Download Bulgaria

Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profiles
BULGARIA
by
R. Hamnett*
* With inputs from staff of the Institute of Upland Stockbreeding and
Agriculture, Troyan and Forage Crops Research Institute, Pleven
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply
the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city
or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented,
does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of
a similar nature that are not mentioned.
The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily
reflect the views of FAO.
All rights reserved. FAO encourages the reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Non-commercial uses will be authorized free of charge, upon request. Reproduction for
resale or other commercial purposes, including educational purposes, may incur fees. Applications
for permission to reproduce or disseminate FAO copyright materials, and all queries concerning
rights and licences, should be addressed by e-mail to [email protected] or to the Chief, Publishing
Policy and Support Branch, Office of Knowledge Exchange, Research and Extension, FAO, Viale
delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy.
© FAO 2006
3
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 5
2. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY 7
2.1 Major topographical features
7
2.2 Major soil types
7
3. CLIMATE AND AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES 7
3.1 General climate
7
3.2 Climate zones
8
3.3 Agro-ecological zones
8
4. RUMINANT AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SYSTEMS 4.1 Dairy
9
9
4.2 Beef and veal
10
4.3 Cattle breeds
10
4.4 Breeding and selection
10
4.5 Sheep
11
4.6 Common pasture utilization
11
4.7 Veterinary and hygiene problems
11
5. THE PASTURE RESOURCE 12
6. OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT OF PASTURE RESOURCES 13
7. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONNEL 15
8. REFERENCES 16
9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 16
10. CONTACTS 16
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
5
1. INTRODUCTION
The Republic of Bulgaria had a population of
8.24 million people in 1998 but according to
the World Factbook it was 7 385 367 by July
2006 with a growth rate of –0.86%. It covers
an area of 110 994 km2. Its greatest distance
from north to south is 330 km and from east
to west 520 km. It is situated in SE Europe on
the Balkan Peninsula between latitudes 41°
and 44 ° N and longitudes 22 and 28° E. To
the north is Romania, to the west, Serbia and
Macedonia, to the south, Greece and Turkey
and to the east the Black Sea.
According to official figures (National
Statistical Institute, 1998), arable land,
permanent crops and grassland constitute
6.2 million ha, about 55% of the total coun- Figure 1. Map of Bulgaria
try area. This represents a maximum poten- Reproduced by kind permission of Trident Press International
tial figure because of extreme topography
limitations and it is likely that more marginal areas will be progressively abandoned, and this figure
will therefore reduce. About 69% of agricultural land is arable, 3% permanent crops and 28% grassland. Approximately 30% of the agricultural land is currently not farmed, which is a reflection of the
depressed state of agriculture following the change to a market economy. In 1999, official statistics (National Statistical Institute, 1999) indicated 221 000 farms with cattle,
averaging 2.75 cattle per farm; 96% of dairy cows are owned by rural households, which have two cows
or less per household. There are a few private dairy farms with 25–30 cows. Average milk yield per dairy
cow is estimated at 3 100 litres per annum (1998) with a national production of 1 286 million litres and
an annual production per population head of 151.4 litres (Todorov,1999). Very few cattle are currently
kept for beef. Sheep rearing has always been significant in Bulgaria. Sheep are mainly used for the
production of milk for cheese and yoghurt. Total numbers peaked in the 1980s reaching 10–11 million
head, but current numbers (see Table 1) were estimated at only 2.8 million (2.1 million ewes) in 1999,
< 2.3 million in 2001 and around 1.7 million in 2005. Goat numbers are small but have increased up to
2000 (declining somewhat since), and this reflects the increased use of milk by households.
The trends in production and trade (Table 2) show how livestock production peaked in the late 1980s
but has since declined markedly, so that net export balances have also reduced. The change to a market economy began in 1989 resulting in a steady disintegration of the livestock
sector as a consequence of liquidating state-controlled cooperatives and companies. The decline in the
livestock sector has been more pronounced than that in arable cropping. Livestock numbers were artificially boosted in the centrally planned economy so the change to a market economy has had a greater
effect. The changes in farm structure, the drop in purchasing power of the population and a loss of
Table 1. Livestock numbers for selected years 1985–2005
1985
1990
1995
1999
Total cattle
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
672
Thousand head
1 751
1 575
638
671
682
640
634
691
728
647
597
370
421
431
416
367
372
400
n.r.
Sheep
10 501
8 130
3 398
2 774
2 549
2 286
1 571
1 728
1 599
1 693
Goats
473
433
795
1 048
1 046
970
675
755
725
718
Horses
118
119
133
133
141
140
151
151
150
150
3 734
4 352
1 986
1 722
1 512
1 144
786
997
1 032
931
Cows
Pigs
Source: FAO database 2006
n.r. = no record
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
6
Table 2. Livestock production for selected years 1985–2005
Home
production
Tonnes
1985
1990
1995
1998
1999
2000
2001
Cow milk
production (,000)
2 117.9
2 100.8
1 165.1
1 327.0
1 388.8
1 410.7
1 224.1
Sheep milk
production (,000)
319.2
272.1
123.3
109.3
106.2
96.7
Beef & veal
production (,000)
132.4
119.7
63.3
54.5
61.1
Mutton & lamb
production (,000)
88.9
60.2
39.9
45.7
Pig meat
production (,000)
334.3
405.8
256.4
Wool, greasy
production (,000)
33.8
27.8
2002
2003
2004
2005
1 306
1 308.5
1 344.8
1 358.6
72.1
93.5
88.7
117.7
115.6
60.4
68.5
23.7
28.5
30.8
24.9
50.0
51.3
44.4
46.5
38.7
36.9
36.5
248.1
267.1
242.9
237
245
250
250
250
8.8
8.0
8.0
7.0
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
Imports
Beef & veal
1 444
9 527
25 588
25 435
19 344
8 521
15 361
22 316
22 481
33 239
n.r.
Cheese & curd
215
1 376
4 431
2 794
1 528
1 906
1 708
2 039
2747
4 108
n.r.
Sheep meat
355
13 174
12
25
160
100
30
5
46
25
n.r.
Milk equivalents
(,000)
78.8
67.4
83.4
71.2
60.1
76.3
53.1
76.6
128.0
164.2
n.r.
Exports
Beef & veal
9 361
3 130
1 273
295
212
203
129
492
354
90
n.r.
Cheese & curd
29 901
17 124
11 184
10 305
11 450
8 600
12 176
1 415
13 834
15 170
n.r.
Sheep meat
21 063
16 871
1 773
4 286
5 714
5 300
6 549
6 397
7 031
7 047
n.r.
Source FAO database 2006
n.r. = no record
traditional export markets have all led to the marked reduction in ruminant livestock output (EU DG VI
report, 1998). Privatization of livestock ownership has been quicker than the restitution of land. Nevertheless, the
privatization of land and former state assets has resulted in almost 4 million new landowners, i.e. nearly
half the population. Very often one landowner has land in several widespread plots and may live in the
city, far from the land holdings. Currently there is no established land market that could begin the process of consolidation and rationalization that would result in more desirable, larger private farms. This is
mainly because the cost of legalizing ownership through registration is prohibitive. Much land remains
as household plots, farmed and owned by country dwellers as a supplement to other activities rather than
as their sole livelihood. Reliable detailed information on emerging farm structures is difficult to establish. Nevertheless, it
can be said that new types of cooperatives and very small private farms are currently dominant. Most
new farming cooperatives are based in the predominantly arable areas and are typically around 700 ha,
often with two per rural settlement, whereas in former times there were very large industrial complexes
typically with 14 000 ha. Within current cooperatives there are likely to be 300–400 members, 80% of
whom are also landowners. Their land will be within the cooperative but often they keep some land back
for their own use. Average plot sizes are 0.7 ha. The cooperatives are mainly in the lowland areas and are
predominantly arable. Very few now have dairy cows. Most intensive livestock and former large dairy
units have been abandoned. There are at present few private farms with substantial holdings. By 1998,
42% of land was farmed by cooperatives/collectives, 6% by the state and 52% by individuals (OECD,
1999). These statistics hide the fact that although officially farmed, much land has in practice become
common grazing.
Nearly all ruminants are now based with householder plots, where dairy cows, goats and sheep are
kept for domestic production, usually to produce cheese and yoghurt. The main reason for the popularity
of household plots is the severe economic recession and high unemployment levels. With low earnings,
much of the population is forced to rely on domestic food production. A poor market for agricultural
production also means that larger private farms are very slow to develop. Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
7
Much of the ruminant population tends to be in the mountainous and upland regions where large
areas are defined as common land with unrestricted access to grazing animals. These areas are severely
underutilized. Village livestock are usually communally grazed under the supervision of a herdsman. 2. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY
2.1 Major topographical features
The landscape is diverse. Topographical Table 3. Soil types in Bulgaria
features run from north to east and are Soil types
Area,
In
In hilly
km2
lowlands
and
featured in the map (see Figure 1). In
and hill
mountain
areas, %
lands, %
the north there is an extensive lowland
32 327
37.07
62.93
plateau between the Balkan Mountains and Cinnamon forest soils 25 928
100.00
the River Danube. The Danube forms the Chernozems
19 050
41.97
58.03
northern border with Romania. The Balkan Grey forest soils
16 411
100.00
Mountains, also known as Stara Planina, Alluvial-meadow soils
cross the country from the northwest corner Chernozems-Mediterranean
7 744
100.00
to the Black Sea in the east. These are the black soils
meadow and forest
1 717
100.00
highest mountains together with the Rila- Mountain
soils
Rhodope massif to the south, rising to
Others
1 376
20.00
80.00
2 925 m (Mount Moussala). Their watershed
Total
110 990
54.47
45.53
is to the Danube in the north and the Aegean Source: Soils in Bulgaria, Gerassimov, 1960
Sea in the south. South of the Balkans is
a series of narrow plains, notably the Thracian plain centred on the city of Plovdiv. This is the most
fertile region. Further south the Rhodope Mountains form the boundary with Greece. More than half of
Bulgaria is hilly or mountainous and the country has an average elevation of 480 m. The capital, Sofia,
lies on an upland plain.
