Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
This manuscript is contextually identical with the following published paper: Biró, M., Molnár, Zs., 1
Babai, D., Dénes, A., Fehér, A., Barta, S., Sáfián, L., Szabados, K., Kiš, A., Demeter, L., Öllerer, K. 2
(2019): Reviewing historical traditional knowledge for innovative conservation management: A re-3
evaluation of wetland grazing. Science of The Total Environment. 666: 1114–1125.The original 4
published pdf is available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.292 5
6
Reviewing historical traditional knowledge for innovative conservation management: 7
A re-evaluation of wetland grazing 8
9
10
Marianna Biró1, 2*
, Zsolt Molnár1, Dániel Babai
3, Andrea Dénes
4, Alexander Fehér
5, Sándor Barta
6, 11
László Sáfián7, Klára Szabados
8, Alen Kiš
8, László Demeter
1, Kinga Öllerer
1,9 12
13
14
1 Institute of Ecology and Botany, MTA Centre for Ecological Research, 2163 Vácrátót, Hungary 15
2 GINOP Sustainable Ecosystems Group, MTA Centre for Ecological Research, 8237 Tihany, 16
Hungary 17
3 Institute of Ethnology, MTA Research Centre for the Humanities, 1097 Budapest, Hungary 18
4 Department of Natural History, Janus Pannonius Museum, 7601 Pécs, Hungary 19
5 Department of Sustainable Development FESRD, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, 949 76 20
Nitra, Slovak Republic 21
6 Cattle herder, 5321 Kunmadaras, Széchenyi u. 7., Hungary 22
7 Shepherd, 4251 Hajdúsámson, Liszt Ferenc u. 9., Hungary 23
8 Institute for Nature Conservation of Vojvodina Province, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia 24
9 Institute of Biology Bucharest, Romanian Academy, 060031 Bucharest, Romania 25
26
*Corresponding author: [email protected] 27
28
2
Abstract 29
Wetlands are fragile, dynamic systems, transient at larger temporal scales and strongly affected 30
by long-term human activities. Sustaining at least some aspects of human management, particularly 31
traditional grazing, would be especially important as a way of maintaining the “necessary” 32
disturbances for many endangered species. Traditional ecological knowledge represents an important 33
source of information for erstwhile management practices. Our objective was to review historical 34
traditional knowledge on wetland grazing and the resulting vegetation response in order to assess 35
their relevance to biodiversity conservation. 36
We studied the Pannonian biogeographic region and its neighborhood in Central Europe and 37
searched ethnographic, local historical, early botanical, and agrarian sources for historical traditional 38
knowledge in online databases and books. The findings were analyzed and interpreted by scientist, 39
nature conservationist and traditional knowledge holder (herder) co-authors alike. 40
Among the historical sources reviewed, we found 420 records on traditional wetland grazing, 41
mainly from the period 1720–1970. Data showed that wetlands in the region served as basic grazing 42
areas, particularly for cattle and pigs. We found more than 500 mentions of habitat categories and 43
383 mentions of plants consumed by livestock. The most important reasons for keeping livestock on 44
wetlands were grazing, stock wintering, and surviving forage gap periods in early spring or mid-late 45
summer. Besides grazing, other commonly mentioned effects on vegetation were trampling and 46
uprooting. The important outcomes were vegetation becoming patchy and remaining low in height, 47
tall-growing dominant species being suppressed, litter being removed, and microhabitats being 48
created such as open surfaces of mud and water. 49
These historical sources lay firm foundations for developing innovative nature conservation 50
management methods. Traditional herders still holding wetland management knowledge could 51
contribute to this process when done in a participatory way, fostering knowledge co-production. 52
53
3
Keywords: effect of livestock grazing, knowledge gap, knowledge co-production, traditional 54
ecological knowledge, vegetation structure 55
56
1. Introduction 57
Wetlands contribute significantly to overall biodiversity and play a major role in the landscapes 58
where they are found, acting as key carbon sinks and climate stabilizers of our planet (IUCN, 1993; 59
Mitsch and Gosselink, 2000; Maitland and Morgan, 2002; Zedler and Kerscher, 2005). Being highly 60
sensitive to external factors such as hydrological and pedological conditions, and owing to the fact 61
that many of their functions and services proved useful to humans and were thus often overused, 62
wetlands have become one of the most threatened ecosystems globally (Mitsch and Gosselink, 2000; 63
Brinson and Malvárez, 2002; Zedler and Kerscher, 2005; Davidson, 2014). 64
Wetlands are dynamic and transient ecosystems. Wetland plant communities are influenced by 65
water supply and climate and can change dynamically in space and time, both long-term and short-66
term (van der Valk, 1981; Mérő et al., 2015). Native herbivores, followed by domestic large 67
herbivores, functioned as ecological keystone species influencing succession, plant species 68
distribution and vegetation patterns in many wetland areas (Van der Valk, 1981; Zedler and Kercher, 69
2005). In previous centuries, wetlands were diversely and extensively used and managed not only 70
through grazing, but also fishing, hunting and reed cutting (Mitsch and Gosselink, 2000; Zedler and 71
Kercher, 2005; Poschlod, 2015). Owing to socio-economic changes (e.g. population growth, 72
intensification of agriculture), many wetlands have been drained, while those that escaped are mainly 73
altered and often no longer managed at all, especially in Europe (IUCN, 1993; Esselink et al., 2000; 74
Brinson and Malvárez, 2002; Stammel et al., 2003). 75
Traditional (extensive) land use practices (e.g., grazing or mowing) harnessed the whole 76
spectrum of habitat types around settlements, including wetlands (Poschlod, 2015), while, as a side-77
product, acted as essential ecological-anthropological disturbances, with major effects on plant 78
communities (Bakker, 1989; Wallis DeVries et al., 1998; Marty, 2005; Hill et al., 2009) and overall 79
4
species and (micro)habitat diversity (Mori, 2011; Mérő et al., 2015; Vadász et al., 2016). Appropriate 80
grazing regimes may, for example, induce patchiness, lead to greater microhabitat diversity, alter 81
habitat functioning (Davidson et al., 2017). At the same time, the absence of large herbivores leads to 82
homogenization, as temperate wetland plant communities become dominated by tall-growing species 83
such as Phragmites, Typha, and Phalaris (van der Valk, 1981; Esselink et al., 2000; Burnside et al., 84
2007; Lougheed et al., 2008), or to an increased abundance of non-native species (Marty, 2005), 85
followed by an impoverishment, especially of flora (Hill et al., 2009; Manton et al., 2016; Davidson 86
et al., 2017; Rannap et al., 2017). Biodiversity loss may alter and decrease the stability of ecosystem 87
functions (Cardinale et al., 2012); therefore wetland conservation management for biodiversity 88
purposes aims to minimize biodiversity losses or to reverse degradation in order to prevent or 89
overcome ecosystem changes (Maitland and Morgan, 2002; Manton et al., 2016). It also aims to 90
enhance habitat diversity (Vadász et al. 2016) and to maintain or recreate habitats e.g., for birds 91
(Mérő et al., 2015; Manton et al., 2016), amphibians (Mester et al., 2015; Rannap et al., 2017), and 92
Red-listed Nanocyperion species (Gugič, 2009; Hill et al., 2009). To achieve their goals, 93
conservation strategies often maintain, reinstate or mimic past traditional management regimes 94
(Mori, 2011; Duncan, 2012; Middleton, 2013; Babai et al., 2015) to provide the “necessary” 95
disturbances. 96
Unfortunately, recent publications on wetland ecology rarely contain information on past 97
traditional management practices (but see Stammel et al., 2003; Burnside et al., 2007; Molnár, 2014). 98
Even less is known about the practical details of these traditional practices and their effects on 99
wetland vegetation. Knowledge of traditional uses would certainly help when planning the proper 100
conservation management of contemporary wetlands (cf. Middleton, 2016). For example, in order to 101
meet biodiversity management or restoration targets, what type of livestock species and breeds 102
should be deployed, in which seasons, and with what intensity? 103
Traditional land-use practices are often based on local traditional ecological knowledge 104
(Berkes et al., 2000). This knowledge and practices still survive in some areas of Europe (e.g., in the 105
5
post-communist member states of the European Union) (Babai et al., 2015; Varga et al., 2016; Hartel 106
et al., 2016). Holders of this knowledge understand their living environment well; for example, they 107
can recognize and name about half the native flora, ca. 100 local habitat types, and have a deep 108
understanding of the ecological dynamics of the local landscape (Babai and Molnár, 2014; Molnár, 109
2014). Traditional ecological knowledge on grazing practices may be crucial when developing 110
feasible and innovative management methods to ensure the maintenance of desired ecological 111
conditions. Innovative methods are often rooted in the past and not only have ecological or 112
conservational value, but also social, cultural and economic benefits (Hartel et al., 2016). Reviving 113
past management practices may decelerate the abandonment of erstwhile management traditions and 114
erosion of the related knowledge, and also bring in policy-relevant, innovative methods, such as 115
outdoor pig rearing (Neugebauer et al., 2005; Hill et al., 2009) or re-designed silvopastoral or 116
silvoarable agroforestry systems in agroforestry innovations (Hartel et al., 2016; Rois-Díaz et al. 117
2018). In some wetland areas, where traditional land uses still persist, a greater amount of this 118
knowledge has survived; such areas include the Lonjsko Polje and Kopački Rit floodplains in 119
Croatia, the Temes region and Bosut forest in Serbia, and the Hortobágy region in Hungary (Gugič, 120
2009; Tucakov, 2011; Molnár, 2014; Varga et al., 2016; Kiš et al., 2018, but see also Duncan, 2012; 121
Ludewig et al., 2014, for examples from other European regions). 122
Traditional ecological knowledge is disappearing rapidly due to globalization and lifestyle 123
changes (Biró et al., 2014). Considerable wetland-related knowledge was already lost, even from the 124
living memory of elderly land users, after extensive wetlands throughout Europe were drained (cf. 125
Middleton, 2016). However, ethnographers and local historians had documented “smaller or larger 126
parts” of the knowledge and practices of past generations. This historical documentation could be 127
utilized effectively by ecologists and conservationists. An ecological re-evaluation of these sources 128
of historical traditional practices and traditional ecological knowledge may thus provide valuable 129
understanding of how particular wetlands were managed centuries or several decades ago and the 130
ways in which vegetation was affected by management (Gimmi et al., 2008; Szabó, 2013). 131
6
Traditional knowledge holders who are still active (e.g., traditional herders) could also help this re-132
evaluation process if this is pursued in a participatory way (Molnár et al., 2016; Kis et al., 2017). 133
Our objectives were to 1) reconstruct past grazing regimes and their effects on wetlands using 134
historical sources of traditional knowledge from the past 300 years; 2) discuss the conservation 135
relevance of these findings; and 3) evaluate the knowledge-base potential of historical traditional 136
grazing practices for tradition-based but innovative conservation management methods of wetlands, 137
adapted to the present socio-ecological environment. 138
139
2. Methods 140
2.1. Study area 141
We studied the Pannonian vegetation region (Fekete et al., 2016) and its neighborhood in the 142
central region of the Carpathian Basin, in Central Europe (Fig. 1). The study area belongs to six 143
countries (Hungary, Slovakia, Ukraine, Romania, Serbia, and Croatia). The climate is subcontinental, 144
the mean annual temperature of Hungary is 10-11°C, and annual precipitation is between approx. 145
500-800 mm (Kocsis, 2018). 146
During the Holocene, the area was mostly covered by floodplain vegetation, with forest-steppe 147
vegetation on loess and sand ridges, and inhabited in the early Holocene by native large herbivores 148
(Magyari et al., 2010; Németh et al., 2017). A substantial part of the wide expanses of wetland 149
