The Magoye Ripper (Arthur Chomba (Box 670577, Mazabuka, Zambia))

Conservation Tillage with Magoye Ripper (Zambia)

Minimum tillage

Description

Conservation Tillage with the Magoye Ripper is an animal draft reduced tillage method that involves the use of the Magoye Ripper to loosen the soil by shattering with a tine instead of ploughing.

The Magoye Ripper is an animal drawn implement used for conservation tillage. The Ripper consists of a frame that is attached to a common plough beam and on this frame is fixed a tine at an angle that penetrates and breaks up the soil when pulled. Only the region where the crop furrow will be is loosened by the tine and by so doing reducing the amount of tillage and disruption of soil structure while preserving the crop residue cover. The frame has some ‘wings’ attached to it that throw the soil out of the ripped furrow to leave it open for planting and collecting of water. Ripping is done in one pass up to a depth of 15cm depending on the strength of the oxen, soil type, hitch assembly settings and the sharpness of the tine.

Purpose of the Technology: Reducing tillage first of all reduces tillage costs and tillage time allowing more time for the farmer to plant early and/or a bigger area. Reducing tillage also reduces the loss of soil organic matter and the destructive effects to the soil structure ultimately improving soil fertility and soil water conservation. Ripping does not invert the soil, hence it does not bury crop residues which further enhance organic matter levels and protect the soil from excessive evaporation and erosion. The open furrow left by the ripper collects water from the adjacent untilled soil much in the same way basins (zai system) are used for water harvesting. This together with the increased rooting depth resulting from the breaking of compacted soil, enhanced infiltration and early planting improves water conservation and hence the resilience of crop to extended dry spells.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The establishment of ripping based conservation tillage mainly involves the purchase of the ripper frame and the
replaceable tines. Liming acidic soils (low pH soils) followed by a final ploughing will be required to correct the soil pH which otherwise will be difficult to correct once conservation tillage has been established. The main establishment activity involves adopting a new mindset and increasing the knowledge base to apply the technology correctly. Knowledge about alternative weed control practices and herbicide use is particularly cardinal as the farmer will have to adopt new weeding practices and routines in the absence of ploughing. Maintenance activities are more or less the same as conventional tillage except for replacing the tillage tines which wear every now and then. The same applies for the inputs except for the increase in use of herbicides.

Natural / human environment: Ripping is best performed in dry season when the soil is dry although this may not be possible with some of the smaller and/or weak oxen when the soil is too dry. It is therefore recommended for farmers in regions that experience long dry seasons to rip at the end of harvest before the soils get too dry and hard and when the oxen are in good condition before they lose weight and strength due to less feed and water, excessive heat as the dry season progresses.
The ripper is mostly suited to small-scale farmers just adopting Conservation Agriculture (CA) since the tool can be easily adapted to the existing plough beam which most of the farmers already have. The small capital outlay for establishing the system makes it suited to resource poor and risk-averse farmers.

Location

Location: Mazabuka/Magoye, Zambia/Southern Province, Zambia

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 27.60569, -16.03342

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. 0.1-1 km2)

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: 10-50 years ago

Type of introduction
A field after ripping with the Magoye Ripper (Arthur Chomba (Box 670577, Mazabuka, Zambia))

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping
    Number of growing seasons per year: 1
Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • soil erosion by water - Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
  • physical soil deterioration - Pc: compaction
  • biological degradation - Bl: loss of soil life
SLM group
  • minimal soil disturbance
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility, A3: Soil surface treatment (A 3.2: Reduced tillage (> 30% soil cover)), A7: Others

Technical drawing

Technical specifications

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: Kwacha
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 5.0 Kwacha
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 2.40
Most important factors affecting the costs
The weed control method employed is the main determinate factor depending on whether the farmer uses hand hoe or herbicides. Abandoning ploughing leads to higher weed densities leading to increased labour requirements/recurrent costs if hand weeding is used. However, with herbicides the weeding labour demand and costs cost are much lower by a factor of about 5. Another major cost is that of fertilizer which makes up about half the cost hence the total cost will vary significantly depending on fertilizer cost.
Establishment activities
  1. Purchase magoye ripper (Timing/ frequency: None)
  2. Purchase knapsack sprayer (Timing/ frequency: None)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (Kwacha) Total costs per input (Kwacha) % of costs borne by land users
Equipment
Magoye ripper Tool 1.0 50.0 50.0 100.0
Knapsack sprayer Tool 1.0 80.0 80.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 130.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 26.0
Maintenance activities
  1. slashing and spreading residues (Timing/ frequency: May-June yearly after harvest)
  2. Ripping (Timing/ frequency: May-June after harvest)
  3. Liming (Timing/ frequency: Nov-Dec before planting)
  4. Planting and fertilizing (Timing/ frequency: Nov-Dec at onset of rains)
  5. chemical weeding (Timing/ frequency: 3 times)
  6. harvesting (Timing/ frequency: April-May)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (Kwacha) Total costs per input (Kwacha) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Slashing and spreading residues ha 1.0 20.0 20.0 100.0
Ripping ha 1.0 50.0 50.0 100.0
Liming ha 1.0 42.0 42.0 100.0
Planting and fertilizing ha 1.0 40.0 40.0 100.0
Plant material
Seeds kg 20.0 2.5 50.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
Fertilizer kg 400.0 0.8 320.0 100.0
Other
Herbicides liters 5.0 6.0 30.0 100.0
Labour: Chemical weeding ha 1.0 24.0 24.0 100.0
Labour: Harvesting ha 1.0 20.0 20.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 596.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 119.2

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Average rainfall 700mm, summer rains from November to March.
Thermal climate class: subtropics. 3 distinct seasons – summer, winter and one rainy season
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to:
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
  • Land is apportioned by traditional leaders
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
  • Land is apportioned by traditional leaders
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
x
good
education

poor
x
good
technical assistance

poor
x
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
x
good
markets

poor
x
good
energy

poor
x
good
roads and transport

poor
x
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
x
good
financial services

poor
x
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
x
increased

Quantity before SLM: 1.8ton/ha
Quantity after SLM: 2ton/ha
mostly due to early planting

fodder production
decreased
x
increased


crop residues needed for soil cover

risk of production failure
increased
x
decreased


Better tolerance to dry spells

production area (new land under cultivation/ use)
decreased
x
increased

Quantity before SLM: None
Quantity after SLM: 20%

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
x
decreased


purchase of herbicides

farm income
decreased
x
increased

Quantity before SLM: None
Quantity after SLM: 15%
due to lower tillage cost, better yield

workload
increased
x
decreased


only if herbicicdes are used for weeding

Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
x
improved


due to improved yields and more time and labour to diversify

recreational opportunities
reduced
x
improved


Less time spent preparing land

conflict mitigation
worsened
x
improved


competition for crop residues with neighbours cattle

Improved livelihoods and human well-being
decreased
x
increased


Technology not yet been applied on a large enough area to make significant impact at community level but increased farm incomes among farmers has led to better education and health among household members.

Ecological impacts
water quality
decreased
x
increased


due to improved good drainage

harvesting/ collection of water (runoff, dew, snow, etc)
reduced
x
improved


open furows collect water

surface runoff
increased
x
decreased


due to better soil cover

excess water drainage
reduced
x
improved


due to improved soil structure

groundwater table/ aquifer
lowered
x
recharge


not applied extensively

evaporation
increased
x
decreased


due to better soil cover

soil moisture
decreased
x
increased


due to resulting improved soil srtucture

soil cover
reduced
x
improved


Due to non-inversion tillage

soil loss
increased
x
decreased


Due to less soil disturbance and better soil cover

soil crusting/ sealing
increased
x
reduced


Due to less soil disturbance

soil compaction
increased
x
reduced


Due to less soil disturbance

nutrient cycling/ recharge
decreased
x
increased


Due to less soil disturbance

salinity
increased
x
decreased


due to resulting good drainage

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
x
increased


Due to less soil disturbance

biomass/ above ground C
decreased
x
increased


Due to less soil disturbance

animal diversity
decreased
x
increased


due to increased soil organic matter (SOM)

Waterlogging
increased
x
decreased


Open furrow collect water in times of excess rainfal

Soil erosion locally
increased
x
decreased


If furrow are made along the slope

Off-site impacts
water availability (groundwater, springs)
decreased
x
increased


only if applied on a large scale

reliable and stable stream flows in dry season (incl. low flows)
reduced
x
increased


only if applied on a large scale

downstream flooding (undesired)
increased
x
reduced


only if applied on a large scale

downstream siltation
increased
x
decreased


only if applied on a large scale

groundwater/ river pollution
increased
x
reduced


only if applied on a large scale

damage on neighbours' fields
increased
x
reduced


only if applied on a large scale

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Timely planting enables larger areas to be planted and better yields. In the long term, improved soil fertility and soil structure results in sustained improved yields. However, if herbicides are not used, the costs and labour requirements of weeding can result in negative benefits.

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
very well
Answer: not known
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
local rainstorm

not well at all
x
very well
local windstorm

not well at all
very well
Answer: not known
drought

not well at all
x
very well
general (river) flood

not well at all
x
very well
Other climate-related consequences
reduced growing period

not well at all
x
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • Enables early planting

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? planting with the first heavy rainfall in November
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • necessitates early planting

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Plant in November or early December with the onset of rainfall
  • fewer operations hence lower costs

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? continuous emphasis on early land preparation (May to July/August)
  • conserves water and soil

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? encourage crop diversification and crop rotation legumes
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • weeding is difficult when herbicides are not used train land users on how to use herbicides
  • ripping is hardly attained in heavy soils in October rip between May and July
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • weed pressure encourage land users to use herbicides and continuous weeding

References

Compiler
  • Silenga Wamunyima
Editors
Reviewer
  • Fabian Ottiger
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: Jan. 15, 2013
Last update: Aug. 14, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Impact study on the acceptance of the Magoye Ripper, Piet Stevens, David Samazaka, Ab Wanders, Douglas Moono, 2002: GART/free
  • Social-economic analysis of conservation agriculture in southern Africa, FAO, 2011: FAO/free online
  • Conservation farming in Zambia, Steven Haggblade, Gelson Tembo, October 2003: INDABA Project, Michigan State University/free online.
  • Conservation farming in Zambia, Conservation farming unit (CFU), 2011: cfu@zamnet.zm
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International