2.2 Major soil types
There are about 20 soil types and subtypes that match the varied Bulgarian environment (Boyadgiev,1994).
They can be grouped into three main regions: • Northern Bulgaria – The Danubian Plain is characterized by the fertile black earth soils known
as chernozems. On the lower northern slopes of the Balkan Mountains up to 700–800 m are grey
forest soils that have good physical characteristics but are low in organic matter and phosphorus. • Southern Bulgaria – Cinnamon forest soils with acidic (cinnamonic) traces – by far the most extensive single category – as well as the modified chernozems, known as chernozem-Mediterranean
black soil, which is a zonal soil with a deep and rich humus horizon.
• Mountain regions – These have brown forest, dark mountain forest and mountain meadow soils.
The soils are typically shallow and prone to erosion and are usually acid to strongly acid.
3. CLIMATE AND AGRO-ECOLOGICAL ZONES
3.1 General climate
The climate has well defined seasons and is moderately continental in the north and tends towards a
Mediterranean type in the south. The average annual temperature is 10 °C. The coldest month is January
at –2 °C and the warmest is July at 25 °C. Typical precipitation is 630 mm but varies between less than
450 mm in the lowland northeast to over 1 000 mm in the highest mountain regions. The lowlands
receive snowfall from mid-October to mid-March (snow can fall up to May in the highest mountain
8
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
regions only) with an annual average of 25–30 days of snow cover. The highest peaks have snow cover
throughout the year. 3.2 Climate zones
Bulgaria can be divided into five inner climatic zones: • Temperate continental zone: includes north Bulgaria and the valleys in the west of Bulgaria, to the
south of Konyavska Mountain. The continental climate is best featured in this zone. It is affected
by the air currents coming from the northwest, west and north.
• Transitional continental zone: characteristic of the valleys south of the Balkan Range, the
upper Thracian valley, the district of Kyustendil and Blagoevgrad, the region of Doupnitsa, etc.
The average temperatures are higher and less unsteady. There is little difference between the
precipitation amounts in the summer and winter (in winter there are both snowfalls and rainfalls),
the snow cover lasts less and the frost-free periods are longer;
• Transitional Mediterranean zone: typical of the river Arda valley, the eastern parts of the upper
Thracian valley, the valleys of the rivers Mesta and Strouma (the middle reaches). The ostensible
Mediterranean climatic influence is apparent in the highest temperature values, mild winters,
occasional snowfalls, short-lasting snow cover (15–30 days). The summer droughts are less
severe than in the true Mediterranean. The precipitation maximum is reached in November and
December, and the minimum in August and September. • The Black Sea coastal zone: characteristic of the narrow coast line (20–40 km and, according
to some authors, even 50–60 km). The climate is strongly influenced by the Black Sea. The air
humidity is higher, the temperature fluctuations are narrower. The climate of this zone changes
from north southward and on the Stranja coast we have both the Black Sea and the Mediterranean
influence (the rainfall amount in winter is elevated as well as the temperatures).
• Mountain zone: characteristic of the mountains higher than 900–1 000 m. The annual precipitation
exceeds 800 mm and the temperatures are lower, fluctuating within a narrower range than in the
lowlands. The snowfall is heavier and the snow cover thicker lasting from November through
March. Occasional snowdrifts can be seen in the summer.
3.3 Agro-ecological zones
Figure 2 shows the agro-ecological zones and if these are compared with the physical map, it can be seen
that they are closely related to topographical features, most notably the two main mountain areas of the
Balkan range and the Rila-Rhodope massif. The most fertile areas for cropping are the extensive Danubian plain to the north and the Thracian
plain to the south. Sugar beet has historically been important and was grown mainly in the north but the
area has dramatically declined since 1989. Tobacco remains a significant crop and is grown mainly in
the central plains and the south. Wine and grape production is also important and is concentrated towards
the southeast and the central part of the Danubian plain, around Pleven. Cereal production covers the
greatest area and wheat is the main crop grown. Irrigation has been historically vital to sustain crop
yields in arable areas, but most irrigation equipment is no longer functioning. In terms of crop production
the following eight regions can be defined:
(i) The Danubian Plain: the basic crops are winter wheat, winter barley, maize, sunflower, sugar
beet, tobacco, rice, vineyards, orchards.
Figure 2. Map of
agro-ecological
zones
Reproduced by kind
permission of Trident
Press International
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
9
(ii) The north Bulgarian region: includes the Balkan Mountains and the northern Fore-Balkan.
The predominant crops are winter wheat, winter barley, oats, maize, sunflowers. In the
uplands potato and flax are grown, strawberries, raspberries, vineyards. Fruit-tree growing is
widespread.
(iii) The West-Bulgarian region: includes the high mountains in the south of Bulgaria and the
valleys between these mountains. The agricultural crops are of mid-European nature: winter
wheat, rye and barley, oats, maize, sunflowers, potatoes flax, vegetables, hops, orchards,
raspberries and strawberries, forage grasslands.
(iv) The southwest Bulgarian region: predominantly mountainous plus the valleys of the river
Strouma and Mesta. The sub-Mediterranean climate favours crops such as rice, sesame, cotton,
aniseed, tobacco, peanuts, apricots, peaches, pomegranates, figs, seedless grapes.
(v) The Thracian region: around the basin of the river Maritsa, the upper Thracian valley, the lower
parts of the Rhodopes. The cultural crops grown include essential oil crops (rose, peppermint,
lavender) and high-quality oriental tobacco.
(vi) The Stranja region: the main crop is tobacco plus other crops typical of the central parts of the
country.
(vii) The Black Sea coast: vineyards, orchards, wheat, barley, cotton, maize, etc.
(viii)The Doubrudja region: the largest wheat-producing region in Bulgaria.
4. RUMINANT AND LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
4.1 Dairy
Background
To understand the current situation, it is necessary to look back at the development of dairy production
prior to the end of communism in 1989. At this time milk was produced by large state cooperatives while
butter and cheese was manufactured in state-owned processing plants. Typical dairy herds were housed
in large 200 place buildings (called K200s). The cows were tied, machine milked (50 cows milked by
one person) and the effluent removed by chain and conveyor. Feed, carted in via central passageways,
was based on a combination of grass, maize or lucerne silage, together with hay, supplemented by cereals and protein concentrates, such as sunflower cake. By Western European standards, these structures
were not very efficient in terms of animal performance and were labour intensive. It is estimated that
80% of the national dairy herd was under state control on these large farms, with the remaining cows in
household units, of one to two cows each.
The change since 1989 has been very dramatic. The state-controlled cooperatives were liquidated and
most cattle were distributed amongst former employees. These new owners were short of facilities for
keeping cattle; feed was expensive and land was not easy to buy or lease ahead of the land restitution
process. These circumstances were not conducive to the formation of new dairy farms selling milk
for processing. Many cattle were sold for slaughter. Most of the remainder finished up as household
cows. Thus, between 1990 and 1995, cow numbers dropped from 617 000 to 354 000, causing a similar
dramatic drop in milk production. Few large dairy units now remain and consequently milk production is currently very fragmented. It is
now estimated that rural households own at least 85% of the dairy cows, with less than two cows per holding. It is reported that in 1997 the largest herd was about 700 cows. Ninety farmers had 20 cows on average and 109 cooperatives and private farms had between 25 and 400 cows per herd (EU DG VI, 1998). During the summer months, many household cows may be kept in small paddocks and supplemented
with cut-and-carry forage from surrounding, common land. Tethering is not as popular as in some
other European countries and it is common for rural communities to develop a communal herd system,
where several individual household cows are grouped in a single herd by day, and cared for by a village
herdsman. Cows are then milked and housed for the night before returning to the communal herd the
following morning after milking (Todorov,1999). 10
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
There has been a big decrease in the proportion of marketed milk, which is now estimated to be
around 40% of total production (EU DG VI, 1998). Self-consumption and local direct or barter sales
account for the remaining 60%. There is now some re-location of milk production close to the big cities,
with some private farmers selling their own production every day in town markets. Feeding
With such fragmented milk production, there is little control of production methods and no proper
scientific approach to feeding a balanced ration. In the past maize silage was balanced with lucerne hay
or haylage plus cereal/legume silage and concentrate feed. Silage making is now rare.
Now the main fodder feed is poor-quality hay from meadow grass, supplemented in winter with
cereals and usually there is inadequate protein supplementation. Straw and sometimes some lucerne hay
may supplement some of the meadow hay. Maize stalks (after grain removal), distillery by-products and
roots are also fed. One positive change has been a greater use of grazing during the summer. The large herds of former
times were mainly zero-grazed on cut forages and silage during the summer and any grazing offered was
‘rather symbolic’ (Kirilov, personal communication).
Milk yield was estimated to be 3 100 litres/head/year in 1998 (Todorov,1999).
4.2 Beef and veal
Prior to 1989, most meat production was based in large-scale, intensive factory- farmed units. This
was supplemented by small-scale production in household plots. Red meat consumption, however, has
never been popular in Bulgaria, so the beef market has always been small. The beef was produced in
feedlots using predominantly maize silage supplemented with cereals. There has never been a tradition
of producing beef from grazed cattle. Veal production has traditionally been more popular, based on
in-door finishing.
Since privatization began, there has been a drop in meat and veal production, so that it is now less
than half its former level.
4.3 Cattle breeds
The breed structure that existed in 1998 is shown in Table 4 Table 4. Cattle breeds by
percentage number
(Todorov,1999). Percentage
Since 1950, there has been a major effort to develop new Breed
breeds with higher performance in parallel with the development Bulgarian Brown Cattle
13
of collective farms. Thus the Bulgarian Brown, Simmental, Black Black and White (crosses)
73
and White and Rhodope are all new breeds. The Grey cattle are Bulgarian Simmental
2
indigenous. The Bulgarian Black and White are based on breed- Bulgarian Red
ing from imported Friesian/Holsteins. The Bulgarian Rhodope Bulgarian Grey
resulted from cross-breeding Jersey cattle with local breeds. Bulgarian Rhodope
8
Bulgarian Browns are most popular in the Balkan Mountains Other breeds
4
since they are more hardy than the Black and Whites, which are
more numerous in the lowland areas. As the name suggests, the Rhodope are popular in the southern
mountain range; they produce milk with a high fat content and are well adapted to local conditions.
About 2% of the dairy herd are buffaloes.
4.4 Breeding and selection
Breeding policy up to 1989 was under the control of the National Breeding Service (NBS) and good
progress was made to improve the genetic merit of the national herd. The NBS still exists and artificial
insemination is used in favour of natural service. However, with the reduced budget and fragmented
dairy production it is now impossible to monitor the productivity characteristics of cattle so that bulls
can be progeny tested. It is likely, therefore, that the overall genetic potential will now start to decline.
There is also said to be insufficient qualified staff to provide a good artificial insemination service
except where dairy herds are concentrated around busy towns (Todorov, 1999). This is clearly an area
of concern for the future.
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
11
4.5 Sheep
There is a traditional high demand for sheep milk, either consumed fresh or made into yoghurt and
white and yellow cheeses. Historically, a nomadic system of mountain sheep farming existed until
collectivization. Flocks of 2 000 sheep were common. They moved from pasture to pasture, along with
the shepherds and their families. During the summer, from late March to the end of October, they stayed
in the Balkan Mountains, and in winter moved south to the Stranja Mountain area and even as far south
as the Greek coast of the White Sea where the growing season is long. The shepherds used special breeds
of sheep, horses and sheepdogs that were very well adapted to the mountains and coastal environment.
The dogs guarded the flock from predators and were not used for sheep handling. The nomads were
Bulgarian and were called Karakachani and the sheep breed had the same name (Todorov,1999). Other flocks were more local and smaller in size (100–200), often with 5–30 dairy cows and calves
for finishing. In winter the sheep were housed on the homesteads in foothill regions below 600 m, where
they were fed meadow hay and small quantities of grain. The ewes usually lambed indoors in January/
February and the lambs weaned on turnout grass in late March/April. Lambs not needed as replacements
were sold at light weights for meat. The ewes were milked at grass after weaning, with the milk used
mainly for yoghurt and cheese production, the cheese often being made by the shepherds. As the season
developed, the sheep were moved to higher alpine pastures.
During the communist period the nomadic system of pasture utilization was destroyed. The
Karakachani were settled in villages and large cooperative flocks were established; these were operated
on a similar system to the smaller flocks of previous times. Suitable infrastructure was established on
mountain pastures with stock buildings and housing for workers and their families. A number of pasture
improvement measures were carried out, including clearing, fertilization and shrub removal. Since 1989 these large cooperative flocks have been dispersed and this has lead to a vacuum in terms
of pasture utilization. The greater part of the pastures (over 85%) is either state-owned or communal
and is used without any real control. This is particularly true of mountain pastures where there are few
claimants for land restitution.
Local Bulgarian sheep breeds include the Staroplaninski Tsigai, Karakachan and the Pleven
Blackhead. The Tsigai has good wool quality but low prolificacy and medium milk yield. The
Karakachan is favoured for its hardiness in mountain areas but has poor wool quality. The Pleven
Blackhead has the highest milk yield. 4.6 Common pasture utilization
Present utilization of permanent pastures, particularly on common land, is usually of mixed cows and
sheep. The typical household farmer may have one or two cows plus five to six sheep or goats and rearing stock for future breeding. As previously mentioned, several owners group together to organize a
communal grazing system on common land. Each species is usually grazed separately. The communal
group either hires a herdsman, or take turns in herding the flock. Both sheep and cattle are brought back
at night for milking because of risk of predation and theft.
Hay is made from local meadows that are regularly cleared of shrubs and woody plants. Currently these
meadows only occasionally receive small amounts of fertilizer. Most are semi-natural, unseeded meadows.
Surveys have shown that only 4% of the meadows in these foothill areas receive any fertilizer (Totev, 1985).
While communal grazing solves problems associated with small-sized household units, there are also
many problems developing related to the uncontrolled communal access to pastures. Stocking rates have
declined to less than half former levels. There is therefore undergrazing and no improved measures in
place, so that grassland is steadily degrading with a return to woody shrubs, particularly juniper. Forests
are also expanding over former grassland areas.
4.7 Veterinary and hygiene problems
Bulgaria is working hard to install the necessary veterinary regulations to comply with EU rules. Once
these are in place, there will be considerable work needed to bring processing plants up to the required
standards, so that they can be certified for export to EU markets. The EU DG VI (1998) report indicated
that only 17 meat processing establishments were approved to export to the EU. These represented a
low proportion of total capacity. At the same time milk plants, which had been formerly approved, had
12
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
their licences revoked. According to news reports three Bulgarian dairies may be approved for exports
during the year 2000. Although only a small proportion of processing capacity, this indicates hope for
the future, but the problems are still immense.
Most dairy processing companies are operating well below capacity, which means that they cannot
generate the funds to refurbish/replace unsatisfactory buildings and plant. The systems of milk production
on farms are also unsatisfactory by EU standards, with poor hygiene and limited milk cooling facilities.
It is not clear which diseases are endemic in sheep and cattle in Bulgaria. Foot and mouth disease
and sheep and goat pox were reported in 1996. The domestic herds are said to be clear of bovine, ovine
and caprine brucellosis, but bovine tuberculosis and enzootic bovine leucosis are endemic. Although
eradication schemes exist, these need stronger enforcement (EU DG VI Report, 1998) 5.THE PASTURE RESOURCE
Grassland is mainly confined to foothills, intermediate mountain areas and alpine pastures and meadows.
Most grassland is now permanent semi-natural pasture, with only very limited areas of sown pasture.
The total area is about 1.74 million ha of which 84% are range lands and 16% are meadows (cut for hay).
According to Kirilov (personal communication) the grassland is distributed as follows:
Lowland 15% Hill 100 to 700 m 58% Mountain 700 to 1 000 m 12% High mountain over 1 000 m 8% Unclassified 7% In the Balkan range rising to 700 m (and even 1 000 m on south-facing slopes) natural meadows
are described as being of the Chrysopogon gryllus type. This is the most widespread type of grassland
association and these meadows accounts for 35% of the hay crop. They are characteristic of badly
aerated, infertile soil, with a pH of between 5 and 7 with yields of 2–2.5 tonnes conserved weight
of hay per ha. Digestibility is low at 56.8% before ear emergence and as low as 41% before flowering (Cheshmedjiev,1980). Most hay will be cut around the flowering state. The main grass species is
Chrysopogon gryllus and Trifolium incarnatum the main legume. Typically grasses:legumes:forbs are in
the ratio of 7:1:2. (Todorov, 1999). Between 350 to 1 200 m, particularly on north facing slopes, Agrostis tenuis (also known as A.
capillaris)/Festuca fallax (also known as F. rubra subspecies commuatata) are the dominant grasses.
Among the legumes, Trifolium pratense and repens plus Lotus corniculatus grow naturally. The in vitro
digestibility of hay made is generally around 55% of the dry matter. The ratio of grasses:legumes:forbs
is typically 5:2:3 (Todorov 1999). The higher legume content probably explains the better digestibility
compared to natural Chrysopogon gryllus-type grasslands. On the upper altitudes, between 900 and 2 000 m Nardus stricta is the dominant grass, in association
with Festuca ovina, Lotus corniculatus and Bromus species. Juniperus spp. and Vaccinium spp. tend to
ingress in most areas because grazing pressures are so low.
According to Todorova (personal communication) permanent grasslands can be classified as follows: 1. Andropogon ischaemum – 34.1 % of the total pasture area; average grazing output of
1 600–2 600 kg/ha.
2. Cynodon dactylon – Lolium perenne – 11.2 % of the pasture area; average grazing output of
4 500–6 500 kg/ha.
3. Nardus stricta – 4.4 % of the pasture area; average grazing output of 2 000–3 000 kg/ha, poor
forage quality. 4. Chrysopogon gryllus – 5.7 % of the pasture area. 5. Agrostis vulgaris – Festuca fallax – 6.8 % of the pasture area; average grazing output of
3 600–4 400 kg/ha, good forage quality. 6. Festuca pseudovina – 10.1 % of the pasture area; average grazing output of 2 000–3 500 kg/ha,
medium forage quality. Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
13
7. Dryland pastures of mixed composition (others) – 14 % of the pasture area; poor-quality grazing
until midsummer drought periods, following which the grass cover wilts. 8. Festuca myuros – Bromus sp. – 8.7 % of the pasture area; poor-quality grazing until summer
drought periods, following which the grass cover wilts. 9. The remaining pasture types occupy a small percentage of the total area.
The larger portion of the permanent pastures in Bulgaria is situated on infertile soils in regions of
insufficient moisture. For many years now they have been neglected and scarcely any measures have
been taken to improve the grassland or introduce correct management and utilisation by the grazing
animals. They are subject to uncontrolled extensive grazing with no grassland management and no
inputs. This has led to deterioration of the sward composition as a result of weed infestation and shrub
encroachment. The surface of a considerable number of them is strewn with anthills, molehills and
uneven patches, all of which reduce the utilisable grassland area. This is the main reason for the low
herbage output (1 500–5 000 kg/ha of green grass) and poor forage value.
Many traditional, agriculturally useful species grow naturally in lowland areas and on slopes up to
1 000 m. Dactylus glomerata, Festuca pretensis, Phleum pratense, Poa pratensis, Festuca arundinacea
and Lolium perenne can all be found growing wild. Lolium perenne tends to be found in moist fertile
areas, particularly where well dunged by passing livestock. On lowland areas it is traditional to sow complex mixtures, typically with Dactylis glomerata, Festuca
arundinacea, Poa pratensis, Lolium perenne and both Trifolium pratense and T. repens. Medicago sativa
and Zea mays are traditionally most popular for forage in arable areas. At higher altitudes, on more acid soils, Festuca rubra, Festuca arundinacea, Phleum pratense and
Agrostis capillaris are the main grassland species sown. Arrhenatherum elatius is also used. Lotus
corniculatus often replaces Trifolium species in acid conditions. Inoculants are available for legumes on
these soils. Currently, however, there are major problems producing adequate supplies of certified seeds even
though there are locally-bred varieties. This is because seed was multiplied on state farms and these no
longer exist. So far there are few suitable replacement seed-producing farms.
