog.

These plantations are considered to have a low importance/impact on high bog habitats. However,

the drainage associated with them may be having a greater impact especially considering the fact

that the drains to the west of the smallest of these plantations appear to have been re-excavated

during the 2005-2012 reporting period.

Other impacting activities

No other significant impacting activities were noted or recorded in 2012 impacting high bog

habitats in the 2005-2012 reporting period. However, there is an old re-vegetating track separating

the northern and southern lobes of high bog.

Conservation activities

Although no physical management actions such as the blocking of drains have been carried out to

improve the conservation status of the high bog habitats, the NPWS has engaged in negotiation

with landowners in relation to the cessation of peat cutting at the site.

Conservation status assessment

The assessment of the conservation status of Annex I Active and Degraded Raised Bog and Bog

Woodland is based on the following(a more detailed description of conservation status assessment

methods is given within the methods section of the project’s Summary Report (Volume 1) :


15

AREA - comparison of current habitat area with favourable reference values and its change in the

reporting period to assess trends.

STRUCTURE & FUNCTION - comparison of central ecotope and active flush area (i.e. the higher

quality wetter vegetation communities) for Active Raised Bog, and marginal and face bank ecotope

area (i.e. the lower quality and drier vegetation communities) for Degraded Raised Bog against

favourable reference values to assess their status and changes in their area in the reporting period to

assess their trend. Community complex descriptions were also taken into account to evaluate

changes in ecotope quality together with an analysis of the indicators recorded in the quadrats.

FUTURE PROSPECTS - an assessment of the influence of current and future activities both negative

and positive (e.g. restoration works) affecting these habitats. Future Prospects for Active and

Degraded Raised Bog are assessed at status and trend level based on the prospects for the habitat to

reach favourable reference values in a two reporting period (12 years).


Area

Table 8.1 indicates that there has been a decrease (0.50ha) in the extent of Active Raised Bog habitat

on Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog from 2005 to 2012. All of this loss has been from sub-central

ecotope and has occurred in the north-east of the northern lobe within Sc1. The sub-central in this

area was mapped in 2005 as extending towards the high bog edge as far as the marginal ecotope,

but in 2012 this particular area was mapped as sub-marginal ecotope (complex 9/7/3 + P). However,

this sub-marginal complex has some sub-central characteristics; Sphagnum cuspidatum in pools (but

at a variable cover), and thus the mapping difference here could, at least partially, be due to

vegetation interpretation differences. Nevertheless, there were six sub-central points (Complex 3/9 +

P) taken within this area in 2005 and thus it is likely that there has been a decrease in the area of Sc1

here. This is likely to have been caused by the ongoing drying out effects of past cutting and/or by

high bog drainage (indeed drains d1, d3 and d14- d17 drain this area of high bog). Drainage on the

cutover and/or dredging works (if carried out) on the stream/river to the north may, also have

contributed to the loss of ARB from this area.

All other ARB boundary differences are extremely minor and considered to be as a result of more

comprehensive surveying in 2012 which resulted in more accurate mapping.

The favourable reference value (FRV) for Area is considered to be the sum of Active Raised Bog

(central, sub-central ecotopes and active flush) plus sub-marginal ecotope when the Habitats


16

Directive came into force in 1994 (see table 8.4). Therefore, Active Raised Bog Area FRV is 42.75ha

(this site was not surveyed by Kelly (1995) so this figure is an estimate by Fernandez et al. (2005), see

tables 8.1 and 8.3 below). This FRV is only approximate until further hydrological and

topographical studies are carried out in order to assess the maximum potential capacity of the high

bog to support Active Raised Bog. The current habitat Area value (8.35ha) is 80.47% below the FRV.

A current Area value more than 15% below FRV falls into the Unfavourable Bad assessment

category.

No long term (1994/5-2012) trend in the Area of Active Raised Bog at the site is available (see table

8.1), but a more recent and short term trend analysis (7 years; 2005--2012) also indicates a decrease

in the area (0.50ha) of Active Raised Bog. Therefore, the habitat Area is given a Decreasing trend

assessment.

The Area of Active Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is assessed as Unfavourable

Bad-Decreasing (see table 8.5).

Structure & Functions

The FRV for S&Fs is for at least half of the Active Raised Bog area to be made up of central and

active flush, i.e. the higher quality wetter vegetation communities. This value is 4.18ha (half of

8.35ha, the current area of Active Raised Bog). The current value is 1.02ha, which is 75.6% below the

FRV. As a value falling over 25% below the FRV falls into the Unfavourable-Bad assessment

category, S&Fs are given an Unfavourable-Bad assessment.

Although table 8.1 indicates no change in the area of central ecotope and active flush, there have

been some changes to their boundaries.

The area of central ecotope (C1) has been mapped as being slightly larger. However, this change is

considered to be as a result of more comprehensive surveying in 2012 which resulted in more

accurate mapping.

Active flush X mapped in the mid-north of the northern lobe in 2005 is now considered to be part of

Sc1. This difference is due to vegetation interpretation differences between the two surveys.

Active flush V mapped in the centre of the southern lobe in 2012 was mapped as sub-central

ecotope in 2005 (Sc2). This difference is due to vegetation interpretation differences between the

two surveys.


17

No long term (1994/5-2012) trend in the area of central ecotope and active flush at the site is

available (see table 8.1), but a more recent and short term trend analysis (7 years; 2005-2012)

indicates that their areas have remained Stable.

Quadrats analysis (Qc1 and Qsc1) indicates the following (only two quadrats were taken in 2005; a

further two; Qsc2 and Qaf1 were taken in 2012):

Qc1: There was a very slight variation in the quadrat data compared to 2005: the quadrat was

previously classified as complex 35 (central ecotope), but is now classed as complex 15 (central

ecotope). This is an interpretation change rather than a real change. The cover of pools has

remained the same (11-25%) while the overall Sphagnum cover has increased (from 34-50% in 2005

to 51-75% in 2012). However, there has been a decrease in the cover of S. cuspidatum (11-25% in 2005

to 4-10% in 2012) while there has been an increase in the cover of S. papillosum (4-10% in 2005 to 11-

25% in 2012) and S. fuscum (“absent” in 2005 to <4% in 2012). The cover of S. austinii (4-10%), S.

denticulatum (<4%) and S. capillifolium (11-25%) has remained the same. A slight increase in the

cover of Calluna vulgaris (4-10% in 2005 to 11-25% in 2012), Carex panicea (“absent” in 2005 to <4% in

2012) and Cladonia portentosa (4-10% in 2005 to 11-25% in 2012) was also recorded as well as a

decrease in the cover of Trichophorum germanicum (4-10% in 2005 to <4% in 2012) and Rhynchospora

alba (4-10% in 2005 to <4% in 2012). However, these changes may merely be the result of a

discrepancy in the quadrat location (up to 2m) between both year surveys, rather than an actual

change.

Qsc1: There was a slight variation in the quadrat data compared to 2005: the cover of pools (from

11-25% in 2005 to 4-10% in 2012) and the overall Sphagnum covers have decreased (from 34-50% in

2005 to 26-33% in 2012). However, the cover of S. cuspidatum (4-10%) and S. austinii (<4%) has

remained the same. There has been a decrease in the cover of S. papillosum (11-25% in 2005 to <4% in

2012), S. denticulatum (<4% in 2005 to “absent” in 2012) while there has been an increase in the cover

of S. capillifolium (4-10% in 2005 to 11-25% in 2012) and S. fuscum (<4% in 2005 to 4-10% in 2012). A

slight increase in the cover of Calluna vulgaris (4-10% in 2005 to 11-25% in 2012) was also recorded as

well as a decrease in the cover of Carex panicea (11-25% in 2005 to 4-10% in 2012), Narthecium

ossifragum (4-10% in 2005 to <4% in 2012) and Rhynchospora alba (4-10% in 2005 to <4% in 2012).

