DOCSLIB.ORG

Technical Guidelines for Farmers and Other Stakeholders, Factsheets on Case Studies and Preparation of Policy Briefs ______WP5

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

1 Innovative and sustainable intensification of integrated food and non-food systems in Europe April 2019 Technical guidelines for farmers and other stakeholders, factsheets on case studies and preparation of policy briefs __________________________________________________________________________________ WP5. Dissemination of outputs and communication to stakeholders Report Innovative and sustainable intensification of integrated food and non-food systems to develop climate-resilient agro-ecosystems in Europe and beyond Funding Scheme: ERA-NET Co-fund FACCE SURPLUS SUBTHEME: Subtheme 3. Sustainable intensification of integrated food and non-food systems of agriculture Authors: Andrea Pisanelli (CNR, Italy), Jo Smith, Sally Westaway (ORC, UK), Bhim Bahadur Ghaley, Lisa Mølgaard Lehmann (UCPH), Robert Borek (IUNG-PIB, Poland), Jacek Zajączkowski (SGGW, Poland), Mignon Sandor, Adrian-Eugen Gliga (USAMV, Romania), Elias Fereres, Manuel López, Tomás Roquette Tenreiro (UCO, Spain), Nina Röhrig, Moritz von Oppenkowski, Tim Roesler, Markus Hassler (UMR, Germany) The project is funded by FACCE SURPLUS, ERA-NET Co-fund between the European Commission and a partnership of 15 countries www.sustainfarm.eu 2 Innovative and sustainable intensification of integrated food and non-food systems in Europe SustainFARM fact sheet Project start date April 2019 Project duration 36 months Project website http://www.sustainfarm.eu Deliverable number D5.3. Technical guidelines for farmers and other Deliverable title stakeholders, factsheets on case studies and preparation of policy briefs Due date deliverable 36 Actual submission date April 2019 Editors Authors Reviewers IUNG-PIB, UCPH, ORC, UMR, USAMV, CNR, Participating beneficiaries IUNG, UCO Work Package No. 5 Dissemination of outputs and communication to Work Package title stakeholders Work Package leader IUNG-PIB IUNG-PIB, UCPH, ORC, UMR, USAMV, CNR, Work Package participants IUNG, UCO Estimated person-months per deliverable N/A Draft/Final Final No of pages (including cover) Dissemination Level PU Public The project is funded by FACCE SURPLUS, ERA-NET Co-fund between the European Commission and a partnership of 15 countries www.sustainfarm.eu 3 Innovative and sustainable intensification of integrated food and non-food systems in Europe Introduction The main objective of the SustainFARM project is to enhance agronomic, environmental and economic performance of integrated food and non-food production systems (IFNS) by optimizing productivity and valorising woody components, residual wastes and co-products. IFNS are systems in which trees, crops and livestock components are integrated in different ways at different scales (plot- field-farm). The specific objectives are to a) assess resource use efficiency and design innovative and cost-effective IFNS for optimum productivity, b) develop sustainability metrics to assess agronomic productivity and environmental performance and c) valorise the woody components, residual waste and co-products into high value bio-energy carriers and bio-products. To achieve the objectives, SustainFARM has adopted an innovative case-study approach, whereby locally relevant IFNS are already identified, to work in close collaboration with the local end- users of the technology, such as farmers, advisory services and policy makers. By involving the end- users and other stakeholders from the start of the project activity, we have co-generated technology, relevant at the local scale to address productivity issues and enhance valorisation of the unused, residual and co-products. SustainFARM investigated the economic and environmental performance of the range of locally relevant IFNS across several agri-climatic zones of Europe and designed innovative IFNS systems, which are resilient and climate-smart. To improve the cost-effectiveness, different means of valorising the co-products (woody components and residual wet olive cake) for multiple uses (bedding material, compost etc.), have been demonstrated at two SME facilities in UK and Italy and the knowledge generated will be shared through the stakeholder platforms. Value chains and life cycle analysis (LCA) of the new bio-products (pellets, bio-energy and food supplements etc.) have been carried out to assess the environmental footprint of the valorisation processes. The best practices and innovative methods are synthesized into a decision support tool (DST) to enable informed decision making by farmers, advisory services and policy makers. To promote the adoption of IFNS in Europe, SustainFARM produced tailor-made products to facilitate knowledge exchange, based on the scientific and practical agronomic knowledge generated in the project and the needs of the various stakeholder groups. The report presents the final conclusions of regional investigation in identified IFNS case studies of 6 countries in different climatic zones of Europe and consider evidence-based solutions for development IFNS innovative systems. The project is funded by FACCE SURPLUS, ERA-NET Co-fund between the European Commission and a partnership of 15 countries www.sustainfarm.eu 4 Innovative and sustainable intensification of integrated food and non-food systems in Europe Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3 SustainFARM Policy brief ..................................................................................................... 