Pasture for Horses: An Underestimated Land Use Class in an Urbanized and Multifunctional Area

Pasture for Horses: An Underestimated Land Use Class in an Urbanized and Multifunctional Area

K. Bomans V. Dewaelheyns H. Gulinck 

Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, K.U.Leuven, Belgium

Page: 
195-211
|
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP-V6-N2-195-211
Received: 
N/A
| |
Accepted: 
N/A
| | Citation

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract: 

This paper investigates the spatial importance of horses in a multifunctional and urbanized area. The growing spatial importance of horses in the open space was already mentioned by different authors, but never quantified before. In many countries, including Belgium, statistics on horses are only partly covered by agricultural data. As a consequence, the amount of space in use for horses, especially hobby horses, is largely unknown but may encompass a significant area of the open space. Especially within the context of an increasing urbanization and growing demands on the remaining rural area, this evolution must not be neglected. A reliable quantification of the space used by horses is therefore essential and is given in this research for the case study Flanders. According to the results of fieldwork, about one-third of the pasture land in Flanders is used to keep horses. A qualitative analysis showed a higher horse density within the more urbanized areas with a fragmented agricultural area and a quantitative analysis showed negative associations between the presence of horses and (i) the distance to gardens, (ii) the parcel area and (iii) the distance to forest. Moreover, an internet survey assessed evolutions and motivations of horse owners to keep horses. The survey resulted in clear data on the fact that the number of horses is increasing. This is mainly motivated by recreational purposes. The majority of horse-keepers do not consider themselves to be part of the agricultural sector. These results, showing an intensified competition for land between stakeholders in the open space of urbanized regions put new challenges for sustainable land use planning. The major challenges are (i) to avoid increasing functional and spatial fragmentation of rural landscapes, (ii) to assure enough space for societal necessity urgencies such as food or energy selfefficiency, (iii) to increase positive interactions of horse keeping with other sectors such as agriculture, nature conservation and others and (iv) to develop a proper visual and cultural landscape strategy, helping in setting up guidelines for fencing and other infrastructural elements that do not deteriorate the landscape character.

Keywords: 

Internet survey, Land use, land use change, multifunctionality, pasture for horses, urban areas

  References

[1] Verburg, P.H., van de Steeg, J., Veldkamp, A. & Willemen, L., From land cover change to land function dynamics: a major challenge to improve land characterization. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(3), pp. 1327–1335, 2009. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.08.005

[2] Myhr, U. & Johansson, R., EcoEffect for outdoor environments, the process of tool development. Environmental Impact Assessment, 28(7), pp. 439–454, 2008. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2007.09.001

[3] Saifi , B. & Drake, L., Swedish agriculture during the twentieth century in relation to sustainability. Ecological Economics, 68(1–2), pp. 370–380, 2008. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.04.003

[4] Viaene, J., Gellynck, X. & De Belder, T., Het economische belang van de paardensector.Universiteit van Gent. Faculteit landbouw en toegepaste biologische wetenschappen. In opdracht van de Belgische Confederatie van het Paard, pp. 1–78, 2003.

[5] Policy Research Cooperation. De paardensector als economische en maatschappelijke actor in Vlaanderen. Een analyse van het economische en sociaal-maatschappelijke profi el en belang van de Vlaamse paardenhouderijen. Presentation Workshop, Brussels, 16th October 2008.

[6] Törn, A., Tolvanen, A., Norokorpi, Y., Tervo, R. & Siikamäki, P., Comparing the impacts of hiking, skiing and horse riding on trail and vegetation in different types of forest. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(2009), pp. 1427–1434, 2009.

[7] Busck, A.G., Kristensen, S.P., Prøstholm, S. & Primdahl, J., Porous landscapes – the case of greater Copenhagen. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 7(3), pp. 145–156, 2008. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2007.05.002

[8] Vlaamse Landmaatschappij (VLM). 7 dialoogdagen over de paardenhouderij – Discussieteksten en verslagen. Een initiatief van Vlaams minister-president Kris Peeters. Vlaamse Landmaatschappij. VU Guido Clerx, 2009. Available online: www.vlm.be.

[9] Van der Windt, N.P., Olde Loohuis, R.J.W. & Agricola, H.J., De paardenhouderij in beeld, een verkenning naar de landschappelijke verschijningsvorm van de paardenhouderij. Alterra-rapport 1444. Wageningen: Alterra, 2007.

[10] Vejre, H., Models for safeguarding urban fringe open landscapes the balance between public and private. Case study of management models for urban green space around Copenhagen. Proc. of the Conference ‘Rurality Near the City’, eds. V. Dewaelheyns & H. Gulinck, KULeuven: Leuven, pp. 51–60, 2008. Available online: www.ruralitynearthecity.be

[11] Daniels, T.L., Hobby farming in America: rural development or threat to commercial agriculture? Journal of Rural Studies, 2(1), pp. 31–40, 1986. doi:10.1016/0743-0167(86)90071-9

[12] Norusis, M.J., SPSS 15.0. Statistical Procedures Companion, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 2006.

