|
MEETING November 1997 Surwold - Germany |
Joint Meeting on Global Peatland Issues
|
MEETING November 1997 Surwold - Germany |
Joint Meeting on Global Peatland Issues
Published in Peatlands International: 1/1998
Reproduced with the kind permission of the publishers
IPS and IMCG meeting in Surwold, Germany, November 7-9, 1997; Report of Workshop Facilitator to the International Mire Conservation Group and the International Peat Society.
Front: G.Hood, C. Rubec, R. Lindsay, J.
Päivänen Photographer: R. Sopo
Table of Contents
Specialists in the field of peatland and mire ecology and resources use, drawn from nine nations (Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom), met in Surwold, Germany, November 7-9, 1997. Participants were selected by the secretariats of the International Mire Conservation Group and the International Peat Society. These participants are listed below:
- Bernard Aue, Germany
- Jens Dieter Becker-Platen, Germany
- Joachim Blankenburg, Germany
- Gerry Hood, Canada
- Heinrich Höper, Germany
- John Jeglum, Sweden
- Hans Joosten, Germany
- Philippe Julve, France
- Richard Lindsay, UK
- Gerry McNally, Ireland
- Junani Päivänen, Finland
- Reidar Pettersson, Sweden
- Jack Rieley, UK
- Clayton Rubec, Canada
- Jan Silva, Germany
- Raimo Sopo, Finland
- Michael Steiner, Austria
The meeting was jointly convened by the executive bodies of the IPS and IMCG. It was noted that the 17 participants were invited largely on the basis of their expertise and experience with the desire to de-emphasise institutional affiliations.
The meeting was convened as an opportunity for participants in the IPS and IMCG to become more acquainted with each other's programs, views and responsibilities. The meeting was designed to follow on from the International Workshop on Global Mire and Peatland Conservation held in Brisbane, Australia on March 9, 1996. In order to facilitate the discussions and design as well as implement the agenda, Mr. Clayton Rubec of Canada agreed to act as a facilitator for the meeting and summarise its findings. The following review provides an overview of the meeting and its conclusions.
To facilitate discussions on the major issues of the meeting, a series of invited presentations were made on the following topics:
The 12 issues selected and listed below represented the consensus of the participants. The issues became the focus of a lively and creative discussion.
- Peatlands Terminology
- What IPS and IMCG should do together to protect Peatlands and Mires
- Climate impact of Greenhouse Gases from utilised Peatlands
- Wise Use concept
- Why use Mires ?
- Tropical Peatlands
- Recognising variation in use/conservation and protection with respect to differences in Biogeographical regions
- Information Exchange, Data Acquisition and Networking
- Peatland Inventory and Statistics
- Defining choices and values for Peatland use
- Ecological processes and Scientific information
- Socio-economic effects and benefits of Peat harvesting in rural areas
The following sections summarise the discussions associated with each of the agreed "top 12" issues of the meeting. The actions agreed are subject to the consideration and endorsement of each of the two executive groups of IMCG and IPS in association with various potential partners.
Issue No. 7, Terminology was identified as the issue the participants in this workshop most strongly wished to discuss. It was noted the major distinction of "mires" and "peatlands" rests with the presence of actively growing peat vegetation. Thus, in some nations such as Canada, the majority of peatlands are fully functional unaffected by any development. In these nations, most peatlands would be considered mires. In other nations such as Germany, peatlands have almost all been ditched and affected by agriculture, municipal construction, horticultural of energy peat harvesting and other forms of development. In these cases, these developed peatlands would no longer be considered mires. It was agreed the ongoing wide range of terminology for peat, peatlands and mire science and management would be well served by efforts to gather, standardise and publish more effective information in these fields. It was noted that the 1996 publication of Global Peat Resources (Lappalainen 1996) by IPS and the ongoing report by IMCG on The Status of Mires in Europe both suffer from a confusing array of inconsistent terminology and classification information from each nation.
B. What IPS and IMCG Should Do Together to Protect Peatlands and Mires
This crosscutting issue (No. 8) is related to all the proposed actions of the two groups. Specific actions draw upon and relate to many of the other issues not discussed in detail but identified in Annex 2.
C. Climate Impacts of Greenhouse Gases from Utilised Peatlands
The role of peatlands and mires on greenhouse gases and climate change, in both their natural state and when affected by various types of development. Issue No. 5, was ranked 3rd in overall weighting for discussion by the participants. However, it was noted neither IMCG or IPS has directed significant attention to the issue. The IPS noted that its Commission II has the ongoing task of gathering information on the issue. IMCG noted that it has a series of other ongoing difficult issues that it is directing its limited resources towards. The participants of the Workshop could not identify any actions or opportunities for the two organisations, IPS and IMCG, to develop jointly towards the issue.
Understanding "wise use", "sustainable development" and a series of related terms was recognised as one of the greatest challenges facing both organisations. This stems from a desire both for good science and for effective resource management. The definition of "wise-use" adopted for this Workshop was drawn from the Wise Use Guidelines developed for the Ramsar Convention.
Related terminology requiring significant consideration was the clear distinction between "protection" versus "conservation". It was agreed protection is generally a tool within a wide spectrum of peatland conservation opportunities. Conservation was regarded as a more encompassing idea, often stressing voluntary, non-regulatory tools in some countries.
