Determination of the factors affecting utilization rate of Eastern Anatolian semiarid public rangelands in Turkey

Year 2020, , 119 - 129, 15.03.2020

Abdurrahman Kara

https://doi.org/10.31015/jaefs.2020.1.14

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Rangelands are important natural resources for the nations with a various measurable and immeasurable outputs such as forage for farm animals, biological diversity, soil and water conservation and ecosystem functions. However, unconscious exploitation has resulted in weakening, deterioration and exhaustion of these natural resources in time. In achieving an effective, sustainable use at a minimum environmental cost without foregoing economic and social development, policy measures towards conscious utilization, conservation and restoration of these resources are of vital importance. Furthermore, user-friendly, robust policy measures require correct scientific information on the actual utilization of rangelands. The effects of various natural and human induced factors on the rangeland forage yield and its utilization rate were researched in this study. Data were collected from the rangelands of 11 villages in five districts of Erzurum province, Turkey. Descriptive statistics and mixed effect panel regression models were used in data analysis. According to the results it was concluded that 1) because of heavy grazing pressure versus low forage production, high-altitude sites, east and southwest slopes should specifically be given the priority in rangeland rehabilitation studies, 2) drought resistant species should be preferred for the overseeding practices due to the xeric nature of southerly slopes, 3) to avoid excessive exploitation and to realize balanced utilization in all rangeland sites, grazing plans should be developed and strictly followed by each village authority, and 4) Heavy grazing pressure on rangelands gets even worse in drought seasons. Therefore, rangelands should be relatively lightly utilized in such seasons not to cause herbage yield losses and other unwanted outcomes in subsequent years.

Keywords

Conscious utilization, Sustainable use, Natural and human induced factors, Mixed effect panel regression

Supporting Institution

Tarımsal Araştırmalar ve Politikalar Genel Müdürlüğü

Project Number

TAGEM/HAYSÜD/05/01/01/01

Thanks

The author extends his limitless gratitude to the Rangeland Team of Eastern Anatolia Agricultural Research Institute for their valuable work on rangeland vegetation surveys and forage sampling in the study area.

