Preserving the Values of Mediterranean Enclosed Fields with Dry Stone Walls, an Example of Vulnerable Natural and Rural Heritage

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper has great potential IF it was restructured and outlined.  In a way it is presently like a whodonit: the reader does not know the area, does not know the history, does not know the enclosures. We are given 2 time stamps to compare, one seems to be the early time of air photos of the area but why the second?  It would seem that 3 time frames may be needed given the history of the area, 1956, after 1975, and the recent 2020 so the changes referred to in the text might be put in context. 

 

As we finally learn that enclosures date back before the 18^th century and served a cyclic pattern that constructed an agropastoral landscape that endured for centuries, is this not the starting point of the paper whose title asks a question can they be preserved? 

 

Since the authors argue that the landscape is vulnerable and perhaps a landscape that is known throughout the Mediterranean, it deserves to be valued but only the reader needs to  appreciate the question and look at the outset for what is the answer.

 

An outline of objectives is important. 

Introduce the topic clearly an succinctly. Define the Mediterranean  enclosed fields and their context and present why this rural landscape is important and now vulnerable. 

 

Then go into the chronological background that should explain the symbiotic strategies of land use with small enclosures value for planting and pasturage. Discussion of the nature of boundaries of the enclosures – walls, hedges, combination and the values should be presented. In the discussion of trees and shrubs, explain clearly with genus spp when mentioned  the objective of this complex landscape was multiple for food, firewood, Ramon trees, grass( what id Ramon?  This is a plant known in the Maya tropical forests?) bring all the characterizations of the area and the chronology into one place.  There is much historical and chronological discussion in a section called results…  this is better up front at the outset setting the scene.  There is also descriptions of the geography that belongs in the background on humid and dry areas, productive and not,  and so forth. Also, areas of flax? Areas that are arable? Areas that are mowed?  Perhaps some of the GIS maps can help?This is essential as a background.

 

In the chronology attention to the changes over time, the longet=vity of the enclosure strategy, and the changes with “modernity.”

 

Next the methods. As best as can be understood, this involved the compilation of maps of the area into the GIS context.  This included historical documentation as well as field work.  Here the value of the comparative data can be stated.

 

The results would be the comparison of the data and the presentation of the changes and how a multi function system has been simplified and the enclosures of old now being lost… why is it important?  Tell us!

 

Conclusions will be the last and will bear on the previos exposition.

 

there are certainly other issues – editing takes time

Appendix A  is an itemization of the changes, but not that the last column of percentages is added not proportioned! 

 

Figure 2 is not labeled correctly

 

This is a worthy project that is looking for clear organization and better presentation. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

This was a readable paper but not well organized

Author Response

Reviewer 1.

 

Thanks for your comments, which have been of great interest and have undoubtedly helped to improve the work.

 

This paper has great potential IF it was restructured and outlined.  In a way it is presently like a whodonit: the reader does not know the area, does not know the history, does not know the enclosures. We are given 2 time stamps to compare, one seems to be the early time of air photos of the area but why the second?  It would seem that 3 time frames may be needed given the history of the area, 1956, after 1975, and the recent 2020 so the changes referred to in the text might be put in context. 

 

Authors 

The selected dates are representative of two key times. 1957 for a time where enclosures land had a full functionality and 2020 for 21th century situation. The text, for to avoid possible misunderstandings, has been modified.

 

As we finally learn that enclosures date back before the 18^th century and served a cyclic pattern that constructed an agropastoral landscape that endured for centuries, is this not the starting point of the paper whose title asks a question can they be preserved? 

 

Authors 

Enclosed land had its origin in the 11th century. For this reason, timeline begins at this date.

 

 

Since the authors argue that the landscape is vulnerable and perhaps a landscape that is known throughout the Mediterranean, it deserves to be valued but only the reader needs to  appreciate the question and look at the outset for what is the answer.

 

Authors 

A key question was changed according to general approach of the paper.

 

An outline of objectives is important. 

Introduce the topic clearly an succinctly. Define the Mediterranean  enclosed fields and their context and present why this rural landscape is important and now vulnerable. 

 

Authors 

The subject of research has been defined in the introduction.

 

Then go into the chronological background that should explain the symbiotic strategies of land use with small enclosures value for planting and pasturage. Discussion of the nature of boundaries of the enclosures – walls, hedges, combination and the values should be presented.

 

 

Authors 

Thanks, the chronologic background was rewritten and the results include a typology of enclosures and heritage values.

 

 

In the discussion of trees and shrubs, explain clearly with genus spp when mentioned  the objective of this complex landscape was multiple for food, firewood, Ramon trees, grass( what id Ramon?  This is a plant known in the Maya tropical forests?) bring all the characterizations of the area and the chronology into one place. 

 

Authors 

We´ve considered taxa reference and we explain the meaning of ramon (tree fodder)

 

 

There is much historical and chronological discussion in a section called results…  this is better up front at the outset setting the scene.  There is also descriptions of the geography that belongs in the background on humid and dry areas, productive and not,  and so forth. Also, areas of flax? Areas that are arable? Areas that are mowed?  Perhaps some of the GIS maps can help?This is essential as a background.

 

Authors 

We´ve clarified these questions by restructuring part of the introduction and the results.

 

In the chronology attention to the changes over time, the longet=vity of the enclosure strategy, and the changes with “modernity.”

 

Next the methods. As best as can be understood, this involved the compilation of maps of the area into the GIS context.  This included historical documentation as well as field work.  Here the value of the comparative data can be stated.

 

Authors 

The comparative nature of the work has been more adequately  highlighted

 

The results would be the comparison of the data and the presentation of the changes and how a multi function system has been simplified and the enclosures of old now being lost… why is it important?  Tell us!

 

Authors 

We´ve written some paragraphs within this chapter to show the changes in the enclosure landscape

 

Conclusions will be the last and will bear on the previos exposition.

 

there are certainly other issues – editing takes time

Appendix A  is an itemization of the changes, but not that the last column of percentages is added not proportioned! 

 

Authors 

The last column has been deleted to avoid confusion.

 

Figure 2 is not labeled correctly

 

Authors 

Ok, we´ve rectified it.

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors,

Receive my congratulations to you all for making this historical approach to the study of this area of Madrid that you have worked on in your recent projects. However, I believe that this work needs further consideration if it is to be published in a journal dedicated to cultural heritage.

There is no solid reflection on the values of natural and cultural heritage or natural landscapes in terms of the short- and long-term impacts they may have on local communities. There is no contextualisation in the current debates on the preservation of natural heritage.

In that vein, there is also no clear research question in this regard. It is an expository piece of work, very detailed, which shows that the work team has the data to conduct the debate on value that it proposes in the title, but it does not go beyond an explanatory text. It lacks the linkage of this information to the natural heritage challenge. 

My recommendation is to do some reading on the subject, as indicated in the text as well as the quotations in which they appear, and thereby rework the research questions, summarise the historical section, and introduce a critical discussion on the value of natural heritage and its significance in everyday life, thus making more situational proposals for improvement.

If this is not possible or is beyond the authors' objectives, I recommend submitting it to another type of journal, such as Land, which is more focused on the descriptive aspects mentioned in the text. In its current state, cultural heritage is dealt with as a very tangential topic.

 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The manuscript needs a copyediting revision.

Author Response

Reviewer 2.

 

Thanks for your comments, which have been of great interest and have undoubtedly helped to improve the work.

There is no solid reflection on the values of natural and cultural heritage or natural landscapes in terms of the short- and long-term impacts they may have on local communities. There is no contextualisation in the current debates on the preservation of natural heritage.

Authors 

Ok, this aspect has been added to the introduction and discussion

In that vein, there is also no clear research question in this regard. It is an expository piece of work, very detailed, which shows that the work team has the data to conduct the debate on value that it proposes in the title, but it does not go beyond an explanatory text. It lacks the linkage of this information to the natural heritage challenge. 

Authors 

This comment has been added to the text

My recommendation is to do some reading on the subject, as indicated in the text as well as the quotations in which they appear, and thereby rework the research questions, summarise the historical section, and introduce a critical discussion on the value of natural heritage and its significance in everyday life, thus making more situational proposals for improvement.

Authors 

Three clear research questions have been included at the end of the intro.

The historical section has been summarised

The value of natural heritage and its significance has been incorporated into the discussion.

 

 

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

I’ve examined your manuscript with big interest and pleasure. It is based on the very interesting and well-though research project with clear methodology. The manuscript is informative, and such papers usually attract the attention of the international audience. The manuscript addresses the urgent research questions and provides the multi-aspect analysis of the properly selected study area to give the proper answers. Generally, I very like this work and find it promising. Some recommendations of how to improve it are specified below.

1)      Title: please, shorten a bit.

2)      Key words: please, avoid the words already available in the title.

3)      Introduction: start with the general research direction, than demonstrate the general importance of your topic, and finalize with objectives and research questions. So, re-organize the order of your storytelling!

4)      The paper needs a new section “Study Area”. Move to there the related information form Introduction (also Fig. 1) and write more about this area (also about its socio-economical patterns and tourism). Photographs would benefit this section.

5)      What is written in the beginning of the section 3 was occasionally taken from the journal’s template. Please, delete!

6)      Line 582: why French? Anyway, the proper citation is necessary.

7)      Conclusions: please, provide the numbered list of 3-5 main findings (2-3 from Results and 2-3 from Discussion), state the limitations of your analysis, and indicate the perspectives for future research.

8)      The captions should be given BELOW the figures – check everywhere (e.g., Figs. 4 and 5).

9)      References: add citations of some articles published in top international journals in the 2020s.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

To me, the wiritng is clear and generally perfect. Anyway, the additional polishing to avoid possible minor linguistic failures and types is always necessary.

Author Response

Reviewer 3.

 

Thanks for your comments, which have been of great interest and have undoubtedly helped to improve the work.

I’ve examined your manuscript with big interest and pleasure. It is based on the very interesting and well-though research project with clear methodology. The manuscript is informative, and such papers usually attract the attention of the international audience. The manuscript addresses the urgent research questions and provides the multi-aspect analysis of the properly selected study area to give the proper answers. Generally, I very like this work and find it promising. Some recommendations of how to improve it are specified below.

• Title: please, shorten a bit.

Authors 

Ok, the title has been shortened

• Key words: please, avoid the words already available in the title.

Authors 

Ok.

 

• Introduction: start with the general research direction, than demonstrate the general importance of your topic, and finalize with objectives and research questions. So, re-organize the order of your storytelling!

Authors 

The narrative scheme has been restructured

• The paper needs a new section “Study Area”. Move to there the related information form Introduction (also Fig. 1) and write more about this area (also about its socio-economical patterns and tourism). Photographs would benefit this section.

Authors

We´ve introduced a new chapter for the study area and two mosaics of photographs in the following sections (Figures 6 y 8).   

 

• What is written in the beginning of the section 3 was occasionally taken from the journal’s template. Please, delete!

Authors

Sorry a mistake. Corrected it.

• Line 582: why French? Anyway, the proper citation is necessary.

Authors

Ok clarified it.

• Conclusions: please, provide the numbered list of 3-5 main findings (2-3 from Results and 2-3 from Discussion), state the limitations of your analysis, and indicate the perspectives for future research.

Authors

A list has been included in the conclusions

• The captions should be given BELOW the figures – check everywhere (e.g., Figs. 4 and 5).

Authors

Ok.

 

• References: add citations of some articles published in top international journals in the 2020s.

        Authors

It´s a topic that has been little addressed in the scientific literature, but a few more citations have been included in the text.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic of the paper is interesting and contributes to the knowledge of threatened landscape types in Europe.

I attach the comments that need to be taken into account or that I have not fully understood.

Overall, there is a lack of overview of how the topic has been treated elsewhere in Europe where such elements and forms of management are still preserved.

The development of the area and the factors that have contributed to its formation, the methods of growing crops and rearing livestock are described in detail and sufficiently.

The assessment in relation to current conditions is very appropriate and sufficient, which I very much appreciate. The various policy instruments, programmes and projects in relation to the conservation and enhancement of habitats and traditional agricultural practices preserving biodiversity are listed.

 

Nevertheless, the paper also relies on a number of general statements. I miss specific research results (apart from the study of historical sources and literature, which are presented in detail and sufficiently), e.g. how the species diversity of plant communities has changed specifically. According to the methodology, no detailed botanical, zoological or pteridophyte research has been carried out. Nevertheless, an indication of at least a few important protected species that can be identified from available databases or scientific papers could be cited to support claims about the importance of this landscape type for biodiversity.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Reviewer 4.

 

Thanks for your comments, which have been of great interest and have undoubtedly helped to improve the work.

 

 

The topic of the paper is interesting and contributes to the knowledge of threatened

landscape types in Europe.

I attach the comments that need to be taken into account or that I have not fully

understood.

Overall, there is a lack of overview of how the topic has been treated elsewhere in Europe

where such elements and forms of management are still preserved.

 

Authors 

A general and more concrete view has made in the introduction.

 

The development of the area and the factors that have contributed to its formation, the

methods of growing crops and rearing livestock are described in detail and sufficiently.

The assessment in relation to current conditions is very appropriate and sufficient, which I

very much appreciate. The various policy instruments, programmes and projects in relation

to the conservation and enhancement of habitats and traditional agricultural practices

preserving biodiversity are listed.

Nevertheless, the paper also relies on a number of general statements. I miss specific

research results (apart from the study of historical sources and literature, which are

presented in detail and sufficiently), e.g. how the species diversity of plant communities has

changed specifically. According to the methodology, no detailed botanical, zoological or

pteridophyte research has been carried out. Nevertheless, an indication of at least a few

important protected species that can be identified from available databases or scientific

papers could be cited to support claims about the importance of this landscape type for

biodiversity

 

Authors 

We believe that this very timely observation could be the subject of another article. A table was added (4.1) in which is shown the lack of taxa functionality and the predictable decline of biodiversity.

We´ve included a table (4.1) which reflects the plant biodiversity sampled in the fieldwork.

 

37-45 The description of the area is in the INTRODUCTION section. I would welcome a

separate chapter or sub-heading.

Authors 

We´ve create and specific chapter for study area

 

45 - 50 I would recommend that the Objectives of the study be put in a separate paragraph,

preferably at the end of the Introduction.

Authors

The objectives have been introduced at the end of the introduction. 

 

55 - 67 The characterization of the traditional enclosed landscape in the introduction seems

to me insufficient, given the overview of the topic in Spain and Europe. Is the name

traditional enclosed landscape itself a scientific expression? How does it differ from

traditional agricultural landscape?

Authors 

Enclosed landscape is an expression that defines a traditional type of landscape. We clarify its meaning in the introduction

 

77 - 78 This landscape is widespread, with different types, in Croatia, Cyprus, France, Greece,

Italy, Slovenia, Spain and Switzerland. You cite scholarly works on this topic. The results of

these authors can be used to characterise the uniqueness or typification of the territory you

are describing or used in the discussion.

Authors 

We´ve completed the references to the enclosure landscape in the Mediterranean by insisting on its uniqueness and heritage value.

79 You should break down the abbreviations, then give only the abbreviated form.

I wish the authors every success in studying this topic.

Authors 

The meaning of abbreviations has been specified

 

89 - 100 A diagram showing the structure of the types and subtypes of enclosed landscapes

you have described would be very helpful.

Authors 

Two figures that show these types and subtypes were added (Figures 6 y 8).

 

175 - 176 Why is the sentence at the beginning of the results in the conditional mode if that

is how this section is presented? This sentence is unnecessary or could be replaced by a

more appropriate description.

Authors 

Sorry a mistake. Corrected it.

 

229 Figire 3 refers to the diagram in the Materials and Methodology, is this the way it should

be?

Authors 

Sorry a mistake. Corrected it.

 

318 Figure 6 Are the figure captions given correctly (Orchards)? The figures appropriately

illustrate the subject matter addressed, so I suggest that their display should be larger.

Authors 

A table, for a better interpretation, has been included

 

372 - 373 ...in the years after the Civil War. What exact time period is meant by this?

Authors 

Ok, we´ve concreted it.

 

392 - 426 In characterizing plant cover, in some places the specific species name is used

(Dactlis glomerata, Fraxinus excelsior), elsewhere there is only a statement of presence

(scrub cover). Can you give a brief overview of the current plant composition on the plots,

mentioning more species?

Authors 

We´ve included a table (4.1)

 

421 - 422 Were any protected species recorded among the pteridophyte species?

Authors 

The pterophyte community is, although of interest, of a generalist type and we´ve finally decided not to include species

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This version is greatly improved.  The basics are set out in a direct way and the points are now explained.  There are issues and it is in the set up.  One has to believe the importance of the enclosed fields when clearly there are very pertinent reasons.  The UNESCO nomination would have the essential points that underscore the importance of the landscape, yet the relevance of agricultural and biodiversity for suture sustainability on the planet seems at the essential foundation of the effort to conserve these millennial features. Maybe look at the concluding points and make sure all are featured at the outset and make a clear introduction that sets the landscape features not simply as historical relics but as a critical component of sustainability that can play a role in the future of agriculture.  

The new photos are excellent and show well the types and forms of the enclosures.  I do not recall a discussion of the humid v arid contexts only the low rainfall in comparison to N Europe.  

There needs to be an explicit effort to explain the value that leans of the agricultural importance and the UNECO heritage.  The importance of the diversity on the landscape and the the management for sustainability should be brought out at the outset not to remain implicit.

The tables of the plants are significant -- and if they were removed the "simplified" version would lack biodiversity, critical in the future of  our planet. Is not the nature of the landscape in is cultural construction?  this is not always clear and may wish to call it a cultural landscape...

I see in Table 4 the column of fodder, are all these plants considered ramon trees? In Mesoamerica there is one tree that carries the name Ramon in Spanish but has many names based on the Indigenous languages, and it is used for fodder.  Is Ramon a term for fodder or for one specific tree?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I can return the comments on the paper that look at  just some of the editing issues. The examples should be such that others may be fond.  Transitions between paragraphs and modifiers like "this" that is difficult to see what is the reference stand out.  

The intro should be broken up to have a basic introduction that sets the scene in the context of the Mediterranean and Europe (watch for repetition) and that followed by the descriptive component as a section like setting.  The chronological section is good, except for the modifiers and transitions.  Many starts of pp are with Thus and However that are not helpful.   

Author Response

The authors welcome all comments and suggestions for improving the manuscript. We respond to the issues raised below.

 

The basics are set out in a direct way and the points are now explained.  There are issues and it is in the set up.  One has to believe the importance of the enclosed fields when clearly there are very pertinent reasons.  The UNESCO nomination would have the essential points that underscore the importance of the landscape, yet the relevance of agricultural and biodiversity for suture sustainability on the planet seems at the essential foundation of the effort to conserve these millennial features. Maybe look at the concluding points and make sure all are featured at the outset and make a clear introduction that sets the landscape features not simply as historical relics but as a critical component of sustainability that can play a role in the future of agriculture.  

AUTHORS

Thanks for the suggestions. We´ve reviewed the introduction for a more clearly perspective and structure and its relationships with sustainability and food security. Also, UNESCO list and its linkage with natural and cultural heritage was rewritten for a best reading.

 

The new photos are excellent and show well the types and forms of the enclosures.  I do not recall a discussion of the humid v arid contexts only the low rainfall in comparison to N Europe.  

AUTHORS

Thanks for the comments. In previous works (cited in bibliography) we´ve identified three subtypes of enclosed fields according to the conservation of soil moisture: humid, dry or semi-humid moisture and no for the rainfall. We´ve clarified within the text (lines 194-195; 418-419 and figure 2).

 

There needs to be an explicit effort to explain the value that leans of the agricultural importance and the UNECO heritage.  The importance of the diversity on the landscape and the the management for sustainability should be brought out at the outset not to remain implicit.

AUTHORS

Thanks. We´ve highlighted these aspects in the introduction.

 

The tables of the plants are significant -- and if they were removed the "simplified" version would lack biodiversity, critical in the future of  our planet. Is not the nature of the landscape in is cultural construction?  this is not always clear and may wish to call it a cultural landscape...

AUTHORS

Thank you. Biodiversity, species and cultural features were considered as a cultural landscape.

 

I see in Table 4 the column of fodder, are all these plants considered ramon trees? In Mesoamerica there is one tree that carries the name Ramon in Spanish but has many names based on the Indigenous languages, and it is used for fodder.  Is Ramon a term for fodder or for one specific tree?

AUTHORS

All the species with a red dot have been used for fodder in the past and, today, those with a green dot are still in use. Fraxinus angustifolia is the most important for fodder production and for landscape creation.

"Ramón" is the substantive form of the "ramonear" verb, which relates to cut the tips for the livestock. This name is for Brosimum alicastrum in Mexico and other Central American countries. As a curiosity in Central America ramón is used in live fences.

 

I can return the comments on the paper that look at  just some of the editing issues. The examples should be such that others may be fond.  Transitions between paragraphs and modifiers like "this" that is difficult to see what is the reference stand out.  

AUTHORS

Thank you very much for the offer, which we gladly accept. In any case, we´ve done some changes to improve the text.

 

The intro should be broken up to have a basic introduction that sets the scene in the context of the Mediterranean and Europe (watch for repetition) and that followed by the descriptive component as a section like setting

AUTHORS

A very good suggestion. We´ve reviewed the introduction to make it more clearly.

 

The chronological section is good, except for the modifiers and transitions.  Many starts of pp are with Thus and However that are not helpful.   

AUTHORS

Thank you for your comment. The grammatical structure of these paragraphs has been revised to make it much more coherent.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, the work has undoubtedly gained in clarity, however I still think that it is a work that does not fit in a heritage journal because it still lacks a lot of bibliographical background on the subject. I leave this decision to the editors and other reviewers,

 

Kind regards

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I believe it would be beneficial for them hire a copy-editor to thoroughly refresh the overall tone of the manuscritp, since it shows a prominent essence of direct translation from Spanish.

Author Response

The authors welcome all comments and suggestions for improving the manuscript. We respond to the issues raised below.

 

I still think that it is a work that does not fit in a heritage journal because it still lacks a lot of bibliographical background on the subject.

AUTHORS

Thanks for the suggestions. We´ve added the changes suggested for you. I hope that the included bibliography fills the gaps.

 

I believe it would be beneficial for them hire a copy-editor to thoroughly refresh the overall tone of the manuscritp, since it shows a prominent essence of direct translation from Spanish.

AUTHORS

All the text was translated by a native translator we´ve added his professional certificate.  In addition, the entire manuscript has been checked again grammatically and translated correctly. 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf