Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Trees:Improving the lives of livestock
Chair: Liz Bowles, Head of Farming, the Soil Association
David Brass
www.lakesfreerange.co.uk
David Brass
C.E.O
Trees on Farm Development and History
1997 Noticed hens like to be under trees, started planting
2001 BFREPA Conference
2004 Sainsbury Woodland
2007 McDonald’s , science
2010 First paper published , Journal of Animal Welfare
2012 Second paper published, Vet Record, commercials of trees
2014 RSPCA Assured change standards
2017 21 million F/R birds benefit, under 2 million trees.
What did Science show
➢Mortality
➢Feather Pecking
➢Disease
➢Production
➢Egg Quality
Benefits of Trees
Why Trees
➢Better Welfare
➢Make more money
➢Better Range Quality
➢Better Drainage
➢Shelters Building
➢ Improves soil structure
➢Reduces runoff, flood reduction
➢Ammonia reduction
➢Environmental indicators - Tree Species
- Early Pollen
- Bats, Barn Owls , Squirrels etc
Enhanced Audits
➢Range with no trees 2/3
➢Range with 2 to 3 yr old whips 6/8
➢10 yr almost full canopy 20/ 30
This includes a significant number of red list species plus Bats, Moths,
Barn owls, Red Squirrels etc.
If it looks right and it feels right then it is right
Ted Green
Forgotten food—Tree Fodder.
Who said cows and horses ate grass?Real Hay not grass hay
A scene of 14,000 years ago … or 14 hours ?
Domestication of animals developed into pastoralism –harmony between nature, people and animals
Andy Smith
The electric sheep -what we can learn about the impact of trees for livestock welfare
Pippa Jones, Yufeng He, Clive Budden, Mark Rayment, Andy SmithSchool of Environment, Natural Resources and GeographyBangor University
Uplands are a challenging environment to farm livestock!
• Extreme temperatures (hot or cold)
• Hypothermia, starvation, disease, exposure, ewe stress
• Late snow fall in March 2013: 150,000 deaths
• Livestock productivity is all about…energy balance and welfare!
• Strategic placement of green infrastructure (shelter) such as trees and hedgerows could improve the productivity of pasture-based livestock systems
Research questions
How does tree-shelter altermicroclimatic conditions?
How is sheep thermal energy balance influenced by micro-climate?
How is the growth of pasture plant species influenced by micro-climate, and how are these factors affected by the presence of tree-shelter?
How does the availability of tree-shelter affect sheep behaviour?
e.g. lambing, extreme weather
WIND
How does the influence of tree-shelter onmicroclimate affect the energy balance of sheltering sheep?
Sheep : Microclimate : Trees (+) : Pasture
Productivity and the energy balance of sheep?
food
faecesurine
N gas
WIND
metabolism
lactation
bodily processes
movement
radiation
thermo-regulation
+ 𝑅𝑛 = 𝑬𝒑−((𝐸𝑎 + 𝐸𝑑 + 𝐸𝑙 + ∆𝐻𝑠 )− (𝐸𝑓 + (𝐸𝑢 + 𝐸𝑔 ))− 𝑀𝑏𝐸𝑖 − (𝐻𝑐𝑣(𝑇𝑠 − 𝑇𝑎) + 𝐻𝑐𝑑(𝑇𝑏 − 𝑇𝑎) + 𝐻𝑎𝑑(𝑇𝑠 − 𝑇𝑠𝑢𝑟) + 𝜆𝐸𝑠 + 𝜆𝐸𝑟 ))
radiation
convectionevaporation
conduction
Development of the e-sheep
How much extra energy does a cold sheep need to stay warm?
Ambient temp 6°C 25°C
Energy 233 kJ/Day 99 kJ/Day
Grass 21g DM/Day → 0.14m2
9g DM/Day → 0.06m2
Silage 21 g/Day 9 g/Day
Compound feed 19 g/Day 8 g/Day
Operative environmental temperature
• Microclimate – and its heating + cooling effects as experienced by a sheep
Body core temperature simulation
• Power needed → energy needed to keep warm = thermoregulatory index
57
Modelling of windbreak effects
Tree-shelter, sheep energy balance + microclimate
• Sheep biophysical model: effect of tree-shelter on thermal balance of a model sheep
• Model sheep energy maintenance
• Micrometeorology: wind speed, wind direction, radiation (light), temperature, humidity, precipitation
• Configuration of tree-shelter systems:, species composition, porosity, etc.
tree-shelter, sheep behaviour + microclimate
• Sheep behaviour:
• Sheep location + time
• GPS tracking
• Detailed movements?
