COMPOST MANURE FOR CROP PRODUCTION [Uganda]
- Creation:
- Update:
- Compiler: Sarah Babirye
- Editor: Kamugisha Rick Nelson
- Reviewers: Nicole Harari, Udo Höggel, Donia Mühlematter
OLWEZO LWAKASASILO
technologies_3303 - 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
Key resource person(s)
land user:
Baguma Innocent
0706385387
None
Uganda
Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
Scaling-up SLM practices by smallholder farmers (IFAD)Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO) - Uganda1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT
When were the data compiled (in the field)?
17/10/2017
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
Comments:
It is a good sustainable land management technology that enables farmers locally to make cheap organic manure to increase food production while improving the degraded areas.
2. Description of the SLM Technology
2.1 Short description of the Technology
Definition of the Technology:
Compost Manure is a technology that promotes soil fertility enhancement with inputs locally availed by farmers.It makes nutrients more available to plants and transform raw organic matter into stable humus for crop production.
2.2 Detailed description of the Technology
Description:
Compost manure application is one of the integrated pest, disease and soil fertility management technologies that cheaply avails organic matter to increase food productivity among local farmers, using the local inputs like weeds, shrubs, kitchen and crop residues with less costs. Nutrients are made more available to plants through transforming raw organic matter into stable humus increasing yields such as in plantations, crops and vegetables like cabbage, amaranthus among others. Among the characteristics of the technology, pits dug should be 2.5m long by 2m wide at a depth of 0.75m and covered by soil in a dome shape on top to prevent water from sipping in the decomposing materials while in the process. In case of a banana plantation, ready compost is spread around the banana hills or in trenches between 4 banana plants. These compost materials are less bulky than the original materials and more pleasant. Importantly, soils with composts cannot easily be blown by water or wind as the soil particles are held tightly together with the sticky substance secreted in the process of decomposition. This glue-like structure also helps to hold moisture in the soil hence improving the soil texture and structure. Decomposition process takes a spell of 4-5 months hence manure is applied twice a year.
On establishment, the farmer selects a suitable place near the garden and home stead for convenience and digs 3 pits. Digging a compost pit requires less costs of about 2500/= per pit, a spade at 15000 and a hoe at 10000 . Pit one contains residues in their raw form collected from either the kitchen, weeds from gardens, peelings and crop residues among others. Materials are then transferred to pit 2, arranged and compressed in layers and covered in a dome shaped manner. These materials are filled in layers and the pit is covered with soil to speed up the process of decomposition. Pit 3comprises of ready decomposed matter ready for use .This ready manure is always cold, dark and most importantly, produces a pleasant smell when spread.
The technology purposely improves production in both annual and perennial plants such as fodder and crops. This therefore restores land degradation. Weeds can easily be removed in areas applied with compost manure as the soil is always soft. Through this technology, home hygiene is improved by collecting wastes in the home environment. They enrich the soils, helping to retain moisture and suppress plant diseases and pests like banana weavils. Besides, the disadvantages are, making composts requires commitment and serious efforts to collect the kitchen and garden residues all the time. Digging a pit is quite laborious and farmers with little land find it hard to reserve land for compost pits. While in the process, a lot of nitrogen is lost.
The sustainable land management measures are agronomic helping in waste management through recycling, re-use or reduction of wastes. Maintenance is always by ensuring that compost pits are not under permanent shade and properly covered. Pits should be emptied after the process is done in preparation for the next cycle.
2.3 Photos of the Technology
2.4 Videos of the Technology
Date:
17/10/2017
Location:
FORTPORTAL,KABAROLE DIST
Name of videographer:
Aine Amon
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment
Country:
Uganda
Region/ State/ Province:
KABAROLE
Further specification of location:
FORTPORTAL MUNICIPALITY
Comments:
Coordinate points where the technology was captured were E 03017319 (Longitude) and Latitude N 004014.4
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:
- during experiments/ research
3. Classification of the SLM Technology
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
Cropland
- Annual cropping
- Perennial (non-woody) cropping
Main crops (cash and food crops):
Bananas, vegetables (cabbage, amarathus among others)
If land use has changed due to the implementation of the Technology, indicate land use before implementation of the Technology:
Land use has not changed due to the technology applied.
