Summary

Description

Stones cleared from land within a narrow valley floor where flat land is at a premium, was used to construct a perimeter stone wall which was subsequently supplemented with a row of poplar tree to protect an agro-forestry area with small scale supplementary irrigation.

The area in question is a very narrow, flat valley floor, 95% of which was covered in stones and boulders, and devoid of vegetation, both grass and trees/shrubs. The stones in the area were cleared and used to build a protecting, perimeter wall (approx. 1.5 m high). This was then supplemented by an inner row of fast growing poplar trees. The stone clearing has resulted in deeper soil within the protected area that has led to far greater vegetation coverage, such as grass (that can be cut and used as fodder), forest and orchard trees and vegetable gardens. Irrigation was provided to the area by a small diameter poly pipe from a permanent spring. The area is now being extended to almost double the size of the initial walled agro-forest area.

Purpose of the Technology: The farmer’s primary aim, in initiating and continuing this SLM approach, was to “leave a legacy of improved land” for future generations, recognising how little flat and potentially productive land there is in this high, narrow valley location. Clearing the land of stones and building a walled enclosure that was irrigated greatly assured the quantity and quality of fodder for his animals, as they remain fenced in beside his village home almost all year. Fruit and vegetable production was also greatly improved.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The family commenced stone clearing and wall construction in 2005. The next task was tree planting; poplar trees were planted around the wall's perimeter. The irrigation source was tapped into using a poly pipe. The vegetable gardens are seasonal and their plants change with the seasons and the family’s needs. Stone removal continues even now, to improve the soil in the walled area. The farmer hopes to extend the walled area in the future.

Natural / human environment: Before the family began clearing stones and building the wall, this land had almost zero productivity. This area has a shortage of cultivated land and with increases in popluation and continued food insecurity, cultivated land is at a premium.

Location

Location: Kushon village, Romit Jamoat, Vahdat, Central District of Tajikistan, Tajikistan

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites

69.2812, 38.7801

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

In a permanently protected area?:

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

Type of introduction

through land users' innovation
as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)
during experiments/ research
through projects/ external interventions

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
increase size of agrictultural land

Land use

Land use mixed within the same land unit: Yes - Agroforestry

Cropland
- Annual cropping
- Perennial (non-woody) cropping
- Tree and shrub cropping: stone fruits (peach, apricot, cherry, plum, etc), pome fruits (apples, pears, quinces, etc.)
Number of growing seasons per year: 1

Grazing land
Animal type: cattle - dairy, sheep

Forest/ woodlandsProducts and services: Fuelwood, Fruits and nuts, Other forest products

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 - Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion

biological degradation - Bc: reduction of vegetation cover, Bh: loss of habitats, Bq: quantity/ biomass decline, Bl: loss of soil life

SLM group

agroforestry
improved ground/ vegetation cover

SLM measures

agronomic measures - A1: Vegetation/ soil cover

vegetative measures - V1: Tree and shrub cover, V2: Grasses and perennial herbaceous plants

structural measures - S6: Walls, barriers, palisades, fences

management measures - M1: Change of land use type, M2: Change of management/ intensity level, M3: Layout according to natural and human environment, M4: Major change in timing of activities, M5: Control/ change of species composition

Technical drawing

Technical specifications

The drawing shows a 1.5m high stone wall, lined with poplar trees on a gentle slope. The site is located in the valley floor and has access to a naturally occuring spring. The enclosed land is now used mainly for fodder production, intercropped with fruit trees and vegetable patches.

Location: Khatlon province. Kushon village, Romit jamoat, Vahdat raion

Date: 21.04.2011

Technical knowledge required for land users: high (The farmer has a good understanding of farming techniques.)

Main technical functions: improvement of ground cover, improvement of topsoil structure (compaction), increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, increase of biomass (quantity), promotion of vegetation species and varieties (quality, eg palatable fodder)

Secondary technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard, reduction of slope angle, reduction of slope length, improvement of subsoil structure (hardpan), stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides), increase of groundwater level / recharge of groundwater, reduction in wind speed, spatial arrangement and diversification of land use

Better crop cover
Material/ species: Perennial pasture (grass) for fodder
Quantity/ density: 100 %
Remarks: covers 1.3 ha

Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: Forest and orchard trees with fodder grasses and vegetable gardens
Quantity/ density: 100
Remarks: dramatically increased

Cover cropping
Material/ species: Perennial grass is the cover crop
Quantity/ density: 100
Remarks: dramatically increased

Retaining more vegetation cover
Material/ species: Land previously bare and stony
Quantity/ density: 100
Remarks: vegetation cover increased

Furrows (drainage, irrigation)
Material/ species: Irrigation via hand cut 20cm cube ditches and poly pipe from nearby spring

Agronomic measure: Stone removal and clearance

Aligned: -along boundary
Vegetative material: T : trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 1200
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 1 m

In blocks
Vegetative material: F : fruit trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 60% cover
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): About 0.5 ha planted

Trees/ shrubs species: Poplar trees - planted

Fruit trees / shrubs species: Apple, cherry, apricot - planted

Grass species: Grass - natural

Other species: Vegetable garden - planted

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 0.00%

Wall/ barrier
Vertical interval between structures (m): Wall around area
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 1.5
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.7
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 500

Construction material (stone): Stone wall – from stones removed from within area

Lateral gradient along the structure: 3 degrees%

Author: Des Mcgarry, Land Management Institute, Giprozem 15, Dushanbe, Tajikistan

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs

Costs are calculated:
Currency used for cost calculation: somoni
Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 4.5 somoni
Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 4.50

Most important factors affecting the costs

The human labour costs involving the family were nothing as they willingly gave of their time to clear the land and build the wall, plant trees and create vegetable gardens. The real labour cost were the few days when the farmer paid 3 men to help build the wall. The cost of the wall cost was also nothing as all materials came from on site. Trees – there was an initial start up cost and the farmer said he tries to plant at least 20 new trees each year to maintain and enhance productivity Grasses (fodder) – are self regenerating and local. The farmer has never bought grass seed or used fertiliser on the grass

Establishment activities

Stone clearing (Timing/ frequency: On initial set up)
Wall building (Timing/ frequency: On initial set up)
Tree planting (Timing/ frequency: annually)
Irrigation pipe (Timing/ frequency: On initial set up)
Vegetable garden (Timing/ frequency: annually)

Establishment inputs and costs

Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit (somoni)	Total costs per input (somoni)	% of costs borne by land users
Labour
Stone clearing	Persons/day	15.0	50.0	750.0	100.0
Wall building	Persons/day	15.0	50.0	750.0	100.0
Tree planting	Persons/day	10.0	25.0	250.0	100.0
Vegetable garden	Persons/day	20.0	15.0	300.0	100.0
Equipment
Tools	Pieces	6.0	16.66666666	100.0	100.0
Plant material
Trees	Pieces	100.0	10.0	1000.0	100.0
Plants for vegetable garden	-	1.0	450.0	450.0	100.0
Construction material
Irrigation pipe	meter	700.0	3.0	2100.0	100.0
Wall	meter	500.0	7.0	3500.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology				9'200.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD				2'044.44

Maintenance activities

Stone clearing (Timing/ frequency: Annually)
Vegetable garden (Timing/ frequency: Annually)
Tree planting (Timing/ frequency: Annually)
Animal husbandry (Timing/ frequency: Annually)
Fertilising and cultivating (garden vegetables) (Timing/ frequency: Annually)
Tree planting (Timing/ frequency: Annually)
Vegetable planting (Timing/ frequency: Seasonally)
random stone removal (Timing/ frequency: Annual)

Maintenance inputs and costs

Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit (somoni)	Total costs per input (somoni)	% of costs borne by land users
Labour
Stone clearing	Persons/day	10.0	25.0	250.0	100.0
Vegetable garden	Persons/day	50.0	25.0	1250.0	100.0
Tree planting	Persons/day	20.0	15.0	300.0	100.0
Animal husbandry	Persons/day	40.0	15.0	600.0	100.0
Other
Labour: Fertilising and cultivating	Persons/day	20.0	15.0	300.0	100.0
Labour: Random stone removal	Persons/day	10.0	15.0	150.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology				2'850.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD				633.33

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

Dominate in Spring (March-May) The period June to September is very hot and dry (almost no rain).
Thermal climate class: temperate

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:

Is salinity a problem?

Occurrence of flooding

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
This is jamoat land (local village land). The farmer has no certificate but is now applying for one

Water use rights

open access (unorganized)
communal (organized)
leased
individual
This is jamoat land (local village land). The farmer has no certificate but is now applying for one

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

Crop production

decreased

increased

Before the Technology this land was almost 95% covered in rocks with almost zero carrying capacity, no productivity and no water supply. So the % increase as a result of the Technology is all related to this increase from nothing.

fodder production

decreased

increased

fodder quality

decreased

increased

animal production

decreased

increased

Quantity before SLM: 2
Quantity after SLM: None

wood production

decreased

increased

risk of production failure

increased

decreased

product diversity

decreased

increased

production area (new land under cultivation/ use)

decreased

increased

land management

hindered

simplified

energy generation (e.g. hydro, bio)

decreased

increased

drinking water availability

decreased

increased

water availability for livestock

decreased

increased

irrigation water availability

decreased

increased

expenses on agricultural inputs

increased

decreased

farm income

decreased

increased

diversity of income sources

decreased

increased

workload

increased

decreased

Socio-cultural impacts

food security/ self-sufficiency

reduced

improved

health situation

worsened

improved

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced

improved

Livelihood and human well-being

None

The primary aim of the farmer in introducing the technology was to improve the family’s lifestyle (livelihoods) and well being. He has easily achieved this and it seems to be getting better, year on year.

