Knowledge co‐production with traditional herders on cattle grazing behaviour for better management of species‐rich grasslands

Abstract

The research gap between rangeland/livestock science and conservation biology/vegetation ecology has led to a lack of evidence needed for grazing‐related conservation management. Connecting scientific understanding with traditional ecological knowledge of local livestock keepers could help bridge this research and knowledge gap. We studied the grazing behaviour (plant selection and avoidance) of beef cattle (c. 33,000 bites) on species‐rich lowland pastures in Central Europe and traditional herding practices. We also did >450 outdoor interviews with traditional herders about livestock behaviour, herders' decisions to modify grazing behaviour and effects of modified grazing on pasture vegetation. We found that cattle grazing on species‐rich pastures displayed at least 10 different behavioural elements as they encountered 117 forage species from highly desired to rejected. The small discrimination error suggests that cattle recognize all listed plants ‘by species’. We also found that herders had broad knowledge of grazing desire and they consciously aimed to modify desire by slowing, stopping or redirecting the herd. Modifications were aimed at increasing grazing intensity in less‐desired patches and decreasing grazing selectivity in heterogenous swards. Synthesis and applications. The traditional herd management practices presented here have significant conservation benefits, such as avoiding under‐ and overgrazing, and targeted removal of pasture weeds, litter and encroaching bushes, tall competitive plants and invasive species. We argue that knowledge co‐production with traditional herders who belong to another knowledge system could help connect isolated scientific disciplines especially if ecologists and rangeland scientists work closely with traditional herders, co‐designing research projects and working together in data collection, analysis and interpretation. Stronger links between these disciplines could help develop evidence‐based, specific conservation management practices while herders could contribute with their practical experiences and with real‐world testing of new management techniques.

Animal Welfare in Extensive Production Systems Is Still an Area of Concern

“…There is growing policy interest in more "bottom-up, " practice-led, collaborative approaches to innovation which involve livestock producers (Brunori et al, 2013). These practice-led approaches respond to the demand for innovation to solve local problems using practical knowledge and creativity at the farm level (Vogl et al, 2016;Molnár et al, 2020). A greater value should be given to participatory approaches to practice-led innovation in addressing complex, multi-factorial issues (van Dijk et al, 2019).…”

Informing decision‐making with Indigenous and local knowledge and science

“…The transition from traditional practices to new management regimes can cause environmental degradation (Congretel & Pinton, 2020, this feature). This highlights how practice which integrates Indigenous and local knowledge can provide mechanisms for conservation and ecosystem‐based adaptation (Hausner et al., 2020; Molnàr et al, 2020, both this feature). An understanding that Indigenous and local knowledge, cultures and practices adapt to changing conditions and are not static can help clarify their potential to address stewardship issues under biophysical and socio‐economic change.…”

“…Knowledge and information for biocultural conservation will include understanding values and needs, recognizing feedbacks between biodiversity and human well‐being (Sterling et al., 2017). For example, in pastoral or silvopastoral situations, herding and grazing practices are based on herders’ detailed integration of situated knowledge of the livestock, landscape, plant phenology and weather patterns (Molnàr et al, 2020, this feature). The biocultural approach recognizes that Indigenous and local knowledge are not robust to every kind of shock; climate change, market forces, sedentarization, conflicts and breakdown of traditional management mechanisms, can lead to patterns of overgrazing and degradation (e.g.…”

“…Integration of knowledge and decision‐making is common through practice within communities. Molnàr et al (2020, this feature), demonstrate how herders integrate knowledge of cattle foraging preferences into their herding practice and to alter grazing behaviour through their traditional practices, thereby reducing the grazing pressure on more desired patches and redirecting grazing to less desired patches, creating conservation benefits. Hausner et al.…”

“…This Special Feature highlights a diverse range of approaches to inform decision‐making with Indigenous and local knowledge and science and reflects that approaches must be tailored and developed to the local context where they are applied. Practice‐focused and decision‐making‐oriented approaches addressed in this feature include informing strategic decision‐making for conservation (priority threat management in Pacific salmon, Walsh et al., 2020, this feature), ecosystem‐based adaptation (reindeer husbandry and land use decisions, Hausner et al., 2020, this feature), understanding the role of Indigenous and local practice in conservation (cattle foraging preferences and conservation herding practice, Molnàr et al, 2020, this feature), understanding the social conditions that promote adaptation to change (Indigenous communities and sea otter recovery, Burt et al., 2020, this feature), and adaptation of Indigenous knowledge and practice to globalization (Congretel & Pinton, 2020, this feature) and informing conservation translocations (Rayne et al., 2020, this feature). More knowledge production‐focused approaches include understanding of complex interactions between seasonal weather and wildlife condition (Gagnon et al., 2020, this feature) and contributions of Indigenous and local knowledge to global contexts, including recently through the Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).…”