Technologies

Biologische Weidewirtschaft von Kühen in einer Tierarche [Switzerland]

Creation: 12/04/2020 11 a.m.
Update: 02/12/2021 4:26 p.m.
Compiler: Julian Meier
Editor: Aline Wicki
Reviewers: Hanspeter Liniger, Rima Mekdaschi Studer

Tierarche

technologies_5837 - Switzerland

View sections

Expand all

Completeness: 82%

1. General information

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Es handelt sich um eine Weide, welche zu einer Tierarche gehört, dies bedeutet, dass die Tiere nicht mehr in der Nutzung stehen. Der Boden ist geprägt durch einen 25 bis 80 cm organischen Oberboden (ca. 20% organisches Material), nachfolgend ist meist eine wasserstauende Tonschicht zu finden. Die Kühe leben fern von deren Nutzung, finanziert durch Spendengelder.
Die beschriebene Weide umfasst ca. 2 Hektaren. Die Parzelle hat eine Länge von ungefähr 220 Metern und eine Breite von ungefähr 95 Metern. Der Boden ist unterschiedlich mächtig. Die Neigung ist über den Perimeter nahezu null Grad.
Das hier beschriebene System besteht aus einer Drainageanlage. Diese sorgt dafür, dass das Gras auf der Weide unter guten Bedingungen wachsen kann. Die heutige Kuhweide wurde vor 2017 als Fruchtfolge-Kulturland genutzt. Das vom Landwirt betriebene Weidesystem schont den Boden, da die Bearbeitung, wie Pflügen oder Grubbern, wie sie zuvor geschah, entfällt. Insbesondere der Abbau des organische (>10%) A-Horizontes könnte diese Nutzung verlangsamen.
Das System wurde durch den Landwirt bestimmt und scheint daher für ihn adäquat zu sein. Das Projekt der «Tierarche Seeland» wurde internistisch vom Landwirt selbst initiiert.

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:

Switzerland

Region/ State/ Province:

Bern

Further specification of location:

Kallnach

Specify the spread of the Technology:

applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

2017

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

through land users' innovation

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Die Tierarche entstand durch die Eigeninitiative des Landwirtes

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:

Ranching

Kühe ohne landwirtschaftliche Nutzung (Ausnahme organischer Dünger)

Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?

Products and services:

manure as fertilizer/ energy production

Tierwohl

Species:

cattle - non-dairy working

Count:

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)

3.4 Water supply

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

rainfed

Comments:

Es besteht ein Drainage-System

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

pastoralism and grazing land management
water diversion and drainage

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

A1: Vegetation/ soil cover
A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
A3: Soil surface treatment
A6: Residue management

A3: Differentiate tillage systems:

A 3.1: No tillage

A6: Specify residue management:

A 6.2: grazed

structural measures

S3: Graded ditches, channels, waterways

management measures

M1: Change of land use type

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by wind

Et: loss of topsoil

chemical soil deterioration

Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)

physical soil deterioration

Pc: compaction
Pw: waterlogging
Ps: subsidence of organic soils, settling of soil

other

Specify:

Stauwasser aufgrund der stauenden Tonschicht im Unterboden.

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

reduce land degradation
adapt to land degradation

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'content_type': 'image/jpeg', 'preview_image': '/media/81/d/81dc6e81-7502-4355-b755-b5f2c7a0ae30.jpg', 'key': 'Technical drawing', 'value': '/media/19/2/1928bfc0-0cf4-49d2-9778-b20863603ed9.jpg', 'template': 'raw'}

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Weidegrösse: 2ha
Tierpopulaton: 15 Stück nicht landwirtschaftlich genutztes Rindvieh
Weidedauer: 9 Monate im Jahr
Neigung: 0°
Drainage: Ja
Bodenhorizontabfolge: A-C
A-Horizont: 25-80 cm / anmoorig (>10% organisches Substanz)
C-Horizont: tonige Stauschicht, mit zunehmender Tiefe mehr Schluff
Bodentyp: Braunerde-Pseudogley

Author:

Aline Wicki / Julian Meier

Date:

30/10/2020

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

per Technology area

Indicate size and area unit:

2 Hektaren

other/ national currency (specify):

CHF

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

0.92

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

186

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Es wurde für diesen Beschrieb keine Kostenrechnung vorgenommen, da ein Status-Quo beschrieben und keine Technologieveränderung vorgenommen wurde. Ausserdem lagen die Daten für die genaue Berechnung der Kosten für die Drainagen nicht vor.

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:

957.00

Specifications/ comments on rainfall:

Für 2019, gemessen in Fräschels

Indicate the name of the reference meteorological station considered:

MeteoSchweiz, Fräschels

Agro-climatic zone

sub-humid

Durchschnittlich 7, 4 Grad Celsius, min. 2 Grad Celsius im Januar, max. 23 Grad Celsius im Juli - Messstation Fräschels

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.

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

not relevant

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):

medium (loamy, silty)

Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface):

medium (loamy, silty)
fine/ heavy (clay)

Topsoil organic matter:

high (>3%)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Ground water table:

< 5 m

Availability of surface water:

good

Water quality (untreated):

poor drinking water (treatment required)

Water quality refers to:

surface water

Is water salinity a problem?

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Stauwasser kann zum Problem werden, scheint aber gemäss dem Landwirten auf der Weide keine grossen Einflüsse zu haben.