5 Factsheet 1. Combined food and energy system (CFE), Taastrup, Denmark ....................... 10 Factsheet 2. Alley cropping and hedge coppice systems in East Anglia, UK ....................... 12 Factsheet 3. Multifunctional olive tree systems in Italy, Umbria Region ............................. 14 Factsheet 4. SRC biomass crops integrated with arable crop production, Poland .............. 16 Factsheet 5. Silvopastoral system with grazing and wood production, Poland .................. 17 Factsheet 6. Fruit trees intercropped with vegetables, Poland ........................................... 17 Factsheet 7. Silvopastoral system in Romania, Maramures county .................................... 18 Factsheet 7. Proposal of an silvopastoral system for Mediterranean environments, Spain 20 Benefits of agroforestry: Insights from willow cultivation in Denmark ................................ 22 Productive hedges: guidance on bringing Britain's hedges back into the farm business .... 26 Wood processing from integrated production. Pellet production ........................................ 42 Using Production Network Analysis for economic evaluation of farming activities ............ 47 Agroforestry and olive orchards: by products and innovative value chains ........................ 53 Circular use of olive pomace for soil health. ...................................................................... 58 Multifunctional landscape design with agroforestry ........................................................... 64 The project is funded by FACCE SURPLUS, ERA-NET Co-fund between the European Commission and a partnership of 15 countries www.sustainfarm.eu 5 Innovative and sustainable intensification of integrated food and non-food systems to develop climate-resilient agro-ecosystems in Europe and beyond (SustainFARM) SustainFARM Policy brief February 2019 Introduction Global policies are currently aware of environment problems caused by agricultural intensive systems. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment highlights that human society benefits not only from products delivered by ecosystems, but also from regulating and cultural services. Agroforestry is defined as the deliberate integration of woody vegetation with agricultural activities in the lower story. Agroforestry systems provide a higher biomass production per unit of land and more ecosystem services than woody-less agricultural lands, such as the reduction of soil erosion and nitrogen leaching, and the increase in carbon sequestration and the improvement of landscape diversity. Agroforestry practices fully respond to the need to implement multi-functional agriculture as requested by the most relevant International and European development strategies and agreements requiring sustainable development goals in Europe. Therefore, adequate policies promoting agroforestry practices and systems should be developed in order to increase agriculture and forestry sustainability as FAO recommends. Agroforestry is one of the most common land use practice worldwide and have formed key elements in European rural landscapes until modern agricultural practices were introduced and adopted at wide scale in the last decades. Woody vegetation was deliberately retained or included in the cultivated or grazed lands by European farmers as it has traditionally served various purposes in the agrarian economy through multiple production as well as delivered environmental benefits. During the second half of the 20th Century, trees and shrubs were progressively removed from the cultivated land of Europe as a result of mechanization and intensification of agriculture, but also as a consequence of land consolidation schemes to increase the size of agricultural parcels carried out all over Europe. Since the end of the 20th Century, the important role of trees in producing valuable products and environmental benefits has been progressively recognized worldwide. Agroforestry and Common Agricultural Policies (CAP) Common Agricultural Policies (CAP) schemes favoring the preservation of large trees
Recommended publications
  • Pulp & Paper: Focus on Hardwood Opportunities