• Position of tree-shelter systems:
• Different orientations/ configurations/porosities (species)
• Microclimate:
• Exposed, sheltered positions
• Key seasons + events:
• Adverse microclimate• Farming year - lambing
Landscape optimisation tools for livestock farming
Empirical measurements
ModellingWeb-based tool
Smart phone visualisation
61
AnnualAverage Temp Range: [-5.28, 1.32]
SummerAverage Temp Range: [-2.02, 3.67]
WinterAverage Temp Range: [-10.31, -3.20]
• Pasture/plant growth characteristics
• Growth rate (seasons)
• Optimal species
• Loss of pasture to trees?
• Changes in pasture quality/productivity?
wind
GROWTH RATE
Future work
Summary• Strategic placement + availability of shelter (trees, shrubs) in the farmland
landscape can enhance animal productivity + welfare
• Tree-shelter will positively impact animal energy balance by reducing energy lost due to microclimatic conditions.
• The configuration of tree-shelter features in the landscape will impact the extent of effect on sheep energy balance.
• Animals preferentially utilise tree-shelter associated pasture in times of climatic extreme.
• What preferences do animals have for configurations of tree-shelter in the landscape?
• Sunlight and pasture growth – the next pieces of the puzzle…
Thank ewe!
Paul Burgess
European Union’s Seventh Framework Program for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 613520
Agroforestry for livestock farmers –lessons from the AGFORWARD project
Paul Burgess1, John E. Hermansen2, Jo Smith3, Monique Bestman4, Boki Luske4, Sandra Novak5, Anne Grete Kongsted2, Rosa Mosquera Losada6, Valerio Bondesan7, Jim McAdam8
Presentation at the Oxford Real Farming Conference, Oxford,Thursday 4 January 2018
1 Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, UK2Aarhus University, Denmark3Organic Research centre, Berkshire, UK4Louis Bolk Institute, Netherlands.5INRA, Lusignan, France6Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain7Veneto Agricoltura, Legnaro, Padova, Italy8Agri-Food & Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Belfast, UK
Copyright © 2017 AGFORWARD
Content
1. To provide an overview of agroforestry
with livestock across Europe
2. Review some innovation of trees with
livestock
3. Review perceptions of agroforestry
across Europe
Silvopastoral systems
Silvopastoral
Combining trees and shrubs with forage and animal production
Silvoarable
Widely spaced trees and shrubs inter-cropped with annual or perennial crops
Hedgerows, windbreaks and riparian buffer strips
Lines of trees/shrubs bordering farmland to protect livestock, crops, and/or soil and water quality
Forest farming
Forested areas used for harvest of speciality crops
Home-gardens
Trees/shrubs with vegetables in urban areas
Silvopastoral systems are importantcovering 3.6% of Europe
Area of agroforestry: Using LUCAS data:15.4 Mha (3.6% of total area and 8.8%
of agricultural area) (den Herder et al. 2017) (excludes 1.8 Mha of homegardens).
0 2000 4000 6000
Spain
Greece
France
Italy
Portugal
Romania
Bulgaria
UK
Sweden
Germany
Other
Area (thousand ha)
Silvopastoral
Silvoarable
www.agforward.eu
46 Innovation leaflets
Improved seasonality of grass production
Longer grazing season under the tree canopies in Spain and Portugal
Improved seasonality of grass production
In Northern Ireland, trees allow earlier access to grass in Spring and extended grazing in autumn
Conservation value of livestock grazing
Red Poll cattle in Epping Forest wearing collars for a virtual fencing scheme to allow unconstrained public access
Reduced mowing costs Opportunities for improved off-site grass use
Grazing of high-stem cider orchards
Hens in organic apple orchards
Woodland eggs• Hens use more of their range • Less feather pecking damage • Fewer wild fowl visits
• Commercial standard sward mixture established as well as customised seed mix
• Rotation of access to manage pressure across the range
Sward establishment under trees
• Reduced heat stress• Trees need to be established
for 2-4 years before access• Metal cage tree protection
was most effective
Pigs and trees
Tree fodder database: leaves of black locust, chestnut, white mulberry and ash have crude protein levels of 22%
Tree fodder
On-line fodder tree database
0.01.0
0.0 1.0
Animal health and welfare
Diversity of products
Crop and pasture production
Animal production
Production of tree products
Quality of tree products
Crop and pasture quality
Disease and weed control
Predation loss to wild animals
Negative attributes
Positive attributes
Positive
Negative
Agroforestry can create production benefits
Analysis of 30 stakeholder groups and 344 stakeholders (Garcia de Jalon et al. 2017)
0.01.0
0.0 1.0
Biodiversity
Landscape aesthetics
Soil conservation
Carbon sequestration
Climate moderation
Water quality
Runoff and flood control
Change in fire risk
Control of noise and odour
Reduced groundwater…
Negative attributes
Positive attributes
Positive
Negative
Agroforestry provides environmental benefits
Analysis of 30 stakeholder groups and 344 stakeholders (Garcia de Jalon et al. 2017)
Modelling ecosystem services for
landscapes with and without agroforestry
Kay et al. (2017) Agroforestry Systems
Ecosystem services modelled:• Crop biomass yield• Groundwater recharge rate• Nutrient retention• Soil conservation• Carbon sequestration• Biodiversity
• Functional biodiversity (Pollination)
• Habitat diversity
Nutr
ient
losses
Soil
losses
Carb
on
sequestr
ation
Sem
i-natu
ral
habitats
Habitat
div
ers
ity
SID
I
Polli
nation
serv
ices
Agroforestry dominated landscape test sites
Agricultural dominated landscape test sites
Comparison of agroforestry and
agricultural landscapes across 12 sites
Agroforestry landscapes
Higher:• Nutrient retention• C sequestration• Soil conservation• Pollination services • Proportions of semi-
natural habitatsLower:• Groundwater
recharge
Gro
un
dw
ate
r
recharg
e r
ate
Biodiversity
Kay et al. (2017) Agroforestry Systems
Be
ne
fits
Lo
sse
s
0.01.0
0.0 1.0
Originality and interest
Project feasibility
Inspection of animals
Regulation
Mechanisation
Management costs
Complexity of work
Administrative burden
Labour
Negative attributes
Positive attributes
Positive
Negative
Farmers indicate that agroforestry has labour and administrative costs
Analysis of 30 stakeholder groups and 344 stakeholders (Garcia de Jalon et al. 2017)
Agroforestry for livestock farmers
1. Is an important land use
2. Established animal welfare and
seasonal grass production benefits
3. Interest in trees as fodder
4. Wider environmental benefits for society
5. Importance of manager’s mind set: do you
focus on the positive innovations or the costs?
6. Visit: www.agforward.eu
References
AGFORWARD (2018). AGFORWARD website. www.agforward.euden Herder M, Moreno G, Mosquera-Losada RM, Palma JHN, Sidiropoulou A, Santiago Freijanes JJ, Crous-Duran J, Paulo JA, Tomé
M, Pantera A, Papanastasis VP, Mantzanas K, Pachana P, Papadopoulos A, Plieninger T, Burgess PJ (2017) . Current extent and stratification of agroforestry in the European Union. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 241: 121–132.
Emile JC, Delagarde R, Barre P, Niderkorn V, Novak S (2017). Evaluation of the feeding value of leaves of woody plants for feeding ruminants in summer. 19th EGF Symposium on "Grassland resources for extensive farming systems in marginal regions: major drivers and future scenarios", Alghero, Sardinia (Italy) Grassland Science in Europe, vol 22, 548-550.
García de Jalón S, Burgess PJ, Graves A, Moreno G, McAdam J, Pottier E, Novak S, Bondesan V, Mosquera-Losada MR, Crous-Durán J, Palma JHN, Paulo JA, Oliveira TS, Cirou E, Hannachi Y, Pantera A, Wartelle R, Kay S, Malignier N, Van Lerberghe P, Tsonkova P, Mirck J, Rois M, Kongsted AG, Thenail C, Luske B, Berg S, Gosme M, Vityi A (2017). How is agroforestry perceived in Europe? An assessment of positive and negative aspects among stakeholders. Agroforestry Systems. DOI 10.1007/s10457-017-0116-3
Kay S, Crous-Duran J, Garcia de Jalon S, Graves A, Palma JHN, Roces-Diaz JV, Szerencsits E, Weibel R, Herzog F (2017). Landscape-Scale Modelling of Agroforestry Ecosystems Services: A Methodological Approach. Submitted.
Kay S, Crous-Duran J, García de Jalón S, Graves A, Ferreiro-Domínguez N, Moreno G, Mosquera-Losada MR et al. (2017). “Spatial Similarities between European Agroforestry Systems and Ecosystem Services at the Landscape Scale.” Agroforestry Systems. doi:10.1007/s10457-017-0132-3.
Luske B, Meir I. van, Altinalmazis Kondylis A, Roelen S, Eekeren N van (2017). Online fodder tree database for Europe. Louis Bolk Institute and Stichting Duinboeren, the Netherlands. 24 November 2017. www.voederbomen.nl/nutritionalvalues/
Palma JHN, Graves AR, Bunce RGH, Burgess PJ, de Filippi R, Keesman KJ, van Keulen H, Liagre F, Mayus M, Moreno G, Reisner Y, Herzog F (2007). Modelling environmental benefits of silvoarable agroforestry in Europe. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 119, 320 – 334.
Questions?