However, these changes may merely be the result of a discrepancy in the quadrat location (up to

2m) between both year surveys, rather than an actual change.

Typical good quality indicators and typical plant species are still found in sub-central and active

flush throughout the entire bog.


18

The Structure & Functions of Active Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog are assessed

as Unfavourable-Bad Stable (see table 8.5).

Future Prospects

Habitat Area has decreased by 0.5ha while S&Fs are assessed as Stable in the current reporting

period. However, there are still 2.83km of functional and reduced functional drains on the high bog

with more on the cutover. 7 turf plots were cut from 2005 to 2010. The high bog has been cutaway

extensively and the current ARB area represents a particularly small percentage of the total high

bog area. There has been no restoration measures carried out at the site which could override the

negative influence of impacting activities.

Habitat Area is currently 80.47% below FRV (see table 8.4) and a Decreasing trend is foreseen due to

the overriding influence of negatively impacting activities. The habitat Area is expected to be more

than 15% below FRV in the following two reporting periods (12 years). Thus, habitat’s Area Future

Prospects are assessed as Unfavourable Bad-Decreasing. Habitat’s S&Fs are currently 75.60%

below FRV (see table 8.4) and a Declining trend is also foreseen. Therefore S&Fs are expected to be

more than 25% below FRV in the following two reporting periods. S&Fs Future Prospects are

assessed as Unfavourable Bad-Declining.

The overall habitat’s Future Prospects are Unfavourable Bad – Declining (see table 8.5).

There is some potential for the restoration of cutover around the entire site, but particularly in the

west between the two lobes of high bog and in the north-east of the site. In addition, the blocking of

functional and reduced-functional drains both on the high bog and cutover and the cessation of

peat cutting is necessary.

The overall conservation status of Active Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is

assessed as Unfavourable Bad-Declining (see table 8.5).

Table 8.1 Changes in Active Raised Bog area Active

Ecotopes 1994/51 2005 2005

(amended) 2012 Change (2005-2012)

Area (ha) Area (ha) Area (ha) Area (ha) Area (ha) %

Central n/a 0.54 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.00

Sub-central n/a 7.78 7.83 7.33 (-)0.50 (-)6.39

Active flush n/a 0.31 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.00

Total n/a 8.63 8.85 8.35 (-)0.50 (-)5.65


19

1These are the figures calculated from the vegetation map drawn by Kelly et al., (1995) that was geo-referenced, digitised and in some cases adjusted as part of Fernandez et al. (2005) project (Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage, however, was not surveyed by Kelly et al., 1995).

Note: Table 8.1 includes 2005 figures and 2005 amended figures. The latter shows the ecotope area

believed to be present in 2005 after surveying improvements in 2012. The comparison between 2005

(amended) and 2012 illustrates the actual changes in ecotope area in the 2005-2012 period. Any

change in ecotope area between the 2005 and the 2005 (amended) values is due to improvement in

mapping accuracy and/or the result of a more comprehensive survey in 2012 (see table 8.2 for

further detail).

Table 8.2 Assessment of changes in individual Active Raised Bog areas Area Quadrats Trend Comment Quadrats analysis

C1 Qc1 Stable Slight changes in boundary (slightly larger). This change is the result of more comprehensive surveying in 2012 which resulted in more accurate mapping.

Qc1: very slight variation in the quadrat data compared to 2005: the cover of pools has remained the same (11-25%) while the overall Sphagnum cover has increased (from 34-50% to 51-75%). A decrease in the cover of S. cuspidatum (11-25% to 4-10%) while there has been an increase in S. papillosum (4-10% to 11-25%) and S. fuscum (“absent” to <4%). However, these changes are very small and may merely be the result of a discrepancy in the quadrat location (up to 2m) between both year surveys, rather than an actual change.

Sc1 Qsc2 & Qsc2

Decreasing Slight changes in boundary (slightly smaller). This change is most likely the result of more comprehensive surveying in 2012 which resulted in more accurate mapping. However, actual ARB habitat losses took place long the northeast section of Sc1, associated with further drying out processes and subsidence likely to be caused by drainage both on the adjacent land and high bog.

Qsc1: a slight variation in the quadrat data compared to 2005: the cover of pools (from 11-25% in 2005 to 4-10% in 2012) and the overall Sphagnum cover have decreased (from 34-50% to 26-33%). However, the cover of S. cuspidatum (4-10%) and S. austinii (<4%) has remained the same. There has also been a decrease in the cover of S. papillosum (11-25% to <4%), S. denticulatum (<4% to “absent”) while there has been an increase in the cover of S. capillifolium (4-10% to 11-25%) and S. fuscum (<4% to 4-10%). However, these changes may merely be the result of a discrepancy in the quadrat location (up to 2m) between both year surveys, rather than an actual change. Qsc2: is a new quadrat.

Sc2 None No longer present

Former Sc2 is now mapped as active flush V. This is the result of


20

Area Quadrats Trend Comment Quadrats analysis re-interpretation of vegetation rather than any actual change.

Sc3 None Stable Slight changes in boundary (slightly smaller). This change is the result of more comprehensive surveying in 2012 which resulted in more accurate mapping.

V Qaf1 Stable This active flush corresponds with the area of former Sc2. This is the result of re-interpretation of vegetation rather than any actual change.

Qaf1 is a new quadrat that was not recorded in 2012.

X None Stable Former active flush X is now mapped as part of Sc1. This is the result of re-interpretation of vegetation rather than any actual change.

Y None Stable (possibly declining)

This small flush/soak is too small to map (mapped as part of Sc1). It is possibly degrading as the 2005 description stated that this “pool is infilled with a lawn of S. cuspidatum and S. papillosum”. It is currently infilled almost exclusively with S. magellanicum. However, the photo taken in 2005 appears to indicate that S. magellanicum already dominated the pool. Thus, the reference to S. cuspidatum may have been a transcribing error.


Area

The Degraded Raised Bog FRV for Area is 22.36ha at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage. This value

corresponds with the difference between the current high bog area (65.11ha) and the Active Raised

Bog FRV (42.75ha) for Area. Degraded Raised Bog is a particular habitat type, for which a FRV

smaller than the current value, may be desirable in many sites. However any decrease in habitat

area would only be considered positive, when it is the result of restoration to Active Raised Bog.

Current habitat area is 153.85% bigger than FRV. Any habitat Area value more than 15% above FRV

falls into the Unfavourable Bad assessment category, and therefore that is the assessment that

applies to DRB habitat area for Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog(see table 8.4).

Table 8.3 indicates that there has been an increase of 0.15ha in the area of Degraded Raised Bog.

This has been brought about as a result of a 0.35ha loss to peat cutting balanced by a 0.5ha increase


21

brought about by the drying out of ARB. Thus, the habitat is given an Increasing trend, which in

this particular case indicates drier conditions on the high bog and a negative assessment trend.

The Area of Degraded Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog assessed as Unfavourable

Bad-Increasing (see table 8.5).


The FRV for S&Fs is for a maximum 25% of the Degraded Raised Bog area to be made up of

marginal and face bank, i.e. the lower quality and drier vegetation communities. This value is

14.19ha (25% of 56.76ha, the current area of Degraded Raised Bog). The current marginal and face

bank ecotopes area value (22.76ha) is 60.39% above the FRV (in the particular case of Degraded

Raised Bog a current area value equal or smaller than FRV is desirable). A current value more than

25% above FRV falls into the Unfavourable Bad assessment category.

Table 8.3 shows that there has been no change in the area of marginal or face-bank ecotope, except

for those areas lost to the high bog because of peat cutting; a 0.28ha decrease in marginal ecotope

and a 0.07ha decrease in face bank. S&Fs trend is assessed based on actual changes within marginal

and face banks ecotope (e.g. decreases due to rewetting processes or increases as a result of further

drying out). Thus, the DRB’s S&Fs at Moorfield/Farm Cottage are given a Stable trend in the

reporting period.

The mapping of boundary between marginal and sub marginal is difficult and decreases are only

recorded where major changes in the vegetation are evident. Therefore, where no changes are

shown, more subtle negative effects cannot be ruled out, and therefore negative changes may have

been underestimated. The basic assumption is that were peat cutting has taken place subsidence

will occur and will continue for some decades and this will dry out the adjacent areas of the bog

Typical good quality indicators and typical plant species are still found throughout the entire bog

on sub-marginal ecotope.

The Structure & functions of Degraded Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog are

assessed as Unfavourable Bad-Stable (see table 8.5).

Future Prospects

The area of Degraded Raised Bog has decreased (by 0.35ha) as a result of peat cutting and this

activity has not been phased out so far at the site. Furthermore, drainage on the high bog (2.83km of

functional and reduced functional drains recorded) and cutover continues to damage the habitat


22

and hinder its recovery to FRV’s, as well as minimising the chances of converting marginal and

facebank ecotopes to sub-marginal and/or Active Raised Bog. There are currently no remediation

works at the site that might contribute to the restoration of good quality habitat.

The 2012 survey also numerous Pinus contorta saplings along the northern margin of the southern

lobe of the high bog. These pines may be spreading in this area of the high bog and if so would be

an indication that drying out of the high bog is occurring.

Habitat Area is currently 153.85% above FRV (see table 8.4) and an Increasing trend is expected in

the following two reporting periods (12 years) due to negatively impacting activities. Habitat Area

is expected to remain more than 15% above FRV. Thus, habitat’s Area Future Prospects are

assessed as Unfavourable Bad–Increasing, which in this case indicates a negative trend. Habitat’s

S&Fs are currently 60.39% above FRV (see table 8.4). A Declining trend is foreseen in the following

two reporting periods and S&Fs are expected to remain more than 25% above FRV. Thus, habitat’s

S&Fs Future Prospects are assessed as Unfavourable Bad-Declining.

The overall habitat’s Future Prospects are Unfavourable Bad–Declining (see table 8.5).

Table 8.3 Changes in Degraded Raised Bog area

Inactive Ecotopes

1994/51 2005 2005 (amended)

2012 Change (2005-2012)

Area (ha) Area (ha) Area (ha) Area (ha) Area (ha) %

Sub-marginal n/a 29.85 32.58 33.08 (+)0.50 (+)1.53

Marginal 2 n/a 22.93 21.73 21.45 (-)0.28 (-)1.29

Face bank2 n/a 1.58 1.38 1.31 (-)0.07 (-)5.07

Inactive flush

n/a 0.62 0.92 0.92 0.00 0.00

Total n/a 54.98 56.61 56.76 (+)0.15 (+)0.26

1These are the figures calculated from the vegetation map drawn by Kelly et al., (1995) that was geo-referenced, digitised and in some cases adjusted as part of Fernandez et al. (2005) project.

2 Any 2012 marginal and face bank ecotope value given within the report should be taken as a maximum value. Their extent is based on the 2012 habitat survey and 2010 aerial photographs. It cannot be ruled out that further marginal and/or face bank ecotope losses may have taken place at the margin of the high bog in the 2011-2012 period associated with peat cutting.

Note: Table 8.3 includes 2005 figures and 2005 amended figures. The latter shows the ecotope area

believed to be present in 2005 after surveying improvements in 2012. The comparison between 2005

(amended) and 2012 illustrates the actual changes in ecotope area in the 2005-2012 period. Any

change in ecotope area between the 2005 and the 2005 (amended) values is due to improvement in

mapping accuracy and/or the result of a more comprehensive survey in 2012.


23

The overall conservation status of Degraded Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is

assessed as Unfavourable Bad-Declining (see table 8.5).


Rhynchospora alba depressions are found across the entire bog in both Active and Degraded Raised

Bog. The species is more frequently found and reaches its finest quality associated within wet

features (Sphagnum pools, lawns and hollows) on Active Raised Bog.

The physical structure and distribution of the habitat across large sections of the high bog makes

the process of calculating its area unfeasible and as a consequence makes the process of calculating

realistic FRVs unfeasible. Thus, the assessment of the habitat Area conservation status is indirectly

based on the assessment of Active Raised Bog habitat Area (a favourable assessment indicates that

all sub-marginal ecotope has turned Active Raised Bog). The habitat Area is given an Unfavourable

Bad assessment.

The Area trend assessment is based on the variation on Active Raised Bog and sub-marginal

ecotope within Degraded Raised Bog in the reporting period. The combined area of Active raised

Bog and sub-marginal ecotope has remained stable in the reporting period. As result habitat Area is

given a Stable trend.

The habitat’s Area Future Prospects status is equally based on the Active Raised Bog Area Future

Prospects status assessment and the Area Future Prospects trend is based on the trend expected for

Active Raised Bog and sub-marginal ecotope in the following two reporting periods. Impacting

activities such as peat cutting and drainage on the high bog and cutovers are threatening Active

and Degraded Raised Bog. Logically this has to have a long term negative effect on Rhynchosporion

depressions. Therefore, the habitat’s Area Future Prospects are given an Unfavourable Bad-

Decreasing assessment.

The S&Fs conservation assessment is also indirectly based on the Active Raised Bog S&Fs status

and trend assessments, as Active Raised Bog supports the finest habitat quality type. Therefore, the

habitat’s S&Fs are given an Unfavourable Bad-Stable assessment.

The habitat’s S&Fs Future Prospects status and trend are equally based on the Active Raised Bog

S&Fs Future Prospects status and trend assessments in the following two reporting periods.

Therefore, the habitat’s S&Fs Future Prospects are given an Unfavourable Bad-Declining

assessment.

The overall habitat’s Future Prospects assessment is Unfavourable Bad-Declining.


24

The conservation status of depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion at Moorfield

Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is assessed as Unfavourable Bad-Declining (see table 8.5).

Table 8.4 Habitats favourable reference values

Habitat Area Assessment Structure & Functions Assessment

FRV Target

(ha) 1

2012 value

(ha) 2

% below

target

FRV 2012

Target (ha) 3

2012 value

(ha) 4

% below

target

7110 42.75 8.35 80.47 4.18 1.02 75.60 1 1994/5 central, sub-central, active flush, bog woodland and sub-marginal ecotope area. However, in the case of

Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage, no survey was carried out in 1995. However, Fernandez et al. (2005) estimated a 10%

decrease in ARB and sub-marginal ecotope from 1995 to 2005. Thus that figure is used here.

2 2012 central, sub-central ecotope, active flush and bog woodland area.

3 Half of the current central, sub-central ecotope and active flush area. The target is that the area of the highest

vegetation quality (i.e. central ecotope and active flush) should be at least this figure.

4 2012 central ecotope and active flush area.

FRV Target

(ha) 5

2012 value

(ha) 6

% above

target FRV 2012

Target (ha) 7

2012 value

(ha) 8

% above

target

7120 22.36 56.76 153.85 14.19 22.76 60.39 5 Current high bog area minus 7110 area FRV.

6 2012 Degraded Raised Bog area.

7 25% of the current Degraded Raised Bog habitat area. The target is that the extent of marginal and face bank ecotopes should not be larger than 25% of the current Degraded Raised Bog habitat area. 8 Current marginal and face bank ecotopes area.

As table 8.5 below indicates, each individual EU habitat present on the high bog has been given the

following overall conservation status assessment based on the three main parameters (Area, S&Fs

and Future Prospects) individual assessments:

Active Raised Bog is assessed as being Unfavourable Bad–Declining.

Degraded Raised Bog is assessed as being Unfavourable Bad–Declining.

