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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 726, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Missenyi District Council (Missenyi District Council) - Tanzania, United Republic of', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 726, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Missenyi District Council (Missenyi District Council) - Tanzania, United Republic of', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

17/06/2014

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

Yes

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?

No

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Is the digging of a farrow measured 0.6 width by 0.6 depth along the contour line and embankment of the excavated soils on the upper side at the slope <2% and upper side at the slope >5% in the banana, beans inter croped fields.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Contour bund combined with Sessbania sesseban, beans and manure technology in banana production is the digging and excavation of a 60cm wide by 60co deep furrow, plated Sessbania sessban along the contour bund, application of farm yard manures in a 30cm deep by 60 cm wide furrow at 30cm from the banana stool and plating beans in the space between bunds. The technology is applied on Perennial (non-woody) cropping system, supported with rain fed to prevent and mitigate land degradations. The production mode is mixed (subsistence and commercial. The technology impact should be observed on controlled soil erosion by water, reduced declining soil fertility, and increased water infiltration. To implement this technology, a total of US$ 100.41 establishment costs per hectare and US% 1,076.47 maintenance costs per hectare per year according to the introduction of the technology in 2012 By TAMP –Kagera. Small ruminants rearing are the supportive measures of the technology.

Purpose of the Technology: The major purpose of the technology is land degradation prevented in 50 ha, crop and livestock production increased by 10% to contribute on food security and livelihood improvement with a SLM. Technically the technology should control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, reduction of slope length, stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides), increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling) and increase of water infiltration.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The establishment activities includes:- First, identification and demarcation of contour line done manually using simple tool (A-frame); this is done in May. Second is the digging of a 0.6m width and 0.6m depth furrow, excavation the soils and place them on the upper side (at the smaller slope) and lower side (at the bigger slope) along the contour using chisel hand hoes, fork hand hoes spades and mattock; this is done in June. Third is to drill two rows of Sessbania sesban seeds, spaced 0.3 m between the rows; this is done in late September. Fourth is the thinning of Sessbania sesban seedlings at the average space of 15cm done manually; this is done when the seedling is at the height of. The maintenance activities include; First is to weed the whole field done manually using local made tools (kahosho); this is done twice in January to February and June to August. Second is to apply farm yard manures in the furrow of 0.3 m deep by 0.6m wide cultivated 0.60 m from the banana stool and facing the granddaughter sucker; this is done early July. Third is desuckering and detrushing of banana stools using local made tools (kihosho and rwabyo) and machete; this is done twice (February and September).Fourth is to plant beans done manually using local made tool (kahosho; this is done in March and September. Fifth is the harvesting of beans and hauling done manually; this is done twice (June and early February). Sixth is cleaning of the furrow done manually using spades; this is done twice at the end of rain seasons (January and December). Finally, harvesting of banana and Sessbania sessban is done according to the market demand.

Natural / human environment: The physical environment is characterized of sub humid climatic zone, 750-1000 mm rain falls, 1000-1500 m.a.s.l, hill slopes land form with gentle slope. The soil texture is medium (loam), Soil fertility is medium, topsoil organic matter is medium (1-3%) and soil drainage/infiltration is medium. The soil water storage capacity is medium, ground water table is 5 - 50 m, availability of surface water is medium and water quality is poor drinking water. This technology is tolerant of seasonal rainfall decrease, droughts / dry spells while sensitive to heavy rainfall events (intensities and amount). The land users applying the technology are individual / household, Small scale land users, common / average land users. The Land ownership is communal / village, individual, not titled . The Land use rights is communal (organised), and/or individual. The water use rights is open access (unorganised). The relative level of wealth is categorized as rich, which represents 4% of the land users and own 34% of the total area. The average category, which represents 64% of the land users own 64% of the total area. The poor category, which represents 32% of the
land users owns 2% of the total area.

2.3 Photos 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

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• less than 10 years ago (recently)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

The technology introduce by TAMP -Kagera using FFS in 2012.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• create beneficial economic impact

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): The majoe land use problems related to soil, water and vegetation in the area were soil erosion, low water soil infiltration and declining soil nutrients.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Moisture stress and low productivity.

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• rainfed

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 2

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 120, Longest growing period from month to month: September to December Second longest growing period in days: 90 Second longest growing period from month to month: March to May

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• agroforestry
• integrated soil fertility management

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 0.002 m2.
The technology applied in a 0.5 acre as FFS site in the host farmer land one year past. However, the period is too short for adoption process to take place.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Type of agronomic measures: temporary trashlines, legume inter-planting, manure / compost / residues
Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main causes of degradation: soil management (Cultivation along the slope), crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (continous harvesting perennial crops without fertilizing the soil.), change of seasonal rainfall (seasonal rainfall is unpredictable now days.), droughts (The area experienced a drought period averaged 155 days.), population pressure (Increased population resulted presure on land, while the responce is cultivation in marginal lands.), poverty / wealth (Poor farmers can not afford to invest in land conservation due to its nature of longterm investment.), education, access to knowledge and support services (Most of farmers received primary education where land concervation is not taught. Further more there is inadequate staffing of Agriculture advisors.)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: low (The technology principles are taught at colleges. Hence retraining should complement this knowledge to accomplish implementation.)
Technical knowledge required for land users: low (The technology is easy to apply, only sensitization can complement the awareness to implement the technology.)

