Contour band combined with Sessebania sessebani, beans, manure and trashlines in banana production. [Tanzania, United Republic of]
- Creation:
- Update:
- Compiler: Godfrey Baraba
- Editor: –
- Reviewers: Ursula Gaemperli, Fabian Ottiger
Fanya juu fanya chini na mbaazi katika uzalishaji wa ndizi.
technologies_1208 - Tanzania, United Republic of
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:
SLM specialist:
Nkuba Julitha
Bukoba District Council
Tanzania, United Republic of
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Bukoba district council (Bukoba district council) - Tanzania, United Republic ofName of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Missenyi District Council (Missenyi District Council) - Tanzania, United Republic of1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT
When were the data compiled (in the field)?
17/06/2014
The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:
Ja
1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology
Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?
Nee
2. Description of the SLM Technology
2.1 Short description of the Technology
Definition of the Technology:
Is the digging of a farrow measured 0.6 width by 0.6 depth along the contour line and embankment of the excavated soils on the upper side at the slope <2% and upper side at the slope >5% in the banana, beans inter croped fields.
2.2 Detailed description of the Technology
Description:
Contour bund combined with Sessbania sesseban, beans and manure technology in banana production is the digging and excavation of a 60cm wide by 60co deep furrow, plated Sessbania sessban along the contour bund, application of farm yard manures in a 30cm deep by 60 cm wide furrow at 30cm from the banana stool and plating beans in the space between bunds. The technology is applied on Perennial (non-woody) cropping system, supported with rain fed to prevent and mitigate land degradations. The production mode is mixed (subsistence and commercial. The technology impact should be observed on controlled soil erosion by water, reduced declining soil fertility, and increased water infiltration. To implement this technology, a total of US$ 100.41 establishment costs per hectare and US% 1,076.47 maintenance costs per hectare per year according to the introduction of the technology in 2012 By TAMP –Kagera. Small ruminants rearing are the supportive measures of the technology.
Purpose of the Technology: The major purpose of the technology is land degradation prevented in 50 ha, crop and livestock production increased by 10% to contribute on food security and livelihood improvement with a SLM. Technically the technology should control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, reduction of slope length, stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides), increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling) and increase of water infiltration.
Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The establishment activities includes:- First, identification and demarcation of contour line done manually using simple tool (A-frame); this is done in May. Second is the digging of a 0.6m width and 0.6m depth furrow, excavation the soils and place them on the upper side (at the smaller slope) and lower side (at the bigger slope) along the contour using chisel hand hoes, fork hand hoes spades and mattock; this is done in June. Third is to drill two rows of Sessbania sesban seeds, spaced 0.3 m between the rows; this is done in late September. Fourth is the thinning of Sessbania sesban seedlings at the average space of 15cm done manually; this is done when the seedling is at the height of. The maintenance activities include; First is to weed the whole field done manually using local made tools (kahosho); this is done twice in January to February and June to August. Second is to apply farm yard manures in the furrow of 0.3 m deep by 0.6m wide cultivated 0.60 m from the banana stool and facing the granddaughter sucker; this is done early July. Third is desuckering and detrushing of banana stools using local made tools (kihosho and rwabyo) and machete; this is done twice (February and September).Fourth is to plant beans done manually using local made tool (kahosho; this is done in March and September. Fifth is the harvesting of beans and hauling done manually; this is done twice (June and early February). Sixth is cleaning of the furrow done manually using spades; this is done twice at the end of rain seasons (January and December). Finally, harvesting of banana and Sessbania sessban is done according to the market demand.
Natural / human environment: The physical environment is characterized of sub humid climatic zone, 750-1000 mm rain falls, 1000-1500 m.a.s.l, hill slopes land form with gentle slope. The soil texture is medium (loam), Soil fertility is medium, topsoil organic matter is medium (1-3%) and soil drainage/infiltration is medium. The soil water storage capacity is medium, ground water table is 5 - 50 m, availability of surface water is medium and water quality is poor drinking water. This technology is tolerant of seasonal rainfall decrease, droughts / dry spells while sensitive to heavy rainfall events (intensities and amount). The land users applying the technology are individual / household, Small scale land users, common / average land users. The Land ownership is communal / village, individual, not titled . The Land use rights is communal (organised), and/or individual. The water use rights is open access (unorganised). The relative level of wealth is categorized as rich, which represents 4% of the land users and own 34% of the total area. The average category, which represents 64% of the land users own 64% of the total area. The poor category, which represents 32% of the
land users owns 2% of the total area.
2.3 Photos of the Technology
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment
Country:
Tanzania, United Republic of
Region/ State/ Province:
Tanzania
Further specification of location:
Bukoba District council
Map
×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.):
The technology introduce by TAMP -Kagera using FFS in 2012.
3. Classification of the SLM Technology
3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology
- improve production
- 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
- Tree and shrub cropping
Main crops (cash and food crops):
Major cash crop: Coffee, Beans, Avocado
Major food crop: Maize, banana
Others: Bambara nuts and sweet potatoes, mangos
Comments:
Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): The majoe land use problems related to soil, water and vegetation in the area were soil erosion, low water soil infiltration and declining soil nutrients.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Moisture stress and low productivity.
