Premium
The impact of ditch blocking on fluvial carbon export from a UK blanket bog
Author(s) -
Evans Christopher D.,
Peacock Michael,
Green Sophie M.,
Holden Joseph,
Chapman Pippa J.,
Lebron Inma,
Callaghan Nathan,
Grayson Richard,
Baird Andrew J.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
hydrological processes
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.222
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1099-1085
pISSN - 0885-6087
DOI - 10.1002/hyp.13158
Subject(s) - ditch , dissolved organic carbon , peat , environmental science , hydrology (agriculture) , surface runoff , fluvial , drainage , total organic carbon , drainage basin , geology , environmental chemistry , geomorphology , ecology , oceanography , structural basin , chemistry , geotechnical engineering , cartography , geography , biology
Abstract We investigated the effects of ditch blocking on fluvial carbon concentrations and fluxes at a 5‐year, replicated, control‐intervention field experiment on a blanket peatland in North Wales, UK. The site was hydrologically instrumented, and run‐off via open and blocked ditches was analysed for dissolved organic carbon (DOC), particulate organic carbon, dissolved carbon dioxide, and dissolved methane. DOC was also analysed in peat porewater and overland flow. The hillslope experiment was embedded within a paired control‐intervention catchment study, with 3 years of preblocking and 6 years of postblocking data. Results from the hillslope showed large reductions in discharge via blocked ditches, with water partly redirected into hillslope surface and subsurface flows, and partly into remaining open ditches. We observed no impacts of ditch blocking on DOC, particulate organic carbon, dissolved carbon dioxide or methane in ditch waters, DOC in porewaters or overland flow, or stream water DOC at the paired catchment scale. Similar DOC concentrations in ditch water, overland flow, and porewater suggest that diverting flow from the ditch network to surface or subsurface flow had a limited impact on concentrations or fluxes of DOC entering the stream network. The subdued response of fluvial carbon to ditch blocking in our study may be attributable to the relatively low susceptibility of blanket peatlands to drainage, or to physical alterations of the peat since drainage. We conclude that ditch blocking cannot be always be expected to deliver reductions in fluvial carbon loss, or improvements in the quality of drinking water supplies.