roles of grassland in the European

The multiple roles of grassland in the European bioeconomy

Edited by M. Höglind A.K. Bakken K.A. Hovstad E. Kallioniemi H. Riley H. Steinshamn L. Østrem

Volume 21 Grassland Science in Europe The multiple

roles of grassland in the European

bioeconomy

Edited by M. Höglind A.K. Bakken K.A. Hovstad E. Kallioniemi

H. Riley H. Steinshamn

L. Østrem

VOLUME 21 GRASSLAND

SCIENCE IN EUROPE

4-8 September 2016 | TRONDHEIM, NORWAY

2016 EGF

4-8 September 2016 | TRONDHEIM, NORWAY

2016

EGF

The multiple roles of grassland in

the European bioeconomy

The multiple roles of grassland in the European bioeconomy

Proceedings of the 26 ^th General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation Trondheim, Norway 4-8 September 2016 Edited by

M. Höglind A.K. Bakken K.A. Hovstad E. Kallioniemi H. Riley H. Steinshamn L. Østrem

Wageningen, 2016

Published by

Organising Committee of the 26^th General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation, NIBIO, Post Office Box 115, 1431 Ås, Norway

NIBIO Other publications: 2(3) 2016 Copyright © 2016

All rights reserved. Nothing from this publication may be reproduced, stored in computerised systems or published in any form or any manner, including electronic, mechanical, reprographic or photographic, without prior written permission from the publisher.

The individual contributions in this publication and any liabilities arising from them remain the responsibility of the authors.

ISBN 978-82-17-01677-9

Abstract submission and evaluation by

Editing and production by Wageningen Academic Publishers P.O. Box 220

6700 AE Wageningen The Netherlands

www.WageningenAcademic.com Distributed by

European Grassland Federation EGF W. Kessler, Federation Secretary c/o Agroscope

Reckenholzstrasse 191 CH-8046 Zürich, Switzerland

E-mail: fedsecretary@europeangrassland.org

Wageningen Academic P u b l i s h e r s

OASES

Online Academic Submission and Evaluation System

Organising Committee

President Lars Nesheim NIBIO General Secretary Peder Lombnæs NIBIO Members Astrid Johansen NIBIO

Vibeke Lind NIBIO

Erik Revdal NIBIO

Scientific Committee

Chair Mats Höglind NIBIO Members Anne Kjersti Bakken NIBIO Knut Anders Hovstad NIBIO

Marit Jørgensen NIBIO

Eveliina Kallioniemi NIBIO

Åshild Randby Norwegian University of Life Sciences

Hugh Riley NIBIO

Odd Arne Rognli Norwegian University of Life Sciences Håvard Steinshamn NIBIO

Liv Østrem NIBIO

English language revisions

Hugh Riley NIBIO

4-8 September 2016 | TRONDHEIM, NORWAY

2016

EGF

Reviewers

B.E. Frankow-Lindberg D. Gasior

M.G. Ghesquière M. Gierus P. Goliński A.-M. Gustavsson M.J.D. Hack-Ten Broeke M.A. Halling

H.M. Hanslin A. Helgadóttir D. Hennessy A. Herrmann A. Hessle

A.G.R.H. Hjelkrem M. Höglind K.A. Hovstad

O. Huguenin-Elie J. Humphreys J.I. Isselstein S. Jaakkola S.K. Jensen L. Johansen A. Johansen M. Jørgensen E. Kallioniemi B. Kramberger B. Krautzer E.A. Lantinga V. Lind A. Lüscher T. Lunnan C.L. Marley A.H. Marshall

M.R. Mosquera-Losada E. Nadeau

L. Nesheim

N. Nilsdotter-Linde J. Nösberger P. O’kiely G. Peratoner T. Persson J. Pickert E.M. Pötsch C. Porqueddu Å.T. Randby D.R.C. Reheul B. Reidy J.A. Reijneveld

H. Riley M. Rinne S. Rivedal O.A. Rognli I. Roldan-Ruiz B.O. Rustas E. Salomon R.L.M. Schils M.K. Schneider M.M. Seppänen H. Sickel E. Spörndly R. Spörndly H. Steinshamn D. Stilmant I.S. Sturite G. Thorvaldsson U. Thumm J. Todnem B. Tonn K. Topp K.R.U. Ulvund

A. Van Den Pol-Van Dasselaar J.C. Van Middelkoop J. Verloop

S. Wehn R.J. Wilkins N. Wrage-Mönnig S. Øpstad

L. Østrem

Supporters and sponsors

Graminor

Nordland Fylkeskommune

Municipalities in Central Norway and in Helgeland Research Council of Norway

Stapledon Memorial Trust Yara

Foreword

The main theme of the 26^th General Meeting of the European Grassland Federation is ‘The Multiple Roles of Grassland in the European Bioeconomy’. But what does ‘Bioeconomy’ mean? According to the European Union, Bioeconomy encompasses the sustainable production of renewable resources from land, fisheries and aquaculture environments and their conversion into food, feed, fibre, bio-based products and bio-energy as well as their related public goods. Bioeconomy is an important element of Europe’s answer to the challenges that lie ahead. The Bioeconomy includes primary production, such as agriculture, forestry, fisheries and aquaculture, as well as the industries that use and process biological resources. Grassland management and forage production are central elements in a bio-based economy, as is forage based livestock production.

There are five plenary sessions focusing on (1) reasons for ruminants and grassland being disconnected and strategies for reconnecting them; (2) pasture and forage potential; (3) associated quality evaluation for ruminant nutrition; (4) synergies between ecosystem services, biodiversity and agricultural production in grasslands; and (5) grasslands in a changing climate with focus on adaptation and mitigation. In the opening session grassland production in Norway will be presented in historical, current and future perspectives.

Five Mid-conference tours will be organised in the surroundings of Trondheim, presenting the diversity of agriculture in Central Norway, ranging from mountain sheep farming, lowland beef production and conventional and organic dairy farming. Different aspects of landscape, biodiversity and ecosystem services in semi-natural grasslands will also be presented. The post-conference tour will take you to the Vega Archipelago World Heritage Area, which consists of a main island and about 6,500 smaller islands and skerries. On the way to Vega we will stop at a salmon-aquarium and visit a family park in which the four largest predators in Norway (wolverine, lynx, wolf and brown bear) are to be found. Various farms and the research station Tjøtta will also be visited.

The General Meeting is organised by the Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research, The Division of Food Production and Society. The division is a leading national research and competence unit with key research areas in crop production, agronomy, soil science, ecology, cultural landscape management, as well as agricultural economics and social sciences. The division has projects and assignments within plant nutrition management and fertilization strategies, agricultural and sensor technologies, environment and resource economics, impacts of land-use changes in agriculture on biodiversity and other ecosystem services, as well as projects based on systems analysis and whole value-chain perspectives.

We would like to thank all authors for their papers and presentations, numerous reviewers for their valuable remarks, members of the scientific and organising committees, the secretary of EGF and our sponsors.

We hope that the 26^th General Meeting of EGF will stimulate fruitful discussions and networking, and that all participants will have some enjoyable days in Trondheim. Our aim is that the conference will be equally as successful as the General Meeting held in Ås, Norway in 1984.

Lars Nesheim Mats Höglind Peder Lombnæs President Chair Secretary European Grassland Federation Scientific committee Organising committee

Table of contents

Foreword IX

Opening session

Agricultural history of Norway 1945-2015 3

Almås R.

Grassland production in Norway 15

Steinshamn H., Nesheim L. and Bakken A.K.

Theme 1.

Reconnecting ruminants to grasslands

Invited

The role of grassland based production system in the protein security 29 Peyraud J.L. and Peeters A.