    Pulp & Paper: Focus on Hardwood Opportunities

    Pulp & Paper: Focus on Hardwood Opportunities Sector Overview Disclaimer © New Forests 2017. This presentation is issued by and is the property of New Forests Asset Management Pty Ltd (New Forests) and may not be reproduced or used in any form or medium without express written permission. This document is dated 2017 with information as at September 30 2015. Statements are made only as of the date of this document unless otherwise stated. New Forests is not responsible for providing updated information to any person. The information contained in this document is of a general nature and is intended for discussion purposes only. The information set forth herein is based on information obtained from sources that New Forests believes to be reliable, but New Forests makes no representations as to, and accepts no responsibility or liability for, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information. Except insofar as liability under any statute cannot be excluded, New Forests, its associates, related bodies corporate, and all of their respective directors, employees and consultants, do not accept any liability for any loss or damage (whether direct, indirect, consequential or otherwise) arising from the use of this information. The information contained in this document may include financial and business projections that are based on a large number of assumptions, any of which could prove to be significantly incorrect. New Forests notes that all projections, valuations, and statistical analyses are subjective illustrations based on one or more among many alternative methodologies that may produce different results. Projections, valuations, and statistical analyses included herein should not be viewed as facts, predictions or the only possible outcome.
  • Improvedforestharvesting and Reduced Impact Logging in Asia Pacific Region

    Improvedforestharvesting and Reduced Impact Logging in Asia Pacific Region

    STATE OF 111E ARI REl^ORI ON IMPROVEDFORESTHARVESTING AND REDUCED IMPACT LOGGING IN ASIA PACIFIC REGION PRE-PROJECT PPD 19/99 REV. itF) STRENGTHENING SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENTOF NATURAL FOREST IN ASIA-PASIFIC , Cover page: Skidding 45, Reduced Impact Logging Activities, " Berau Forest Management Project (BMFP) " Location: Petak 29, Swakelola Labanan, East Kalimantan, PT. In hutani I STATE OF 11/1E ARI REPORT ON IMPROVEDFORESTHARVESTING AND REDUCED IMPACT LOGGING IN ASIA PACIFIC REGION PRE-PROJECT PPD 19199 REV. I (F) STRENGTHENINGSUSTAINABLEMANAGEMENTOF (^)^ NATURAL FOREST IN ASIA-PASIFIC o ITTO I FOREWORD The Indonesia Ministry of Forestry, in its capacity as Task Manager for the Asia-Pacific Forestry Commission's Ad Hoc Working Group on Sustainable Forest Management, with support from the International Tropical Timber Organization has implemented a pre-project focused on the application of the code of practice for forest harvesting in Asia- Pacific. The development objective of the pre-project PPD I 9199 Rev. , (F); "Strengthening Sustainable Management of Natural Forest in Asia-Pacific" is to promote the contribution of forest harvesting to sustainable management of tropical forest in Asia-Pacific countries. It is expected that after the pre-project completion the awareness of improves forest harvesting practices will have been significantly raised and political support for the implementation of the Code secured. To implement a comprehensive training programme and to operationalize demonstration sites for RIL implementation there is a need to understand the status of forest management particularly state of the art on forest harvesting in each Asia Pacific country. This state of the art report was prepared by Dr.
  • Short Rotation Intensive Culture of Willow, Spent Mushroom Substrate

    Short Rotation Intensive Culture of Willow, Spent Mushroom Substrate

    plants Article Short Rotation Intensive Culture of Willow, Spent Mushroom Substrate and Ramial Chipped Wood for Bioremediation of a Contaminated Site Used for Land Farming Activities of a Former Petrochemical Plant Maxime Fortin Faubert 1 , Mohamed Hijri 1,2 and Michel Labrecque 1,* 1 Institut de Recherche en biologie végétale, Université de Montréal and Jardin Botanique de Montréal, 4101 Sherbrooke East, Montréal, QC H1X 2B2, Canada; [email protected] (M.F.F.); [email protected] (M.H.) 2 African Genome Center, Mohammed VI Polytechnic University (UM6P), Lot 660, Hay Moulay Rachid, Ben Guerir 43150, Morocco * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-514-978-1862 Abstract: The aim of this study was to investigate the bioremediation impacts of willows grown in short rotation intensive culture (SRIC) and supplemented or not with spent mushroom substrate (SMS) and ramial chipped wood (RCW). Results did not show that SMS significantly improved either biomass production or phytoremediation efficiency. After the three growing seasons, RCW- amended S. miyabeana accumulated significantly more Zn in the shoots, and greater increases of some PAHs were found in the soil of RCW-amended plots than in the soil of the two other ground Citation: Fortin Faubert, M.; Hijri, cover treatments’ plots. Significantly higher Cd concentrations were found in the shoots of cultivar M.; Labrecque, M. Short Rotation ‘SX61’. The results suggest that ‘SX61’ have reduced the natural attenuation of C10-C50 that occurred Intensive Culture of Willow, Spent in the unvegetated control plots. The presence of willows also tended to increase the total soil Mushroom Substrate and Ramial concentrations of PCBs.
  • WOOD | Natural Woodchips™

