Guest blog by Gavin Thomas, Conservation Adviser Bowland Wader Project

Lapwing nesting in an area of mown rush

I recently helped deliver an event for farmers in Lancashire’s Forest of Bowland AONB (Area of Natural Beauty) on rush management. There are various methods employed to tackle rush but not all sit well with management for wading birds! So with support from a colleague from Natural England, I was charged with offering advice on the options available to farmers, particularly within the boundaries of Environmental Stewardship Schemes.

The day was organised by Myerscough College and the Scottish Agricultural College and was hosted by the Stott family at Laund Farm in Chipping. The Stotts’ farm has been in agri-environment schemes for many years and has a good population of breeding waders. In fact Simon’s work for waders landed him the RSPB’s National Operation Lapwing Champion Award in 2005. He’s also a previous winner of the Farmers Guardian Best Young Farmer Producer Award and Farmers Weekly Sheep Farmer of the Year, so is well placed to demonstrate methods for rush management alongside sound farming practice.

Over 80 farmers attended the event, an indication of the problems rushes are posing after a series of particularly wet years. It’s certainly been one of the challenges for the Wader Project too as rush management has been way down the priority list for most seeing as many didn’t even get their silage and hay crops in last year due to the atrocious weather.

Managing rush for waders is not about its complete eradication. Even Lapwings, which is the wader that is least tolerant of rush, require scattered tussocks for chick cover and camouflage for nests and incubating adults. At the other end of the scale Snipe prefer far more rush cover - up to 40% cover across a field. To simplify things, a scattered tussocky rush cover of between 10 and 30% across a field with a few denser stands in the wettest areas will cater for the broadest range of species.

Ideal diverse rush structure

Scottish Agricultural College made it clear on the day that there are many species of rushes some of which are scarce and have a high biodiversity value. The focus of the day was control of soft rush, Juncus effusus, which is widespread and if left unmanaged can dominate fields, reducing their agricultural and ecological value.

Beef cattle grazing rushes

Rushes thrive in waterlogged soils so drainage was the first recommendation to keep rushes under control. Clearly field drainage is bad news for breeding waders as they depend heavily on boggy areas for their abundant insect food. It was therefore also made clear that rush control can be achieved without drainage work, through various combinations of topping, chemical control and cattle grazing, and it was also highlighted that these can all be supported through agri-environment schemes. This was plain for all to see at the Stotts’ farm.

Ditch edge rush eaten by Highland cattle

Aerating the soil using a sward slitter was also discussed. This improves soil structure and provides better conditions for soil invertebrates – staple food sources for wading birds. Liming, which many farmers present at the event undertake on their own land, can also help control rushes which favour acidic soils. Cattle can be an effective rush control measure too as being non-selective, they will graze rushes, especially green regrowth and help trample up their roots. Cattle will also produce a diverse, tussocky sward structure which is highly valuable to breeding waders and a range of other species. Many farmers present on the day lamented the continued loss of beef cattle from the uplands, this being a major issue for both farming and conservation.

There was broad agreement that cutting rushes is on its own was unlikely to solve a rush infestation problem and could even make it worse by encouraging regrowth and spreading seed, especially when the cuttings were not removed from the field. SAC and Myerscough stressed that cutting should be undertaken as part of a programme of work which includes cattle grazing and chemical control if necessary.

All present agreed that chemical control is often needed to get on top of serious soft rush infestations. Glyphosate is used but the selective hormone herbicides MCPA and 2,4-D are more effective at controlling rushes without damaging the underlying grass sward. It was made clear that boom spraying would result in killing off broad leafed plants too which add biodiversity value and structure to the sward. This is why boom spraying is not permitted on land in agri-environment schemes and Natural England stressed that any chemical treatment can only be done with weed wipers or by spot spraying.

One of the main take home messages was that timing is really important with all these practices. Rushes are easiest to control when still growing so manufacturers often recommend treatment between late May and early July. As this is the ground nesting bird season, a better alternative is to top rushes in early August (and remove the cuttings) then treat the regrowth several weeks later. This will remove the risk of disturbance of ground nesting birds and potential destruction of any nests with eggs or flightless chicks. It is also easier and more economical to treat sparse re-growing rush than a more established, thicker cover.

Weed wiping rush

Weed wiping equipment is also preferable to spraying as it can be mounted to ATVs, as wet areas with rush infestations are usually boggy and unsuitable for tractor passage. Many types of weed wiper exist and no clear consensus was reached on the day as to which is best! However many agreed that two passes in opposite directions ensures the best kill rates as does adding a ‘wetter’ to the mix which helps the chemical stick better to the waxy rush stems. Rolling the rushes beforehand to break up the waxy cuticle of the stems also allows for more effective chemical action.

It was clear to all present at the event that an effective programme of rush management will often require several years of effort. But sticking with it will improve the quality of grazing available to livestock and benefit breeding waders and other biodiversity interests on the farm. As already stated, timing is essential and where a field is in an agri-environment scheme, Natural England reminded everyone that their agreement prescriptions will outline which methods are permitted and when they can be undertaken.

It was interesting to speak to a few farmers who still use rush for bedding. It is a free on-farm resource afterall! The 2 or 3 year rotational cutting strategy employed ensures that a varied rush structure is present across the farm and this provides a useful diversity of wading bird habitat. Leaving the rush to dry and go yellow after cutting then chopping it and mixing with straw or in the case of one farmer the tussock forming Tufted Hair Grass (Deschampsia) which livestock leave alone, is part of this practise. Harvesting rush in this way in recent years has been very difficult though due to the wet summer weather. So as ever, the weather was the hot topic of the day but nobody present could come up with a solution to solve that little chestnut!

All photos by Gavin Thomas