Cattle coming from the pastures drinking from one of the drinking water points on a hot day. (Sady Odinashoev (Muminabad, Tajikistan))

Rotational grazing supported by additional water points (Tajikistan)

Чаронидани даврави бо нуктахои обнуши ва чойхои дамгири

Description

After the end of the Soviet era, an increased number of livestock with less grazing land available, has led to the deterioration of the pastures, including overgrazing, reduction of plant diversity, poor livestock health and soil erosion. To tackle the problem, Caritas Switzerland together with livestock committees at village level introduced rotational grazing supported by extra water points and rest places.

When in 2009 the project started in the two watersheds of Fayzabad and Gesh in Muminabad district, the communities had identified insufficient livestock water points in the pastures, and poor pasture management as top priorities concerning natural resource management in the watersheds. At that time, one of the biggest problems for livestock and herders was the difficult access to water when grazing the daily pastures above the villages. At lunch time, herds had to walk long distances (4-5 kilometers) and actually had to come back to the villages for drinking water. Climbing twice a day to the pasture costs the cattle a lot of energy leading to a yearly loss of up to 40-50 kg, according to a Caritas Switzerland study. One initial measure to improve the condition of the livestock was therefore to establish water points in the pastures. At first, water sources that supply water throughout the year were identified.

Purpose of the Technology: The water is now collected in a cement catchment, from where it is channelled through pipes to the drinking water points for animals. In some cases water tanks are placed above water points, to collect water and to distribute it to the water points. Additionally, rest places were found for the livestock, where they can have a rest in the shade after drinking water on hot summer days.
In conjunction to the establishment of water points, a rotational grazing scheme was introduced. The pasture land in the watershed was divided into ten parts and in each plot the animals were allowed to graze for five to eight days, assuring longer growing times for grass on specific pastures and thus increasing the quantity of grass and the quality of the pastures.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Livestock committees, consisting of five people, were organised. They took the lead in developing appropriate grazing schemes and discussing the location of the water points with the villagers. They are in charge of further maintenance of the water points, and the daily organisation of the rotational grazing. One of the five committee members is the shepherd. Every morning he accompanies the herd and checks the water points and the rest places. Once a month he collects one Somoni from each family to cover costs arising from this method of pasture management in the watershed.

Natural / human environment: The technology is implemented on pasture land where animal drinking water is readily available only in spring, and during the rest of the year the distances to water sources are long. Daily pastures in stony terrain with steep slopes and pastures situated higher up are difficult to reach. The livestock grazing on common grazing land are controlled by the head shepherd with the task of coordinating the different helpers and having overall responsibility for herding the livestock.

Location

Location: Muminabad, Tajikistan, Khatlon, Tajikistan

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 70.0694, 38.1313

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. 100-1,000 km2)

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation: less than 10 years ago (recently)

Type of introduction
Cattle coming from the pastures drinking from one of the drinking water points on a hot day. (Sady Odinashoev (Muminabad, Tajikistan))
Cattle having a rest under the shade of a tree during a hot summer's day after drinking water. (Viviane Bigler (University of Bern))

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
    • Perennial (non-woody) cropping: berries
    • Tree and shrub cropping: tree nuts (brazil nuts, pistachio, walnuts, almonds, etc.)
    Number of growing seasons per year: 1
  • Grazing land
    • Semi-nomadic pastoralism
    • rotational grazing
    Animal type: goats, Livestock density (if relevant): > 100 LU /km2
  • Forest/ woodlandsProducts and services: Other forest products
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
  • soil erosion by wind - Et: loss of topsoil
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
  • physical soil deterioration - Pc: compaction
  • biological degradation - Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
  • water degradation - Ha: aridification
SLM group
  • pastoralism and grazing land management
  • improved ground/ vegetation cover
SLM measures
  • vegetative measures - V1: Tree and shrub cover
  • management measures - M2: Change of management/ intensity level

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
Rotational grazing map for pasture management.

Location: Muminabad district. Muminabad, Khatlon, Tajikistan

Date: 2010-12-27

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: increase in organic matter, increase of infiltration

Secondary technical functions: improvement of ground cover

In blocks
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 200
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 5.00
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 6.00

Trees/ shrubs species: maple

Fruit trees / shrubs species: mulberry, wallnut

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 80.00%

Change of land use practices / intensity level: from grazing land to rotational grazing land

Layout change according to natural and human environment: water points
Author: Sa'dy Odinashoev, Muminabad

