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

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management (CACILM I)

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Kazakh Institute of Soil Science and Agrochemistry - Kazakhstan

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2.1 Short description of the Approach

The restoration of degraded rangelands and the improvement of their productivity through the organization of distant stock-breeding and the introduction of pasture rotation (in the frame of CACILM).

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: The main goal is the restoration of degraded pastures through a revival of the traditional method of stock-breeding (seasonal distant livestock pasturing) using modern methods of land area organization (introduction of pasture rotation with regulated load) with far-ranging inclusion of local population

Methods: The amount of livestock has considerably increased in Katon-Karagay district for the last years. As a result, the livestock concentrates around the villages, and unsystematic and uncontrolled pasture use leads to the loss of valuable forage grasses and an aggravation of land degradation. Within the framework of the GEF/SGP “Organization of Katon-Karagay Village Pastureland Management to Minimize Land Degradation” Project a scheme for pastureland restoration including the organization of traditional seasonal distant pasturing as well as the introduction of a pasture rotation system around Katon-Karagay village was developed

Stages of implementation: A number of meetings with the local population and workshops were organized by a group of the GEF/UNDP Project consultants. As a result of the activities of this initiative group, the 'Mametek' Public Association was established. Within the same framework, the pasturelands in the surrounding areas of Katon-Karagay State National Natural Park were examined. As a result of that examination, a plan to restore and improve the pasturelands was developed by the project staff. A scheme of pasture rotation was designed for Katon-Karagay village by the GEF/SGP Project staff, according to which the pastures around the villages were divided in 4 areas; the sequence of grazing in the areas; and the norms of pasture load were defined. All areas were fenced. An agreement on joint activity between local administration, 'Mametek' Public association and 'Atameken' Farmers’ Association was signed. New system of distant stock-breeding was established in a high mountain pasture . Equipment for stock-breeders was purchased.

Role of stakeholders: GEF/SGP “Organization of Katon-Karagay Village Pastureland Management to Minimize Land Degradation” Project is responsible for general management and initial financial support. Pastures were examined and the action plan was developed under the GEF/UNDP Project. Rural Akimat provides land for lease and regulates legal obligations and contracts. Local inhabitants are the main actors implementing the agreed upon activities in the target area (fencing and guarding the areas) and direct work regarding livestock grazing. 'Mametek' PA conducts direct organizational activity, supervises implementation of the activities (the order of grazing in the areas, grazing norms and loads) and settles conflicts. 'Atameken' Farmers Association implements the organization of livestock grazing and works in accordance with the pasture rotation scheme and attracts/hires workers. Katon-Karagay National Park is concerned with the biodiversity conservation of its area, and provides methodical support

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities

To secure pasturing using distant rangelands To organize pasture rotation to restore forage resources of pastures in surrounding areas of villages

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Reduction of pasture productivity, Soil degradation, Conflicts related to land area use

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	external support	During the initial stage, meetings and workshops were organized to explain the need for land restoration
planning	passive
implementation	interactive	The local population actively participates in the implementation of the approach through pasturing livestock in accordance with the project plan
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Контроль за выполнением мероприятий, оценка состояния пастбищ
Research	none

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• SLM specialists alone

Explain:

The specialists of the GEF/UNDP “Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity in the Kazakhstani Sector of the Altai-Sayan Ecoregion” Project conducted the work with the local population explaining the need in due arrangement of pasture use to prevent degradation and restore vegetation. After this, the local population expressed their desire to initiate and realize the approach

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

Form of training:

• public meetings

Form of training:

• «Learning for sustainability» проведен ОФ «CAMP-Co

Subjects covered:

Explanation of the need for pasture rotation, its advantages and methods of implementation

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

No

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, a little

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

• Indirectly, by reducing the workload of the akimat

Give further details:

Indirectly, through a reduction in workload: there is no need for the Akmat to check the pastures’ condition, since these responsibilities have been transferred to “Mametek” PA

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

Economic / production aspects were regular monitored by land users through measurements; indicators: Supervision over a condition of a vegetative cover are lead
Bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations
There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

No

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 10,000-100,000

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (Project “Organization of Katon-Karagay Village Pastureland Management to Minimize Land Degradation” ): 70.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (Akimat): 20.0%; local community / land user(s) (developed free of charge by means organization and use of land areas (fencing)): 10.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

Yes

If yes, specify type(s) of support, conditions, and provider(s):

State subsidies for seeds

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

• agricultural

• construction

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• paid in cash

Comments:

'Mametek' PA pays cash work of shepherds

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

The example of the land users participating in the approach’s implementation will urge some rural inhabitants to join and even to expand the activity

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The condition of pastures in the areas surrounding the village has improved How to sustain/ enhance this strength: To raise population’s awareness on correct pasture use

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Low running expenses; How to sustain/ enhance this strength:Despite high enough initial expenses, the subsequent current expenses are insignificant and there is no necessity to improve this strength
High cost efficiency
The developed steady interconnected scheme of Akimat - OO Mametek - PA Atameken which has allowed to introduce the given approach (the state and economic structures, local community
Restoration of the degraded pastures and increase of their efficiency; How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Renewal of a traditional way of agriculture and pasture rotation
Support from the population and local authorities

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
The land does not belong to land users, but is provided by short-term leases. It is not clear, whether the lease will be extended.	Efforts should be made to renew the lease when it expires

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
The land does not belong to land users, but is provided by short-term leases. It is not clear, whether the lease will be extended.	Efforts should be made to renew the lease when it expires

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Management of pasturable дфтвы in village Katon-Karagaj village (results of the project), 2010

Available from where? Costs?

from. Katon-Karagai