Grass strips [Uganda]
- Creation:
- Update:
- Compiler: Wilson Bamwerinde
- Editor: –
- Reviewer: Fabian Ottiger
Omukikizo (Runyankore)
technologies_1151 - Uganda
View sections
Expand all Collapse all1. General information
1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology
SLM specialist:
Ayoreka Ruth
Mbarara
Uganda
Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
The Transboundary Agro-ecosystem Management Project for the Kagera River Basin (GEF-FAO / Kagera TAMP )Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - Italy1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT
When were the data compiled (in the field)?
18/04/2013
The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:
Ja
1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches
Extension advisory service [Uganda]
Through ULAMP by agricultural extensions ,adopted to conserve land degaradation by practicing grass strips.
- Compiler: Wilson Bamwerinde
2. Description of the SLM Technology
2.1 Short description of the Technology
Definition of the Technology:
Napier grass strips control soil erosion on annual and perennial cropland on moderately-angled to highly-angled slopes.
2.2 Detailed description of the Technology
Description:
Napier grass is native to the tropical African savanna, where one cultivar is also known as Uganda grass or elephant grass. In Uganda, extensive natural Napier grasslands grew on the fringes of tropical forest until quite recently, the grass being used as mulch for coffee plantations and, later, banana plantations. Its use as cut fodder is more recent.
Napier grass strips as a conservation technology was introduced to members of Farmer Field Schools in Mwizi sub-county by Kagera TAMP field facilitators. Its extensive rhizomatous root system coupled with dense, leafy clumps makes it a quickly establishing vegetative technology against soil erosion by stabilizing the soil and checking surface runoff.
The technology is watershed oriented, with grass strips planted on the upper side of "Fanya Ju" trenches to enhance runoff checking and sediment retention. Mulching is also used to reduce direct impact of rain-drops that otherwise loosen the top soil and worsen the process of surface erosion. When established, grass strips form a continuous hedge along the contour, 0.5m to 1.0m high, regularly cut to provide fodder for livestock or for mulch. The strips are 10m apart.
Purpose of the Technology: The grass strips protect the land from surface erosion, progressively checking the speed of surface runoff, trapping sediment and increasing infiltration. Over time grass strips lead to the formation of terraces.
Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Napier grass is propagated from root splits, canes with 3 nodes or from whole canes. In the soil excavated from a shallow (0.30m to 0.60m) fanya ju trench, the planting material is planted 0.15m to 0.20m deep with splits planted upright, three node canes planted at an angle of 30-45 degrees while whole canes are buried in the furrow 0.60m to 0.90m apart. The root splits and canes are usually spaced 0.50m to 0.60m along the contour. Root splits generally take more labor to prepare and to plant but result in quicker establishment and earlier and higher forage yields. Once the crop is well-established the original planting material type generally has little effect strip characteristics.
The grass strips are maintained by regular harvesting to a height of o.3m or lower depending on the amount of rain.
Natural / human environment: Maintenance is simple and cheap. Hand hoes and pangas are the only tools used in establishment and maintenance. A little manual labor is all that is required for establishment and management. Stands can survive for decades when well-maintained, but because of its rapid growth and high yields, Napier grass requires regular application of nitrogen (N) phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) in the form of farm yard manure, readily available in Mwizi from the livestock that feed on the grass. While pests and diseases that attack the Napier grass exist, it has not yet been observed to be a problem.
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment
Country:
Uganda
Region/ State/ Province:
Uganda
Further specification of location:
Mbarara
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.):
It was initiated by Uganda siol and water pilot project in 1994
3. Classification of the SLM Technology
3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology
- reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
- create beneficial economic impact
3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied
Cropland
- Annual cropping
- Perennial (non-woody) cropping
Main crops (cash and food crops):
Major cash crop annual cropping: Beans
Major food crop annual cropping: Irish potatoes
Major other crop annual cropping: Casava
Major cash crop perennial (non-woody) cropping: Banana
Major food crop perennial (non-woody) cropping: Banana
Mixed (crops/ grazing/ trees), incl. agroforestry
- Agroforestry
Main products/ services:
Bananas
Comments:
Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): There was erosion and plant/crops were growing stunted. The soil was dusty.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): There was low crop production per unit area, crops were washed away by runoff.
Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping
Type of cropping system and major crops comments: Coffee is planted in banana plantation
If land use has changed due to the implementation of the Technology, indicate land use before implementation of the Technology:
Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping
3.3 Further information about land use
Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
- rainfed
Number of growing seasons per year:
- 2
Specify:
Longest growing period from month to month: September to January Second longest growing period from month to month: From March to June
3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs
- improved ground/ vegetation cover
- cross-slope measure
3.5 Spread of the Technology
Specify the spread of the Technology:
- evenly spread over an area
If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, indicate approximate area covered:
- 1-10 km2
Comments:
The technology is being adopted well on perennial cropland banana plantations, on moderate to steep slopes in Mwizi sub-county, Mbarara district.
3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology
vegetative measures
- V2: Grasses and perennial herbaceous plants
Comments:
Main measures: vegetative measures
Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -graded strips *<sup>3</sup>
3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology
soil erosion by water
- Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
Comments:
Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion
Main causes of degradation: soil management (Continuous cultivation), other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify (Steep slopes facilitate the speed of v), population pressure (Land is subdivided into small pieces and is left to rest.)
3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation
Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
- reduce land degradation
4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs
4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing
Grass strips are lines across the slope and are separated by the annual cropland. The distance between the strips range between 10m and 15m .
Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate (They are already trained)
Technical knowledge required for land users: high (There is high level of illeteracy)
Main technical functions: reduction of slope length
Aligned: -graded strips
Vegetative material: G : grass
Number of plants per (ha): -
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1.8
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 10
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 1
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.5
Grass species: Napier grass
4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs
other/ national currency (specify):
Ug Shillings
Indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (if relevant): 1 USD =:
2600.0
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:
0.70
4.4 Establishment activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Cutting | Vegetative | wet season |
2. | Transporting | Vegetative | |
3. | Planting | Vegetative |
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 | 200 | 7.0 | 100.0 | ||
Equipment | Tools | 200m | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 100.0 |
Other | Grass cuttings | 200m | 1.0 | 8.0 | 8.0 | 100.0 |
Total costs for establishment of the Technology | 10.0 |
Comments:
Duration of establishment phase: 1 month(s)
4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing/ frequency | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Slashing | Vegetative | 2 times a year |
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 | 200 m | 1.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | |
Equipment | Tools | 200m | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology | 6.0 |
Comments:
Machinery/ tools: Handhoes and pangas are used in daily activities.
Costs are calculated for grass strips for 5 strips of 30metres
4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs
Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:
There is cheap hired labour and the slope is not so steep
5. Natural and human environment
5.1 Climate
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
Specifications/ comments on rainfall:
Recieved twice a year, March/June and September/January
Agro-climatic zone
- sub-humid
Thermal climate class: tropics
5.2 Topography
Slopes on average:
- 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
Altitudinal zone:
- 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.
Comments and further specifications on topography:
Altitudinal zone: 1501-2000 m a.s.l. (It its the highest parts of the district)
Landforms: Hill slopes (ranked 1, technolgy applied across the slope) and footslopes (ranked 2)
Slopes on average: Gentle (ranked 1, shoulder slopes are gentle), hilly (ranked 2, hill sides are steep)
5.3 Soils
Soil depth on average:
- 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):
- medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
- low (<1%)
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: Shallow (ranked 1, at the upper end of the slope), very shallow (along the hill slopes, ranked 2,) and deep (in the valley)
Soil texture: Medium (cannot form a crumbling ribbon)
Soil fertility: Medium (can support plant growth)
Topsoil organic matter: Low (colour change to brownish)
Soil drainage/infiltration: Medium
Soil water storage capacity: Medium (crops can still grow during the dry season)
5.4 Water availability and quality
Ground water table:
> 50 m
Availability of surface water:
poor/ none
Water quality (untreated):
poor drinking water (treatment required)
Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:
Water quality (untreated): Poor drinking water (treatement required, water in valley only for livestock)
5.5 Biodiversity
Species diversity:
- medium
5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology
Market orientation of production system:
- mixed (subsistence/ commercial
Off-farm income:
- less than 10% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
- average
- rich
Individuals or groups:
- individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
- manual work
Gender:
- women
- men
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:
Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Difference in the involvement of women and men: no difference
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
50% of the land users are very rich and own 40% of the land.
30% of the land users are rich and own 50% of the land.
20% of the land users are average wealthy and own 10% of the land (have enough food,good housing).
Off-farm income specification: All land users do not get off farm income
Level of mechanization: Manual work (the terrain of the land do not allow animal traction and mechanised cultivation )
Market orientation: There is no specialization
5.7 Average area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology
- < 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
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
- small-scale
Comments:
Average fragments
5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights
Land ownership:
- individual, not titled
Land use rights:
- individual
Water use rights:
- open access (unorganized)
5.9 Access to services and infrastructure
health:
- poor
- moderate
- good
education:
- poor
- moderate
- good
technical assistance:
- poor
- moderate
- good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
- poor
- moderate
- good
markets:
- poor
- moderate
- good
energy:
- poor
- moderate
- good
roads and transport:
- poor
- moderate
- good
drinking water and sanitation:
- poor
- moderate
- good
financial services:
- poor
- moderate
- good
6. Impacts and concluding statements
6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown
Socio-economic impacts
Production
crop production
Quantity before SLM:
200kg
Quantity after SLM:
1300kg
Comments/ specify:
From improved yields people have increased suplus for sell and enough money to cater for family necesities
fodder production
Comments/ specify:
Introduction of zero grazing
fodder quality
animal production
risk of production failure
Comments/ specify:
There is crop failure close to strips
production area
Comments/ specify:
Grasses occupy are where crops would grow
Income and costs
farm income
Quantity before SLM:
50000shs
Quantity after SLM:
75000shs
Other socio-economic impacts
Competition
Comments/ specify:
Crop failure near gras strips (on the lower side)
Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
Comments/ specify:
Food was enough,balanced diet
Ecological impacts
Water cycle/ runoff
surface runoff
Comments/ specify:
Water speed was reduced
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals
pest/ disease control
Comments/ specify:
They create hiding places for rats
6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown
damage on neighbours' fields
damage on public/ private infrastructure
Comments/ specify:
There is no more water movement to the lower fields
6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)
Gradual climate change
Gradual climate change
Season | Type of climatic change/ extreme | How does the Technology cope with it? | |
---|---|---|---|
annual temperature | increase | not known |
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it? | |
---|---|
local rainstorm | well |
local windstorm | not known |
Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it? | |
---|---|
drought | not well |
Hydrological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it? | |
---|---|
general (river) flood | not known |
Comments:
By planting Calliandra alongside the grass strips
6.4 Cost-benefit analysis
How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:
slightly negative
Long-term returns:
slightly positive
How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:
positive
Long-term returns:
positive
Comments:
Grasses are used to feed livestock and mulching. It requires low labour.
6.5 Adoption of the Technology
- more than 50%
If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):
10
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?
- 10-50%
Comments:
20% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
2 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
Comments on acceptance with external material support: 2 families have applied the technology with external support
80% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
8 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
Comments on spontaneous adoption: The technology was initiated by 2 land users and only 8 have adopted
There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology
Comments on adoption trend: There is still need for community sensitization and material support
6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view |
---|
Land users are already sensitized How can they be sustained / enhanced? Continuous sensitization |
There is high demand for animal feed and mulching How can they be sustained / enhanced? Estabkish more grass strips |
Planting materials are available How can they be sustained / enhanced? Leaving some grasses to overgrow |
6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view | How can they be overcome? |
---|---|
Low adoption of the technology | setting demonstrations |
Low turn up at training sessions | Forining farmer groups like Farmer field schools |
Links and modules
Expand all Collapse allLinks
Extension advisory service [Uganda]
Through ULAMP by agricultural extensions ,adopted to conserve land degaradation by practicing grass strips.
- Compiler: Wilson Bamwerinde
Modules
No modules