1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

European Interreg project FABulous Farmers

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH) - United Kingdom

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

Nee

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

A mixture of silvopastoral agroforestry approaches, including extensive and rotational cattle grazing around trees, provide benefits for biodiversity as well as leaf fodder for cattle, edible fruits and nuts, and wood fuel.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

A first generation farmer with a mixed 36 hectare farm has been exploring the establishment of a regenerative silvopastoral agroforestry system.

Under this system the farm has been divided into four zones:
1. Cae mawr- 4.3 ha field. Formerly semi-improved permanent pasture with occasional scattered trees. The field has been divided with hedges into 8 rotational grazing units for Highland and Welsh White cattle. Hedges are of mixed edible fruit and nut varieties. The more distant hedges are composed of mixed native species.
2. Cae Ceirch – 5.4 ha field. Semi-improved permanent pasture with scattered trees and gorse bush. New planting of native species amongst the gorse, creating enclosures by planting native trees at a variety of densities. Electric fences have installed for protection and will be removed once the trees are large enough to withstand browsing. Additionally, field trees are being planted and protected with "cactus tree guards" (tubular sleeves of wire mesh with outer spikes).
3. Lower slopes - 3 ha area. Old pasture which has been grazed exceptionally lightly for a number of years. Allowing native trees, mostly birch, willow and hazel to naturally regenerate. Bracken and bramble have been controlled by pigs with the aim of rehabilitating towards a silvopastoral system. Some thinning of trees will be undertaken in places to achieve that end.
4. Riparian woodland - 1 ha area. Occasionally grazed by cattle on an "as needed" (ad hoc) basis.

The system aims to produce high quality nutrient-dense food, with the highest animal welfare, whilst simultaneously providing maximum biodiversity benefits.

New tree planting is protected by electric fencing comprising chestnut posts with ring insulators and poly wire, with cactus tree guards for individual trees.

The benefits include shelter and shade for animals, with increased diversity of forage. In time there will be a harvest of edible products for human consumption (fruits and nuts etc). And the system provides a variety of biodiversity benefits as well as a visual - aesthetic - improvement to the landscape.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2018

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through land users' innovation

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• conserve ecosystem
• preserve/ improve biodiversity
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts

• Improve animal welfare

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Ja

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agro-silvopastoralism

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• No (Continue with question 3.4)

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Ja

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Silvo-pastoralism

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• agroforestry
• windbreak/ shelterbelt
• pastoralism and grazing land management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

other/ national currency (specify):

£GBP

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

0.85

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Ground preparation – marking out planting lines	Winter
2.	Planting trees	Winter
3.	Erecting electric fencing	Winter

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

If you are unable to break down the costs in the table above, give an estimation of the total costs of establishing the Technology:

8000.0

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

100%

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Checking trees visually	Ongoing - monthly
2.	Vegetation maintaince via mowing	Once a year in late summer
3.	Management of rotational mob grazing	Ongoing during grazing season - daily
4.	Checking electric fences	Ongoing - weekly

4.6 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Checking trees & electric fences	Hours	24.0	10.0	240.0	100.0
Labour	Vegetation maintance	Hours	30.0	10.0	300.0	100.0
Labour	Management of rotational grazing pastures	Hours	100.0	10.0	1000.0	100.0
Equipment	Flail mower attachment to tractor / strimmer	unit	1.0			100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					1540.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					1811.76

Comments:

Flail mower attachment to tractor / strimmer already owned as part of farm management

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The cost of trees, establishment (i.e. planting & replacing trees) and fencing

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Nee

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Nee

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• individual, not titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• individual

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Nee

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• single cases/ experimental

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 91-100%

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

Nee

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Offers the opportunity to radically increase the biodiversity potential of the farm
Shelter belts improve animal welfare
Productivity increases with diversification of products and co-benefits.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
A whole system approach promotes co-benefits of the farm improving animal welfare, biodiversity and diversification and thus resilience of the farm business.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
High set up costs	Careful choice of tree protection mechanism and seeking grant assistance

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
The system can be expensive to implement for little return in short-term	Grant assistance
Approach takes time to implement (i.e. trees to grow) before full benefits are seen, and management during this time in particular is higher than traditional methods	Long-term farm planning and seek guidance for the most effective implementation techniques to ensure best chance of success

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.4 General comments

The implementation of this silvopastoral agroforestry system is still in its relatively early stages as the trees and hedges have not yet reached maturity and thus the land user has not seen the full benefits of the work undertaken. However, in this whole-system approach to long term regeneration of the farm the land user has been able to plan well and utilise expertise and experience to make it a success.