Temporary pastoral settlements are a keystone of high-mountain ecologies, yet they are not included in any official datasets. Therefore, to fill this gap, this research aims to create the first systematic spatial inventory of high-altitude rural temporary dwellings (sheepfolds and shelters) and land use in the central part of the Southern Carpathians, one of the major traditional areas for sheep breeding in Romania. The data sources include 1:5000 orthophotos, 1:25,000-scale topographic maps, the Corine Land Cover model, field investigation campaigns, and forestry maps. Each one provided complementary information, which was integrated through cross-comparison and ground truth validation for settlement status and the consistent classification of land-use categories. The methodological steps followed are as follows: digitizing shelters, sheepfolds, and agricultural surfaces; overlaying elements of interest for the study; using Data Management, Spatial Analyst, Conversion Tools, and Field Calculation; and interpreting graphical and cartographical materials. Through overlay analysis, we examined how temporary settlements correlate with land-use categories; the ArcGIS Saptial Analyst tools enabled the identification of altitudinal patterns and spatial clusters. We identified 753 sheepfolds and 5411 shelters in this part of the Carpathians, situated at high altitudes, closely connected to the transhumance and pendulation phenomenon. The analysis of land use for the altitude-temporary settlements within the Parâng-Cindrel Mountains highlighted the fact that the traditional agriculture is still carried on by the locals, but biodiversity is at stake where fields are abandoned. Implications regarding the ecological and environmental impact of grazing in the area, conflict mitigation, and livestock protection as well as the cultural dimension are discussed. The study provides the first spatially explicit inventory of these shelters and sheepfolds, providing a cornerstone for interdisciplinary policy-making, conservation, and local development priorities.
Marinescu et al. (Thu,) studied this question.