Submitted

Reasons for grasslands to last in Western Brittany: an agrarian diagnosis 44 Martel G., Raffray M., Couvreur S., Devienne S. and Petit T.

Identification of feeding systems used on dairy herds in northern Spain: influence on milk

performance 47 Santiago C., Martínez-Fernández A., Jiménez-Calderón J.D. and Vicente F.

Contract rearing on mountain farms reduces the environmental impact of milk through

optimised forage use 50

Marton S.M.R.R, Baumgartner D.U. and Gaillard G.

Feeding self-sufficiency levels in dairy cow and goat farms in Western France: current situation

and ways of improvement 53

Brocard V., Jost J., Rouillé B., Caillaud D., Caillat H. and Bossis N.

Environmental impacts of pasture-based beef production compared to concentrate-based beef

fattening in Switzerland 56

Alig M, Wolff V, Nemecek T and Gaillard G.

The environmental performance of grassland and arable-based dairy farms – a case study from Austria 59

Herndl M., Marton S.M.R.R., Baumgartner D.U., Guggenberger T., Steinwidder A. and Gaillard G.

The effect of social factors on the extent of grazing 62

Van den Pol-Van Dasselaar A., Philipsen A.P. and de Haan M.H.A.

How does grazing duration per year affect the environmental impacts of dairy farming? 65 Baumgartner D.U., Bystricky M., Guggenberger T. and Marton S.M.R.R.

Trampling effects on leys from four seed mixtures – ground cover after grazing 68 Nilsdotter-Linde N., Salomon E., Adolfsson N. and Spörndly E.

Effects of three different pasture allocation techniques on milk yield and quality with mid-

lactation dairy cows 71

Kidane A., Prestløkken E., and Steinshamn H.

Netherlands grass monitoring network 74

Stienezen M.W.J., Remmelink G.J., Van Der Weiden T., Tjoonk L., Nolles J.E., Voskamp-Harkema W. and Van Den Pol-Van Dasselaar A.

Attitudes of German grazing and non-grazing farmers towards the impact of grazing on milk

production 77 Becker T., Kayser M., Tonn B. and Isselstein J.

The application of behaviour sensors and sward measurement to support grazing management 80 Timmer B., Zom R.L.G. , Holshof G., Spithoven M. and Van Reenen C. G.

Effects of grazing previously abandoned grassland on performance in sheep 83 Grøva L., Steinshamn H., Brunberg E. and Lande U.S.

Three possible grazing systems for dairy farms with high stocking rates 86 Holshof G., Galama P.G. and Zom R.L.G.

The effect of perennial ryegrass cultivars and allowance on utilisation, grazing efficiency and

milk production 89

McDonagh J., Gilliland T.J. , McEvoy M., Delaby L. and O’Donovan M.

Posters

Recording grazing time of dairy cows in automatic milking systems by the Lifecorder+® sensor 92 Brocard V., Danilo S. and Allain C.

Detailed analysis of cattle behaviour on a rangeland under free range grazing system 95 Halasz A., Nagy G., Tassi J. and Bajnok M.

Comparison of grazing vs indoor feeding on environmental and economic sustainability of

dairy-systems 98 Schmeer P., Doluschitz R. and Elsaesser M.

Monthly, annual and altitudinal variation of forage production in a mountainous-subalpine

grassland 101 Koutsoukis Ch., Akrida-Demertzi K., Demertzis P.G., Roukos Ch., Voidarou Ch.,

Mantzoutsos I. and Kandrelis S.

An innovative forage system to produce bioclimatic milk 104 Novak S., Audebert G., Chargelègue F. and Emile J.C.

Role of pasture-based diet in modulating some meat nutritional traits of young Sarda bulls 107 Acciaro M., Decandia M., Sitzia M., Manca C., Giovanetti V., Rassu S.P.G., Leiber F.,

Addis M., Fiori M. and Molle G.

Success of Brachypodium pinnatum in oligotrophic grasslands: seasonal allocation patterns of

nutrients and metals 110

Canals R.M., Durán M., San Emeterio L. and Múgica L.

Materials to prevent trampling damage on pasture areas subjected to high dairy cow traffic 113 Salomon E. and Spörndly E.

Protein productivity and extractability of legume and grass species during spring growth 116 Solati Z., Jørgensen U. and Søegaard K.

Drawing pathways of cattle farms to identify the factors of grassland maintenance in the long term 119 Petit T., Couvreur S. and Martel G.

Local spatio-temporal dynamics of grassland maintenance between 2000 and 2010 in French

cattle areas 122

Couvreur S., Defois J., Petit T. and Ben Arfa N.

Grazing practices, perception and expectations of Walloon dairy farmers 125 Lessire F., Bernard M., Reding R., Lioy R., Kristensen T., Reuter W., Elias E. and Dufrasne I.

Effects of grassland and grazing management on fatty acid intake and milk – a review 128 Elgersma A.

BEHARUM project: use of ICT to monitor feeding behaviour in grazing ruminants 131 Decandia M., Giovanetti V., Acciaro M., Mameli M., Molle G., Cabiddu A., Manca C.,

Cossu R., Serra M.G., Dimauro C. and Rassu S.P.G.

An analysis of dairy farming and its evolution in Central Switzerland from 2010 to 2014 134 Hofstetter P., Haas Th., Sutter F., Albisser G. and Höltschi M.

Milk production and cow behaviour in an automatic milking system with morning and evening

pasture access 137

Kismul H., Eriksson T., Höglind M., Næss G., Spörndly E.

I know what you fed last summer – using ¹³C to retrospectively analyse cattle diets 140 Hammes V., Nüsse O., Isselstein J. and Kayser M.

Relationships between milk trans-fatty acids profile and diet fed to cows in Galician (NW

Spain) dairy farms 143

Flores-Calvete G., Dagnac T., Resch-Zafra C., Pereira-Crespo S., Botana A., Veiga M., Agruña M.J., González-González L., Barreal M. , Lorenzana-Fernández R. and Fernández-Lorenzo B.

Key-points for successful pasture-based lamb production observed in Western Sweden 146 Arnesson A., Carlsson A. and Helander C.

Theme 2.

Forage and pasture quality evaluation

Invited

Forage quality evaluation – current trends and future prospects 151 Südekum K.-H., Krizsan S.J. and Gerlach K.

Sensing grassland quantity and quality – new technologies in the field and laboratory 159 Wachendorf M. and Dale L.M.

Submitted

Effect of wilting and silage additives on silage quality of lucerne, red clover and legume-grass

mixtures 170 Weiβ K. and Kalzendorf C.

Dry matter losses and hygienic quality of grass silage inoculated with different lactic acid

bacteria strains 173

Vrotniakiene V. and Jatkauskas J.

Effect of mower/conditioner type during legume or grass harvesting on silage quality 176 Fychan R., Leemans D.K., Scott M.B., Theobald V.J., Sanderson R. and Marley C.L.

Hay sampling methods affect the results of forage analyses 179

Bodner A., Prünster T., Reiterer R. and Peratoner G.

Effect of dry matter content and feeding level on intake and organic matter digestibility of

perennial ryegrass offered to sheep 182

Garry B., Baumont R., Boland T.M., O’Donovan M. and Lewis E.

Cereal-legume mixtures: forage quality under Mediterranean conditions 185 Porqueddu C., Melis R.A.M. and Julier B.

Nitrogen fertilisation effects on multi-species and Lolium perenne yields and composition

under silage management 188

Moloney T., Sheridan H., O’Riordan E.G. and O’Kiely P.

Widening the harvest window with contrasting grass-clover mixtures 191 Nilsdotter-Linde N., Halling M.A. and Jansson J.

The potential of α-linolenic acid to predict herbage quality 194

Bracher A. and Mosimann E.