Rhynchosporion depressions is assessed as being Unfavourable Bad–Declining.

Table 8.5 Habitats conservation status assessments

Habitat Area

Assessment


Assessment

Future Prospects Assessment Overall Assessment

7110 Unfavourable

Bad-Decreasing Unfavourable Bad-

Stable Unfavourable Bad-

Declining Unfavourable Bad-

Declining

7120 Unfavourable Bad-Increasing

Unfavourable Bad-Stable

Unfavourable Bad-Declining

Unfavourable Bad-Declining

7150 Unfavourable

Bad-Stable Unfavourable Bad-

Stable Unfavourable Bad-

Declining Unfavourable Bad-

Declining


25

Conclusions

Summary of impacting activities

Peat cutting still continues at the site and has taken place at seven locations in the 2004/05-

2010 reporting period. 0.35ha of high bog have been lost in this period due to peat cutting.

2.8km of drains on the high bog remain either functional or reduced functional.

Cutover drainage (peripheral drainage) associated with either currently active or no longer

active peat cutting continues to impact on the high bog habitats. In addition, maintenance

works have been carried out in the reporting period on drains in agriculture land to the

mid-west and south-west of the high bog.

8.15ha of conifer plantation in three separate areas lie on cutover to the mid-west and

north-west of the high bog.

A small number of Rhododendron ponticum as well as saplings of Pinus contorta were

recorded on the southern lobe of the high bog and these species may be spreading.

No fire events have damaged the high bog in the reporting period.

Changes in active peat forming areas

There has been a 0.5ha loss in the total Area of Active Raised Bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm

Cottage Bog in the 2005 to 2012 period. All of this loss has been from sub-central ecotope

and has occurred in the north-east of the northern lobe within Sc1.

There have also been some minor changes to the boundaries of the habitat, although all

such changes are attributed to the more comprehensive mapping exercise employed in the

current survey or to vegetation re-interpretation.

The area of central ecotope (C1) has been mapped as being slightly larger. However, this

change is considered to be as a result of more comprehensive surveying in 2012 which

resulted in more accurate mapping.

Active flush X mapped in the mid-north of the northern lobe in 2005 is now considered to

be part of Sc1. This difference is due to vegetation interpretation differences between the

two surveys.

Active flush V mapped in the centre of the southern lobe in 2012 was mapped as sub-

central ecotope in 2005 (Sc2). This difference is due to vegetation interpretation differences

between the two surveys.


26

All other ARB boundary differences are extremely minor and considered to be as a result of

more comprehensive surveying in 2012 which resulted in more accurate mapping.

Other changes

The 2012 survey noted that there is a possibility that Pinus contorta is spreading on the

southern lobe of high bog with numerous saplings recorded along the northern margin. A

number of Rhododendron ponticum were also recorded in the east of this lobe.

Quadrats analysis

Quadrats Qc1 and Qsc1 showed only very slight variation in quadrat data with these

changes most likely to be due to interpretation or to quadrat location (up to 2m difference

between surveys).

Quadrats Qsc2 and Qaf1 are newly recorded quadrats in 2012.

Restoration works

No restoration works have been undertaken at the site.

NPWS has engaged in negotiation with landowners in relation to the cessation of peat

cutting at the site. Despite negotiations peat cutting continues at Moorfield Bog/Farm

Cottage.

Summary of conservation status

Active Raised Bog has been given an Unfavourable Bad–Declining conservation status at

Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog. Habitat Area has decreased while quality (S&Fs) have

remained unchanged in the reporting period. However both of these assessment criteria are

currently substantially below the FRVs. Future Prospects are considered Unfavourable Bad-

Declining as impacting activities (peat cutting and drainage) continue to threaten the

habitat.

Degraded Raised Bog has been given an Unfavourable Bad-Declining conservation status

at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog. The habitat Area has increased as a result of Active

Raised Bog habitat losses associated with impacting activities (peat cutting and drainage).

S&Fs have remained stable. Both habitat Area and S&Fs are above the FRV. Future

Prospects are considered Unfavourable Bad–Declining due to threatening impacting

activities.

Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion has been given an Unfavourable

Bad-Declining conservation status at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog. Habitat Area and


27

quality (S&Fs) are considered to have remained Stable in the reporting period. However,

Future Prospects are considered Unfavourable Bad-Declining as a result of threatening

impacting activities.

The conservation status of the overall raised bog at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog is assessed as

being Unfavourable Bad-Declining.

Recommendations

Cessation of peat cutting.

Restoration works including blocking of high bog reduced-functional and functional

drains, as well as cutover drains. Drainage on the high bog and adjacent land are

considered to have directly caused the ARB habitat losses along the northeast section of Sc1

and thus the blocking of these drains is essential to prevent further losses.

Further restoration works recommended include the removal of the three conifer

plantations (and the blocking of associated drains) from the cutover on Moorfield Bog/Farm

Cottage.

Further hydrological and topographical studies to ascertain the capacity of the high bog to

support Active Raised Bog and thus estimate a more accurate favourable reference value.

Further botanical monitoring surveys on the high bog in order to assess changes in the

conservation status of habitats, and also potentially, monitoring surveys of cutover areas if

they become part of future restoration programmes at the site.

References

Cross, J.R. 1987. Unusual stands of birch on bogs. Irish Naturalist Journal 22: 305-310

Cross, J. R. 1990. The Raised Bogs of Ireland: their Ecology, Status and Conservation. Report to the Minister of State at the Department of Finance.

Douglas, C. & Grogan, E. 1985. Survey to locate raised bogs of scientific interest in Counties Galway (east) and Roscommon. Unpublished report, National Parks & Wildlife, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin.

Fernandez, F., Fanning, M., McCorry, M. and Crowley, W. 2005. Raised Bog Monitoring Project 2004-05. Unpublished report, National Parks & Wildlife Service, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin.

Kelly, L., Doak, M. and Dromey, M. 1995. Raised Bog Restoration Project: An Investigation into the Conservation and Restoration of Selected Raised Bog Sites in Ireland. Unpublished report, National Parks & Wildlife, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin.


28

Kelly, L. & Schouten, M.G.C. 2002. Vegetation. In: M. G. C. Schouten (Ed.), Conservation and Restoration of Raised Bogs: Geological, Hydrological and Ecological Studies, pp.110-169, Department of Environment and Local Government, Dublin, Ireland/Staatabosbeheer, The Netherlands.


29

Appendix I Detailed vegetation description of the high bog


Central Ecotope Complex

COMPLEX 15

Location: this complex characterises C1

Ground: soft (quaking adjacent to pools)

Physical indicators: absent

Calluna height: 11-20cm

Cladonia cover: 4-10% (11-25% in places)

Macro-topography: depression

Pools: 11-25%

Sphagnum cover: 51-75%

Narthecium cover: <4%

Micro- topography: Low hummocks/hollows and pools

Tussocks: absent

Degradation or regeneration evidence: absent

Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (11-25%), Erica tetralix (4-10%), Eriophorum vaginatum (4-10%), E.

angustifolium (4-10%; 11-25% in places), Narthecium ossifragum (<4%), Rhynchospora alba (4-10%),

Carex panicea (4-10%; <4% in places), Drosera anglica (<4%), Andromeda polifolia (<4%),

Menyanthes trifoliata (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 11-25%), S. austinii (H; 4-10%), S. fuscum

(H; <4%), S. papillosum (H & L; 4-10%; 11-25% in places), S. denticulatum (P; <4%), S. cuspidatum

(P; 11-25%; 4-10% in places), Pleurozia purpurea (<4%), Odontoschisma sphagni (<4%).

Additional comments: Although this area is classed as complex 15, the inter-pool areas are

quite dry (firm to soft underfoot) and support very few large hummocks. However, the pool

cover is ca. 20% and these support a relatively good cover of Sphagnum cuspidatum (very little

open water) with lawns and low hummocks of S. papillosum dominating around the pool

edges.

Quadrat Qc1 was recorded within this complex.


30

Sub-Central Ecotope Complexes

COMPLEX 3/9A + P

Location: this complex characterises Sc1 and Sc3

Ground: soft



Cladonia cover: 34-50%

Macro-topography: gentle slope down towards centre of bog

Pools: 11-25% (4-10% in places)

Sphagnum cover: 34-50% (26-33% in places)

Narthecium cover: 4-10% (<4% in places)


Tussocks: absent


Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (11-25%), Erica tetralix (<4%), Eriophorum angustifolium (11-25; 4-

10% in places), E. vaginatum (<4%; 4-10% in places), Carex panicea (4-10%; 11-25% in places),

Rhynchospora alba (<4%), Andromeda polifolia (<4%), Menyanthes trifoliata (<4%), Campylopus

atrovirens (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 11-25%), S. papillosum (H; 4-10%), S. austinii (H;

<4%), S. fuscum (H; <4%), S. tenellum (H; <4%), S. magellanicum (L & P; <4%), S. cuspidatum (P; 4-

10%).

Additional comments: Sphagnum magellanicum occurs at a very low cover throughout most of

this complex. However there are areas where it replaces S. cuspidatum in the pools such as to

the north-east of the swallow hole that was recorded to the east of C1.

Where Eriophorum vaginatum is more abundant that E. angustifolium the complex is termed 3/9 +

P.

A very small isolated patch (Sc3) of this complex is found in a depression to the south-east of

the main area of sub-central ecotope. Here the pools are dominated by Sphagnum cuspidatum in

the south and by S. magellanicum in the north.

Quadrat Qsc1 was recorded within this complex.

COMPLEX 9/7/10

Location: northern section of Sc1

Ground: soft to very soft


31




Macro-topography: gentle slope towards the centre of the bog

Pools: absent


Narthecium cover: <4% (largely absent)

Micro- topography: hummocks/hollows

Tussocks: Trichophorum germanicum (4-10%; <4% in places)


Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (26-33%), Eriophorum vaginatum (4-10%), E. angustifolium (4-

10%), Carex panicea (<4%; 4-10% in places), Andromeda polifolia (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H;

26-33%), S. papillosum (H; 4-10%), S. subnitens (H; <4%), S. tenellum (H; <4%), S. austinii (H;

<4%), S. fuscum (H; <4%), S. cuspidatum (Hl; <4%).

Additional comments: this complex has some sub-marginal characteristics and where it occurs

it grades into the sub-marginal complex 9/7 with the differences between the two being so

subtle that the boundary between sub-marginal and sub-central ecotope here is difficult to

accurately map.

A wetter version of this complex also occurs with Eriophorum angustifolium (11-25% up to 34-

50% in places) being much more abundant than E. vaginatum (<4%) and here the complex is

termed 9a/7/10. This complex occurs in a depression and was classed as an active flush (X) in

2005. A swallow hole is also found in this area. This is a difference in vegetation interpretation

rather than a real change. The ground is very soft underfoot, the Cladonia portentosa cover is

lower (4-10%) and the Calluna taller (31-40cm). Vaccinium oxycoccos is also present and

Trichophorum germanicum is absent. A swallow hole is present to the east of this complex.

Quadrat Qsc2 was recorded within this complex.

Active flushes

FLUSH V

Location: mid of south lobe

Ground: very soft and very wet




32

Cladonia cover: <4%


Pools: 4-10% (absent in the east)



Micro- topography: Low hummocks/hollows

Tussocks: Eriophorum vaginatum 11-25% and a localized patch of Molinia caerulea


Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (26-33%), Erica tetralix (<4%), Eriophorum vaginatum (11-25%), E.

angustifolium (4-10%), Rhynchospora alba (<4%), Vaccinium oxycoccos (<4%), Aulacomnium palustre

(<4%), Hylocomium splendens (<4%), Pleurozium schreberi (<4%), Andromeda polifolia (<4%), Juncus

effusus (<4%), Dicranum scoparium (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 11-25%), S. papillosum (H;

11-25%), S. subnitens (H; <4%), S. austinii (H; <4%), S. fuscum (H; <4%), S. magellanicum (L; 11-

25%), S. fallax (H; <4%), S. cuspidatum (P; <4%).

Additional comments: To the east of the area of Molinia caerulea this flush is dominated by

tussocks of Eriophorum vaginatum (26-33%) with the dominant Sphagnum being S. capillifolium

(34-50%). However, to the west of the Molinia caerulea there are lawns of Sphagnum

magellanicum (26-33%) as well as S. fallax (4-10%) and S. cuspidatum (<4%). Here the cover of

Eriophorum vaginatum is lower (<4%) and that of E. angustifolium is higher (11-25%).

Rhynchospora alba is also more frequent in this area.

Quadrat Qf1 was recorded within this flush.

FLUSH Y (SOAK)

Location:

Ground: very soft



Cladonia cover: <4%


Pools: Entire area is a pool/lawn



Micro- topography: Lawn/pool

Tussocks: absent


33

Degradation or regeneration evidence: possibly degrading as previous description stated that

this “pool is infilled with a lawn of S. cuspidatum and S. papillosum”. However, the photo taken

in 2005 appears to indicate that S. magellanicum already dominated the pool. Thus, the

reference to S. cuspidatum may have been a transcribing error.

Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (<4%), Eriophorum vaginatum (<4%), E. angustifolium (<4%),

Rhynchospora alba (<4%), Carex panicea (<4%), Menyanthes trifoliata (<4%), Aulacomnium palustre

(<4%), Sphagnum papillosum (L; <4%), S. magellanicum (L; 91-100%).

Additional comments: This feature is a Sphagnum-filled pool ca. 5m x 4m. The pool is

surrounded on the north and eastern side by a low ridge dominated by robust Calluna vulgaris

and with Vaccinium oxycoccos and Hylocomium splendens (<4%). Flush Y is too small a feature to

map and is thus mapped as part of Sc1.


Sub-Marginal Ecotope Complexes

COMPLEX 4/9A + P

Location: in the north-west of the southern lobe.

Ground: very soft and very wet





Pools: 11-25%


Narthecium cover: <4% (4-10% in places)


Tussocks: absent


Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (26-33%), Erica tetralix (4-10%), Eriophorum vaginatum (<4%), E.

angustifolium (4-10%), Carex panicea (<4%), Narthecium ossifragum (<4%), Rhynchospora alba (4-

10%), Menyanthes trifoliata (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 11-25%), S. papillosum (H; 4-10%;

11-25% in places), S. magellanicum (L; <4%; 4-10% in places), S. cuspidatum (P; <4%; 4-10% in

places), Campylopus atrovirens (<4%), Cladonia uncialis (<4%), Racomitrium lanuginosum (<4%).


34

Additional comments: this complex has sub-central characteristics in places, but these areas

were considered too small to map.

COMPLEX 9/7

Location: eastern section of southern lobe and western section of northern lobe

Ground: very soft




Macro-topography: gentle slope

Pools: absent


Narthecium cover: <4% (largely absent)

Micro- topography: hummocks/hollows

Tussocks: Eriophorum vaginatum (26-33%)


Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (11-25%), Eriophorum vaginatum (26-33%), E. angustifolium (<4%),

Carex panicea (<4%), Molinia caerulea (<4%), Vaccinium oxycoccos (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium

(H; 26-33%), S. papillosum (H; 4-10%), Polytrichum strictum (<4%).

Additional comments: in the southern lobe this complex has some flush characteristics and

there is a localised patch dominated by Molinia caerulea (10m x 3m). To the south-west of this

Molinia patch, the highest quality area of this complex is found and this is dominated by

tussocks of Eriophorum vaginatum (34-50%) with Vaccinium myrtillus also present. This area is

very wet and the Sphagnum cover is high so that the complex has some sub-central

characteristics here.

