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

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

24/05/2008

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:

Allowing livestocks to graze in pasturelands in a periodic and regular manner.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Sheep breeding has been very common for a long time in the Karapinar district. Sheep grazes in 50 km2 pasture area within the DESIRE hotspot during summers and they are fed in stables in winters. Pasture areas are degraded due to lack of rain, overgrazing and no-remediation. Farmers allow their livestock to go out from early spring onwards due to expensive feed costs in stables. A pasture can not feed sheep efficiently due to high numbers of sheep, early grazing and soil weakness due to high wind erosion. If a part of pasture is grazed one year, the remaining parts will be grazed coming year, in this way pastures are rested in rotation. So, in rested pastures soil erosion will be minimum since herb growth is good for the next year.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Annual precipitation is low (270 mm) while evaporation is high (750 mm) per year. Soils are thin because of wind deflation and degradation. As a result soil fertility is low and biomass is very poor. Negatively, farmers grow plants that need lots of water. Strip farming has not been performed and drip irrigation is not preferred method.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Irrigation water is scarce, pasture lands are very poor, electricity for irrigation is very expensive.

Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: sheep in natural pastures.

Livestock is grazing on crop residues

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• rainfed

Comments:

Water supply: rainfed

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 240Longest growing period from month to month: Oct - MaySecond longest growing period in days: 180Second longest growing period from month to month: May - Oct

Livestock density (if relevant):

50-100 LU /km2

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• pastoralism and grazing land management
• improved ground/ vegetation cover

• Rotational grazing

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 50 m2.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: management measures

Secondary measures: vegetative measures

Type of vegetative measures: scattered / dispersed

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Et: loss of topsoil, Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bh: loss of habitats

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Bq: quantity / biomass decline, Bs: quality and species composition /diversity decline, Bl: loss of soil life

Main causes of degradation: overgrazing (Controlled grazing must be performed immediately.), droughts (Yearly temperature is increasing.), population pressure (Population increases parallel to the labourlessness.)

Secondary causes of degradation: disturbance of water cycle (infiltration / runoff) (Annual rain is low.), over abstraction / excessive withdrawal of water (for irrigation, industry, etc.) (Groundwater is excessively used to irrigate plants of high water demand.)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation, mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Main technical functions: improvement of ground cover, reduction in wind speed

Secondary technical functions: increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, increase of groundwater level / recharge of groundwater, sediment retention / trapping, sediment harvesting, increase of biomass (quantity)

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: C : perennial crops
Number of plants per (ha): 5000000

Perennial crops species: graminea and laguminosa

Layout change according to natural and human environment: densely herb growing

Major change in timing of activities: rotational grazing

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Turkish Liras

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

1.3

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	sowing	Vegetative	early spring / once
2.	fertilizing	Vegetative	early spring / once
3.	Farmers training	Management	winter / once
4.	Barbed wire	Management	winter / once

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	23.0	23.0	50.0
Equipment	Machine use	ha	1.0	105.0	105.0	10.0
Equipment	Tools	ha	1.0	39.0	39.0	10.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					167.0

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 6 month(s)

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	fertilizing	Vegetative	early spring / once 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	ha	1.0	45.0	45.0	50.0
Equipment	Machine use	ha	1.0	16.0	16.0	10.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					61.0

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: tractor, fertilizing machine, tractor, screw

The cost were calculated according to prices of 2008 for seed, fertilizer and labour.

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Seed and fertilizer costs.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

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 fertility is: Very low-low
Soil drainage/infiltration is: Medium
Soil water storage capacity is: Medium-very low

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Ground water table: 5-50m (it decrease in summer and increase in winter)
Availability of surface water: poor/none (it is high in winter and very low in summer)
Seasonability of water quality and source of water pollution: For agricultural use only (irrigation) (Commonly ground water is used for agriculture. It is more saline in summer than winter seasons.)
Seasonability of water quality and source of water pollution: poor drinking water (treatement required) (Its quality is good in winter, while that of is bad in summer. Usually ground water.)

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 0.5% - 1%
70% of the land users are average wealthy and own 70% of the land.
30% of the land users are poor and own 30% of the land.

Market orientation: The production is slightly subsidised

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)

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Water availability and quality

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Comments:

Planting shrub species as rows perpendicular to wind direction which are tolaerant to drought and dust storms. So the other plants can survive more and soil erosion by wind will decrease.

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)?

Comments:

Pasture maintenance costs are low. Only rotational grazing is done and seeding and fertilizing were realized periodically.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

145

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:

50% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

145 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: Sheep owners supported this technology idea. Because rotational grazing and pasture improving are easy and cheap.

10% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

30 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: Sheep owners or farmers liked rotational grazing model, but they had no knowledge about it. Government Farming Organization gave knowledge about the application of this measure.

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: In both Karapınar and vicinity, farmers learned the new grazing technology and its benefits. Pasture grazing conflicts decreased gradually. The technology in question was a model for around settlements.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The conservation is easy to apply. How can they be sustained / enhanced? With education, and care, they can sustain the method.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Low expensive, usable and adoptable How can they be sustained / enhanced? No overgrazing, animal density mustn't be inceased. Instead, the government should support new seeding and fertilizing expenses and give knowledge about new techniques.

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?
Lack of pasture at initial phase of the method.	Feed crops production like sillage corn, welch or clover.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Conflicts among farmers.	With training they can overcome this problem. And they did not preserve new pasture areas sowed to graze their sheep.