The law abolishing the Dogana di Foggia, although consisting of only a few articles, had a devastating impact on transhumance. The main provisions of the law were as follows:

• The Dogana di Foggia was abolished and all its employees were to be absorbed into other administrations;

• The compulsory nature of transhumance was abolished;

• The foro doganale was abolished and all pending cases were to be transferred to the ordinary courts;

• All privileges previously granted to the locati were abolished: bread, salt, and oil would henceforth be paid at full price, and the wool of gentile sheep would be taxed in the same way as all other wool.

In terms of treatment of the occupants, a distinction was made between massari and locati. The massari of the “terre salde di Corte a coltura,” namely state-owned lands not belonging to any locazione and designated for cultivation, could have them registered under censuazione by paying an annual perpetual rent of 54 ducats. The censuari were required to pay one year’s rent in advance as an entry fee. The law also established that the rent was redeemable. All third-party rights over these lands were considered abolished, with the sole exception of statonica, which remained vested in those entitled to it: this was intended to avoid depriving them of summer grazing rights previously enjoyed. This limitation also ceased to apply if the lands were cultivated or redeemed.

In the case of the locati, the situation was more complex. They were required to pay an annual sum equal to the last year’s rent, increased by 10%. In this case as well, an initial payment equal to one annual installment was required, and the censused lands were redeemable. The size of the censused locazioni depended on the number of sheep owned by the locato, with a maximum extension of 50 carra or 365 hectares (1 carra ≈ 24 Neapolitan tomoli ≈ 7.3 hectares). In this way, the creation of large landed estates was to be avoided and a more equitable distribution of land encouraged. In this case too, all rights over the lands were abolished except for statonica.

Finally, both the tratturi and the riposi along them remained state property, since the intention was to abolish the Dogana di Foggia but not transhumance itself, which was to remain free and accessible to all shepherds.

The law, enacted on 23 May 1806, granted 20 days to the locati and the massari to exercise their right of pre-emption over the poste they had previously occupied. This condition gave rise to numerous problems. The date of enactment was crucial: on 23 May, all Abruzzese locati had already returned to their summer pastures, so while the massari claimed their lands in time, many locati lost their right of pre-emption and their poste were acquired by others. Others lost the opportunity because they lacked liquid capital—the sums involved were substantial—and the 20-day period was insufficient to secure financing. As a result, those who in subsequent years wished to practice transhumance in Apulia were forced to pay rent to the censuari, clearly at higher rates than those paid by the latter. Many breeders, in order to reduce costs, began to winter their flocks in the neighboring Papal States. This practice was later countered through export taxes on livestock: every animal crossing the border in winter contributed to the neighboring state a trade that for centuries had represented an important source of revenue for the Kingdom of Naples.

The first disputes following the abolition of the Dogana concerned the rule of the 50 carra. Large Apulian landowners, generally barons and dukes, appealed to what they claimed was an inconsistency in the law: on the one hand, lands were to be granted in proportion to the number of livestock owned; on the other, the 50 carra limit made this practically impossible. Initially, the Crown lifted the limit, allowing greater concentration of land in the hands of a few large proprietors. Following protests, the 50 carra limit was reinstated, and excess lands already assigned were taken from their holders and redistributed, triggering new legal disputes. In any case, large landowners eventually managed to regain control of the lands in subsequent years. Indeed, following a livestock epidemic shortly after the censuazione, many small censuari were unable to pay the required rent and were forced to relinquish their lands.