**3.1 Case scenario 1: status of the grassland habitats with the optimal livestock density for sustainable economic production (OLD\_E)**

This scenario considers the values of the optimal livestock density (carrying capacity) recommended by the Romanian grassland experts for sustainable economic production of biomass [47–49]. Most grazing management studies and textbooks recommend different optimal LDs (stocking rates), but they generally tend to increase with altitude following the available plant biomass.

For the analyzed grassland polygons of Romania (33529.42 km2 ), the deviation of the existing livestock density from the OLD\_E (**Figure 4**) results in 52.45% of the grassland area being degraded (major impact, current LD with more than 50% over or under OLD\_E). The LD was much higher than the carrying capacity (overgrazing impact) for 44.05% of the area, with 8.40% of the area being impacted by abandonment, the LD being far under the OLD. Of the 39.25% grassland habitat area that is partially impacted (10.1–50% over or under the CC), 23.94% has an LD under the optimal value, while 15.31% is moderately overgrazed. At the national level, only 8.28%


#### **Figure 4.**

*The spatial distribution of impact and degradation at the national level caused by the deviations from grazing optimum for the socioeconomic production scenario; the deviation classes, status, their percentage, and area at the national level.*

*Habitats of the World - Biodiversity and Threats*

The geoprocessing steps that were performed and integrated into ModelBuilder

in order to identify the status of each grassland polygon regarding the DEVOLD are presented in **Figure 3**. In the first stage, all the input data were processed at the national level. The current LUs and subsequently the LD (LUs/ha), OLD, and DEVOLD were derived for each grassland polygon based on the OLD\_E values recommended for each of the three altitude belts from Romania (**Figure 3a**). In the second stage, the resulting grasslands–DEVOLD\_E dataset was intersected with the limits of ROSCIs in order to analyze the status of the grassland habitats included within these protected areas (**Figure 3b**). Subsequently, in the third stage, the OLD\_B value was input into the model as an alternative to OLD\_E for the grassland habitats included in ROSCIs (**Figure 3c**). The developed GIS toolbox with the OLD model is flexible, allowing to easily test a different OLD or to be adapted for any similar case study. As mentioned above, the results obtained from the model are an approximation that considers the LD as having a uniform distribution throughout all the grassland habitats from each TAU. Although the situation within individual grassland parcels might be different, on average it is accurate at the TAU level, particularly taking into account the spatial and temporal dynamics of grazing, the high probability

*The models generated for the analysis of the (a) grassland habitats at the national level, using deviations from the optimal livestock for socioeconomic production (OLD\_E); (b) grassland habitats from the N2000 SCIs, using deviations from the optimal livestock for socioeconomic production (OLD\_E); and (c) grassland habitats from the N2000 SCIs, using deviations from the optimal livestock for biodiversity conservation* 

**36**

**Figure 3.**

*(OLD\_B).*

of the permanent grassland area is not impacted with regard to the carrying capacity, the LD being within the interval of 10% over to 10% under the optimal value, 3.37% being partly overgrazed, while 4.91% of this area being used slightly below the optimal intensity. Although the obtained results concerning the LD distribution and deviation from OLD are consistent with other studies that evaluate the grassland status from Romania [31, 32, 48, 56], they are only supported by the livestock statistical reports, field data regarding the habitat status not being available yet. Validation by grassland experts in the field was only performed for one TAU (Zăvoi) [48] for a model that used the same dataset (livestock units within the permanent grassland polygons of a TAU) to extract the livestock density classes and evaluate the grassland status.

When analyzing the situation of the grassland polygons that are within N2000 ROSCIs, the percentage of the degraded area is 50.33%, slightly lower than at the national level (**Figure 5**). Of this, 30.52% represents areas prone to degradation from intense overgrazing (the current LD being far over the OLD), while in 19.81% of the area degradation is caused by abandonment. The proportion of partially impacted grasslands is slightly larger within the N2000 sites than at the national level, reaching 42.99% of the total area. Most of these grasslands are undergoing moderate abandonment (28.86%), while moderate overgrazing affects an area only half as large (14.13%). A smaller proportion of the ROSCI grasslands—6.68%—are not impacted with regard to this criterion than at the national level. Of these grasslands, those experiencing minor overgrazing and the ones with slight abandonment have similar percentages, 3.22% and 3.46%, respectively.


#### **Figure 5.**

*The spatial distribution of impact and degradation within the N2000 ROSCIs caused by the deviations from grazing optimum for the socioeconomic production scenario; the deviation classes, status, their percentage, and area at the national level.*

**39**

**Table 2.**

−50 to −10.1%

*Deviation from Grazing Optimum in the Grassland Habitats of Romania Within...*

**3.2 Case scenario 2: status of the grassland habitats with the optimal livestock** 

For the grasslands included in N2000 ROSCIs, a lower livestock density might be recommendable that has been shown to maintain and enhance biodiversity in similar contexts from Central and Southeastern Europe [21, 50–54]. For the analysis, the value of 0.45 LU/ha was tested, the recommended LD for biodiversity conservation being under 0.5 [21, 50–54]. However, the large range of elevations and ecological conditions from Romania might require more specific values for different grassland types and altitude belts if a more accurate evaluation is desired. In the perspective of this lower optimum LD (**Table 2**), an 8% increase in the proportion of degraded N2000 grasslands appears (to 58.49%), the major impact source being overgrazing, 50.46%, while abandonment contributes with only 8.03% to degradation. The percentage of partially impacted grassland areas is lower than in the previous scenario by 33.35%, while overgrazing and abandonment have almost equal importance in this case (17.91% and 15.44%, respectively). In this scenario, the percentage of the area not impacted is 8.15%, very similar to the nationwide figure for all the grasslands. Of this area, 4.41% is lightly overgrazed, while 3.74% is used slightly below

It appears that in the case of the grasslands from N2000 sites, which are important for biodiversity conservation, under the existing LD conditions, a lower optimal LD can be proposed without generating widespread conflicts between the socioeconomical activities and nature conservation. Since the major impacts include both overexploitation and abandonment, in some neighboring TAUs that experience opposite tendencies, sharing the grassland resources and a better distribution of the livestock may be a first, easier step to improve grassland degradation status (**Figure 6**). Our results regarding the areas free from overgrazing are consistent with other studies which revealed that the spatial (geographical) distribution of grazing may be as important as the LD [24, 57, 58]. This means that, beyond good local management of grazing, an optimized, larger scale of grazing management is needed as well. When viewed at a regional scale such as TAUs, where we graze may

**ROSCIs (%)**

No data No data 0.01 0.01 0.00

*Comparison of DEVOLD percentages between the socioeconomic and biodiversity-focused scenarios in ROSCIs.*

**DEVOLD\_B in ROSCIs (%)**

3.46 3.74 0.28

3.22 4.41 1.19

28.86 15.44 −13.42

14.13 17.91 3.78

19.81 8.03 −11.77

30.52 50.46 19.93

**Difference**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85734*

the optimal intensity.

be as important as how we graze.

−10 to 0% No impact—slight

0 to 10% No impact—minor

10.1 to 50% Partial—moderate

≤50% Major impact

>50% Major impact

**DEVOLD Grassland habitat status DEVOLD\_E in** 

abandonment

overgrazing

Partial impact—moderate abandonment

overgrazing

(degraded)—abandonment

(degraded)—overgrazing

**density for biodiversity conservation (OLD\_B)**
