GrazeLIFE Leaflet
GrazeLIFE Layman’s Report
GrazeLIFE Recommendations
Herbiforests: How living forests can mitigate our climate and biodiversity crises
GRAZELIFE REPORT 2021 REWILDING EUROPE
How European policies – especially the Common Agricultural Policy – can better support extensive grazing
GrazeLIFE Practitioners Guide

Also available in:

GrazeLIFE Final Report

Grazing for life

Online symposium presenting the outcomes of GrazeLIFE

Juan Carlos Muños / Rewilding Europe

Grazing for life

Online symposium presenting the outcomes of GrazeLIFE

Supporting extensive grazing for climate adaptation and biodiversity

Europe today is facing major environmental challenges, like climate change, biodiversity loss, soil degradation and increased frequency and severity of wildfires. On request of the European Commission, the GrazeLIFE consortium reflected on current policies, legislation and subsidy systems regarding different land-use forms. The study concluded that the benefits of extensive grazing can contribute significantly to solving some of the most pressing climate and biodiversity issues if only the EU and Member States are committed to apply their policies and regulations in a more effective way.

In this symposium,  GrazeLIFE consortium representatives from different parts of Europe will share their findings. They’ve come up with recommendations for both policymakers and practitioners to support extensive grazing systems, for the benefit of people and nature.

 

The event has passed but you can still watch the recording on Rewilding Europe’s YouTube channel.

Watch recording

Check out publications

Speakers

(click to learn more)

Guy Pe’er

Wouter Helmer

Julia Rouet-Leduc

Jaime Fagúndez

Desy Kostadinova

Hristo Hristov

Programme

10.30 Welcome and introduction
Mei Elderadzi – Rewilding Europe

10.35 Introduction of GrazeLIFE
Wouter Helmer – Rewilding Europe

GrazeLIFE results and recommendations

10.40 Sustainable grazing for multiple ecosystem services
Julia Rouet-Leduc – German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv)

11.00 Recommendations to improve grazing policies and legislation
Dr. Guy Pe’er – German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) / UFZ – Helmholtz

11.20 Symbolic handover of the GrazeLIFE reports with recommendations to Humberto Delgado Rosa, Director for Natural Capital, DG Environment, European Commission

11.25 Video Grazing for Life

11.30 Coffee break 

Grazing challenges in practice

11.40 Part 1. Learning from pioneering practice in the Rhodope Mountains
Desislava Kostadinova/Hristo Hristov – Rewilding Rhodopes

12.00 Part 2. Wild ponies are guardians of the mountains in Galicia, NW Spain
Dr. Jaime Fagundez – University of A Coruña

12.20 Follow-up actions on regional and national level
Wouter Helmer – Rewilding Europe

12.30 Closing

 

Nelleke de Weerd

GrazeLIFE – Literature review

Reference list

Adler, P., Raff, D. & Lauenroth, W. (2001). The effect of grazing on the spatial heterogeneity of vegetation. Oecologia         128, 465-479.

Alday, J. G., Santana, V. M., Lee, H., Allen, K. A. & Marrs, R. H. (2015). Above-ground biomass accumulation patterns in moorlands after prescribed burning and low-intensity grazing. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 17, 388–396.

Allan, E., Manning, P., Alt, F., Binkenstein, J., Blaser, S. … Fischer, M. (2015). Land use intensification alters ecosystem multifunctionality via loss of biodiversity and changes to functional composition. Ecology Letters 18, 834-843.

Andresen, H., Bakker, J. P., Brongers, M., Heydemann, B. & Irmler, U. (1990). Long-term changes of salt marsh communities by cattle grazing. Vegetatio 89, 137-148.

Andriuzzi, W. S. & Wall, D. H. (2018). Soil biological responses to, and feedbacks on, rewilding. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 373, 20170448.

Asner, G. P. & Archer, S. R. (2010). Livestock and the global carbon cycle. In:Steinfeld, H., Mooney, H., Schneider, F. & Neville, N. (eds).  Livestock in a changing landscape: drivers, consequences, and responses. Island Press.

Bachelet, D., Lenihan, J. M., Daly, C., & Neilson, R. P. (2000). Interactions between fire, grazing and climate change at Wind Cave National Park, SD. Ecological Modelling 134, 229–244.

Bakker, E. S., Ritchie, M. E., Olff, H., Milchunas, D. G. & Knops, J. M. H. (2006). Herbivore impact on grassland plant diversity depends on habitat productivity and herbivore size. Ecology Letters 9, 780-788.

Balčiauskas, L., Kazlauskas, M. & Balčiauskienė, L. (2017). European bison: changes in species acceptance following plans for translocation. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 63, 1–9.

Bashan, D. & Bar-Massada, A. (2017). Regeneration dynamics of woody vegetation in a Mediterranean landscape under different disturbance-based management treatments. Applied Vegetation Science 20, 106–114.

Beja, P., Schindler, S., Santana, J., Porto, M., Morgado, R., Moreira, F., Pita, R., Mira, A. & Reino, L. (2014). Predators and livestock reduce bird nest survival in intensive Mediterranean farmland. European Journal of Wildlife Research 60, 249-258.

Bernes, C., Bråthen, K. A., Forbes, B. C., Speed, J. D. M. & Moen, J. (2015). What are the impacts of reindeer/caribou (Rangifer tarandus L.) on arctic and alpine vegetation? A systematic review. Environmental Evidence 4, 4.

Bondi, G., Peruzzi, E., Macci, C., Masciandaro, G. & Pistoia, A. (2015). Changes in soil organic matter associated with pig rearing: influence of stocking densities and land gradient on forest soils in Central Italy. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 211, 32-42.

Brady, E. (2006). The aesthetics of agricultural landscapes and the relationship between humans and nature. Ethics, Place and Environment, 9, 1–19.

Bruegger, R. A., Varelas, L. A., Howery, L. D., Torell, L. A., Stephenson, M. B. & Bailey, D. W. (2016). Targeted Grazing in Southern Arizona: Using Cattle to Reduce Fine Fuel Loads. Rangeland Ecology and Management 69, 43–51.

Bünemann, E. K., Bongiorno, G., Bai, Z., Creamer, R. E., De Deyn, G. … Brussaard, L. (2018). Soil quality – A critical review. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 120, 105-125.

Byrnes, R. C., Eastburn, D. J., Tate, K. W. & Roche, L. M. (2018). A global meta-analysis of grazing impacts on soil health indicators. Journal of Environmental Quality 47, 758-765.

Calleja, J. A., Escolà, M., Carvalho, J., Forcadell, J. M., Serrano, E. & Bartolomé, J. (2019). Cattle grazing fails to control shrub encroachment in Mediterranean Landscapes. Rangeland Ecology and Management 72, 803-811.

Celaya, R., Jáuregui, B. M., García, R. R., Benavides, R., García, U. & Osoro, K. (2010). Changes in heathland vegetation under goat grazing: Effects of breed and stocking rate. Applied Vegetation Science, 13, 125–134.

Celaya, R., Martínez, A., & Osoro, K. (2007). Vegetation dynamics in Cantabrian heathlands associated with improved pasture areas under single or mixed grazing by sheep and goats. Small Ruminant Research 72, 165–177.

Conant, R. T., Cerri, C. E. P., Osborne, B. B. & Paustian, K. (2017). Grassland management impacts on soil carbon stocks: a new synthesis. Ecological Applications 27, 662-668.

Corlett, R. T. (2016). The Role of Rewilding in Landscape Design for Conservation. Current Landscape Ecology Reports 1, 127–133.

Cromsigt, J. P. G. M., te Beest, M., Kerley, G. I. H., Landman, M., le Roux, E. & Smith, F. A. (2018). Trophic rewilding as a climate change mitigation strategy? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 373, 20170440.

Crowther, T. W.,  van den Hoogen, J., Wan, J., Mayes, M. A., Keiser, A. D., Mo, L., Averill, C. & Maynard, D. S. (2019). The global soil community and its influence on biogeochemistry. Science 365, 772.

de Bello, F., Lepš, J. & Sebastià, M.-T. (2007). Grazing effects on the species-area relationship: variation along a climatic gradient in NE Spain. Journal of Vegetation Science 18, 25-34.

DeSilvey, C. & Bartolini, N. (2019). Where horses run free? Autonomy, temporality and rewilding in the Côa Valley, Portugal. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 44, 94–109.

Doboszewski, P., Doktór, D., Jaworski, Z., Kalski, R., Kułakowska, G., Łojek, J., … Górecka-Bruzda, A. (2017). Konik Polski horses as a mean of biodiversity maintenance in post-agricultural and forest areas: An overview of polish experiences. Animal Science Papers and Reports 35, 333–347.

Doran, J. W. (2002). Soil health and global sustainability: translating science into practice. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 88, 119-127.

EIP-AGRI (2017). EIP-AGRI Focus Group Reducing emissions from cattle farming Final Report. Accessed from: https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/sites/agri-eip/files/eip-agri_fg_livestock_emissions_final_report_2017_en.pdf.

EIP-AGRI (2018). EIP-AGRI Focus Group Grazing for carbon Final Report. Accessed from: https://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/sites/agri-eip/files/eip-agri_fg_grazing_for_carbon_final_report_2018_en.pdf.

Eychenne, C. & Lazaro, L. (2014). Summer pastures: between “commons” and “public goods.” Revue de Géographie Alpine 102, 0–12.

Endress, B. A., Wisdom, M. J., Vavra, M., Parks, C. G., Dick, B. L., Naylor, B. J. & Boyd, J. M. (2012). Effects of ungulate herbivory on aspen, cottonwood, and willow development under forest fuels treatment regimes. Forest Ecology and Management 276, 33–40.

Eurostat. (2017). Archive: Agri-environmental indocator – greenhouse gas emmissions. Obtained from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Archive:Agri-environmental_indicator_-_greenhouse_gas_emissions&oldid=464740

Eze, S., Palmer, S. M. & Chapman, P. J. (2018). Soil organic carbon in grasslands: effects of inorganic fertilizers, liming and grazing in different climate settings. Journal of Environmental Management 223, 74-84.

Fares, S., Bajocco, S., Salvati, L., Camarretta, N., Dupuy, J. L., Xanthopoulos, G., … Corona, P. (2017). Characterizing potential wildland fire fuel in live vegetation in the Mediterranean region. Annals of Forest Science 74, 1.

Farris, E., Filigheddu, R., Deiana, P., Farris, G. A. & Garau, G. (2010). Short-term effects of sheep pasture land due to grazing abandonment in a Western Mediterranean island ecosystem: A multidisciplinary approach. Journal for Nature Conservation 18, 258-267.

Filalozza, A., Brown, C., Dettlaff, M. A., Batbaatar, A., Grenke, J. … Cahill, J. F. (2020). The effects of livestock grazing on biodiversity are multitrophic: a meta-analysis. Ecology Letters 23, 1298-1309.

Floate, K. D., Wardhaugh, K. G., Boxall, A. B. A., & Sherratt, T. N. (2005). Fecal residues of veterinary parasiticides: Nontarget Effects in the Pasture Environment. Annual Review of Entomology, 50, 153–179.

Foster, C. N., Barton, P. S. & Lindenmayer, D. B. (2014). Effects of large native herbivores on other animals. Journal of Applied Ecology, 51, 929–938.

Fowler, F., Gillespie, C. J., Denning, S., Hu, S. & Watson, W. (2020). Mixing the message: do dung beetles (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae) affect dung-generated greenhouse gas emissions? BioRxiv, DOI: 10.1101/2020.11.19.389601.

Francini, G., Liiri, M., Männistö, M., Stark, S. & Kytöviita, M.-M. (2014). Response to reindeer grazing removal depends on soil characteristics in low Arctic meadows. Applied Soil Ecology 76, 14-25.

Garrido, P., Edenius, L., Mikusiński, G., Skarin, A., Jansson, A. & Thulin, C. G. (2020). Experimental rewilding may restore abandoned wood-pastures if policy allows. Ambio. DOI: 10.1007/s13280-020-01320-0.

Gao, J. & Carmel, Y. (2020). A global meta-analysis of grazing effects on plant species richness. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 302, 107072.

Genovese, D., Culasso, F., Giacosa, E. & Battaglini, L. M. (2017). Can livestock farming and tourism coexist in mountain regions? A new business model for sustainability. Sustainability, 9, 1–21.

Gish, M., Ben-Ari, M. & Inbar, M. (2017). Direct consumptive interactions between mammalian herbivores and plant-dwelling invertebrates: prevalence, significance, and prospectus. Oecologia 183, 347-352.

Greaves, T. (2019). Movement, wildness and animal aesthetics. Environmental Values, 28, 449–470.

Hardy, C. C. (2005). Wildland fire hazard and risk: Problems, definitions, and context. Forest Ecology and Management 211, 73–82.

Hazell, P. B. R. (2009). The Asian green revolution. IFPRI Discussion Paper. Intl Food Policy Research Inst.

Herrero-Jáuregui & Oesterheld, M. (2018). Effects of grazing intensity on plant richness and diversity: a meta-analysis. Oikos 127, 757-766.

IPCC. (2018). Summary for policymakers. In: Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H. O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P. R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J. B. R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M. I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, T. Waterfield (eds.)]. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 32 pp.

James, M. B. & Donnelly, A. (2004). Carbon sequestration in temperate grassland ecosystems and the influence of management, climate and elevated CO2. New Phytologist 164, 423-439.

Jauregui, B. M., Garcia, U., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R. (2009). Sheep and Goat Grazing Effects on Three Atlantic Heathland Types. Rangeland Ecology & Management 62, 119–126.

Jauregui, B. M., Rosa-Garcia, R., Garcia, U., WallisDeVries, M. F., Osoro, K. & Celaya, R. (2008). Effects of stocking density and breed of goats on vegetation and grasshopper occurrence in heathlands. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 123, 219–224.

Jepson, P. (2016). A rewilding agenda for Europe: Creating a network of experimental reserves. Ecography 39, 117-124.

Jerrentrup, J. S., Wrage-Mönnig, N., Röver, K.-U. & Isselstein, J. (2014). Grazing intensity affects insect diversity via sward structure and heterogeneity in a long-term experiment. Journal of Applied Ecology 51, 968-977.

Joern, A. & Laws, A. N. (2012). Ecological Mechanisms Underlying Arthropod Species Diversity in Grasslands. Annual Review of Entomology, 58, 19–36.

Johnson, C. N., Prior, L. D., Archibald, S., Poulos, H. M., Barton, A. M., Williamson, G. J., & Bowman, D. M. J. S. (2018). Can trophic rewilding reduce the impact of fire in a more flammable world? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 373, 20170443.

Johnston, E. A., Poulton, P. R. & Coleman, K. (2009). Chapter 1 Soil organic matter: its importance in sustainable agriculture and carbon dioxide fluxes. Advances in Agronomy 101, 1-57.

Jorgensen, B. S. & Stedman, R. C. (2001). Sense of Place as an attitude: Lakeshore owners attitudes toward their properties. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 233–248.

Kalabokidis, K. D., Koutsias, N., Konstantinidis, P. & Vasilakos, C. (2007). Multivariate analysis of landscape wildfire dynamics in a Mediterranean ecosystem of Greece. Area 39, 392–402.

Klumpp, K., Fontaine, S., Attard, E., Le Roux, X., Gleixner, G. & Soussana, J.-F. (2009). Grazing triggers soil carbon loss by altering plant roots and their control on soil microbial community. Journal of Ecology 97, 876-885.

Koninx, F. (2018). Ecotourism and rewilding: the case of Swedish Lapland. Journal of Ecotourism, 0, 1–16.

Kooijman, A. M., Cusell, C., van Mourik, J. & Reijman, T. (2016). Restoration of former agricultural fields on acid sandy soils: conversion to heathland, rangeland or forest? Ecological Engineering 93, 55-65.

Köster, E., Köster, K., Aurela, M., Laurila, T., Berninger, F., Lohila, A. & Pampanen, J. (2013). Impact of reindeer herding on vegetation biomass and soil carbon content: a case study from Sodankylä, Finland. Boreal Environment Research 18, 35-42.

Kramer, K., Groen, T. A. & Van Wieren, S. E. (2003). The interacting effects of ungulates and fire on forest dynamics: An analysis using the model FORSPACE. Forest Ecology and Management 181, 205–222.

Kruess, A. & Tscharntke, T. (2002). Grazing intensity and the diversity of grasshoppers, butterflies, and trap-nesting bees and wasps. Conservation Biology 16, 1570-1580.

Koerner, S. E., Smith, M. D., Burkepile, D. E., Hanan, N. P., Avolio, M. L. … Zelikova, T. J. (2018). Change in dominance determines herbivore effects on plant biodiversity. Nature Ecology & Evolution 2, 1925-1932.

Lasanta, T., Khorchani, M., Pérez-Cabello, F., Errea, P., Sáenz-Blanco, R. & Nadal-Romero, E. (2018). Clearing shrubland and extensive livestock farming: Active prevention to control wildfires in the Mediterranean mountains. Journal of Environmental Management, 227, 256–266.

