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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 426, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'NCCR North-South (NCCR North-South) - Kyrgyzstan', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 426, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'NCCR North-South (NCCR North-South) - Kyrgyzstan', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

15/07/2005

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

Yes

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Intercropping of wheat in an existing orchard that was established during the Soviet period.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology involves intercropping wheat in an existing apricot orchard, that was established during soviet times to increase farm production, by integrating different resources in an environment protected from soil erosion. The intercropped area is ploughed by tractor. In general, farmers do not practice crop rotation since they usually allocate cereal production to the most fertile field plots of their farm.
Along the trees aligned on contour, a three metre wide grass strip is left uncultivated to control runoff, and to protect the ground from splash erosion. Spacing between rows is 13 metres, which allows unhindered farm operations.
Most orchards in Faizabad Rayon were established during Soviet times. Tree rows were planted close together in order to obtain maximum yields from the orchard monoculture systems. Some of the tree rows were removed, allowing more space for intercropping.

Purpose of the Technology: The technology is applied in existing orchards which generally range between 10-25% in gradient. In existing orchards, intercropping alone is relatively cost intensive. Harvesting two crops at a time increases overall farm production and improves food security since harvests of intercropped food crops are found to be more reliable than those on exposed annual cropland. However, many orchards are still owned by state farms which usually do not practice intercropping. Since management of fruit trees require considerable labour and material inputs (e.g. chemicals for pest/disease control as well as fertilisers) which often cannot be met by farmers, yields of fruit trees have declined after the privatisation of these areas. Furthermore, farmers often lack knowledge of appropriate orchard management techniques and miss opportunities to gradually replace old trees by new seedlings.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): severe water erosion (rills and gullies) and subsequent fertility decline on cropland and overgrazed pastures

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): fertility decline, soil erosion and washing downslope of seeds before they can sprout

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: Intercropped winter wheat and sometimes chickpeas are sown in autumn; flax, alfa alfa, esparzet, and also chickpeas are sown in early spring

3.3 Further information about land use

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

• rainfed

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• agroforestry

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:

• 1-10 km2

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures

Secondary measures: vegetative measures

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, mineral (inorganic) fertilizers, contour tillage

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wg: gully erosion / gullying, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content

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

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Intercropping of wheat between apricot trees aligned on contour

Location: Chinoro. Faizabad Rayon, RRS

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard, control of concentrated runoff: impede / retard, reduction of slope length

Secondary technical functions: increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, reduction in wind speed, increase in soil fertility

Mixed cropping / intercropping
Material/ species: winter wheat
Quantity/ density: 150kg/ha
Remarks: intercropping between tree rows

Mineral (inorganic) fertilizers
Material/ species: superphosphate, silitra
Quantity/ density: 200kg
Remarks: only for intercropped wheat

Contour tillage
Remarks: between tree rows

Aligned: -contour
Vegetative material: F : fruit trees / shrubs
Number of plants per (ha): 200
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 2
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 13
Vertical interval within rows / strips / blocks (m): 4

Vegetative measure: aligned: contour
Vegetative material: G : grass
Vertical interval between rows / strips / blocks (m): 2
Spacing between rows / strips / blocks (m): 10
Width within rows / strips / blocks (m): 3

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass

Fruit trees / shrubs species: apricot trees

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 18.00%

Gradient along the rows / strips: 0.00%

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• US Dollars

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	establishment of apricot orchard by state enterprise	Vegetative	established in 1989
2.	acquiring land use rights for existing orchard lands from local authorities	Vegetative
3.	thinning and clearing of tree rows	Vegetative

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	thinning and clearing of tree rows	ha	1.0	6.0	6.0	100.0
Equipment	tools	ha	1.0	25.0	25.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					31.0

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 0 month(s)

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	disc ploughing (area for intercropping)	Agronomic	before sowing / annual
2.	sowing (winter wheat)	Agronomic
3.	applying of fertiliser	Agronomic	early spring / each cropping season
4.	harvesting	Agronomic	summer / each cropping season
5.	pruning of fruit trees	Vegetative	autumn/winter /annual
6.	cutting of grass strip	Vegetative	summer /annual
7.	applying manure for fruit trees	Vegetative	winter/early spring /annual
8.	removal of twiggs affected by insects/deseases	Vegetative	spring /weekly

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	sowing and weeding	ha	1.0	18.0	18.0	100.0
Labour	pruning of fruit trees	ha	1.0	45.0	45.0	100.0
Labour	cutting of twiggs affe	ha	1.0	15.0	15.0	100.0
Equipment	machine use	ha	1.0	20.0	20.0	100.0
Plant material	seeds	ha	1.0	30.0	30.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	fertilizer	ha	1.0	50.0	50.0	100.0
Fertilizers and biocides	compost/manure	ha	1.0	40.0	40.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					218.0

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: tools: saw, sickle, pruning shears, fork, bucket

per hectare (with the described spacing of trees and tree rows)

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The number of trees influences costs considerably, since orchard management is labour and input intensive

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Landforms: Also valley floors

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: low-high

Soil drainage / infiltration: medium - good

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

5% of the land users are rich and own 15% of the land.
75% of the land users are average wealthy and own 70% of the land (local authorities sometimes need to be bribed in order to acquire land use rights for orchard land).

Off-farm income specification: In general, all farmers (including those applying SWC technologies) are highly dependent on off-farm income, which in most cases is earned in Russia either by themselves or by their relatives.

Market orientation of production system subsistence (self-supply): Only surpluses are sold or exchanged for other goods

Level of mechanization: Ploughing is carried out using a tractor whenever possible, but animal traction also existent.

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:

• state

Land use rights:

• leased

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

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

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

NA

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

Comments on spontaneous adoption: estimates

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: In general, there is a growing demand for orchard land for intercropping. However, a considerable amount of orchards are still managed by state farms which usually do not maintain intercropping systems.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
two harvests at a time How can they be sustained / enhanced? increase in farm production
good wheat harvests in intercropping systems

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
low costs for establishment (intercropping only)
wheat production with very little soil erosion
intercropping can improve food security of low income families

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?
yield of fruit trees insufficient because required inputs are not affordable	gradually replace old trees by new seedlings
Insufficient yields of intercropped plants because of shadow of old/large fruit trees
orchard systems vulnerable to pests, late frost and strong winds

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
productive orchard systems require considerable amounts of recurrent inputs (e.g. chemicals for pest/disease control, fertiliser) which locals often cannot afford	avoiding intercropping of sparsely growing crops in vulnerable intercropping systems; improving ground cover by mulching
in comparison to orchards with an intact grass cover, intercropping of sparcely growing plant species increases the risk of soil erosion
intercropped wheat hinders maintenance activities of fruit trees