Use of near infrared reflectance spectroscopy for the determination of silica content in tall fescue 197 Cougnon M., Van Waes C., Struyf E., Schoelynck J., Reheul D.

‘WiltExpert’ – a model for on-farm prediction of grass wilting time from mowing to ensiling

dry matter content 200

Pickert J., Hoffmann T., Herrmann A., Thaysen J., Weise G. and Wellenbrock K.-H.

webGRAS: a web application to estimate the potential forage quality of mountain permanent meadows 203

Peratoner G., Romano G., Schaumberger A., Piepho H.-P., Resch R. and Bodner A.

The in-situ ruminal degradation characteristics of a perennial ryegrass and mixed perennial

ryegrass and white clover swards 206

Egan M., Hennessy D. and Lewis E.

Prediction of the in vivo organic matter digestibility of cereal-legume intercrops silages 210 Maxin G., Arrigo Y., Dozias D., Andueza D., Le Morvan A., Baumont R. and Delaby L.

Comparison of protein degradation in the rumen measured in situ and in vivo 213 Johansen M. and Weisbjerg M.R.

Posters

Assessments of the values of multi-species grassland for grazing, silage and hay production 216 Taugourdeau S., Julien L., Capron J.M., Barradas A. , Messad S. and Huguenin J.

Effects of inoculant on the fermentation, microbial composition and aerobic stability of whole

crop maize ensiled in big tube 219

Jatkauskas J. and Vrotniakiene V.

Ensilability of different mixtures of legumes and grasses 222

Wyss U., Frick R. and Mosimann E.

Effects of harvest delay on nutritive value in four grass and four legume species in binary mixtures 225 Elgersma A. and Søegaard K.

The feed tables developed by INRA for forage quality evaluation: comparison with CVB and

NorFor values 229

Baumont R., Maxin G. and Nozière P.

Leaf:stem ratio as a tool to estimate field losses 232

Johansen M., Søegaard K. and Weisbjerg M.R.

Effects of heifers and sheep grazing on herbage production on a previously abandoned grassland 235 Steinshamn H., Adler S.A., Grøva L. and Lande U.S.

Showcase Hardenberg (NL): effect of variable manure rate applications on grass yields 238 Nysten S.W.P., Westerdijk C.E., Kocks C.G. and Kempenaar C.

Nutritive and fermentative quality and stability over time of silages made with winter forage

legumes 242 Baizán S., Vicente F., Soldado A., Modroño S. and Martínez-Fernández A.

Influence of nitrogen fertilization on the crude protein fractions of grassland forage 245 Gierus M., Pötsch E.M. and Weichselbaum F.

Balanced phosphorus fertilization on grassland in a mixed grazing and mowing system; results

after 18 years 248

Van Middelkoop J.C., Ehlert P.A.I. and Regelink I.

Changes in herbage nutrient content by dose and type of organic fertilizer 251 Štýbnarová M., Hradilová M., Látal O., Pozdíšek J., Mičová P. and Fiala K.

Phytoestrogen concentration in red clover (Trifolium pratense L.) varieties 254 Bernes G., Höjer A. and Gustavsson A.M.

Assessment of forage quality in diverse pastures by sensing spectral reflection and height of swards 257 Fricke T., Safari H. and Wachendorf M.

Silage qualities in the mountain area – a field survey 260

Wyss U., Dettling T. and Reidy B.

Evaluation of fifteen leguminous and non-leguminous forage species to improve forage quality

of temporary grasslands in northern Germany 263

Hamacher M., Loges R. and Taube F.

The effect of previous contrasting grazing intensity on the content of nutrients in pasture forage 266 Pavlů K., Homolka P. and Hejcman M. and Pavlů V.

The effect of ensiling on variety rank of maize silage 269

Swanckaert J., Pannecoucque J., Van Waes J., Haesaert G. and Reheul D.

Breeding for better cell wall digestibility in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) 272 Ghesquiere A., Baert J., Van Parijs F. and Muylle H.

Influence of early cutting dates on forage yield and quality of alpine pastures 275 Gregis B. and Reidy B.

Dry matter intake and in vivo digestibility of different cereal-legume intercrops mixtures in sheep 278 Maxin G., Dozias D., Andueza D., Emile J.C., Le Morvan A. and Delaby L.

Wavy hair-grass (Avenella flexuosa) – yield, regrowth and feed quality 281 Todnem J. and Lunnan T.

Net replacement film in round bale ensiling of ley crops 284

Spörndly R. and Nylund R.

Modelling gas production from silage fermentation 287

Daniel J.L.P., Junges D., Santos M.C., Jobim C.C. and Nussio L.G.

Optimization of the harvesting time of pure lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) swards in Finland 290 Mäkiniemi K, Niskanen M and Seppänen M

Variability of forage quality between and within three maturity groups of Lolium perenne L.

during the first growth 293

Poetsch E.M., Resch R. and Krautzer B.

Alkaloid content variability in Lolium perenne infected with Epichloë endophytes in natural

grasslands 296 Soto-Barajas M.C., Zabalgogeazcoa I., Alvarez Pascua A. and Vazquez-de-Aldana B.R.

Morphological and productive aspects of sorghum intercropped with legumes 299 Da Silva M.S.J., Jobim C.C., Emile J.C., Audebert G. and Novak S.

Fatty acid, carotenoid and vitamin-E contents of Plantago lanceolata at different maturity stages 302 González L., Pereira-Crespo S., Dagnac T., Resch-Zafra C., Fernández-Lorenzo B.,

Botana A., Veiga M., Aguión A. and Flores-Calvete G.

Statistical models to estimate the potential forage quality of permanent meadows at the first cut 305 Romano G., Piepho H.-P., Schaumberger A., Bodner A. and Peratoner G.

Effects of yeast inoculation and air exposure on the nutritive value of corn silages 308 Salvo P.A.R., Daniel J.L.P., Santos M.C., Morais G., Schonell E.P. and Nussio L.G.

Suitability of different methods to describe the botanical composition for predicting forage

quality of permanent meadows at the first cut 311

Peratoner G., Romano G., Piepho H.-P., Bodner A., Schaumberger A., Resch R.

and Pötsch E.M.

Breeding of cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata L.) with improved forage quality 314 Rancane S., Berzins P., Stesele V. and Jansons A.

Yield and composition changes of temporary and permanent pasture 317 Stoycheva I., Kirilov A., Naydenova Y. and Katova A.

Impact of long-term fertilization on crude protein fractions of lucerne forage in the first cut 320 Hakl J., Kunzová E. and Konečná J

Effects of harvesting red clover/ryegrass at different stage of maturity on forage yield and quality 323 Fychan R., Sanderson R and Marley C.L.

Effects of sainfoin on silage protein when ensiled in combination with either ryegrass or lucerne 326 Fychan R., Leemans D.K., Sanderson R. and Marley C.L.

Productivity and quality of multicomponent grass swards on three soil types 329 Adamovics A. and Gutmane I.

Effect of fertilization on yield on permanent grasslands in Serbia 332 Vučković S., Prodanović S., Simić A., Savić M. and Pajčin Đ.

Ground truthing – Evaluation of different methods for estimating yields of grass fields in Norway 335 Mølmann J.A.B., Jørgensen M., Ancin Murguzur F.J. and Taff G.

Theme 3.

Forage potential in ruminant nutrition

Invited

Improving utilisation of forage protein in ruminant production by crop and feed management 340 Huhtanen P. and Broderick G.

Grazed grass in the dairy cow diet – how this can be achieved better! 350 O’ Donovan M. and Delaby L.

Submitted

Characterisation of protein and fibre in pulp after biorefining of red clover and perennial ryegrass 366 Damborg V.K., Stødkilde L., Jensen S.K. and Weisbjerg M.R.

