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

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

02/06/2014

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:

Various environmentally-friendly rural practices have been developed and applied in vineyards and orchards. These included contour tillage, strip cropping and buffer strips, as well as barriers to impede runoff made from straw and brushwood etc. There are also forest belts, channels for water retention and discharge, dams, and grassed waterways; trees are planted on land affected by landslides and soil erosion.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Tartaul de Salcie belongs to the Pri-Danube steppe pedologic region: clay-sandy carbonated chernozem is predominant. Widespread erosion leads to compaction of upper horizons. There is a danger of soil alcalization if irrigated.The landscape is hilly, and very fragmented with a dense network of valleys. Almost 85% of the land is situated on slopes. The climate is moderately continental: the summers are warm and long, and the winters are mild and dry. Annual rainfall ranges around 500 millimetres; long dry spells are not unusual. The sources of income are crops, mainly grapes and walnuts for sale. Vegetables are also grown - for home consumption. People also have cattle and sheep, mainly for consumption. Plots are about 2 to 4 hectares per household, with title deeds and land maps to prove it. The main problem relates to registration and legalization of sale or inheritance of land which is bureaucratized and expensive. Incomes depend closely on the amount of precipitation, and also on market access and prices, but on average, per capita, it is 38 US dollars per month.
Various environmentally-friendly rural practices have been developed and applied in vineyards and orchards. These included contour tillage, strip cropping and buffer strips, as well as barriers to impede runoff made from straw and brushwood etc. Integrated plant protection is carried out, reducing soil and water pollution. There are also forest belts, and trees are planted on land affected by landslides and soil erosion. Cleaning of natural springs is carried out, and their protection is ensured. Forest species trees are planted around homes - and cleaning within around the village is practiced.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.4 Videos 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

Indicate year of implementation:

2000

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• during experiments/ research
• through projects/ external interventions

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• 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

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

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:

• 1

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• agroforestry
• rotational systems (crop rotation, fallows, shifting cultivation)
• cross-slope measure

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:

• 100-1,000 km2

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

- Control of runoff
- Maintain/ increase soil fertility
- Increase/maintain water stored in soil

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

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

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Development of environmentally friendly rural practices	Vegetative	After harvest of crops
2.	Public awareness and education	Vegetative	In winter when farmers have time and during vegetative period - to show the results of the measures
3.	Monitoring and evaluation	Vegetative	After rainfall and strong winds
4.	Combine income generation with land management	Vegetative	During establishment and maintenance
5.	Give up unproductive land use practices	Vegetative	When farmers are convinced about efficiency of tested practices
6.	Development of environmentally friendly rural practices	Agronomic	After harvest of crops
7.	Public awareness and education	Agronomic	In winter when farmers have time and during vegetative period - to show the results of the actions
8.	Monitoring and evaluation	Agronomic	After rainfall and strong winds
9.	Combine income generation with land management	Agronomic	During implementation
10.	Give up unproductive land use practices	Agronomic	When farmers are convinced about efficiency of tested practices

Comments:

Similar activities are performed for structural and management measures

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

The project Sustainable Agriculture financed by the Dutch Foundations CORDAID AND NOVIB

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• not relevant

Comments and further specifications on topography:

The landscape is hilly, very fragmented with a dense network of valleys. Almost 85% of the land is situated on slopes. About 60% of the land has a gradient from 2 to 6 degree, while 25% of land has an inclination exceeding 6 degrees. Water erosion processes are widespread and quite intense. The predominant length of the hillsides in Tartaul de Salcie is over 1000 m.

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.

Tartaul de Salcie belongs to the Pri-Danube steppe pedologic region. Clay-sandy carbonated chernozem is predominant on the territory of the village.The intensification of the erosion process leads to compaction of the upper horizons. The drainage porosity is high in the weakly and moderately eroded soils, and medium in heavily eroded soils. There is a large impact of erosion on penetrability. There is a danger of soil alkalization if irrigated

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

Yes

Specify:

Water mineralization is high: 1 mg/l

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Yes

Regularity:

episodically

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

The sources of income are agricultural crops, mainly grapes and walnuts for sale, but also vegetables for home consumption. People also have cattle and sheep in their households, mainly for own consumption and some extra for sale.|
People in the community have land plots of about 2 to 4 hectares per household - which belongs to them - and they have title deeds and land maps to prove it. The main problem relates to registration and legalization of sale or inheritance of land which is bureaucratized and expensive. The principal landowner in the village is the association of shareholders “TarSalAgro”.
Income in the area depends much on the amount of precipitation and also on market access and prices, but on the average for the last 3 years the estimated income per capita per month was 38 US dollars.

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:

• company
• communal/ village

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

Comments regarding impact assessment:

While illegal cutting of trees still occurs, people started planting forest species of trees on all spare spaces in the village, which has improved the environment and compensates for earlier loss through tree cutting without replacement planting. |
Community cohesion has improved. People became less isolated through participation in meetings, training events, they exchange opinions more frequently and assist each other. |
Productivity is paramount, since it guarantees future income. For the soil to be productive for many years ahead, sustainable technologies were proposed and implemented. Thus, while the crops have not increased much, the replacement of mineral nutrients with manure diminished expenditures and needs. Changes included a cleaner community area and cleaner households, better use of existing resources, and more attention to hygiene.

6.3 Exposure and sensitivity of the Technology to gradual climate change and climate-related extremes/ disasters (as perceived by land users)

Comments:

Environmentally friendly rural practices implemented in Tartaul de Salcie improved soil properties, water quality, restored forests, planted forest belts, i.e. they create very good conditions for the development of agricultural biodiversity and wild biodiversity in farming landscapes. |
Environmentally friendly rural practices are one of the main sinks of carbon dioxide. Thus, they have a positively impact on climate change mitigation. |
Environmentally friendly rural practices are in harmony with nature and they positively impact on climate change adaptation.

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

• 1-10%

If available, quantify (no. of households and/ or area covered):

The area covered is over 1000 ha

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

• 10-50%

6.6 Adaptation

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

No

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Reduce soil loss and runoff from the slopes
The project used local knowledge and people are happy that their ideas are implemented in their own village.
Almost all village the population was involved to some extent in the development and implementation of activities, and they are proud that their village has become better than others, and outsiders come and learn how to improve their own situation.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Show sincere interest in people's life and their problems. Seek expertise among wise village people and encourage them to share it. Accept people as they are and provide assistance for their growth
Teach people to save and plan. Advise them that wise investment always pays off. Teach them to invest more in things they treasure most (family, health, land, local forests, etc.).
Try out and experiment with new things on a small scale, so that failure does not affect income significantly.

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?
Difficulty to cover maintenance costs after end of project	Possibility to apply for additional funding to National Environmental Fund and to motivate the private sector to cover better the respective expenses.
Lack of interest of new LPA to continue to implement the SLM practices on communal land.	Awareness building workshops with farmers who implement SLM practices.
Lack of substantial difference in profit.	Although there is a small difference in the short term, nevertheless the soil quality and water storage capacity will be improved, and as a result, the yields and profits will be increased in the long term.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Making a Difference. Secretariat of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD)

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.recoveryplatform.org/assets/submissions/200909020934_recovery_from_desertification.pdf

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Elena Bivol, Valentin Ciubotaru. Farmer’s Book (Cartea fermierului)/ NGO BIOS, Chisinau, 2005, 264 p. ISBN: 978-9975-9901-4-1

Available from where? Costs?

NGO BIOS. 72/3 Columna str. # 3, Chisinau, MD-2001, Republic of Moldova