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 in days: 120, Longest growing period from month to month: September to December Second longest growing period in days: 90 Second longest growing period from month to month: March to May
3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs
- agroforestry
- integrated soil fertility management
3.5 Spread of the Technology
Comments:
Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 0.002 m2.
The technology applied in a 0.5 acre as FFS site in the host farmer land one year past. However, the period is too short for adoption process to take place.
3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology
agronomic measures
- A1: Vegetation/ soil cover
- A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
vegetative measures
- V2: Grasses and perennial herbaceous plants
structural measures
- S2: Bunds, banks
Comments:
Type of agronomic measures: temporary trashlines, legume inter-planting, manure / compost / residues
Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour
3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology
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)
Comments:
Main causes of degradation: soil management (Cultivation along the slope), crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (continous harvesting perennial crops without fertilizing the soil.), change of seasonal rainfall (seasonal rainfall is unpredictable now days.), droughts (The area experienced a drought period averaged 155 days.), population pressure (Increased population resulted presure on land, while the responce is cultivation in marginal lands.), poverty / wealth (Poor farmers can not afford to invest in land conservation due to its nature of longterm investment.), education, access to knowledge and support services (Most of farmers received primary education where land concervation is not taught. Further more there is inadequate staffing of Agriculture advisors.)
3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation
Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
- prevent land degradation
- reduce land degradation
4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs
4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing
Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: low (The technology principles are taught at colleges. Hence retraining should complement this knowledge to accomplish implementation.)
Technical knowledge required for land users: low (The technology is easy to apply, only sensitization can complement the awareness to implement the technology.)
Main technical functions: control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, reduction of slope length, stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides), increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of infiltration
Temporary trashlines
Material/ species: Farm product residue, banana dry leaves and pseudostems.
Remarks: Spread across the slope at 5cm depth.
Legume inter-planting
Remarks: dibling scatered in the space between the bunds,
Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: cow dunng
Remarks: mixed in the furrow measured 30cm depth, 60cm toward the grand daughter banana plant.
Aligned: -contour
Vegetative material: O : other
Number of plants per (ha): 1667
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.15
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.3
Other species: Sessebania sesseban
Bund/ bank: level
Spacing between structures (m): 6
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.6
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.6
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 35
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.6
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.6
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 35
Construction material (earth): soils
Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 3%
Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.
4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs
other/ national currency (specify):
Tshs
Indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (if relevant): 1 USD =:
1700.0
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:
1.76
4.4 Establishment activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | To plant sessebania seeds by drilling along the contour bunds, | Vegetative | March |
2. | To thin extra seedling and allow a 30cm between plants by 30cm between rows. | Vegetative | irregular |
3. | To demarcate the contour line | Structural | August |
4. | To dig and excavate soils to make bunds | Structural | |
5. | Purchase tools | Management |
Comments:
Lifespan of tools: 5 years
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 | plant sessebania seeds by drilling along the contour bunds | Mandays | 1.0 | 1.76 | 1.76 | 100.0 |
Labour | thin extra seedling and allow a 30cm between plants by 30cm between rows | Mandays | 1.0 | 1.76 | 1.76 | 100.0 |
Labour | demarcate the contour line | Mandays | 1.0 | 1.76 | 1.76 | 100.0 |
Labour | dig and excavate soils to make bunds | Mandays | 1.0 | 1.76 | 1.76 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Tools | pieces | 4.0 | 2.91 | 11.64 | 100.0 |
Plant material | Seeds | kg | 0.9 | 0.588888 | 0.53 | |
Total costs for establishment of the Technology | 19.21 |
Comments:
Duration of establishment phase: 15 month(s)
4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing/ frequency | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | To Weeding the entire field prior nonseasonal. | Agronomic | June to september & february |
2. | To apply manure in a 60 x60 farrow along the daughter plant | Agronomic | october |
3. | desuckering and detrushing banana plants | Agronomic | September & February |
4. | To plant (dibbling) beans in the space between bunds. | Agronomic | October and March |
5. | To harvest seeds | Vegetative | |
6. | To prune branches for goat feeds | Vegetative | irregular |
7. | To remove soil sediments in the farrow | Structural | june and february |
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 | Weeding the entire field prior nonseasonal. | Mandays | 6.0 | 1.76 | 10.56 | 100.0 |
Labour | apply manure in a 60 x60 farrow along the daughter plant | Mandays | 10.0 | 1.76 | 17.6 | 100.0 |
Labour | desuckering and detrushing banana plants | Mandays | 3.0 | 1.76 | 5.28 | 100.0 |
Labour | lant (dibbling) beans in the space between bunds | Mandays | 3.0 | 1.76 | 5.28 | 100.0 |
Plant material | Seeds | kg | 30.0 | 0.706 | 21.18 | 100.0 |
Fertilizers and biocides | Compost/manure | tons | 1.5 | 29.413333 | 44.12 | |
Other | Labour: harvest seeds | mandays | 5.0 | 1.76 | 8.8 | 100.0 |
Other | Labour: prune branches for goat feeds | mandays | 5.0 | 1.76 | 8.8 | 100.0 |
Other | Labour: remove soil sediments in the farrow | mandays | 3.0 | 1.76 | 5.28 | 100.0 |
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology | 126.9 |
Comments:
The costs were calculated on plant population (banana 1111) per hector as well as length of the bund (sebania spps 6762)
4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs
Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:
The most determinate factor is labour (US$ 308.25/799.92).
