1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - Italy

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

02/06/2011

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Ja

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Soil bund and Fanya Juu constructed along the contour lines in microwatershed to conserve soil moisture and control erosion.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Soil bund and Fanya Juu constructed in combination in a microwatershed for retaining maximum possible rain water in the soil by obstructing runoff water. Soil bunds are suitable for steeper slopes compared to fanya juu terraces which are more effective in gentle and flatter slopes.Land users in the SWC area prefer to combine the two physical structures for many reasons.One important factor is the cost of establishment, which is a function of labour needed for the construction. Fanya juu which means throwing soil upslope in Kiswahili intails throwing soil upslope which is more labours than throwing soil to downslope in the case of soil bunds. The other reason is that cultivated lands with fanya juu terraces are not easily accessed by free grazing livestock. The ditches placed in the downslope side of the embankment (fanya juu) is not easily vrossable but in soil bund although not that easy livestock are seen to trample over the embankment and jump the ditch which is placed in the upslope side. The other advantage farmers consider is that Fanya juu is more efficient in controlling runoff because the water that overtops the embankment is trapped by the ditch. Fanya Juu despite its high cost is preferred to be applied in combination with bunds because of the other advantage that it forms bench terrace rapidly.

Purpose of the Technology: The major purpose is to trap as much rain water as possible and also control soil erosion. Cultivated lands with with Soil bund and Fanya Juu have shown remarkable improvement in soil moistureavailability to crops compared to fields with no measures.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Soil bund and Fanya Juu are established in the same way by digging soil from and embanking it on a contour line. A contour line is laid out by following zero gradient. Once the soil is dug and embanked it is lightly compacted to avoid colapse. To further ensure bund stabilityuseful trees/shrubs are planted.The planted tree/shrub species are those offering multiuses such as fodder, fertility improving and fuelwood. Maintenance: It is done by repairing breaks and managing planted trees on the structure or by upgrading the structure by increasing its height and plant improved tree and fruit tree species.

Natural / human environment: The technology is suitable to semiarid climatic condition which have erratic rains and where crop production is limited by soil moisture stress. Soils in the technology area are susceptable to erosion and therefore the structure should be stablized by planting trees or grass species.

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

Fanya juu is first practiced in Kenya and soil bunds are also exotic but experienced widely in Ethiopia over the past 30 years.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• conserve ecosystem

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Soil erosion, productivity decline, degraded grazing and forest lands, soil moisture stress.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Poor crop production, high fertilizer cost, lack of grazing land.

3.3 Further information about land use

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 210 Longest growing period from month to month: Apr - Nov

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• cross-slope measure
• surface water management (spring, river, lakes, sea)

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 15 km2.

Soil and water conservation activities started in the area about 30 years ago by the extension program of the Ministry of Agriculture. Systematically planned SWC measures, however, came into picture recently as Integrated microwatersheds planning & implementation approach was introduced.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wg: gully erosion / gullying, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Pk: sealing and crusting

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• reduce land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

Comments:

Secondary goals: rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard

Secondary technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, reduction of slope angle, reduction of slope length

Early planting
Material/ species: sorghum and maize
Quantity/ density: 80-100000
Remarks: broadcasting

Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: sorghum-teff-beans
Remarks: broadcasting

Contour planting / strip cropping
Material/ species: maize, sunflower

Agronomic measure: mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: wheat-safflower
Remarks: broadcasting

Legume inter-planting
Remarks: field crops (safflower sunflower)

Manure / compost / residues
Remarks: at homesteads

Mineral (inorganic) fertilizers
Material/ species: Dap, Urea
Quantity/ density: 1.5 q/ha

Minimum tillage
Remarks: at pilot level for maize planting

Contour tillage
Remarks: For cereal crops on terraced cultivated lands

Aligned: -contour
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 400
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 50-100

Trees/ shrubs species: casea seame, leucanea, sesbania

Grass species: local, elephant grass

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 5.00%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is (see figure below): 2.00%

Gradient along the rows / strips: 1.00%

Waterway
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 1.5m
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 3m
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 500m
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 1.5m
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 3m
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 3m

Bund/ bank: level
Spacing between structures (m): 1.5m
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5m
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 1m
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 150m
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.65m
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1.5m
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 150m

Structural measure: diversion ditch / cut-off drain
Spacing between structures (m): 200m
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.75m
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 120m
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 150m
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.75m
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1.2m
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 150m

Construction material (earth): soil bund and fanya juu

Construction material (stone): waterways and diversions

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 5%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is: 2%

Lateral gradient along the structure: 0%

For water harvesting: the ratio between the area where the harvested water is applied and the total area from which water is collected is: 1:1

Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.