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation: USD
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = n.a
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 6.00
Most important factors affecting the costs
Distance to the water source, and the availability of high resolution satellite maps (the technology is cheaper if maps are available because the planning process gets facilitated).
Establishment activities
  1. Planting trees to create rest places for livestock (Timing/ frequency: spring)
  2. Planting trees to create rest places for livestock (Timing/ frequency: None)
  3. water points (Timing/ frequency: 2 months)
  4. construction of the pipeline from the spring to the water points (Timing/ frequency: 1 month)
  5. catchment device on the spring (Timing/ frequency: None)
  6. catchment device on the spring (Timing/ frequency: None)
  7. calculating carring capacity and number of days of grazing period on each plot (Timing/ frequency: None)
  8. calculating carring capacity and number of days of grazing period on each plot (Timing/ frequency: None)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (USD) Total costs per input (USD) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Planting trees incl. seeds Persons/day 20.0 5.5 110.0 20.0
Waterpoints construction labour Persons/day 160.0 5.5 880.0 100.0
Pipeline Construction incl. Watertanks etc pipeline 1.0 6648.0 6648.0 30.0
Equipment
Catchement device device 1.0 353.0 353.0 20.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 7'991.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 7'991.0
Maintenance activities
  1. Protecting young trees with dead branches from thorny bushes (Timing/ frequency: 2-3 years)
  2. Protecting young trees with dead branches from thorny bushes (Timing/ frequency: None)
  3. Watering of trees (done by sheperd) (Timing/ frequency: 1-2 years)
  4. Watering of trees (done by sheperd) (Timing/ frequency: None)
  5. rotational grazing and checking the water catchment and distribution system (salary for shepherd) (Timing/ frequency: 8 months)
Maintenance inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (USD) Total costs per input (USD) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
rotational grazing and checking the water catchment and distribution system ha 800.0 0.7975 638.0
Protecting young trees with dead branches from thorny bushes Persons/day 20.0 5.5 110.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 748.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 748.0

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
Thermal climate class: temperate
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
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
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
fodder production
decreased
x
increased


in the upper area more grass

fodder quality
decreased
x
increased


perenial plants

animal production
decreased
x
increased


milk, meat

drinking water availability
decreased
x
increased


No water available previously

drinking water quality
decreased
x
increased


No water available previously

irrigation water availability
decreased
x
increased

expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
x
decreased


less money spent on vets

farm income
decreased
x
increased


more milk prduced

workload
increased
x
decreased


less walking for herders

pasture area
decreased
x
increased


road to the new pastures

Water payments
reduced
x
increased


No payment previously

Socio-cultural impacts
cultural opportunities (eg spiritual, aesthetic, others)
reduced
x
improved

community institutions
weakened
x
strengthened


livestock commitee have respect in the village

SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
x
improved


villagers

conflict mitigation
worsened
x
improved


Previously a lot of conflict in this area, regular meeting have helped reduce these.

situation of socially and economically disadvantaged groups (gender, age, status, ehtnicity etc.)
worsened
x
improved


Empowerment of women and marginalised groups. Women are involved in the workshops

collaboration between different stakeholders
decreased
x
increased


watershed group in livestock committee in the village

Livelihood and human well-being
reduced
x
increased

Ecological impacts
water quantity
decreased
x
increased


water points

water quality
decreased
x
increased


filtering in the spring

surface runoff
increased
x
decreased

evaporation
increased
x
decreased

soil moisture
decreased
x
increased


more grass

soil cover
reduced
x
improved

soil loss
increased
x
decreased


Cattle do not need to walk over soem areas

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
x
increased

plant diversity
decreased
x
increased


due to better management

habitat diversity
decreased
x
increased


more plants

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases
increased
x
decreased


grass

Off-site impacts
downstream flooding (undesired)
increased
x
reduced

downstream siltation
increased
x
decreased

wind transported sediments
increased
x
reduced

damage on neighbours' fields
increased
x
reduced

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

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
x
very well
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
local rainstorm

not well at all
x
very well
local windstorm

not well at all
x
very well
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%
Number of households and/ or area covered
500 households in an area of 93.7 km^2 (10 persons/km^2)
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
  • More water points

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? Less risks for their animals
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Rotational grazing to improve grass cover
  • Better incomes for the farmer and at the same time pasture ressources are better managed

    How can they be sustained / enhanced? more meetings and workshops
  • None
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • difficult to work with maps one day workshop
  • one person had to share their water with the rest of the village organise meetings --> good communication, show the advantages to everybody
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • One year for such a project is too short project should be extended to 2-3 years as within three years the trees in the rest places will be well established
  • only one water point it is not enough to improve soil and water conservation rotational grazing and rest places have to be implemented together with water points
  • young trees have to be protected Using PET bottles or thorny bushes

References

Compiler
  • Sa'dy Odinashoev
Editors
Reviewer
  • Deborah Niggli
  • David Streiff
  • Alexandra Gavilano
  • Joana Eichenberger
Date of documentation: Des. 27, 2010
Last update: Nov. 2, 2021
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International