Towards the north of this complex in the southern lobe, the quality decreases. The ground is

less soft underfoot and the Sphagnum cover is lower as is the cover of Eriophorum vaginatum (11-

25%) while the cover of Calluna vulgaris is higher (34-50%). The southern lobe is separated from

the northern lobe by what appears to be a re-vegetated old track.

A number of small (0.5m) Rhododendron ponticum are present within this complex as well as a

1.8m Pinus contorta.

Where this complex occurs in the northern lobe it has a lower Sphagnum cover (11- 25%; 26-33%

in places). In parts of the northern lobe, the cover of Narthecium ossifragum also increases and

where its cover is >10%, the complex is termed 9/7/6.


35

COMPLEX 9/7/3

Location: this is the most widespread sub-marginal ecotope at the site and is found across

entire high bog

Ground: soft




Macro-topography: gentle slope

Pools: absent



Micro- topography: Low hummocks/hollows and flats

Tussocks: Trichophorum germanicum (<4%)


Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (26-33%), Erica tetralix (4-10%), Eriophorum vaginatum (4-10%; 11-

25% in places), E. angustifolium (<4%), Carex panicea (4-10%), Narthecium ossifragum (<4%),

Rhynchospora alba (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 11-25%), S. papillosum (H; 4-10%), S. tenellum

(H; <4%), S. cuspidatum (Hl; <4%), Cladonia uncialis (<4%).

Additional comments: this complex grades into the marginal complex 6/7/3 where the cover of

Narthecium ossifragum increases and the cover of Eriophorum vaginatum and Sphagnum

decreases.

This complex also grades into a better quality sub-marginal complex (9/7) in the mid-east of the

southern lobe where the cover of Eriophorum vaginatum and Sphagnum increases and that of

Carex panicea decreases.

To the west of Flush V, this complex occurs with a 4-10% cover of pools and thus is termed

9/7/3 + P. These pools are mainly algal but there is a higher cover of Sphagnum cuspidatum (4-

10%) in places and Drosera anglica is present along with Racomitrium lanuginosum (<4%). This

complex also occurs in parts of the northern lobe. Here Menyanthes trifoliata and Campylopus

atrovirens are also present and there is a higher cover of Carex panicea (11-25%) and a lower

cover of Eriophorum vaginatum (4-10%).

Where Eriophorum angustifolium is more frequent than E. vaginatum the complex is termed

9a/7/3. Here the cover of Sphagnum papillosum is higher (11-25%) and that of S. capillifolium is

lower (4-10%).


36

Where Myrica gale is found in this complex in the east of the northern lobe it is named 9/7/3 +

My.

COMPLEX 9/7/2

Location: found along the edge of sub-marginal ecotope in the northern lobe and narrowest

section of the site linking both lobes

Ground: soft




Macro-topography: flat

Pools: absent



Micro- topography: Low hummocks/hollows and flats

Tussocks: Trichophorum germanicum (4-10%)


Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (26-33%), Erica tetralix (4-10%), Eriophorum vaginatum (4-10%; 11-

25% in places), E. angustifolium (<4%), Carex panicea (<4%), Narthecium ossifragum (<4%),

Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 11-25%), S. papillosum (H; 4-10%), S. tenellum (H; <4%), Hypnum

jutlandicum (<4%), Cladonia uncialis (<4%), Odontoschisma sphagnii (<4%).

Additional comments: none.

Marginal Ecotope Complexes

COMPLEX 6/7/3

Location: this is the most common marginal ecotope community complex and is found across

entire high bog margin, but the northeastern section

Ground: firm to soft




Macro-topography: gentle slope (steep closer to the high bog edge)

Pools: absent


37


Narthecium cover: 11-25%

Micro- topography: low hummocks/Narthecium ossifragum flats/ hollows



Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (34-50%), Erica tetralix (<4%), Eriophorum vaginatum (<4%), E.

angustifolium (<4%), Narthecium ossifragum (11-25%), Carex panicea (11-25%; 4-10% in places),

Trichophorum germanicum (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 4-10%), S. papillosum (H; <4%).

Additional comments: in the north-west of the southern lobe, conifers appear to be invading

with ca. 20-25 saplings (0.5 – 2.0m tall) of Picea sitchensis and Pinus contorta recorded in a small

area (ca. 20m x 20m) within this complex here.

Huperzia selago was recorded within this complex where it occurs to the south of the active

flush (FV).

COMPLEX 3/2

Location: along the margin of the northern lobe

Ground: firm

Physical indicators: bare peat 4-10% (11-25% in places); Campylopus introflexus <4%



Macro-topography: gentle to steep slope

Pools: absent


Narthecium cover: 4-10% (11-25% in places)

Micro- topography: flats

Tussocks: Trichophorum germanicum (4-10%; 11-25% in places)


Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (11-25%), Narthecium ossifragum (4-10%), Carex panicea (11-25%),

Trichophorum germanicum (4-10%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 4-10%).

Additional comments: Rhynchospora alba occurs in patches within this complex and in these

areas the complex is termed 3/4/2.

Inactive flushes


38

FLUSH T

Location: the south-west of the southern lobe

Ground: soft



Cladonia cover: <4%

Macro-topography: gentle to steep slope to high bog margin

Pools: absent



Micro- topography:

Tussocks: Eriophorum vaginatum (26-33%) and Molinia caerulea (4-10%)


Species cover: Molinia caerulea (4-10%), Calluna vulgaris (11-25%), Eriophorum vaginatum (26-

33%), Vaccinium oxycoccos (<4%), Hylocomium splendens (<4%), Aulacomnium palustre (<4%),

Dryopteris dilatata (<4%), Rubus fruticosus (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 26-33%).

Additional comments: One 2m tall Picea sitchensis is also present within this small flush (ca.

2m x 10m). This flush is too small to be mapped but a point was taken in GIS. However, this is

not shown on the Ecotope Map.

FLUSH U

Location: the south-west of the southern lobe

Ground: firm to soft



Cladonia cover: <4%

Macro-topography: steep slope to high bog margin

Pools: absent



Micro- topography:

Tussocks: Molinia caerulea (34-50%)



39

Species cover: Molinia caerulea (34-50%), Calluna vulgaris (11-25%), Eriophorum vaginatum (11-

25%), Potentilla erecta (<4%), Carex panacea (4-10%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; 11-25%).

Additional comments: Ulex europaeus is present where this flush meets the high bog edge.

FLUSH W

The main section of Flush W was not surveyed in 2012. However, the 2005 description stated that it

appeared to occur on old cutover and was dominated by Molinia caerulea with patches dominated

by Calluna vulgaris and Eriophorum vaginatum. Other species recorded included Juncus effusus,

Polytrichum strictum, Vaccinium oxycoccos and Myrica gale.

FLUSH W1

Molinia flush surrounded by a band of 9/7 type flushed sub-marginal vegetation. The central axis of

flush W1 has 51-75% cover of Molinia caerulea and the ground is soft underfoot and sloping into the

high bog expanse. Other species recorded include Eriophorum vaginatum (11-25%), Calluna vulgaris

(11-25%) and Sphagnum capillifolium (11-25%).

FLUSH W2

Molinia flush on old cutover. The ground is soft underfoot and cover of Molinia caerulea is 76-90%.

The Sphagnum cover is 4-10% dominated by Sphagnum capillifolium. Other species recorded include

Eriophorum vaginatum (4-10%), Potentilla erecta (<4%) and Polytrichum strictum (<4%).

FLUSH Z

This feature is not a flush but a series of several small swallow holes. The vegetation between the

swallow holes is typical of the adjacent sub-marginal complexes. The swallow holes contain

Polytrichum strictum, Dryopteris dilatata, Blechnum spicant, Eriophorum vaginatum and Calluna vulgaris.