    WOOD | Natural Woodchips™

    WOOD | Natural WoodChips™ TORGINOL® Natural WoodChips™ are manufactured from a range of premium quality natural and engineered wood veneer species. 4617 South Taylor Drive Reclaim your environment with the holistic serenity of organic wood. Sheboygan, WI 53081 | USA TORGINOL® Natural WoodChips™ will enhance your environment (920) 694-4800 [email protected] | www.torginol.com with ecological simplicity. This innovative wood flooring solution combines the hygienic benefits of seamless flooring with nature’s TYPICAL WOOD SYSTEM elegant wood grains, sustaining a timeless appeal for the life of your floor. PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS Color (Natural) Visual Evaluation (ASTM D4086) Pass * Dry Film Thickness Micrometer (ASTM D1005) 6 - 8 mils TMTM Shape Visual Evaluation (ASTM D4086) Random PROTECTIVE TOPCOAT Odor Olfactory (ASTM D1296) Odorless CLEAR GROUT COAT Moisture Content (< 5%) Moisture Meter (ASTM D4442) Pass NATURAL WOODCHIPS Size Distribution (~3/8”) Normal Sieve Analysis (ASTM C136) Pass PIGMENTED BASECOAT COVERAGE RATE GUIDELINES PRIMER/SEALER Type Size Full Coverage CONCRETE All ~ 3/8” 15 - 20 SF / LB *For best results, a sanding coat is recommended Coverage rates may vary depending on customer preferences and application techniques. prior to applying the final topcoat(s). WOOD SPECIES LIMITATIONS A Natural Product Wood is a natural material and may not be uniform in appearance. Natural variations in the characteristics of individual pieces W1010 / HONEY MAPLE W1000 / POWDERED ASPEN W2010 / WHITE ASH should not be considered defects. The color and grain variations contribute to the wood veneer’s unique character and beauty. Aging and Light Exposure W1015 / WINTER BIRCH W1040 / CLASSIC MAHOGANY W2015 / AGED HICKORY Wood ages naturally over time as it is exposed to light and other environmental elements.
  • Tree Preservation Orders: a Guide to the Law and Good Practice

    Tree Preservation Orders: a Guide to the Law and Good Practice

    Tree Preservation Orders: A Guide to the Law and Good Practice On 5th May 2006 the responsibilities of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) transferred to the Department for Communities and Local Government. Department for Communities and Local Government Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU Telephone: 020 7944 4400 Website: www.communities.gov.uk Documents downloaded from the www.communities.gov.uk website are Crown Copyright unless otherwise stated, in which case copyright is assigned to Queens Printer and Controller of Her Majestys Stationery Office. Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the publication specified. Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply for a Click-Use Licence for core material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp or by writing to the Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected]. This publication is only available online via the Communities and Local Government website: www.communities.gov.uk Alternative formats under Disability Discrimination
  • Denitrifying Bioreactors—An Approach for Reducing Nitrate Loads

    Denitrifying Bioreactors—An Approach for Reducing Nitrate Loads

    G Model ECOENG-1647; No. of Pages 12 ARTICLE IN PRESS Ecological Engineering xxx (2010) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Engineering journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoleng Review Denitrifying bioreactors—An approach for reducing nitrate loads to receiving waters Louis A. Schipper a,∗, Will D. Robertson b, Arthur J. Gold c, Dan B. Jaynes d, Stewart C. Cameron e a Department of Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand b Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada c Department of Natural Resources Science, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881, USA d National Laboratory for Agriculture and the Environment, USDA-ARS, 2110 University Blvd, Ames, IA 50011-3120, USA e GNS Science, Private Bag 2000, Taupo, New Zealand article info abstract Article history: Low-cost and simple technologies are needed to reduce watershed export of excess nitrogen to sensitive Received 12 November 2009 aquatic ecosystems. Denitrifying bioreactors are an approach where solid carbon substrates are added Received in revised form 9 March 2010 into the flow path of contaminated water. These carbon (C) substrates (often fragmented wood-products) Accepted 3 April 2010 act as a C and energy source to support denitrification; the conversion of nitrate (NO −) to nitrogen gases. Available online xxx 3 Here, we summarize the different designs of denitrifying bioreactors that use a solid C substrate, their hydrological connections, effectiveness, and factors that limit their performance. The main denitrifying Keywords: bioreactors are: denitrification walls (intercepting shallow groundwater), denitrifying beds (intercepting Denitrification concentrated discharges) and denitrifying layers (intercepting soil leachate).
  • A History of Export Woodchipping from North East

