Mango orchard (left) shiled against strong winds by a pine plantation (Right) (Issa Aliga)

Pine-shielded mango growing (Uganda)

Pito yen PIne Inget mayembe

Description

Pine-based shelter belt is used to protect an orchard of mangoes against strong winds in order to prevent abscission of generative organs such as flower buds, flowers, small fruits and ripened fruits

Falling of flower buds and young fruits are brought about by strong winds common in northern Uganda. This can significantly reduce the number of fruits harvested and therefore cause a reduction in income to the farmer.

Fruit trees (mainly mangoes and oranges) are protected from strong winds by establishing a pine plantation beside the orchard. The plantation of pine is established in the direction from where the strong winds come and the fruit trees are established on the opposite side so that the wind velocity is reduced by the pines before it damages the fruit trees. This is because pine trees generally grow taller than the fruit trees and thus provide a shield against strong winds. Individual plants of the fruit trees are planted at a spacing of 6 x 6 m within and between rows. The spacing between the fruit trees and pine trees is approximately 10 meters. Within five years, pine trees reach a size of about 8 meters high and a diameter of about 15 cm. The fruit trees and the pines are established at the same time and all management activities such as weeding, pruning and thinning are done in a manner similar to conventional management practice for individual orchards or pine plantations.

The most important inputs for this technology are the seedlings, labour for planting and periodic activities such as weeding, thinning and pruning. On average, a seedling of a fruit tree costs about UGX 3,000 while a pine tree costs UGX 500. Approximately 500 trees are planted in an acre of land in the ratio of 3:1 for fruit tree to pine tree, respectively. This technology is suitable for farmers who have extra land besides that for the orchards, in order to plant pine shelterbelts.

One great advantage of this technology to farmers is that it provides benefits from both pine plantation and from the orchard. According to the farmer, controlling wind speed using pine shelterbelts can improve the yield of the fruit trees by up to 50% which compensates for the number of fruit trees being reduced by 30%. Nonetheless, the return on investment is high, mainly due to the high price fetched for the fruits from the orchard. This technology is also a climate change adaptation strategy because it guards against extreme weather events such as strong winds, diversifies farmers income and mitigates climate change through carbon sequestration in pine plantation.

Despite the advantages, the farmer was abhorrent of the high establishment costs that are also relatively high compared to the costs a farmer has growing only orchards. The payback period is also fairly long, approaching 5 years for the orchard and 15-20 years for the timber from the pines. A further challenge is how to manage drought and heavy winds that are becoming more frequent and extreme.

Shielding orchards is done where the land is generally flat and the winds are strong such as in the plains of northern Uganda. It is suitable where both fruit trees and timber provide equally important products for the market.

Location

Location: Northern, Uganda

No. of Technology sites analysed: single site

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 32.08786, 2.86487
  • 32.09061, 2.86761

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. < 0.1 km2 (10 ha))

Date of implementation: 2013; less than 10 years ago (recently)

Type of introduction
Mango trees (left) sheltered by a pine plantation (right) from strong winds that result in flower and fruit abscission. (Issa Aiga)

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Cropland - Perennial (non-woody) cropping
  • Forest/ woodlands - Products and services: Fruits and nuts
Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Number of growing seasons per year: 2
Land use before implementation of the Technology: n.a.
Livestock density: n.a.
Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • soil erosion by wind - Et: loss of topsoil, Ed: deflation and deposition, Eo: offsite degradation effects
  • other -
SLM group
  • forest plantation management
  • agroforestry
  • windbreak/ shelterbelt
SLM measures
  • vegetative measures - V1: Tree and shrub cover
  • management measures - M5: Control/ change of species composition

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
Author: Bernard Fungo
Pine trees spaced at 3 x 3 meters throughout the plantation
Approximately 500 trees per acre
Mango trees planted 10 meters away from the Pine trees
spacing of mangoes is 6 x 6 meters

