Importance and functions of European grasslands.

The European agricultural policy is not simple and needs to accommodate also social and environmental requirements. Grassland will continue to be an important form of land use in Europe, but with increased diversity in management objectives and systems used. Besides its role as basic nutrient for herbivores and ruminants grasslands have opportunities for adding value by exploiting positive health characteristics in animal products from grassland and through the delivery of environmental benefits. In fact grasslands contribute to a high degree to the struggle against erosion and to the regularizing of water regimes, to the purification of fertilizers and pesticides and to biodiversity. Finally they have aesthetic role and recreational function as far as they provide public access that other agricultural uses do not allow. But even for grassland it is very difficult to create a good frame for its different tasks (1) the provision of forage for livestock, (2) protection and conservation of soil and water resources, (3) furnishing a habitat for wildlife, both flora and fauna and (4) contribution to the attractiveness of the landscape. Nevertheless it is the only crop, able to fulfil so many tasks and to fit so many requirements.

Agri-environmental grass hay: nutritive value and intake in comparison with hay from intensively managed grassland.

Chemical composition, digestibility, nutritive value and intake of hay from an agri-environmental management (EH) were compared with those from hay (Lolium perenne) from an intensive management (IH). IH was of low to moderate quality because of unfavourable weather conditions. EH was harvested mid-June of 2000 (EH1) and 2001 (EH2) on the same sward that had not received mineral fertilizer for 10 years. The EH was characterized by a species-rich botanical composition. On average, it had lower contents of protein (32%), NDF (9%) and ash (35%), and a higher concentration of water-soluble carbohydrates (117%) than IH. Digestibility of dry and organic matter, determined with sheep, was not different between IH and EH and averaged 59 and 63%, respectively. Crude fibre and NDF digestibility were lower in EH (58 and 57%, respectively) than in IH (70 and 69%, respectively). Net energy value for lactation did not differ between IH and EH and amounted to 4.78 MJ per kg DM. True protein digested in the small intestine and rumen degraded protein balance were lower in EH (63 and -60 g per kg DM) than in IH (71 and -33 g per kg DM). Intake of hay was investigated in Holstein-Friesian heifers and Belgian Blue double-muscled heifers (mean BW 280 +/- 22 kg and 269 +/- 21 kg, respectively), and in Belgian Blue non-lactating and non-pregnant double-muscled cows (initial BW 642 +/- 82 kg), using a cross-over design. Hay was freely available. It was supplemented with 1 kg concentrate daily. Dry matter intake from hay was higher for EH than for IH in heifers (4% and 13%, respectively in Holstein-Friesian and Belgian Blue heifers) and in cows (22%). Hay from an agri-environmental management may be used for low-performing animals, as energy intake only exceeded maintenance requirements by 20 to 35%. Several characteristics of EH were different between years, such as dry matter digestibility, net energy value for lactation and fermentable organic matter content.