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

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

Catastrophic shifts in drylands (EU-CASCADE)

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

Cyprus University of Technology (Cyprus University of Technology) - Cyprus

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Use of different types of fodder in order to reduce grazing impact on natural vegetation

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Goats graze on almost all plants even on thorny shrubs. The pastoralist in the past (some still do now a days) use to spread seeds on the grazing area in order to provide fodder for the animals. Another method is to provide fodder within the farm using dry seeds of wheat, barley, soya etc which can be stored in big silos.

Purpose of the Technology: The purpose of this technology is to provide to the animals with the food they need in order to minimize or even stop them from grazing on the wild flora such as shrubs, trees and annual plants. Within the study area, most of the vegetation is vanished and only traces of plant species can be found. Even the thorny shrubs like Callicotome villosa and Rhamnus oleiodes are suffering from overgrazing.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Fodder can be provided in-farm and out-farm. In-farm fodder is provided using a silo in which dry fodder can be store, mixed and deliver to the animals mechanically. Out-farm fodder is provided seasonally since the seeds should be seeded and plants must grow up before eaten by the animals

Natural / human environment: By providing fodder to the animals in-farm, grazing is avoided since the animals remain within the farm. This way, animal diseases transmission from one farm to another can be minimized. Also, animals may travel a long distance to find food whose energy miight be less than the energy they use.
Seeding on the hills will attract the goats and stop them from grazing on other wild plant species. Minimizing grazing will allow to the vegetation to recover and grow up providing good aesthetic view and also shelter for the wild animals. Furthermore, vegetation increase will contribute to the decrease of soil erosion and the increase of organic matter.

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

Comments (type of project, etc.):

EU funding gave the opportunity to some new farmers to buy new equipment for fodder provision. In this way the new farmers were able to feed their animals and increase their productivity

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

Land use mixed within the same land unit:

Yes

Specify mixed land use (crops/ grazing/ trees):

• Agro-pastoralism (incl. integrated crop-livestock)

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): overgrazing due to a large amount of animals, drought, erosion

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): drought, poor calcareous soils, incomes are not enough to buy food

Semi-nomadism / pastoralism: goats/ rabbits, birds

Ranching: goats

Livestock density: > 100 LU /km2

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

3.3 Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

Has land use changed due to the implementation of the Technology?

• Yes (Please fill out the questions below with regard to the land use before implementation of the Technology)

3.4 Water supply

Comments:

Water supply: rainfed, rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• pastoralism and grazing land management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: agronomic measures, structural measures

Specification of other structural measures: Use of Silos in order to provide fodder to the animals

Type of agronomic measures: mixed cropping / intercropping, legume inter-planting

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Bc: reduction of vegetation cover

Main causes of degradation: overgrazing (large number of animals), change in temperature (hot summers & cold winters force the animals to eat more in order to obtain water and energy from plants), change of seasonal rainfall (summers without rain and winters with some rain), droughts (heavy droughts every 3-4 years), poverty / wealth (farmers can not afford to feed the animals)

Secondary causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (about 90 years ago), urbanisation and infrastructure development (Urbanisation mostly at the coastal zone has forced the animals to move to the North. A large number of animals is concentrated in the northern site, increasing the overgrazing problem), inputs and infrastructure: (roads, markets, distribution of water points, other, …) (A highway road split the area in two), war and conflicts (In 1974 many refugees moved from the North to the South due to the invasion of Turkish troops. Most of them who established in the area became farmers, and therefore increased the number of animals)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Main goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

euro

If relevant, indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (e.g. 1 USD = 79.9 Brazilian Real): 1 USD =:

0.77

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Buy or make a Silo	anytime
2.	Buy cereal seeds (200kg)
3.	Buy legume seeds (200kg)

Comments:

Inputs: Stainless steel

4.4 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	116.0	116.0	100.0
Equipment	Stainless steel silo	ha	1.0	2589.0	2589.0	100.0
Equipment	Fodder transfer tubes	ha	1.0	1000.0	1000.0	100.0
Plant material	Agricultural	ha	1.0	427.0	427.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					4132.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					5366.23

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 0.5 month(s)
Life-span of cereal seeds: 6 months
Life-span of legumes seeds: 3-4 months

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	spreading seeds	during rainfall (oct - Mar)

4.6 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	233.0	233.0	100.0
Plant material	Seeds	ha	1.0	427.0	427.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					660.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					857.14

Comments:

Cost were calculated according to the farmers opinion which was confirmed by the agricultural department. Seeds and labor are calculated as units per ha and the silo per unit (farm)

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Cost for applying fodder is affected by 3 factors: a) the price of the Silo which is applied only once, b) the cost of the seeds and c) the labor needed for spreading the seeds. The slope in the area where the technology is applied is steep and makes the seeding difficult.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 100-500 m a.s.l (The area where the technology is applied is 1km far from the sea)
Landforms: Hill slopes (The area of interest consists of steep hill slopes)
Slopes on average are rolling (most common) and hilly (sometimes after soil erosion)

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 depth on average is very shallow (the area is considered to be rocky) to shallow (only where soil is concentrated)
Soil texture is coarse (Analysis has shown that soil texture is 50% sand, 25% silt and 25% Clay)
Soil fertility is low
Topsoil organic matter is medium where some vegetation is, low where no vegetation is and high where vegetation is
Soil drainage/infiltration is poor (inter patch), medium (patch-interpatch) or good (plant patch)
Soil water storage capacity is low-medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Availability of surface water is poor/none (there is no surface water available in the area)

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Thorny shrubs, olive and carob trees, annual grass

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly Leaders / privileged
Difference in the involvement of women and men: no young women are involved with goat farming
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
Annual population growth: negative
10% of the land users are average wealthy and own 10% of the land (they make profit).
10% of the land users are poor and own 5% of the land (they barely survive).
Off-farm income specification: Some of the pastoralists who apply the SLM technology, have apartments which they rent to tourists during the summer season
Market orientation of production system: Equipment and structure subsidy (50% of the equipment and structures are funded)
Market orientation: Mixed (subsistence and commercial): Pastoralists receive subsidy from EU funds annually

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:

• state

Land use rights:

• open access (unorganized)
• individual

Comments:

More than 70% of the land belongs to the government (forestry department) and the land is open to everybody. The pastoralists do not pay rent for using the land. The land which belongs to individuals is used by the owners or is been rented to the pastoralists

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)

Gradual climate change

Gradual climate change

	Season	increase or decrease	How does the Technology cope with it?
annual temperature		increase	not well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	well
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)?

Comments:

Shepherds who apply the technology and are in a better socio-economical status are satisfied with their incomes but they believe that things could get better. Shepherds who don't apply the technology are poor, not satisfied with the incomes they receive and at the same time they are negative in applying the technology although they see other shepherds being in a better socio-economic status than them.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Comments:

100% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

2 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support

Comments on acceptance with external material support: New farmers-shepherds can have up to 60% funding from EU and government funds for construction and equipment

There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: The cost of buying fodder is extremely high. Also the equipments (silo) is considered to be expensive.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Using the Silo for providing fodder, they spend less hours in the farm.
By providing fodder, the quality and quantity of milk and meat is better
By keeping the animals in the farm, they save work hours and also the threat of animal poisoning is minimized

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
By providing fodder in and out of the farm the animals receive a better quality of fodder and the right quantities of fodder they need. How can they be sustained / enhanced? experts can give advices to the shepherds about the type of fodder, and the quantity during different seasons
Through grazing in a specific area marked and seeded by the shepherd, the animals avoid direct contact with other animals. This minimizes the spread of diseases between animals of different farms. How can they be sustained / enhanced? Shepherds should come to an agreement about the area their animals graze and create borders
Seeding cereals and legumes within the grazing areas decreases overgrazing on shrubs and annual plants How can they be sustained / enhanced? in the case where the shepherd is leading the animals, he should not allow the animals to graze on shrubs
The presence of a Silo in a farm makes fodder provision easier and therefore less work is required How can they be sustained / enhanced? Government funding can cover the cost of the silo
seeding in the grazing area leads to improved soil cover which minimizes soil erosion

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?
It is difficult to spread seeds on the rocky hills
Buying fodder is expensive

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Not all shepherd are able to buy the Silo and large amounts of fodder to store in the silo	Government funding can cover the cost of the silo
The Randi forest area is suffering from prolonged droughts. Seeding cereals in the grazing land will not be achieved without rain.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information