Mound plantation with non-mangrove plant species in coastal areas for land stabilization (Md. Fazlay Arafat)

Mound plantation in coastal area with non-mangrove plant species for land stabilization (Bangladesh)

Mound plantation

Description

Mound plantation with non-mangrove species to transform mono-culture plantations subsequently into more ecologically resilient, mixed species plantations and as well as to accelerate natural processes of accretion and land stabilization in coastal areas.

Bangladesh has nearly five decades of experience of coastal afforestation and reforestation on offshore islands and newly accreted lands. Coastal plantations were originally planted mainly to protect coastal populations against tidal bores, cyclones and storm surges and as well as to speed up the stabilization of newly accreted lands that eventually protect interior agricultural land from saline intrusion. According to the historical approaches to coastal afforestation and reforestation in Bangladesh, only a few pioneer mangrove species are suitable for planting on newly accreted coastal lands. Mangrove plantations that were established with a handful of pioneer species require increasing levels of management to promote ‘artificial succession’. There is need to transform these predominantly monoculture plantations subsequently into more ecologically resilient, mixed species plantations. Mound plantation with non-mangrove species was introduced in some places to address this issue.
Under the ‘Climate Resilient Participatory Afforestation and Reforestation Project’ non-mangrove mound plantations were established in 2013 in South Salimpur area of Sitakundu upazila (administrative unit) in Chittagong district by the Forest Department. Earlier, in 1983 the newly accreted char land (river islands formed from sedimentation) was planted with mangrove species Keora (Sonneratia apetala). Mangroves are salt-tolerant trees that cope with salt water immersion and wave action and are adapted to life in waterlogged and harsh coastal conditions. Due to cyclones and illegal removal of trees the Keora plantations were destroyed in many spots. In the meantime, the mangroves had accumulated sediments and the land was raised as compared to the adjacent inland areas. This accreted and stabilized land is suitable for non-mangrove plantation as the water does not flood the raised land regularly.
However, the area is regularly inundated by the tide during the monsoon. In addition storm surges flood the land and cause waterlogged conditions, which are not suitable for the survival of non-mangrove species. To successfully plant non-mangrove species along the coast, mound plantation is practiced. The mound served as a raised bed to protect the seedlings from waterlogged conditions in monsoon seasons. Akashmoni (Acacia auriculiformis), Jhau (Casuarina equisetifolia), Arjun (Terminalia arjuna), Rain-tree (Albizia saman), Babla (Vachellia nilotica) tree species are planted in mound. The major activities of this practice are cleaning of site from weeds & making of round shaped mounds. The diameter of the mound in the base is 1m and in top is 0.6m with a height of 0.6m. The mound is prepared through soil heaps from the plantation site. Inter and intra row spacing is 2.6m x 2.6m center to center of the mounds. 1500 mounds per hectare are constructed and one bamboo stick put inside every mound to support the plated seedlings to stand firmly.
The dimension of pit in each mound is 0.3m x-0.3m s 0.3m and the pit needs to be kept open for two weeks for drying before the one year old seedling can be transplanted in the pits. The seedlings were raised in the nursery of Forest Department under the project. While planting seedlings 0.5 kg compost and 0.5 kg loamy soil are mixed in the pit to increase the fertility of the soil. Vacancy filling is required in the next year and weeding practice continues till 3rd year of plantation.
Advantage of mixed-species over monocultures is the promotion of diversifying production under different rotation periods. Mixed-species plantations are more resistant to damage caused by storms, insects or diseases. Mound plantation with non-mangrove mixed species increased the diversity and ecological services. Mound plantations are vulnerable to a variety of threats from livestock grazing, mainly buffalo, to extraction of timber and outright conversion of plantations to other land uses such as agriculture, aquaculture and salt production.
However, the mound plantation practice contributes in coastal greenbelt species diversification along with speed up the natural processes of accretion and land stabilization.

Location

Location: Kattoli coast area, Chittagong district, Bangladesh

No. of Technology sites analysed: 2-10 sites

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 91.75424, 22.38166
  • 91.75633, 22.36829
  • 91.75675, 22.37536

Spread of the Technology: evenly spread over an area (approx. 0.1-1 km2)

In a permanently protected area?: No

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

Type of introduction
Mound plantation with non-mangroves in coastal area (Md. Fazlay Arafat)
Plantation on mound to stabilize soil in coastal zone where land inundated regularly by tide (Md. Fazlay Arafat)

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
Land use mixed within the same land unit: No

  • Forest/ woodlands
    • Tree plantation, afforestation. Varieties: Mixed varieties
    Tree types (evergreen): Acacia auriculiformis, Casuarina equisetifolia, Terminalia Arjuna, Albizia Saman, Vachellia nilotica
    Products and services: Timber, Fuelwood, Nature conservation/ protection, Recreation/ tourism, Protection against natural hazards

Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

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 water - Wc: coastal erosion
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cs: salinization/ alkalinization
SLM group
  • forest plantation management
  • windbreak/ shelterbelt
  • ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction
SLM measures
  • vegetative measures - V1: Tree and shrub cover

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
The dimensions of structures are explained in the description part
Author: Md. Fazlay Arafat