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
3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs
- integrated soil fertility management
- home gardens
3.5 Spread of the Technology
Specify the spread of the Technology:
- applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area
Comments:
In case of banana plantation, the compost is applied around banana heaps and in trenches between 4 banana heap.
3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology
agronomic measures
- A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
structural measures
- S4: Level ditches, pits
management measures
- M6: Waste management (recycling, re-use or reduce)
3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology
soil erosion by water
chemical soil deterioration
- Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
biological degradation
- Bc: reduction of vegetation cover
- Bq: quantity/ biomass decline
- Bl: loss of soil life
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:
Compost manure application reduces /restores degraded soils. This is throug improving soil structure, soil moisture and micro organism content.
4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs
4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology
4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing
The dimensions for the compost pits are:
Width 2 m
Length 2 m
Depth 0.5 m
Slope: Gentle slope
4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs
Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:
- per Technology unit
other/ national currency (specify):
UGX
Indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (if relevant): 1 USD =:
3224.0
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:
1 Pit costs 2500/= (i.e Labour to construct a pit where the residues are deposited).
4.4 Establishment activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Select a suitable place near the garden and near the home stead | Other measures | Once |
2. | Site should not be under permanent shade | Other measures | Once |
3. | Put top soil in between different layers to quicken decomposition | Structural | once |
4. | After filling with materials,cover with soil and make it dome shaped | Structural | Once |
5. | leave it to settle for 4-5 months when it is fully decomposed | Other measures | 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 | Digging 3 Pits | man pit | 3.0 | 2500.0 | 7500.0 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Hiring a hoe | pic | 1.0 | 1000.0 | 1000.0 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Hiring a spade | pic | 1.0 | 1000.0 | 1000.0 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Hiring a watering can | pic | 1.0 | 1000.0 | 1000.0 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Hiring a pan | pic | 1.0 | 1000.0 | 1000.0 | 100.0 |
Total costs for establishment of the Technology | 11500.0 |
If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:
All costs are covered by the land user (100%)
Comments:
The technology is cost efficient to low income farmers.
4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing/ frequency | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | By covering the manure under decomposition | Management | Every 5 months |
2. | By empying the pits when manure is ready | Management | Every 5 months |
Comments:
The technology has few activities on the maintenance side.
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 | Emptying pits | 1.0 | 2500.0 | 2500.0 | 100.0 | |
Equipment | Hiring a hoe | pic | 1.0 | 1000.0 | 1000.0 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Hiring a spade | pic | 1.0 | 1000.0 | 1000.0 | 100.0 |
Equipment | Hiring a pan | pic | 1.0 | 1000.0 | 1000.0 | 100.0 |
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology | 5500.0 |
4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs
Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:
Labour. Despite the fact that the technology is highly cost effective, most farmers lack money to hire people to dig pits for them and buy the few necessary inputs like spade, hoes for the activity to take place.
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
- humid
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.
Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:
- not relevant
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)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface):
- medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
- medium (1-3%)
5.4 Water availability and quality
Ground water table:
5-50 m
Availability of surface water:
medium
Water quality (untreated):
for agricultural use only (irrigation)
Is water salinity a problem?
Nee
Is flooding of the area occurring?
