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)

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

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:

It is an embankment of soil with no gradient along the contour and stablized with grasses, tree/shrub plant species.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology cosists of an embankment of soil accross the slope, cutoff drains constructed at a given interval, water ways for disposing runoff from the bunds and cutoff drains, vegetative measures and agronomic practices on cultivated lands. The structures are laid out at a gradient of 1% in order to safely drain excess water. The immidiate result expected is the control of soil erosion, well drained soils control land degradation, decrease slope length and angle and then sustain productivity. The mantainance is frequently done by removing the silt from the channel and repairing the broken part of the bunds and also stablize the bund by planting. The technology is suitable to high rainfall area where crop fields experience seasonal waterlogging. The surplus water needs to be drained by the help of graded channels of smaller gradients. The channels should be properly constructed in a way no channel scour or sediment deposition takes place. Cutoff drains need to be placed at given interval to reinforce the graded bunds. Waterways are paved with stone to avoid channel scour because of the higher gradients involved in waterway construction.

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

Country:

Ethiopia

Region/ State/ Province:

Amhara

Further specification of location:

Hulet Ejju Enese

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, specify area covered (in km2):

78.69

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:

• 10-100 km2

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 78.69 km2.

Soil bund is applied in combination with cutoff drain, water ways and plantations.

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 was practiced by land users but not designed properly. It is the result of modifications of traditional technologies and adding some new elements improved techniques.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Ja

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agro-silvopastoralism

Cropland

• Annual cropping
• Tree and shrub cropping

Annual cropping - Specify crops:

• cereals - maize
• fodder crops - grasses
• fodder crops - other

• wheat, teff (cereal), vetiver (fodder crop)

Tree and shrub cropping - Specify crops:

• mango, mangosteen, guava
• papaya

• coffee

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 240 Longest growing period from month to month: Apr - Oct

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:

• Semi-nomadic pastoralism

Animal type:

• cattle - dairy
• cattle - non-dairy beef

Products and services:

• meat
• milk

Forest/ woodlands

Type of tree:

• Acacia species
• Eucalyptus saligna

Comments:

Major food crop annual cropping: Teff, maize, wheat
Grass species: local grasses, vetiver, elephant grass
Trees/ shrubs species: acacia, Eucalyptus saligna
Fruit trees / shrubs species: mango, guava, papaya, coffee

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): expansion of gullies, loss of top soil, fertility decline/poor land productivity and free grazing.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): decrease productivity, gullies expansion, unable to practice relay cropping.

Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: on communal grazing lands

Grazingland comments: Livestock production is decreasing because of decreasing grazing land and its productivity.

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: Teff-vetch, teff-wheat-maize-teff

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

Comments:

Water supply: Also mixed rainfed - irrigated and post-flooding

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• cross-slope measure

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

• Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
• Wg: gully erosion/ gullying

chemical soil deterioration

• Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)

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

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

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Amhara

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: control of concentrated runoff: retain / trap

Secondary technical functions: improvement of ground cover, increase / maintain water stored in soil, water harvesting / increase water supply

Better crop cover
Material/ species: teff, wheat
Remarks: broad casting

Relay cropping
Material/ species: vetch
Remarks: broad casting

Contour planting / strip cropping
Material/ species: maize
Remarks: 40cm between rows & 20 cm between plants

Agronomic measure: removing less vegetation cover
Material/ species: wheat
Quantity/ density: 40%
Remarks: broad casting

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: cow dung, compost

Mineral (inorganic) fertilizers
Material/ species: DAP, UREA
Remarks: 1 qt. DAP & 0.5 qt UREA

Rotations / fallows
Material/ species: on grass lands
Remarks: at least 1 year rotation

Contour ridging
Remarks: using BBM

Aligned: -graded strips
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 4000
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 20
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.25
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.5

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 10000
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 1
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 1

Trees/ shrubs species: acacia, saligna,

Fruit trees / shrubs species: mango, guava, papaya

Perennial crops species: coffee

Grass species: local grasses, vetiver, elephant grass

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 6.00%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is (see figure below): 4.00%

Gradient along the rows / strips: 1.00%

Waterway
Spacing between structures (m): 200
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.7
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 3
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 500
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.8
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 500

Bund/ bank: graded
Vertical interval between structures (m): 1-2.5
Spacing between structures (m): 20
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.3
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 150
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.75
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 150

Structural measure: diversion ditch / cut-off drain
Vertical interval between structures (m): 50
Spacing between structures (m): 500
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.5
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 1
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 250
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.8
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 1
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 250

Construction material (earth): soil dug out from the ditches and piled as embankment

Construction material (stone): stone is used for paving the water ways

Construction material (wood): used for constructing checkdams

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 6%

If the original slope has changed as a result of the Technology, the slope today is: 4%

Lateral gradient along the structure: 1%

Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.

Other type of management: change of management / intensity level - protect the structure from breaching.

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Birr

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

8.6

4.3 Establishment activities

4.4 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 24 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

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

Comments:

The calculation is for 1 ha land in SWC area, where the first year construction of SWC technology with normal cropping (Teff) production and recurrent cost is calculated for the second year for the same plot of land and production system.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

labour, slope

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 2001-2500 m a.s.l. (The SWC area is within this range)
Slopes on average: Also moderate (ranked 2) and hilly (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: Also deep (ranked 2) and shallow (ranked 3)
Soil texture: Medium (ranked 1, major component is clay loam) and fine/heavy (ranked 2)
Soil fertility: Medium (ranked 1, use of chemical fertilizer is increasing every year), low (ranked 2) and very low (ranked 3)
Soil drainage/infiltration: Medium (ranked 1), poor (ranked 2) and good (ranked 3)
Soil water storage capacity: High (ranked 1), low (ranked 2, ground water level is decreasing every year) and very low (ranked 3)

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 200-500 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 2% - 3%
35% of the land users are average wealthy and own 40% of the land (they take care of their land).
40% of the land users are poor and own 35% of the land (they construct SWC but no follow up).
25% of the land users are poor and own 25% of the land (some times they rent out their land for others).
Off-farm income specification: Farmers have so far not been engaged in any type off-farm activites in the area.
Level of mechanization: Animal traction (ranked 1, local plough) and manual work (ranked 2)
Marekt orientation: Subsistence (ranked 1) and mixed (ranked 2, some crops and livestock products)

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

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

Land ownership:

• state

Land use rights:

• 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

Comments:

Comments on acceptance with external material support: estimates

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: survey results

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: In the SWC area more than 75% of the households adopted the technology. They include stone walls to reinforce soil bunds. Stone walls have the disadvantage of harbouring rodents and hence soil bunds are preferred.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

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

7.1 Methods/ sources of information