Upgrading of essential amino acids in plants through cattle for higher nutritional value for humans 369 Patel M., Sonesson U. and Hessle A.

Protein quality of lucerne – a comparison to red clover and effects of wilting and ensiling 372 Nadeau E., Hallin O., Richardt W. and Jansson J.

Comparison of pasture based feeding systems and a total mixed ration feeding system on dairy

cow milk production 376

McAuliffe S., Gilliland T.J Egan M. and Hennessy D.

Milk production potential of regrowth grass silages 379

Sairanen A., Palmio A. and Rinne M.

The economics of grass and red clover silage yield and quality in organic dairy system 382 Flaten O., Bakken A.K., Lindås A. and Steinshamn H.

Effects of silage additives and aerobic exposure before feeding on feed intake and growth of ewe lambs 385

Dønnem I. and Randby Å.T.

The effect of delayed fertilizer N application on root biomass and N uptake of Lolium perenne 388 De Boer H.C., Deru J.G.C., Hoekstra N.J. and Van Eekeren N.

Including bioactive legumes in grass silage to improve productivity and reduce pollutant emissions 391 Niderkorn V., Copani G. and Ginane C.

Meta-analysis of the impact of white clover inclusion on milk production of grazing dairy cows 394 Dineen M. , Delaby L., Gilliland T. and McCarthy B.

The effect of grazing multispecies swards on lamb performance and herbage production 397 Grace C., Boland T.M., Fritch R., Sheridan H. and Lynch M.B.

Evaluation of perennial ryegrass variety performance on Irish farms 400 Byrne N., Berry D.P., Geogehgan A., O’Leary M., Gilliland T.J. and O’Donovan M.

Early lactation pasture allowance and duration: the effect on yield of milk fat and protein 403 Kennedy E., Delaby L., Roche J., Horan B. and Lewis E.

Effects of feeding red clover compared to ryegrass silage to growing cattle out-wintered on kale 406 Marley C.L., Powell H.G., Theobald V.J., Davies J.W., Scollan N.D., Sanderson R. and

Fychan R.

The Moorepark grass growth model: application in grazing systems 409 Ruelle E. and Delaby L.

Effect of ewe prolificacy potential as dictated by sire breed and stocking rate on grass utilisation

and lamb carcass output 412

Earle E., McHugh N., Boland T.M. and Creighton P.

The timing of access to pasture affects ingestive behaviour and milk yield of dairy ewes 415 Molle G., Decandia M., Giovanetti V., Manca C., Acciaro M., Epifani G., Salis L.,

Cabiddu A., Cannas A. and Sitzia M.

Posters

Sainfoin accessions exhibit a marked potential for optimisation of proanthocyanidins in the forage 418 Malisch C.S., Suter D., Salminen J.P., Studer B. and Lüscher A.

The effects of legume-grass inoculation on silage fermentation, aerobic stability and milk yield 421 Jatkauskas J. and Vrotniakiene V.

Diet composition of grazing dairy cows with and without concentrate supplementation using

different markers 424

Schori F., Heublein C., Südekum K.-H. , Gill F.L. and Dohme-Meier F.

Impact of N fertilisation and legume sowing density on cereals – peas intercropping performances 427 Stilmant D., Seutin Y., Clément C., Pitchugina E, Planchon V. and Jamar D.

Rejection of grass around dung pats; influence of smell, taste or both? 430 Verwer C., Van Schooten H., Philipsen B., Lennsinck F., Van Houwelingen K. and

Van Eekeren N.

Protein efficiency in grazing dairy cows supplemented with partial mixed rations with or

without legumes 433

Jiménez-Calderón J.D., Martínez-Fernández A. and Vicente F.

Digestibility and degradability of seaweed protein in ruminants 436 Lind V., Tayyab U., Novoa-Garrido M., Roleda M.Y. and Weisbjerg M.R.

Five successful strategies for grazing in combination with automatic milking 439 Philipsen A.P., Cornelissen J.M.R. and Van den Pol-Van Dasselaar A.

Fatty acids routed from fresh grass to milk influence δ¹³C in milk 442 Auerswald K., Schäufele R. and Bellof G.

Maize yield and composition affected by rate and timing of nitrogen fertiliser and mulch type 445 Corcoran E.M., O’Kiely P._, Gilland T.J._, Burke J.I. and Lynch M.B.

Effect of different N and P levels on the forage yield and some yield characteristics of

Pennisetum hybridum 448 Geren H. and Yaman M.

Yield and silage characteristics of Pennisetum hybridum as affected by plant densities 451 Geren H., Kavut Y.T. and Ünlü H.B.

Forage yield and nutritional values of Pennisetum purpureum as affected by cutting height 454 Geren H., Simić A. and Dželetović Z.

Effect of cutting intervals on the forage yield and some yield characteristics of Napier grass 457 Geren H., Kavut Y.T., Unlu H.B. and Simić A.

How much potassium for silage maize on light sandy soils? 460

Herrmann A., Schröder F., Kluβ C., Lausen P., Techow E., Feger G. and Taube F.

Yields and feed value of different fodder galega-grass mixtures 464 Meripõld H., Tamm U., Tamm S., Võsa T. and Edesi L.

Effects of inoculation with homolactic bacteria on losses and quality of wheat silage in different

layers in bunker-silo 467

Jobim C.C., Oliveira M.R., Daniel J.L. and Neumann M.

Effect of excreta patches on biomass productivity and grazing selectivity in low-input pastures 470 Scheile T., Isselstein J. and Tonn B.

Variation of digestibility in Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam. var. italicum Beck) 473 Baert J., Ghesquiere A. and Van Waes C.

Inclusion of Arachis pintoi in different levels on diets based on dwarf elephant grass 476 Dall-Orsoletta A.C., Reiter T., Kozloski G.V., Niderkorn V. and Ribeiro-Filho H.M.N.

Intake and performance of ewes and lambs fed grass-clover silage treated with chemical additives 479 Nadeau E. and Arnesson A.

Towards improved potassium fertiliser recommendation for silage maize in the Netherlands 482 Bussink D.W., Van Schooten H., Van Middelkoop J.C. , Holshof G. and Doppenberg G.

Impact of inoculation with homofermentative bacteria on the aerobic stability of wheat silage

stored in farm-scale bunker-silos 486

Oliveira M.R., Daniel J.L.P., Neumann M. and Jobim C.C.

Modelling the surface of a paddock affected by urine and faeces deposition during grazing by

dairy cows 489

Ruelle E., Hennessy D., Paillette C. and Delaby L.

The role of fungal diseases in the accumulation of dead tissue in timothy and meadow fescue swards 492 Kykkänen S., Virkajärvi P., Hyrkäs M. and Parikka P.

Early lactation pasture allowance and duration: the effect on bodyweight and body condition

score in cows 495

Kennedy E., Delaby L., Roche J., Horan B. and Lewis E.

The development of yield and digestibility of the third cut of grass silage in Finland 498 Hyrkäs M., Sairanen A., Virkajärvi P., Toivakka M. and Suomela R.

Timing of different non-chemical control strategies of narrow-leaved ragwort (Senecio

inaequidens) in grassland 501

Pietrogiovanna M., Spechtenhauser R., Gluderer P.M., Broll M. and Peratoner G.

The relation between stocking rate, supplementary feed and grazing hours on grass intake as

assessed by model simulations 504

Holshof G., Philipsen A.P. and Van den Pol-Van Dasselaar A.

Effects of legume establishment by slot-seeding on dry matter and protein yield 507 Elsaesser M., Engel S. and Thumm U.

Effect of seeding rate and ryegrass type on sward tiller density and productivity under

simulated grazing 510

Byrne N., O’Donovan M., Delaby L., and Gilliland T.J.

Cattle intake of grass fibres preserved with different additives 513 Durksz D., Klop A., Zonderland J. and Koopmans B.

Utilising common vetch (Vicia sativa) as a source of forage protein for grazing ewes 516 Marley C.L., Theobald V.J., Fychan R., Thomas B., Gethin A., Scott M.B., Sanderson R. and McCalman H.M.

Direct sowing of red clover by three technologies 519

Skládanka J., Kohoutek A., Odstrčilová V., Houdek I. and Horký P.

Theme 4.

Synergies between ecosystem services, biodiversity and agricultural production in grasslands

Invited

Ecosystem service indicators for grasslands in relation to ecoclimatic regions and land use systems 524 Plantureux S., Bernués A., Huguenin-Elie O., Hovstad K., Isselstein J., McCracken D.,

Therond O. and Vackar D.

Submitted

Linkages between biodiversity and ecosystem services in grazed and abandoned semi-natural

grasslands? 548 Wehn S., Johansen L. and Hovstad K.A.

Effects of grazed plant groups in Norwegian alpine rangelands on milk production and quality parameters 551

Sickel H., Abrahamsen R.K., Eldegard K., Lunnan T., Norderhaug A., Ohlson M., Sickel M., Steenhuisen F. and Torp T.

A French classification of permanent grasslands at national level to evaluate their forage and

environmental services 554

Michaud A. , Plantureux S., Pottier E. and Baumont R.

Diversity promotes production of ryegrass-clover leys through inclusion of competitive forb

species 557 Cong W-F., Søegaard K. and Eriksen J.

Successional change after grassland abandonment 560

Aune S. and Hovstad K.A.

Effect of long-term intensive and extensive grazing on plant species composition 563 Pavlů V., Pavlů L., Gaisler J., Supek S., Hujerová R., Hejcman M. and Ludviková V.

How can livestock farmers contribute to maintaining and increasing ecological networks? 567 Couvreur S, Bertier M, Pain G, Pithon J, Manoli C and Thareau B

Tree-livestock interaction promotes nutrient shift and influences plant species richness in orchards 570 Schmiedgen A., Schmitz A., López-Sánchez A., Roig S. and Isselstein J

Environmentally and economically sustainable dairy and beef production in Sweden 573 Hessle A., Bertilsson J., Stenberg B., Kumm K.-I. and Sonesson U.

Nitrogen fixation in red clover grown in multi-species mixtures with ryegrass, chicory, plantain

and caraway 576

Dhamala N.R., Rasmussen J., Carlsson G., Søegaard K. and Eriksen J.

Variation of legume contents and symbiotic nitrogen fixation under intensive grazing 579 Auerswald K., Hoffmann R. and Schnyder H.

Upscaling soil carbon and nutrient losses from dairy farms to regional level 582 Hanegraaf M.C., Den Boer D.J., Doppenberg G.J.. and Korevaar H.

Phytoextraction of soil phosphorus by grass-clover as a synergy between agriculture and nature restoration 585

Timmermans B.G.H. and Van Eekeren N.

Patch-dependent herbage growth drives paddock productivity in a long-term extensive grazing system 588

Ebeling D., Tonn B. and Isselstein J.

High functional dispersion of forage mixtures suppresses weeds in intensively managed

temperate grassland 591

Suter M., Hofer D. and Lüscher A.

Posters

Assessment of soil structure and plant root patterns by means of X-ray micro computed

tomography in grassland sites 594

Kuka K., Illerhaus B. and Joschko M.

The influence of Lupinus polyphyllus Lindl. on energetic conversion parameters of plant

biomass from semi-natural grasslands 597

Hensgen F. and Wachendorf M.

Valorising forage resources and conserving ecosystem services in marginal pastures 600 Zehnder T., Schneider M.K., Berard J., Kreuzer M. and Lüscher A.

The first pillar of the new CAP – implications for low input grasslands 603 Luick R. and Roeder N.

Soil acidity effect on agrocenoses with perennial grasses 606

Tomchuk D., Skuodienė R. and Aleinikovienė J.

Mixtures provided similar benefits to nitrogen yield under grazing and under mowing 609 Huguenin-Elie O., Husse S., Buchmann N. and Lüscher A.

Maintaining grasslands on cattle farms: the role of local social dynamics 612 Sigwalt A., Jacquerie V. , and Couvreur S.

Implications for conservation management of hay meadows; cutting dates 615 Wehn S. and Johansen L.

The North Wyke Farm Platform: Data Portal 618

Harris P., Sint H.M., Griffith B.A., Hawkins J.M.B., Evans J., Orr R.J. and Lee M.R.F.

Evaluating ecosystem services in the life cycle assessment of grassland-based dairy systems 621 Nemecek T., Jeanneret P., Oberholzer H.-R., Schüpbach B., Roesch A., Alig M., Hofstetter P.

and Reidy B.

Pasture growth, structure and morphology during winter of diploid and tetraploid perennial

ryegrass with or without white clover 624

Guy C., Gilliland T.J., Coughlan F., Hennessy D. and McCarthy B.

The 2014-20 CAP pillar 2 and conservation objectives – is there policy coherence for semi-

natural grasslands? 627

Luick R., Jedicke E. and Schoof N.

Influence of cutting date on botanical composition and yield of species-rich lowland meadows

in south Germany 630

Thumm U., Raufer B., Seither M. and Elsäβer M.

Trade-offs between ecosystem services in managed and abandoned semi-natural grasslands 633 Johansen L., Wehn S., Taugourdeau S. and Hovstad K.A.

The effect of selected soil and climate parameters on multiple ecosystem services from

abandoned and managed semi-natural grasslands 636

Johansen L., Wehn S. and Taugourdeau S.

Effect of different N, P, K fertilisation on plant species composition and species richness in an

alluvial meadow 639

Pavlů L., Poetsch E.M., Pavlů V., Hejcman M., Hujerová R. and Gaisler J.

Grazer effects on plant species richness and tree debarking within orchard pastures 642 Schmitz A., López-Sánchez A., Roig S. and Isselstein J.

Persistence of legumes-based grasslands: some features for synergy between ecosystem services 645 Vertès F., Gastal F., Delaby L., Pierre P. and Pottier E.

Ploughing down and reseeding grassland on three dates in autumn: effect on crop yield and

nitrate nitrogen concentration in the soil 648

De Vliegher A.

Ploughing down and reseeding grassland in April or at the end of May after one cut: effects on

crop yield and nitrate nitrogen concentration in the soil 651

De Vliegher A.

Measuring root systems in forage legumes: a comparison of two systems 654 Collins R.P., Lowe M.J., Marshall A.H., Boyle R. and Humphreys M.W.

Impact of ecological factors on the flooded meadow phytocoenosis structure and productivity 657 Skuodienė R., Nekrošienė R., Katutis K., Repšienė R. and Šiaudinis G.

Does the variety of Lolium perenne affect the performance of binary and multi-species mixtures? 660 Heshmati S., Tonn B. and Isselstein J.

Aboveground-belowground biodiversity linkages in dairy sheep systems with different grazing regimes 663

Mandaluniz N., Epelde L., Pascual A., Arranz J., Albizu I., Mendarte S., Blanco F., Garbisu C. and Ruiz R.

Litter decomposition on a heterogeneous cattle pasture is influenced by sward structure 666 Tonn B., Grabow I., Krohne I., Potthoff M. and Isselstein J.

Phytodiversity in nutrient-poor heathlands and grasslands: how important are soil chemical

factors? 669 Riesch F., Stroh H. G., Tonn B. and Isselstein J.

Attractiveness of main sward types to suckler cows grazing on heterogeneous fen grassland 672 Pickert J. and Müller J.

Analysis of plant communities growing in small wetland areas in meadows 675 Skrzyczyńska J., Gładzka A., Ługowska M. and Jankowska J.

