1 / 26

TREES, BIRDS AND AGRICULTURE

TREES, BIRDS AND AGRICULTURE. Biodiversity In Uganda’s Farming Systems In Relation To Agricultural Intensification. Herbert Tushabe Simon Bolwig David Mushabe. NBDB. MUIENR. Background & Problem.

luyu
Download Presentation

TREES, BIRDS AND AGRICULTURE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TREES, BIRDS AND AGRICULTURE Biodiversity In Uganda’s Farming Systems In Relation To Agricultural Intensification Herbert Tushabe Simon Bolwig David Mushabe NBDB MUIENR

  2. Background & Problem • Biodiversity within farming systems provide important economic, recreational, and environmental benefits (ecosystem services). For example: • Trees: fuel, timber, medicine, soil conservation, nutrient pumps, shade, wildlife habitats, carbon storage • Birds: crop pollination, pest control, recreation 8/6/2014 – Page 2

  3. Background & Problem (cont’d) • Agricultural intensification causes loss of biodiversity through replacement of natural habitats with more permanent and homogenous areas with fields and pastures • Rate of loss in Uganda’s farming systems is estimated at 50% per decade (Pomeroy and Mwima 2003) • Some biodiversity loss under intensification is inevitable – challenge is to minimize impact: • protecting habitats for threatened bird species • preventing fragmentation of habitats in general • conserving woody vegetation for improved soil and water conservation, e.g. along streams and field boundaries • Birds and trees are good indicators for biodiversity richness 8/6/2014 – Page 3

  4. Biodiversity Conservation Values

  5. Crop land and & Tree Cover Y2000 8/6/2014 – Page 5

  6. Study Objectives • Contribute to an improved understanding of how agricultural intensification affects biodiversity, specifically: • Describe patterns in agricultural land use and in the abundance and species richness of woody vegetation and birds in selected farming systems • Explore relationships between cultivation intensity and occurrence of woody vegetation and birds • Suggest methods of reducing the trade-offs between food production and biodiversity conservation • Outline a more comprehensive study 8/6/2014 – Page 6

  7. Study Design & Site Selection • Data collected on land use, woody plants, and birds in 14 study sites in crop-based farming systems in central and western Uganda • Existing MUIENR bird monitoring study sites, plus two new sites • Pros: reduced survey costs; availability of time series data • Cons: sampling procedure not perfectly suited to purpose of study, therefore validity of cross-site statistics uncertain 8/6/2014 – Page 7

  8. Location of Study Sites 8/6/2014 – Page 8

  9. Study Sites 8/6/2014 – Page 9

  10. Land Use, Bird and Tree Survey End Start 8/6/2014 – Page 10

  11. Description of Land Use • Dominant land uses • farmland, natural vegetation, other • Land use intensity indicators • Cultivation intensity • Cultivated / (cultivated + fallow) • Fallow age; fallow vegetation type • Cropping pattern & crop diversity • Natural vegetation type 8/6/2014 – Page 11

  12. Dominant Land use Types in Smallholder Sites Others: Woodlots, Settlements, Access Roads, Market place, Burial sites, Factory 8/6/2014 – Page 12

  13. Indicators of Land Use Intensity 8/6/2014 – Page 13

  14. Cropping Pattern & Crop Diversity 8/6/2014 – Page 14

  15. Description of Woody Vegetation • Tree survey plots at 50m intervals along land use transects • Number of species (indigenous vs exotic) • Number of stems (diameter classes) • Useful plants • Canopy cover • Plus opportunistic records to capture new species 8/6/2014 – Page 15

  16. Number of Stems, Tree Species & Canopy Cover 8/6/2014 – Page 16

  17. Useful Trees in Smallholder Sites 8/6/2014 – Page 17

  18. Bird Survey data • Species richness estimates • Timed species counts • Predictive modelling • Regression analyses 8/6/2014 – Page 18

  19. Bird Results – Species Richness 8/6/2014 – Page 19

  20. 50 40 44 36 30 33 28 26 20 ALL SPECIES 10 10 0 10 FF 8 1 3 0 50 40 41 30 30 28 20 F 16 10 SPECIES 3 6 0 TREE PERCENTAGE OF SPECIES 70 66 60 63 60 50 40 40 f 30 32 20 22 10 0 Commercial Cotton Most intense………………..Least LARGE - SCALE SMALL - SCALE PASTURE Bird Results – Predictive Modelling • Very few of the predicted species (only 10%) occur in large-scale commercial sites, compared to 44% in the least intensively cultivated small-scale farms. • No forest specialists and few forest generalists (6%) were found in the large-scale commercial sites, compared to 8% and 41% respectively in the least intensively cultivated small-scale farms. 8/6/2014 – Page 20

  21. Regression Analyses – Birds and Land Use • Regression analyses show a negative relationship between encounter rates of birds and cultivation intensity in eight small holder sites with respect to all categories of ’tree bird’ species, as well as Red data listed and migratory species • Regressions on abundance are also negative for all bird categories, except for ’forest visitors’ • Other analyses reveal that ’tree bird’ species are more numerous on smallholder farms than on plantations 8/6/2014 – Page 21

  22. Regression Analyses – Birds and Trees • Canopy cover seems to have a positive effect on bird distributions in the smallholder sites 8/6/2014 – Page 22

  23. Conclusions • Agricultural intensification appears to lead to a loss of bird species (and possibly woody plants), but more observations in randomly selected sites are required to confirm this • In particular, intensification causes the disappearance of the more specialized species, which cannot tolerate extensive habitat change • Further analyses showed that tree canopy, especially of indigenous trees, is an underlying factor for forest bird abundance and richness 8/6/2014 – Page 23

  24. Preliminary Recommendations • Improved regulation and incentives for farmers to minimise biodiversity impact of intensification • But more information is needed on: • Which species might survive in ’biodiversity friendly’ farming systems in Uganda (and which require protected areas) • Which natural habitats (and in what spatial arrangements) within farming systems would ensure the conservation of such plants and animals • Appropriate types of regulations and incentives • Better understanding of the services provided to farmers by biodiversity within farming systems 8/6/2014 – Page 24

  25. A view from Hima pasture with a forest reserve in the background 8/6/2014 – Page 25

  26. Birds in Kyegegwa 8/6/2014 – Page 26

More Related