Pastoral Husbandry in Ariège: Animal Vulnerability on Rangelands, Adaptations to Accompaniment Measures of the Brown Bear (Ursus artos) Reintroduction and Conservation Plan in French Pyrenees 2006-2009 and Farming System evolutions

http://www.toulouseagricampus.fr/

http://www.ensat.fr/

RESEARCHS ENDING MEMORY

Presented for the graduation of Master AGROBIOSCIENCES

Specialisation: The Agro Food Chain

Option: Productions Territories and Sustainable Development

Pastoral Husbandry in Ariège: Animal Vulnerability on Rangelands, Adaptations to Accompaniment Measures of the Brown Bear (Ursus artos) Reintroduction and Conservation Plan in French Pyrenees 2006-2009 and Farming System evolutions.

By:

Eric Duplex ZOUKEKANG

Defence year: 2008

http://www.aspap.info/

http://www.toulouseagricampus.fr/

http://www.ensat.fr/

RESEARCHS ENDING MEMORY

Presented for the graduation of Master AGROBIOSCIENCES

Specialisation: The Agro Food Chain

Option: Productions Territories and Sustainable Development

Pastoral Husbandry in Ariège: Animal Vulnerability on Rangelands, Adaptations to Accompaniment Measures of the Brown Bear (Ursus artos) Reintroduction and Conservation Plan in French Pyrenees 2006-2009 and Farming System evolutions.

By:

Eric Duplex ZOUKEKANG

Thesis prepared under the direction of : HEMPTINNE Jean-Louis
Presented on: 27/06/2008

http://www.aspap.info/

Masters of the internship : TERRIEUX Agnès BESCHE-COMMENGE Bruno

Résumé :

Les nouvelles exigences de société en matière d'environnementale ont conduit l'homme à mettre sous forme de réserves de biodiversité les espaces à faibles intérêts économiques. La structure sociale de l'Ariège offre une certaine capacité de résistance à de brusques changements politiques ; le cheptel y a pris l'habitude de quitter la ferme pour l'estive en début juin pour redescendre en fin septembre. Les exploitations individuelles ont des effectifs réduits, les perspectives et alternatives économiques faibles et une économie précaire. L'estivage est leur fer de lance, non seulement comme une tradition, mais en raison de son fort intérêt économique, sanitaire, stratégique et technique. La main-d'oeuvre, les conditions de travail et l'économie sont les principaux facteurs expliquant la résistance au changement. Le système peut s'adapter à une nouvelle donnée technique, mais l'attachement à une certaine fierté professionnelle est un obstacle ; élever autrement doit venir des éleveurs eux-mêmes. Faire le meilleur usage de l'herbe au pâturage, produire de beaux agneaux et réduire l'alimentation en bergerie est un critère d'excellence technique. Avec l'ours, les éleveurs se demandent quels projets ruraux et choix de société veulent les décideurs ; ils sont pessimistes sur leur avenir car la vie et la dynamique humaine ici sont fortement dépendantes de l'élevage ; ils ne savent pas si ces critères sont pris en compte dans l'ensauvagement.

Dans le contexte économique actuel du pastoralisme, les charges supplémentaires ne sont pas acceptables. Puisque les mesures d'accompagnement ne fournissent que 50% de subvention pour les charges du berger lorsqu'elles ne sont pas toutes utilisées et 80% dans le cas contraire, près de 99% d'éleveurs pro-ours enquêtés ne sont que des opportunistes ; ils faisaient déjà garde serrée avec un Patou. Avec le parc ils bénéficient de 80% de subvention lors de l'embauche de berger. Pour tous les agriculteurs, le mesures d'accompagnement ne sont applicables ni partout, ni à plein temps, ni par tous les temps ; la paire berger-Patou réduit la prédation, mais ne devrait pas être présentée comme une panacée. Faire un progrès dans le processus de cohabitation signifie revenir en arrière, enlever la frustration et les conflits d'intérêts et mettre le prix. Il faut diviser par 200 le nombre de moutons qui estivent pour avoir le nombre de bergers, cabanes, parcs et Patou nécessaire pour une protection efficace du troupeau.

Mots-clés : Pastoralisme, système d'élevage, Estive, Ours, Biodiversité, Préservation, Environnement, Développement Durable.

Abstract:

New social requirements for environmental concerns lead human to put into reserve of biodiversity space of low economic interest. Historically, national governments are often hostile to pastoralists. In Arièges's Mountain Summer Pasture, social structure brings a certain resistance to sudden political changes. Here, livestock usually and it has become naturally leave the farm area for summer pastures in early to mid June returning again from mid September to early October. Individual holdings are of low flock, weak perspectives and alternatives, economic precariousness. Summer farming is the spearhead of the system not only as a tradition but due to its economic, sanitation, feedstuff constitution importance. Workforce, working conditions and economy are the most important factors explaining the resistance to change in this production system. The system practiced brings about a certain capacity of adaptation, but the devotion to allegation of a certain professional "pride" is a stumbling block for the implementation of bear subsidies. Farmers can practice husbandry in another way but this way will come from them. Make the best possible use of grass on rangeland to feed its flock and produce beautiful lambs minimizing trough feeding is a criterion of technical excellence. With bear project, breeders want to know what future, rural projects, and societal choices decision-makers recommend for Pyrenees. They are pessimistic on their future because life and human dynamics in Ariège are now strongly dependent to pastoralism and they do not know if these constitutive criteria of sustainable development have been taken into consideration in the «wilding» approach.

In the economic context of pastoralism today, additional charges are hardly appreciable. Since accompaniment measures provide only 50% subsidy for the shepherd's charge when all the measures are not used and 80% when they are, near to 99% of farmers for pastoral cohabitation investigated are just opportunists; they were already using Patou and «tight-guarding» practice. They have joined parks to their functioning mode to have 80% compensation when taking shepherd. For all farmers, accompaniment measures are applicable neither everywhere nor at full-time, nor in all weathers; the pair shepherd-Patou reduces predation but it should not be presented as panacea. In order to make a progress in the cohabitation process, authorities should come back, remove frustration and conflicts of interest and put the price. We have to divide by 200 the number of sheep that summer to know the number of shepherds, cabins, parks and Patou necessary for effective herd protection.

Keywords : Pastoralism, stocking system, Mountain Summer Pasture, Bear, Biodiversity, Preservation, Environment, Sustainable Development.

Contents

Résumé i

Abstract ii

Contents iii

Tables and diagrams v

Abbreviations and acronyms vi

Acknowledgments vii

Introduction 1

Chapter 1: General presentation of the study 3

1.1 Context 3

1.1.1 The natural milieu of Ariège 3

1.1.1.1 A collective management of resources 3

1.1.1.2 A recognised patrimonial interest 3

1.1.2 Role and objectives of the stocking system 4

1.1.2.1 Some definitions 4

1.1.2.2 Role and objectives of pastoralism 5

1.1.3 Rangeland valorisation by grazing livestock: challenges and difficulties around the pasturelands 6

1.1.3.1 Biophysical threats to pastoral land 6

1.1.3.2 Stock farming, biodiversity, product's quality and ecosystem services 6

1.1.3.3 Social impact on grazing behaviour of herbivorous 7

1.1.3.4 Herdsman expertise, animal physiology and behaviour, topography and plant physiology for pastoral area utilisation 8

1.1.3.5 Social and economic threats to pastoral land 8

1.1.4 Production's means, operating mode, products, social, technical and spatial considerations 9

1.1.4.1 Study of farming systems 11

1.1.4.2 Study of grazing system 11

1.1.5 The brown bear predation context 12

1.1.5.1 General considerations 12

1.1.5.2 Brown bear ecology 13

1.2 Problem 14

1.2.1 Research question 15

1.2.2 Hypothesis 15

1.2.3 Objectives 15

Chapter 2: Field and data collection 16

2.1 Field 16

2.1.1 Ariège-Pyrenees 16

2.1.2 ASPAP 16

2.1.3 Farm, men and flock in mountain zone 16

2.2 Data collection 16

2.2.1 A bibliographic approach to define the status of the topic 16

2.2.2 Field surveys 17

2.2.3 Structures and systems analysis 17

Chapter 3: Results and discussion Erreur ! Signet non défini.

3.1 Results Erreur ! Signet non défini.

3.1.1 General characteristics of pastoral husbandry in Ariège Erreur ! Signet non défini.

3.1.2 Farming system typology 19

3.1.2.1 Production systems according to animal mobility 20

3.1.2.2 Production systems according to geographic localisation of the farm 20

3.1.2.3 Productions systems according to diversification 20

3.1.3 Mountain Summer Pasture what is? 20

3.1.4 How does bear intervenes in a rural and professional milieu? 21

3.1.5 What are then bear damages on pastoralism? 24

3.1.6 How does ecology perceived in that bear polemic? 25

3.1.6.1 In this context does the bear an umbrella or emblematic species? 25

3.1.7 What is the brown bear re-introduction cost? 26

Conclusion 27

References 29

Tables and diagrams

Diagrams figures and tables	Pages
Diagram 1:	A
Diagram 2:	A
Diagram 3:	C
Diagram 4:	23
Figure 1:	b
Table 1:	d

Abbreviations and acronyms

AEGS: Agro-Environmental Grazier Subsidy

AGA: Always with Grass Area

AI: Artificial Insemination

CAP: Common Agricultural Policy

CLT: Collective Land Tenure

CBD: Convention on Biological Diversity

FAO: Food and Agricultural Organisation

GIS: Geographic Information System

IZ: Intermediary Zone

IZBC: Important Zones for Birds' Conservation

LLU: Large Livestock Unit

LPG: Local Professional Group

MSP: Mountain Summer Pasture

NZEIFF: Natural Zone of Ecological Interest for Fauna and Flora

PG: Pastoral Group/Grouping

PLA: Pastoral Land Association

PU: Pastoral Unit

UAA: Useful Agricultural Area

WWF: World Wildlife Fund

Acknowledgments

This work resulted from numerous literatures research, discussions with resource persons, and succession of semi-directive interviews. The idea has also raised from my knowledge on pastoral husbandry practice and accompaniment measures of the bear plan 2006-2009. So I am taking here the opportunity to thank:

The French government to have provided to me an ideological framework through its bear plan.

Madam TERRIEUX Agnès and Mister HEMPTINNE Jean-Louis for their efforts to the supervision of this work.

Gentlemen GARDE Laurent and LASSEUR Jacques for their advices for literature research.

Mister BESCHE-COMMENGE Bruno for his reception, sympathy, supervision and implication in the organisation and progress of interviews.

Madam BONIFACE Magali and Gentlemen LACUBE Philippe, CARRIERE Claude and RALU Olivier for their implication to the organisation of interviews.

Special thanks to all the Managers, Breeders and Shepherds who answer to my numerous questions and with whom I spent a marvellous time.

I will finally thank my family members and THE PROVIDER.