Large-scale grassland restoration in Estonia – best practice and socio-economic implications

Date:
2018/06/12

Time:
12:00

Room:
K307 Elsi

Large-scale grassland restoration in Estonia – best practice and socio-economic implications

(Oral)

Liis Kasari
lkasari@ut.ee

Department of Botany, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Lai 40, 51005 Tartu, Estonia
,
Annely Esko
Estonian Environmental Board, Narva mnt 7a, 15172 Tallinn, Estonia
,
Elisabeth Prangel
Department of Botany, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Lai 40, 51005 Tartu, Estonia
,
Ignacio M. Hernández-Agramonte
Department of Botany, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Lai 40, 51005 Tartu, Estonia
,
Aveliina Helm
Department of Botany, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Lai 40, 51005 Tartu, Estonia

DOI: 10.17011/conference/eccb2018/107825

SEE PEER REVIEW

In the beginning of 20th century, 1/3 of mainland area of Estonia – 18 000 km2 – was covered by semi-natural grasslands. Since then, similarly to all other regions in Europe, changes in land-use resulted in abandonment and conversion of grasslands and disappearance of cultural landscapes. In 2013, only 270 km2 (1.5% of historical coverage) of semi-natural grassland areas were under suitable management (grazing or mowing), necessary for their long-term persistence. With a target set in the “Action plan for Estonian semi-natural grassland communities until 2020”, Estonia aims to increase managed grassland area to 450 km2 by 2020 [1].

We will provide overview of the current status and trends of restoration of biodiverse semi-natural grassland systems in Estonia. More specifically, we will focus on large-scale restoration activities that have occurred in alvar grasslands in Western Estonia. From 2014 to 2020, ca 600 land-owners and 41 local farmers and farming companies in 25 regions all over western part of Estonia are participating in the LIFE+ program project “LIFE to Alvars” (LIFE13NAT/EE/000082). Project aims to double the area of managed alvars in Estonia by restoring 2500 hectares of grasslands and encouraging local people and farmers to take up grazing. Since the beginning of project, we have gained considerable new knowledge regarding the best practice of large-scale grassland restoration starting from the awareness raising and public engagement to best techniques for actual restoration.

Already by 2017, restoration activities, vastly changing landscapes and awareness-raising activities have had considerable impact both on the public knowledge about the value of grasslands, as well as on economic and lifestyle choices among local people. Implementation of infrastructure necessary for grazing (fences, animal drinking places and shelters, gates), coupled with the support system for managing semi-natural areas have created incentive for local farmers to increase their livestock and move animals from cultural grasslands to restored alvars. By 2017, following the restoration of the first 1500 hectares of traditional grassland landscapes, 270 head of cattle and 400 sheep had been added to the herds of local farmers. In addition, 4 families had moved back to countryside and changed their profession to livestock farmers. Open grasslands have great aesthetical, cultural heritage and recreational value and several nearby tourism facilities noted the positive effect of grassland restoration on their activities, by boosting number of visitors and by increasing the opportunities to offer scenic nature tours [2].

[1] Ministry of Environment, Estonia (2013). Action plan for semi-natural grasslands 2014-2020. [in Estonian].

[2] Prangel, E. (2017). The provisioning of ecosystem services on open and successional alvar grasslands. Master thesis. University of Tartu. [in Estonian].

SEE PEER REVIEW

INTRO:
This abstract provides interesting insights in a large-scaled grassland conservation programme in Estonia. Since the area of semi-natural grasslands dramtically decreased over the last century, there is an urgent need to develop suitable management measures in order to increase the area of well-managed semi-natural grasslands. The authors clearly highlight the importance of collaborations with local people and farmers for successful restoration of alvar grasslands. Thus, they underline the significance of public engagement to attract local farmers for large-scaled restoration measures. Futhermore, initial successes of the project and most-suitable restoration techniques are presented.
MERITS:
Due to their cultural value and high importance for conservation, alvar grassland are of particular importance for the maintenance of biodiversity. As the main goal of the project is to double the area of alvar grasslands in Estonia, it has an outstanding high value. As there is generally a gap of knowledge, how to restore semi-natural grasslands, the study may provide novel information for grassland restoration. Additionally, it is encouraging to note that the authors present the results of applied research wich may directly contribute to biodiversity conservation.
CRITIQUE:
The abstract does not present any results of empiric studies. If the authors can provide any scientific evidence, for example which restoration techniques are the most effective, I would recommend implying such results to the manuscript.
DISCUSSION:
In my opinion, the goal of the presented project should be highly appreciated. As it has an outstanding high relevance for grassland conservation, it may act as a flagship project in the conservation of semi-natural grasslands in Europe. Thus, I think that it provides interesting information for ecologists participating the ECCB.

- - -
INTRO:
This study reports on a large-scale restoration project concerning grazed grasslands in Estonia. The work is interdisciplinary and takes a social-ecological approach, reporting on how landscapes have changed and how restoration also has affected the appropriation of ecosystem services related to the grazed grassland.
MERITS:
The merits of this work is, as I see it, the strong focus on farmers perceptions and responses to the new possibilities for grazing that arises through the restoration project. In particular, the focus on the learning process in terms of best-practice techniques and fundamentally important underlying issues such as awareness raising and public engagement suggests that the work presented here has a high possibility to serve as a blueprint for restoration projects also elsewhere.
CRITIQUE:
It is hard to judge the weaknesses of this work based on the short format imposed by the submission rules, but conceptually I cannot see any substantial weaknesses. The authors could perhaps give a bit more details on the type of data that they have considered, in particular those that were used in reference [2], but given the nature of the submission I don't see this as something that the authors must do.
DISCUSSION:
The authors suggest that local effect related to habitat quality is more important to pollination success compared to effects of the surrounding landscape structure. Some earlier research has found similar results in particular in relatively heterogeneous landscapes. It would be interesting to know a bit more about the structure of the focal landscapes in order to assess how the findings of this interesting contribution relate to earlier research.

Large-scale grassland restoration in Estonia – best practice and socio-economic implications

Date:2018/06/12

Time:12:00

Room:K307 Elsi

Large-scale grassland restoration in Estonia – best practice and socio-economic implications

(Oral)

SEE PEER REVIEW

SEE PEER REVIEW

Date:
2018/06/12

Time:
12:00

Room:
K307 Elsi