    A History of Export Woodchipping from North East

    History of Export Woodchipping A HISTORY OF EXPORT WOODCHIPPING IN NORTH EAST NSW Dailan Pugh, August 2013 This paper outlines the Commonwealth‟s extreme reluctance over many decades to meet its obligations to oversee the introduction, expansion, and constraints on export woodchipping in north- east NSW. It in part explains their desire to absolve themselves of all responsibilities by signing Regional Forest Agreements, but also chronicles the political over-riding of environmental obligations by successive Commonwealth resource ministers. In early 2013 Boral were unable to get Forest Stewardship Council accreditation for a pile of woodchips it had amassed and thus could not sell it. They announced they were going to close down their export woodchipping operations. There is now an intention to replace woodchipping with the burning of forest residues for electricity, meaning any tree not classed as a sawlog. The history of woodchipping provides a salutatory lesson as to how we could expect an industry based around burning of native forests for electricity could develop. Though with less restrictions on species and quality, and the ability to locate processing facilities all over the north coast, the environmental consequences could be far worse. By the late 1960s the New South Wales and Western Australian Governments were in negotiations with Japanese companies to supply them with woodchips, and Tasmania, Victoria and the Northern Territory were being mooted. On 14 November 1967 NSW Premier Robert Askin announced that Harris-Daishowa would construct an export woodchip mill at Twofold Bay near Eden. Exports started in 1971. Tasmania started exporting woodchips in 1972 and West Australia in 1975.
  • Frequently Asked Questions About OSB

    Frequently Asked Questions About OSB

    FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT OSB www.egger.com ChAPTERS • SECTION A: DEFINITION / CLASSIFICATION / PROPERTIES • SECTION B: STANDARDS & SYMBOLS • SECTION C: RAW MATERIALS & PRODUCTION • SECTION D: USE & APPLICATIONS • SECTION E: STORAGE & CONDITIONING • SECTION F: ON-SITE INSPECTION & TESTING • SECTION G1: OSB/3 vERSUS OSB/2 • SECTION G2: OSB VERSUS PARTICLEBOARDS • SECTION G3: OSB VERSUS PLYWOOD • SECTION G4: OSB VERSUS SOLID WOOD • SECTION H: TONGUE & GROOVE (T&G) • SECTION I1: MOISTURE BEHAVIOR & RAIN • SECTION I2: FIRE BEHAVIOR • SECTION I3: FUNGUS / DECAY / MOULD • SECTION J: DENSITY • SECTION K: FORMALDEHYDE • SECTION L: EXTERNAL USE • SECTION M1: EXPANSION GAPS • SECTION M2: FIXING & GLUING • SECTION M3: SURFACE TREATMENT & PANEL FINISHING • SECTION N: SQUEAK • SECTION O: ETICS • SECTION P: LIFETIME & WARRANTIES • SECTION Q: MISCELLANEOUS 2 SECTION A: DEFINITION / CLASSIFICATION / PROPERTIES 1. Q: WHAT IS OSB? A: OSB is an engineered plane and rigid wood panel made of wood strands of selected quality with controlled cross orientation, bound with a synthetic resin under high temperature and pressure conditions. Depending on their technical class (type) and intended use, the boards can be used in dry or humid condition. 2. Q: HOW MANY TYPES OF OSB EXIST AND WHAT IS THE INTENDED USE FOR EACH? A: According to EN 300, there are 4 types of OSB, known as technical classes: • OSB/1 → general purpose non load-bearing boards for use in dry conditions (service class 1) • OSB/2 → load-bearing boards for use in dry conditions (service class 1) • OSB/3 → load-bearing boards for use in humid conditions (service classes 1 & 2) • OSB/4 → heavy-duty load-bearing boards for use in humid conditions (service classes 1 & 2) Among these, OSB/3 is currently the most used product in Europe.
  • Sorption of Veterinary Antibiotics to Woodchips

    Sorption of Veterinary Antibiotics to Woodchips

    SORPTION OF VETERINARY ANTIBIOTICS TO WOODCHIPS by MANU AJMANI B.Tech, G.B.P.U.A & T - Pantnagar, 2008 A REPORT submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Civil Engineering College of Engineering KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 2011 Approved by: Major Professor Dr. Alok Bhandari Copyright MANU AJMANI 2011 Abstract In the upper Midwest, subsurface tile drainage water is a major contributor of nitrate (NO3 –N) coming from fertilizers and animal manure. Movement of NO3 -N through tile drainage into streams is a major concern as it can cause eutrophication and hypoxia conditions, as in the Gulf of Mexico. Denitrifying bioreactors is one of the pollution control strategies to treat contaminated tile drainage water. These bioreactors require four conditions which are: 1) organic carbon source, 2) anaerobic conditions, 3) denitrifying bacteria and 4) influent NO3-N. This research focuses on investigating fate of veterinary antibiotics in woodchips commonly used in in-situ reactors. Tylosin (TYL) and sulfamethazine (SMZ) are two veterinary antibiotics which are most commonly used in the United States and can be found in tile water after manure is land applied. Partition coefficients of TYL and SMZ on wood were determined by sorption experiments using fresh woodchips and woodchips from an in situ reactor. It was concluded that the woodchips were an effective means to sorb the veterinary antibiotics leached into the tile water after application of animal manure. Linear partition coefficients were calculated and phase distribution relationships were established for both the chemicals. The fresh woodchips gave inconclusive data but predictions could be made by the information determined in the experiments using woodchips from a ten year old woodchip bioreactor.
  • Importation of Solid Wood Packing Material

    Importation of Solid Wood Packing Material

    United States Department of Agriculture Importation of Solid Marketing and Regulatory Wood Packing Material Programs Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Draft Environmental Impact Statement—October 2002 Importation of Solid Wood Packing Material Draft Environmental Impact Statement—October 2002 Agency Contact: Raymond B. Nosbaum Senior Regulatory Coordinator Plant Protection and Quarantine Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service U.S. Department of Agriculture 4700 River Road, Unit 141 Riverdale, MD 20737 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Mention of companies or commercial products in this report does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture over others not mentioned. USDA neither guarantees nor warrants the standard of any product mentioned. Product names are mentioned solely to report factually on available data and to provide specific information. This publication reports research involving pesticides. All uses of pesticides must be registered by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies before they can be recommended.
  • The Isabella Plantation Conservation Management Plan February 2012

    The Isabella Plantation Conservation Management Plan February 2012

    The Isabella Plantation Conservation Management Plan February 2012 Isabella Plantation Landscape Conservation Management Plan 2012 Prepared by The Royal Parks January 2012 The Royal Parks Rangers Lodge Hyde Park London W2 2UH Tel: 020 7298 2000 Fax: 020 7402 3298 [email protected] i Isabella Plantation Conservation Management Plan CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 3 Richmond Park ............................................................................................................................................. 3 The Management Plan ................................................................................................................................ 4 Aims of the Isabella Plantation Management Plan ................................................................................ 4 Structure of the Plan .................................................................................................................................. 6 2.0 GENERAL AND MANAGEMENT CONTEXT ............................... 7 Location ......................................................................................................................................................... 7 Existing TRP Management Framework ................................................................................................ 10 Management Structure of Richmond Park .......................................................................................... 10 Landscape Management
  • Sheffield Trees and Woodlands Strategy 2016-2030

    Sheffield Trees and Woodlands Strategy 2016-2030

    Sheffield Trees and Woodlands Strategy 2016-2030 Sheffield City Council September 2016 Consultation Draft Key Strategic Partners Forest Schools Forestry Commission Froglife National Trust Natural England Peak District National Park Authority Sheffield and Rotherham Wildlife Trust Sheffield Green Spaces Forum Sheffield Hallam University Sheffield Local Access Forum Sheffield University Sorby Natural History Society South Yorkshire Forest Partnership Sport England Woodlands Trust Contents Foreword ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1. Context ............................................................................................................................................ 2 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 What the Strategy Covers ....................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Legislation, Policy and Strategy Linkages ................................................................................ 3 1.4 Our Vision and Aims ................................................................................................................ 3 1.5 Strategy Monitoring and Review ............................................................................................ 4 1.6 Additional Documents ...........................................................................................................