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated: per Technology area (size and area unit: 1 ha; conversion factor to one hectare: 1 ha = 1 ha=2.47 acres)
  • Currency used for cost calculation: BDT
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 84.0 BDT
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 500 BDT
Most important factors affecting the costs
Labor
Establishment activities
  1. Nursery establishment (Timing/ frequency: October-November)
  2. Raising seedlings (Timing/ frequency: January-February)
  3. Site preparation: clearing of site and mound construction (Timing/ frequency: April-May)
  4. Transplantation of seedlings (Timing/ frequency: June)
  5. Fertilizer application: Compost mixed with loamy loamy soil (Timing/ frequency: June)
Establishment inputs and costs (per 1 ha)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (BDT) Total costs per input (BDT) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Nursery preparation person-days 17.0 500.0 8500.0 100.0
Earth clearing and mound preparation person-days 150.0 500.0 75000.0 100.0
Plantation work person-days 25.0 500.0 12500.0 100.0
Equipment
Bucket pieces 15.0 250.0 3750.0 100.0
Spade pieces 15.0 500.0 7500.0 100.0
Plant material
Seeds for nursery bed Lump sum 1.0 1000.0 1000.0 100.0
Poly bags Pieces 1800.0 1.0 1800.0 100.0
Bamboo stick to support seedlings Pieces 1600.0 2.0 3200.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
Compost to apply in plantation kg 1000.0 4.0 4000.0 100.0
Urea for poly bag seedling kg 4.0 35.0 140.0 100.0
TSP for poly bag seedling kg 4.0 40.0 160.0 100.0
MoP for poly bag seedling kg 4.0 30.0 120.0 100.0
Construction material
Bamboo for nursery fencing pieces 4.0 250.0 1000.0 100.0
Other
Seedling transportation cost Lump-sum 1.0 1000.0 1000.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 119'670.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 1'424.64
Maintenance activities
  1. Vacancy filling (Timing/ frequency: June)
  2. 1st year weeding (Timing/ frequency: 3 times in a year)
  3. 2nd year weeding (Timing/ frequency: 3 times in a year)
  4. 3rd year weeding (Timing/ frequency: 2 times in a year)
  5. Fertilizer application to the newly planted trees (Timing/ frequency: June)
Maintenance inputs and costs (per 1 ha)
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (BDT) Total costs per input (BDT) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Seedling transportation person-days 1.0 500.0 500.0 100.0
Vacancy filling person-days 4.0 500.0 2000.0 100.0
Fertilizer application to the newly planted trees person-days 4.0 500.0 2000.0 100.0
Weeding person-days 40.0 500.0 20000.0 100.0
Plant material
Bamboo stick to support seedlings pieces 350.0 2.0 700.0 100.0
Fertilizers and biocides
NPK fertilizer kg 75.0 30.0 2250.0 100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology 27'450.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD 326.79

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
Water quality refers to: both ground and surface water
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
good
education

poor
good
technical assistance

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

poor
good
markets

poor
good
energy

poor
good
roads and transport

poor
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
good
financial services

poor
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
wood production
decreased
increased

forest/ woodland quality
decreased
increased

risk of production failure
increased
decreased


Due to diversified non-mangrove species used in the plantation the risk of failure reduced

production area (new land under cultivation/ use)
decreased
increased


Mound plantation increase production area through converting unproductive land areas

land management
hindered
simplified


Once established, the non-mangrove species do not require much silvicultural operation

Socio-cultural impacts
recreational opportunities
reduced
improved


The spot become popular to tourist

SLM/ land degradation knowledge
reduced
improved

Ecological impacts
surface runoff
increased
decreased


surface runoff decrease as raised mounds acts as a barrier

evaporation
increased
decreased

soil cover
reduced
improved

soil loss
increased
decreased


Soil loss with water decreased as mounds reduces surface runoff

soil accumulation
decreased
increased

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
increased

vegetation cover
decreased
increased

biomass/ above ground C
decreased
increased

plant diversity
decreased
increased

beneficial species (predators, earthworms, pollinators)
decreased
increased

habitat diversity
decreased
increased

pest/ disease control
decreased
increased

flood impacts
increased
decreased


flood impact decreases as the mound forest act as a barrier and protect the raised land

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases
increased
decreased

wind velocity
increased
decreased

Off-site impacts
wind transported sediments
increased
reduced

impact of greenhouse gases
increased
reduced

Cost-benefit analysis

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

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

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

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
very well
seasonal rainfall increase

not well at all
very well
Season: wet/ rainy season
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
tropical storm

not well at all
very well
local rainstorm

not well at all
very well
local thunderstorm

not well at all
very well
storm surge/ coastal flood

not well at all
very well
epidemic diseases

not well at all
very well
insect/ worm infestation

not well at all
very well
Other climate-related consequences
sea level rise

not well at all
very well

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
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
  • The mixed plantation is now more pest resistance
  • The aesthetic beauty is increased and attract more tourists
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • The mixed stand with mound plantation supports more ecological services like supply of fuel wood, wildlife habitat, timber, tourism, greenbelt, etc.
  • Species mixtures maximize the use of resources, and consequently increase stand-level productivity and carbon sequestration.
  • Speed up the natural succession process. Otherwise it takes long period of time to grow non-mangrove species in coastal areas.
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
  • The mounds often requires to be repaired when it faces frequent tropical storms and storm surges
  • Grazing hampers the stand at the initial stage Community awareness
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • Only salt tolerant plant species can be planted

References

Compiler
  • Fazlay Arafat
Editors
  • Mutasim Billah
  • Md. Jakir Hossain
  • Md. Arfanuzzaman
Reviewer
  • Nicole Harari
  • Rima Mekdaschi Studer
  • Ursula Gaemperli
Date of documentation: April 25, 2019
Last update: April 6, 2020
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