site dossier · 000575 Ferbane
Bog Special Area of Conservation · Co. Offaly, Ireland

A 151.9-hectare basin-type midland raised bog about 10 km east of Shannonbridge, Co. Offaly, underlain by low-permeability Waulsortian limestone and clay-rich tills^[NPWS-02]. Designated under the EU Habitats Directive for three Annex I peatland habitats — Active Raised Bog [7110] (priority), Degraded Raised Bog [7120] and Rhynchosporion depressions [7150]^[NPWS-01]. About 120 ha of high bog, of which 32.6 ha was active raised bog at the last full survey (2012)^[NPWS-04]. No physical restoration measures had been carried out at the site as of the 2015 conservation-objectives review^[NPWS-04].

Available sources describe a domed raised bog in unfavourable but restorable condition, with a dense, still-functional drain network drying the high bog. This document does not claim the site is "restored" or "in favourable condition" — only that the published record supports the framing above. Per-unit condition grades, ownership, and any restoration activity after 2015 were not retrievable during this compile (see §11).

02At a glance

03Location context

04Peatland context

• Basin-type midland raised bog. Domed, surrounded on all sides by low-relief bedrock ridges; described by NPWS as a good example of a typical midland raised bog of considerable conservation significance^{[NPWS-02][KEL-95]}.
• Deep ombrotrophic peat. Irish raised bogs typically hold 3–12 m of peat; the high bog at Ferbane is mapped at 120 ha with no measured loss between 1994 and 2012^[NPWS-04].
• Active raised bog is declining. 32.6 ha of ARB in 2012, down from 41.7 ha (1994) and 36.9 ha (2005) — a continuous 21.8% loss driven by drainage^[IWM-81].
• High-quality core is small. Only 2.0 ha (6.1%) of the ARB is central ecotope; 30.6 ha is sub-central; no soaks or active flushes were recorded^[NPWS-04].
• Underlying geology. Low-permeability Waulsortian limestone (a poor aquifer) and clay-rich tills, with more permeable stony till to the north^[NPWS-04].
• Peat depth. No site-specific figure retrieved from open sources; a 2012 LiDAR DEM records surface relief of 53.7–63.7 m across the dome^[NPWS-04]. field check

05Environmental designations

what this meansThe site is itself a European site (SAC), so any plan or project affecting it — or hydrologically connected to it — triggers a Habitats Directive Appropriate Assessment. The three Annex I habitats below are the SAC's qualifying interests, and the AA's "significant effect" test is judged against their site-specific conservation objectives. Desk orientation only — not a screening determination.

Qualifying interests (Annex I habitats)

• [7110] Active raised bogs — priority habitat^[NPWS-01]
• [7120] Degraded raised bogs still capable of natural regeneration^[NPWS-01]
• [7150] Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion^[NPWS-01]

Restoration-target habitats (not current QIs)

• None recorded. Restoration objectives at Ferbane are expansion of the existing QIs rather than re-establishment of additional Annex I habitats — specifically, expansion of [7110] Active raised bog to 43.5 ha and the central ecotope to 21.8 ha (see note below)^[NPWS-04].

ARB is a priority Annex I habitat in Unfavourable–Bad conservation status nationally^[NPWS-09]. The site-specific conservation objective is to restore ARB to 43.5 ha and central ecotope to 21.8 ha^[NPWS-04]. Per-unit current condition grades and the full Natura 2000 Standard Data Form assessment were not surfaced here. field check

Site habitats — Fossitt × Annex I

what this meansEvery mapped polygon at Ferbane is tagged with both the Irish standard Fossitt (2000) level-3 code and, where applicable, the EU Habitats Directive Annex I 4-digit code — the two classification systems Irish ecologists cite together when lifting habitat data into an EIAR or AA. The high bog dome is further broken down by Kelly & Schouten (2002) raised-bog ecotope (central → face-bank), which is the NPWS field standard for 7110/7120 condition assessment. Identification follows the EU Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats (EUR 28); areas, ecotopes and survey dates are lifted directly from the cited NPWS field reports.