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:

Habitat diversity:

medium

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Sedentary or nomadic:

Sedentary

Market orientation of production system:

commercial/ market

Off-farm income:

less than 10% of all income

Relative level of wealth:

average

Individuals or groups:

individual/ household

Level of mechanization:

mechanized/ motorized

Gender:

women
men

Age of land users:

middle-aged

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)?

large-scale

Comments:

29 Hektaren beträgt die Gesamtbewirtschaftungsfläche.

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

Land ownership:

communal/ village
individual, titled

Land use rights:

leased
individual

Water use rights:

communal (organized)

Are land use rights based on a traditional legal system?

Yes

Specify:

Schweizer Recht, BV Art. 26 Eigentumsrecht
Pachtreglement Burgergemeinde Kallnach

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

crop production

decreased

increased

risk of production failure

increased

decreased

product diversity

decreased

increased

land management

hindered

simplified

Water availability and quality

irrigation water availability

decreased

increased

demand for irrigation water

increased

decreased

Income and costs

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased

decreased

farm income

decreased

increased

workload

increased

decreased

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

excess water drainage

reduced

improved

evaporation

increased

decreased

Soil

soil cover

reduced

improved

soil loss

increased

decreased

soil compaction

increased

reduced

soil organic matter/ below ground C

decreased

increased

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Vegetation cover

decreased

increased

habitat diversity

decreased

increased

pest/ disease control

decreased

increased

Climate and disaster risk reduction

drought impacts

increased

decreased

impacts of cyclones, rain storms

increased

decreased

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases

increased

decreased

wind velocity

increased

decreased

Specify assessment of on-site impacts (measurements):

Wichtig: Da keine neuen Technologien in Rahmen dieses Projektes implementiert wurden, handelt es sich um einen Abgliech mit der durchschnittlichen Nutzung innerhalb eines 28,4 Hektaren grossen Perimeters in Kallnach BE. Die Einschätzungen erfolgten aufgrund von Beobachtungen im Feld, Bodenproben und Befragungen der Landwirte.

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

water availability

decreased

increased

groundwater/ river pollution

increased

reduced

impact of greenhouse gases

increased

reduced

Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):

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

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	moderately
seasonal temperature	winter	increase	well
seasonal temperature	spring	increase	well
seasonal temperature	summer	increase	moderately
seasonal temperature	autumn	increase	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	not well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
heatwave	moderately
drought	moderately

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
extended growing period	well

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

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

Short-term returns:

negative

Long-term returns:

slightly positive

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

Short-term returns:

slightly negative

Long-term returns:

slightly negative

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

1-10%

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?

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Adaption an das Nässe-/Stauwasserproblem
Verbesserter Bodenschutz durch extensivere Nutzung
Schopf/Unterstand als Stall bereits vorhanden

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Adaption an das Nässe-/Stauwasserproblem
Verbesserter Bodenschutz durch extensivere Nutzung
Verbesserte Bodenbedeckung, dadurch weniger Kohlenstofffreisetzung.

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?
Verlust von gutem Ackerland durch Weide aufgrund der Dauerweide	Standortwechsel

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Enkommensverlust im Vergleich zu den Akcerbauflächen in der Nachbarschaft	Einnahmen durch Patenschaften in der Tierarche.

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

field visits, field surveys

Meherer Feldbegehungen
20 Bohrpunkte im Perimeter Kallnach (28,4 ha)

interviews with land users

Befragung des Landwirten im Rahmen des Bodenverbesserungsprojekt Seeland (BOVE) und Masterarbeit

compilation from reports and other existing documentation

Recherche

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

01/05/2020

Comments:

Mai bis Oktober 2020 in mehreren Begehungen

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Wirz Set Handbücher, Agridea, 2020, ISBN: 978-3-7245-2369-7 (Handbuch Betrieb und Familie, Handbuch Pflanzen und Tiere)

Available from where? Costs?

44 CHF, Reinhard dt Verlag

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Meteo Schweiz

URL:

https://map.geo.admin.ch/?lang=de&topic=ech&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pixelkarte-farbe&layers=ch.swisstopo.zeitreihen,ch.bfs.gebaeude_wohnungs_register,ch.bav.haltestellen-oev,ch.swisstopo.swisstlm3d-wanderwege&layers_opacity=1,1,1,0.8&layers_visibility=false,false,false,false&layers_timestamp=18641231,,,&E=2581786.92&N=1206881.37&zoom=6.6594771435586075

View sections

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)

co-compiler:

land user:

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:

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?

Comments:

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

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:

Region/ State/ Province:

Further specification of location:

Specify the spread of the Technology:

Is/are the technology site(s) located in a permanently protected area?

2.6 Date of implementation

Indicate year of implementation:

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

Comments (type of project, etc.):

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:

Is integrated crop-livestock management practiced?

Products and services:

Species:

Count:

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

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

3.4 Water supply

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

Comments:

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

A3: Differentiate tillage systems:

A6: Specify residue management:

structural measures

management measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by wind

chemical soil deterioration

physical soil deterioration

other

Specify:

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Author:

Date:

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

Indicate size and area unit:

other/ national currency (specify):

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

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall

Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

Specifications/ comments on rainfall:

Indicate the name of the reference meteorological station considered:

Agro-climatic zone