Wetlands Ecology and Management

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 189–204 | Cite as

Hydrological assessment for wetland conservation at Wicken Fen

  • M.P. McCartney
  • A. de la Hera


Wicken Fen in East Anglia, UK is a unique habitat and a wetland of international importance. A comparison of water table measurements made between 1928 and 1931 with contemporary observations indicates that summer minimum water table elevations are between 0.20 m and 0.45 m lower than in the past. The disparity cannot be attributed to differences in rainfall. There are a number of reasons why the Fen may be 'drying', but it was not possible to identify a single dominant cause. A simple water balance model that simulates groundwater levels in different areas of the Fen has been developed. This indicates that although locally important, in most years flows of water from ditches into the Fen comprise less than 10% of total summer inputs and in wet summers there is a net outflow from the Fen into the ditches. Based on an assessment of the water requirements of desired vegetation communities, a more active water management strategy than is presently implemented is proposed. This paper highlights how a better quantitative understanding of ecosystem functioning and the impact of human interventions are a pre-requisite for the development and implementation of sustainable wetland conservation strategies.

Hydrological modelling Water budget Wetland drainage 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Acreman M.C. and Josée P. 2000. Wetlands. In: Acreman M.C. (ed.), The Hydrology of the UK: a Study of Change. Routledge, London, UK, pp. 204-224.Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous 1996. Water Level Management Plan for Wicken Fen. Environment Agency, UK.Google Scholar
  3. Barbier E.B., Acreman M. and Knowler D. 1997. Economic Evaluation of Wetlands: Guide for Policy Makers and Planners. Ramsar Convention Bureau, Gland, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  4. Beltman B., van den Brook T., van Maanen K. and Vanveld K. 1996. Measures to develop a rich fen wetland landscape with a full range of successional stages. Ecological Engineering 7: 299-313.Google Scholar
  5. Colston A. and Broadbent-Yale P. 2000. Wicken Fen -the next 100 years. The National Trust. Acquisitions Group, 5 pp. Scholar
  6. Environment Agency 1998. The Cam Local Environment Agency Plan. Consultation Report. Anglian Region, Peterborough, UK, 141 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Friday L. and Colston A. 1999. Wicken Fen -the restoration of a wetland nature reserve. British Wildlife 11: 37-46.Google Scholar
  8. Friday L.E. and Harvey J. 1997. Sedge, litter and droves. In: Friday L.E. (ed.), Wicken Fen: The Making of a Wetland Nature Reserve. Harley Brooks, Colchester, UK, pp. 60-81.Google Scholar
  9. Friday L.E. and Rowel T.A. 1997. Patterns and processes. In: Friday L.E. (ed.), Wicken Fen: The Making of a Wetland Nature Reserve. Harley Brooks, Colchester, UK, pp. 11-21.Google Scholar
  10. Friday L.E., Walters S.M. and Lock J.M. 1997. Carr and woodland. In: Friday L.E. (ed.), Wicken Fen: The Making of a Wetland Nature Reserve. Harley Brooks, Colchester, UK, pp. 82-97.Google Scholar
  11. Gilman K. 1994. Hydrology and Wetlands Conservation. John Wiley & Sons, London, UK.Google Scholar
  12. Gilman K. 1988. The Hydrology of Wicken Fen. Institute of Hydrology, Llanbrymair, UK.Google Scholar
  13. Godwin H. 1931. Studies in the ecology of Wicken Fen. I. The ground water level of the Fen. Journal of Ecology 19: 449-473.Google Scholar
  14. Godwin H. and Bharucha F.R. 1932. Studies in the ecology of Wicken Fen, II. the Fen water table and its control of plant communities. Journal of Ecology 20: 157-191.Google Scholar
  15. Gowing J.W. 1977. The hydrology of Wicken Fen and its Influence on the Acidity of the Soil, MSc Thesis, Cranfield Institute of Technology, UK.Google Scholar
  16. Grieve I.C., Gilvear D.S. and Bryant R. 1995. Hydrochemical and water source variations accross a floodplain mire, Insh Marshes, Scotland. Hydrol. Procs. 9: 99-110.Google Scholar
  17. Grout M.W. and Whiteman M.I. 2000. Management of groundwater resources within the Anglian Region of the Environment Agency Proceedings of the British Hydrological Society 7th National Hydrology Symposium. Newcastle, UK, pp. 1.19-1.29.Google Scholar
  18. Grootjans A.P., Wassen M.J. and Wiersinga W.A. 1988. The effects of drainage on groundwater quality and plant species distribution in stream valley meadows. Vegetatio 75: 37-48.Google Scholar
  19. Hough M.N. and Jones R.J.A. 1997. The United Kingdom Meteorological Office rainfall and evaporation calculation system: MORECS version 2.0 -an overview. The Meteorological Office, UK.Google Scholar
  20. Jansen A.J.M., de Graaf M.C.C. and Roelofs J.G.M. 1996. The restoration of species-rich heathland communities in the Netherlands. Vegatatio. 126: 73-88.Google Scholar
  21. Klötzli F. and Grootjans A.P. 2001. Restoration of natural and semi-natural wetland systems in Central Europe: progress and predictability of developments. Restoration Ecology 9: 209-219.Google Scholar
  22. Lock J.M., Friday L.E. and Bennett T.J. 1997. The management of the Fen. In: Friday L.E. (ed.), Wicken Fen: The Making of a Wetland Nature Reserve. Harley Brooks, Colchester, UK, pp. 213-254.Google Scholar
  23. Llamas M.R., Garcia M. and de la Hera A. 1996. Landscape changes and ecological impacts cuased by groundwater abstraction in the Upper Guadiana Basin (Spain). Actas of Proceedings II Paesaggio Culturale Nelle Strategie Europee. Torino, 16–17 May 1996.Google Scholar
  24. Lloyd J.W., Tellam J.H., Rukin N. and Lerner D.N. 1993. Wetland vulnerability in East Anglia: a possible conceptual framework and generalised approach. Journal of Environmental Management 37: 87-102.Google Scholar
  25. McCartney M.P., de la Hera A., Acreman M.C. and Mountford O. 2001. An Investigation of the Water Budget of Wicken Fen. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
  26. Mountford O., McCartney M.P., Manchester S.J. and Wadsworth R.A. 2002. Wildlife Habitats and their Recreation within the Great Fen Project. Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Monks Wood, UK.Google Scholar
  27. Newbold C. and Mountford O. 1997. Water level requirements of wetland plants and animals. English Nature Freshwater Series No. 5. English Nature, Peterborough, UK.Google Scholar
  28. Newson M., Gardiner J. and Slater S. 2000. Planning and managing for the future. In: Acreman M. (ed.), The Hydrology of the UK: A Study of Change. Routledge, London, UK, pp. 244-269.Google Scholar
  29. Penman H.L. 1948. Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Series A 193: 120-145.Google Scholar
  30. sitelist.htm.Google Scholar
  31. Richert M., Dietrich O., Koppisch D. and Roth S. 2000. The influence of rewetting on vegetation development and decomposition in a degraded fen. Restoration Ecology 8: 186-195.Google Scholar
  32. Rodwell J.S. (ed.) 1991. British Plant Communities. Mires and Heaths Vol. 2. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  33. Rodwell J.S. (ed.) 1995. British Plant Communities. Aquatic Communities, Swamps and Tall-Herb Fens Vol. 4. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  34. Rowell T.A. 1983. The History and Management of Wicken Fen -Discussion Paper 1. Land Use at Wicken Fen Since c. 1600. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  35. Schrautzer J., Asshoff M. and Müller F. 1996. Restoration strategies for wet grasslands in Northern Germany. Ecological Engineering 7: 255-278.Google Scholar
  36. Sheail J. and Wells T.C.E. 1983. The fenlands of Huntingdonshire, England: a case study in catastrophic change. In: Gore A.J.P. (ed.), Mires: Swamp, Bog, Fen and Moor. B. Regional Studies. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. 375-393.Google Scholar
  37. Silvertown J., Dodd M.E., Gowing D.J.G. and Mountford O. 1999. Hydrologically defined niches reveal basis for species richness in plant communities. Nature 400: 61-63.Google Scholar
  38. Souch C., Gilbert J., Gowing D., Hess T. and Fiorini E. 2000. Anglian Region Joint Study on Water Resources Availability for Wetland Creation. Cranfield Ecohydrology Centre, Cranfield University, UK.Google Scholar
  39. Stace C. 1997. New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1130 pp.Google Scholar
  40. Suffolk Wildlife Trust 2000. Redgrave and Lopham Fen National Nature Reserve. Scholar
  41. van Diggelen, Grootjans A.P. and Harris J.A. 2001. Ecological restoration: state of the art or state of the science? Restoration Ecology 9: 115-118.Google Scholar
  42. Vitt D.H. 1994. An overview of factors that influence the development of Canadian peatlands. Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada 169: 7-20.Google Scholar
  43. Wassen M.J., Barendregt A., Bootsma M.C. and Schot P.P. 1989. Groundwater chemistry and vegetation gradients from rich fen to poor fen in the Naardermeer (the Netherlands). Vegetatio 79: 117-132.Google Scholar
  44. Wassen M.J. 1995. Hydrology, water chemistry and nutrient accumulation in the Biebrza fens and floodplains (Poland). Wetlands Ecology and Management 3: 125-137.Google Scholar
  45. Wassen M.J. and Grootjans A.P. 1996. Ecohydrology: an interdisciplinary approach for wetland management and restoration. Vegetatio 126: 1-4.Google Scholar
  46. Westhoff V. 1971. The dynamic structure of plant communities in relation to the objectives of nature conservation. In: Duffey E. and Watt A.S. (eds), The Scientific Management of Animal and Plant Communities for Conservation. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  47. Wheeler B.D., Shaw S.C., Fojt W.J. and Robertson R.A. (eds) 1995. Restoration of Temperate Wetlands. John Wiley, Chichester.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • M.P. McCartney
    • 1
  • A. de la Hera
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Crowmarsh GiffordWallingfordUK
  2. 2.Department of Geodynamics, Faculty of Geological SciencesComplutense UniversityMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations