Responses to LEDD in grazing land: general

Editor's note 14Jun2012: Text source D211 section 4.4

Responses to LEDD may take the form of planned, formal actions which may be initiated at any organisational level, as a mechanism to alleviate LEDD. Using an array of tools (policy, fiscal, technical and regulatory), such responses aim to halt, mitigate or remediate the impacts of LEDD, restore ecosystem services and, eventually, human well-being. Equally, responses to LEDD may be informal, unplanned and may arise as a result of the way that land is used by stakeholders to achieve individual and/or collective goals (LEDDRA Internal Document 2011).    Based on the categorization of responses to LEDD developed in WP7 (LEDDRA internal document 2011), response types are categorised as physical/technological; economic; social; institutional/legal; research; and educational/communication. This section of this report briefly discusses examples of responses to LEDD in grazing land. Policies (as institutional/legal responses) also clearly play a key role in responding to LEDD and these are briefly discussed here. However, policy responses to LEDD are the subject of the joint Deliverable Reports co-ordinated by WP6 and are therefore described in more detail in those reports.

One of the first consequences of LEDD is the loss of grassland productivity. In response to this, farmers compensate for the low profitability of pastures by a sequence of actions which range from the addition of supplementary food to partial or complete livestock stubble, to finally the abandonment of grazing activity. These actions are implemented alongside increases in herd size. Average herd size has changed in Spain from around 300 sheep per herd in the 1950s to around 1000 sheep per herd today. In terms of social issues, one of the difficulties associated with shepherding activity is the working conditions. Shepherds need to stay for prolonged periods with their herds in the fields and without the commodities of towns, which make this job unattractive to new entrants and young workers. The difficulties for shepherds have brought about changes to make livestock herds easier to manage. An example is the switch from sheep to cattle production. Cattle can be maintained in the mountains without the need for the permanent presence of a shepherd, unlike sheep which need the shepherd’s presence. Farmers can raise cattle and retain part time work either on the farm or off-farm, for example in the local administration or in rural tourism activities associated with the mountains.

To prevent abandonment of rural areas and grazing activity, the administration has developed different mechanisms to facilitate farming life. Different laws have been implemented at national and regional levels with the objective of establishing and regulating measures to promote the attainment of sustainable rural areas. Their general objectives are simultaneously economic, social and environmental. The specific objectives range from those oriented to the diversification of economic activity and improvement of infrastructure and public facilities to the provision of basic social services and achievement of environmental quality in rural areas. Among the objectives of the Natural Heritage and Biodiversity Law are: the maintenance of essential ecological processes for the preservation of biodiversity, genetics, population and species; and preservation of the variety, uniqueness and beauty of natural ecosystems, geological and landscape diversity. A number of instruments have been developed under the umbrella of different laws. These instruments include different activities such as, for example, maintenance of grazing grassland and meadows and maintenance of grazing stubble. Measures have also been implemented to provide specific support for livestock such as those for sheep and goats whose production are covered by designations of quality production, or to compensate for the specific disadvantages affecting farmers of dairy cattle in economically vulnerable or sensitive areas, from an environmental point of view. These measures are also intended to lead to improvements in infrastructures in rural areas.

All of these responses can be classed as prevention, mitigation and adaptation. Restoration and rehabilitation measures are very incipient, and need to be carefully considered, because they include the use of measures such as controlled fires, which may have undesirable consequences.