Main technical functions: control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, reduction of slope length, stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides), increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of infiltration

Temporary trashlines
Material/ species: Farm product residue, banana dry leaves and pseudostems.
Remarks: Spread across the slope at 5cm depth.

Legume inter-planting
Remarks: dibling scatered in the space between the bunds,

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: cow dunng
Remarks: mixed in the furrow measured 30cm depth, 60cm toward the grand daughter banana plant.

Aligned: -contour
Vegetative material: O : other
Number of plants per (ha): 1667
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.15
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 0.3

Other species: Sessebania sesseban

Bund/ bank: level
Spacing between structures (m): 6
Depth of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.6
Width of ditches/pits/dams (m): 0.6
Length of ditches/pits/dams (m): 35
Height of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.6
Width of bunds/banks/others (m): 0.6
Length of bunds/banks/others (m): 35

Construction material (earth): soils
Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 3%
Vegetation is used for stabilisation of structures.

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Tshs

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

1700.0

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	To plant sessebania seeds by drilling along the contour bunds,	Vegetative	March
2.	To thin extra seedling and allow a 30cm between plants by 30cm between rows.	Vegetative	irregular
3.	To demarcate the contour line	Structural	August
4.	To dig and excavate soils to make bunds	Structural
5.	Purchase tools	Management

Comments:

Lifespan of tools: 5 years

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	plant sessebania seeds by drilling along the contour bunds	Mandays	1.0	1.76	1.76	100.0
Labour	thin extra seedling and allow a 30cm between plants by 30cm between rows	Mandays	1.0	1.76	1.76	100.0
Labour	demarcate the contour line	Mandays	1.0	1.76	1.76	100.0
Labour	dig and excavate soils to make bunds	Mandays	1.0	1.76	1.76	100.0
Equipment	Tools	pieces	4.0	2.91	11.64	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	kg	0.9	0.588888	0.53
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					19.21

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 15 month(s)

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	To Weeding the entire field prior nonseasonal.	Agronomic	June to september & february
2.	To apply manure in a 60 x60 farrow along the daughter plant	Agronomic	october
3.	desuckering and detrushing banana plants	Agronomic	September & February
4.	To plant (dibbling) beans in the space between bunds.	Agronomic	October and March
5.	To harvest seeds	Vegetative
6.	To prune branches for goat feeds	Vegetative	irregular
7.	To remove soil sediments in the farrow	Structural	june and february

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 the entire field prior nonseasonal.	Mandays	6.0	1.76	10.56	100.0
Labour	apply manure in a 60 x60 farrow along the daughter plant	Mandays	10.0	1.76	17.6	100.0
Labour	desuckering and detrushing banana plants	Mandays	3.0	1.76	5.28	100.0
Labour	lant (dibbling) beans in the space between bunds	Mandays	3.0	1.76	5.28	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	kg	30.0	0.706	21.18	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	Compost/manure	tons	1.5	29.413333	44.12
Other	Labour: harvest seeds	mandays	5.0	1.76	8.8	100.0
Other	Labour: prune branches for goat feeds	mandays	5.0	1.76	8.8	100.0
Other	Labour: remove soil sediments in the farrow	mandays	3.0	1.76	5.28	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					126.9

Comments:

The costs were calculated on plant population (banana 1111) per hector as well as length of the bund (sebania spps 6762)

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The most determinate factor is labour (US$ 308.25/799.92).

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

5.3 Soils

If available, attach full soil description or specify the available information, e.g. soil type, soil PH/ acidity, Cation Exchange Capacity, nitrogen, salinity etc.

Soil fertility: Medium and low
Soil drainage/infiltration: Medium
Soil water storage capacity: Medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Availability of surface water: Medium (In dry season all ponds dry of while in rain season some ponds overflows)
Water quality: Poor drinking water (treatement required, surface water during rainy season and ground (spring water) during dry season)

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Earthworms, ants, grasshoppers etc.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: < 0.5%
Relative level of wealth: rich, average, poor

4% of the land users are rich and own 34% of the land.
64% of the land users are average wealthy and own 64% of the land.
32% of the land users are poor and own 2% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: The off-farm income is less than 10% for land users who applied the technology because the opportunity cost of implementing the technology is absconded from off-farm activites.
Market orientation: Mixed (banana, beans and maize are for subsistence and commercial while coffee if for commecial purely)
Level of mechanization: Manual work (using handoes and forkhoess)

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:

• communal/ village
• individual, not titled

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

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

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

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)

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	not well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Comments:

The technology is tolerant of seasonal rainfall decrease, droughts / dry spells while sensitive to heavy rainfall events (intensities and amount). In case of sensitivity spillways on bands is considered to be the best modification.

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:

The short term returns (annual farm income) is slightly negative compared with establishment costs while the long term returns anticipated being very positive in the long term returns ( cumulative farm income) due to reduced establishment costs.
The short term return is slightly positive compared with maintenance costs while the long-term return is anticipated to be very positive due increased land productivity.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 1-10%

Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have did so spontaneously, i.e. without receiving any material incentives/ payments?

• 0-10%

Comments:

9% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
13 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
Comments on acceptance with external material support: 3 participants as host farmer provided with farm inputs during FFS.

13 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
Comments on spontaneous adoption: No body has adopted, because the technology has been introduce in late 2012.

There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology
Comments on adoption trend: The technology implementation is still young to be adopted.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Appropriate technology in the sense of intensive labour application.
Supportive measures very diversity.
Low establishment costs, only structure measures.

6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Trushlines on can not reduce the moisture strees completely in the drought area as such.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information