Nee
5.5 Biodiversity
Species diversity:
- medium
Habitat diversity:
- medium
5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology
Sedentary or nomadic:
- Sedentary
Market orientation of production system:
- subsistence (self-supply)
Off-farm income:
- > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
- average
Individuals or groups:
- individual/ household
Level of mechanization:
- manual work
Gender:
- women
Age of land users:
- middle-aged
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
5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights
Land ownership:
- individual, not titled
Land use rights:
- individual
Water use rights:
- communal (organized)
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:
8Kg of bananas in 1 acre
Quantity after SLM:
25kg of banana in 1 acre
crop quality
fodder production
fodder quality
Income and costs
farm income
Comments/ specify:
Farmers are able with the use of this technology to harvest high yields for both home consumption and commercial purposes.
Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
Ecological impacts
Soil
soil moisture
Comments/ specify:
Moisture increases to 75%
soil loss
Comments/ specify:
Soils with composts cannot easily be blown by water and wind as the soil particles are held tightly together with the sticky substance secreted in the process. This glue-like structure also helps to hold moisture in the soil hence improving the soil texture and structure and therefore wind and rains cannot blow away the soils.
nutrient cycling/ recharge
Comments/ specify:
Nutrients can be recycled in the soil over and over again in the process of applying this manure to the soil.
soil organic matter/ below ground C
Comments/ specify:
Breaking down of matter like weeds, shrubs, kitchen residues (banana, cassava, sweet potato peelings) into humus by the micro-organisms improve on the soil organic matter.
Biodiversity: vegetation, animals
Vegetation cover
Comments/ specify:
High fertility levels of the soils from theses decomposed composts increase the vegetation cover as a result of humus generated.
animal diversity
Comments/ specify:
The quantity of annelids like earth worms increased. This is because they feed on both live and dead organic matter. Earthworms help in the breaking down of organic matter into humus and improve on soil aeration.
pest/ disease control
Comments/ specify:
Besides enriching the soil with fertility, the compost manure has the ability to suppress diseases and pests in the garden like the banana weevil.
6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown
Comments regarding impact assessment:
The technology has no off site impacts.
6.4 Cost-benefit analysis
How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:
very positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:
very positive
Long-term returns:
very positive
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?
- 90-100%
6.6 Adaptation
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
Nee
6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view |
---|
Manure made on farm is cheaper than when it is brought from off farm. Organic manure improves on soil structure. |
Manure is readily available. Increases water holding capacity. |
The technology improves on home hygiene. |
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view |
---|
It is a very cheap technology that avails manure to farmers using locally available materials. |
Poor farmers who cannot afford buying in organic fertilizers can improve on their yields using this technology. |
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? |
---|---|
The technology requires a garden that is so close to the homestead since the materials are bulky to carry. | Make pits closer to the home. |
Need to control the rainfall run off from the decomposing area. | Advisable to construct pits under shades. |
Microbes required to release nutrients require moisture so seasonal variations may affect the system. | Farmers should always utilize the seasons' conditions to enable best microbial action. |
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view | How can they be overcome? |
---|---|
Few farmers have adopted the technology since it demands commitment. | Sensitization to farmers on the importance of organic manure. |
There is always a bad smell before the materials are covered up hence may result to conflicts from neighbours. | Collecting the wastes faster and cover them immediately. |
7. References and links
7.1 Methods/ sources of information
- field visits, field surveys
1
- interviews with land users
1
- interviews with SLM specialists/ experts
1
7.2 References to available publications
Title, author, year, ISBN:
The Effects Of Various Organic Fertilizers On Growth Biology Essay,PASCHALIS BARLAS,2013
Available from where? Costs?
https://www.uniassignment.com/essay-samples/biology/the-effects-of-various-organic-fertilizers-on-growth-biology-essay.php
7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online
Title/ description:
Climate change mitigation potential of agricultural practices supported by IFAD investments by Mery Richards,Aslihan Arslan,Romina Cavatassi Todd Rosenstock
URL:
https://www.academia.edu/38512422/IFAD_RESEARCH_SERIES_35_-_Climate_change_mitigation_potential_of_agricultural_practices_supported_by_IFAD_investments_An_ex_ante_analysis
Links and modules
Expand all Collapse allLinks
No links
Modules
No modules