Version classiqueVersion mobile

What Works in Conservation 2017

 | 
William J. Sutherland
, 
Lynn V. Dicks
, 
Nancy Ockendon
, 
et al.

5. FOREST CONSERVATION

5.2 Threat: Agriculture

Texte intégral

5.2.1 Livestock farming

Based on the collated evidence, what is the current assessment of the effectiveness of interventions for livestock farming?

Likely to be beneficial

● Use wire fences within grazing areas to exclude livestock from specific forest sections

Trade-offs between benefit and harms

● Prevent livestock grazing in forests

Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)

● Reduce the intensity of livestock grazing in forests
● Shorten livestock grazing period or control grazing season in forests

No evidence found (no assessment)

● Provide financial incentives not to graze

Likely to be beneficial

Use wire fences within grazing areas to exclude livestock from specific forest sections

1Three of four studies, including one replicated, randomized, controlled study in Kenya, Israel, Mexico and Panama found that excluding livestock using wire fences increased the size, density or number of regenerating trees. One study found no effect on tree size and decreased tree density. Four of eight studies, including two replicated, randomized, controlled studies across the world found that excluding livestock using increased biomass, species richness, density or cover of understory plants. Four studies found mixed or no effects on understory plants. Assessment: likely to be beneficial (effectiveness 58%; certainty 63%; harms 18%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​1205

Trade-off between benefit and harms

Prevent livestock grazing in forests

2One site comparison study in Israel found that preventing cattle grazing increased the density of seedlings and saplings. Two of three studies, including one replicated, controlled study, in Brazil, Costa Rica and the UK found that preventing livestock grazing increased survival, species richness or diversity of understory plants. One study found mixed effects. Assessment: trade-offs between benefits and harms (effectiveness 69%; certainty 45%; harms 20%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​1206

Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)

Reduce the intensity of livestock grazing in forests

3Two studies, including one replicated, randomized, controlled study, in the UK and Greece found that reducing grazing intensity increased the number of tree saplings or understory total weight. Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 78%; certainty 34%; harms 0%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​1207

Shorten livestock grazing period or control grazing season in forests

4One of two studies, including one replicated, controlled study, in Spain and Australia found that shortening the grazing period increased the abundance and size of regenerating trees. One found no effect native plant species richness. One replicated study in the UK found that numbers of tree seedlings were higher following summer compared to winter grazing. Assessment: unknown effectiveness (effectiveness 58%; certainty 33%; harms 0%).
http://www.conservationevidence.com/​actions/​1208

No evidence found (no assessment)

5We have captured no evidence for the following interventions:

  • Provide financial incentives not to graze

Lire

Open access

Acheter

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search