It was felt a joint, scientific report outlining peatland resource management and conservation requirements for peatlands and mires would significantly serve global in the conservation of peatland types of wetlands defined by the Ramsar Convention. As the report would be prepared and distributed by the joint efforts of IPS and IMCG, it would strongly position both organisations as credible and authoritative partners in peatland issues globally. The target audience would be the 103 nations and numerous observer states participating in the Ramsar Convention. It would also be of relevance to the non-government organisations (such as Wetlands International, WWF, IUCN, etc) that participate in the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. These nations and groups strongly affect or regulate the majority of global peat resource use and conservation programmes.
It was noted that this issue strongly overlaps with the issue Protection of Peatland Vegetation and the issue Why Protect Mires. In essence, all three of these issues became subsets of the discussion on the Wise Use Concept (above D.). Hence no specific actions were discussed on this issue.
The meeting focused on the example of peat swamp forests in Indonesia based on the presentation by professor Jack Rieley from the University of Nottingham - UK. This covered research priorities, the difficulty of working in developing nations and the vital importance of tropical peatlands. The Workshop also discussed the impact of recent severe fires in peat swamp forests in Indonesia primarily as well as Malaysia and other nations of Southeast Asia.
G. Recognising variation in use/conservation and protection with respect to differences in Biogeographical regions
The range of practical management solutions in various ecosystems and biogeographical regions of the World was discussed.
Overall, it was felt that a common international framework of peatland/mire regions is an important prerequisite to evaluating the scope and importance of impacts and management responses suited to particular peatland/mire situations. It was recognised that the proposed second edition of Global Peat Resources book in the year 2000 presented an opportunity to publish an overview paper on biogeographical-mire region relationships. Such a review would be more brief and general than a fully researched scientific study on this topic it was agreed.
It was agreed that the two organisations could do more to exchange useful information that would facilitate mutual respect, trust and knowledge. It was agreed the current Workshop had been effective and should be repeated.
It was agreed that this issue was discussed in association with the discussion as outlined above in section H
Much rests on use on use of evaluation information and evaluation models or systems to rank the importance of values of particular peatland/mire sites. It was agreed that examples of these evaluation and ranking systems do exist but are poorly known. An international workshop and publication on peatland evaluation systems were suggested as valuable opportunities.
It was agreed that this issue is a subset of section H and was incorporated in that section.
L. Socio-Economic Effects and Benefits of Peat Harvesting in Rural Areas
It was agreed that this issue is a subset of the Wise Use concept and was incorporated in section D.
The Workshop was held in a relax and informal fashion with every effort made to accommodate the varying views and opinions of its participants while also maintaining interest in the discussions. Both IMCG and IPS participants proved effective and knowledgeable in their presentations and explanation of their points of view.
Overall the meeting was quite valuable for the organisations and the individuals involved. One measure of this was the decision to have further such meetings. Clearly both groups have a great deal to offer and will mutually benefit through information sharing and co-operation on the range of 11 actions proposed herein.
Action A:
IMCG and IPS propose to establish a Joint Working Group to bring together peatland, mire and peat terminology and work towards an joint publication on terminology.
Action B:
Both IMCG and IPS separately confirmed their participation in the Millenium Wetland Event, August 6-12-2000 at the invitation of Canadian partners in cooperation with INTECOL and the Society of Wetlands Scientists. IMCG and IPS agreed to work closely together in the design and implementation of their respective programmes during the Event at Québec City, Canada.
Action D-1:
It was agrred that IMCG and IPS should establish a Joint Working Group to prepare a Discussion Paper on Wise Use Guidelines for Global Peatlands and Mires.
Action D-2:
It was proposed that the contributions by this Joint Working Group be edited into a joint paper to be published and distributed to the participants of the 7th Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands, in Costa Rica in May 1999.
Action G:
Dr. Michael Steiner of the IMCG agreed to consider leading preparation of a paper on global mire types and mires regions for the Global Peat Resources book, second edition. It would include several subsections.
Action H-1:
The IMCG and IPS should have at least one joint meeting of selected particiapnts and board members each year to focus on key issues of mutual interest.
Action H-2:
It was agreed the IMCG and IPS should develop stronger linkages with the Ramsar Convention, Wetlands International, IUCN Wetlands Programme, Society of Wetland Scientists, INTECOL and other appropriate agencies or groups. This could be done through such things as exchange of newsletters on a regular basis.
Action H-3:
It was agreed that IMCG and IPS should consider and make enquiries concerning the hosting of an international workshop or an informal booth on global peatland management in assocoation with the Ramsar Convention meeting in Costa Rica in May 1999. A workshop would be developed in consultation with international partner agencies in a manner similar to the March 1996 IPS/IMCG/IUCN Canada-Norway in Australia.
Action J:
It was agreed that IMCG and IPS would cooperate in organising a workshop on peatland/mire evaluation models and systems with case studies for presentaion at the Québec Millenium Wetlands Event in the year 2000.
Author's Address:Clayton D.A. Rubec,
Habitat Conservation Division,
Canada Wildlfe Service,
Environment Canada
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3, Canada
Phone: +1-819-953-0485
fax: +1-819-994-4445
e-mail: Clay.Rubec@ec.gc.ca
Back to Information and Resources Page
Back to IMCG Home Page