Technologies

Metallic fences to prevent damages to pastures from wild boars [Italy]

technologies_1608 - Italy

View sections

Expand all Collapse all
Completeness: 76%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:

Velia De Paola

SLM specialist:

Quaranta Giovanni

University of Basilicata

Italy

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Catastrophic shifts in drylands (EU-CASCADE) {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1085, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'University of Basilicata - Italy', 'template': 'raw'}

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:

Yes

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

CONSTRUCTION OF FENCES TO KEEP WILD BOAR OFF PASTURE LAND

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The regulations implemented by the Pollino national park to protect the wild fauna have led to large numbers of wild boar in the local area. Numbers of wild boar have also increased because of breeding with non-native species (a Hungarian strain) on the part of hunting associations. Numbers have increased so much that currently these animals have even reached rural areas destined for pasture, livestock farming and cultivation. To protect crops and pastures more fences have been built. Typically these fences are constructed out of pales made from local wood and galvanised iron netting.

Purpose of the Technology: Protection of pasture land and cropland

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The construction of fences requires an initial investment in order to buy the wooden pales and iron netting. Generally the pales come from local woods, often from the farm itself, and are felled and prepared by local farmers who also usually construct the fences themselves. The height of the fences ranges from 1m to 1.20

Natural / human environment: Production methods are characterised by a medium level of mechanisation (only the most demanding operations are carried out using mechanical means), the production system is essentially mixed, a small part is destined for personal consumption whilst the bulk of production is destined for local markets. The property is predominantly privately owned but also includes some public land, especially in the case of pasture land. Most farms in the area are livestock farms whilst the agricultural component is destined exclusively for private consumption. The area is partially included in two bordered national parks, i.e. Pollino national park and val d’agri national park. This peculiar situation creates a very natural environment allowing the presence of many wild species.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

Media Gallery

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

Country:

Italy

Region/ State/ Province:

Basilicata

Further specification of location:

CASTELSARACENO

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 0.1-1 km2

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • through land users' innovation

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):
  • Agro-pastoralism (incl. integrated crop-livestock)

Cropland

Cropland

  • Annual cropping
Number of growing seasons per year:
  • 1
Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 120 Longest growing period from month to month: march to august

Grazing land

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:
  • Semi-nomadic pastoralism
  • Ranching
Animal type:
  • goats
  • sheep
  • cows
Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): The wild boar tend to dig into the ground in search of food and, in doing so, leave soil open to processes of erosion and permanently degrade grass cover.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Severe damage to grass cover and crops
Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: Shepherds use the area for summer grazing and move downhill in winter
Mixed: (eg agro-pastoralism, silvo-pastoralism): A reduced number of farmers cultivate their field for fodder and pastures
Grazingland comments: Sheep and goats are the most valuable livestock
Type of grazing system comments: Sheep and goats are the most valuable livestock

Livestock density: > 100 LU /km2

3.4 Water supply

Comments:

Water supply: rainfed, mixed rainfed - irrigated

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • Protection of pasture land and cropland from wildlife

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

structural measures

structural measures

  • S6: Walls, barriers, palisades, fences
Comments:

Main measures: structural measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

soil erosion by water

  • Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
physical soil deterioration

physical soil deterioration

  • Pc: compaction
biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
  • Bh: loss of habitats
  • Bq: quantity/ biomass decline
  • Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline
Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion, Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bq: quantity / biomass decline, Bs: quality and species composition /diversity decline

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Pc: compaction, Bh: loss of habitats

Main causes of degradation: increase and spreading of wild boars

Secondary causes of degradation: other human induced causes (specify) (Introduction of wild boars by hunting associations), governance / institutional (Excessive protection of the species by the National park)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'content_type': None, 'preview_image': '', 'key': 'Technical drawing', 'value': None, 'template': 'raw'}
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Technical knowledge required for land users: low

Secondary technical functions: improvement of ground cover, increase of biomass (quantity)

Structural measure: FENCES
Spacing between structures (m): 1pale/1.33m

Construction material (wood): Pales in wood

Construction material (other): Iron net (1 meter high)

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

euro

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

0.74

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

81.08

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Wood pales and network every 20 years
2. wood pales
3. Iron net

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit Total costs per input % of costs borne by land users
Labour Wood pales and network 1000m 1.0 5000.0 5000.0 100.0
Construction material Wood pales Pales 750.0 4.4144 3310.8 100.0
Construction material Iron net 1000 meter 1.0 5405.4 5405.4 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 13716.2
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 18535.41
Comments:

Lifespan of the wood pales and network: 20 years

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Checking fence for repairs 6 times a year

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 fence for repairs Day 1.0 81.08 81.08 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 81.08
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 109.57

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The total cost for the construction of 1,000 metres of fencing is spread over a period of 20 years on the basis of the duration of the structure

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

1519.00

Specifications/ comments on rainfall:

68% in winter and 15% in summer

Agro-climatic zone
  • sub-humid

Thermal climate class: temperate

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)
If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil fertility is medium-low
Soil drainage/infiltration is good
Soil water storage capacity is medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

5-50 m

Availability of surface water:

medium

Water quality (untreated):

good drinking water

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Availability of surface water is medium (minimum during month of September and October)

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • medium

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household
Gender:
  • men
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Difference in the involvement of women and men: active farmers are present only males; women are not actively involved in land management
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: negative; 2%
and own 90% of the land.
and own 10% of the land.
Off-farm income specification: Most of the off farm income derives from public sector, i.e. Municipality, Mountain Community, Region and other public bodies. Very few farmer members run local shops or handcraft.

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

  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • small-scale
Comments:

Considering communal land used by farmers

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

Land ownership:
  • communal/ village
  • individual, titled
Land use rights:
  • communal (organized)
  • individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
technical assistance:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
roads and transport:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
drinking water and sanitation:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
financial services:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

fodder production

decreased
increased
Quantity before SLM:

7t/ha

Quantity after SLM:

8t/ha

risk of production failure

increased
decreased
Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased
decreased

farm income

decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved

Improved livelihoods and human well-being

decreased
increased

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Soil

soil loss

increased
decreased

soil compaction

increased
reduced
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

biomass/ above ground C

decreased
increased

beneficial species

decreased
increased

habitat diversity

decreased
increased

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

damage on neighbours' fields

increased
reduced

damage on public/ private infrastructure

increased
reduced

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

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm well
local windstorm well
Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
drought well
Hydrological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences
How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

slightly positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

slightly positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
  • 0-10%
Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: support by the national park

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
If the National Park of Pollino would also support activities to prevent damage caused by wild boar instead of focusing solely on the conservation of wild local species (boar).

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Greater economic support for the building of fences.
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The technology helps preserve pastures and protects against damage to crops

How can they be sustained / enhanced? If the National Park of Pollino would also support activities to prevent damage caused by wild boar instead of focusing solely on the conservation of wild local species (boar).

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?
Disadvantage solely related to high cost of construction. More subsidies
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
The only disadvantage is the high initial cost of building fences which is, however, partly mitigated by the possibility to use the fences also as boundary marker dividing one property from another.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules