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

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) - Uganda

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

17/10/2018

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:

Pastures act as fallows therefore they improve soil quality over time

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Growing Improved Pastures (chloris gayana, brachiaria mulato and pernisetum purpurem) is a technology promoted among small, meduim scale farmers in Kyegegwa District, Western Uganda for sustainable dairy production, improved nutrition and sustainable land management.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Improved pastures comprising of fast growing nutritious grasses or legumes are generally said to be more productive than the local native pastures, because they have higher protein, carbohydrate levels and are easy to digest.
The pastures on the farm documented are established on a 2 acre piece of land located on a gently sloping area of about 20% in Kyegegwa District which experiences an average annual rainfall of about 1200 mm. The field covers the entire landscape and is neighboured by a cassava plantation. Within the same field, contour trenches were established to separate one pasture field from the other, and to also prevent soil and nutrient loss within the field. Pastures planted include Chloris gayana (rhodes grass), Brachiaria mulato (signal grass) and Pennisetum (napier grass). All grasses are native to East Africa.

Each pasture type on each plot is planted as a pure stand; the Chloris field lies on a 3000 m2 plot size, the Brachiaria field lies on 1000 m2 plot size and the Pennisetum field lies on a 4000 m2 plot size.

-Chloris gayana was planted at a spacing of 30 cm inter row and broadcasted within the rows, the seeds were mixed with sand before they were broadcasted. Thereafter the seeds were covered lightly with soils to enable easy germination of the tiny seeds.
-Brachiaria mulato was planted at a spacing of 60X 60cm
-Napier was planted at 75x 60cm.

Prior to establishment of the pastures, the plots were cleared of the bush, ploughed twice and harrowed to make a fine seed bed before planting. Two tonnes of animal manure was added. The following equipment was used:

-Hand hoes
-3 slashers
-A spirit level for leveling the contour trenches

Planting material for all the grasses was provided by the Rwebitaba Zonal Agricultural Research and Development Institute (RwebiZARDI) in form of root tillers for Brachiaria, seeds for Chloris and cuttings for the Pennisetum grass.

Kyegegwa is one of the districts where conflicts between livestock keepers and crop farmers are increasing. This kind of pressure does not allow free range grazing any more. Therefore the pastures planted were not only to provide better quality and quantity feeds for the dairy project throughout the year but also to reduce on conflicts with neighbours. Chloris gayana yields between 20-27t DM/ha and was planted to provide hay. It is drought tolerant, has a high regeneration capacity, easy to digest and is rich in carbohydrates, while Bracharia mulato is also palatable and often used in a cut & carry system. Bracharia is easy to conserve as compared to other grasses and is rich in proteins. Napier grass was planted for its early maturity, regeneration capacity, especially during the rainy season and just like Brachiaria easy to makes silage. The improved pastures are suitable for both cut & carry and grazing and they are tolerant to drought therefore providing a sustainable feed base for the diary all year round. The pastures were also planted to act as a fallow, thereby also improving soil fertility.

Establishment costs were estimated to be at UGX 1,396,000 while maintenance costs were estimated to be at UGX 320,000 per annum. Improved pastures are advantageous because they provide more nutrients than local pastures; Chloris provides more carbohydrates whereas Brachiaria and Penisetum provide more protein. Pastures rehabilitate degraded land by acting as vegetation cover for longer periods hence reducing soil erosion and increasing soil fertility. They control broad leaved weeds and a small piece of land is used to cut and carry for stock. Improved pastures require fencing as well as improved management practices such as a good soil fertility plan.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.4 Videos 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

Indicate year of implementation:

2016

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

The improved pastures were promoted by Rwebitaba ZARDI through the Kamwenge District Local government

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

Comments:

The farm is neighboured by a cassava plantation and a maize field

If land use has changed due to the implementation of the Technology, indicate land use before implementation of the Technology:

The field was previously used for maize cultivation

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• mixed rainfed-irrigated

Comments:

There is a wetland at the foot of the slopes where water is drawn and used to irrigate the pastures, in addition an irrigation system is being constructed to enable sustainable pasture production.

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 2

Specify:

Pastures are harvested twice a year

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• pastoralism and grazing land management

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:

• < 0.1 km2 (10 ha)

Comments:

The field lies on 0.8 ha of land

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Improved pastures planted include Signal grass (Brachiaria mulato), Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana), and Napier grass (pernnisetum Purpurem)

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

The pastures are a perennial crop that act as a soil cover for longer periods of time, preventing soil and nutrient loss therefore improving soil fertility and productivity

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:

• prevent land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

Comments:

Pastures, because of their longivity, reduce soil erosion and therefore improve soil fertility

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

The technical drawing shows improved pastures established on 0.8 ha of land (8000 m2), planted with Brachiaria (planted on 1000 m2 plot size at a spacing of 60×60cm), Chloris guyana, planted on a 3000 m2 plot size at a spacing of 30cm inter row and seed broadcasted within the row. Napier grass planted on a 4000 m2 plot size at a spacing of 75×60cm, using plant cuttings. The pastures are planted in three different blocks with each block separated by a contour trench of 2 m width and 60 m length. The Brachiaria grows up to a height of 50 cm, Chloris to around 90 cm and Napier grass can grow up to a 2 m.

