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

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

Bureau of Soils and Water Management (Bureau of Soils and Water Management) - Philippines

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

29/06/2016

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

Yes

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

It is a farming system that integrates the growing of fodder crops under plantation crops.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

It is an integration of livestock and agronomic crop production of incorporating small ruminants in an existing citrus plantation. This technology was based on the private initiative of the farmer where he adapted it from other land users. He further improved it through study of reading materials and ad hoc monitoring of his environment.

Purpose of the Technology: After the adaption of the technology, the land user observed a decrease in the infestation of aphids. The land user observed and concluded that the decline in the aphids infestation was due to the presence of the small ruminants in the area. The small ruminants forage on grasses that were continuously growing, year-round, in the plantation area. The foraging of grasses improved the micro-environment of the plantation crop, which contributed to the decline and almost total eradication of aphids in the area, as observed by the land user. This promoted natural farming and improved the biodiversity.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The area was first established as a citrus plantation inter-cropped with Vigna unguiculata, Cucurbita maxima, and Ipomoea batatas, as cash crop during the vegetative stage of the citrus crop. As the small ruminants increased in number, the land user decided to do “controlled grazing” by dividing the area into 3 paddocks. During lean days of forage grasses, the land user practices “cut-and-carry” system of feeding. In addition, the manure of the small ruminants serves as a source of organic fertilizer for the citrus and other crops grown by the land user.

Natural / human environment: Aside from the eradication of the aphids on the citrus crop, the technology aided in the financial needs of the land user. It increased the land user’s income by an increase in the fruits bore by the crop and the increase in the number of the small ruminants. The land user sells or sometimes suppliers of citrus fruit and goat meat would go to the area to do wholesale buying. As for the community near the area, they to benefit from the area, by wholesale buying the citrus fruit and be the one selling it to the market. The technology does not only contribute to the livelihood improvement of the land user but also to the community.

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 land users' innovation

• experience from other farm land user

Comments (type of project, etc.):

8 years

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Possibility of pollution in the area. The land user might have applied pesticide to the citrus crops to control the pest, but the land user did not mention of it. Application of herbicide to control the growth of grasses within and outside the area.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Without land conservation, there was an occurrence of pest in the citrus plants.

Mixed: (eg agro-pastoralism, silvo-pastoralism): silvo-pastoralism, goat and sheep grazing in combination

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Mixed: Ms: Silvo-pastoralism

If land use has changed due to the implementation of the Technology, indicate land use before implementation of the Technology:

Cropland: Cp: Perennial (non-woody) cropping

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• rainfed

Comments:

Water supply: rainfed, rainfed

Number of growing seasons per year:

• 1

Specify:

Longest growing period in days: 120Longest growing period from month to month: July to November

Livestock density (if relevant):

1-10 LU /km2

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• integrated crop-livestock management
• integrated pest and disease management (incl. organic agriculture)

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• evenly spread over an area

If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, indicate approximate area covered:

• < 0.1 km2 (10 ha)

Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 0.08 m2.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Secondary measures: vegetative measures

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, manure / compost / residues

Type of vegetative measures: scattered / dispersed

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Bp: increase of pests / diseases, loss of predators

Main causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (intercropping planting), droughts (time frame of drought)

Secondary causes of degradation: soil management (grazing of small ruminants), overgrazing (no. of small ruminants), change in temperature (dry season time frame)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation
• restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

Secondary goals: rehabilitation / reclamation of denuded land

Third goal: prevention of land degradation, rehabilitation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Citrus plants are evenly distributed in the area, with a planting distance of 8 feet by 8 feet. The ground cover are forage grasses for the small ruminants.

Location: Barangay San Roque. San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan

Date: 06/29/2016

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate (technical assistance from agricultural advisory from other aspect in land degradation)

Technical knowledge required for land users: high (land user is open minded with the technology introduced)

Main technical functions: improvement of ground cover, stabilisation of soil (eg by tree roots against land slides), increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of biomass (quantity), promotion of vegetation species and varieties (quality, eg palatable fodder)

Secondary technical functions: control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard, control of concentrated runoff: drain / divert, increase of surface roughness, increase of infiltration, reduction in wind speed, spatial arrangement and diversification of land use

Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: pole sitao-squash-sweet potato/citrus

Agronomic measure: intercropping (1st Year)
Material/ species: pole sitao/citrus
Quantity/ density: 2,000/188

Agronomic measure: intercropping (2nd year)
Material/ species: squash/ citrus
Quantity/ density: 2,000/188

Agronomic measure: intercropping (3rd year)
Material/ species: sweet potato/ citrus
Quantity/ density: 8,800/188

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: goat manure
Quantity/ density: 5,000 kg
Remarks: .5 per square meter

Scattered / dispersed
Vegetative material: G : grass

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Philippine Peso

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

47.5

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	rotational grazing	Vegetative	rainy season
2.	cut-and-carry feeding system	Vegetative	dry season
3.	Buying pole sitao	Agronomic
4.	Buying sqaush	Agronomic
5.	Buying citrus	Agronomic

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	Labour	ha	1.0	10.52	10.52	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	ha	1.0	3160.0	3160.0	100.0
Plant material	Seedlings	ha	1.0	48.0	48.0	100.0
Construction material	Hog wire	ha	1.0	397.89	397.89	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					3616.41

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 12 month(s)
Life span of products:
Pole Sitao - 1 year
Squash - 1 year
Citrus - 50 years

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	Labour	ha	1.0	10.52	10.52	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					10.52

Comments:

The above costs usually occurs during the dry season when forage grasses are scarce. Lean months of availability of forages grasses are from the months April to June. This is the time the cut-and-carry method is applied and the start of the maintenance/recurrent cost.

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Cut-and-carry method of feeding the small ruminants during lean months of forage grasses.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Landforms: Ridges (concave)

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 is: Medium
Soil drainage/infiltration is: Good
Soil water storage is: High

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Difference in the involvement of women and men: It is the countries socio-cultural model, where men is the one working and the women stay at home. According to the land user it is the women who is record keeper.
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 0.5% - 1%
10% of the land users are average wealthy.
Off-farm income specification: off-farm income provides additional income to the land user during the dry season.
Market orientation: Subsistence (small ruminants are bought by the land user)

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:

• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

Climate and disaster risk reduction

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)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	Type of climatic change/ extreme	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	not known

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	not known
local windstorm	not known

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	not known

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	not known

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)?

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

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

• 90-100%

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

1 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Decreased in occurrence of pest
Increased land user's income
Helped the land user's neighbor by profit sharing during harvest of the citrus fruits

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Less labor input How can they be sustained / enhanced? Improve the varietal species of the forage grass
Decreased in occurrence of pest How can they be sustained / enhanced? Maintain the existing micro environment
Rotational grazing

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
There was an inbreeding of the small ruminants	Putting another small ruminants of good genetic quality

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Variety of forage grass is of low quality in terms of crude protein content	Planting of improved variety with a high crude protein content
Species of small ruminants are not of good genetic quality in terms of meat quality	Putting of species with a good genetic quality in terms of meat produce