Lavorel, S., Grigulis, K., Lamarque, P., Colace, M.-P., Garden, D. … Douzet, R. (2011). Using plant functional traits to understand the landscape distribution of multiple ecosystem services. Journal of Ecology 99, 135-147.

Lecomte, X., Caldeira, M. C., Catry, F. X., Fernandes, P. M., Jackson, R. B. & Bugalho, M. N. (2019). Ungulates mediate trade-offs between carbon storage and wildfire hazard in Mediterranean oak woodlands. Journal of Applied Ecology, 56, 699–710.

Leifeld, J. & Fuhrer, J. (2009). Long-term management effects on soil organic matter in two cold, high-elevation grasslands: clues from fractionation and radiocarbon dating. European Journal of Soil Science 60, 230-239.

Leonard, S., Kirkpatrick, J. & Marsden-Smedley, J. (2010). Variation in the effects of vertebrate grazing on fire potential between grassland structural types. Journal of Applied Ecology 47, 876–883.

Loepfe, L., Martinez-Vilalta, J., Oliveres, J., Piñol, J. & Lloret, F. (2010). Feedbacks between fuel reduction and landscape homogenisation determine fire regimes in three Mediterranean areas. Forest Ecology and Management, 259, 2366–2374.

López-Díaz, M. L., Benítez, R. & Moreno, G. (2017). How do management techniques affect carbon stock in intensive hardwood plantations? Forest Ecology and Management 389, 228-239.

López-Santiago, C. A., Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-López, B., Plieninger, T., Martín, E. G. & González, J. A. (2014). Using visual stimuli to explore the social perceptions of ecosystem services in cultural landscapes: The case of transhumance in Mediterranean Spain. Ecology and Society, 19, 27.

Lovreglio, R., Meddour-Sahar, O. & Leone, V. (2014). Goat grazing as a wildfire prevention tool: A basic review. iForest 7, 260–268.

Luoto, M., Pykälä, J. & Kuussaari, M. (2003). Decline of landscape-scale habitat and species diversity after the end of cattle grazing. Journal for Nature Conservation 11, 171-178.

Maldonado, A. D., Ramos-López, D. & Aguilera, P. A. (2019). The role of cultural landscapes in the delivery of provisioning ecosystem services in protected areas. Sustainability, 11, 1–18.

Mancilla-Leytón, J. & Vicente, Á. M. (2012). Biological fire prevention method: Evaluating the effects of goat grazing on the fire-prone mediterranean scrub. Forest Systems 21, 199–204.

Martino, S. & Muenzel, D. (2018). The economic value of high nature value farming and the importance of the Common Agricultural Policy in sustaining income: The case study of the Natura 2000 Zarandul de Est (Romania). Journal of Rural Studies 60, 176–187.

McLauchlan, K. K., Higuera, P. E., Miesel, J., Rogers, B. M., Schweitzer, J., Shuman, J. K., … Watts, A. C. (2020). Fire as a fundamental ecological process: Research advances and frontiers. Journal of Ecology 108, 2047– 2069.

McNaughton, S. J. (1991). Grazing as an optimization process: grass-ungulate relationships in the Serengeti. American Naturalist 113, 697-703.

McSherry, M. E. & Ritchie, M. E. (2013). Effects of grazing on grassland soil carbon: a global review. Global Change Biology 19, 1347-1357.

Medina-Roldán, E., Paz-Ferreiro, J. & Bardgett, R. D. (2012). Grazing exclusion affects soil and plant communities, but has no impact on soil carbon storage in an upland grassland. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 149, 118-123.

Middleton, B. A., Holsten, B. & van Diggelen, R. (2009). Biodiversity management of fens and fen meadows by grazing, cutting and burning. Journal of Vegetation Science 9, 307-316.

Milcu, A. I., Hanspach, J., Abson, D. & Fischer, J. (2013). Cultural ecosystem services: a literature review and prospects for future research. Ecology and Society 18, 44.

Mitsopoulos, I. D. & Dimitrakopoulos, A. P. (2017). Effect of fuel treatments on crown fire behavior in Aleppo pine forests of Greece: A simulation study. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal, 16, 1507–1514.

Moreira, F., Viedma, O., Arianoutsou, M., Curt, T., Koutsias, N., Rigolot, E., … Bilgili, E. (2011). Landscape – wildfire interactions in southern Europe: Implications for landscape management. Journal of Environmental Management, 92, 2389–2402.

Morgan-Davies, C., Waterhouse, A., Pollock, M. L. & Holland, J. P. (2008). Integrating hill sheep production and newly established native woodland: Achieving sustainability through multiple land use in Scotland. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 6, 133–147.

Navarro, A., & López-Bao, J. V. (2019). EU agricultural policy still not green. Nature Sustainability 2, 990.

Navarro, L. M. & Pereira, H. M. (2012). Rewilding Abandoned Landscapes in Europe. Ecosystems 15, 900–912.

Naveed, M., Herath, L., Moldrup, P., Arthur, E., Nicolaisen, M., Norgaard, T., Ferré, T. P. A. & de Jonge, L. W. (2016). Spatial variability of microbial richness and diversity and relationships with soil organic carbon, texture and structure across an agricultural field. Applied Soil Ecology 103, 44-55.

Ne’eman, G., Perevolotsky, A. & Schiller, G. (1997). The management implications of the Mt. Carmel research project. International Journal of Wildland Fire 7, 343–350.

Nogués-Bravo, D., Simberloff, D., Rahbek, C. & Sanders, N. J. (2016). Rewilding is the new Pandora’s box in conservation. Current Biology 26, R87-R91.

Nuñez, C. M. V, Scorolli, A., Lagos, L., Berman, D. & Kane, A. J. (2016). Management of Free-Roaming Horses. In: Ransom, J. I. & Kaczensky, P. (eds). Wild equids: Ecology, Management, and Conservation. The John Hopkins University Press.

Oesterheld, M. & McNaughton, S. J. (1991). Effect of stress and time for recovery on the amount of compensatory growth after grazing. Oecologia85, 305-313.

Olff, H. & Ritchie, M. E. (1998). Effects of herbivores on grassland plant diversity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13, 261-265.

Olff, H., Vera, F. W. M., Bokdam, J., Bakker, E. S., Gleichman, J. M., De Maeyer, K., & Smit, R. (1999). Shifting mosaics in grazed woodlands driven by the alternation of plant facilitation and competition. Plant Biology, 1, 127–137.

Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-Lopez, B., González, J. A., Plieninger, T., Lopez, C. A. & Montes, C. (2014). Socio-cultural valuation of ecosystem services in a transhumance social-ecological network. Regional Environmental Change 14, 1269–1289.

Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-López, B., López, C. A., Palomo, I. & González, J. A. (2013). Envisioning the future of transhumant pastoralism through participatory scenario planning: a case study in Spain. The Rangeland Journal 35, 251–272.

Papini, R., Valboa, G., Favilli, F. & L’Abate, G. (2011). Influence of land use on organic carbon pool and chemical properties of Vertic Cambisols in central and southern Italy. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 140, 68-79.

Pausas, J. G. & Keeley, J. E. (2014). Abrupt climate-independent fire regime changes. Ecosystems 17, 1109–1120.

Pe’er, G., Bonn, A., Bruelheide, H., Dieker, P., Eisenhauer, N., Feindt, P. H., … Lakner, S. (2020). Action needed for the EU Common Agricultural Policy to address sustainability challenges. People and Nature, 2, 1–12.

Pe’er, G., Zinnegrebe, Y., Hauck, J., Schindler, S., Dittrich, A. … Lakner, S. (2017). Adding some green to the greening: improving the EU’s ecological focus areas for biodiversity and farmers. Conservation Letters 10, 517-530.

Perino, A., Pereira, H. M., Navarro, L. M., Fernández, N., Bullock, J. M., Ceauşu, S., … Wheeler, H. C. (2019). Rewilding complex ecosystems. Science, 364 (6438).

Perpiña Castillo, C., Kavalov, B., Diogo, V., Jacobs-Crisioni, C., Batista e Silva, F. & Lavalle, C. (2018). JRC113718. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/jrcsh/files/jrc113718.pdf.

Plieninger, T., Hartel, T., Martín-López, B., Beaufoy, G., Bergmeier, E., Kirby, K. … Van Uytvanck, J. (2015). Wood-pastures of Europe: Geographic coverage, social-ecological values, conservation management, and policy implications. Biological Conservation 190, 70–79.

Pöyry, J., Luoto, M., Paukkunen, J., Pykälä, J., Raatikainen, K. & Kuussaari, M. (2006). Different responses of plants and herbivore insects to a gradient of vegetation height: an indicator of vertebrate grazing intensity and successional age. Oikos 115, 401-412.

Prior, J. & Brady, E. (2017). Environmental Aesthetics and Rewilding. Environmental Values, 26, 31–51.

Proulx, M., & Mazumder, A. (1998). Reversal of grazing impact on plant species richness in nutrient-poor vs. nutrient-rich ecosystems. Ecology 79, 2581–2592.

Raatikainen, K. J. & Barron, E. S. (2017). Current agri-environmental policies dismiss varied perceptions and discourses on management of traditional rural biotopes. Land Use Policy 69, 564–576.

Redpath, S. M., Bhatia, S. & Young, J. (2015). Tilting at wildlife: reconsidering human-wildlife conflict. Oryx 49, 222-225.

Richmond, A. S., Wylie, A. R. G., Laidlaw, A. S. & Lively, F. O. (2015). Methane emmissions from beef cattle grazing on semi-natural upland and improved lowland grasslands. Animal 9, 130-137.

Ripoll-Bosch, R., de Boer, I. J. M., Bernués, A. & Vellinga, T. V. (2013). Accounting for multi-functionality of sheep farming in the carbon footprint of lamb: A comparison of three contrasting Mediterranean systems. Agricultural Systems 116, 60–68.

Robertson, A., Tirado, C., Lobstein, T., Jermini, M., Knai, C., Jensen, J. H., Ferro-Luzzi, A. & James, W. P. T. (2004). Food and health in Europe: a new basis for action. WHO Regional Publications, European Series no. 96. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.

Rosa García, R., Fraser, M. D., Celaya, R., Mendes Ferreira, L. M., García, U. & Osoro, K. (2013). Grazing land management and biodiversity in the Atlantic European heathlands: a review. Agroforstry Systems 87, 19-43.

Rouet-Leduc, J. & von Essen, E. (2019). The Compromises of Rewilding in Swedish Laponia: Implications for Nature Reconciliation. The Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies 17, 38-54.

Ruiz-Mirazo, J. (2011). Environmental benefits of extensive livestock farming: wildfire prevention and beyond. In: Bernués, A., Boutonnet, J. P., Casasús, I., Chentouf, M., Gabiña, D., Joy, M. … Pacheco, F. Economic, social and environmental sustainability in sheep and goat production systems.

Ruiz-Mirazo, J., Martínez-Fernández, J. & Vega-García, C. (2012). Pastoral wildfires in the Mediterranean: Understanding their linkages to land cover patterns in managed landscapes. Journal of Environmental Management 98, 43–50.

Savian, J. V., Neto, A. B., de David, D. B., Bremm, C., Três Schons, R. M. … de Faccio Carvalho, P. C. (2014). Grazing intensity and stocking methods on animal production and methane emission by grazing sheep: implications for integrated crop-livestock system. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 190, 112-119.

Scharlemann, J. P. W., Tanner, E. V. J., Hiederer, R. & Kapos, V. (2014). Global soil carbon: understanding and managing the largest terrestrial carbon pool. Carbon Management 5, 81-91.

Schwartz, K. Z. S. (2005). Wild horses in a “European wilderness”: Imagining sustainable development in the post-Communist countryside. Cultural Geographies 12, 292–320.

Sitters, J., Kimuyu, D. M., Young, T. P., Claeys, P. & Olde Venterink, H. (2020). Negative effects of cattle on soil carbon and nutrient pools reversed by megaherbivores. Nature Sustainability 3, 360-366.

Sitters, J., Wubs, E. R. J., Bakker, E. S., Crowther, T. W., Adler, P. B. … Veen, G. F. (2019). Nutrient availability controls the impact of mammalian herbivores on soil carbon and nitrogen pools in grasslands. Global Change Biology 26, 2060-2071.

Smith, F. A., Lyons, S. K., Wagner, P. J. & Elliott, S. (2015). The importance of considering animal body mass in IPCC greenhouse inventories and the underappreciated role of wild herbivores. Global Change Biology 21, 3880-3888.

Smith, S. W., Vandenberghe, C., Hastings, A., Johnson, D., Pakeman, R. J., van der Wal, R. & Woodin, S. J. (2014). Optimizing carbon storage within a spatially heterogeneous upland grassland through sheep grazing management. Ecosystems 17, 418-429.

Soulé, M. & Noss, P. (1998). Rewilding and biodiversity: complementary goals for continental conservation. Wild Earth 8, 1-11.

Soussana, J. F., Tallec, T. & Blanfort, V. (2010). Mitigating the greenhouse gas balance of ruminant production systems through carbon sequestration in grasslands. Animal 4, 334-350.

Stark, S., Männistö, M. K. & Smolander, A. (2010). Multiple effects of reindeer grazing on the soil processes in nutrient-poor northern boreal forests. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 42, 2068-2077.

Starns, H. D., Fuhlendorf, S. D., Elmore, R. D., Twidwell, D., Thacker, E. T., Hovick, T. J. & Luttbeg, B. (2019). Recoupling fire and grazing reduces wildland fuel loads on rangelands. Ecosphere 10, e02578.

Stuart, A. J. & Lister, A. M. (2007). Patterns of late quaternary megafaunal extinctions in Europe and northern Asia. CFS Courier-Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg 259, 287-297.

Suominen, O. & Olofsson, J. (2000). Impacts of semi-domesticated reindeer on structure of tundra and forest communities in fennoscandia: a review. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 37, 233–249.

Surová, D., Ravera, F., Guiomar, N., Martínez Sastre, R. & Pinto-Correia, T. (2018). Contributions of Iberian Silvo-Pastoral Landscapes to the Well-Being of Contemporary Society. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 71, 560–570.

Svenning, J.-C. (2002). A review of natural vegetation openness in north-western Europe. Biological Conservation 104, 133-148.

Svenning, J.-C., Pedersen, P. B. M., Donlan, C. J., Ejrnæs, R., Faurby, S. … Vera, F. W. M. (2016). Science for a wilder Anthropocene: synthesis and future directions for trophic rewilding research. Proceedings of the National Academy of the USA 113, 898-906.

Swift, M. J., Heal, O. W. & Anderson, J. M. (1979). Decomposition in Terrestrial Ecosystems. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Takagi, S., & Miyashita, T. (2014). Scale and system dependencies of indirect effects of large herbivores on phytophagous insects: A meta-analysis. Population Ecology, 56, 435–445.

Tanetztap, A. J. & Coomes, D. A. (2012). Carbon storage in terrestrial ecosystems: do browsing and grazing herbivores matter? Biological Reviews87, 72-94.

Tsiouvaras, C. N., Havlik, N. A. & Bartolome, J. W. (1989). Effects of goats on understory vegetation and fire hazard reduction in a coastal forest in California. Forest Science 35, 1125–1131.

Valderrábano, J. & Torrano, L. (2000). The potential for using goats to control Genista scorpius shrubs in European black pine stands. Forest Ecology and Management 126, 377–383.

Van Berkel, D. B. & Verburg, P. H. (2014). Spatial quantification and valuation of cultural ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape. Ecological Indicators, 37, 163–174.

van Klink, R., van der Plas, F., van Noordwijk, C. G. E., WallisDeVries, M. F. & Olff, H. (2015a). Effects of large herbivores on grassland arthropod diversity. Biological Reviews 90, 347-366.

van Klink, R., Schrama, M., Nolte, S., Bakker, J. P., WallisDeVries, M. F. & Berg, M. P. (2015b). Defoliation and soil compaction jointly drive large-herbivore grazing effects on plants and soil arthropods on clay soil. Ecosystems 18, 671-685.

van Klink, R., & WallisDeVries, M. F. (2018). Risks and opportunities of trophic rewilding for arthropod communities. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 373, 1–8.

van der Plas, F., Howison, R. A., Mpanza, N., Cromsigt, J. P. G. M. & Olff, H. (2016). Different-sized grazers have distinctive effects on plant functional composition of an African savannah. Journal of Ecology, 104, 864–875.

Varela, E., Górriz-Mifsud, E., Ruiz-Mirazo, J. & López-i-Gelats, F. (2018). Payment for Targeted Grazing: Integrating Local Shepherds into Wildfire Prevention. Forests, 9, 464.

Ward, S. E., Bardgett, R. D., McNamara, N. P., Adamson, J. K. & Ostle, N. J. (2007). Long-term consequences of grazing and burning on northern peatland carbon dynamics. Ecosystems 10, 1069-1083.

Warnock, A. D., Florentine, S. K., Graz, F. P. & Westbrooke, M. E. (2012). Short-term gain and long-term pain: Lessons learnt from the control of Lachnagrostis filiformis (fairy grass) in Victoria, Australia. Weed Biology and Management 12, 156–167.