Face bank Complexes

COMPLEX 1

Location: this complex was found along the bog margin

Ground: firm

Physical indicators: bare peat (4-10%)

Calluna height: <50cm

Cladonia cover: <4%


40

Macro-topography: flat to steep slope

Pools: absent

Sphagnum cover: generally absent but <4% in places


Micro- topography: tall robust Calluna vulgaris/low hummocks



Species cover: Calluna vulgaris (76-90%), Erica tetralix (4-10%), Trichophorum germanicum (<4%),

Narthecium ossifragum (<4%), Sphagnum capillifolium (H; <4%), Hypnum jutlandicum (<4%).

Additional comments: none

Bog Woodland (91D0)

No bog woodland present on Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage.


The habitat occurs at Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage Bog in both Active and Degraded Raised Bog,

but it is only occasional found on degraded habitat. Only Rhynchospora alba was recorded within the

2012 survey at this site.

R. alba is found in all ecotopes in Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage, such as: central ecotope (15); sub-

central ecotope (3/9A + P); sub-marginal ecotope (4/9A +P; 9/7/3) and marginal ecotope (3/4/2).

The species becomes very frequent within complexes 15 (central), 4/9A + P (sub-marginal) and 3/4/2

(marginal, but within run off channels).

The species is always found associated with wet features such as Sphagnum pools, Sphagnum lawns

and hollows, along with Sphagnum magellanicum, S. papillosum, S. cuspidatum. It was also found

within Narthecium ossifragum dominated hollows in sub-marginal and marginal ecotope complexes.

R. alba was also recorded in more degraded areas of the bog such as steep slope sections at the edge

of the bog where run-off channels are found.


41

Appendix II Photographical records

Photograph Number Aspect Type Feature Date

DSC00351 NE Overview Qaf1 18/10/2012

24102012143 NE Overview Qc1 24/10/2012

24102012142 NE Overview Qsc1 24/10/2012

24102012145 NE Overview Qsc2 24/10/2012

24102012146 E Overview Soak overview 24/10/2012

24102012147 E Overview Soak overview 24/10/2012


42

Appendix III Quadrats

Ecotope type Central Central Sub-central Sub-central

Complex Name 35 15 3/9 + P 3/9a + P

Quadrat Name Qc1 Qc1 Qsc1 Qsc1

Easting 164117 164117.38 164093 164097.02

Northing 274408 274408.02 274342 274341.87

Date 24/02/2005 24/10/2012 24/02/2005 24/10/2012

Firmness soft Very soft very soft Soft

Burnt No No No No

Algae in hollows % Absent Absent 1-3 (many indiv) Absent

Algae in pools % 1-3 (many indiv) Absent 4-10 1-3 (many indiv)

Bare peat % Absent Absent Absent 1-3 (many indiv)

High hummocks % na 4-10 na Absent

Low hummocks % 26-33 26-33 26-33 11-25

Hollows % 4-10 4-10 4-10 11-25

Lawns % 4-10 4-10 Absent Absent

Pools % 11-25 11-25 11-25 4-10

Pool type Interconnecting Interconnecting Tear & Regular Tear

S.austinii hum type na Active na Active

S.austinii hum % 4-10 4-10 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (few indiv)

S.austinii height(cm) na 11-20 na 0-10

S.fuscum hum type Absent Relic na Active

S.fuscum hum % Absent 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (many indiv) 4-10

S.fuscum height(cm) Absent 0-10 na 11-20

Leucobryum glaucum Absent Absent Absent Absent

Trichophorum type Flats Absent Flats Flats

Trichophorum % 4-10 1-3 (few indiv) 1-3 (few indiv) 1-3 (few indiv)

S.magellanicum % Absent Absent Absent Absent

S.cuspidatum % 11-25 4-10 4-10 4-10

S.papillosum % 4-10 11-25 11-25 1-3 (many indiv)

S.denticulatum % 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (many indiv) Absent

S.capillifolium% 11-25 11-25 4-10 11-25

S.tenellum % na 1-3 (few indiv) na 1-3 (many indiv)


43

Ecotope type Central Central Sub-central Sub-central

Complex Name 35 15 3/9 + P 3/9a + P

S.subnitens % Absent Absent Absent Absent

R.fusca % Absent Absent Absent Absent

R.alba % 4-10 1-3 (many indiv) 4-10 1-3 (several indiv)

N.ossifragum % 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (many indiv) 4-10 1-3 (several indiv)

Sphag pools % 4-10 11-25 4-10 4-10

Dominant pool Sphag S.cuspidatum S.cuspidatum S.cuspidatum S.cuspidatum

Sphag lawns % 4-10 4-10 Absent Absent

Sphag humm % 11-25 26-33 26-33 11-25

Sphag holl % 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (many indiv)

Total Sphag % 34-50 51-75 34-50 26-33

Hummocks indicators S.austinii S.austinii&S.fuscu

m

S.austinii&S.fuscu

m S.austinii&S.fuscum

Cladonia portent % 4-10 11-25 34-50 34-50

Other Cladonia sp na C.uncialis na C.uncialis

C. panicea % Absent 1-3 (several indiv) 11-25 4-10

Calluna cover % 4-10 11-25 4-10 11-25

Calluna height(cm) 21-30 11-20 21-30 11-20

Other NotableSpecies

Pleurozia purpurea

Menyanthes

D.anglica

Menyanthes

Campylopus atro

Other comment

Ecotope type Sub-central Flush

Complex Name 9/7/10 na

Quadrat Name Qsc2 Qaf1

Easting 164454.58 164193.16

Northing 274451.57 273863.75

Date 24/10/2012 18/10/2012

Firmness Soft Quaking

Burnt No No

Algae in hollows % Absent Absent

Algae in pools % Absent Absent

Bare peat % Absent Absent

High hummocks % 11-25 Absent

Low hummocks % 51-75 34-50


44



Hollows % 11-25 4-10

Lawns % Absent 26-33

Pools % Absent 11-25

Pool type Absent Regular

S.austinii hum type Active Absent

S.austinii hum % 1-3 (many indiv) Absent

S.austinii height(cm) 11-20 Absent

S.fuscum hum type Active Absent

S.fuscum hum % 1-3 (many indiv) Absent

S.fuscum height(cm) 11-20 Absent

Leucobryum glaucum Absent Absent

Trichophorum type Flats Absent

Trichophorum % 1-3 (few indiv) 1-3 (several indiv)

S.magellanicum % Absent 34-50

S.cuspidatum % Absent 4-10

S.papillosum % 4-10 4-10

S.denticulatum % Absent Absent

S.capillifolium% 26-33 4-10

S.tenellum % 1-3 (many indiv) 1-3 (many indiv)

S.subnitens % Absent Absent

R.fusca % Absent Absent

R.alba % Absent 1-3 (many indiv)

N.ossifragum % 1-3 (few indiv) 1-3 (many indiv)

Sphag pools % Absent 4-10

Dominant pool Sphag S.cuspidatum

Sphag lawns % Absent 26-33

Sphag humm % 34-50 26-33

Sphag holl % 4-10 1-3 (many indiv)

Total Sphag % 34-50 51-75

Hummocks indicators S.austinii&S.fuscum Absent

Cladonia portent % 51-75 1-3 (many indiv)

Other Cladonia sp

C. panicea % 1-3 (several indiv) Absent

Calluna cover % 11-25 34-50

Calluna height(cm) 21-30 21-30


45



Other NotableSpecies

S. fallax 4-10 V.oxy; Poly comm.; P.

Strictum; Dicranum; Menyanthes;

Molinia <4%

Other comment S. cusp pool adj

Note: Data for those 2005 quadrats re-surveyed in 2012 is given to the right of the original 2005

quadrat data in table above. Not all quadrats reported in 2005 were re-surveyed in 2012.