Reading notes. Ecotope codes follow Kelly & Schouten (2002) and are the field-survey unit for raised-bog Annex I condition assessment; Fossitt PB1/PB2 are the level-3 equivalents an ecologist carries into an EIAR/AA habitat map. 7150 is not separately polygonised — NPWS explicitly states the interspersed distribution makes a separate area calculation unfeasible^[IWM-81]. Cutover Fossitt codes are taken from the NPWS Restoration Plan (2022) Figure 5.3 / 5.4 map legends^[NPWS-10]; cutover Sphagnum vegetation types (HS1, LS1, MS1–4, BP1–3) follow Smith & Crowley (2020) IWM 128^[IWM-128]. The EU Interpretation Manual of European Union Habitats (EUR 28) is the standard identification basis for all Irish Annex I peatland assignments^[EU-IM] — it underlies the NPWS assessments here but is not cited by name in either the 2012 site report or the 2022 Restoration Plan. field check A modern re-mapped polygon dataset carrying per-record FOSS_CODE, ANNEX_CODE, DATA_QUAL, survey date and unique ID — per Heritage Council (2011) Habitat Survey Guidance — is not in open record for this site.

06Land cover & land use

• High-bog ecotope mosaic. Wet central / sub-central active raised bog with Sphagnum pools and lawns, grading out to drier sub-marginal, marginal and face-bank ecotopes toward the dome margins^[NPWS-04].
• Cutover-bog margin (~21 ha). A narrow zone of cutover surrounds the high bog on all sides, dominated by Downy Birch (Betula pubescens) and Gorse (Ulex europaeus), with bracken, willow, bilberry, Scots Pine and Rhododendron^[NPWS-02].
• Transitional habitats. Wet grassland, improved grassland, cutover bog and mixed woodland; areas of poor-fen vegetation and birch woodland occur on cutover surfaces along the margins^[NPWS-04].
• Scots Pine encroachment. Pinus sylvestris has colonised the drier margins and via drains onto the high bog, with trees up to 8 m recorded in the east, south and north^[IWM-81].
• Peat cutting has largely ceased. Only a single plot to the north-west was recorded as cut during a 2003 survey; drains from past cutting remain around most of the site^[IWM-81].
• No forestry plantations occur on the bog itself^[NPWS-04].

07Hydrology & drainage signals

what this meansThe drain lengths and depths below are pressures on the bog's water balance, not direct measurements of the current water table. For active raised bog, mean water levels need to sit within ~10 cm of the surface with seasonal swings under 20 cm — whether that is met here can only be confirmed by on-site piezometer monitoring (see §11). The figures describe the drainage problem, not the outcome.

• The dense drain network has lowered water levels and continues to dry the bog, with active-raised-bog loss recorded at the latest monitoring survey^[IWM-81].
• Perimeter drains intercept the regional water table; declining groundwater head (by analogy with Clara Bog) may have contributed to subsidence, particularly on the more permeable northern side^[NPWS-04]. inferred from desk source
• Flow patterns on the dome have been disrupted by subsidence and drainage; the highest point sits in the southern half of the bog (2012 LiDAR DEM)^[NPWS-04].
• Total nitrogen deposition in the vicinity is ~13.4 kg N/ha/yr against a site target of ≤5 kg N/ha/yr — a chronic eutrophication pressure^[NPWS-04].
• Per-piezometer water-level time series and a full hydrological budget are not in open sources. field check

08Restoration opportunity signals

These are signals, not conclusions. They suggest the site is a reasonable candidate for drain-blocking restoration relative to a typical degraded midland raised bog, but they do not constitute an ecological judgement — and no physical works are on record here yet.

• The high bog is judged to be still in restorable condition despite water loss^[NPWS-02].
• No major fire events have been reported from the high bog in recent times, and the high cover of Cladonia portentosa suggests the bog has not burned for some time^[NPWS-04].
• Ferbane sits within the national network of 53 raised-bog SACs with published conservation objectives; NPWS drain-blocking restoration is established on comparable midland bogs (Clara, Mongan, Sharavogue, Raheenmore)^[NPWS-04].

