Search

Search Results

• magyar

  55-58

  Péter Pál Dr. Mikó

  Views:

  140

  A cikk a gyepalkotók 2021-2023. évi vetőmagárainak növekedését hasonlítja össze a Magvas Vetőmag Kft. árai alapján.

• Economic aspects of grasslands

  73-82

  Andras Nabradi

  Views:

  159

  There are several products can be originated from the grass-land but their economic value in some cases are uncertain. The article shows the social benefits of the grass-land products answering the same time for the question: what the value is of the product in practice and how can it be determined. There are considered the market and non-market type of product of the grass-land and a new category is introduced; the animal keeping value of the grass.

  Value of grassland products

• The big game unit (BGU) as an economic index for comparing big game management in different habitas: Papers presented at the „Timely questions in grassland and game management” scientific conference (Hungarian Academy of Sciences – Kaposvár University, 18-19 May 2006)

  39-46

  Robert Barna

  Views:

  123

  This article presents a comparative examination of the financial data found in a report on game management concerning the counties of the South-Transdanubian Region. The most healthy cost structure was found in Tolna County, even though the 2003/2004 hunting year showed a deficit. In Somogy and Baranya counties, the damage caused by game was so great that management could not compensate for it.
  The recently introduced big game unit (BGU) as an economic index clearly shows the difference among big game management in Hungary's counties. The produciton of a big game unit caused a 20% loss in Somogy, 10% in Baranya, 2% in Tolna County in the financial balance for the 2003/2004 hunting year.

• Conflicts between farming and nature reservation in grassland managements

  31-34

  Istvan Forgo

  Sandor Barna

  Csilla Toth

  Sandor Vagvolgyi

  Views:

  207

  In the last few years important changes occurred in the grassland usage and in the grassland framing, which changes revised the farming circumstances of the grassland farmers. These changes come to the fore leading in the environment friendly, agricultural environment friendly programs, and drove farmers into a corner. The unfavorable economic conditions impressed the whole agriculture, because the grass hay user ruminant stock depressed drastically, farms with small animal stock and the herds ended countryside. The economic process did not serve animal husbandry recovery. Farmers see way out for the grassland sector, but on the marked factors we saw the impresses of the negative effects. We say this because they marked complementary seeding and reseeding as primary factors. Aims of the agricultural environment protection programs and the farmer’s cost-of-living will generate more conflicts. On these conflicts could ease rethinking the aims of the agricultural environment protecting programs, with lighten the strict directions of the nature conservation provisions and with ecological grassland farming.