1.2 参与该技术评估和文件编制的资源人员和机构的联系方式

有助于对技术进行记录/评估的项目名称（如相关）

European Interreg project FABulous Farmers

有助于对技术进行记录/评估的机构名称（如相关）

UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH) - 英国

1.3 关于使用通过WOCAT记录的数据的条件

编制者和关键资源人员接受有关使用通过WOCAT记录数据的条件。:

是

1.4 所述技术的可持续性声明

这里所描述的技术在土地退化方面是否存在问题，导致无法被认为是一种可持续的土地管理技术？:

否

2.1 技术简介

技术定义:

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 技术的详细说明

说明:

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 技术照片

2.5 已应用该技术的、本评估所涵盖的国家/地区/地点

2.6 实施日期

注明实施年份:

2018

2.7 技术介绍

详细说明该技术是如何引入的:

• 通过土地使用者的创新

3.1 该技术的主要目的

• 改良生产
• 保护生态系统
• 保持/提高生物多样性
• 适应气候变化/极端天气及其影响

• Improve animal welfare

3.2 应用该技术的当前土地利用类型

同一土地单元内混合使用的土地：:

是

具体说明混合土地使用（作物/放牧/树木）:

• 农林牧业

3.3 由于技术的实施，土地使用是否发生了变化？

由于技术的实施，土地使用是否发生了变化？:

• 否（继续问题3.4）

同一土地单元内混合使用的土地：:

是

具体说明混合土地使用（作物/放牧/树木）:

• 林牧业

3.4 供水

该技术所应用土地的供水:

• 雨养

3.5 该技术所属的SLM组

• 农业林学
• 防风林/防护林带
• 畜牧业和牧场管理

3.6 包含该技术的可持续土地管理措施

3.7 该技术强调的主要土地退化类型

3.8 防止、减少或恢复土地退化

具体数量名该技术与土地退化有关的目标:

• 修复/恢复严重退化的土地

4.2 有关投入和成本计算的一般信息

具体说明成本和投入是如何计算的:

• 每个技术区域

其它/国家货币（具体说明）:

£GBP

如相关，注明美元与当地货币的汇率（例如1美元=79.9巴西雷亚尔）：1美元=:

0.85

4.3 技术建立活动

	活动	时间（季度）
1.	Ground preparation – marking out planting lines	Winter
2.	Planting trees	Winter
3.	Erecting electric fencing	Winter

4.4 技术建立所需要的费用和投入

如果您无法分解上表中的成本，请估算建立该技术所需要的总成本。:

8000.0

如果土地使用者负担的费用少于100%，请注明由谁负担其余费用:

100%

4.5 维护/经常性活动

	活动	时间/频率
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 维护/经常性活动所需要的费用和投入（每年）

	对投入进行具体说明	单位	数量	单位成本	每项投入的总成本	土地使用者承担的成本%
劳动力	Checking trees & electric fences	Hours	24.0	10.0	240.0	100.0
劳动力	Vegetation maintance	Hours	30.0	10.0	300.0	100.0
劳动力	Management of rotational grazing pastures	Hours	100.0	10.0	1000.0	100.0
设备	Flail mower attachment to tractor / strimmer	unit	1.0			100.0
技术维护所需总成本					1540.0
技术维护总成本，美元					1811.76

注释:

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

4.7 影响成本的最重要因素

描述影响成本的最决定性因素:

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

5.1 气候

5.2 地形

说明该技术是否专门应用于:

• 不相关

5.3 土壤

5.4 水资源可用性和质量

水的盐度有问题吗？:

否

该区域正在发生洪水吗？:

否

5.5 生物多样性

5.6 应用该技术的土地使用者的特征

5.7 应用该技术的土地使用者使用的平均土地面积

5.8 土地所有权、土地使用权和水使用权

土地所有权:

• 个人，未命名

土地使用权:

• 个人

用水权:

• 个人

土地使用权是否基于传统的法律制度？:

否

5.9 进入服务和基础设施的通道

6.1 该技术的现场影响

社会经济效应

生产

收入和成本

社会文化影响

生态影响

土壤

生物多样性:植被、动物

6.3 技术对渐变气候以及与气候相关的极端情况/灾害的暴露和敏感性（土地使用者认为的极端情况/灾害）

渐变气候

渐变气候

	季节	增加或减少	该技术是如何应对的？
年温度		增加	好

6.4 成本效益分析

技术收益与技术建立成本相比如何（从土地使用者的角度看）？

技术收益与技术维护成本/经常性成本相比如何（从土地使用者的角度看）？

6.5 技术采用

• 单例/实验

在所有采用这项技术的人当中，有多少人是自发的，即未获得任何物质奖励/付款？:

• 91-100%

6.6 适应

最近是否对该技术进行了修改以适应不断变化的条件？:

否

6.7 该技术的优点/长处/机会

土地使用者眼中的长处/优势/机会
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.

编制者或其他关键资源人员认为的长处/优势/机会
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 技术的弱点/缺点/风险及其克服方法

土地使用者认为的弱点/缺点/风险	如何克服它们？
High set up costs	Careful choice of tree protection mechanism and seeking grant assistance

编制者或其他关键资源人员认为的弱点/缺点/风险	如何克服它们？
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 信息的方法/来源

7.4 一般注释

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.