WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS
Field measurements one and two years after peatland restoration compared alternative ditch blocking and filling methods with drained and undrained reference areas in eastern Finland. Methane fluxes increased after rewetting relative to drained controls but stayed below the undrained natural reference; fluxes rose between years one and two along with developing vegetation. Site conditions and ditch-filling methods shaped early responses.
WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ
The counter-signal is that restoring a wetland can improve hydrologic and ecological processes while making one greenhouse-gas flux look worse at first. This is a reason to account for CO2, methane, water table and biodiversity across decades, not an argument that rewetting is a failure.
CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY
Only early post-restoration methane flux was compared, not full lifetime CO2-equivalent climate balance, long-term vegetation outcomes or all peatland types. Method effects can change as soil and vegetation recover.
SOURCE
Theodorou et al. · Wetlands · Finnish drained-peatland rewetting methane
View original evidence ↗