Wehn, S., Anders Hovstad, K. & Johansen, L. (2018). The relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem services and the effects of grazing cessation in semi-natural grasslands. Web Ecology 18, 55–65.

Zhiyanski, M., Glushkova, M., Ferezliev, A., Menichetti, L. & Leifeld, J. (2016). Carbon storage and soil property changes following afforestation in mountain ecosystems of the Western Rhodopes, Bulgaria. iForest – Biogeosciences and Forestry 9, 626-634.

Zimmerman, G. T. & Neuenschwander, L. F. (1984). Livestock grazing influences on Community Structure, Fire Intensity, and Fire Frequency within the Douglas-Fir/Ninebark Habitat Type. Journal of Range Management 37, 104–110.

Zhou, W. & Gong, P. (2005). Multiple-use tradeoffs in Swedish mountain region forests. Forest Policy and Economics, 7, 39–52.

Zhou, G., Zhou, X., He, Y., Shao, J., Hu, Z., Liu, R., Zhou, H. & Hosseinibai, S. (2017). Grazing intensity significantly affects belowground carbon and nitrogen cycling in grassland ecosystems: a meta-analysis. Global Change Biology 23, 1167-1179.

This privacy statement was last updated on February 7, 2021 and applies to citizens and legal permanent residents of the European Economic Area and Switzerland.

In this privacy statement, we explain what we do with the data we obtain about you via https://grazelife.com. We recommend you carefully read this statement. In our processing we comply with the requirements of privacy legislation. That means, among other things, that:

  • we clearly state the purposes for which we process personal data. We do this by means of this privacy statement;
  • we aim to limit our collection of personal data to only the personal data required for legitimate purposes;
  • we first request your explicit consent to process your personal data in cases requiring your consent;
  • we take appropriate security measures to protect your personal data and also require this from parties that process personal data on our behalf;
  • we respect your right to access your personal data or have it corrected or deleted, at your request.

If you have any questions, or want to know exactly what data we keep of you, please contact us.

1. Purpose, data and retention period

We may collect or receive personal information for a number of purposes connected with our business operations which may include the following: (click to expand)

2. Cookies

Our website uses cookies. For more information about cookies, please refer to our Cookie Policy

3. Disclosure practices

We disclose personal information if we are required by law or by a court order, in response to a law enforcement agency, to the extent permitted under other provisions of law, to provide information, or for an investigation on a matter related to public safety.

If our website or organisation is taken over, sold, or involved in a merger or acquisition, your details may be disclosed to our advisers and any prospective purchasers and will be passed on to the new owners.

We have concluded a data Processing Agreement with Google.

4. Security

We are committed to the security of personal data. We take appropriate security measures to limit abuse of and unauthorized access to personal data. This ensures that only the necessary persons have access to your data, that access to the data is protected, and that our security measures are regularly reviewed.

5. Third-party websites

This privacy statement does not apply to third-party websites connected by links on our website. We cannot guarantee that these third parties handle your personal data in a reliable or secure manner. We recommend you read the privacy statements of these websites prior to making use of these websites.

6. Amendments to this privacy statement

We reserve the right to make amendments to this privacy statement. It is recommended that you consult this privacy statement regularly in order to be aware of any changes. In addition, we will actively inform you wherever possible.

7. Accessing and modifying your data

If you have any questions or want to know which personal data we have about you, please contact us. You can contact us by using the information below. You have the following rights:

  • You have the right to know why your personal data is needed, what will happen to it, and how long it will be retained for.
  • Right of access: You have the right to access your personal data that is known to us.
  • Right to rectification: you have the right to supplement, correct, have deleted or blocked your personal data whenever you wish.
  • If you give us your consent to process your data, you have the right to revoke that consent and to have your personal data deleted.
  • Right to transfer your data: you have the right to request all your personal data from the controller and transfer it in its entirety to another controller.
  • Right to object: you may object to the processing of your data. We comply with this, unless there are justified grounds for processing.

Please make sure to always clearly state who you are, so that we can be certain that we do not modify or delete any data of the wrong person.

8. Submitting a complaint

If you are not satisfied with the way in which we handle (a complaint about) the processing of your personal data, you have the right to submit a complaint to the Data Protection Authority.

9. Contact details

Rewilding Europe
Toernooiveld 1
6525 ED Nijmegen
The Netherlands
Netherlands
Website: https://grazelife.com
Email: info@rewildingeurope.com
Phone number: +31-6-30543387

Scientific Advisory Committee

The GRAZELIFE consortium has found a team of scientists willing to advise it during the project. They are specialists in the field of wildfire prevention, agricultural policies, ecosystem services, herbivory and biodiversity.

Dr. Guy Pe’er

Dr. Elisabeth Bakker

Dr. Alfons van der Plas

Dr. Francisco Moreira

Areas

Coa Valley – Portugal

Two case studies will gather information of different grazing models in the Greater Coa Valley, their relation to wildfire prevention, and their competitive power compared to other land use models like forestry or simple land abandonment. One case study will focus on the Faia Brava reserve, the largest private nature reserve in Portugal, and the challenges of how to scale up the natural grazing model with semi-wild herbivores that is used. This study will provide an overview of financial and veterinarian restrictions that private organizations and landowners in NE-Portugal face when trying to set up grazing systems that limit wildfires and enhance biodiversity.

The second case study will collect information from different parts of the Coa Valley – with different land management models – and their vulnerability to wildfires in relation to human densities/activities. With the current frequency of wildfires in Portugal (on average once every 10–15 years), there is an urgent need to assess new grazing models and their effectiveness in fire prevention, carbon storage/sequestration and reaching biodiversity-targets, compared to the effects of land abandonment (leading to shrub-encroachment) and large-scale plantations of pine and eucalyptus forests. This study comes with comparable data regarding fire prevention, carbon storage/sequestration and biodiversity-targets for different land uses.

Galicia – Spain

In this part of Spain, wild ponies are present in several mountain ranges with uneven densities and different situations. Alternative uses include mainly forestry and land abandonment. The traditional system of wild ponies’ coexistence with the use of natural resources is now threatened due to conflicts with landowners, legal situations and policies, low market prices and wolf attacks.

After evaluation of the existing information on this topic, 3-5 subareas will be selected for an in-depth case study on the land management models that are used. In each case study owners` associations and other relevant stakeholders will be contacted to perform the questionnaires. By a combination of remote sensing and existing public data and fieldwork, cartography of the grazed areas will be developed, which will depict: i) natural and semi-natural habitats according to the Habitats directive, ii) landscape values, iii) fuel biomass and wildfire risk areas. These landscape and habitat properties will be compared among the different grazing models practiced in the region in order to investigate which one performs best regarding biodiversity maintenance and fire prevention.

Velebit – Croatia

Velebit Mountains and the adjacent Lika Plains belong to the biodiversity hotspots of Europe. These rich mosaic landscapes are at risk of bush encroachment on the one hand and intensive farming on the other hand. To protect these valuable lands, first pioneering actions with natural grazing by horses, cattle and wild ungulates have been set up in the last five years. Although these natural grazing models seems to be profitable, they can’t compete with upcoming large-scale sheep and cattle farming that benefit more from current subsidy-systems, even though the latter grazing models may perform less in biodiversity, landscape development and carbon storage. A practical assessment of these conflicts is desperately needed, which will require direct discussions with relevant authorities at the regional and national level, including a more in-depth cost-efficiency analysis with particular attention to alternative business models and subsidy systems, as well as current costs of fire prevention with a system in which natural grazing limits the scale of wildfires.

To address the question of environmental costs and benefits,  two field studies will be conducted in the Lika Plains and surrounding areas of the Velebit Mountains.  .

One study – in cooperation with the University of Zagreb and, within it, the Faculty of Agriculture – will assess the impact of different levels of grazing intensities, ranging from sheep and cattle farming (and mowing) to natural grazing with (semi)wild herbivores – on 1) biodiversity, 2) wildfire prevention and 3) carbon storage/sequestration in Lika Plains, based on data of the vegetation structure. The study will also examine the competitive power of these different grazing models in relation to (inter)national policies, legislation and subsidy-systems.

The second study will – via interviews – examine the impact of natural grazing on historically grazed, but now abandoned, areas in Velebit Mountains that face bush- and forest encroachment with growing risks for wildfires. The study will assess whether natural grazing systems can add value to spontaneous regrowth of forests in these abandoned areas with regard to biodiversity and whether it could help effective wildfire prevention. Legal, financial and policy barriers for implementation of the most effective management models will be mapped.

