MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND IN CATALONIA (SPAIN)

Transcription

1 MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND IN CATALONIA (SPAIN) Workshop on Control and Management of Agricultural Land in IACS May 2018 Vilnius (Lithuania) Laura Ruana Pavon Paying agency of Catalonia

2 GUIDELINE 1. Introduction 2. Management of permanent grassland 2.1 Classification 2.2 Grazing eligibility coefficient (pro-rata coefficient) 2.3 System and performances 3. Delineation of ineligible area vs pro-rata system 4. More than 50% ineligible vs abandoned 5. Conclusions and perspective 2

3 1. INTRODUCTION 3

4 1. INTRODUCTION km declared reference parcels 4

5 1. INTRODUCTION Aid applications Direct Payments Basic Payment Scheme Voluntary Coupled Support Small Farmers Scheme Basic Payment Greening Young farmers Nuts Rice Protein crops Grain legumes 46 Tomato 5 Suckler cow Dairy cattle 528 Dairy cattle- entitlements, no area 3 Fattening cattle Fattening cattle- entitlements, no area 18 Ovine 967 Caprine 644 Ovine/caprine - entitlements, no area

6 1. INTRODUCTION. LPIS 2018 Total reference parcels ha Permanent Grassland reference parcels ha 6

7 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.1 Classification. LPIS uses Eligible uses Non-eligible uses VF FL FV OF VO CI FY FS IV TH OV PS PA PR TA VI Vineyard fruit trees Nuts olive trees Nuts - vineyard Olive trees - fruit trees Vineyard - olive trees Citrus trees Fruit trees Nuts Greenhouses Orchard Olive trees Pasture (grassland) Pasture with trees Pasture with bushes Arable land Vineyard AG IM ED FO CA ZV ZU Water land Unproductive Buildings Forest land Roads-paths Censored area Urban area 7

8 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.1 Classification. LPIS uses PASTURE (GRASSLAND): PS 8

9 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.1 Classification. LPIS uses PASTURE WITH BUSHES: PR 9

10 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.1 Classification. LPIS uses PASTURE WITH TREES: PA 10

11 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.1 Classification. LPIS uses FOREST LAND: FO 11

12 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.2. Grazing eligibility coefficient (GEC) Established in 2005 GEC is a percentage that indicates the fraction of the parcel that is usable as a pasture for domestic livestock. Its value goes from 0% to 100% in the uses PA, PR and PS Which is the graphic representation of this concept? 12

13 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.2. Grazing eligibility coefficient (GEC) Established in 2005 GEC is a percentage that indicates the fraction of the parcel that is usable as a pasture for domestic livestock. Its value goes from 0% to 100% in the uses PA, PR and PS Which is the graphic representation of this concept? GEC = 100% GEC = 0% 13

14 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.2. Grazing eligibility coefficient (GEC) Factors that reduce GEC Rocky land/pedregosity Slope Difficulty of access Scarcity of vegetation Non-grazible spices Erosion. 14

15 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.2. Grazing eligibility coefficient (GEC) Gross area Net area Eligible area Declared 15

16 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.2. Grazing eligibility coefficient (GEC) PERMANENT GRASSLAND IN CATALONIA 2018 CLAIM YEAR TOTAL area (ha) DECLARED area (ha) LPIS use Gross area GEC (%) Eligible area Gross area GEC (%) Eligible area PA , , PR , , PS , , , ,

17 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.2. Grazing eligibility coefficient (GEC) Permanent grassland eligible area evolution (ha) 17

18 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.3. System and performances GEC linked to cadastral use 2005: GEC=0% 5 years non-declared parcels 2008: implementation of an automatic model Margins model + Slopes model + Landsat model +Validation (CAPI + OTSC) and follow-up After implemantation of the model, constantly: Automatic and manual performances 18

19 2. MANAGEMENT OF PASTURES 2.3. System and performances Automatic performances 2014/2015 Model of covers and soils of Catalonia (MCSC Model) Since 2015: NO GEC <20% Parcels with GEC < 20% automatically changed to GEC = 0% Every year: calculation of maxim GEC (slope + landsat). Complement to photointerpretation + field visits. 19

20 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI specialized group 20

21 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI annual ortophoto 50 cm 25 cm specialized group 21

22 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI guides 22

23 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI guides 23

24 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI guides 24

25 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI guides 25

26 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI guides 26

27 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI guides 27

28 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances CAPI guides 28

29 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances OTSC specialized group 29

