* Corresponding Author
Model Pengelolaan Ternak di Sekitar Hutan Gunung Mutis dan Dampaknya terhadap Kelestarian Hutan
https://doi.org/10.22146/jik.28281 Rahman Kurniadi(1*), Herry Purnomo(2), Nurheni Wijayanto(3), Asnath Maria Fuah(4)
(1) Balai Penelitian dan Pengembangan Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan Kupang, Jl. Alfons Nisnoni No.7, Kupang 85115
(2) Fakultas Kehutanan, Institut Pertanian Bogor, Jl. Lingkar Akademik, Babakan, Dramaga, Bogor 16001
(3) Fakultas Kehutanan, Institut Pertanian Bogor, Jl. Lingkar Akademik, Babakan, Dramaga, Bogor 16001
(4) Fakultas Peternakan, Institut Pertanian Bogor, Jl. Agatis, Babakan, Dramaga, Bogor 16001
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
Penelitian ini mengkaji kelayakan finansial dan dampak dari model pengelolaan ternak yang ditemukan di sekitar hutan Gunung Mutis di Pulau Timor. Data dikumpulkan melalui wawancara terhadap 40 masyarakat sekitar hutan. Terdapat dua model pengelolaan ternak yang ditemukan di sekitar hutan. Model pertama adalah model pemeliharaan ternak di dalam kandang dan model kedua adalah model penggembalaan ternak di hutan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kedua model layak secara finansial. Namun demikian, jika menggunakan biaya tenaga kerja komersial, model pemeliharaan ternak di dalam kandang secara finansial tidak layak untuk dilakukan, sedangkan model penggembalaan di hutan layak secara finansial. Model pengelolaan ternak di dalam hutan berdampak negatif terhadap regenerasi pohon sedangkan model pemeliharaan ternak di dalam kandang tidak berdampak negatif terhadap kelestarian hutan. Dari hasil penelitian disarankan agar pemerintah membatasi areal untuk penggembalaan ternak di hutan.
Kata kunci: kelayakan finansial; model silvopasture; Mutis; penggembalaan ternak hutan; Timor
Livestock Management Models Around Mt. Mutis Forest and Its Impact on Forest Sustainability
Abstract
The study examined the financial feasibility and impacts of livestock management models found around Mt. Mutis forest in Timor Island of Indonesia. Data was collected through interviewing 40 communities around the forest. There were two livestock management models around the forest, the first model was livestock management which raise livestock in the cattle pen, and the second model was livestock management which graze livestock in the forest. This study found that both livestock management models were financially feasible. However, if commercial cost of workers was counted, the livestock management model which raise livestock in the cattle pen was financially not feasible while livestock management model which graze livestock in the forest was financially feasible. Livestock management model which graze livestock in the forest however had negative impacts on the regeneration of trees. On the basis of this study, it is suggested that the government should limit the forest area that could be used for forest grazing.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Biro Pusat Statistik. 2016. Provinsi Nusa Tengara Timur dalam angka. Kupang. Biro Pusat Statistik.
Burner DM, Braur DK. 2003. Herbage response to spacing of loblolly pine trees in a minimal management silvopasture in southeastern USA. Agroforestry Systems 57:69-77.
Carpenter TE, Chrie M, Greiner M. 2007. An analysis of an early-warning system to reduce abortions in dairy cattle in Denmark incorporating both financial and epidemiologic aspects. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 78:1–11.
Cubbage F, et al. 2012. Comparing silvopastoral systems and prospects in eight regions of the world. Agroforestry Systems 86:303–314. doi: 10.1007/s10457-012-9482-z.
Diatmojo N, Emawati S, Sari AI. 2012. Analisis finansial usaha penggemukan sapi peranakan Friesian Holstein (PFH) jantan di Kecamatan Selo Kabupaten Boyolali. Tropical Animal Husbandry 1:43-51
Donaghy P, Bray S, Rebecca G, Rolfe J, Stepens M, Hoffman M, Stunzer A. 2010. The bioeconomic potential for agroforestry in Australia’s northern grazing systems. Small-scale Forestry 9:463–484.
Elyakime B, Cabanettes A. 2013. Financial evaluation of two models for energy production in small French farm forests. Renewable Energy 57:51-56.
Eriksen FI, Whitney AS. 1981. Effects of light intensity on growth of some tropical forage species. Interaction of light intensity and nitrogen fertilization on six forage grasses. Agronomy journal 73:427-433.
Ervin J. 2003. Protected area assessments in perspective. Bioscience 53:819–822.
Feldhake CM, Neel JPS, Belesky DP, Mathias EL. 2005. Light measurement methods related to forage yield in a grazed northern conifer silvopasture in the Appalachian region of eastern USA. Agroforestry Systems 65:231–239.
Fisher R. 2012. Tropical forest monitoring, combining satellite and social data, to inform management and livelihood implications: Case studies from Indonesian West Timor. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 16:77–84.
Fuah, AM, Siregar H, Winarno. 2014. Peternakan terpadu: Konsep rancang dan aplikasi. PT Penerbit IPB Press, Bogor.
Garrett HE, Kerley MS, Ladyman KP, Walter WD, Godsey LD, Sambeek V, Brauer DK. 2004. Hardwood silvopasture management in North America. Agroforestry Systems 61:21-33.