References

• Adkins L.C., Hill, R.C. (2011). Using Stata for principles of Econometrics, John Wiley and Sons Inc. USA
• Altın, M. (2001). Evolution, characteristics, grazing patterns and improvement of grassland vegetations. Lecture Notes, Trakya University Faculty of Agriculture, Tekirdağ
• Anonymous, (2013). PROPHET StatGuide: Do your data violate linear regression assumptions? Retrieved March 11, 2013, from http://www.basic. northwestern.edu/statguidefiles/linreg_ass_viol.html.
• Avağ, A., Koç, A, Kendir, H. (2012). Result report for the National Rangeland Utilization and Management Project: TÜBİTAK Project No: 106G017. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policies, Ankara
• Baltagi, B.H. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data. John Wiley and Sons, Chicester, UK
• Browning, D. M., Duniway, M. E., Laliberte, A. S., Rango, A. (2012). Hierarchical analysis of vegetation dynamics over 71 years: soil–rainfall interactions in a Chihuahuan desert ecosystem. Ecological Applications 22 (3): 909–926. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/11-1193.1
• Cameron, A. C., Trivedi, P. K. (2010). Microeconometrics using Stata. Revised Edition. Stata Press, Texas, USA
• Christen, R. E., Kunz, P.L., Langhans, W., Leuenberger, H., Sutter, F., Kreuzer, M. (1996). Productivity, requirements and efficiency of feed and nitrogen utilization of grass-fed early lactating cows exposed to high Alpine conditions. Journal Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition. 76, 22-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0396.1996.tb00673.x
• Çakal, Ş. (2016). An investigation on spatial and temporal changes in some properties of rangeland vegetation in Çoruh Basin. Atatürk University School of Natural and Applied Sciences, PhD Thesis, Erzurum.
• Çakal, S., Kara, A., Koç, A., Avag, A. (2012). Comparison of rangeland vegetation study methods. International Journal of Forest, Soil and Erosion, 2 (2), 105-106.
• Danckwerts, J. E., Aucamp, A. J. (1986). The effect of range condition on the grazing capacity of semi–arid South African savanna. In: Rangelands: A Resource Under Siege. Proceedings of the second International Rangeland Congress. Australian Academy of Science, Adelaide, Australia, pp.229–230.
• De Vries, D.M., De Boer, T.H.A., Diver, J.P.P. (1951). Evaluation of grassland by botanical research in the Netherlands, Proceedings of the United Nationals Scientific Conference on the Conservation and Utilization of Resources, United Nations, 6, 522–524.
• Duan, C., Shi, P., Zhang, X., Zong, N., Chai, X., Geng, S., Zhu, W. (2017). The rangeland livestock carrying capacity and stocking rate in the Kailash sacred landscape in China. Journal of Data and Information Science, 8(6), 551-558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5814 /j.issn.1674-764x.2017.06.001
• Dumlu, S.E., Özgöz, M.M., Çakal, Ş., Aksakal, E., Uzun, M., and Şimşek, U. (2011). Important legume and grass forage crop species commonly found in natural mountain grasslands in Yusufeli –Artvin. International Journal of Forest, Soil and Erosion, 1, 43–46.
• Erkovan, H.İ., Koç, A., Serin, Y. (2003). Some vegetation properties of Bayburt (Turkey) Province rangeland. Proceedings of the 12th Symposium of the European Grassland Federation, 8, 617–619.
• Gökkuş, A., Koç, A. (2001). Range and pasture management. Atatürk University Faculty of Agriculture, Erzurum
• Griffin, G. F. (1989). An enhanced Wheel-Point Method for assessing cover, structure and heterogeneity in plant communities. Journal of Range Management, 42,79-81. DOI:10.2307/3899664
• Gujarati D.N. (2011). Econometrics by example, USA: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Gujarati, D.N. (1995). Basic Econometrics, New York, USA: McGraw–Hill.
• Kara, A. (2019). The threshold rangeland condition to fully compensate live weight losses. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 17(2), 4475-4497. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15666/aeer/1702 _44754497
• Kara, A., Dumlu, E.S., Uzun, M., Çakal, Ş. (2019). Twofold excessive utilization rate yields high financial equivalent but seriously threatens public rangelands in Turkey. International Journal of Agriculture Environment and Food Sciences, 3(3), 155-161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31015/ jaefs. 2019.3.7
• Kara, A., Kadıoğlu, S., Dumlu, S.E., Aksakal, E., Özgöz, M.M., Uzun, M., Çakal, S., Şimsek, U. (2014). How long does it take to pay back rangeland improvement investments? A case study from Erzurum Province in Turkey. The Rangeland Journal, 36, 469–474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/RJ13106
• Khumalo, G. Holechek, J. (2005). Relationships between Chihuahuan Desert perennial grass production and precipitation. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 58, 239–246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2111/1551-5028(2005)58[239: RBCDPG]2.0.CO;2