30 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances OTSC specialized group 30

31 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances OTSC specialized group 31

32 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances Manual performances OTSC specialized group 32

33 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. SPECIALIZED GROUP Few people Common criteria Subjectivity Training sessions Region knowledge

34 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances How to apply for the GEC review? For parcels Individually used: throught Claim IT system GEC review application 34

35 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures How to apply for the GEC review? For common permanent grassland parcels: through COMUNALS application 35

36 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures COMUNALS APPLICATION. For commonly exploited permament grassland parcels. Public and private Works with LPIS references Avoids overdeclaration (not possible to declare more area than the eligible one). Calculates the eligible area according to GEC Allows the review application of the GEC Reduces the possible errors in the declarations Generates accrediting certificates 36

37 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures GEC 90% 10 % NOT eligible 37

38 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures GEC 90% 10 % NOT eligible 38

39 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures GEC 90% 10 % NOT eligible 39

40 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures GEC 90% Farmer 2 10 % NOT eligible 40

41 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures GEC 90% Farmer 2 10 % NOT eligible 41

42 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures GEC 90% Farmer 2 10 % NOT eligible 42

43 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures GEC 90% Farmer 2 10 % NOT eligible 43

44 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures GEC 90% Farmer 2 10 % NOT eligible 44

45 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures NORMALIZED CERTIFICATE. MANDATORY FOR PARCELS OF CATALONIA

46 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Common pastures Training sessions before claims CALENDARI COMUNALS 2018 Inici funionament Comunals 2018 Bellver i Bagà Tortosa Inici sol licitud única Inici adjudicacions Comunals 2018 Tremp i Vielha Sort i La Seu d'urgell Solsona Càrrega parcel les Ripoll Gener Febrer Formació Assignació de recintes Alta entitats Petició de parcel les Març Abril Fi període sol licitud única Maig Fi modificacions sol licitud única Fi període d'adjudicacions 29

47 2. MANAGEMENT OF PERMANENT GRASSLAND 2.3. System and performances. Continuously since 2005 Specialized group in pastures GEC reviews (automatic and manual performances) Integration of OTSC and reviews in the system Specific application for common pastures (since 2006) 30

48 3. Delineation of ineligible area vs pro-rata system PRO-RATA PROS Easier and more realistic representation Less workload in editing geometries More continuous LPIS reference (without holes ) It allows making reductions caused by non-specific ineligible areas (like slope, aridity) More flexible Only option for very scattered non-eligible elements/areas 48

49 3. Delineation of ineligible area vs pro-rata system PRO-RATA CONS More difficult determination Automatic model needed New tecnologies creates the need to update the models. Same results? It may conflict with the necessary LPIS stability for grants management In big parcels can be difficult to review 49

50 4. More than 50% ineligible vs Abandoned (non-eligible) More than 50% ineligible Pasture vocation Cause of low GEC: Slope Cause of low GEC: Rocky Activity/evidences of activity Previous years ortofotos evidences activity Rural environment Abandoned/non-eligible No pasture vocation No activity Previous years ortofotos evidences lack of activity Rural environment Not accessible 50

51 4. More than 50% ineligible vs Abandoned (non-eligible) 25295:18:98:1 NON-ELIGIBLE 51

52 4. More than 50% ineligible vs Abandoned (non-eligible) 25295:18:95:1 NON-ELIGIBLE 52

53 4. More than 50% ineligible vs Abandoned (non-eligible) 17047:5:319:1 8,03 ha m 53

54 4. More than 50% ineligible vs Abandoned (non-eligible) 17047:5:319:1 8,03 ha m 54

55 4. More than 50% ineligible vs Abandoned (non-eligible) 17047:5:319:1 8,03 ha m 55

56 4. More than 50% ineligible vs Abandoned (non-eligible) 17047:5:319:1 8,03 ha m GEC = 44% 56 % ineligible 56

57 4. More than 50% ineligible vs Abandoned (non-eligible) 17047:5:319:1 8,03 ha m GEC = 44% 56 % ineligible 57

58 5. CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVE Automatic and manual methods are complementary and both required to establish a correct GEC The creation of a specialized group is key for our management of PG. It allows applying common criteria in all the territory Currently: updating automatic model with Sentinel-2 Challenge: monitoring agricultural activity in PG. (Mediterranean) 58

59 Thank you for your attention!