Alternative management for oligotrophic grassland conservation in the Apuseni Mountains 678 Balázsi Á., Păcurar F., Rotar I. and Vidican R.

The effects of mulching and mineral fertilizers on oligotrophic grasslands’ floristic composition 681 Rotar I., Păcurar F., Balázsi Á. and Vidican R.

Grassland: quantification of the environmental services provision 684 Roeder N., Laggner B., Osterburg B. and Schmidt T.G.

Leaf temperature as a proxy for competition in phytodiverse agricultural grassland 687 Schick K., Müller J. and Wrage-Mönnig N.

The effect of soil P on legume distribution and biodiversity on small spatial scales 690 Mahnke B., Müller J. and Wrage-Mönnig N.

Traditional to commercial use of seaweeds: cross-disciplinary perspectives in using local protein

sources in Arctic sheep husbandry 693

Bay-Larsen I., Vestrum I.K., Lind V., Risvoll C., Novoa-Garrido M. and Roleda M.Y.

Management and previous sward composition influence the potential for establishing species-

rich grassland 696

Seither M. and Elsaesser M.

Effect of management practice on floristic composition of lowland permanent grasslands 699 Krstic D., Vujic S., Cupina B., Eric P., Cabilovski R., Manojlovic M. and Lombnaes P.

Carbon partitioning to roots of maize hybrids differing in maturity group 702 Komainda M., Taube F., Kluβ C. and Herrmann A.

Short-term effects of cutting frequency and organic fertilizer on species composition in semi-

natural meadows 705

Angeringer W., Karrer G., Starz W., Pfister R. and Rohrer H.

Flower-rich habitat formation for wild pollinators in intensive agriculture lands 708 Sarunaite L., Arlauskiene A., Slepetys J., Jablonskyte-Rasce D. and Kadziuliene Z.

Root mass of differentially defoliated patches on a long-term grazing experiment 711 Köhler J., Ebeling D., Tonn B. and Isselstein J.

Impact of the sheep grazing season on xerothermic grassland sward utilisation 714 Kulik M., Warda M., Gruszecki T.M., Junkuszew A., Bojar W. and Tatarczak M.

Foraging activity of red deer population on restored mid-forest meadows 717 Daszkiewicz J. and Goliński P.

A common shoot developmental framework for perennial legume species with contrasting

morphogenesis 720 Faverjon L., Escobar-Gutiérrez A.J. and Louarn G.

The importance of spring and autumn grazing for seedling establishment in semi-natural grasslands 723 Hovstad K.A.

The impact of soil-protecting technologies on soil erosion with maize sown on arable land and grassland 726

Kohoutek A., Odstrčilová V., Nerušil P., Němcová P., Vopravil J., Kincl D., Jurka M. and Skládanka J.

Theme 5.

Grassland in a changing climate – perspectives on mitigation and adaption

Invited

Role of European grasslands in the mitigation of climate change – potential, constraints and

research challenges 730

Smith P., Merbold L. and Van den Pol-Van Dasselaar A.

Climate challenges and opportunities in northern and southern Europe – role of management and exploitation of plant traits in the adaptation of grasslands 746

Ergon Å., Volaire F._, Korhonen P., Virkajärvi P., Seddaiu G., Jørgensen M., Bellocchi G._, Østrem L., Reheul D. and Baert J.

Submitted

Priorities for modelling European grasslands under climate change 759 Kipling R.P., Virkajärvi P., Breitsameter L. and Bellocchi G.

Intercomparison of models for simulating timothy yield in Northern countries 762 Korhonen P., Palosuo T., Höglind M., Persson T., Van Oijen M., Jégo G., Virkajärvi P.,

Bélanger G. and Gustavsson A.M.

Nitrogen is a key indicator for sustainable use of European grasslands 765 Van der Hoek K.W.

Fertilizing strategy and spreading technology for cattle slurry – grass yield and ammonia emissions 768 Salomon E., Rodhe L. and Sundberg M.

Greenhouse gas emissions and agronomic feasibility for forage production on inverted peat soil 771 Hansen S., Rivedal S., Øpstad S., Heggset S., Deelstra J. and Dörsch P.

Effects of tractor traffic on soil compaction and grassland yield 774 Rivedal S., Riley H., Lunnan T. and Sturite I.

Rooting of permanent grassland in relation to build-up of soil organic matter for climate

mitigation 777 Iepema G.L., Deru J.G.C., Hoekstra N.J. and Van Eekeren N.

Analysis of changing climate impact on timothy productivity in two contrasting geographical

locations 780 Goliński P., Jørgensen M., Czerwiński M., Golińska B., Mølmann J. and Taff G.

The degree of perenniality of timothy (Phleum pratense L.) accessions is related to geographic

origin 783 Jokela V. and Seppänen M.M.

Incidence of root pathogens associated to clover root rot in Sweden 786 Almquist C., Stoltz E. and Wallenhammar A.-C.

Genome-wide allelic shifts in forage crops when grown at five diverse locations across Norway 789 Kovi M.R., Byrne S., Østrem L., Ergon Å., Marum P., Asp T. and Rognli O.A.

Impacts of spring and summer droughts on yield and forage quality of three grasslands 792 Meisser M., Deléglise C., Signarbieux C., Vitra A., Mosimann E. and Buttler A.

Variability in germination under extreme temperatures of two perennial pasture legumes 796 Ahmed L.Q., Durand J.L. and Escobar-Gutiérrez A.J.

Biofuel production from European grassland and impact on the livestock sector 799 Leclère D., Havlík P., Valin H. and Frank S.

Posters

Climate-smart strategies to safeguard persistency and achieve sustainable grassland production 802 Humphreys M, Loka D, Gwynn-Jones D, Scullion J, Doonan J, Gasior D, Harper J, Farrell M, Kingston-Smith A, Dodd R, Chadwick D, Hill P, Mills G, Hayes F, Robinson D and Jones D

Life-Dairyclim, European project aiming to mitigate methane emissions and carbon footprint

of dairy cows 805

Lessire F., Bernard M., Reding R., Lioy R., Kristensen T., Reuter W., Elias E. and Dufrasne I.

Effect of cutting frequency on above- and belowground biomass production of soft rush

(Juncus effusus) and compact rush (J. conglomeratus) 808 Kaczmarek-Derda W., Østrem L., Myromslien M., Brandsæter L.O. and Netland J.

Red clover traits under selection in mixtures with grasses versus pure stands 811 Ergon Å. and Bakken A.K.

Impact of waterlogging under different temperatures on hardening and freezing tolerance of

timothy (Phleum pratense) 814 Jørgensen M., Mølmann J. and Taff G.

Satellite data for monitoring of European grasslands – new tool for adaptation to climate change 817 Dabrowska-Zielinska K., Goliński P., Jørgensen M., Mølmann J. , Taff G., Twardy S.,

Tomaszewska M. , Golińska B., Budzynska M., Gatkowska M. and Kopacz M.

The effects of legume content and drought on symbiotic N₂ fixation and herbage nitrogen yield 820 Hoekstra N.J., Finn J.A. and Lüscher A.

Climatic adaptation of species and varieties of grass and clover in the West Nordic countries 823 Thorvaldsson G., Østrem L., Öhlund L., Sveinsson T., Dalmannsdottir S., Djurhuus R.,

Høegh K. and Kristjansdottir T.A.

Forage crop yield and nutritive value under climate change in Canada 826 Thivierge M.-N., Jégo G. , Bélanger G. , Bertrand A. , Tremblay G.F. , Baron V. , Rotz C.A.

and Qian B.

Searching for the ideal cover crop in forage maize: undersown tall fescue versus post-harvest

sown Italian ryegrass 829

Cougnon M., Claerhout S., De Frenne P., De Cauwer B. and Reheul D.