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
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.
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)
- fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
- medium (1-3%)
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 fertility: Medium and low
Soil drainage/infiltration: Medium
Soil water storage capacity: Medium
5.4 Water availability and quality
Ground water table:
5-50 m
Availability of surface water:
medium
Water quality (untreated):
poor drinking water (treatment required)
Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:
Availability of surface water: Medium (In dry season all ponds dry of while in rain season some ponds overflows)
Water quality: Poor drinking water (treatement required, surface water during rainy season and ground (spring water) during dry season)
5.5 Biodiversity
Species diversity:
- medium
Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:
Earthworms, ants, grasshoppers etc.
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
Individuals or groups:
- individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
- manual work
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: < 0.5%
Relative level of wealth: rich, average, poor
4% of the land users are rich and own 34% of the land.
64% of the land users are average wealthy and own 64% of the land.
32% of the land users are poor and own 2% of the land.
Off-farm income specification: The off-farm income is less than 10% for land users who applied the technology because the opportunity cost of implementing the technology is absconded from off-farm activites.
Market orientation: Mixed (banana, beans and maize are for subsistence and commercial while coffee if for commecial purely)
Level of mechanization: Manual work (using handoes and forkhoess)
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 area of land owned or leased by land users applying the Technology:
< 0.5 ha: Poor
0.5-1 ha: Majority own average of 0.75 ha of cropland, thow few posess established forest as well as rangeland (rweya).
1-2 ha: Rich
5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights
Land ownership:
- communal/ village
- individual, not titled
Land use rights:
- communal (organized)
- individual
Water use rights:
- open access (unorganized)
5.9 Access to services and infrastructure
health:
- poor
- moderate
- good
education:
- 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:
5
Quantity after SLM:
9
Comments/ specify:
banana and beans
fodder production
Quantity before SLM:
0
Quantity after SLM:
2
Comments/ specify:
dessebania tree branches.
fodder quality
Quantity before SLM:
14
Quantity after SLM:
21
Comments/ specify:
Digestable Crude Protein.
animal production
Quantity before SLM:
0.05kg
Quantity after SLM:
0.075kg
Comments/ specify:
liveweight gain per goat kid/annum
Income and costs
expenses on agricultural inputs
Comments/ specify:
manures costs
Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
Comments/ specify:
Increased banana and beans productivity can sustainthe house hold consuption requirement as well as selling excess to access source of animal protein and utilise a balanced diety for prosperous health.
health situation
community institutions
SLM/ land degradation knowledge
Improved livelihoods and human well-being
Comments/ specify:
It is very difficult to identify the contribution to improved livelihood and well-being of such juvenile technology in the area.
Ecological impacts
Water cycle/ runoff
surface runoff
Comments/ specify:
trashlines
evaporation
Comments/ specify:
trashlines and beans crops
Soil
soil moisture
Comments/ specify:
use of trshlines and beans as crop cover
soil cover
Comments/ specify:
beans
soil loss
Comments/ specify:
sedments collcted if furrows
nutrient cycling/ recharge
Comments/ specify:
sessebania
soil organic matter/ below ground C
Comments/ specify:
manures
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals
biomass/ above ground C
Comments/ specify:
Trashline
beneficial species
6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown
damage on public/ private infrastructure
Comments/ specify:
run-off water retined by bund in the field insteady of running along the roadsides.
6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
Meteorological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it? | |
---|---|
local rainstorm | not well |
Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it? | |
---|---|
drought | well |
Comments:
The technology is tolerant of seasonal rainfall decrease, droughts / dry spells while sensitive to heavy rainfall events (intensities and amount). In case of sensitivity spillways on bands is considered to be the best modification.
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:
very positive
How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:
slightly positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
Comments:
The short term returns (annual farm income) is slightly negative compared with establishment costs while the long term returns anticipated being very positive in the long term returns ( cumulative farm income) due to reduced establishment costs.
The short term return is slightly positive compared with maintenance costs while the long-term return is anticipated to be very positive due increased land productivity.
6.5 Adoption of the Technology
- 1-10%
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:
9% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
13 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
Comments on acceptance with external material support: 3 participants as host farmer provided with farm inputs during FFS.
13 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
Comments on spontaneous adoption: No body has adopted, because the technology has been introduce in late 2012.
There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology
Comments on adoption trend: The technology implementation is still young to be adopted.
6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view |
---|
Appropriate technology in the sense of intensive labour application. |
Supportive measures very diversity. |
Low establishment costs, only structure measures. |
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? |
---|---|
Trushlines on can not reduce the moisture strees completely in the drought area as such. |
7. References and links
7.1 Methods/ sources of information
- field visits, field surveys
- interviews with land users
Links and modules
Expand all Collapse allLinks
No links
Modules
No modules