Rhodope Mountains – Bulgaria

With over 10 years of pioneering practices in natural grazing in the Eastern Rhodopes, there is much knowledge available regarding managers experiences with policy restrictions and subsidies and the effects of grazing models for biodiversity and ecosystem services. This needs proper documentation and analysis, also for the benefit of similar projects in other parts of Europe. Therefore, a quick scan will be performed about current practices on natural grazing in the Eastern Rhodopes and the challenges regarding competing land-use models.

Topics that will be addressed are:

  1. competition of natural grazing with subsidized herding (with dogs) of sheep and cattle,
  2. protection of natural grasslands (for example with susliks) versus subsidized ploughing of these grasslands,
  3. natural grazing with rare breeds and the legal restrictions (for example artificial shelters) that are connected to the subsidies of these breeds,
  4. advantages, disadvantages and barriers to obtain a ‘wild status’ for free roaming horses (Bulgaria is pioneering here),
  5. emerging knowledge about the way free roaming cattle and horses learn to defend themselves against large predators.

Danube Delta – Romania/Ukraine

With the collapse of natural populations of large herbivores and (later) livestock numbers due to land abandonment, large parts of the Danube Delta show a tendency to monocultures of vast reed beds. More or less by accident escaped/free roaming herds of horses and cattle locally show a positive impact on the structure of the reed beds, but on other places (for example Letea forest) their impact is heavily debated. The time is ripe to learn from these incidents and draw conclusions that can be useful for the larger delta-ecosystems.

Therefore, an ecological and socio-economical assessment will be conducted of the current grazing models in the Danube Delta (in the Ukrainian Outer Delta, on islands in Ukraine and Romania and in the Romanian dune complexes). This case study will gain from the diversity of different grazing models, especially on the Ukraine side, offering a valuable comparative study/natural experiment to learn from. Based on a habitat overview of the entire delta, the assessment will include an investigation of the scaling-up potential of the grazing models studied, but also describe existing limitations due to legal or financial restrictions. This subject has the full attention of the Biosphere Reserve and Delta Institute in Romania and Rewilding Ukraine is preparing a larger cooperation with these organisations in a long-term research project, beyond the timeframe of this Preparatory Project. In that sense the preliminary study within this GRAZELIFE-project should be considered as a first assessment to gather information that is both useful for EU-policies as well as for a more comprehensive study that will consider the whole delta ecosystem.

Oder Delta – Germany/Poland

For several years, both the Polish and German parts of the Oder Delta have seen a steady decline in grazing livestock production. This applies especially to semi-natural economic forms. Extensively grazed areas are increasingly threatened to lose their agricultural eligibility altogether, because of changes in the vegetation structure, or – in wetlands – due to the (temporary) existence of open water areas that are no longer recognized as agricultural land by the agricultural authorities. This development leads to individual areas taken out of agricultural use and forgoing natural succession in the best case, but more usually a change is made to more intensive cultivation methods instead of grazing. Both are usually associated with negative consequences for regional biodiversity. For this reason, there is much interest for nature conservation in determining the causes of the decline in grazing livestock farming and paying special attention to agricultural subsidies and their role in maintaining (extensive, sustainable) grazing or altering land-use.

For this reason two case studies will be conducted (one on the German side and one on the Polish side) to examine the responses of landowners and –users to the agricultural support in the last and current funding periods in both countries, with both the first pillar (Direct Payments) and the second pillar (Agri-Environmental-Climate Measures) of the CAP. The focus will be on those land managers who are either currently practicing near-natural grazing or have given up this method with the change from the last to the current agricultural subsidy period. In particular, beneficial or obstructive framework conditions for near-natural grazing as well as any changes with a changeover to the current funding period (2014–2021) will be examined. This analysis is done separately for the German and the Polish side in order to identify national and regional differences in programming and implementation.

As a result, insights should be gained as to which parameters need to be changed within the agricultural promotion in order to create conditions for a spatial expansion of more sustainable grazing practices and, above all, for more natural grazing methods.

Lowland Rivers Rhine and Meuse – Netherlands/Belgium

The Dutch floodplains of the rivers Rhine and Meuse have a 30-year history of natural grazing projects by conservation organizations, with excellent results regarding biodiversity. However, for landowners it increasingly appears more attractive to use farm cattle and also for farmers it is more profitable to continue less sustainable models, because of subsidies related to more intense grazing and mowing systems. This problem may have worsened with the recent CAP reform reintroducing coupled-payments (i.e., payments that are coupled with production) after a gradual decrease of such payments since the 90s. As this issue will be addressed more generally in the Oder Delta case studies, the Dutch input will focus more on two more specific challenges related to natural grazing:

  1. legal restrictions towards cross-border grazing projects (here between the Netherlands and Belgium) and
  2. the ecological value of (regarding animal medicines) clean manure in grazed ecosystems.

Specifically, we will examine the problem with cross-border movements of grazing herds. At the moment this is very difficult because of (inter)national legislation, therefore limiting possibilities for large scale grazing projects in border regions. A case study in the Border-Meuse region will provide information on this topic and possible options to overcome these limitations, which can be useful for other European border areas as well.

A second case study will examine the role of manure in ecosystems by comparing the flora and fauna of manure of (semi-)wild herbivores with that of livestock grazing in nature reserves. The use of, for example, deworming medicines, can be shown to make a huge difference in terms of biodiversity and will be an extra argument for natural grazing that can be applied to other European regions as well. The case studies will result in recommendations regarding cross-border grazing projects and the value of faeces from untreated animals in (semi)natural ecosystems.

Lithuania

Encouraging animal keeping is one of the key priorities of agricultural policy in Lithuania, therefore this Member State seeks more flexibility to grazing management strategies that can support EU-goals on biodiversity and climate mitigation along with securing farmers’ incomes. To make this approach available within the European context of this Preparatory Project, a better understanding of the Lithuanian situation is essential. For the Lithuanian situation it is useful to check the implementation of this strategy in the field, with relevant stakeholders regarding grazing management systems.

The case study will analyse different grazing models and best practices of animal grazing in Lithuania implemented in different ecological (e.g. different habitat types) and socio-economic contexts (e.g. involvement in implementation of Pillar 2 of the CAP (Rural Development Programme). To realize this targeted farming areas will be screened with multispectral aerial photos made by the associated beneficiary BEF-LT. This would allow a rapid, but still comprehensive assessment of vegetation diversity and structure in targeted areas, contributing to defining the most useful grazing models. The action will specifically focus on CAP payment systems applied in targeted field farms. Experts will analyse benefits and limitations of the applied measures and what improvements (administrative, management requirements, etc.) could be made to maximize the delivery of ecosystem services of Regulation & Maintenance. This case study will thereby develop recommendations how Rural Development Program in Lithuania can be improved to perform better delivery of targeted ecosystem services.

Partners

Rewilding Europe – Coordinating Beneficiary

Rewilding Europe (RE) is a Europe-oriented nature conservation NGO, recognized as charity by the Dutch law (ANBI-status by Dutch Tax Authority), whose activities focus on allowing natural processes to shape our landscapes. This is done in a way that such landscapes help solving modern socio-economic issues like climate adaptation, flood protection and fire prevention. At the same time, our approach creates attractive landscapes that support biodiversity conservation and create a base for new local economies, using different sectors such as nature-based tourism. By involving local communities in this process, we try to establish new sustainable rural economies.

Herbivory is one of the key-processes at the basis of many European natural landscapes and their rich biodiversity, and this includes natural grazing by large herbivores like bison, deer, wild horses and bovines (with the latter two extinct in the wild). It’s estimated that more than 50% of Europe’s biodiversity is directly or indirectly linked to herbivory. Land abandonment (between 0,5 and 1 mio/ha/yr (IEEP, 2011)) in parts of Europe, puts this relationship at risk. After millions of years of natural grazing, followed by thousands of years of livestock grazing (which gradually replaced wild herbivores), these landscapes now show a break in the grazing tradition. With the farmers and shepherds, grazing livestock is rapidly declining and almost absent in many regions, while most wild herbivores have become extinct or survived only in very low numbers.

Rewilding Europe and its partners in more than 25 European countries are involved in setting up and supporting new herbivore systems in rewilding areas. The main aim of this specific activity is to bring back and test the process of natural grazing in different eco- and climate regions and its impact on biodiversity, landscape development, trophic chains, and how this can support wildlife tourism, supply of regional products and other new enterprise forms. Part of our work is restocking and reintroduction of wild herbivores and providing local partners with wild-living herds of primitive horse and cattle breeds, via the European Wildlife Bank (EWB), a tool set up by RE.

In order to test and support new economic models based on the approach as described above, RE has established a loan facility, called Rewilding Europe Capital (REC), that provides local enterprises and start-ups with loans for businesses that are not only based on such newly established natural values, but also contribute (in kind or financially) to a more natural landscape. For this purpose RE has signed a contract with the European Investment Bank – under the Natural Capital Financing Facility – to scale up REC’s programme for nature-based enterprises.

