Change type of livestock

Overall effectiveness category No evidence found (no assessment)
Number of studies: 0
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Changing the species or breed of livestock on peatlands could reduce undesirable impacts. For example, using light sheep rather than heavy cows may reduce trampling impacts. Additionally, different species and breeds of livestock feed in different ways, leading to different impacts on vegetation (Loucougaray et al. 2004). Sheep nibble buds and shoots of selected plants, whilst cattle are less picky and pull off clumps of mixed vegetation. Sheep maintain shorter, more uniform lawns of vegetation than cattle which leave tufts of longer vegetation, whilst horses can maintain patches of short vegetation. Traditional or heritage livestock breeds may consume different species of plants in different amounts to modern breeds (Tolhurst & Oates 2001) and be better adapted to harsh conditions on some peatlands e.g. upland bogs.

Key peatland types where this action may be appropriate: bogs, fens/fen meadows, tropical peat swamps.

Related actions: completely remove livestock from degraded peatlands; low intensity grazing as a traditional or novel conservation tool.

_{Loucougaray G., Bonis A. & Bouzillé J.-B. (2004) Effects of grazing by horses and/or cattle on the diversity of coastal grasslands in western France. Biological Conservation, 116, 59–71.}

_{Tolhurst S. & Oates M. (2001) The Breed Profiles’ Handbook: A Guide to the Selection of Livestock Breeds for Grazing Wildlife Sites. English Nature, Peterborough.}

Key messages

We found no studies that evaluated the effects, on peatland vegetation, of changing livestock type.

‘We found no studies’ means that we have not yet found any studies that have directly evaluated this action during our systematic journal and report searches. Therefore we have been unable to assess whether or not the action is effective or has any harmful impacts. Please get in touch if you know of such a study for this action.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Please cite as:

Taylor, N.G., Grillas, P. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Peatland Conservation. Pages 367-430 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Peatland Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Cut/remove/thin forest plantations Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	4	Synopsis Link
Implement ‘mosaic management’ of agriculture Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Use barriers to keep livestock off ungrazed peatlands Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link