09Species & surveys

Flora — bog mosses confirmed present

• Sphagnum magellanicumMagellanic bog-mosslawns / pools^[NPWS-02]
• Sphagnum cuspidatumfeathery bog-mosspools^[NPWS-02]
• Sphagnum papillosumpapillose bog-mosslawns / low hummocks
• Sphagnum capillifoliumred bog-mosshummocks
• Sphagnum austiniiAustin's bog-mossactive hummocks · ARB indicator^[NPWS-04]
• Sphagnum fuscumrusty bog-mosshummocks · ARB indicator
• Sphagnum tenellumsoft bog-moss
• Sphagnum subnitenslustrous bog-moss

Flora — vascular plants & dwarf shrubs

• Rhynchospora albawhite beak-sedgeRhynchosporion [7150]
• Eriophorum vaginatumhare's-tail cottongrass
• Eriophorum angustifoliumcommon cottongrass
• Narthecium ossifragumbog asphodel
• Drosera anglicagreat sundew
• Menyanthes trifoliatabogbean
• Andromeda polifoliabog-rosemary
• Vaccinium oxycoccoscranberry
• Calluna vulgarisheather
• Erica tetralixcross-leaved heath
• Carex paniceacarnation sedge
• Myrica galebog-myrtle

Negative / invasive indicator species

• Pinus sylvestrisScots pine · encroaching
• Rhododendron ponticumnon-native invasive · NE margin
• Campylopus introflexusnon-native moss · disturbed areas
• Betula pubescensdowny birch · cutover / margins
• Ulex europaeusgorse · cutover
• Pteridium aquilinumbracken · cutover

Fauna — recorded (2005 conservation plan)

• Irish harecommon on the bog
• Common frogpresent
• Badger · Foxin the area
• Snipebred within site
• Curlewbred within site
• Skylark · Meadow pipitbred within site
• Pheasant · Woodcocksite margins
• Merlin · Kestrel · Sparrowhawkfrequent the site

10Constraints & risks

• Drainage is the biggest threat. 10.9 km of high-bog drains (7.8 km still fully functional) continue to dry the bog; ARB has declined 21.8% since 1994 and the loss is ongoing^[IWM-81].
• No restoration implemented to date. As of the 2015 conservation-objectives review no physical works had been carried out — the site is in passive decline^[NPWS-04].
• Regional groundwater dependence. Margin drains intercept the regional water table; deepening or maintaining cutover drains risks further lowering groundwater head and ARB loss^[NPWS-04].
• Small high-quality core. Central ecotope is only 2.0 ha, leaving the best-quality habitat limited and vulnerable to further drying^[NPWS-04].
• Encroachment. Pinus sylvestris and Rhododendron ponticum on the margins indicate drying and require active management^[IWM-81].
• Nitrogen deposition of ~13.4 kg N/ha/yr exceeds the 5 kg N/ha/yr site target — a chronic atmospheric pressure outside site control^[NPWS-04].
• Ownership / turbary rights are not in the open record; restoration would depend on landowner and turbary agreements. unknown

11Unknowns & recommended field checks

Items the public record could not answer in this compile, and that a working ecologist would want to verify on the ground or via NPWS directly.

• designation Per-unit / current condition grades and the full Natura 2000 Standard Data Form qualifying-interest assessment
• restoration Whether any physical restoration (drain-blocking, bunding) has been implemented since the 2015 review
• tenure Ownership, turbary rights, and commonage across the high bog and cutover
• peat Site peat-depth profile — no site-specific figure was retrieved^[NPWS-04]
• hydrology Per-piezometer water-table time series; annual rainfall / hydrological budget
• designation Confirmation of any overlapping or adjacent NHA / pNHA status^[OTH-01]
• species Site-specific faunal assemblage data (CO supporting document notes this is limited)^[NPWS-04]
• species Full results of the recent spider (Araneae) survey of the bog^[NPWS-04]
• field Current extent of any active peat-cutting (single plot recorded cut in 2003)
• field Current extent of Rhododendron and Pinus on margins and high bog
• field Whether the 32.6 ha ARB figure has declined further since the 2012 survey

AAAssessment & regulatory data

what this meansFive data fields an ecologist must carry into an AA Screening, Natura Impact Statement or EIAR that are not captured elsewhere on this page. Where a value is not yet on record it is shown as a field to complete (field check), not omitted — so the dossier mirrors the structure of the statutory report it feeds.

1 · National conservation status — Article 17 (2025)

The EU Habitats Directive Article 17 assessment grades each habitat on four parameters — Range, Area, Structure & Functions, Future Prospects — plus an Overall result; the AA/NIS "significant effect" test is judged against these for each qualifying interest. Grades below are the national 2025 assessments for Ferbane's three QIs (this supersedes the 2019 figure cited in §05).

• [7110] Active raised bog (priority) — Overall Unfavourable–Bad, national trend improving · Range U-B · Area U-B · Structure & Functions U-B · Future Prospects U-B (NPWS Article 17, 2025)
• [7120] Degraded raised bog — Overall Unfavourable–Bad, national trend improving · all four parameters U-B (NPWS Article 17, 2025)
• [7150] Rhynchosporion depressions — Overall Unfavourable–Inadequate · Range Favourable · Area U-I (deteriorating) · Structure & Functions U-I · Future Prospects Favourable (NPWS Article 17, 2025)

2 · Receiving waters, WFD status & hydrological catchment

The bog's drains discharge to a surface-water body; the AA source–pathway–receptor model and the EIAR water chapter need that water body named, its WFD status, and the catchment / zone of influence that defines how far effects can travel beyond the boundary.

Catchment

Lower Shannon (Brosna) inferred

Hydrometric area

25A

Receiving watercourse

River Brosna (via the Silver River) inferred

WFD water-body code

field check — from EPA Maps / catchments.ie

WFD ecological status

field check

WFD chemical status

field check

Zone of influence

Perimeter drains intercept the regional water table → River Brosna → River Shannon; effects can travel well beyond the SAC line (CIEEM Box 10). inferred

3 · Ecological valuation (geographic importance)

Every valued ecological receptor must be rated on the TII / CIEEM geographic scale — International → National → County → Local — because that rating drives the significance matrix in the EcIA / NIS.

• International — Ferbane Bog SAC and its Annex I qualifying habitats [7110*] Active raised bog, [7120] Degraded raised bog, [7150] Rhynchosporion.
• National — breeding Curlew and Snipe recorded within the site (2005 conservation plan). inferred
• County / Local — Irish hare, common frog and the cutover / woodland habitats on the margins. field check
• Ratings follow TII (International→Local) / CIEEM "Important Ecological Features".

4 · European sites within the zone of influence

AA Screening must identify every European site (SAC/SPA) that could be affected — with name, code, qualifying interests, distance and connecting pathway — not just the host site.

• River Shannon Callows SAC · 000216 — downstream via the Brosna → River Shannon. distance field-check
• Middle Shannon Callows SPA · 004096 — downstream on the Shannon floodplain. distance field-check
• Mongan Bog SAC · 000580 — midland raised-bog network. distance field-check
• Fin Lough (Offaly) SAC · 000576 — nearby designated site. distance field-check
• All Saints Bog SAC · 000566 & Clara Bog SAC · 000572 — regional bog network; not hydrologically connected.
• Site codes and inter-site distances to be confirmed on npws.ie. codes inferred

5 · In-combination plans & projects

Cumulative assessment is mandatory; the screening report must name the other plans and projects considered. "Simply stating that there are no cumulative impacts is insufficient" (OPR PN01).

• Within the Brosna (HA 25A) catchment: neighbouring raised-bog restoration / LIFE drain-blocking works, the Offaly County Development Plan, and current planning-register applications — compile and screen for in-combination effects. field check