evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Conservation and Restoration of Mire Habitats — Estonia's LIFE Mires Programme

Estonia · Tallinn · See the Estonia profile · See the Tallinn profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 3% 80/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Estonia's 2015–2021 LIFE Mires programme restored natural water conditions on nearly 8,000 hectares of drained peatland by closing 317km of ditches and building about 2,500 dams, bringing back capercaillie, moor frogs and bog butterflies across six Natura 2000 sites.

317 km
Drainage ditches closed (2015-2021)
~2,500 dams
Dams constructed (2015-2021)
~300,000 m3
Soil moved (2015-2021)
~8,000 hectares
Mire area with natural water conditions restored (2015-2021)

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Eestimaa Looduse Fond (Estonian Fund for Nature), European Commission LIFE Programme, Estonian Environmental Investment Centre
Period
2015–2021
Keywords
peatland restoration, biodiversity conservation, climate mitigation, EU LIFE programme

Context

About a fifth of Estonia's mires were drained for forestry and peat extraction during the Soviet era, degrading habitats protected under the EU Habitats Directive and turning former carbon sinks into net emitters as exposed peat oxidises. The Estonian Fund for Nature (Eestimaa Looduse Fond) ran the EUR 2.8 million LIFE Mires project from 2015 to 2021, co-financed by the European Commission's LIFE Programme and Estonia's Environmental Investment Centre, across six Natura 2000 sites: Tudusoo, Sirtsi, Lahemaa, Alam-Pedja, Agusalu and Ohepalu.

Activities

Works included closing 317 kilometres of drainage ditches, constructing roughly 2,500 dams, moving about 300,000 cubic metres of soil, and sowing Sphagnum moss to accelerate the return of ten target mire and bog-woodland habitat types.

Results

Natural water conditions were restored across nearly 8,000 hectares, exceeding the project's roughly 6,000-hectare target. Botanical, hydrological and remote-sensing monitoring documented the return of species including willow grouse, moor frog, western capercaillie, Leucorrhinia dragonflies and bog-associated butterflies, alongside recovering wild cranberry stands. Preliminary 2021 results reported re-established mire vegetation and hydrological conditions consistent with reduced carbon emissions from the rewetted peat, though no verified CO2 tonnage was published.

Conclusions

The project published a best-practice handbook to support replication of its restoration methods elsewhere in the EU, evidencing a deliberate transferability strategy rather than a one-off intervention, though long-term biodiversity trends were still being monitored at closeout.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k) — EUR 2.8 million total project budget, co-financed by the EU LIFE Programme and Estonia's Environmental Investment Centre, 2015-2021.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Six-year project (2015-2021) with monitoring continuing after closeout; a published handbook supports multi-year replication elsewhere in the EU.
Staffing & skills
Estonian Fund for Nature (Eestimaa Looduse Fond), lead implementing NGO, European Commission LIFE Programme, co-financer, Estonia's Environmental Investment Centre, national co-financer

Conditions for success

  • EU LIFE co-financing paired with national co-financing from Estonia's Environmental Investment Centre
  • Established conservation NGO as delivery partner across six Natura 2000 sites
  • Deliberate transferability strategy via a published best-practice handbook

Common failure modes

  • No independently verified CO2 tonnage avoided or sequestered was published, despite carbon mitigation being a stated goal
  • Long-term biodiversity trends were still being monitored at project closeout, so durability of gains is not yet confirmed

Where it fits

Governance type
NGO-led delivery with EU and national government co-financing
Scale
national (six Natura 2000 sites)
Income level
high-income (EU member state)

Commonly funded by

LIFE Programme National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful