Biodiversity component. Ibex survey Potential competition between ibex and livestock Livestock depredation survey

Transcription

1 Biodiversity component Ibex survey Potential competition between ibex and livestock Livestock depredation survey

2 Methods ibex survey 6 (8) surveys conducted (4 in spring, 1 in autumn and 1 in winter): First survey in collaboration with IUCN to standarise methodology 5 surveys UMB, Training 7 Basho people. 2 additional surveys by locals.

3 Main findings Total population size minimum 80 animals Good production of kids compared to other parts of Northern Areas, and Indian Himalayas Population highly skewed towards young animals, indicating population in growth (recovery)

4 Population model Model fitting the survey result Model fitting the adjusted survey result Survival in model fitting the survey result Survival in model fitting the adjusted result Number of animals Survival in different age classes years 1.5 years 2.5 years 3.5 years 4.5 years 5.5 years 6.5 years 7.5 years 8.5 years 9.5 years 10.5 years 11.5 years 12.5 years 13.5 years 14.5 years 15.5 years 0

5 IUCN, Gov. and Basho Conservation Committee (2004 and 2005). 2 trophy hunt projects: USD (75 % community, 25 % government). Local motivation for wildlife (and forest) protection.

6 Ibex livestock interactions Main findings: Ibex and livestock have distinct spring habitat segregation in Basho With the present population size of ibex and livestock, nothing indicates that livestock grazing have negative influence on the recovery of the ibex population in Basho valley.

7 Depredation (1999 carcass reports) Wolf: 55 small and 25 large animals reported killed (stable throughout most of the year) Snow leopard: 10 small and 11 large animals reported killed (during summer only) All together about 2 % of the total livstock.

8 BASHO: Management Pasture and livestock Livestock census Biomass production & forage quality Grazing activity and diet selection Animal performance managment

9 Management a flexible 3 step summer migration regime adapted to utilize the lush alpine summer pastures lower summer settlements serve multipurpose functions migration is constrained by labour shortage co-operative herding systems reduced utilization and/or specialization

10 Management: Daily vertical movement of small and large milking ruminants 4400 Small ruminants Large ruminants Altitude (masl) Early Middle Late Summer

11 Livestock census : Number of small animals per household Number of animals Goats Sheep S N D M G K B A Village

12 Livestock census : No of large animals per household their own 3 Number of animals S N D M G K B A Village

13 Livestock census : Number of large animals managed per household (barpa included) 5 Animal number S N D M G K B A Village

14 Livestock census: Changes in total watershed livestock, Basho people memory (1945 no = 10) Year Cultivated land per household 6 kanal 4 kanal 3 kanal 2 kanal Large ruminants OOOOOO OOOO OOOOO OOOOO O OOOOOO OOOOOO OOO OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO OO Small ruminants ooooo ooooo ooooo ooo ooooo o ooo

15 Biomass production and forage quality soil mapping vegetation mapping monthly cutting of protected plots at different altitude (vegetation types) for biomass measurements chemical analyses of estimated off-take (protein and fiber)

16 Biomass production & forage quality: Quality of fodder Composition (%DM) Hemicellulose Cellulose Lignin Crude protein Winter grass Hay Basho Hay Norway Summer forages

17 Grazing activity and diet selection: Grazing activity Grazing activity - large ruminants Grazing activity - small ruminants Time spent grazing (% ) Cow Zomo Morning Mid day Afternoon T ime spent grazing (%) Morning Mid day Afternoon Goats Sheep

18 Grazing activity and diet selection: Diet selection Diet sel. (% ) Diet selection - large ruminants Gram. 80 Herbs Diet sel. (%) Diet seletion - small ruminants Gram. 80 Herbs Leaves Cow Zomo 0 Sheep Goats

19 Animal performance: Seasonal body weight change small ruminants Goats Sheep Body weight (kg) Body weight (kg) July Sept. Nov. Jan. March May Nov. 1 Dec. 2 3Jan. 4 Feb. 5 March 6 7 April 8 May 9 10 June

20 Animal performance: Seasonal body weight change - cows 140 Body weight (kg) Dec. Jan. Feb. March April May June

21 Animal performance: Animal died Large animals Small animals Number of animals Jan. Feb. March April & May June

22 Animal performance: Supplementary feed experiment: Body weight / Milk production: Body weight (kg) Milk yield (ml/day) Control Suppl. fed 0 Control Suppl. fed

23 Suggestions 1. Test out the projects recommendations (see poster) and report effects and obstacles. earlier harvesting of hay meadows increased number of cuttings improved winter storage regime improve preventive health management and care earlier movement to the broqs extensive pasture use

24 2. Follow up ongoing breeding practices 3. Test out breeding systems. 4. The house-cow management system

25

26 MSc Thesis june 2007: Characteristics, management practices and peoples preferences for local cows and exotic crossbreeds in Baltistan, Pakistan (Ghulam Raza)

27 Study Area

28 Different Breeds

29 Objectives of study To study characteristics, management practices and preferences to the local breeds and cross breeds. To understand the reason of adoption and nonadoption of crossbreeds in the study area, and their consequences on livelihoods. To study the effects on local breeds due to adoption of crossbreeds in the area

30 FINDINGS Primary and secondary preferences of respondents for different breeds (%) Breeds Jersey cr.br. Zomo Friesian cr.br. Local cattle 1 st pref nd pref prices - feeding habits - milk fat content - disease resistance - fertility - age of puberty - taste of milk -adaptable in local management system - barpa and grazing at high altitudes - body size

31 Table 1: Percentage of households with different breeds and mean number of cows per household, by village Villages Mean number of cows per household and standard deviation (std)* Jersey Cr.br Percentage of households with different breeds Zomo Friesian Cr.br Local cattle Gharbuchung (Upper village) 2.35 (1.5)* Hatchi (Middle village) 1.78 (0.9)* Kraming (Lower village) 2.12 (1.24)*

32 Main changes on livelihoods due to adoption of crossbreeds in the Area Percent of respondents Type of improvements* Increased milk production Increased income due to calf value Improved health * Due to multiple responses by the respondents for the same character (improvements), the sums of all improvements are more than hundred.

33 Division of household labor in Division of household labor in Livestock Management Husband Wife Children Husband Wife Children Husband Wife Children Husband Wife Children Husband Wife Children Husband Wife Children Husband Wife Children Husband Wife Children Husband Wife Children Who decides to s ell or buy the feed to animal Milking Cleaning of shed Who sell m ilk&butter Who gets the money by selling Who does the breeding Who does the housing who makes the butter Household work Percent respondents

34 The way forward..! Control Crossbreeding (conservation of local breed) Improve the fodder quantity and quality in area Link the production of milk from farmers to market, milk by products

35 Thank you