[13] Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), Statistical Development Series 1996: Conducting Agricultural Censuses and Surveys. Rome, 1996.

[14] Gallego, F.J., Sampling Frames with Square Segments. Offi ce for offi cial publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg, 1995.

[15] Tsiligirides, T.A., Remote sensing as a tool for agricultural statistics: a case study of area frame sampling methodology in Hellas. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 20(1998), pp. 45–77, 1998.

[16] Cotter, J. & Nealon, J., Area Frame Design for Agricultural Surveys, National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA: Washington, 1987.

[17] Bunce, R.G.H., Metzger, M.J., Jongman, R.H.G., Brandt, J., De Blust, G., Elena-Rossello, R. et al., A standardized procedure for surveillance and monitoring European habitats and provision of spatial data. Landscape Ecology, 23(1), pp. 11–25, 2007. doi:10.1007/s10980-007-9173-8

[18] Cooper, A. & en McCann, T., Habitat Change in the Northern Ireland Countryside: Summary Report of the Northern Ireland Countryside Survey, 2000. Environment Heritage Service, Department of the Environment for the Northern Ireland, Belfast, 2002.

[19] Gallego, F.J., Crop area estimation in the MARS project. Conference on Ten Years of the MARS Project, Brussels. Agriculture and Regional Information Systems, Space Applications Institute, JRC, Italy, 1999.

[20] Bunce, R.G.H., Howard, D.C.J., Hallam, C.J. & Benefi eld, C.B., Ecological Consequences of Land Use Change. Final Report to Department of Environment, Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Cumbria (UK), 1992.

[21] Sepp, K., The Methodology and Applications of Agricultural Landscape Monitoring in Estonia. Vol. 9. Dissertationes Geographicae Universitatis Tartuensis, Tartu University Press, Tartu. 167 pp, 1999.

[22] Rondeux, J.E., Bauffe, C., Boreux, D. & Dawant, J.M., Mise au point d’une méthodologie d’inventaire des habitats dans le cadre du suivi de la biodiversité en Région Wallone, Faculté Universitaire des sciences agronomiques de Gembloux, Unité de Gestion et Economie forestières, 1999.

[23] O’Neill, R.V., Hunsaker, C.T., Timmins, S.P., Jackson, B.L., Jones, K.B., Riiters, K.H. & Wickham, J.D., Scale problems in reporting landscape pattern at the regional scale. Landscape Ecology, 11(3), pp. 169–180, 1996. doi:10.1007/BF02447515

[24] Malhotra, N.K. & Birks, D.F., Questionnaire design. Marketing Research: an Applied Orientation, Pearson Education Limited, pp. 324–331, 2003.

[25] Roth, M., Validating the use of internet survey techniques in visual landscape assessment – an empirical study from Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(3), pp. 179–192, 2006. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2005.07.005

[26] Reips, U.D., The Web-experiment Method: Advantages, Disadvantages and Solutions, Academic Press: San Diega, CA, pp. 89–114, 2000. doi:10.1026//1618-3169.49.4.243

[27] Reips, U.D., Standards for internet-based experimenting. Experimental Psychology, 49(4), pp. 243–256, 2002.

[28] Bächtiger, M., Frick, A. & Reips, U.D., Financial Incentives, Personal Information and Dropout in Online Studies, Pabst Science: Lengerich, Germany, pp. 209–219, 2001.

[29] Van de Sype, P., Drijvende krachten van landgebruiksveranderingen in Sint-Katelijne-Waver. Eindwerk aan de Katholieke Universiteit van Leuven, Departement aard- en omgevingswetenschappen, afdeling bos, natuur en landschap, p. 105, 2008.

[30] Dewaelheyns, V., Bomans, K. & Gulinck, H., Verspreiding, morfologie en ruimtelijke associaties van het tuincomplex in Vlaanderen. Ad Hoc Opdracht voor Steunpunt Ruimte en Wonen. In opdracht van Departement Ruimte, Wonen en Onroerend Erfgoed, Brussel, pp. 1–138, 2008.

[31] Meeus, S. & Gulinck, H., Semi-urban areas in landscape research: a review. Living Reviews in Landscape Research, 2(2008), p. 3, 2008. Available online: http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2008-3.

[32] Krause, C.L., Our visual landscape – managing the landscape under special consideration of visual aspects. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54(1–4), pp. 239–254, 2001. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00139-6

[33] von Haaren, C., Landscape planning facing the challenge of the development of cultural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 60(2), pp. 73–80, 2002. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00060-9