IMPACT OF SHEEP MEAT IN THE CONSERVATION OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES K. Osoro, R. Celaya, A. Martínez, U. García, R. Rosa Animal Production Systems -

Transcription

1 IMPACT OF SHEEP MEAT IN THE CONSERVATION OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES K. Osoro, R. Celaya, A. Martínez, U. García, R. Rosa Animal Production Systems - SERIDA

2 Available resources: Vegetation and Sheep

3 PERMANENT GRASSLANDS ha across the EU % of the total Utilized Agricultural Area

4 EVOLUTION OF NUMBER OF HEADS OF SHEEP Source: FAOSTAT

5 SHEEP CENSUSES IN AGROCLIMATIC ZONES ATLANTIC & BOREAL CONTINENTAL CONTINENTAL MEDITERRANEAN Source: FAOSTAT

6 Milions of heads Milions of heads Milions of heads CATTLE CENSUSES IN AGROCLIMATIC ZONES ATLANTIC & BOREAL Belgium Denmark Finland Ireland Netherlands Sweden United Kingdom CONTINENTAL Austria Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Estonia Germany Hungary Latvia Lithuania Poland Romania Slovakia Slovenia France Greece MEDITERRANEAN Italy Malta Portugal 5 Spain Source: FAOSTAT

7 NUMBER OF ANIMALS CATTLE SHEEP Source: Eurostat. Data 2014

8 Percentage of heads of cattle vs sheep across the EU United Kingdom Sweden Netherlands Luxembourg Ireland Germany Finland Denmark Belgium ATLANTIC ZONE Slovenia Slovakia Romania Poland Lithuania Latvia Hungary Estonia Czech Republic Croatia Bulgaria Austria Spain Portugal Malta Italy Greece France Cyprus 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% CONTINENTAL ZONE MEDITERRANEAN Cattle Sheep Source: Eurostat. Data 2012

9 SHEEP VERSUS CATTLE: STOCKS & PRODUCTION Source: FAOSTAT

10 Animal live weigth changes

11

12 g/day Body weight changes in heath-gorse shrublands in no lactating animals Spring Summer Vacas Cows Yeguas Mares Ovejas Sheep Cabras Goats Grazing periods: sheep & goats: mid-may to late October /early November cows & mares: mid-june to September/October Osoro K.; Ferreira L.M.M.; García U.; Jáuregui B.M.; Rosa García R., Celaya R Diet selection and performance of sheep and goats grazing on different heathland vegetation types. Small Ruminant 109, Celaya R.; Ferreira L.M.M.; García U.; Rosa García R.; Osoro K Diet selection and performance of cattle and horses grazing in heathlands". Animal 5,

13

14 BW gain per LU (g/day.lu) Daily body weight (BW) gains per livestock unit (LU) in partially improved heath-gorse shrublands Cattle Horse Sheep Goat DAMS OFFSPRING Period 1 Period 2 Overall Period 1 Period 2 Overall Period 1 Period 1 K. Osoro, L.M.M. Ferreira, U. García, A. Martínez and R. CelayaA (2015). Forage intake, digestibility and performance of cattle, horses, sheep and goats grazing together on an improved heathland. Animal Production Science.

15 Vegetation dynamics

16 Phytomass amount and composition in heathlands and mechanically cleared areas after three years under sheep grazing or ungrazed (Celaya et al., 2007) kg DM/ha Heathland Cleared area Sheep Ungrazed Sheep Ungrazed Heather Gorse Herbaceous

17 Plant cover and aerial phytomass in gorse (Ulex gallii)-dominated shrublands grazed by sheep or ungrazed after burning in May 2001 (Jáuregui et al., 2007, 2009) Cover (%) Sheep grazed Ungrazed Oc Ju My Ag Oc My Ag Oc My Ag Oc My Ju Bare ground Dead matter Herbaceous Gorse Heather Phytomass (kg DM/ha) Sheep grazed Ungrazed Herbaceous Gorse Heather 0 Sp 2001 Jl 2002 My Ag Nv Ju Oc Ju Ag Ju Ju

18 Plant cover, gorse (Ulex gallii) height and phytomass in gorse-dominated shrublands grazed by sheep or ungrazed five years after mechanical clearing (Benavides et al., 2009) % Cover cm Gorse height kg DM/ha Phytomass Sheep Ungrazed Sheep Ungrazed Sheep Ungrazed Heather Gorse Herbaceous Dead matter Bare ground

