4.7 Article

The historical and socioeconomic perspective of calcareous grasslands - lessons from the distant and recent past

Journal

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
Volume 104, Issue 3, Pages 361-376

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3207(01)00201-4

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Calcareous grasslands are one of the most species-rich habitats and a central issue in nature conservation management in Europe. Comparative vegetation ecological studies let us suppose that calcareous grasslands did not exist before the neolithic age except on small and isolated areas such as hilly domes or outcrops in the Jurassic mountains and, therefore, they are man-made. Species number increased from the neolithic age whereas calcareous grasslands only spread since the Roman Empire which is evident from palynological and macrofossil findings. A historical analysis of the more recent times showed that the maximum of spread was only between the fifteenth and twentieth century, the period of large sheep flock migrations and transhumance. However, there were many different types of land use beside grazing from which calcareous grasslands developed such as alternate husbandry and three field rotation system. Practices to establish calcareous grasslands included also the sowing of hayseed. During the twentieth century, the number and area of calcareous grasslands decreased tremendously due to abandonment and afforestation since hay making and especially traditional shepherding became more and more uneconomical. Today, calcareous grasslands are threatened. Conservation management such as mowing was not able to maintain species richness and characteristic species, especially indicators of land use history. An integrative approach combining historical and socio-economic issues is proposed to maintain and to redevelop calcareous grasslands in Europe. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available