Varying growth behavior of Lolium perenne L. clones under drought conditions and after

rewatering 832 Westermeier P. and Hartmann S.

Changes in freezing tolerance and photosystem II acclimation mechanisms within a Lolium

perenne × Festuca pratensis substitution series 835

Gasior D., Harper J., Thomas A., James C., Armstead I. and Humphreys M.W.

The North Wyke Farm Platform: the impact of ploughing, cultivations and reseeding on

emissions of CO₂ and N₂O 838

Cardenas L.M., Dunn R.M., Misselbrook T.H., Harris P., Broccolo F., Orr R.J. and Lee M.R.F.

A tannin extract to mitigate methane emissions in dairy cows grazing on tropical pasture 841 Alves T.P., Dall-Orsoletta A.C., Mibach M., Biasiolo R and Ribeiro-Filho H.M.N.

Effect of different renovation and weed management strategies on botanical composition and

forage yield in perennial leys 844

Tørresen K.S., Bakken A.K., Jørgensen M. and Höglind M.

Climate influence on an extensive managed forest steppe grassland from Romania 847 Sărăţeanu V., Laieş D.G., Durău C.C. and Cotuna O.

Cereal cover crops in interaction with undersown red clover seed production at prolonged

growing season 850

Bender A., Aavola R. and Tamm S.

Semi-natural grasslands phenological evolution in western Switzerland over 21 years 853 Vuffray Z., Deléglise C., Amaudruz M., Jeangros B., Mosimann E. and Meisser M.

Biomass yield and energy content of grass from urban roadside verges 856 Piepenschneider M., Hensgen F. and Wachendorf M.

Spatial and temporal synchronicity in Norwegian lamb weaning weights 859 Steinheim G., Ådnøy T., Klemetsdal G., Jørgensen N.H. and Holand Ø.

Farming and research – working together to develop grassland varieties resilient to water stress

to mitigate and adapt to climate change 862

McCalman H.M., Marley C.L., Crotty F.V., Scollan N.D. and Humphreys M.

Ash and mineral content of grasses for combustion 865

Adamovics A.

New cultivars needed to ensure survival of perennial ryegrass across the northern region 868 Helgadóttir Á., Marum P., Persson C., Isolathi M., Aavola R. and Rognli O.A.

Integrated effects of higher temperatures, acid substrate and heavy metals on red clover 871 Slepetys J., Slepetiene A. and Kadziulienė Z.

Contribution to C-sequestration by leys in arable rotation during a 60 year long-term trial in

southeast Norway 874

Bleken M.A.

Annual yields of intensively managed grassland mixtures only slightly affected by experimental

drought events 877

Hofer D., Suter M., Haughey E., Finn J.A. and Lüscher A.

Keyword index 881

Authors index 890

Opening session

Agricultural history of Norway 1945-2015

Almås R.

Center for Rural Research, 7491 Trondheim, Norway; reidar.almas@bygdeforskning.no

Abstract

In Norway, a country with just 3% arable land and a long winter, you should not find a thriving agricultural production all over the country. To explore this agricultural puzzle, I will focus on the political and institutional development since 1945. Who were the important actors, how did they argue and how did they act? What groups were mobilised, what organisations have been active and what institutions have been built? It may be argued that the modernisation process went on more or less in the same way in all the advanced economies. However, there are huge differences in natural resources, farm structure, and political culture. Why is Norwegian agricultural history interesting for an international audience?

Because the interplay between the land and the people took on quite distinctive traits here, which later became part of what might be called the Norwegian model. There are two answers to our main questions, why Norwegian farming has been thriving since 1945, in spite of its competitive disadvantages: (1) Farmers have been able to organise strong production and marketing co-operatives in order to gain more value added out of food production. (2) The Norwegian food markets have been strictly regulated, built on the regulation regime founded on a political compromise dating back to the 1930s.

Keywords: Norwegian agricultural history, farm policy, productivist agriculture, agricultural co- operatives, cultural landscape, Norwegian model

Introduction

Norway has slightly above 5 million inhabitants and 40,558 registered self-employed farmers. Norwegian agriculture consists mainly of family farms and the main farm size is 23 hectares of operated farm land.

Agricultural employment constitutes around 2% of the country`s total workforce. How can it be, that in a country with little arable land, a low sun and a long winter, you find a gorgeous cultural landscape, agricultural production that is prevalent all over the country and rural people that seem to fare well?

Compare this picture to some other countries in the world where you find poverty in rural areas created for wealth. There may be richer agricultural resources than in Norway, but they are less developed and less shared. Can the explanation be found at the organisational-institutional level? Can it be that the agricultural population of Norway has organised, compromised, and allied themselves in such a way that they have been able to counteract their comparative disadvantages?

To explore this agricultural puzzle, I want to focus on the political and institutional development since 1945. Who were the important actors, how did they argue and how did they act? What groups were mobilised, what organisations have been active and grew strong and what institutions have been built?

What kind of alliances and compromises were formed? Farmers in Norway still speak with a powerful political voice. Why do Norwegian legislators vote for big subsidies to farming every June, when they mostly – with a big majority – favour the Agricultural Agreement between the farmers’ organisations and the government?

What is the distinctive Norwegian experience from the modernisation process of agriculture after World War II? It may be argued that the process went on more or less in the same way in all the advanced economies, from the US to Europe, from France to Norway. On the other side, there are huge differences, because of differences in natural resources, farm structure, and political culture. Why is Norwegian agricultural history interesting for an international audience? Because the interplay between the land

and the people took on quite distinctive traits here, which later became part of what might be called the Norwegian model. The cultural landscapes of Norway, with little arable land but plentiful of fjords and mountains, may explain why pluriactivity has been a dominant form of production. Even with the ‘death of peasantry’ (Hobsbawm, 1994), part-time farming prevail, but why?

What are the turning points in Norwegian farming and farm policy after WWII? Some of them would be the same as in the agricultural histories of other industrialised countries, like the rise and fall of productivist agriculture. However, there are many traits end tendencies you will find in Norway, which will not be so prevalent in other of the advanced capitalist countries. For instance: why were the agrarian co-operatives so successful in Norway and why do they prevail? Why does the Norwegian parliament, supported by a majority in the public opinion, give so much economic support to agriculture? Compared to other European nations, the interests of farmers and rural inhabitants have an important say in decision making at the national level. Turning back to our main puzzle, how can it be, that in a country with little arable land and a long winter, there you find a beautiful cultural landscape and a flourishing agriculture all over the country? Plants have a short growing season in most of the country, and it is only small parts of the lowlands and coastal areas of South Norway that have similar possibilities for farming as our neighbouring countries. Explanations must be sought elsewhere than in soil, landscape and climate.

The ‘dream of the family farm’: 1945-1975

It was a slim and hungry, but not a starving nation that experienced the liberation of 8 May 1945. At the end of WWII, 3 million people lived in Norway, half of those lived in sparsely populated areas and 950,000 lived on farms. During the war years few investments were made in agricultural buildings and equipment. Nevertheless, agriculture had to wait, because priority was given to those manufacturing industries earning foreign currency through exports. In addition, the Northern Provinces were devastated because of the scorched earth tactics during German withdrawal, and needed everything from farm animals and living houses to ports and hospitals. Imported agricultural machinery was rationed. Credit was scarce, and the Government channelled financial aid through agricultural credit associations and encouraged the farmers to join tractor co-operatives.

The Labour Party now started a period of 20 years in power. The main policy goal was increased public welfare based on economic growth. To reach that goal, labour force and investment capital was channelled to the most productive industries. The primary industries; agriculture, forestry and fishing had accumulated a surplus labour force during the crisis and war times. Towns and suburbs grew quickly and rural areas were depopulated. Between 1945 and 1950 the numbers of working hands in the manufacturing industries passed the numbers of those working in agriculture. This was a symbolic event, showing that Norway had entered the era of social democratic industrialism.