19 Brooms (Genista florida) in high mountain pastures grazed by cattle or sheep

20 Grass flowerstems in high mountain pastures under sheep grazing could be controled by cattle grazing

21 Impact on invertebrate fauna

22 Axis 2 (10.4%) Diversity of invertebrate fauna 0.8 Sheep*Herbaceous Xne Hla Goat*Gorse Goat*Heather Osp Pca Pag Lba Svi Pni Lbl Cas Aeq Sir Ihi Ose Cge Tne Ama Cma Pla Aac Har Pcu Pst Mfo Cne Nha Sab Tte Apu Cpu Sga Sheep*Gorse Ppu -0.6 Sheep*Heather Goat*Herbaceous -0.8 Axis 1 (20.4%) 0.8

23 Grazing pressure and sustainability

24 ANALYSIS OF THE CURRENT SITUATION A. Partial accomplishment of theoretical objectives of CAP: extensification, sustainable management of natural resources and biodiversity. On the contrary current scenarios involve intensification / abandonment and the subsequent increase of large wildfires and floods with invaluable economical, environmental and social costs. ABANDONMENT CAP INTENSIFICATION B. Lack of specific support from the administrations for the development of more extensive and sustainable productions, as it occurs with meat sheep. The support is not just about allocating payments, which is necessary, but it should also include guide and advise to develop activities that meet the pursued goals

25 Aspects that have contributed to unsustainable dynamics with invaluable environmental costs 1. The objectives supported by the CAP have been linked to animal production systems focused on production. A clear example is the subsidy payment per liter of milk produced regardless of the degree of intensification of the production model and the level of use of the renewable natural resources. This is quite contradictory to the intended prioritization of the extensification. 2. The objectives of genetic improvement have focused on quantitative production, forgetting the qualitative and environmental aspects, and ecosystem services. The possible adverse effects of the residues from antiparasitic treatments on local biodiversity (such as the coprophagous fauna) or the resistance of parasites to such products have also not been taken into consideration. 3. The carcass conformation (butcher quality) and the meat quality (sensory and functional quality) are frequently (sometimes intentionally) confused. This is detrimental to the indigenous breeds better adapted to environmental conditions (climate and food supply) and potential pathogens.

26 4. The local breeds should be promoted because: a) they are the basis for the maintenance of PDO and PGI products, i.e. a differentiable production, b) allow an efficient use of nutritional resources, c) their activity prevents encroachment and the accumulation of flammable biomass. 5. Little appreciation by society of the role of grazing, particularly small ruminants, and therefore of shepherds, in aspects mentioned in the previous section, in addition to their contribution to the cultural richness of a territory. YEAR 2004 LAST MERINO TRASHUMANCE FLOCK IN SOMIEDO NATURAL PARK (ASTURIAS)

27 6. Inefficient control of predatory wildlife which severely impacts on small ruminants. This trend is supported by urban groups unaware of rural life, especially in the marginal areas, and its role in the conservation of biodiversity and other key ecosystem services for the rest of the society. 7. Rural society condense few votes, but cover wide territories. They are frequently ignored by politicians regardless of their essential contribution to preserve the biodiversity compared to the pollution originated in the consumer urban societies. 8. The plans for the management of wildlife, as well as other strategies developed in rural areas, are frequently designed in the offices by technocrats which ignore the real problems and their consequences.

28 No. heads EVOLUTION OF LIVESTOCK & LANDSCAPE % CATTLE SHEEP GOATS

29 ABANDONMENT FIRE RISK Forest fires , based on satellite observations. Source: AEE

30 2010 Before 2011 After wildfire

31

32

33

34

35 In summary, we must learn to establish mechanisms of action adapted to the new society but which pay special attention to the real actors in rural areas: those who manage the tools (animals) and the ones which generate ecosystem services, food and other products differentiable by their high quality and productive models, and who also preserve the cultural heritage which benefits to the rest of the society

36 DISSAPEARANCE OF CULTURAL HERITAGE

37 THANK YOU VERY MUCH for all you are doing for us

38 THANK YOU VERY MUCH again