Wiktor: So wetlands can't serve as a gamechanger, in stopping the processes of stepping or desertification? However, can they stop this process?
Magdalena: Wetlands full of water contribute as much as possible to counteract drought, and therefore also to stop the processes of steppification or desertification.
Unfortunately, the draining of more than 85% of the peatlands in Poland seriously contributes to the droughts that occur every year. Peatlands in their boggy state are up to 95% water - by draining them, we destroy natural retention sites. Unfortunately, dried-up lakes have a much greater effect on people's imagination than marshes turned into meadows or pastures. And yet pastures and meadows cut by drainage ditches are former marshes. Ditches dug in the People's Republic of Poland still drain them, draining more peat deposits. The natural carbon stores I mentioned earlier emit huge amounts of carbon dioxide when drained, releasing the carbon stored in them for thousands of years back into the atmosphere. This process can be stopped - by blocking the ditches, we can re-wet the wetlands and stop the emissions.
Swamps have proven that they can be a game changer - in the Carboniferous period, when prehistoric peatlands formed the current carbon deposits, the carbon content of the atmosphere decreased significantly, and with it came a cooling of the climate. So, on the one hand, marshes help us fight climate warming, and on the other hand, they help us adapt to the climate change we are already facing by mitigating heat and preventing flooding after heavy rains.
A raised bog in early spring
Photo: Pawel Pawlikowski | © Center for Wetland Conservation
Wiktor: What does wetland protection in Poland look like outside the Ramsar Convention ?
Magdalena: Wetlands that have not been heavily degraded and are still of natural value, i.e. there are rare plant and animal species, are mostly protected - within national parks, Natura 2000 areas or reserves.
To be able to effectively fight global warming, we need to extend protection to the peat that is still in the ground. Legislation is needed to prohibit further draining of peatlands, plowing peat soils, as well as building on them or extracting peat. Instead of subsidizing farmers to drain peatlands for hay production (which is often mowed just for subsidies and the bales linger around), we should encourage them with subsidies to retain water in these areas and facilitate the process of rewetting peatlands.
Wiktor: You talk about more complex systems such as the Wawer Bend. Could we use elements of wetlands on a small scale in the urban landscape? I also talked to Kasper Jakubowski, mentioned earlier, about pocket forests. Can we implement wetland solutions in such small spaces? Can we create such a micro wetland?
Magdalena: Wetlands do not have to be large at all. It can even be a roadside reed, into which water from roadways and sidewalks is drained. We should consciously use the potential of precipitation in the city, and instead of draining rainwater through storm drains into the river as quickly as possible, let us drain this water into reservoirs in green areas and collect it there. Allow rush vegetation to grow around these reservoirs, which purify the water and provide valuable habitat for animals, further increasing biodiversity. The former urban rivers I mentioned are often small streams that could be dug up where possible and routed through parks to meander fancifully and retain water in the landscape for as long as possible.
However, we should remember not to create urban greenery at the expense of peatlands. Most horticultural substrates are mainly peat. Companies establishing green roofs and vertical gardens on the walls of buildings often use horticultural substrates with peat for this purpose. Peat can also be found in decorative urban pots or flowerbeds in the park. To create greenery in the city and beautify a home or office, we destroy natural ecosystems that have formed over thousands of years. For such applications, you can safely use compost or peat-free substrates, which have already been available on the Polish market for several years.
Wiktor: Earlier you said that a big advantage of wetlands is that they are difficult for humans. They are difficult to navigate. In environmental education today, there is a lot of talk about contact with nature. Trips to forests are promoted. Can wetlands offer such places?
Magdalena: Of course. At wetlands in national parks and reserves, traffic is directed along wooden footbridges, which can be walked over with a dry foot. Viewing terraces with telescopes for bird watching can be an additional attraction for visitors. In this way, we can separate and channel the movement of people along the edge of the marsh, while allowing observation of what is happening further away. We can observe animals from a distance without frightening them or interfering with their environment.
I like urban wetlands very much, because they allow us to tame city dwellers to the swamps, as well as educate them about their role in nature. People in the countryside know very well what marshes are, because they have them nearby. City dwellers often can't even imagine a swamp, and the unfamiliar can seem threatening or simply not exist in consciousness. When I show my friends photos of bogs, they are surprised, because they expected mud, and they see a lot of greenery - open landscapes with low vegetation. I believe that the proximity and greater accessibility of marshes in cities will translate into residents getting to know them better, and establishing an emotional relationship to better protect them, not only in cities.
Wetlands in cities are also very important for flood prevention. We need a ban on the development of wetlands. If we allow people to build homes in a place where water naturally collects, they will always be fighting this water and draining the area to save their homes already. This is how we lose water retention areas for good and build up river valleys, i.e. natural floodplains, where the river can safely flood without causing property damage, i.e. flooding. To reclaim these areas, we should move the levees as far away from the river as possible where it is stillpossible. For our own good and safety, we should give more space to the water.
Magdalena Galus - a graduate of the Interdepartmental Studies in Environmental Protection at the University of Warsaw (MSOŚ UW), a nature lover, for more than a decade associated with the Center for Wetlands Protection, currently serving as director of the Association, involved, among other things, in the program for re-wetting drained peatlands "Put your money in the mud!".
© Private Archive
Wiktor: Can youpoint to activities in Poland concerning wetlands that are worth publicizing and showcasing ?
Magdalena: In Rozwarow we have a great example of using marshes without draining them and in a nature-friendly way. Mr. Alfred Smolczynski obtains reeds from the Rozwarow Marshes by mowing them in winter with specially adapted machines. Mowing the reeds has a good effect on the population of an extremely rare bird in Europe, the aquatic warbler, while Mr. Alfred's company builds roofs out of the reeds obtained. This is a great example of paludiculture, or swamp agriculture.
In Greater Poland, local farmer Patryk Kokocinski convinced his neighbors to counteract the increasingly frequent droughts that have significantly reduced their crops in recent years. Together they raised the water level in the drainage ditches draining their fields. Thanks to Patrick, farmers in Snowidow no longer fight spring spills, but let the water stand in the meadows in the spring and are happy that there is enough water to last longer. They've built dams in areas that aren't used, such as mid-field woodlots, to mimic those created by beavers, and keep the water there year-round. Patrick and his partner founded the Association for the Protection of the Mid-Field Landscape "Life in the Fields!", which shows farmers that cooperating with nature pays off much more for farmers than fighting against it, and directly translates into yields.
Meanwhile, at the Center for Wetland Conservation, we are currently working on developing a certification system for reducing carbon emissions from re-wetting drained peatlands. Through such a system, companies, institutions, but also ordinary people, will be able to reduce their carbon footprint by donating funds for peatland re-wetting. We are also implementing our pilot program "Throw Money into the Mud," in which we are raising funds to buy back peat lands for re-wetting. However, we are struggling with Polish law.
Wiktor: What are these legislative problems?
Magdalena: The problem is the purchase of agricultural land by NGOs. In the first place, agricultural land can be bought by any individual farmer, then the National Center for Agricultural Support (KOWR), then the State Forests, if the land is partially covered with forest. A non-governmental organization as a legal entity is last in the line. In order to be able to buy a drained peatland, which usually functions as a meadow or pasture in the land registry, we have to commit to using it for five years after purchase. That is to say, instead of damming the ditches and retaining water in the peatland as soon as possible, we should mow or graze it for 5 years - this is absurd, because we don't have that much time! How is Poland supposed to become climate-neutral by 2050 if drained peatlands constantly emit carbon dioxide instead of immobilizing it underground?
A peat bog drained by a drainage ditch and turned into a meadow
Photo by Lukasz Kozub | © Center for Wetland Conservation
Wiktor: There is no political will to change this?
Magdalena: For the time being, there isn't. We are trying to convince the NEB and the Ministry of Agriculture to change. We need top-down protection of peat lands - that natural water retention should be the priority on them, not agriculture. If we started to take into account the environmental costs incurred in food production, such as draining peatlands, farming on peat lands would simply not be profitable. If we didn't subsidize with agri-environmental subsidies the mowing of meadows on drained peatlands, but water retention, paying farmers to retain water on the land, we wouldn't have to invest in building retention basins. And we would have greater biodiversity and local cooling of the microclimate for free.
Wiktor: Doyou see an improvement in the perception of this problem in Poland?
Magdalena: Yes, especially in recent years, when wetlands have proven to be so important in the context of climate change. Our association has been active for 22 years. Initially, we protected wetlands for nature, to save the rare species that are found there - this was poorly perceived. And now we are approached by companies that want to reduce their negative impact on the environment by restoring wetlands. Entrepreneurs themselves are reducing the carbon footprint of their companies as much as they can, and they want to offset the rest by stopping greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere.
Wiktor: If you could summarize in a few sentences why wetland conservation is so important?
Magdalena: Wetlands are water, and without water there is no life. Wetlands must be wet! There is no other way.
Wiktor: Thank you for the interview!
interviewed by Wiktor Bochenek
photos courtesy of the Zakole Group and the Center for Wetland Conservation