Change of land use type: cut and carry, weeding and cultivation and proper management.

Other type of management: site guarding - 0vergrazed lands are closed for establishing vegetation.

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Birr

Indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (if relevant): 1 USD =:

8.6

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	collecting seeds	Vegetative	dry season
2.	seedling production	Vegetative	dry season
3.	seedling planting	Vegetative	rainy season
4.	direct sowing of seeds	Vegetative	rainy season
5.	contour marking	Structural	dry season
6.	embanking soils	Structural	dry season
7.	light compaction	Structural	dry season
8.	fencing	Management	dry season

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	ha	1.0	199.0	199.0	20.0
Equipment	Tools	ha		63.0		5.0
Plant material	Seeds	ha	1.0	8.0	8.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					207.0

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 84 month(s)

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	tillage /primary)	Agronomic
2.	tillage/secondary/	Agronomic
3.	seedbed preartaion	Agronomic
4.	planting/sowing	Agronomic
5.	Weeding	Agronomic
6.	cultivation	Agronomic
7.	weeding and cultivation	Vegetative	after rains /annual
8.	replanting	Vegetative	during rains /annual
9.	repair breaks	Structural	after rains/as required
10.	upgrading	Structural	dry season/annual
11.	upgrading and repairing of breaks	Management	before rains / annual

4.7 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour	ha	1.0	13.0	13.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					13.0

Comments:

length of terrace, number of trees planted

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

slope, soil condition labour availability

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Landforms: Hill slopes (are largley cultivated and some grazing lands, ranked 1), valley floors (are totally cultivated lands and have potentials if suffiecent rains are received, ranked 2) and mountain slopes (are grazing and shrub lands. Valley floors depend for runoff water from this, ranked 3)
Slopes on average: Flat (bunds were built before but silted up due to soil burial, ranked 1), rolling (ranked 2) as well as gentle and moderate (both ranked 3)

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil depth on average: Moderately deep (soils on gentle slopes where the technology is dominantly practiced, ranked 1), shallow (soils on hillslopes are predominantly , ranked 2) and deep (soils in the valley floors are moderately deep to deep, ranked 3)
Soil texture is medium (on gentle slopes and valley floors, ranked 1) and coarse/light (on hilly slopes and gentle slopes, ranked 2) and fine/heavy (ranked 3)
Soil fertility is very low (soils that are continuously cropped on gentle slopes, ranked 1), low (soils on steep slopes because of erosion, ranked 2) and medium (soils on valley floors because of deposited soils, ranked 3)
Topsoil organic matter is low (soils of shallow depth on hillslopes, ranked 1) and medium (soils on valley floors, ranked 2)
Soil drainage/infiltration is good
Soil water storage capacity is low (shallow soils on the hillslopes, ranked 1) and medium (soils in the valley floors, ranked 2)

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 100-200 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 2% - 3%
5% of the land users are rich (have means to pay labour).
35% of the land users are average wealthy (get organized in groups for labour share).
60% of the land users are poor (are beneficiaries of food for work).
Off-farm income specification: land users who have implemented SWC measures have better income compared with those who have not implemented SWC.
Level of mechanization: Manual labour (land is tilled by oxen plough)
Market orientation cropland: Subsistence (poor and average farmers produced for themselves, ranked 1) and mixed (better of and rich produce food for own consumption and also market, ranked 2)

5.7 Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• state

Land use rights:

• open access (unorganized)
• individual

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Other ecological impacts

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 0-10%

Comments:

95% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: estimates

5% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: Spontaneous adoption is being observed who are average in wealth in particular and in families who have adequate awarness of SWC measures in general.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Structures do not hinder farm operations because they are widely spaced. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Practice inter bund measures that trap runoff efficiently.
Fodder is grown on bunds and there is no area lost How can they be sustained / enhanced? Strengthening the introduction of high yielding fodder species.
Homestead intensification activities are integrated with the SWC technology. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Embrace more land in the program
Crop, fodder and wood production increased because of plantation, structures and area enclosures. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Use more efficient techniques and inputs that enhance soil fertility.
Crop production has increased because of improved soil moisture avalability.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
are labour consuming	organize farmers in groups and undertake repairs before the damage gets more serious
require frequent maintenance

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
require regular maintenance	make quality structures and avoid livestock interference
require closer protection and guarding	practice more cut and carry