• Koç, A., Çakal, Ş. (2004). Comparison of some rangeland canopy coverage methods, Proceedings of the International Soil Congress Natural Resource Management for Sustainable Development. 7–10 June 2004. Erzurum, pp. 41–45.
• Koç, A., Gökkuş, A., Altın, M., (2003). Comparison of the worldwide used methods in definition of range condition and a suggestion for Turkey, Proceedings of the 5th Field Crops Congress of Turkey. 13–17 October 2003. Diyarbakır, pp. 36–42.
• Koç, A. Gökkuş, A. (1996). Some important features of the plants in rangeland vegetations of Palandöken mountains, Proceedings of the Third National Pasture and Forage Crops Congress of Turkey, 17–19 June 1996, Erzurum, pp. 107–114.
• Kutiel, P., Lavee, H. (1999). Effect of slope aspect on soil and vegetation properties along an aridity transect. Israel Journal of Plant Science. 47: 169e178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07929978. 1999. 10676770
• Lambert, M.G. Roberts, E. (1976). Aspect differences in an unimproved hill country pasture. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 19(4), 459–467. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/00288233.1976.10420975
• Lumley, T., Diehr, P., Emerson, S., Chen, L. (2002). The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annual Review of Public Health, 23,151–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.publhealth.23.100901.140546
• Maren, I.E., Karki, S., Prajapati, C., Yadav, R.K., Shrestha, B.B. (2015). Facing north or south: Does slope aspect impact forest stand characteristics and soil properties in a semiarid trans–Himalayan valley?. Journal of Arid Environments, 121, 112–123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jaridenv. 2015. 06.004
• Nahidan, S., Nourbakhsh, F. Mosaddeghi, M.R. (2015). Variation of soil microbial biomass C and hydrolytic enzyme activities in a rangeland ecosystem: are slope aspect and position effective? Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 61, 797–811. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2014.958819
• O'Connor, T.G., Rouxt, P.W. (1995). Vegetation changes (1949–71) in a semi–arid, grassy dwarf shrubland in the Karoo, South Africa: influence of rainfall variability and grazing by sheep. Journal of Applied Ecology, 32, 612–626. DOI: 10.2307/ 2404657 https://www.jstor.org/stable/ 2404657
• Okatan, A., Reis, M., Yüksel, A. (1999). Relationships between the yield potential and important forage plants found in the Trabzon–Meryemana Creek watershed, Turkey, Eldridge, D., Freudenberger, D. (Eds.), People of the Rangelands. Building the Future, Proceedings of the VIth International Rangeland Congress. Townsville, Queensland, pp. 327–328.
• Özgür, F., Karagül, R., Özcan, M. (2017). Changes in plant composition and forage production in relation to elevations in the rangelands of Alanya Province. Journal of Forestry, 13 (1), 18–27.
• Park, H.M., (2008). Univariate analysis and normality test using SAS, Stata and SPSS. Working Paper. The University Information Technology Services (UITS), Center for Statistical and Mathematical Computing, Indiana University. Retrieved July 30, 2009, from http://www.indiana.edu/~statmath/ stat/all/ normality/index.html.
• Pournemati, A., Ghorbani, A., Sharifi, J., Gheshlagh, F.M.A., Amirkhani, M., Ghodarzi, M. (2017). Effects of elevation, slope and aspect on forage production of plant life forms in Sabalan rangelands, Ardabil province. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research, 24 (1), 110–124.
• StataCorp. 2015. Stata: Release 14. Statistical Software. College Station, StataCorp LLC, Texas.
• Tamartash, R. (2012). Investigation on the relationship between vegetation characteristics and topographic factors in utilization units of mountainous rangelands of Vaz, Mazandaran. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research, 19 (3), 469–481.
• Tisdale, S.L., Nelson, W.L., Beaton, J.D. Havlin, J.L. (1995). Soil Fertility and Fertilizer. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
• Torres–Reyna, O. (2007). Panel data analysis fixed and random effects using Stata (v. 4.2), Data & Statistical Services, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA, Retrieved January 2, 2017, from https://www. princeton.edu/~otorres/Panel101.pdf
• TÜMAS, (2013). Climatic data. – Meteorological Data Archive System of Turkey (TÜMAS), Turkish State Meteorological Service, Ankara,
• Vallentine, J.F. (1990). Grazing Management, Academic Press, Inc. San Diego, USA
• Wangchuk, K., Gyaltshen, T., Yonten, T., Nirola, H., Tshering, N. (2013). Shrubland or pasture? Restoration of degraded meadows in the mountains of Bhutan. Mountain Research and Development, 33 (2), 161–169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-12-00091.1