Nonetheless, all 2005 quadrat data is given above. Additional quadrats were recorded where

necessary. Some 2005 quadrats may have been classified under a different ecotope category in 2012;

further detail is given within the report.


46

Appendix IV Survey maps

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Sc1

W

C1

V

Sc2

U

BB

Z

W2W1

Sc3

D

Qc1

Qsc1

Qsc2

Qsc1

Qaf1

164000.000000

164000.000000

164900.000000

164900.000000

2738

00.00

0000

2738

00.00

0000

2744

00.00

0000

2744

00.00

0000

Legend" Quadrat

NHAEcotope type

CentralSub-central

Bog WoodlandActive FlushSub-marginalMarginalInactive Flush

WoodlandFace bankOpen water

Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage NHA (000221)Co. Galway/Co. Roscommon0 130 260 390 52065

Meters

1:5,500 ±Map 1: Ecotopes Map and QuadratsOrdnance Survey Ireland Licence No EN 0059208 © Ordnance Survey Ireland / Government of Ireland

Ecology and Environmental Consultants Ireland Ltd.

Raised Bog Monitoring & Assessment Survey 2013

#

#

#

##

#

###

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

##

##

#

#

#

#

#

# #

###

#

#

##

#

##

#

###

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

###

#

##

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

####

##

##

#

###

#

#

##

#

# ## #

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

## #

##

#

#

##

#

## #

## #

# ##

# #

#

####

####

##

####

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

##

##

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

##

## #

#

#

##

# #

# #

#

#

##

#

##

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

####

###

####

#

#

#

#

#

### ###

###

#

#

#

#

#

#

## ##

####

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

###

##

##

#

##

#

#

#

#

##

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#####

##

#

##

#

##

##

###

#

#

#

##

#

#

###

#

#

###

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

# #

#

#

""

""

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"" "

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

"

""

"

"""

"

"

"

"

"

"""

"

"

""

"

"

"

""

" "

""

"

"

"

"

" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"" "

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

"

"

"

"

" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

""

"

"

"

"

" "

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"""

"""

""

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

""

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"""

"

""

""""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

" "

""

"

"

"" "

" " "

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"" "

"

""

"""

"

""

"

""

""

"

"

"" "

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

""

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

" "

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

" "

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"""

"

""

""

"

""

"

"

""

"

"

"""

""

"

"

" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

""

"

"

"""

""

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

" "

"""

"

"

"

"

"

""""

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

""

"

" "

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

1

15 1515

9/7

3/6

3/63/6

3/6

3/63/63/6

3/6

3/6

3/6 3/63/6

3/6

9/7

9/7

9/79/79/7

9/79/7 9/7 9/7

9/7

9/7

9/7

9/7

9/79/7

9/79/79/79/79/7

9/79/7

9/7

9/79/7

9/79/7

9/7

9/79/7

9/7

3/23/23/2

3/2

3/23/2

3/2

3/23/23/2

3/23/23/2

3/2

3/2 3/23/2

3/2

3/2

3/2

3/2

3/23/2

3/2

3/23/2

4/9a

6/3/9

6/3+P6/3+P

6/3+P

6/3+P6/3+P

6/3+P6/3+P6/3+P

6/3+P6/3/96/3/9

6/3+P6/3/9

6/3/96/3/99/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

6/3/96/3/9 6/3/9

6/3/9

6/3/96/3/9 6/3/9

6/3/99/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/36/3/96/3/9

6/3/96/3/9

6/3/96/3/9

9/7/36/3+P

6/3+P

6/3+P6/3+P6/3/9

6/3/96/3+P

6/3/99/7/3

9/7/3

6/3+P

6/3+P6/3+P

6/3/96/3+P

6/3+P

6/3/96/3+P

6/3/9

6/3+P

6/3/96/3/9

6/3+P

6/3+P6/3/9

6/3/96/3/99/7/39/7/39/7/3 9/7/3

9/7/3 6/3/9

6/3/96/3/99/7/36/3/96/3/9

6/3+P

6/3/96/3+P

6/3+P6/3+P6/3+P

6/3+P6/3+P

6/3+P

6/3+P6/3+P

6/3/96/3/9

9/7+P9/7+P

9/7+P

3/6+P3/6+P3/6/2

3/6/2

3/6/23/6/2

3/6/23/6/2

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/39/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/69/7/39/7/39/7/3

9/7/29/7/39/7/39/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/6

9/7/2

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/2

9/7/69/7/2

9/7/6

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/69/7/3

9/7/29/7/6

9/7/69/7/3

9/7/3 9/7/69/7/39/7/39/7/3

9/7/2

9/7/29/7/29/7/3 9/7/3

9/7/6

9/7/39/7/69/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3 9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/39/7/3

9/7/3

9/7/3

3/9+P3/9+P3/9+P

3/9+P3/9+P

3/9+P3/9+P

6/7/3

3/7/6

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/3

3/4/2

6/7/36/7/36/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/3 6/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/36/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/3

6/7/36/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/36/7/3

6/7/36/7/3

6/7/3

9/7+Cl

9/7+Cl9/7+Cl

9/7+Cl9/7+Cl9/7+Cl

9/7+Cl

9/7+Cl

9/7+Cl9/7+Cl

9/7+Cl

9/7+Cl

9/7/10

9a/7/3

9a/7/3

9a/7/39a/7/3

4/9a+P

4/9a+P4/9a+P

4/9a+P

3/9a+P3/9a+P

3/9a+P

3/9a+P3/9a+P

3/9a+P

3/9a+P3/9a+P

3/9a+P3/9a+P

3/9a+P 3/9a+P3/9a+P3/9a+P

3/9a+P

3/9a+P

3/9a+P

9/7/3+P

6/3/9+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9/7/3+P

9a/7/109a/7/10

9a/7/10

9a/7/10

Not available

Not available

164000.000000

164000.000000

164900.000000

164900.000000

2738

00.00

0000

2738

00.00

0000

2744

00.00

0000

2744

00.00

0000

0 150 300 450 60075 Meters

1:5,500 ±Legend

Ecotope type" Central ecotope complex" Sub-central ecotope complex" Sub-marginal ecotope complex" Marginal ecotope complex" Face bank ecotope complex

" FlushBoundary type

# SC/C# F/C# SM/C# M/C

# F/SC# SM/SC# M/SC# FB/SC# F/SM# M/SM

# SM/FB# F/M# M/FB# F/FB# Other

NHA

Ordnance Survey Ireland Licence No EN 0059208 © Ordnance Survey Ireland / Government of Ireland



Map 2: Vegetation community complexesMoorfield Bog/Farm Cottage NHA (000221)Co. Galway/Co. Roscommon

d1

d3

d8

d4

x2

d2

d5d6a

d10

d6

d11

d7

d20

d6b

d15

d9

d16

x3

d19

x1 x4d1

3

d18

d17

d12

d1

d4

d4

d3

d8

d5

d7

164000.000000

164000.000000

164900.000000

164900.000000

2738

00.00

0000

2738

00.00

0000

2744

00.00

0000

2744

00.00

0000

0 140 280 420 56070Meters

1:5,500 ±Legend

High Bog drainageBlocked:non-functional

Blocked:reduced functional

Not blocked:functional

Not blocked:non-functional

Not blocked:reduced functional

High bog cutaway (2004/05-10)

Burnt high bog (2004/05-12/13)

NHA

Ordnance Survey Ireland Licence No EN 0059208 © Ordnance Survey Ireland / Government of Ireland



Map 3: Impacts (High bog drainage; Turf cutting;Fire events)Moorfield Bog/Farm Cottage NHA (000221)Co. Galway/Co. Roscommon

moorfield bog/farm cottage bog(nha 000221), co. …...raised bog monitoring and assessment survey...

Documents