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated: per Technology area (size and area unit: Acres; conversion factor to one hectare: 1 ha = 0.4)
  • Currency used for cost calculation: Uganda Shillings
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 3500.0 Uganda Shillings
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 5000
Most important factors affecting the costs
Land preparation and planting
Establishment activities
  1. Clearing of land (Timing/ frequency: At the beginning of the season)
  2. Planting (Timing/ frequency: Once at the start of the establishment)
  3. Weeding (Timing/ frequency: None)
  4. Thinning of pine plantation (Timing/ frequency: None)
  5. Pruning of the pine plantation (Timing/ frequency: At age 3 and 7 years)
Establishment inputs and costs (per Acres)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (Uganda Shillings) Total costs per input (Uganda Shillings) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Land preparation Acre 1.0 200000.0 200000.0 100.0
Planting Acre 1.0 100000.0 100000.0 100.0
Plant material
Seedlings of Pine Acre 500.0 500.0 250000.0 100.0
Seedlings of Mangoes Acre 300.0 3000.0 900000.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 1'450'000.0
Maintenance activities
  1. Weeding (Timing/ frequency: Twice a year for the first year and once a year thereafter)
  2. Pruning (Timing/ frequency: At age 3 and 7 years)
  3. Thining (Timing/ frequency: At age 4 and 8 years)
Maintenance inputs and costs (per Acres)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (Uganda Shillings) Total costs per input (Uganda Shillings) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Weeding Acre 1.0 100000.0 100000.0 100.0
Pruning of Pine Acre 1.0 20000.0 20000.0 100.0
Thinning of Pine Acre 1.0 200000.0 200000.0 100.0
Plant material
Seedlings for beating-up - Pine Number 100.0 500.0 50000.0 100.0
Seedlings for beating-up - Mangoes Number 50.0 3000.0 150000.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 520'000.0

Natural environment

Average 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
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
n.a.
Slope
  • 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
Altitude
  • 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.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • 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)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Is salinity a problem?
  • Yes
  • No

Occurrence of flooding
  • Yes
  • No
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 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
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
x
good
education

poor
x
good
technical assistance

poor
x
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
x
good
markets

poor
x
good
energy

poor
x
good
roads and transport

poor
x
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
x
good
financial services

poor
x
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
expenses on agricultural inputs
increased
x
decreased

farm income
decreased
x
increased

diversity of income sources
decreased
x
increased

Socio-cultural impacts
food security/ self-sufficiency
reduced
x
improved

SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
x
improved

Ecological impacts
soil moisture
decreased
x
increased

drought impacts
increased
x
decreased

wind velocity
increased
x
decreased

micro-climate
worsened
x
improved

Off-site impacts
wind transported sediments
increased
x
reduced

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
x
very positive

Climate change

Climate-related extremes (disasters)
Wind speed

not well at all
x
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 10-50%
  • more than 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 10-50%
  • 50-90%
  • 90-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Yes
  • No
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
  • Improvement in income
  • Increase production diversification
  • Increased social security because trees provide benefits over long periods of time
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • Very high cost of establishment, not affordable by many farmers Do gradual planting instead of embarking on larger area than one can afford
  • There is high risk of damage to young trees by grazing animals in the areas, especially during dry season Fence-off the area, especially the orchard
  • Pest and disease of mangoes result in severe damage to the orchard Treat according to recommended schedule
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • The technology requires large areas of both orchard and pine plantation, which are not available among a majority of farmers in the area. Joint land-use planning at community level to determine appropriate cropping mixtures in the landscape.
  • Timing of establishment of the orchard has to be done after the pine has grown to a height of 3-4 meters (about 2 years). This is a fairly heavy investment for low-income farmers in a very short time before the actual benefits begin to accrue. Sourcing for low-interest loans from commercial banks and other microfinance institutions

References

Compiler
  • Bernard Fungo
Editors
  • JOY TUKAHIRWA
  • Kamugisha Rick Nelson
  • betty adoch
  • Sunday Balla Amale
Reviewer
  • Nicole Harari
  • Renate Fleiner
Date of documentation: June 30, 2017
Last update: July 18, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • N/a:
Links to relevant information which is available online
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International