The following list of grass-legume forage crop cultivars bred in Bulgaria has been provided by P.
Todorova (personal communication):
• Medicago sativa L.: cv. Dounavka, Nadezhda-1, Nadezhda-2, etc., bred by the the Research Institute of Agriculture and Seed Production “Obraztsov Chiflik”, Rousse; cv. Pleven-6, Pleven-13, etc
bred by the Forage Research Institute in Pleven;
• Onobrychis Gaerth: cv. Yubileina-25;
• Bromus inermis Leyrs: cv. Nika;
• Dactylis glomerata L.: cv. Dubrava, developed at the Forage Research Institute in Pleven;
• Festuca arundinacea Stchreb: cv. Albena developed at the Forage Research Institute in Pleven, and
cv. Elena bred at the IUSBA, Troyan;
• Lotus corniculatus: cv. Turgovishte bred in the Research Station in Turgovishte;
• Phleum pratense: cv. Troyan bred at the IUSBA, Troyan;
• Lolium perenne: a cultivar has been bred at the Research Station in Sredets.
6. OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT OF PASTURE
RESOURCES
With a halving of grazing livestock numbers and little immediate prospect of a recovery, any general
improvement in the pasture resource is unlikely in the short term. Recovery in livestock numbers is dependent on several factors: • Most importantly there needs to be an improved market for the livestock products and this will
depend on an upturn in the economy. Progress with the economy and greater spending power will
mean that the population becomes less dependent on household domestic production. At the same
14
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
time the market for agricultural produce is
likely to improve.
• There is also a need for consolidation of
household plots into larger, more economically
viable private farms. A land market needs to
be developed to encourage this but this is still
some years away. It again depends on a better
market for agricultural produce to stimulate a
demand for land. • Better prospects for export of livestock products to the EU. This will need an upgrading in
hygiene and veterinary standards. There will
also be limited prospects for increased exports Suckled calf beef production
to former communist bloc states. In the meantime, there needs to be focus on development of systems that can better utilize the pasture
resources. These can provide guidance for improvements in the future, as conditions slowly improve. The FAO project (TCP/RER/6711 – Low Input Grassland Production Systems for Grassland Feeding)
is one example where the aim was to develop new technologies based around private farms (Krajkovic,
1999). It has involved cooperation between three countries (Slovakia, Poland and Bulgaria) that have
many of the same problems. The counterpart organization for the project in Bulgaria was the Institute of
Upland Stockbreeding and Agriculture (IUSBA) at Troyan in the Balkan Mountains. In conjunction with experts from the Institute, the project produced two booklets on “Suckled calf
beef production” and “Grassland Establishment”.
The relatively larger private farms were used as pilot farms together with the institute’s own farms
at Troyan and Smolyan in the Rhodope Mountains. The first priority was to encourage reseeding/
improvement of grassland in limited areas to produce better grazing and forage conservation to meet the
nutritional needs at critical stages of the animal production cycle. These included early lactation for dairy
cows and tupping and late pregnancy for the sheep flocks. It was realized that full utilization of pastures
was not possible but the message was that it was better to utilize some pastures fully to improve sward
quality rather than to underutilize all the grassland. Extensive unimproved grassland could still be used
for the less critical periods of the production cycle. It has already been mentioned that outdoor grazed beef has not been traditional, but suckler herds
are well suited to the extensive conditions and good results have been achieved by the IUSBA with
Hereford, Angus and other breeds of cattle in the Balkan Mountains. The recommendation was to
crossbreed these with local cattle to increase the availability of suckler cows and to achieve benefits of
hybrid vigour. The project has also encouraged technology transfer between the three countries and as
an example Slovakia has carried out trials on the production of two-year beef from grassland with two
seasons at grass. Similar grass finishing of beef will also be possible for Bulgaria as markets develop. Livestock production is more or less organic but there is no certification protocol or organization in place to achieve this. It is a priority that
this be established for the future. Organic production could improve
marketing opportunities for outputs from Bulgarian grassland. Silage production is now almost non-existent except on a few
larger dairy farms. The need for silage production in place of hay is
largely accepted as a necessary change to achieve improved winter
feeding. A by-product of this would also be better grassland management. The resources and machinery needed, however, are not
currently available. Large-scale machinery is not necessary and the
technology for producing silage in small, field clamps is well practised in Poland and other countries and could be adapted for use in
Bulgaria. A more expensive alternative is the shared use of big bale
machinery but this is likely to need outside funding to demonstrate
the potential first.
Grassland establishment
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
15
A shortage of available seed for pasture improvement remains a problem that must be solved along
with an upgrading of seed certification procedures. There needs to be financial incentive for private
farmers to multiply certified seed for sale.
The municipally owned common grazing (land) will continue to deteriorate due to lack of management
control. A legal framework needs to be established to control access and perhaps apply grazing charges
so that a fund and plan for improvement can be established, as exists in other countries.
All these changes need to be coordinated with an improvement in downstream food processing, so
that suitable markets can be found for products. 7. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS AND
PERSONNEL
Establishment and contact details
Key personnel
Research topics
Institute of Upland Stockbreeding
and Agriculture, 281, V. Levski Str.,
Troyan 5600
Tel: +359 67022802
Tel/fax: +359 67023032
Email: [email protected] or
[email protected]
Dr. M. Todorov, (Director)
Dr Ilia Ralchev
(Deputy Director)
Dr P Todorova
Dr M. Yonkovski
Dr T. Mihovsky
Lyuba Deliskaya
Beef production Extension services
Grassland research
Milk Production
Plant Breeder
Librarian and translator/interpreter
Forage Crops Research Institute
89, General Vladimir Vazov Str.,
5800 Pleven
Tel: +359 64 22474
Fax: +359 64 38528
Email: [email protected] or
[email protected]
Antanas Kirilov
Roumen Chakarov Todor
Kertikov
Emil Vassilev
Breeding and seed production of
alfalfa, clover, pea, grasses etc. in the
lowlands; agrotechnical management
of perennial and annual forage crops,
plant protection; forage harvesting
technologies, conservation and
evaluation.
Agricultural Academy
30, Souhodolska str.
1373, Sofia
Tel: +359 2 2929481/481
211901/236
Fax: +359 2 211905
Prof. Dr. Hristo Kurdjin,
President
Research Experimental Station
Turgovishte 7700
Tel: +359 601 24312
Fax: +359 601 26490
Dr. D. Dimitrov,
Director
Breeding, seed production and variety
preservation of major perennial and
annual forage legumes; development of
systems for improvement of permanent
pastures and commons
Research Experimental Station
Vidin 3700
Tel: +359 94 23811
Fax: +359 94 20068
Zh. Andreinski, Director
Development of technologies for growing alfalfa, maize, forage pea, broad
beans
Research Experimental Station
Sredets 8300
Tel: +359 05551 4737
K. Stoeva
Development of technologies for growing of annual forage crops and maintenance of permanent grasslands
Country Pasture/Forage Resource Profile
16
Research Experimental Station
35, Nevyastata Str.
Smolyan 4700
Tel: +359 0301 32704
Fax: +359 0301 33501
Dr. V. Kafedjiev
Breeding and maintenance of local
varieties of annual and perennial forage
grass species 8. REFERENCES
Boyadgiev T. (1994) Soil map of Bulgaria according to the FAO-UNESCO-ISRIC revised legend explanatory
notes. Soil Science Agrochemistry and Ecology, N 4-6, p.52–56.
Cheshmedjiev B. (1980) Feed characteristics of the permanent pastures and meadows in Bulgaria, Zemizdat, Sofia.
EU DG VI Report (1998) Agricultural Situation and Perspectives in the Central and Eastern European
Countries – Bulgaria – European Commission Report by the Agricultural Directorate (VI). FAO Database 2006 (website http://faostat.fao.org)
Gerassimov, I.P. (1960) Soils in Bulgaria, Sofia.
Krajkovic, V. (1999) Final Report for F.A.O. Project TCP/RER/6711 (A) “Low Input Grassland Production
Systems for Livestock Feeding”. December 1999 - Report prepared by Prof. Vladimir Krajkovic. National Statistical Institute of the Republic of Bulgaria. Statistical Yearbooks and Reference Books
1998 and 1999.
OECD (1999) Agricultural Policies in Emerging and Transition Economies, July 1999, ISBN 92-64-17058-8.
Todorov M.M. (1999) Bulgarian Report for FAO Project TCP/RER/6711.
Totev T. (1985) Effect of raising rates of nitrogen applied singly or at a P60 background on the productivity
of natural meadows of the transitional association Chrysopogon gryllus – Agrostis capillaris in the Troyan
region. Plant Science, vol XXII, No 9, 78–86.
Dr A Kirilov, personal communication – see Forage Crops Research Institute, Pleven, for contact details.
Dr P Todorova, personal communication – see Institute for Upland Stockbreeding and Agriculture, Troyan
for contact details.
9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Grateful thanks are due to many of the staff at the Institute of Upland Stockbreeding and Agriculture at
Troyan (especially Director Dr. M. Todorov and Dr. P. Todorova) and Dr A. Kirilov from the Institute
of Forage Science, Pleven, for their generous help in providing information for this profile. Particular
thanks are due to Lyuba Deliskaya at Troyan for her hard work translating Bulgarian texts into English.
Dr John Frame’s advice was also much appreciated.
10. CONTACTS
This profile was written and will be updated from time to time by: Bob Hamnett
33 Stankelt Road
Silverdale, Carnforth, Lancs LA5 0TF, UK
Tel/Fax: 00 41 (0)1524 701394
Email: [email protected]
Livestock production data updated by S.G. Reynolds in November 2002 and
October 2006.