A technological and social revolution in agriculture

Although agriculture was not given first priority by the Government, farmers were quite optimistic in the first post-war period. Investments were made, production increased and new markets were opened.

Lack of labour force now employed by the manufacturing industries pushed farmers to invest in labour saving technologies. The first to leave agriculture were relatives and hired farm hands, and women left before men (Almås, 2002: p. 123). This exodus of agricultural labour force changed the gender system of agriculture, starting a process of masculinisation of agriculture, which has lasted up to this day. Both push and pull factors were strong. Incomes in the urban industries were higher and social benefits, like vacation, were also drawing cards. Urban housing was well organised in the first post-WWII years, offering a completely new life for rural migrants. When labour became scarcer in rural areas, demand for wage increase to urban standards trigged farmers to invest in timesaving technologies. To find seasonal helpers in labour intensive summer weeks also became more difficult. Consequently intensified mechanisation

was a logical solution. In the 1950s when credit and import regulation was eased, mechanisation went on at a forced rate and pushed labour out of agriculture.

Socially, WWII was in many ways an end to 2,000 years of peasant tradition (Bull, 1979: p. 237).

Alongside with the industrialisation of farming, social relations at the farm and in the countryside changed fundamentally. From being a large labour unit with several farm helper hands, most farms in a few years reduced to a household operation. Running water and electricity had revolutionised the working life of rural women. Reduced number of children and fewer working people on the farms, as well as less home processing and consumption, decreased the female labour burden drastically. The labour force on many farms was also reduced to the ownership nucleus family. This modernisation of the working role of the farmer’s wife also changed her social relations. Farmwomen became more active in social life, establishing for instance a national association of farmers wives in 1946. Soon voluntary associations or municipalities started to build elderly homes to take care of people in old age. Cultural habits deeply embedded in the community crumbled. Social habits around weddings, funerals and other family events were simplified. Welfare policies were also extended to rural areas, like old age pension (1936) and children’s allowance (1946).

The farm structure also started to change in the 1950s, as it became difficult to make a decent living matching the demands for income at the time. Many small farms were depopulated, or the family members started to work off the farm, just farming part-time or renting away the land. Some of those farms had been established as crofter homes of as new farms in the 1920s and 1930s. Out of 195,000 units owned by the farm family, 75% had less than 5 hectares of arable land. Only 41% of units had farming as the only source of living. Now, as the family farm was the ideal unit of farming according to Government plans, agricultural policies gave investment priority to units that had the possibility to expand. By most politicians of the time, the sustainable family farm was meant to be a permanent and central part of the rural social system. A new agricultural law in 1955 prohibited farm partition and gave the government first right to buy when cultivated land came on sale. Such land should later be sold to neighbouring farmers, as a way to strengthen their economic sustainability. This structure rationalisation, partly created by market mechanisms and partly induced by government policies, led to the liquidation of 44,000 small farms during the 1950s. The production, however, increased, made possible by tractorization and raising productivity in animal and plant production. Cheap fuel and state funded agricultural research spurred this emergence of productivist agriculture.

Within the governing Labour Party, there were cleavages and conflicts over agricultural policies. On the one side were the national economists and their allies within the Government, who wanted to transfer labour and financial capital quickly from the primary industries to the fast growing export sectors. After WWII, these people took a firm hold of the economic policies of central party and government apparatus, and remained in power up to 1965 when the Labour Government resigned. Agrarian and rural groups in the party tried to mobilise support for small scale agriculture, without success. Their power base was the Smallholders’ Union and the labour group in the Parliament. As agriculture itself, this group had to fight on the defensive in the party, and lost a decisive battle in 1962 when the majority of the Parliament chose to close the Smallholders’ College, following a recommendation from the labour minister of agriculture.

One way to increase the size of small farms was by the use of cheap concentrated feedstuffs and chemical fertilizer. In this way it was possible to increase the production without adding much land to the farm.

From the early 1950s a policy of canalisation was introduced, which in principle paid grain better than milk and meat in relative terms. The goal was to promote a regional specialisation, in which the lowland Eastern Provinces mainly produced grains, while animal production based on grass was canalised to the fjords and valley regions and the north.

Partly because of better cultivation and use of fertilizer and chemicals and partly because of better plant material, the yields increased quickly during the first post-war decades. A network of agricultural college institutes, experiment stations, and co-operative trial rings made it possible to do applied research and spread the results to practical farming at a fast pace. This knowledge system, partly inspired by the US Land Grant Agricultural College system, became famous for the close ties between researchers and practical users. As a part of the Marshall Plan, 60 grants were giving to promising young scholars in the years 1950-1956. From 1956 and two decades onwards, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation also gave from five to six grants every year to further education within agriculture, forestry and veterinary science. Many of those receiving Kellogg grants became leading figures within their fields later, and their US experiences were published in popular booklets (Almås, 2002: p. 197).

In animal husbandry take-off came in the 1960s, as modern breeding techniques and seamen freezing technology became available. Professor of animal breeding Harald Skjervold became at a young age a leading figure in the field, as he combined the latest knowledge in genetics with computer science and well-organised animal farmers. Not least his ability to explain the breeding principles and mobilise farmers to participate in breeding programmes, gave him legendary status. In a couple of decades new synthesized races of cows and pigs were created, based on large breeding programmes and centralised research on offspring databases. The best males by heredity were chosen for seamen banks, and after insemination was applied in a mass scale to all females in the programme, it was possible from characteristics of their offspring to choose new males for breeding. The same principles from the Norwegian breeding model were later applied to establish breeding programmes for salmon in fish farming.

The cultural landscape of Norway was drastically changed in this period. From WWII to the early 1970s the rural face was given its present form. Because of mechanized cultivation, trees and bushes were cleared away and brooks and creeks were put in pipes. Because of the closure of small farms, small plots were amalgamated and old farmhouses were taken down. The landscape became regionalised because of the canalisation policy, as grain production was predominant in the Eastern Provinces and animal husbandry was more common elsewhere. Where agriculture was marginal, as in some parts of the Northern Provinces, in the mountainous areas and in the fjords, the land was not cultivated anymore and became gradually covered, mainly by deciduous forest. This process of forestation slowed down when agriculture experienced better times in the 1970s and 1980s. All through these years, the Government financially stimulated the cultivation of new agricultural land from forestland and mores, and new machinery like bulldozers and ditch diggers made it possible to increase the area of fully cultivated land. The total agricultural area decreased, however, as meadows and pastures were abandoned because of specialisation and mechanisation.

In forestry, the same modernisation was taking place as in agriculture. Because of the outbreak of the Korean War in 1951, prices on forest products increased rapidly, and stayed at a rather high level for several years. The long-time development, however, was a decrease in the price of timber, as is the case with most raw materials. The association of farmer forest owners (Norges Skogeierforbund) wanted to build their own processing industry to give them a better bargaining position against timber buyers. This motive coincided with Government industrial policies to modernise the pulp and paper industry, which was structurally scattered and financially weak. After almost two decades of fruitless efforts, the paper mill Nordenfjeldske Treforedling was opened in 1966 at Fiborgtangen in North Trøndelag. The forest owners, the state, and private capital owned the shares jointly. This was a typical ‘social democratic deal’

of that time. The forest owners through their association had at first a majority of the shares, which they later lost when the firm became a trans-national paper company: Norske Skog. The farmer forest owners succeeded to build their own industry, but lost control in the 1990s, when Norske Skog went into global acquisitions and the financial muscles of the forest organisations were too weak.