consisted of floodplain oak forests and swamp forests, but extensive treeless wetlands may also have 150
existed (Magyari et al., 2010; Fehér, 2018). For several millennia, the area was populated mostly by 151
nomadic herding tribes. Later, according to medieval sources, the floodplains played a prominent 152
role in the lives of local inhabitants (Belényesy, 2012). 153
In the 16th and 17th centuries, when the region was under Ottoman occupation, livestock 154
represented a mobile form of wealth among people hiding from the enemy (Szűcs, 1977). Year-155
round, free-range cattle and pig husbandry that made intensive use of the wetlands continued to be an 156
important source of income until the first half of the 19th century, thanks to the export of livestock to 157
7
Western Europe (Bellon, 1996). Most of the drainage of extensive wetlands (measuring up to several 158
hundred thousand hectares in area) took place in the region between 1850 and 1900 (Andrásfalvy, 159
1975). The period saw parallel increases in the production of forage (maize, alfalfa) and in stockyard 160
husbandry, which resulted in the substitution of breeds and the rapid decline of wetland husbandry 161
(Andrásfalvy, 1975; Balassa, 1990). In recent decades, the practice among villagers of grazing their 162
pigs on wetlands has been abandoned almost completely in each country. Wetland grazing, 163
meanwhile, continues to the present day in several areas, mostly by cattle, with smaller quantities of 164
sheep and pigs. 165
166
2.2. Literature search and analysis 167
When searching the literature for sources of historical traditional knowledge, we looked for 168
information on the types of livestock and objectives of grazing in wetlands, grazed plant species, the 169
activities of livestock and their effects on vegetation, as well as the main habitat types of grazed 170
wetlands, including specific microhabitats. For the purposes of this study, we regarded wetlands as 171
areas that are usually dominated by Phragmites australis, Carex, Typha, Schoenoplectus and 172
Glyceria spp. and euhydrophyte species. Both online and printed historical sources were reviewed. 173
The internet search was carried out in the Arcanum Digitheca Digital Library Online Database 174
(http1) and in the Public Collection Library of the Hungaricana Online Database (http2) in June-175
October 2018. These databases store over 17 and 11 million pages, respectively, containing 176
information on the entire study area, as it largely matches the territory of the erstwhile Austro-177
Hungarian Monarchy. We conducted our search using the Hungarian equivalents for the words 178
“marsh, wetland, tussock, moor, reed, sedge, grazing, pasture, and wet pasture”, namely the terms 179
“mocsár, zsombék, láp, nád, sás, vizes hely, legel, legelő, vizes legelő, mocsaras legelő”, and the 180
local terms for cattle, cows, pig, swine, horse, sheep, goat, geese, buffalo, and herds of these 181
livestock. We repeated this search also in the national languages of the other five countries in 182
libraries and collections (ethnographic, local historical, early botanical and agrarian papers, 183
8
encyclopedias and books). Additionally, we examined ethnographical and other books that were not 184
available through the digital databases (approx. 6000 pages). Altogether 165 historical sources 185
contained relevant information (see the complete reference list in the Supplementary Material). 186
We set up a digital database, into which we collated the records that mention wetland grazing, 187
assigning them to different thematic columns. We separated any mentions of wet meadows from 188
mentions of wetlands (including marshes, floodplains, water bodies and moors) dominated by 189
Phragmitetea, Caricetea and Lemnetea plant communities, and did not process the former, as we 190
focused on non-conventional grazing areas in wetlands. Grazer species mentioned only a few times, 191
e.g., geese and buffalo, were omitted from our analysis (5 records). Analysis and interpretation of 192
historical information was greatly facilitated by some particularly detailed documentation from the 193
late 18th century, before the regulation of the rivers, consisting of hundreds of pages of travel diaries 194
by the renowned botanist, Pál Kitaibel (Gombocz, 1945), and several hundred sheets of maps (scale: 195
1: 28 800) from the First Military Survey of the Habsburg Empire (http3). The localization of records 196
was performed using ArcGIS version 10.1 (ESRI 2012). In the paper, the erstwhile condition of the 197
wetlands and information about the details and effects of grazing are presented using quantitative 198
summaries and original quotations. Local folk terms for plants and habitats have been replaced, 199
respectively, by their Latin and/or English equivalents. 200
Analysis and interpretation of historical mentions was carried out by groups of co-authors 201
(traditional knowledge holder herders, nature conservationists and scientists) to avoid 202
misinterpretation and to detect unreliable or distorted information. Scientist and conservationist co-203
authors based their interpretations on their personal field experience and information from the 204
literature, whereas herders used their own personal herding experience and knowledge inherited from 205
family members and elders. Herder co-authors, for example, helped to define old plant names and 206
information on livestock activity, while by remembering their grandparents’ stories they helped 207
decrease the knowledge gap caused by the shifting baseline syndrome (c.f. Soga and Gaston, 2018). 208
209
9
210
3. Results 211
Among the historical sources we found 420 records pertaining to traditional wetland grazing in 212
the past. The earliest records date from the 15th century, but the bulk of them were generated 213
between 1720 and 1970. (Fig. 1). The livestock grazed on the wetlands were mostly cattle (208 214
mentions, 49%), pigs (149 mentions, 35%), horses (29), and sheep (34) (Fig. 1). The sources 215
emphasized the importance of extensively kept breeds of animals, such as Hungarian grey cattle and 216
certain breeds of pigs. 217
218
3.1. Habitat categories of grazed wetlands 219
In relation to wetland grazing, we found 508 mentions of habitat categories (Fig. 2). A total of 220
83 mentions were related to microhabitats (e.g., muddy patches) and 257 to habitat mosaics (e.g., 221
large permanent wetlands). Vegetation types (dominated often by one or two wetland species) were 222
mentioned in 168 cases, most frequently Phragmites and Typha beds. 223
224
3.2. Reasons for keeping livestock on wetlands 225
The sources often explicitly stated why livestock was kept on wetlands (253 mentions, Fig. 3). 226
The most important reasons were grazing in general, stock wintering, and surviving forage gap 227
periods in summer and early springtime. The livestock was usually tended by a herder, who 228
monitored the movement of the herd, but we found no mention of grazing where the herder was 229
constantly beside the herd. Management purposes were mentioned in eight cases e.g., cleaning 230
marshy hayfields from litter by trampling and grazing or preserving other pastures from grazing by 231
pigs. 232
In the case of pigs, the main objective was to make money by keeping the animals on wetlands. 233
The removal of creatures (e.g., fish and their remains) left behind after floods was a rarely 234
10
mentioned, but important objective: “the fish stuck in the hollows of the floodplain were gobbled up 235
by pigs.” (Oláh, 1540 in Andrásfalvy, 1975). 236
237
3.3. Timing and activity of livestock on the wetlands 238
We found 232 mentions in the records concerning the timing when livestock was kept on the 239
wetlands (Fig. 4). Almost half of the mentions indicated the importance of stock wintering on 240
wetlands. It was mentioned several times that cattle herds kept on conventional pastures were moved 241
to large floodplain wetlands for winter (even distances of up to 200 km, see Mód, 2003). Wetlands in 242
the region served as basic grazing areas, particularly for cattle and pigs, and in many places, these 243
livestock grazed all year round on wetlands. It was also common for pigs to spend only certain 244
periods on the wetlands in spring and summer. From autumn they were driven to nearby or more 245
distant (up to 100-150 km, see Szabadfalvi, 1971) woodlands to fatten on acorns. 246
We found 388 cases describing livestock activity on wetlands, with grazing being the most 247
frequently mentioned (Fig. 5). When activities of livestock were described, besides grazing, 248
trampling, wallowing and uprooting were also commonly mentioned. Almost a sixth of all mentions 249
referred directly to trampling, uprooting or wallowing (61). There were 19 accounts of livestock 250
entering deeper water: “From one grazing place to the next, they waded in waist-high water.” 251
(Szűcs, 1942). 252
253
3.4. What plants were consumed by livestock on wetlands? 254
Regarding the types of vegetation consumed by livestock, we found 383 mentions, classified 255
into 19 species or groups of species (Table 1). The most frequently mentioned plants were 256
Phragmites australis, Typha spp., Bolboschoenus maritimus, Schoenoplectus lacustris, and Carex 257
spp. For Phragmites australis, Bolboschoenus maritimus, and Schoenoplectus lacustris, the 258
preference for young shoots or leaves was emphasized in mentions related to cattle: “the cattle 259
would take Bolboschoenus maritimus even from under the water until the plants grew old.” (Varga, 260
11
1994). Most commonly mentioned as the preferred forage were the young leaves and shoots of reeds 261
as well as narrow-stemmed reeds, especially during summer droughts and in winter. Some mentions 262
showed the importance of reed beds as winter pastures, which were prepared in summer: “In July … 263
the reeds were cut, even if they were not needed. The reed that sprouted in its place did not wilt by 264
winter.” (Andrásfalvy, 1975). In winter, the cattle would also suffice on dried plants or those 265
withered from frost: “Carex, Typha, Juncus, Eleocharis, and even the Phragmites provided good 266
feed in winter.” (Györffy, 1941). 267
With several plant species, the consumption of roots was of major significance (seven species 268
were specified as being consumed by pigs, mostly in late winter, early spring) (Table 1). The sources 269
often recorded (68 mentions)that pigs were fond of the underground parts of plants, such as the 270
young tubers of Bolboschoenus maritimus (“[pigs] did not like them so much after they had 271
hardened” (Havel et al., 2016)), the roots of Carex and Phragmites, the underground tubers of 272
Typha species, and the sweet-tasting, young underground reed shoots (5-10 cm long). These were 273
sometimes compared with the most valuable food source for pigs at the time, mast (acorn) feeding: 274
“they eat sweet reed shoots as greedily as they eat acorns in other places.” (Bél, 1727). Pigs were 275
also fond of the tender white parts at the base of the stem of Typha species and young reed leafs. Pigs 276
relished the forage provided by wetlands and were also very fond of food of animal origin (e.g., 277
worms, maggots, fish [including dead fish], frogs, carcasses of animals, birds’ eggs and chicks, 278
snails, mice, snakes, larvae): “The wetland pigs also cleaned up the carcasses, devouring the dead 279
livestock…” (Balassa, 1990). 280
On several occasions, sources emphasized how well-nourished wetland-grazed pigs were: 281
“They can eat good Typha tubers, plenty of Bolboschoenus, on which the pigs grow as fat as on 282
mast.” (Török, 1870). Certain wetland plants (e.g., Trapa natans, Phragmites australis) were once 283
regarded as of full nutritional value, and not merely fed to livestock as a “last resort”: “When the 284
water caltrop [Trapa natans] is in its early stages of growth, pigs like it as much as acorns or maize 285
[…] It is as useful as mast, and makes them just as fat.” (Szabóné Futó, 1974). Sources also 286
12
mentioned some plants whose consumption could cause problems to the livestock, although we could 287
only find information on this in connection with cattle, for pigs “would eat everything”. Cattle very 288
much liked the young, sweet leaves of Glyceria maxima, for example, but overconsumption would 289
make them bloated. When cattle consumed the muddy grass left over after a flood (Bodó, 1992), or 290
the young shoots or roots of Cicuta virosa, which are easily turned up from loose soil, this could 291
result in death (Sajó, 1905). 292
293
3.5. Effects of livestock on wetland vegetation 294
In 54 cases, sources provided explicit information on how cattle and pigs altered or otherwise 295
impacted wetland vegetation (Fig. 6). One of the most important effects of cattle was that the 296
wetland vegetation remained low in height: “Even young, tender reeds were unable to grow if they 297
were constantly grazed.” (Havel et al., 2016). In extreme drought, livestock was forced to graze on 298
Typha spp. and Schoenoplectus lacustris, “leaving the soil bare” (Kitaibel 1800, in Gombocz, 1945). 299
Grazing of Carex elata had a substantial impact on the structure of tussocky areas: “Carex tussocks 300
could easily be recognized despite being grazed bare, and from among them rose older and younger 301
leaves of Aspidium Thelipteris.” (Borbás, 1881). 302
Another important impact of cattle was the creation of open surfaces of mud and water (Fig. 7): 303
“… all [the cattle] walked there, trampling even the Bolboschoenus maritimus, so that sometimes, it 304
would not even emerge from the water […] there was such a large expanse of clear water.” (Havel 305
et al., 2016). “This trampled and churned sea of mud provided an ideal home for swamp birds.” 306
(Glück, 1903). Margittai (1939) mentions occurrences of Elatine triandra “in puddles on the 307
pasture, in the inner, muddy part of cattle footprints”. Further spectacular effect of grazing by cattle 308
was the emergence and maintenance of trails and paths by trampling. In the wake of cattle wandering 309
between grazing areas, muddy and watery tracks with no vegetation would be formed. If such trails 310
were untrampled by cattle for a longer period, “the trails became overgrown by Phragmites, Carex 311
and Stratiotes aloides and ‘went blind’” (Györffy, 1941). 312
13
One important effect of stock wintering was the removal and trampling of litter. This also 313
assisted springtime revegetation: “the grazing livestock especially cleared the interior of the 314
wetlands [in winter] by eating the edible plants and trampling the rest down. Thus, the next year, ‘the 315
areas cleared in this way produced much better forage’.” (Bellon, 1996). Other sources also 316
emphasized that grazed wetland vegetation would regenerate and rejuvenate more readily, and that 317
young shoots were selected by the livestock: “Whatever the livestock broke off gave rise later to 318
three or four new shoots, which were subsequently grazed upon.” (Morvay, 1940). In some places, 319
long-term cattle grazing completely transformed the wetland vegetation, leading to changes in the 320
dominant plant species. 321
322
4. Discussion 323
4.1. Wetland grazing in the Pannonian region between 1720 and 1970 324
We managed to obtain a large number of historical records on wetland grazing of livestock in 325
the Pannonian region and its immediate vicinity. These historical accounts enable us to form a 326
reasonable, albeit incomplete image of past wetland grazing practices and their effects on vegetation. 327
Unexpectedly, none of the sources gave a detailed discussion of the activities and effects of wetland 328
grazing by livestock. Publications on livestock management from this period (e.g., Fándly, 1792) 329
also lack detailed information on the relationship between grazing and wetland vegetation. Neither 330
the18th, nor the 19th-century works on flora mention any differences or comparisons between the 331
vegetation of grazed and ungrazed wetlands (e.g., Kitaibel 1793–1815, in Gombocz, 1945; Borbás, 332
1881). To bridge this knowledge gap, it is especially important to process the information that can be 333
gathered from the non-botanical historical sources. An ecological re-evaluation of these historical 334
sources would harness their potential from the perspective of wetland management through grazing 335
for biodiversity conservation purposes. 336
Wetlands played an important role in the everyday life of societies living close to floodplains 337
and other wetlands. In the Carpathian basin and in other European regions as well, animal husbandry 338
14
was the main source of income in areas with relatively few arable fields (e.g., Cook and Moorby, 339
1993; Bellon, 1996; Poschlod, 2015). Grazing was probably pursued on almost all wetlands, even on 340
the interiors of large wetlands (measuring several thousand hectares, Lovassy, 1931; Morvay, 1940; 341
Györffy, 1941). 342
Specific husbandry systems were developed for optimal utilization of wetlands to achieve 343
short- and long-term benefits. The ideal habitat for keeping pigs, for example, had grazing wetlands 344
and mast forests in close proximity to each other (Belényesy, 2012), which mostly existed on 345
extensive floodplains (Szabadfalvi, 1971; Gugič, 2009; Kiš et al., 2018). Until the beginning of the 346
19th century, extensive pig husbandry was based on mast feeding (Balassa, 1990; Szabó, 2013). Pigs 347
also fed in wetlands, however, and in many cases, keeping pigs on wetland was nearly as profitable 348
as keeping them in mast forests (Török, 1870; Szabadfalvi, 1971, Szabóné Futó, 1974). On the other 349
hand, for cattle husbandry wetlands provided the means for survival in the subcontinental climate of 350
the Pannonian region during extremities, like droughts that occurred almost every year (Varga et al., 351
2016). We found few mentions concerning the number of animals kept in wetlands, but from the 352
sources it can be inferred that the number of pigs kept in such habitats was substantial in comparison 353
with the present situation, exerting a significant impact on plant communities (Neugebauer, 2005; 354
Poschlod, 2015; Varga, et al 2016). In a wetland near Mukachevo (Ukraine), for example, the density 355
reached one pig per hectare – 6880 pigs on ca. 6-7000 ha (Szabadfalvi, 1971). 356
The spatio-temporally variable management systems of wetlands and entire landscapes through 357
grazing led to the appearance and maintenance of heterogeneous habitats, leading to transitions 358
between vegetation states (van der Valk 1981; Wallis de Vries et al., 1998; Bölöni et al., 2011; Mérő 359
et al. 2015). Stronger grazing intensity often produced pioneer surfaces, kept vegetation in a 360
transitional state, while a lack of grazing facilitated the succession processes of many wetland 361
habitats (van der Valk, 1981; Hill et al., 2009), and their homogenization (Esselink et al., 2000; 362
Burnside et al., 2007; Lougheed et al., 2008) . 363
15
Several management decisions helped to maintain wetland habitats in good condition and 364
suitable for long-term grazing (e.g., the removal or, on the contrary, even the non-removal of reed or 365
dry litter from a given area), and aided the exploitation of biomass in places that were otherwise 366
inaccessible in summer (Bellon, 1996). Local regulations also helped to maximize the number of 367
livestock that could be kept by a village (Bellon, 1996; Belényesy, 2012). Before river regulations 368
and wetland drainage, wetlands were often set aside as reserves particularly for wintering, as 369
haymaking and forage production were of lesser importance than nowadays (Györffy, 1941; Szűcs, 370
1977; Bellon, 1996; Belényesy, 2012). Transhumance to these reserve pastures was an important part 371
of historic wetland management to maximize short- and long-term benefits and to balance forage 372
availability on a regional scale (Szabadfalvi, 1971; Mód, 2003; Belényesi, 2012). Seasonal patterns 373
of transhumance, including movement of sheep, pigs, cattle, and horses to floodplain wetlands 374
during winter (Maior, 1911; Szabadfalvi, 1971; Mód, 2003) or for feeding animals (cattle or pigs) 375
before taking them to market (Neugebauer et al., 2005), were similar to those known from other 376
European landscapes (Poschlod, 2015; Costello and Svensson, 2018). 377
378
4.2. The effect of grazing on wetland vegetation between 1720 and 1970 379
Based on historical sources, livestock had an effect on wetland vegetation mainly due to their 380
grazing, trampling, and uprooting behavior, thus reducing biomass and creating micro-habitats (cf. 381
Esselink et al., 2002; Hill et al., 2009, Davidson et al., 2017). Among the obvious effects of grazing 382
were reduced height of vegetation, lower biomass, and greater openness of vegetation. There were 383
only a few species in the wetlands that were not consumed by livestock. Sources usually revealed 384
different effects between cattle and pigs, with cattle being associated mostly with trampling, and pigs 385
with uprooting. The effect of grazing could vary according to the season, partly because livestock 386
would sometimes only spend specific periods of the year on the wetlands, and partly because they 387
would consume certain species of plants only in particular phenological stages, such as after frost or 388
withering, when the taste of several plants changed (e.g., Carex and Typha spp., Andrásfalvy, 1975), 389
16
or in spring, when there were young, tender shoots of reed (Morvay, 1940; Györffy, 1941; Varga, 390
1994). Surfaces dislodged by digging pigs contributed to an increased richness of wetland 391
microhabitats by creating patches of mud and puddles, whose importance for biodiversity has 392
recently been demonstrated (Hill et al., 2009; Poschlod et al., 2002). Several sources stated that 393
certain plant species were consciously reduced by grazing livestock, leading to the creation of 394
pastures consisting of grasses and sedges (Lovassy, 1931; Morvay, 1940). Examples of this are also 395
known from other European regions, although experience shows that grazing alone is sometimes 396
insufficient to eliminate reeds or other species (Valkama et al., 2008). 397
Judging from these accounts, our opinion is that the structure and species composition of the 398
vegetation of wetlands close to settlements was fundamentally transformed by grazing, while in 399
wetlands further away from settlements, grazing had a significant effect. Past folk names for 400
wetlands attest to the diversity of wetlands and describe the main types of vegetation (cf. Molnár, 401
2014; Fehér, 2018). Sources indicate that dominant plant species of wetlands in the past were largely 402
the same as today (e.g., Lovassy, 1931; Kitaibel in Gombocz, 1945). Mud vegetation was not 403
described in the sources, only muddy surfaces, but in the lists of wetland species compiled by 404
Kitaibel (in Gombocz, 1945), there is a remarkably large number of species that require trampling 405
and are avoided by grazing livestock (e.g., Ranunculus lateriflorus, Mentha pulegium, Alisma spp., 406
Eleocharis palustris, Gratiola officinalis). Undesirable plants in the past were mostly the poisonous 407
species (alien invasive species were not yet present). We could find no information about the 408
poisonous species being destroyed (although this is common practice in the Carpathian region, Babai 409
and Molnár, 2014), whereas dense reed beeds were substantially and deliberately reduced by targeted 410
grazing (cf. Lovassy, 1931; Valkama et al., 2008). 411
412
4.3. The current conservation relevance of historical wetland grazing 413
Historical sources often explicitly mention livestock effects that are of potential relevance to 414
contemporary wetlands conservation (e.g., reduction of tall species, creation and maintenance of 415
17
patches of mud and open water). It was surprising that, despite significant grazing density, the 416
sources did not mention degraded wetlands (compared with degraded overgrazed grasslands and 417
forests, which are mentioned frequently in historical sources, e.g., Borbás, 1881; Kitaibel in 418
Gombocz, 1945). Apart from during the extreme droughts of 1790s and 1863 , when the livestock 419
were driven 200-250 km in search of wetlands to graze on (Morvay, 1940; Szabadfalvi, 1971; Mód, 420
2003), there were no mentions to suggest that grazing wetlands became exhausted and degraded. 421
There may be one reason for this, that majority of the benefits of the wetlands were incidental, 422
secondary comparing to the benefits from forests or grasslands, whose degradation affected local 423
communities more seriously. Additionally, wetland dynamic occurs in shorter cycles. Consequently, 424
degradation of wetlands (e.g. changing species composition) was considered a natural phenomenon, 425
and local communities didn’t perceive these trends as harmful. 426
Despite the potential for wetland management, recent botanical and conservation-oriented 427
synthetic works in our region rarely, if at all, mention grazing in wetlands (Bölöni et al., 2011; 428
Haraszthy, 2014). We argue that the effect of past grazing (especially pigs) was possibly far more 429
significant in wetlands than is generally thought by botanists and conservationists (see also Poschlod, 430
2015; Szigetvári, 2015). It seems that this field of study is also prone to the shifting baseline 431
syndrome (cf. Vera, 2009; Soga and Gaston, 2018). Most of today’s generation of botanists and 432
conservationists have never seen pigs grazing in wetlands. Large-scale wetland grazing of pigs is not 433
part of their worldview because the open vegetation of wetlands previously trampled and uprooted 434
by pigs has grown back in recent decades, and the structure and species composition of such 435
wetlands is entirely different (cf. Neugebauer et al., 2005; Hill et al., 2009; Szigetvári, 2015). A lack 436
of scientific knowledge and understanding of traditional grazing systems often leads to erroneous 437
management recommendations, as shown by the personal experience of some of the authors of this 438
paper, who have previously recommended avoiding grazing in wetland areas, which they later found 439
to be dependent of this particular disturbance. 440
18
Grazing livestock were shifted away from wetlands in the 1970s and 1980s to prevent 441
“degradation”; i.e., the creation of muddy, trampled patches (Havel et al., 2016; Szigetvári, 2015). 442
Meanwhile, it is obvious that ungrazed wetlands differ in nature from grazed wetlands (Lougheed et 443
al., 2008; Bölöni et al., 2011; Molnár, 2014; Mérő et al., 2015; Mester et al., 2015), and many 444
features from the past grazed wetlands would be beneficial to conservation even nowadays 445
(Neugebauer et al. 2005; Poschlod, 2015). The decrease in species richness of ungrazed and thus 446
closed-vegetation wetlands is considerable (Lougheed et al., 2008; Mester et al., 2015). From a 447
conservation perspective, species-rich wetlands require disturbance by large grazing livestock 448
(Bakker, 1989; Neugebauer et al. 2005; Mérő et al., 2015). Wetland plant species have, for millennia, 449
adapted to grazing (the wild herbivores of the early Holocene were gradually replaced by domestic 450
livestock). Wetlands, therefore, should be grazed, and in the proper manner, which begs the question 451
of how they should be grazed. 452
453
4.4. The need for innovative conservation management regimes through knowledge co-454
production 455
The historical information showed that livestock grazed in the wetlands, not only during the 456
growing season but also in winter. Wetland-fattened livestock was highly valued at market (e.g., 457
Morvay, 1940). Breeds of livestock were kept that were well adapted to wetland grazing (e.g., they 458
could swim well and tolerate cold weather and diseases) (cf. Andrásfalvy, 1975; Balassa, 1990; 459
Bellon, 1996). It may be stated that nowadays the livestock breeds, the herders and the social 460
environment that sustained such historical wetland grazing practices no longer exist. In the 21st 461
century, however, there is an increasing demand for nature-friendly farming and extensive free-range 462
animal husbandry, which often results in entirely extensive grazing practices (Flade et al., 2006; 463
Duncan, 2012; Varga et al., 2016; Costello and Svensson, 2018). An opportunity exists to develop 464
innovative wetland-grazing regimes that function as appropriate conservation management practices. 465
Such innovations are fully compliant with the new conservation paradigm, whose objective is to 466
19
reintroduce, restore or diversify certain natural and anthropological disturbances (Mori, 2011; 467
Middleton, 2013; Vadász et al., 2016; Hartel et al. 2016). Innovation can be aided not only by the 468
historical information described above, but also by the surviving (though often neglected) traditional 469
ecological knowledge, in which regard Central Europe is in a privileged position and of regional 470
significance (Molnár and Berkes, 2018). Some of the traditional knowledge holders are middle-aged 471
and thus still use and adapt their knowledge and graze their herds in the remnant wetlands (Molnár et 472
al., 2016; Kis et al., 2017). For example, in the Hortobágy National Park (a UNESCO World Cultural 473
Heritage Site for its herding traditions), modern-day herders distinguish between 15 wetland types 474
and are familiar with their species (e.g., knowledge of Phragmites, Typha latifolia and T. 475
angustifolia, Carex acutiformis, Schoenoplectus lacustris and Trapa natans is above 95%, that of 476
Phalaris arundinacea, Eleocharis spp. and Bolboschoenus maritimus is above 80%, and that of 477
Glyceria maxima is also 55%, Molnár, 2014). Traditional grazing practices are not banned in these 478
reserves, but are rather seen as acceptable and essential for maintaining the optimal ecological 479
conditions of wetlands for many threatened species (http4), like in some UNESCO Biosphere 480
Reserves in Germany and France (Flade et al. 2006; Duncan, 2012; Ludewig et al., 2014). 481
482
4.5. Improving wetland conservation management 483
Our review provided numerous examples of historical traditional practices and traditional 484
ecological knowledge representing lessons on wetland grazing. This, together with the substantial 485
traditional ecological knowledge held by present-day herders, and with the desire among nature 486
conservationists for better management, lays firm foundation for innovation and knowledge co-487
production. Experience has shown that together, scientific and traditional types of knowledge are 488
capable of generating insights that were previously lacking from both systems (Molnár et al., 2016). 489
For developing innovative wetland conservation methods, we recommend giving consideration to the 490
following criteria: 491
20
As is the case with grasslands (cf. Vadász et al. 2016), wetlands should also be grazed at 492
varying intensities in a mosaic pattern, with both over- and under-grazed areas (http4). 493
The application of grazing periods that last different lengths of time may help facilitate greater 494
regulation of intensity and control the effects on vegetation (cf. Cornelissen et al., 2014). 495
Late autumn grazing may be of importance for nature conservation, for example, by decreasing 496
litter cover. 497
Besides ancient breeds (e.g., Mangalitsa pig, Hungarian grey cattle), certain modern breeds 498
(e.g., Limousine cattle, Merino sheep, Yorkshire pig) may also be suitable for wetland grazing. 499
It is worth devoting particular attention to pig grazing, although there is relatively limited 500
active experience of this management type (but see Poschlod et al., 2002; Neugebauer et al., 501
2005; Gugič, 2009; Hill et al., 2009). 502
It would be beneficial to summarize results achieved to date by European experimental 503
ecological research into wetland grazing (e.g. Neugebauer et al., 2005; Mester et al., 2015; 504
http4). Wilderness experiments also provide numerous lessons on year-round extensive 505
wetland grazing (e.g. Vera, 2009; Cornelissen et al., 2014; http5). 506
21st-century technology may also prove valuable, e.g., temporary electric fences on the 507
“outside” of wetlands (that is, the opposite side to where the herders are present). 508
It is worth involving and giving leading roles to herders who are familiar both with the 509
livestock and local wetland habitats and have substantial experience (“conservation herders”, 510
Molnár et al., 2016). A herder can plan forage regeneration, and with timed grazing or mowing 511
and adapted herd size, grazable biomass can often be increased during springtime or periods of 512
drought (Kis et al., 2017). As part of innovative development, present-day herder experience 513
should be placed under “creative tension” with the help of historical sources to test whether it 514
is possible for herders to revive extinct management components (primarily in the case of 515
pigs), as numerous practical elements of past wetland grazing have been lost. 516
517
21
5. Conclusions 518
On the one hand, the effect of grazing on wetland vegetation is obvious (vegetation became 519
patchy and remained low in height, tall-growing dominant species were suppressed, litter was 520
removed, and microhabitats like open surfaces of mud and water were created), but on the other 521
hand, grazing can be done in many ways, resulting in just as many effects on vegetation, about which 522
little is known. Therefore, a wide range of experiments should be conducted, which will require the 523
involvement of nature conservationists, herders, and researchers alike. 524
The historical sources have demonstrated that grazing is often beneficial with regard to the 525
conservation of wetlands. It would therefore be worthwhile experimenting boldly. At the same time, 526
the image of wetlands that have been trampled and “colored” with livestock excrement is often hard 527
to reconcile with the present-day conservation worldview. This is very similar to how things were in 528
the past: the lake “is heavily grazed, but in places its flora is beautiful nonetheless!” wrote Ádám 529
Boros in 1957, when he discovered great diversity in the vegetation of a lake where traditional 530
grazing was done intensively (Boros 1912–1972). It would therefore be important to carry out 531
research that takes the long-term historical perspective into account, as a way of overcoming the 532
shifting baseline syndrome in the conservation management of wetlands. 533
534
Acknowledgement 535
We thank the herders Imre Berczi and János Máté for sharing with us their knowledge about wetland 536
grazing, and Steve Kane for English translations and revision. 537
538
Funding 539
This research was supported partly by the project “Effects of extensive grazing on vegetation in non-540
conventional pasture-lands (marshes and forests)”- NKFIH K 119478 and partly by the National 541
Research, Development and Innovation Office project GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00019. Dániel Babai 542
was supported by the MTA Premium Postdoctoral Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of 543
22
Sciences). Kinga Öllerer acknowledges the support received through project no. RO1567-544
IBB03/2018 of the Romanian Academy. Research in Slovakia was supported by the Slovak Grant 545
Agency VEGA, project no. 1/0767/17. 546
547
References 548
Andrásfalvy, B., 1975. Duna mente népének ártéri gazdálkodása Tolna és Baranya megyében az 549
ármentesítés befejezéséig, in: K. Balog, J. (Ed.), Tanulmányok Tolna megye történetéből 7. 550
Tolna Megyei Tanács Levéltára, Szekszárd. 551
Babai, D., Molnár, Zs., 2014. Small-scale traditional management of highly species-rich grasslands 552
in the Carpathians. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 182, 123–130. 553
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2013.08.018 554
Babai, D., Tóth, A., Szentirmai, I., Biró, M., Máté, A., Demeter L., Szépligeti, M., Varga, A., 555
Molnár, Á., Kun, R., Molnár, Zs., 2015. Do conservation and agri-environmental regulations 556
effectively support traditional small-scale farming in East-Central European cultural 557
landscapes? Biodivers. Conserv. 24, 3305–3327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-015-0971-z 558
Bakker, J.P., 1989. Nature management by grazing and cutting. Geobotany Vol. 14. Kluwer 559
Academic Publishing, Dordrecht. 560
Balassa, I., 1990. A magyar sertéstartás történetének néhány kérdése, in: Pintér, S. (Ed.), A Magyar 561
Mezőgazdasági Múzeum Közleményei 1988–1989, Budapest, pp. 235–252. 562
Bél, M., 1727. Békés vármegye leírása, in: Krupa, A. (Ed.) Forráskiadványok a Békés Megyei 563
Levéltárból 18, 1993, Gyula. 564
Belényesy, M., 2012. Fejezetek a középkori anyagi kultúra történetéből I-II. Documentatio 565
Ethnographica 29. L’Harmattan, MTA BTK Néprajztudományi Intézete, Budapest. 566
Bellon, T., 1996. Beklen. Animal husbandry of the cities in Nagykunság in the 18-19th centuries. 567
Karcag város önkormányzata, Karcag. 568
Berkes, F., Colding, J., Folke, C., 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive 569
management. Ecol. Appl. 10(5), 1251–1262. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-570
0761(2000)010[1251:ROTEKA]2.0.CO;2 571
Biró, É., Babai, D., Bódis, J., Molnár, Zs., 2014. Lack of knowledge or loss of knowledge? 572
Traditional ecological knowledge of population dynamics of threatened plant species in East-573
Central Europe. J. Nat. Conserv. 22(4), 318–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2014.02.006 574
Bodó, S., 1992. A Bodrogköz állattartása. Borsodi Kismonográfiák 36. Herman Ottó Múzeum, 575
Miskolc. 576
Bölöni, J., Molnár, Zs., Kun, A. (Eds.), 2011. Magyarország élőhelyei. A hazai vegetációtípusok 577
leírása és határozója. ÁNÉR 2011. MTA ÖBKI, Vácrátót. 578
Borbás, V., 1881. Békés vármegye flórája. Értekezések a Természettudományok Köréből 11/18: 1–579
105. Akadémiai Könyvkiadó Hivatal, Budapest. 580
Boros, Á., 1912–72. Florisztikai jegyzetek. Kéziratos Útinapló. History of Science Collection of the 581
Botanical Department of the Hungarian Natural Museum, Budapest. 582
Brinson, M.M., Malvárez, A., 2002. Temperate freshwater wetlands: Types, status, and threats. 583
Environ. Conserv. 29(2), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892902000085 584
Burnside, N.G., Joyce, C.B., Puurmann, E., Scott, D.M., 2007. Use of vegetation classification and 585
plant indicators to assess grazing abandonment in Estonian coastal wetlands. J. Veg. Sci. 18(5), 586
645–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2007.tb02578.x 587
Cardinale, B.J., Duffy, E., Gonzalez, A., Hooper, D.U., Perrings, C., Venail, P., Narwani, A., Mace, 588
G.M., Tilman, D., Wardle, D.A., Kinzig, A.P., Daily, G.C., Loreau, M., Grace, J.B., 589
Larigauderie, A., Srivastava D.S., Naeem, S., 2012. Biodiversity loss and its impact on 590
humanity. Nature 486 (7401), 59. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11148 591
23
Cook, H., Moorby, H., 1993. English Marshlands Reclaimed for Grazing: A Review of the Physical 592
Environment. J. Environ. Manage. 38(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1993.1029 593
Cornelissen, P., Bokdam, J., Sykora, K., Berendse, F., 2014. Effects of large herbivores on wood 594
pasture dynamics in a European wetland system. Basic Appl. Ecol. 15(5), 396–406. 595
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2014.06.006 596
Costello, E., Svensson, E. (Eds)., 2018. Historical archaeologies of transhumance across Europe. 597
Themes in Contemporary Archology, vol. 6. Routledge. 598
Davidson, K.E., Fowler, M.S., Skov, M.W., Doerr, S.H., Beaumont, N., Griffin, J.N., 2017. 599
Livestock grazing alters multiple ecosystem properties and services in salt marshes: A meta 600
analysis. J. Appl. Ecol. 54(5), 1395–1405. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12892 601
Davidson, N.C., 2014. How much wetland has the world lost? Long-term and recent trends in global 602
wetland area. Mar. Freshwater Res. 65(10), 934–941. https://doi.org/10.1071/MF14173 603
Duncan, P., 2012. Horses and grasses: the nutritional ecology of equids and their impact on the 604
Camargue (Vol. 87). Springer Science & Business Media. 605
Esselink, P., Zijlstra, W., Dijkema, K.S., Van Diggelen, R., 2000. The effects of decreased 606
management on plant-species distribution patterns in a salt marsh nature reserve in the Wadden 607
Sea. Biol. Conserv. 93(1), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(99)00095-6 608
Fándly, J., 1792. Piľní domajší a poľní hospodár. Václav Jelinek, Trnava. 609
Fehér, A., 2018. Vegetation history and cultural landscapes – case studies from South-west Slovakia. 610
Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60267-7_2 611
Fekete, G., Király, G., Molnár, Zs., 2016. Delineation of the Pannonian vegetation region. 612
Community Ecol. 17, 114–124. https://doi.org/10.1556/168.2016.17.1.14 613
Flade, M., Plachter, H., Schmidt, R., Werner, A., 2006. Nature Conservation in Agricultural 614
Ecoystems. Results of the Schorfheide-Chorin Research Project. Quelle & Meyer 615
Gimmi, U., Bürgi, M., Stuber, M., 2008. Reconstructing anthropogenic disturbance regimes in forest 616
ecosystems: a case study from the Swiss Rhone valley. Ecosystems 11(1), 113–124. 617
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-007-9111-2 618
Glück, I., 1903. Esti húzáson. Vadászlap 24 (24), 315-317. 619
Gombocz, E. (Ed.), 1945. Diaria Itinerum Pauli Kitaibelii I-II. 1793-1815. Természettudományi 620
Múzeum, Budapest. 621
Gugič, G., 2009. Managing sustainability in conditions of change and unpredictability. The living 622
landscape and floodplain ecosystem of the Central Sava river basin. Lonjsko Polje Nature Park 623
Public Service, Krapje, Croatia. 624
Györffy, I., 1941. Nagykunsági krónika. Reprint 1984. Nagykun Múzeum, Karcag. 625
Haraszthy, L. (Ed.), 2014. Natura 2000 fajok és élőhelyek Magyarországon. Pro Vértes 626
Természetvédelmi Közalapítvány, Csákvár. 627
Hartel, T., Réti. K-O., Craioveanu C., 2016. Tree Hay as Source of Economic Resilience in 628
Traditional Social-ecological Systems from Transylvania. Martor 21, 53–64. 629
Havel, A., Molnár, Á., Ujházy, N., Molnár, Zs., Biró, M., 2016. Zsiókások és nádasok legeltetése és 630
egyéb használatai a Duna-völgyi szikes tavak területén a helyi emberek visszaemlékezései 631
alapján. Természetvédelmi Közlemények 22, 84–95. 632
Hill, B.T., Beinlich, B., Köstermeyer, H., Dieterich M., Neugebauer, K., 2009. The pig grazing 633
project: Prospects of a novel management tool, in: Dieterich, M., Van Der Straaten, J. (Eds.), 634
Cultural Landscapes and Land Use, Springer, Dordrecht. pp. 193–208. 635
https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2105-4_12 636
IUCN, 1993. The Wetlands of Central and Eastern Europe. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and 637
Cambridge. 638
Kiš, A., Stojnić, N., Sabadoš, K., Đapić, M., Bošnjak, T., Molnár, Zs., Perić, R., Stanišić, J., Pil, N., 639
Galamboš, L., Dobretić, V., Puzović, S., Delić, J., Kicošev, V., Kartalović, V., 2018. 640
Advocating Ecosystem Services Assessment and Valuation (ESAV) in Bosut Forests area - 641
integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in natural resource uses and management. 642
Institute for Nature Conservation of Vojvodina Province (INCVP), Novi Sad, Serbia. 643
24
Kis, J., Barta, S., Elekes, L., Engi, L., Fegyer, T., Kecskeméti, J., Lajkó, L., Szabó, J., 2017. 644
Traditional Herders’ Knowledge and Worldview and Their Role in Managing Biodiversity and 645
Ecosystem Services of Extensive Pastures, in: Roué, M., Molnár, Zs. (Eds.) Knowing Our 646
Land and Resources: Indigenous and Local Knowledge of Biodiversity and Ecosystem 647
Services in Europe & Central Asia. Knowledges of Nature 9. UNESCO, Paris, pp. 57–71. 648
Kocsis, K., (Ed.), 2018. National Atlas of Hungary: Natural Environment. Research Centre for 649
Astronomy and Earth Sciences of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Geographical Institute, 650
Budapest. 651
Lougheed, V.L., McIntosh, M.D., Parker, C.A., Stevenson, J.R., 2008. Wetland degradation leads to 652
homogenization of the biota at local and landscape scales. Freshw. Biol. 53, 2402–2413. 653
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2008.02064.x 654
Lovassy, S., 1931. Az Ecsedi-láp és madárvilága fennállása utolsó évtizedeiben. Magyar 655
Tudományos Akadémia, Budapest. 656
Ludewig, K., Korell, L., Löffler, F., Scholz, M., Mosner, E., Jensen, K., 2014. Vegetation patterns of 657
floodplain meadows along the climatic gradient at the Middle Elbe River. Flora, 209(8), 446–658
455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flora.2014.04.006 659
Magyari, E.K., Chapman, J.C., Passmore, D.G., Allen, J.R.M., Huntley, J.P., Huntley, B., 2010. 660
Holocene persistence of wooded steppe in the Great Hungarian Plain. J. Biogeogr. 37(5), 915–661
935. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02261.x 662
Maior, G., 1911. România agricolă, studiu economic, ed. II. Bucharest. 663
Maitland, P.S., Morgan, N.C., 2002. Conservation Management of Freshwater Habitats. Lakes, rivers 664
and wetlands. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5858-9 665
Manton, M., Angelstam, P., Milberg, P., Elbakidze, M., 2016. Wet grasslands as a green 666
infrastructure for ecological sustainability: Wader conservation in southern Sweden as a 667
case study. Sustainability 8(4), 340. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040340 668
Margittai, A., 1939. Megjegyzések a magyar Elatine-fajok ismeretéhez. Botanikai Közlemények 36, 669
296–307. 670
Marty, J. 2005. Effects of cattle grazing on diversity in ephemeral wetlands. Cons. Biol. 19(5), 1626–671
1632. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00198.x 672
Mérő, T.O., Lontay, L., Lengyel, S., 2015. Habitat management varying in space and time: the 673
effects of grazing and fire management on marshland birds. J Ornithol. 156(3), 579–590. 674
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10336-015-1202-9 675
Mester, B., Szalai, M., Mérő, T.O., Puky, M., Lengyel, S., 2015. Spatiotemporally variable 676
management by grazing and burning increases marsh diversity and benefits amphibians: A 677
field experiment. Biol. Conserv. 192, 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.09.030 678
Middleton, B.A., 2013. Rediscovering traditional vegetation management in preserves: Trading 679
experiences between cultures and continents. Biol. Conserv. 158, 271–279. 680
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2012.10.003 681
Middleton, B.A., 2016. Broken connections of wetland cultural knowledge. Ecosystem Health and 682
Sustainability, 2(7), e01223. https://doi.org/10.1002/ehs2.1223 683
Mitsch, W.J., Gosselink, J.G., 2000. The value of wetlands: importance of scale and landscape 684
setting. Ecol. Econ. 35, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00165-8 685
Mód, L., 2003. Egy dél-alföldi mezőváros gazdasági kapcsolatai a 18. században. A Móra Ferenc 686
Múzeum Évkönyve: Studia Ethnographica 4. 687
Molnár, Zs., 2014. Perception and Management of Spatio-Temporal Pasture Heterogeneity by 688
Hungarian Herders. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 67, 107–118. https://doi.org/10.2111/REM-D-13-689
00082.1 690
Molnár, Zs., Berkes, F., 2018. Role of Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Linking Cultural and 691
Natural Capital in Cultural Landscapes, in: Paracchini, M.L., Zingari, P. (Eds.), Reconnecting 692
Natural and Cultural Capital – Contributions from Science and Policy. Office of Publications 693
of the European Union, Brussels, pp. 183–194. 694
25
Molnár, Zs., Kis, J., Vadász, Cs., Papp, L., Sándor, I., Béres S., Sinka G., Varga, A., 2016. Common 695
and conflicting objectives and practices of herders and nature conservation managers: the need 696
for the conservation herder. Ecos. Health and Sustain. 2(4), e01215. 697
https://doi.org/10.1002/ehs2.1215 698
Mori, A.S., 2011. Ecosystem management based on natural disturbances: hierarchical context and 699
nonequilibrium paradigm. J. Appl. Ecol. 48(2), 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-700
2664.2010.01956.x 701
Morvay, P., 1940. Az Ecsedi-láp vidékének egykori állattartása és pásztorélete. Ethnographia / A 702
Magyar Néprajzi Társaság értesítője 51, Budapest. 703
Németh, A., Bárány, A., Csorba, G., Magyari, E., Pazonyi, P., Pálfy, J., 2017. Holocene mammal 704
extinctions in the Carpathian Basin: a review. Mammal Rev. 47(1), 38–52. 705
https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12075 706
Neugebauer, K.R., Beinlich, B., Poschlod, P. (Eds.), 2005. Schweine in der Landschaftspflege–707
Geschichte, Ökologie, Praxis. NNA-Berichte, 18, 2. Alfred Toepfer Akademie für Naturschutz 708
(NNA), Schneverdingen. 709
Poschlod, P., 2015. Geschichte der Kulturlandschaft. Ulmer. 710
Poschlod, P., Schneider-Jacoby, M., Köstermeyer, H., Hill, B.T., Beinlich, B., 2002. Does large-711
scale, multi-species pasturing maintain high biodiversity with rare and endangered species? – 712
The Sava floodplain case study, in: Redecker, B., Finck, P., Härdtle, W., Riecken, U., 713
Schröder, E. (Eds.), Pasture landscapes and nature conservation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. 714
pp. 367–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55953-2_28 715
Rannap, R., Kaart, T., Pehlak, H., Kana, S., Soomets, E., Lanno, K., 2017. Coastal meadow 716
management for threatened waders has a strong supporting impact on meadow plants and 717
amphibians. J. Nat. Conserv. 35, 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2016.12.004 718
Rois-Díaz, M., Lovric, N., Lovric, M., Ferreiro-Domínguez, N., Mosquera-Losada, M.R., den 719
Herder, M., Graves, A., Palma, J.H.N., Paulo, J.A., Pisanelli, A., Smith, J., Moreno, G., García, 720
S., Varga, A., Pantera, A., Mirck, J., Burgess, P., 2018. Farmers’ reasoning behind the uptake 721
of agroforestry practices: evidence from multiple case-studies across Europe. Agrofor. Syst. 722
92, 811–828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-017-0139-9 723
Sajó, K., 1905. Levélszekrény rovat, Természettudományi Közlöny, (37. évfolyam, 425-436. füzet) 724
1905-01-10 / 425. füzet (89. oldal) 725
Soga, M., Gaston, K.J., 2018. Shifting baseline syndrome: causes, consequences, and implications. 726
Front. Ecol. Environ. 16(4), 222–230. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1794 727
Stammel, B., Kiehl, K., Pfadenhauer, J., 2003. Alternative management on fens: Response of 728
vegetation to grazing and mowing. Appl. Veg. Sci. 6(2), 245–254. 729
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-109X.2003.tb00585.x 730
Szabadfalvi, J., 1971. Az extenzív állattenyésztés Magyarországon. Műveltség és Hagyomány 12. 731
Kossuth Lajos Tudományegyetem, Debrecen. 732
Szabó, P., 2013. Rethinking pannage: historical interactions between oak and swine, in Rotherham, 733
I.D. (Ed.), Trees, Forested Landscapes and Grazing Animals. Routledge, London, pp. 68–78. 734
Szabóné Futó, R., 1974. A sulyom gyűjtése és felhasználása a Takta mellékén. A Herman Ottó 735
Múzeum Közleményei 13, 113–118. 736
Szigetvári, C., 2015. Legeltetés, gyepre alapozott állattartás természetvédelmi szempontú értékelése. 737
E-misszió, Természet- és Környezetvédelmi Egyesület Nyíregyháza. http://www.e-738
misszio.hu/doksik/enpi/tanulmany_legeltetes_es_term_ved.pdf 739
Szűcs, S., 1942. A régi Sárrét világa. Magyar Néprajzi Társaság, Budapest. 740
Szűcs, S., 1977. Régi magyar vízivilág. Magvető Kiadó, Budapest. 741
Török, K., 1870. A tiszamenti népéletből. I. A réti kanász, in: Nagy, M. (Ed.), Magyarország 742
képekben. II. Budapest. 743
Tucakov, M., 2011. Tamiš River Valley - dynamic floodplain. IUCN, Belgrade and BPSSS, Novi 744
Sad. 745
26
Vadász, C., Máté, A., Kun, R., Vadász-Besnyői, V., 2016. Quantifying the diversifying potential of 746
conservation management systems: An evidence-based conceptual model for managing 747
species-rich grasslands. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 234, 134–141. 748
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.03.044 749
Valkama, E., Lyytinen, S., Koricheva, J., 2008. The impact of reed management on wildlife: A meta-750
analytical review of European studies. Biol. Conserv. 141(2), 364–374. 751
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.11.006 752
van der Valk, A.G., 1981. Succession in Wetlands: A Gleasonian Approach. Ecology 62(3), 688–753
696. https://doi.org/10.2307/1937737 754
Varga, A., Molnár, Zs., Biró, M., Demeter, L., Gellény, K., Miókovics, E., Molnár, Á., Molnár, K., 755
Ujházy, N., Ulicsni, V., Babai, D., 2016. Changing year-round habitat use of extensively 756
grazing cattle, sheep and pigs in East-Central Europe between 1940 and 2014: Consequences 757
for conservation and policy. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 234, 142–153. 758
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.05.018 759
Varga, D., 1994. Kies Kiskunság, szeretett Szentmiklós. Lyukasóra könyvek. Magyar Írókamara, 760
Budapest. 761
Vera, F.W.M, 2009. Large-scale nature development. The Oostvaardersplassen. British Wildlife, 762
20(5), 28–36. 763
Wallis DeVries, M.F., Bakker, J.P., Van Wieren, S.E. (Eds.), 1998. Grazing and Conservation 764
Management. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands 765
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4391-2 766
Zedler, J.B., Kercher, S., 2005. Wetland resources: status, trends, ecosystem services, and 767
restorability. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 30, 39–74. 768
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144248 769
770
Internet sources 771
http1: Arcanum Digitheca Digital Library Online Database https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/en/ [last 772
accessed on 01.11.2018] 773
http2: HUNGARICANA Hungarian Cultural Heritage Portal, Public Collection Library 774
https://library.hungaricana.hu/ [last accessed on 01.11.2018] 775
http3: MAPIRE - Historical Maps Online https://mapire.eu/en/map/europe-18century-firstsurvey 776
[last accessed on 10.09.2018] 777
http4: Large scale grazing management of steppe lakes in the Hortobágy National Park, Hungary 778
http://www.legelotavak.hu/en [last accessed on 06.12.2018] 779
http5: Pentezug Wild Horse Reserve, Hungary, http://www.hnp.hu/en/szervezeti-780
egyseg/conservation/oldal/pentezug-wild-horse-reserve [last accessed on 22.11.2018] 781
782
783
27
Figures 784
785
Fig. 1. Map of the study area in the Carpathian Basin, Central Europe. Symbols indicate localities of 786
historical mentions of wetland grazing by domestic livestock. Country borders: thick grey lines, main 787
rivers: thin grey lines (source: Natural Earth). Source of base map: ASTER-DEM, USGS, 2009 788
789
790
Fig. 2. Habitat categories of grazed wetlands, as mentioned in the historical sources 791
28
792
793
Fig. 3. Reasons for grazing and, below the line, other reasons for keeping livestock on wetlands, as 794
mentioned explicitly in the historical sources 795
796
797
Fig. 4. Timing of presence of livestock on wetlands, as mentioned explicitly in the historical sources 798
29
799
800
Fig. 5. Activity of livestock on wetlands, as mentioned explicitly in the historical sources 801
802
803
Fig. 6. Effect of domestic livestock on wetland vegetation, as mentioned in the historical sources 804
30
805
Fig. 7. Above: Impacts of grazing include the creation of open water surfaces, the maintenance of 806
vegetation at low height, thus decreasing the dominance of Phragmites australis and Typha 807
angustifolia, and creating breeding and migrating bird habitats with open water surfaces ( Hortobágy 808
National Park, Hungary, photos: Zsolt Molnár). Below: Traditional pig grazing in the Bosut forest 809
(Serbia). Pasturing practices with modern pig breeds provide habitats for Hottonia palustris, 810
Ludwigia palustris and Marsilea quadrifolia, which are Red-listed species in many Central European 811
countries (photos: Ábel Molnár and Viktor Ulicsni) 812
813
814
815
Graphical Abstract 816
817
818
31
819
820
Table 1. Plant species and plant parts consumed by livestock on wetlands, as documented in the 821
historical sources. “Root” refers to underground parts, such as roots, rhizomes and tubers. 822
823
Plant species / parts Cattle Pigs Horses Sheep Total
Reeds – total (Phragmites australis) 34 16 5 1 56
young reeds 26 2 4 1 33
reed roots and underground shoots 14 14
Sedges – total (Carex riparia, C. acutiformis, C. acuta etc.) 19 9 4 4 36
young sedges 1 2 3
sedge roots 6 6
Bulrushes – total (Typha latifolia, T. angustifolia) 6 21 5 32
young bulrushes 2 2
mealy bulrush roots 19 2 21
Bolboschoenus maritimus – total 9 10 19
young shoots of B. maritimus 4 4
tubers of B. maritimus 9 9
Wetland plants in general – total 3 21 24
young wetland plants 2 3 1 6
roots of wetland plants 16 16
Schoenoplectus lacustris – total 4 5 2 11
young shoots of S. lacustris 2 1 3
roots of S. lacustris 1 1 2
Carex elata – total 5 5
young leaves of C. elata 1 1
Grasses in general (including dry grass) 6 4 4 3 17
Dry grass, grass litter 14 2 1 2 19
Glyceria maxima 4 1 4 9
Eleocharis palustris, E. uniglumis 7 7
Juncus effusus, J. conglomeratus 3 3
Agrostis stolonifera 2 2
Unripe fruits of Trapa natans 7 7
Chenopodiaceae spp. 2 2
Thistles (Cirsium spp., Carduus spp.) 2 2
Willow and poplar twigs, shoots and catkins (Salix spp. and Populus spp.) 3 1 2 6
Acorus calamus 1 1
Triglochin palustris 1 1
Phalaroides arundinacea 1 1
Marsh fern roots (Thelypteris palustris) 1 1
Sow thistle roots (Sonchus spp.) 1 1
Water weed and its roots 2 2
Total 156 178 27 22 383
824
825
32
Appendix 1. 826 827 Reference list of the 165 historical sources containing relevant information on wetland grazing 828 829 Andrásfalvi, B., 1970. A fok és jelentősége régi vízgazdálkodásunkban. Nyelvtudományi Értekezések, 70. 830 Andrásfalvy, B., 1973. A Sárköz és a környező Duna menti területek ősi ártéri gazdálkodása és vízhasználatai a szabályozás előtt. 831
Vízügyi Történeti Füzetek 6. Budapest. 832 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/SZAK_DUNA_Vtf_06_Sarkoz/?query=harmatk%C3%A1sa&pg=40&layout=s 833
Andrásfalvy, B., 1975. A sárköziek gazdálkodása a XVIII. és XIX. században. In: Dankó I. (Ed.), Dunántúli dolgozatok. 3. Janus 834 Pannonius. Múzeum Kiadványai, Pécs. https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_BARA_Dundolg_03/?pg=0&layout=s 835
Andrásfalvy, B., 1975. Duna mente népének ártéri gazdálkodása Tolna és Baranya megyében az ármentesítés befejezéséig. In: K. 836 Balog, J. (Ed.), Tanulmányok Tolna megye történetéből 7. Tolna Megyei Tanács Levéltára, Szekszárd. 837 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/TOLM_Ttmt_07/?pg=409&layout=s 838
Angyal, B., 1992. Állattartás, in: Fehérváry, M. (Ed.), Gúta hagyományos gazdálkodása a XX. század első felében. Népismereti 839 Könyvtár 2, Csehszlovákiai Magyar Néprajzi Társaság, Komárom, pp. 61–90. 840
Angyal, B., 1994. A lelédi állattartás, in: Liszka, J. (Ed.), Leléd hagyományos gazdálkodása a XX. század első felében, Népismereti 841 Könyvtár 8, Lilium Aurum – Szlovákiai Magyar Néprajzi Társaság, Komárom – Dunaszerdahely, pp. 67–81. 842
Babus, J., 1959. A Lónyai vizek néprajza. Néprajzi Közlemények 4(3), Budapest. 843 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/ORSZ_NEPR_Nk_04_3/?pg=4&layout=s 844
Balassa, I., 1975. Lápok, falvak, emberek. Gondolat, Budapest. 845 Balassa, I., 1990. A magyar sertéstartás történetének néhány kérdése, in: Pintér, J. (Ed.), A Magyar Mezőgazdasági Múzeum 846
Közleményei 1988–1989, Budapest. 847 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/ORSZ_MEZO_MMMk_14_1988_89/?pg=236&layout=s 848
Bálint, S., 1976. A szögedi nemzet. A szegedi nagytáj népélete. Első rész. 1974/75-2. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve, Szeged. 849 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_CSON_EK_1974_75_2/?pg=408&layout=s&query=mocs%C3%A1r 850
Balogh, I., 1958. Pusztai legeltetési rend Debrecenben a XVIII — XIX. Században. Ethnographia 69, 539—566. 851 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Ethnografia_1958_069/?query=SZO%3D(%22mocsaras%20legelo%22)%20OR%20SZO%3D852 (%22vizes%20legelo%22)%20OR%20ESZO%3D(%22zsomb%C3%A9kos%20legel%C5%91%22)&pg=560&layout=s 853
Bán, T., Igmándy, J., (1935–38). Hajdunánás fészkelő madarai. Aquila, 42–45. https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Aquila_1935-854 1938/?query=SZO%3D(SZO%3D((%20mocs%C3%A1r%20OR%20n%C3%A1das)%2030N%20ESZO%3D(liba%20OR%20gul855 ya%20OR%20csorda%20OR%20m%C3%A9nes)))&pg=687&layout=s 856
Baranyi, B., Gazdag, I., Koticsné Magyari, M., Lévai, B., Szabadi, I., Vajda, M., V Szatmári, I., 2000. Nagyrábé. Száz magyar falu 857 könvvesháza Kht., Budapest. p. 170. https://www.arcanum.hu/hu/online-kiadvanyok/SzazMagyarFalu-szaz-magyar-falu-858 1/nagyrabe-BD73/ 859
Bárth J., 1974. Kalocsa környéki ártéri kertek a XVIII-XIX. században. Agrártörténeti szemle 16(1-2), 213-233 860 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/AGRARTORTSZLE_16/?pg=246&layout=s 861
Bede, Á., Csathó, A. I., Czukor, P., & Sümegi, P., 2015. A hortobágyi Ecse-halom tájtörténete. Tájökológiai Lapok, 13(1), 169-184. 862 http://www.tajokologiailapok.szie.hu/pdf/201501/14_Bede_et_al.pdf 863
Bél, M., 1727. Békés vármegye leírása (Historia Comitatus Békésiensis), Transl. Szalay, E., Pánczél, B. in: Krupa, A. (Ed.) 1993. 864 Forráskiadványok a Békés Megyei Levéltárból 18, Gyula. 865 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/BEKM_Fbml_18_bel_matyas/?pg=0&layout=s 866
Bél, M., 1735. Heves megye ismertetése 1730–1735. Trans. Kondorné Látkóczi, E. In: Bán, P. (Ed.), 2001. A Heves megyei levéltár 867 forráskiadványa. Eger. pp. 236 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/HEVM_Fk_08/?pg=0&layout=s 868
Bél, M., 1735. Szatmár megye ismertetése. Trans. Soós, I. In: Gyarmathy, Zs. (Ed.), 1985. Szabolcs-Szatmár megyei helytörténetírás 869 V-VI. Szabolcs-Szatmár Megyei Levéltár, Nyiregyháza. pp. 24-92. 870 https://library.hungaricana.hu/en/view/SZSM_Ek_03_04/?pg=25&layout=s 871
Bél, M., Laurentsik K., 1835. Bereg megye leírása. Trans. Balogh, I. In: Gyarmathy, Zs. (Ed.), 1985. Szabolcs-Szatmár megyei 872 helytörténetírás V-VI. Szabolcs-Szatmár Megyei Levéltár, Nyiregyháza. pp. 9-70. 873 https://library.hungaricana.hu/en/view/SZSM_Ek_05_06/?pg=10&layout=s 874
Bél, M., Schemberger, F.1787 Szabolcs megye a XVIII. Században. Trans. Balogh, I. In: Gyarmathy, Zs. (Ed.), 1979. Szabolcs-875 Szatmár megyei helytörténetírás I-II. Szabolcs-Szatmár Megyei Levéltár, Nyiregyháza. pp. 12-76. 876 https://library.hungaricana.hu/en/view/SZSM_Ek_01_02/?pg=13&layout=s 877
Bél, M., Wellmann I., 1984. Magyarország népének élete 1730 táján. Gondolat Kiadó. Budapest. pp.517. 878 Belényesy, M., 1956. Az állattartás a 14. Században Magyarorszagon. Néprajzi Értesitő 38, 23–59. 879
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/NeprajziErtesito_1956/?pg=24&layout=s 880 Belényesy, M., 2012. Fejezetek a középkori anyagi kultúra történetéből I-II. L’Harmattan, MTA BTK Néprajztudományi Intézete: 881
Budapest. 882 Bellon, T. 1994. Adatok Szabadszállás gazdálkodásához. Néprajz és Nyelvtudomány 35, 145-181. http://acta.bibl.u-883
szeged.hu/3756/1/etno_lingu_035_145-181.pdf 884 Bellon, T., 1996. Beklen. Animal husbandry of the cities in Nagykunság in the 18-19th centuries. Karcag város önkormányzata, 885
Karcag. p. 415. 886 Bellon, T., 2003. A Tisza néprajza. Ártéri gazdálkodás a tiszai Alföldön. Timp Kiadó, Budapest. 887 Bencsik, J., 1973. A gyűjtögető gazdálkodás emlékei a Tisza mentén, a volt alsószabolcsi falvakban. A Hajdúsági Múzeum Évkönyve 888
1, 111-126. https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_HAJB_HajMuzEK_1973_01/?pg=116&layout=s 889 Bencsik, J., 1974. A paraszti közösség gazdasági tevékenysége (Fejezet Polgár történetéből). Hajdúsági Közlemények 3. 890
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_HAJB_HajdusagiKozl_03/?pg=88&layout=s 891 Bilkei, I., Káli, Cs., Petánovics, K., 2001. Zalavár. Száz magyar falu könvvesháza Kht., Budapest. p. 200. 892
https://www.arcanum.hu/hu/online-kiadvanyok/SzazMagyarFalu-szaz-magyar-falu-1/zalavar-12F98/ 893
33
Bodó, S., 1992. A Bodrogköz állattartása. Borsodi Kismonográfiák 36. Herman Ottó Múzeum, Miskolc. 894 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_BAZE_Hom_Bkmon_36_Bodrogkozallattartas/?query=sulyom&pg=19&layout=s 895
Borbás, V., 1881. Békés vármegye flórája. Értekezések a Természettudományok Köréből 11(18), 1–105. Akadémiai Könyvkiadó 896 Hivatal, Budapest. 897
Borbás, V., 1900. A Balaton flórája. Kilián Frigyes M. K. Egyetemi Könyvtárus Bizománya, Budapest, p. 431. 898 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/SZAK_BAKO_BalatonTudTanEredm_10/?pg=0&layout=s 899
Borovszky, S., 1908. Magyarország vármegyéi és városai. Szatmár vármegye. Országos Monográfia Társaság. Budapest. p. 658. 900 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Borovszky_Szatmar/?query=SZO%3D(%22mocsaras%20legelo%22%20OR%20%22vizes%2901 0legelo%22%20OR%20%22zsomb%C3%A9kos%20legel%C5%91%22)&pg=327&layout=s 902
Bottlik, J,. 2001. Gát. Száz magyar falu könyvesháza Kht., Budapestp. p. 233. https://www.arcanum.hu/hu/online-903 kiadvanyok/SzazMagyarFalu-szaz-magyar-falu-1/gat-4CD6/ 904
Candrea, I.A., Densușianu, O., Sperantia, T.D., 1906. Graiul nostru, vol. I, Bucharest. 905 Cs. Szabó, I., 1992. Sertéstartás a békési sárréten és peremvidékén. Folklór és etnográfia 70, Debrecen. 906 Cselenák, G 1978. Állattenyésztés Gomboson. In: Jung, K. (Ed.), Gombos (Bogojevo): Írások egy nyugat–bácskai falu jelenéről és 907
múltjáról. Arany János Művelődési Egyesület, Szabadka, pp. 76–77. 908 Csiba, L., 1993. Fejezetek Tejfalu történetéből. Tejfalui Alapítvány – Nap Kiadó. Tejfalu – Dunaszerdahely. 909 Csiszár, Á., 1971. A beregi sertéstenyésztés. Ethnographia 82, 481—496. 910
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Ethnografia_1971_082/?pg=505&layout=s 911 Csiszár, Á., 1974. Sertésmakkoltatás az északkeleti erdővidéken. AGRÁRTÖRTÉNETI SZEMLE 16 (1-2), 248-262. 912
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/AGRARTORTSZLE_16/?pg=247&layout=s&query=sert%C3%A9s 913 Dorner, B., 1925. Halastófenék befüvesitése és műtrágyázása. Köztelek, 102–103, 1551. 914
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Koztelek_1925_2/?query=harmatk%C3%A1sa&pg=772&layout=s 915 Dorogi, M., (1959) Emlékiratok II. Paraszti feljegyzések a XIX. sz. első feléből. Néprajzi Közlemények 4, 1–2. 916 Dunka, S., Papp, F., 2008. A Berettyó vízgazdálkodásának és jeges árvizének története. Vízügyi Történeti Füzetek 17. Budapest. 917
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/SZAK_DUNA_Vtf_17_Berettyo/?query=n%C3%A1dfi%C3%B3k&pg=43&layout=s 918 Ébner, S., 1925. A Bodrogköz lápi községeinek településföldrajzi vázlata. Föld és Ember 5(3-4), 65–102. 919 Ecsedi, I., 1914. A Hortobágy puszta és élete. Debrecen. 920
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Books_15_Neprajz_0922_Hortobagy_puszta_es_elete_224/ 921 Elek, Gy., 2008. Várostörténet ötvenkét tételben. Karcag város története 1506–1950 között. Karcagi Nyomda. Kft., Karcag. p. 199. 922 Feichtinger, S., 1870. Jelentés a Csajkások kerülete és Torontál vármegye flórája érdekében tett 1870. augusztus havi utazásomról. 923
Matematikai Természettudományi Értesítő 8, 2–36. 924 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/MatEsTtudKozlemenyek_08/?query=B%C3%A9cs&pg=36 925
Fényes, E., 1836. Magyar országnak, 's a' hozzá kapcsolt tartományoknak mostani állapotja. Statisztikai és geographiai tekintetben. 1. 926 kötet. Pest: Trattner-Károlyi nyomtatása. 927 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Books_13_Helytortenet_0694_Magyar_orszagnak_allapotja_statistikai_es_geographiai_tekint928 etben_1_1293/?pg=0&layout=s 929
Fényes, E., 1837. Magyar országnak, 's a' hozzá kapcsolt tartományoknak mostani állapotja. Statisztikai és geographiai tekintetben. 3. 930 kötet. Pest: Trattner-Károlyi nyomtatása. 931 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Books_13_Helytortenet_0696_Magyar_orszagnak_allapotja_statistikai_es_geographiai_tekint932 etben_3_1293/?pg=0&layout=s 933
Filep, A., 1959. Adatok a XVIII—XIX. század fordulójának népi gazdálkodásához. Agrártörténelmi Szemle 2(1-4), 153–161. 934 Fodor, F., 1942. A Jászság életrajza. Szent István Társulat, Budapest. p. 504. 935 Fodor, F., 2001. A Duna–Tisza közi homokhátság délkeleti részének paraszti gazdálkodása a második világháborúig. A Móra Ferenc 936
Múzeum Évkönyve. Studia Ethnographica 3. Szeged. 937 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_CSON_EK_SE_3_2001/?pg=76&layout=s 938
Földes, L., 1982. "A vándorló Erdély." Történeti-néprajzi vizsgálatok az Erdély-Havasalföld közötti transhumance-ról. 3. 939 Ethnographia 93, 353–389. 940 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Ethnografia_1982_093/?query=SZO%3D(SZO%3D((%20mocs%C3%A1r%20OR%20n%C3941 %A1das)%2030N%20ESZO%3D(kecske%20OR%20birka%20OR%20juh%20OR%20l%C3%B3%20OR%20bivaly))%20)&pg=942 397&layout=s 943
Füzes, E., Mándoki, L., 1963. Baranya népe. A Janus Pannonius Múzeum Füzetei 5. Pécs. 944 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_BARA_JPM_fuzet_05/?pg=0&layout=s 945
Gaál, L., 1972. Az Esterházy hercegi hitbizomány gazdálkodása, 1930-1940. 2. rész, Költség-előirányzat és jövedelmezőség. 946 Agrártörténeti Szemle 14(3-4), 475–518. https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/AGRARTORTSZLE_14/?pg=492&layout=s 947
Gaskó, B., 2009. A változások gazdasági háttere. Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve: Studia Naturalia 5. Szeged. 948 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_CSON_EK_Sn_05/?pg=49&layout=s&query=szarvasmarha 949
Géresi, K., 1891. Nagy-Károly és Szatmár vidéke. Az ecsedi láp. In: Az Osztrák-Magyar Monarchia írásban és képben. Magyar 950 Királyi Államnyomda Kiadó, Budapest. 951 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/OMM_07_Magyarorszag_2/?query=n%C3%A1dfi%C3%B3k&pg=393&layout=s 952
Glück, I. 1903. Esti húzáson. Vadászlap 24 (24), 315-317. https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/VadaszLap_1903/?pg=318&layout=s 953 Gombocz, E. (Ed.), 1945. Diaria Itinerum Pauli Kitaibelii I-II. Természettudományi Múzeum, Budapest. p. 1082. 954 Gombocz, Z., Horváth, A. O. 1939. Kitaibel Pál Baranyában. Pécs. 955 Gunda Béla (1984): A szatmári hagyományos népi műveltség etnográfiai helyzete. In: Ujváry Zoltán (Ed.), Tanulmányok Szatmár 956
néprajzához. Debrecen, p. 35-137. 957 Györffy, I., 1928. A szilaj pásztorok. Debreceni Egyetem Földrajzi Intézete. 958 Györffy, I., 1941. Nagykunsági krónika. Reprint 1984. Nagykun Múzeum, Karcag. 959 Gyurikovits, Gy., 1839. Köbölkúti tóról, rajta létezett úszó szigetekről és annak lecsapoltatásáról. Tudományos Gyűjtemény 11, 40–49. 960 Halász, P. 1970. Az állati fehérje jelentősége a hagyományos sertéstartásban. Agrártörténeti Szemle 12(3-4), 381–384. 961
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/AGRARTORTSZLE_12/?pg=389&layout=s 962 Hass M. (Ed.) 1845: Baranya földirati, statisticai és történeti tekintetben. Pécs, Lyceum. 350 p. https://digitalia.lib.pte.hu/?p=1392 963
34
Havel, A. 2018. Ökológiai emlékezet és tájhasználat-történeti tudás átadásának lehetőségei fiatalabb generációk számára – vezetett 964 túrák a Cserhát Natúrpark területén. MSc Thesis. Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem Társadalomtudományi Kar, Budapest. 965
Havel, A., Molnár, Á., Ujházy, N., Molnár, Zs., Biró, M., 2016. Zsiókások és nádasok legeltetése és egyéb használatai a Duna-völgyi 966 szikes tavak területén a helyi emberek visszaemlékezései alapján. Természetvédelmi Közlemények 22, 84–95. 967
Házi, A., 1988. Adatok a régi sárréti világból. A térség föld- és vízrajzi áttekintése, in: Miklya, J. (Ed.), Sárréti írások-3. Szeghalom, p. 968 133–203. 969
Hegedűs, A., 1995. Kanizsa, Martonos és Horgos 1751-től 1848-ig. In: Papp, Gy. (Ed.), Kanizsa monográfiája I., Cnesa, 970 Magyarkanizsa. p. 377. 971
Hegyi, I., 1978. A népi erdőkiélés történeti formái. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest. 972 Hegyi, I., 1982. Fejezetek a Bakony erdei állattartásának történetéből. Néprajzi tanulmányok Dankó Imre tiszteletére, Debrecen. 973
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_HAJB_Hbmmk_39/?pg=256&layout=s 974 Herman, O., 1898—1899. Utinapló. III. Ősfoglalkozások. 37. l. 975 Hódi, I., 2002. Az öreg tölgy mesél: Gemenc. Tolna Megyei Levéltári Füzetek 10. Szekszárd. 976
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/TOLM_Lf_10/?query=k%C5%91gy&pg=356&layout=s 977 Hollaender, H., 1907. A malaria elterjedése Magyarországon. Magyar Királyi Belügyminisztérium. Budapest. p 611. 978
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/KlasszikusOrvosiKonyvek_101/?pg=2&layout=s 979 Jákó, Zs., 1940. Bihar megye a török pusztítás előtt. Település- és népességtörténeti értekezések 5. Sylvester Nyomda BT, Budapest. 980 Janó, Á. Pásztorkodás Hajdúnánáson. Kézirat a Debreceni Kossuth Lajos Tudományegyetem Néprajzi Intézetében, No. 25. 7-8, 15. 981 Katona, I., 1962. Sárköz. Budapest. 982 Kerner, A., 1886. Az Osztrák-Magyar Monarchia Növényvilága. in: Az Osztrák-Magyar Monarchia írásban és képben. Magyar Királyi 983
Államnyomda Kiadó, Budapest. 984 Kis, B., 1836. A Békés-Bánáti Református Egyházmegye története. In: Gilicze, L., Kormos, L. (Eds.), 1992. Dél-Alföldi Évszázadok. 985
5. Szeged-Békéscsaba https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/CSOM_Dae_05/?pg=54&layout=s 986 Kiss, G., 1992. A Dráva-völgy magyar-horvát etnikai csoportjai egy társadalomtörténész szemével (1664-1849). Baranyai történetírás. 987
A Baranya Megyei Levéltár évkönyve, 1990/1991. pp. 157-203. https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/BARM_evk_1990-988 91/?pg=166&layout=s 989
Kiss, G., Keresztes, K., 1952. Ormánysági szótár. Budapest. 990 Kiss, I., 1961. Régi Rétköz. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest. 991 Kiss, K., 1896. A Bodrogköz köz- és mezőgazdasági szempontból. A Bodrogközi Tiszaszabályozó Társulat Monográfiája, 1846-1896, 992
Budapest. 993 Kiss, L., 1954. Nagyhalász. Ethnographia 65, 329—373. 994
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Ethnografia_1954_065/?pg=340&layout=s 995 Kiss, L., 1981. A Rétköz. Szabolcs-Szatmári Szemle. 16, 68-81. https://docplayer.hu/68365884-A-szabolcs-szatmari-szemle.html 996 Kohl, J.G., 1842. Heise in Ungarn. 1.) Abteilung. Pest und die mittlere Donau. 2.) Abt. Das Banat, die Pusten und der Plattensee. 997
Dresden und Leipzig. 998 Kormány, Gy., Németh, P., Takács, P., Bene, J., Nemes, Cs. 2002. Tuzsér. Száz magyar falu könvvesháza Kht., Budapest. p. 999
https://www.arcanum.hu/hu/online-kiadvanyok/SzazMagyarFalu-szaz-magyar-falu-1/tuzser-1150C/ 1000 Koroknay, Á. 1995. Kanizsa és Martonos határőrvidéki korszaka. In: Papp, Gy. (Ed.), Kanizsa monográfiája I., Cnesa, Magyarkanizsa. 1001
p. 284. 1002 Kovács, E. 2008. A falu a Mosztonga rét mellett fekszik. Bácsország, Bácsország Honismereti Társaság, Szabadka (44), pp. 24–29. 1003 Kovács, M., 1962. Adatok a XVI-XVIII. század magyar állattartásának és tenyésztésének történetéhez. A Magyar Mezőgazdasági 1004
Múzeum Közleményei 1, 44–62. https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/ORSZ_MEZO_MMMk_01_1962/?pg=45&layout=s 1005 Lábadi, K., 1994: Kopács, a víz melletti falu. HunCro Sajtó és Nyomdaipari Kft. Budapest. p. 632. 1006 Lakatos, K., 1905. A titeli lápokon. Vadászlap 26, 328-331, 359-364. 1007
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/VadaszLap_1905/?pg=322&layout=s 1008 Liszka, J., 1992. A zsákmányoló gazdálkodás emlékei a köbölkúti mocsárban, in: Liszka, J. (Ed.), Fejezetek a szlovákiai Kisalföld 1009
néprajzából. A magyarságkutatás könyvtára XII., OKTK Magyarságkutatás Program, Budapest, pp. 31–43. 1010 Lőrinczy, B., É., Hosszú F., 1979–2010. Új magyar tájszótár I. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest. 1011 Lovassy, S., 1930. A nád irtása. Természettudományi Közlöny 62, 656. 1012
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/TermtudKozl_1930/?query=SZO%3D(ESZO%3D(mocs%C3%A1r%20OR%20n%C3%A1das1013 )%2010N%20ESZO%3D(legel%20OR%20sert%C3%A9s%20OR%20diszn%C3%B3%20OR%20konda%20OR%20marha)%20)1014 &pg=669&layout=s 1015
Lovassy, S., 1931. Az Ecsedi-láp és madárvilága fennállása utolsó évtizedeiben. Magyar Tudományos Akadémia, Budapest. 1016 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/MTA_Konyvek_418360/?pg=2&layout=s 1017
Lovász, Gy. (Ed.), 1977. Baranya megye természeti földrajza. Baranya monográfiai sorozat, Pécs. 1018 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/BARM_Mono_1977/?query=k%C3%A1lmos&pg=257&layout=s 1019
Mágócsy-Dietz, S., 1889. Levélszekrény, feleletek. Természettudományi Közlöny 21(233-244), 621. 1020 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/TermtudKozl_1889/?query=SZO%3D(ESZO%3D(zsomb%C3%A9k*)%2030N%20ESZO%31021 D(legel%20OR%20sert%C3%A9s%20OR%20diszn%C3%B3%20OR%20konda%20OR%20marha)%20)&pg=636&layout=s 1022
Maior, G., 1911. România agricolă, studiu economic, ed. II. Bucharest. 1023 Majerszky, I., 1914. A Duna-ártéri szigeterdők felujitásáról. Erdészeti Lapok 53, 235-246. 1024 Margittai, A., 1939. Megjegyzések a magyar Elatine-fajok ismeretéhez. Botanikai Közlemények 36, 296–307. 1025
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/BotanikaiKozlemenyek_036/?query=Megjegyz%C3%A9sek%20a%20magyar%20Elatine-1026 fajok%20ismeret%C3%A9hez.&pg=325&layout=s 1027
Márki, S., 1892. Aradvármegye és Arad szabad királyi város története I-II. Arad, 1892–1895. 1028 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/CsaladHely_MonografiaMegye_Aradvmmonografia_2_1/?pg=0&layout=s 1029
Mikica I. 2012. Selo Bosut U Sremu (1706 - 2006). Monography. Sremska Mitrovica. 626 pp. 1030 Mizser, L. (Ed.), 2001. Szatmár vármegye Pesty Frigyes 1864-1866. évi helynévtárában. Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg Megyei Levéltár, 1031
Nyíregyháza. 1032
35
Mód, L., 2003. Egy dél-alföldi mezőváros gazdasági kapcsolatai a 18. században. A Móra Ferenc Múzeum Évkönyve: Studia 1033 Ethnographica 4. https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_CSON_EK_SE_4_2003/?pg=28&layout=s 1034
Moldován, G., 1913 A magyarországi románok. Budapest. 1035 Molnár, A., 1967. Egy parasztgazda élete és gazdálkodása a Bihar megyei Sápon (1890-1896). Agrártörténeti Szemle, 9(1-2), 117–1036
172. https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/AGRARTORTSZLE_09/?pg=174&layout=s 1037 Molnár, A., 1974. Egy nagysárréti falu mezőgazdasága a XIX. században. Agrártörténeti Szemle 16(1-2), 263-279. 1038
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/AGRARTORTSZLE_16/?pg=262&layout=s 1039 Morvay, P., 1940. Az Ecsedi-láp vidékének egykori állattartása és pásztorélete. Ethnographia / A Magyar Néprajzi Társaság értesítője 1040
51, Budapest. 1041 https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Ethnografia_1940_051/?query=sert%C3%A9start%C3%A1s&pg=136&layout=s 1042
Nagy Czirok, L., 1965. A lótenyésztés múltja és jelene a Kiskunságon, in: Takács, L. (Ed.), Néprajzi Közlemények 10(1-2), 131–289. 1043 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/ORSZ_NEPR_NK_10_1_2/?pg=143&layout=s&query=mocsaras 1044
Nagy, J., 1929. Régi utazások Magyarországon, in: Bibó, I. (Ed.), Népünk és Nyelvünk I. Szegedi Tudományegyetem, Szeged. 1045 Németh, J., 1919. Szerbia Egyetemes Leírása. Budapest. 1046 Oláh, M., 1540. Hungária, in: Szigethy G., Németh, B. (Ed.), Gondolodó Magyarok sorozat. Magvető Könyvkiadó, 1985, Budapest. 1047 Osváth, P., 1875. Bihar vármegye Sárréti járása leírása. Nagyvárad. 1048 Pais, S., 1964. A becsvölgyi gazdálkodás. Néprajzi Közlemények 9(2). 1049
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/ORSZ_NEPR_Nk_09_2/?pg=2&layout=s 1050 Paládi-Kovács, A., 1979. A magyar parasztság rétgazdálkodása. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest. 1051 Paládi-Kovács, A., 1993. A magyarországi állattartó kultúra korszakai. MTA Néprajzi Kutatóintézet, Budapest. 1052 Papp, J. 2008. Hortobágy. Magyar Néprajzi Könyvtár, Debrecen. 1053
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_HAJB_Sk_19_Hortobagy/?query=sulyom%20gy%C3%B3gyn%C3%B6v%C3%A1054 9ny&pg=33&layout=s 1055
Pataki, A., 1992. Baranya titkokat rejtegető földrajzi nevei. Jugoszláviai Magyar Művelődési Társaság, Újvidék. 1056 Pejin, A., 2000. A forradalom és a polgári átalakulás kora, in: Szloboda, J. (ed.), Zenta monográfiája I, Dudás Gyula Múzeum- és 1057
Levélbarátok Köre, Zenta. p. 284. 1058 Pető, M., 2001. François-Sulpice Beudant kelet-magyarországi utazása 1818-ban. A Nyíregyházi Jósa András Múzeum évkönyve 43. 1059
Nyíregyháza. https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_GYMS_Gysz_1931/?pg=166&layout=s 1060 Pokorny, L., 1863. Magyarország tőzegképletei. Mathematikai és Természettudományi Közlemények, 2. 1061
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/MatEsTtudKozlemenyek_02/?pg=111&layout=s 1062 Rapaics, R., 1918. Az Alföld növényföldrajzi jelleme. Erdészeti Kísérletek 21, 1-164. 1063 Réfi Oszkó, M., 1997. Gazdálkodás a Rétközben a XVIII–XIX. században. A Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg Megyei Levéltár Kiadványai 1064
III. Tanulmányok 4, Nyíregyháza. 1065 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/SZSM_Tan_04_Gazdalkodas/?query=harmatk%C3%A1sa&pg=62&layout=s 1066
Reuter, C. Történeti adatok az Árpád-kori Baranya megye növényföldrajzához. Kézirat, 1963. 62. 1. 1067 Sajó, K., 1905. Természettudományi Közlöny, Levélszekrény, 37(425-436), 89. 1068
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/TermtudKozl_1905/?pg=104&layout=s 1069 Sára, J., 2018. Adatok az ócsa-dabasi Turjánvidék tájtörténetének ismeretéhez. In: Korda M. (Ed.): Természetvédelem és kutatás a 1070
Turjánvidék északi részén. Rosalia 10. Duna-Ipoly Nemzeti Park Ig., Budapest. pp. 29-42. 1071 https://www.dunaipoly.hu/uploads/2018-07/20180703152034-rosalia-10-honlapra-eml06tff.pdf 1072
Somogyi, S., 2000. A végbement természetátalakítás tájrajzi vonatkozásai. In: Somogyi, S. (Ed.). A XIX. századi folyószabályozások 1073 és ármentesítések földrajzi és ökológiai hatásai Magyarországon. Budapest. pp. 222.-230. 1074
Stahl, H.H., 1993. Satele devălmașe. Vol. I. Editura Cartea Românească, Bucharest. 1075 Szabadfalvi, J. 1991. A sertés Magyarországon. Ethnica, Debrecen. 1076 Szabadfalvi, J., 1966. Nomád teleltetési rendszer az Alföldön. Műveltség és Hagyomány. VIII. 90. 1. 1077 Szabadfalvi, J., 1968. A magyar takarmánygazdálkodás honfoglalás előtti rétegéhez. Ethnographia 79(3), 338-349. 1078
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Ethnografia_1968_079/?pg=364&layout=s 1079 Szabadfalvi, J., 1968. Makkoltatás a Zempléni hegységben. Ethnographia 79(1), 62-75. 1080
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Ethnografia_1968_079/?pg=73&layout=s 1081 Szabadfalvi, J., 1971. Az extenzív állattenyésztés Magyarországon. Műveltség és Hagyomány 12. Kossuth Lajos Tudományegyetem, 1082
Debrecen. Debreceni Déri Múzeum Évkönyve. 1083 https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_HAJB_DERI_1969_1970/?pg=294&layout=s 1084
Szabadfalvi, J., 1984 Tanulmányok a magyar pásztorkodás köréből. Studia Folkloristica et Ethnographica 10. Debrecen 1085 Szabó, M., 1957. A Körös és Berettyó alsófolyása vidékének rétgazdálkodása, in: Némethy E., Takács, L. (Ed.), Néprajzi 1086
Közlemények 2(3-4), Budapest. https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/ORSZ_NEPR_Nk_02_3_4/?pg=4&layout=s 1087 Szabó, P., 1993. A sertés legeltetése, in: Vinczeffy, I. (Ed.), Legeltetéses állattartás. Tudományos Közlemények, Debreceni 1088
Gyepgazdálkodási Napok 11. DATE, Debrecen, pp. 239–245. 1089 Szabóné Futó, R. 1974. A sulyom gyűjtése és felhasználása a Takta mellékén. A Herman Ottó Múzeum Közleményei 13, 113–118. 1090
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/MEGY_BAZE_Mhomk_13/?pg=120&layout=s 1091 Szemere, L., 1908. Megfigyelések a kékvércséről. Aquila 15 (1-4), 312–313. 1092
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Aquila_1908/?query=legel&pg=346&layout=s 1093 Szeremlei, S., 1911. Hód-Mező-Vásárhely története 4. A közmivelődés története 1526-1848. I. Hódmezővásárhely. 1094
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/CsaladHely_MonografiaVaros_HodMezoVasarhelyTortenete_4/?pg=244&layout=s 1095 Szilágyi, M., 1991. Gazdaságnéprajzi adatok a Szernye-mocsár vidékéről. In: Halász Péter (Ed.), A Duna menti népek hagyományos 1096
műveltsége. Tanulmányok Andrásfalvy Bertalan tiszteletére. Budapest, pp. 147-152. 1097 Szilágyi, M., 1999. Az áradások és a gazdálkodás összefüggése az ármentesítések előtt. Ethnographia 110, 55–72. 1098
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Ethnografia_1999_110/?query=diszn%C3%B3&pg=75&layout=s 1099 Szilágyi, M., 2014. Szövegemlékek a Szernye-mocsárról. In: Báti Anikó (Ed.), Zsákmányolók és zsákmányaik. Történeti-néprajzi 1100
dolgozatok a vadászatról-vadfogásról és a természetes hasznosítás egyéb formáiról. Életmód és Tradíció 12. MTA BTK 1101 Néprajztudományi Intézet, Budapest, pp. 147-162. 1102
36
Szöllősi, Gy. 2003. A Ludasi-tó vize. Grafoprodukt, Szabadka. 1103 Szűcs, S., 1937. A nagysárréti juhászat. Debreceni Szemle XI, 168. 1104 Szűcs, S., 1942. A régi Sárrét világa. Magyar Néprajzi Társaság, Budapest. 1105 Szűcs, S., 1977. Régi magyar vízivilág. Magvető Kiadó, Budapest. 1106 Tagán, G., 1940: Állattartás a Szernye-mocsár környéki falvakban I. ÚT. EA. 1857 sz. 1-54 old. 1107 Takács, E., 1997. Petrák-krónika. In: Tanulmányok Csongrád megye történetéből 25. Szentes, Szeged. p 351. 1108
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/CSOM_Tan_25/?pg=8&layout=s 1109 Takács, L. 1966. Lápi gazdálkodás és irtás a Kisbalatonon. Néprajzi Értesítő 48, 167–196. 1110
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/NeprajziErtesito_1966/?pg=166&layout=s 1111 Takács, L., 1966. Berki pásztorok a Kis-Balaton szigetein. Néprajzi Közlemények 11(1-2), Budapest. 1112
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/ORSZ_NEPR_NK_11_1_2/?pg=4&layout=s 1113 Takács, L., 1973. A Kis-Balaton és környéke, in: Kanyar J. (Ed.), Somogyi Almanach 27-29. Kaposvár. 1114
https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/SOMM_SomAlm_027-29/?query=harmatk%C3%A1sa&pg=135&pg=135&layout=s 1115 Takács, L., 1981. Csille szavunk eredetéhez. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 83, 145-150. 1116
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/NyelvtudomanyiKozlemenyek_083/?pg=144&layout=s 1117 Takács, P., 1987. Adalékok a Szabolcs megyei parasztok úrbérrendezéskori földműveléséhez. Agrártörténeti Szemle 29(3-4), 328–1118
361.https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/AGRARTORTSZLE_29/?pg=357&layout=s 1119 Takáts, Gy., 1986. Somogyi pásztorvilág. Somogy Megyei Múzeumok Igazgatósága, Kaposvár. 1120 Tálasi, I., 1936. A Kiskunság népi állattartása. Budapest. p. 271. 1121 Tálasi, I., 1942. Változásvizsgálatok a népi állattenyésztés köréből. Néprajzi Értesítő 34(3-4), 203–220. 1122 Thullner, I., 2001. Lébény. Száz magyar falu könvvesháza Kht., Budapest. p. 210. https://www.arcanum.hu/hu/online-1123
kiadvanyok/SzazMagyarFalu-szaz-magyar-falu-1/lebeny-888C/ 1124 Török, K., 1870. A tiszamenti népéletből. I. A réti kanász, in: Nagy, M. (Ed.), Magyarország képekben. II. Budapest. 1125 Trenkó, Gy., 1909. A Bodrogköz vízrajzához. Földrajzi közlemények I., Budapest. 1126
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/FoldrajziKozlemenyek_1909/ 1127 Ujházy, N., Biró M., 2013. A vizes élőhelyek változásai Szabadszállás határában. Tájökológiai Lapok 11(2): 291-310. 1128
http://www.tajokologiailapok.szie.hu/pdf/201302/11_Ujhazy.pdf 1129 Vajkai, A., 1959. Szentgál. Egy bakonyi falu néprajza. Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó. p 398. 1130 Varga, D., 1994. Kies Kiskunság, szeretett Szentmiklós. Lyukasóra könyvek. Magyar Írókamara, Budapest. 1131 Vasvári, M. (1935-38) A bakcsó és üstökös gém táplálkozási oekologiája. Aquila 42-45, 590. 1132
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/Aquila_1935-1938/?pg=603&layout=s&query=sert%C3%A9s 1133 Wellmann, I., 1975. Népesség és mezőgazdaság a XVII. és a XVIII. század fordulóján. Történelmi szemle 18(4), 701-744. 1134
https://adtplus.arcanum.hu/hu/view/TortenelmiSzemle_1975/?query=n%C3%A1dfi%C3%B3k&pg=730&layout=s 1135
1136