Ecological impacts

water quantity

decreased

increased

water quality

decreased

increased

harvesting/ collection of water (runoff, dew, snow, etc)

reduced

improved

surface runoff

increased

decreased

excess water drainage

reduced

improved

evaporation

increased

decreased

soil moisture

decreased

increased

soil cover

reduced

improved

soil loss

increased

decreased

soil crusting/ sealing

increased

reduced

soil compaction

increased

reduced

nutrient cycling/ recharge

decreased

increased

biomass/ above ground C

decreased

increased

plant diversity

decreased

increased

Hazard towards adverse events

increased

decreased

Off-site impacts

water availability (groundwater, springs)

decreased

increased

buffering/ filtering capacity (by soil, vegetation, wetlands)

reduced

improved

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view

As above, as these words were transcribed during the farmer interview, on site.

Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view

The stone clearing and wall building underpins the whole SLM initiative. That it was achieved by only 3 or 4 people, in under a year and at such a low cost (with minimal paid labour) adds to the strengths. The wall is also critical to keep animals out of this now richly vegetated area, not only sheep and goats but also wild pigs and even wolves. The stone clearing “created” soil which is critical for all the vegetation growth within the walled area.

How can they be sustained / enhanced? The farmer is in the process of expanding the stone cleared area, and is using the stone to build a larger perimeter fence, aiming for a larger plot of 2 or 3 ha.
Bringing water to the site (at his own cost) by poly pipe was a critical part to the technology. The walled agro-forestry area would have struggled without this extra and constant water supply – as the soil is so shallow (all the rock remains below the soil surface). Now he can have good fodder grass, trees, orchard and vegetables with a guarenteed regular supply. Getting the plants and trees through the hot summer months is the key use of the water.

How can they be sustained / enhanced? The farmer wishes to source a 2nd spring to water the extended (2 - 3 ha) site.
The rich mix of vegetation on the site (trees, perennial grasses and vegetable production) not only ensures the intervention remains viable but also ensures a continuous, rich, healthy food supply to the family and their animals year round.

How can they be sustained / enhanced? The farmer has already started to plant new fruit trees outside the original walled area, in readiness for moving the fence to encompass a 2 -3 ha site.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome

As above; as these were the sentiments of the farmer during the on site interview.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome

None really. What the farmer has achieved is most impressive. Particularly as his Technologies were all self-financed and conducted slowly and carefully, hence with no financial burden to the family and no interruption or lessening of their food supply. If costs / budget permit (unlikely) to bring some power-type assistance to stone removal (like a small tractor) or a solar powered pump to increase irrigation water pressure. However, the farmer may not wish to be reliant on such items, as if they breakdown, his whole enterprise (currently so successful) may suffer.

Integrated stone wall and poplar tree perimeter fencing (Tajikistan)

Description

Stones cleared from land within a narrow valley floor where flat land is at a premium, was used to construct a perimeter stone wall which was subsequently supplemented with a row of poplar tree to protect an agro-forestry area with small scale supplementary irrigation.

Location

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose

Land use

Water supply

Purpose related to land degradation

Degradation addressed

SLM group

SLM measures

Technical drawing

Technical specifications

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs

Most important factors affecting the costs

Establishment activities

Establishment inputs and costs

Maintenance activities

Maintenance inputs and costs

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall

Agro-climatic zone

Specifications on climate

Slope

Landforms

Altitude

Technology is applied in

Soil depth

Soil texture (topsoil)

Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)

Topsoil organic matter content

Groundwater table

Availability of surface water

Water quality (untreated)

Is salinity a problem?

Occurrence of flooding

Species diversity

Habitat diversity

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation

Off-farm income

Relative level of wealth

Level of mechanization

Sedentary or nomadic

Individuals or groups

Gender

Age

Area used per household

Scale

Land ownership

Land use rights

Water use rights

Access to services and infrastructure

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Off-site impacts

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs

Benefits compared with maintenance costs

Climate change

Gradual climate change

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Other climate-related consequences

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?

Number of households and/ or area covered

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

To which changing conditions?

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view

Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome

References

Compiler