As RE considers communication on its evolving vision on this topic and the results from the showcases in the field of vital importance, it deploys a broad spectrum of communication tools, ranging from local education-programmes to tv-documentaries broadcasted worldwide.

Additionally, in order to gather scientific evidence of the ecological and socio-economic benefits connected to rewilding in general – and more specific to natural grazing – RE is involved in the establishment of an independent and dedicated rewilding professorship at the Wageningen University, that will be connected to the scientific review of the management models discussed and tested in the current LIFE-project. Specifically, for the GRAZELIFE project, Rewilding Europe will use the knowledge and experience of Dr. Elisabeth Bakker, associated with the Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO).

Having worked in dozens of rewilding projects, in which herbivory is often a key process, RE and its network-partners have extensive practical experience with the challenges of natural grazing within the current European policies, legislation and subsidy-systems. Representatives of the RE-network, gathered in this GRAZELIFE-consortium are therefore well positioned to come up with recommendations to support sustainable grazing-models that benefit Europe’s wider agenda on biodiversity, climate adaptation, fire prevention and other socio-economic issues in rural areas.

 

Rewilding Europe is providing a large part of the cofunding needed for this LIFE Preparatory Project. Rewilding Europe is supported in this by the Arcadia Fund, the UK based charitable trust of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin that supports charities and scholarly institutions that preserve cultural heritage and the environment.

Universität Leipzig – Associated Beneficiary

Universität Leipzig (ULEI), which has been founded in 1409, today has about 30,000 students more than 400 professors and enables scientists to work in interdisciplinary projects. ULEI has extensive experience in international research projects and projects of the EU structural funds. In the recently finished 7. Research Framework Program of the EU it participated in some 75 projects (including ERC, MCA, and collaborative projects) with an overall EC-contribution of more than 25 million Euro and was coordinator of 5 collaborative research projects. Currently there are some 40 H2020 projects at ULEI. These are listed in Annex 3b.

Julia Rouet-LeducJulia Rouet-Leduc is a PhD student working full time with the GRAZELIFE project at the University of Leipzig and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv). The PhD project takes an interdisciplinary approach to explore different types of grazing and the ecosystem services they provide. The research project will use multiple methods to assess the different types of land uses of interest in the GRAZELIFE project and to fill knowledge gaps, especially when it comes to wild and semi-wild grazing systems. The first year of the three-year PhD project will be focused on a literature review, and the rest of the time will be dedicated to bridge the gaps identified in the literature review, for example thanks to semi-structured interviews, field work, etc. The outcome of PhD project will be to make policy recommendations that are especially relevant to the Common Agricultural Policy. Julia has a background in Political Sciences from Sciences Po Paris and a Master in Environmental Sciences and Sustainability from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU)

The team of ULEI will be supervised administratively by Dr. Alfons van der Plas, while the overall work will be jointly supervised by Dr. Guy Pe’er and Dr. van der Plas as PIs. The team’s work would be further supported by Dr. Francisco Moreira (CiBio/InBIO, Portugal). Both G. Pe’er and F. Moreira only require reimbursement of travelling costs in order to facilitate their participation in the project, while in return, gaining much knowledge and support of additional research institutes. The team and institutes are described hereafter.

The German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig is one of four research centers funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG) with an average annual budget of 8 million EUR (9 million USD) since October 2012. It is jointly hosted by three universities and eight leading non-university research institutions. iDiv currently employs more than 170 scientists and non-scientists, is still growing and well-connected to leading biodiversity specialists from all over the world. In addition to the topical research groups, iDiv has strong central services (outreach office, biodiversity informatics, bioinformatics), a Synthesis Centre (sDiv) fostering theoretical and synthetic thinking by hosting workshops and funding short-term postdoc and sabbatical positions as well as a PhD school (yDiv) educating young scientists in transdisciplinary biodiversity research. Two research groups at iDiv, “Biodiversity Conservation” and “Ecosystem Services”, explicitly address topics of relevance for this project; and members of these groups have been closely collaborating with Rewilding Europe including a ‘synthesis project’ project specifically addressing rewilding topics. Additionally, iDiv members have an exceptional range of collaboration networks, as well as access to datasets, that will be highly beneficial for the project.

The Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Germany, was established in 1991 as the first and only centre in the Helmholtz Association of National Research Centres to be exclusively devoted to environmental research in a great variety of fields. It currently employs around 1200 people. Founded in response to the severe pollution prevailing in Central Germany, the UFZ has become a world-wide acknowledged centre of expertise in sustainable land-use and restoration of landscapes, as well as the preservation of biodiversity and natural landscapes. Since its foundation in 1991 the UFZ has participated in more than 160 EC funded projects. UFZ is and was participating in 74 Projects funded within FP7 and Horizon 2020, 10 of them coordinated by UFZ. At present, the UFZ is hosting an ERC advanced grant, 3 Marie Curie Individuals fellowships and is coordinating two ITNs. Over six departments and tens of UFZ members work on topics of relevance to FarmGov, ranging from citizen science and monitoring, through agricultural best practices, to understanding and engaging in science-policy dialogues. At least five departments offer valuable expertise of relevance to the project, namely the Dept. ‘Nature Conservation’, ‘Ecosystem Services’, ‘Community Ecology’, ‘Environmental Politics’ and ‘Environmental Economics’. Examples of relevant projects that are running at or coordinated by UFZ members, include EKLIPSE and ECOPOTENTIAL.

Universidade da Coruña – Associated Beneficiary

UDC is a research and educational institution with leading research groups in many areas including science and technology. UDC has participated and is currently participating in over 125 international research projects, which are mostly co-financed by the European Union (H2020 Programme, previous Framework Programmes, Interreg, COST, NILS, LIFE+, etc.). In addition, our University has coordinated 3 collaborative projects within FP7 and H2020 and coordinates two Starting Grants of the European Research Council. As an entity, UDC has a European Research Projects Office, which provides direct support to project proposals and their financial management. This Office has actively collaborated in the management of 15 Interreg projects.

The research lab led by Jaime Fagúndez at the UDC has a wide experience in conservation management of terrestrial habitats and evaluating the effects of herbivores in natural systems. They have regular meetings with the administration and often communicate with commoners, land owners and stakeholders regarding environmental issues. With their extensive networks in Galicia – because of its tradition with feral herds an interesting region for this GRAZELIFE-project – UDC is well positioned to establish contacts with relevant stakeholders in this area and gather input for recommendations on effective grazing systems.

Rewilding Rhodopes Foundation – Associated Beneficiary

The Rewilding Rhodopes Foundation (till 2015 called New Thracian Gold Foundation) is active in the region of the Eastern Rhodopes in Bulgaria with a strong focus on: promoting and implementing restoration and conservation of natural processes and biodiversity in cooperation with stakeholders; bringing back the variety of wildlife and exploring new ways for people to earn a fair living from the wild; finding new economic drivers to financially support the wilderness areas; stimulating and improving natural grazing and sustainable green tourism in Bulgaria in cooperation with local, regional and national parties.

The RRF team consists of committed wildlife, tourism and communication experts. The Foundation works on the preservation and restoration of wildlife, not only for the sake of wildlife but also for the development of sustainable organic farming and tourism in order to re-utilize the land that has been abandoned in recent years and to generate alternative sources of income for the local inhabitants. Among the major achievements of RRF are the reintroduction of extinct large grazing mammals like wild horses, red deer and wild fallow deer. RRF is associated beneficiary in LIFE RE Vultures project (LIFE14NAT/NL/000901). The Foundation is responsible for actions focused on deer population restoration and supporting local nature friendly business.

Rewilding Ukraine – Associated Beneficiary

Rewilding Ukraine main goals are to support restoration of natural capital in the Danube Delta and foster the nature-based economies. The organisation is building-up a programme to support development of tourism and other economic models that support natural ecosystem. The founders of the organisation were directly involved in implementation of several wetland restoration, natural grazing and community-based projects and consolidate the efforts now to further push for conservation and development of nature-based economies in Ukrainian part of the Danube delta region.

The RU team is well-experienced in the management of EU- and nationally funded projects. RU team members have scientific backgrounds in wetland conservation and restoration, regional development and cross-border cooperation in Europe (including the EU Neighborhood Policy).

Rewilding Ukraine staff are representatives of Ukraine to the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River expert groups for River Basin Management and Flood Protection as well as the Ukrainian national Ramsar Committee, coordinate European Dam Removal Initiative in South-East Europe.