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

other/ national currency (specify):

UGX

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

3800.0

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Slashing	Management	Once
2.	Ploughing	Agronomic	Once
3.	Field Marking	Agronomic	Once
4.	Planting	Agronomic	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	Slashing	day	3.0	100000.0	300000.0	100.0
Labour	Ploughing	day	3.0	120000.0	360000.0	100.0
Labour	Planting	day	2.0	100000.0	200000.0	100.0
Labour	Excavating contour trenches	meter		10000.0		100.0
Equipment	Slasher	piece	3.0	7000.0	21000.0	100.0
Equipment	Hoes	piece	3.0	10000.0	30000.0	100.0
Equipment	Chisel	piece	1.0	10000.0	10000.0	100.0
Equipment	Spirit level	piece	1.0	20000.0	20000.0	100.0
Plant material	Wheelbarrow	piece	1.0	75000.0	75000.0	100.0
Plant material	Panga	piece	3.0	10000.0	30000.0	100.0
Plant material	Brachiaria	bags	5.0	50000.0	250000.0
Plant material	Chloris gayana	kg	1.0	100000.0	100000.0
Plant material	Napier grass	piece	10.0	50000.0	500000.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Manure	bag	20.0	10000.0	200000.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					2096000.0

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

Labour and equipment costs were covered by the land user

Comments:

Planting material was provided by the Town Council

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Weeding	Agronomic	once a month
2.	Pesticide application	Agronomic	once a month
3.	Cutting	Management	twice a month
4.	Fertiliser application	Agronomic	twice annually

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	piece	1.5	80000.0	120000.0	100.0
Labour	Spraying	piece	1.5	10000.0	15000.0	100.0
Labour	Cutting	piece	1.5	10000.0	15000.0	100.0
Equipment	Panga	piece	3.0	10000.0	30000.0	100.0
Equipment	Knapsack	piece	1.0	120000.0	120000.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Pesticides	liter	1.0	20000.0	20000.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					320000.0

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

The seed and planting material were given by the RwebitabaZARDI through the Kyegegwa Town Council

Comments:

Establishment of the improved pastures was done in partnership with the RwebiZARDI and Kyegegwa town council. The Agreement was for the development partners to provide seed and the beneficiary to incur establishment and maintenance costs .

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Availability of labour

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Nee

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Ja

Regularity:

episodically

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

The water table is high

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

The field has only grasses

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

The farmer owns a general merchandise shop in Kyegegwa town

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:

• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• individual

Comments:

A personal water reservoir was constructed

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Soil

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)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	Type of climatic change/ extreme	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	very well
annual rainfall		decrease	very well

Comments:

Since pastures help in soil moisture retention they cope with drought easily

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:

Establishment costs of improved pastures are high, therefore benefits are meager at the beginning, but as they last for more than a year, very positive benefits are acquired

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• single cases/ experimental

Comments:

For now the field is also used as a multiplication site for seed

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
Napier does not flower hence it ensures constant supply of fodder to live stock throughout the year
They are highly nutritious
They reduce soil erosion
Increase soil fertility

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The grasses are resistant to pests and diseases
They take a short time to establish
They are tolerant to drought
The mixer of Chloris, Brachiaria and Penisetum grasses ensures that the animals have a balanced diet

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?
Establishment costs are high	soliciting support from local government
Accessibility to seed is difficult	its got through District local government
Skills in hay production are still lacking	seek for training from development agents

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
If not properly managed the grasses can flower and loose their nutritive value	harvest grass before flowering
If the livestock are grazed before the grasses have well established they can be destroyed	cut and carry until pastures have reached 6 months and above

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

FROM EXTENSIVE TO SEMI-INTENSIVE LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN THE ALBERTINE RIFT; (RashidMubiru., Teddy Namirimu,Suzan Owino, Louis Kyalingonza, Priscilla Nyadoiand Joel Buyinza ). 2013

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.uws.or.ug/wp-content/themes/UWS/PDFs/LIVESTOCK%20MANAGEMENT%20EXTENSION%20MANNUAL%202013%20UWS-1.pdf

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

FROM EXTENSIVE TO SEMI-INTENSIVE LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SYSTEMS IN THE ALBERTINE RIFT; (RashidMubiru., Teddy Namirimu,Suzan Owino, Louis Kyalingonza, Priscilla Nyadoiand Joel Buyinza ). 2013

URL:

http://www.uws.or.ug/wp-content/themes/UWS/PDFs/LIVESTOCK%20MANAGEMENT%20EXTENSION%20MANNUAL%202013%20UWS-1.pdf

Title/ description:

For more milk, grow pastures for your cows( New vision news paper; Monday,July 29,2019)

URL:

https://www.newvision.co.ug/new_vision/news/1499385/milk-grow-pastures-cows