Gleeson T, Martin P, Mifsud C. 2012. Northern Australian beef industry assessment of risks and opportunities. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry, Australia.
Gunawan B, Takeuchi K, Tsunekawa A, Abdoellah OS. 2004. Community dependency on forest resources in West Java, Indonesia. Journal Sustainable Forest 18:29–46. Halbritter HH, Bender LC. Herbivory of sympatric elk and cattle onLincoln National Forest, south-central New Mexico. Forest Ecosystems 2(25): 1-13.
Hasler B, Regula G, Stark KDC, Sager H, Gottstein B, Reist M. 2006. Financial analysis of various strategies for the control of Neospora caninum in dairy cattle in Switzerland. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 77:230–253.
Hjeljord O, Histol T, Wam HK. 2014. Forest pasturing of livestock in Norway: effects on spruce regeneration. Journal of Forestry Research 25(4):941-945.
Jibat T, Mouritsa MCM, Hogeveena H. 2016. Incidence and economic impact of rabies in the cattle population of Ethiopia. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 130: 67–76
Kaho LMR, Nalle AA, Nomeni YF, Sole RA, Victoriano BA, Tao A, Messakh OS, Aithur M, Kaho UJR. 2010. Penilaian ekonomi sumberdaya kawasan CA Mutis (Tidak diterbitkan).
Kallenbach RL, Kerley MS, Bishop-hurley MS. 2006. Cumulative forage production, forage quality, and livestock performance from an annual ryegrass and cereal rye mixture in a pine–walnut silvopasture. Agroforestry Systems 66:43–53.
Lamb GC, Mercandante VRG, Henry DD, Fontes PLP, Dahlen CR, Larson JE, Dilorenzo N. 2016. Invited review: Advantages of current and future reproductive technologies for beef cattle production. The Professional Animal Scientist 32(2):162-171.
Lentz C, Mallo M, Bowe M. 1998. Environmental management in Gunung Mutis: a case study from Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia. The Internasional Association for the Study of Common Property, 10–14 June 1998, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Lindgren PMF, Sullivan TP. 2014. Response of forage yield and quality to thinning and fertilization of young forests: implications for silvopasture management. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 44:281–289.
Mayer AC, Stickli V. 2005. Long term impact of cattle grazing on sub alpine forest development and efficiency of snow avalanche protection. Arctic, Antarctica, and Alpine Research 37(4):521-526.
Mhina GJ, Leppla N, Thomas MH, Solis D. 2016. Cost effectiveness of biological control of invasive mole crickets in Florida pastures. Biological Control 100:108–115.
Monjardino M, Macleod N, McKellar L, Prestwidge D. 2015. Economic evaluation of irrigated forage production in a beef cattle operation in the semi-arid tropics of northern Australia. Agricultural Systems 139:122-143.
Muhamad D, Okubo S, Harasima K, Parikesit, Gunawan B, Takeuchi K. 2014. Living close to forests enhances people’sperception of ecosystem services in a forest–agricultural landscape of West Java, Indonesia. Ecosystem Services 8: 197–206.
Nepstad DC, Carvalho G, Barros AC, Alencar A, Capobianco JP, Bishop J, Mountinho PR, Lefebvre, PA, Silva UL, Prins E. 2001. Road paving, fire regime feedbacks, and the future of Amazon forests. Forest Ecology and Management 154:395–407.
Piana RP, Marsden SJ. 2014. Impacts of cattle grazing on forest structure and raptor distribution within a neotropical protected area. Biodiversity and Conservation 23:559–572.
Rudel, Thomas K, Defries R, Asner GP Laurance, William F. 2009. Changing drivers of deforestation and new opportunities for conservation. Conservation Biology 23(6):1396–1405.
Sahala J, Widiati R, Baliarti E. 2016. Analisis kelayakan finansial usaha penggemukan sapi simmental peranakan ongole dan faktor-faktor yang berpengaruh terhadap jumlah kepemilikan pada peternakan rakyat di Kabupaten Karanganyar. Buletin Peternakan 40(1): 75-82
Stjepan P, Mersudin A, Dzenan B, Nenad P, Makedonka S, Dane M, Spela PM. 2015. Private forest owners’ willingness to supply woody biomass in selected South-Eastern European countries. Biomass and Bioenergy 81:144-153.
Sharrow SH. 2007. Soil compaction by grazing livestock in silvopastures as evidenced by changes in soil physical properties. Agroforestry Systems 71: 215-223.
Wahyudi A, Harianto SP, Darmawan A. 2014. Keanekaragaman jenis pohon di hutan pendidikan konservasi terpadu Tahura wan abdul rachman. Jurnal Sylva Lestari 2(3):1-10.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jik.28281
Article Metrics
Abstract views : 8024
| 
views : 11666
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2017 Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© Editorial Board Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan
Faculty of Forestry, Universitas Gadjah Mada
Building D 2nd floor
Jl. Agro No 1, Bulaksumur, Sleman 55281
Phone. +62-274-512102, +62-274-550541, +62-274-6491420
Fax. +62-274-550541 E-mail : jik@ugm.ac.id
former website : jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jikfkt/
new website : jurnal.ugm.ac.id/v3/jik/
Indexed by:
Jurnal Ilmu Kehutanan is under the license of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