The Rewilding Ukraine team has good experience in coordination of joint activities implemented in cooperation with partners from Romania and republic of Moldova.

Stichting ARK Natuurontwikkeling / ARK Nature – Associated Beneficiary

ARK Nature, established in 1989, is a nature conservation organization that has been pioneering rewilding for over 25 years. ARK Nature’s main focus is rewilding via a bottom-up approach, based on natural processes, linked to economic and social development of the region. ARK is mainly focused on projects in and around the Netherlands, but also elsewhere in Europe.

ARK has almost thirty years of experience in demonstrating how changes in society can provide new opportunities for nature, resulting in wilder landscapes. We are convinced, and have established, that more space for nature improves the quality of life, for people and nature. Robust, spontaneous nature is essential for plants and animals, but also for the economy and people’s well-being.

Large grazers are found to be crucial in the development of the landscapes. ARK is highly experienced in reintroducing native natural herbivores that are key to the landscape forming processes, like European bison and red deer. Also we promote natural grazing with horses and cattle in nature reserves in and around the Netherlands. We have supported and executed ample research into the effects of grazers on biodiversity and on the interaction with visitors in the nature reserve. To create support for herbivory ARK has educated numerous nature managers as well as people living around the nature reserves. This has contributed demonstrably to making natural grazing common practice in the nature reserve.

Until 2007 ARK managed their own herds of cattle and horses. We subsequently established Free Nature which continued as an independent organisation for herd management.

Baltic Environmental Forum Lithuania – Associated Beneficiary

Baltic Environmental Forum Lithuania (BEF-LT) was founded after the finalisation of the technical assistance project in the Baltic States. It was founded in 2003 as a non-governmental, non-profit organisation, with some of the leading environmentalists in the country.

BEF-LT has a long-years’ experience in facilitating a Baltic dialogue and organising trainings and seminars needed for improved professional attitude of its stakeholders on environmental issues. The organisation is dedicated to protection of healthy and clean environment, resource and biodiversity conservation for future generations. The organization’s credo defined as “nature shall be protected not from people but with people”, which illustrates a strong emphasis on communities’ involvement in conservation work as well as importance of addressing social and economic aspects as precondition for ensuring favourable conservation status of protected species / habitats.

Since 2010, BEF-LT is actively dealing with land management issues by preforming habitat restoration, and establishing self-sustaining farming mechanisms to ensure necessary conservation requirements and habitat maintenance.  The team consists of experienced entrepreneurs, biologists and communicators dealing with stakeholders from farm to national political levels. BEF-LT has extensive experience working on biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes. It is involved in practical conservation projects as well as scientific and political think-tanks focussed on improving rural development and biodiversity conservation goals. BEF-LT has extensive experience in implementation and managing of projects co-financed by LIFE program.

Grazelife

Grazing for wildfire prevention, ecosystem services,
biodiversity and landscape management

Juan Carlos Muñoz Robredo / Rewilding Europe

Grazelife

Grazing for wildfire prevention, ecosystem services,
biodiversity and landscape management

Acronym:
GRAZELIFE

Reference Code:
LIFE 18 PRE/NL002

Duration:
3 years.
Start date 01-01-2019.
End date: 31-12-2021

Total budget:
€ 833,325

EU contribution:
€ 499,995

Project focus

On request of the European Commission the LIFE Preparatory Project GRAZELIFE aims on improving implementation possibilities of different grazing models – both by domestic and wild/semi-wild herbivores – to identify the most (cost)effective means to maximise / promote wildfire prevention, climate adaptation, the provision of multiple ecosystem services, landscape and nature conservation, and to minimize human-wildlife conflicts, by maintaining long-term stable and resilient ecosystems.

This Project is co-funded by the LIFE Programme of the European Union.

Coordinating beneficiary:

Objectives

Description of different grazing models and their (cost)effectiveness for biodiversity, wildfire prevention, reduction of human-wildlife conflicts, climate adaptation and ecosystem services, compared to other land management-systems (including mowing, land abandonment and reforestation), specified for different European regions, and substantiated with case studies.

Build a robust knowledge-base with respect to effectiveness and cost-efficiency of different grazing models.

Analyse and map factors that facilitate, impede or restrict the implementation of the most effective grazing models (financial, social-cultural, political, physical, ecological, administrative, technical, etc.)

Formulating recommendations for the EU to adapt relevant policies, legislation and subsidies in a way that will promote the most effective models for land management and enhance coherence with EU-targets on biodiversity, the restoration agenda, reduction of human-wildlife conflicts and climate adaptation.

STAFFAN WIDSTRAND / REWILDING EUROPE

Vast areas of Europe have been abandoned in recent decades or will be abandoned in coming decades: current levels of abandonment of land in rural areas in the EU are 0,5-1 mio ha/year. This has severe, and often negative, consequences for the biodiversity and ecosystem service provisioning in the abandoned land.

STAFFAN WIDSTRAND / REWILDING EUROPE

Land abandonment causes large scale bush-encroachment and spontaneous massive forest regrowth, which can not only lead to the disappearance of small scale cultural and mosaic landscapes, but also to a loss of biodiversity (ca. 50% of the biodiversity on land is directly or indirectly related to herbivory). In addition, this process also has consequences for ecosystem services and disservices. Through the higher availability of fire fuel, bush-encroachment could lead to increased risks of wildfires (especially in the Mediterranean region), a risk which becomes increasingly relevant with climate change.

BRUNO D'AMICIS / REWILDING EUROPE

Traditional measures to stop this process, like mowing or herding sheep, are relatively expensive compared to the natural processes that keep landscapes open, like natural grazing. On top of that, promotion of grazing with traditional livestock – while associated with valuable traditions and cultures – may also often lead to increasing human-wildlife conflicts, for example with large predators. Natural grazers are able to learn to defend themselves, and predation of wild herbivores does not conflict with human interests.

ANDREY NEKRASOV

First experiments with natural and semi-natural grazing show that such policies can promote wildlife-based tourism, carbon credits and sales of regional products (e.g. wild meat), and thus create viable business opportunities for landowners and -users. However, this model is financially, legally and politically poorly supported compared to other land management options like mowing or ploughing grasslands, although the latter may have less positive (and in many cases even a negative) impact on EU-targets for biodiversity and climate adaptation/mitigation.

STAFFAN WIDSTRAND / REWILDING EUROPE

Ecologically there might be challenges as biodiversity targets are mostly defined in terms of species and fixed habitats – instead of complete ecosystems – often leading to conservation regimes that limit the functioning of ecological processes on a larger scale. Allowing spontaneous forest regrowth and herbivory as antagonistic processes in a landscape of shifting mosaics – where all species of grassy and wooded landscapes, and all the gradients in between, find their place but in moving patterns – is a management option that deserves more attention.

STAFFAN WIDSTRAND / REWILDING EUROPE

Therefore, the following questions need to be addressed/resolved:

  1. Which land management models – with a focus on grazing models – have most beneficial impacts regarding EU targets on biodiversity, climate adaptation, reducing human wildlife conflicts and reducing fire hazards?
  2. Which policies and subsidy-systems promote, or pose barriers, to implementation of these models?

Expected results

Ready-to-use information on practically tested grazing models, differentiated to the regions of Europe, including a practitioners’ guide how to adopt such new models.

Clear and practical recommendations to the European Commission and Member States to facilitate (or at least not hamper/disable) these models via their policies, legal systems and subsidy systems.

As soon as these grazing models are adopted and/or incorporated in European and Member State policies and subsidy systems, a substantial and positive impact can be expected on improved biodiversity, carbon sequestration, and reduction of fire risks in those places (EU-wide) where the models will be applied.


Warning: Undefined array key "content_builder" in /data01/virt42777/domeenid/www.rewildingeurope.com/multistaging/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/cache/67bf10708e84a9f106c45a6fab5607e1e842949b.php on line 8

Warning: Undefined array key "content_builder" in /data01/virt42777/domeenid/www.rewildingeurope.com/multistaging/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/cache/67bf10708e84a9f106c45a6fab5607e1e842949b.php on line 8

Warning: Undefined array key "content_builder" in /data01/virt42777/domeenid/www.rewildingeurope.com/multistaging/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/cache/67bf10708e84a9f106c45a6fab5607e1e842949b.php on line 8

Warning: Undefined array key "content_builder" in /data01/virt42777/domeenid/www.rewildingeurope.com/multistaging/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/cache/67bf10708e84a9f106c45a6fab5607e1e842949b.php on line 8

Warning: Undefined array key "content_builder" in /data01/virt42777/domeenid/www.rewildingeurope.com/multistaging/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/cache/67bf10708e84a9f106c45a6fab5607e1e842949b.php on line 8
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.