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)

Book project: where people and their land are safer - A Compendium of Good Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) (where people and their land are safer)

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

CARITAS (Switzerland) - Switzerland

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

11/10/2016

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?

Yes

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Water points at daily pasture for livestock in order to reduce erosion and enhance productivity of cattle and livestock

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Water points for cattle is mainly used in semi-arid and arid regions where livestock is kept on daily pastures and water is distant or difficult to access.

Bringing water from springs or other sources to the pastures will greatly increase farm productivity and improve reproduction of animals. Difficult and distant access to water during the day can negatively cost a high amount of animal’s energy. Long distance to water sources will reduce meat supply, milk production and reproductive capacities by up to 50%.

By providing water for pastures, negative effects to livestock productivity can be reduced to a minimum.

In order to implement the technology, water sources have to be found and identified that are within an optimal distance to the and from the different pasture grounds. Sources need to have a perennial output. If water is accessible to a reasonable cost, the issue surrounding land ownership can be solved, i.e. a land is communally owned or the land owner gives user rights to the pasture users.

If water source and land for construction are found in an optimal distance to the different pasture grounds, the drinking water system for animals is designed and constructed. Construction involves spring catchment, laying of pipes and finally installation of the water point.

Besides the direct benefits (i.e. increased productivity and reproduction), the water points at the pastures reduce erosion in often critical locations such as steep slopes surrounding springs. Water points also protect springs from being destroyed or spoiled by the animals. Thus the technology has a risk reduction benefit. A potential negative effect of the technology is a reduction of biodiversity, as drawing of water from catchment springs may result in reduced fauna and flora.

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

Indicate year of implementation:

2014

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• through projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

By a Caritas Switzerland project

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• reduce risk of disasters

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

3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• pastoralism and grazing land management
• surface water management (spring, river, lakes, sea)

3.5 Spread of the Technology

Specify the spread of the Technology:

• applied at specific points/ concentrated on a small area

Comments:

20 water points have been established in the district of Muminabad at specific locations across the watershed.

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

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

Comments:

Water points in daily pastures lead to less movements of herds from and to natural water sources, as water is brought to the animals. Densitiy of animals around natural water sources lead to damages by tampling through compaction of land, while overgrazing leads to vegetation losses, that lead to increased washing or blowing out of soil. Trampling can as well destroy a natural water source and make it unusable.

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing

Lengh of the water point is 18 m, depth 0.5 m

4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology unit

other/ national currency (specify):

Tajik Somoni

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

8.0

4.4 Establishment activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing
1.	Identify water sources (spring detection)	Other measures	early spring and late autumne (at least two years)
2.	Identify where a potential water point should be placed in the pasture area	Other measures	N/A
3.	Identify the land ownership	Other measures	N/A
4.	Design of the system	Other measures	N/A
5.	Spring catchment	Structural	summer
6.	Digging trenches and lay pipes	Structural	Spring
7.	Connecting the tubes to spring catchment	Structural	N/A
8.	Construct water point	Structural	N/A

4.5 Costs and inputs needed for establishment

If possible, break down the costs of establishment according to the following table, specifying inputs and costs per input. If you are unable to break down the costs, give an estimation of the total costs of establishing the Technology:

15000.0

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Labour		1.0	3500.0	3500.0	20.0
Equipment	Transport Dushanbe	nr of rund trip	0.3	3050.0	915.0
Equipment	Transport	nr of round trip	3.0	150.0	450.0
Plant material	Tubes	m	1820.0	4.0	7280.0
Plant material	Cement	kg	1800.0	1.06	1908.0
Plant material	Gravel	m3	6.0	180.0	1080.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					15133.0

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

Integrated Watershed Management Project, Caritas Switzerland

4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Type of measure	Timing/ frequency
1.	Close/open water point during winter time / spring	Management	twice per year
2.	Small repairs	Structural	twice per year

Comments:

Water points from cement are not that intensive for maintenance, Herders will take care of the water sources as they are daily there. It is important taht tube system is fully covered so taht the animals will not destroy any open laying tubes.

4.7 Costs and inputs needed for maintenance/ recurrent activities (per year)

If possible, break down the costs of maintenance according to the following table, specifying inputs and costs per input. If you are unable to break down the costs, give an estimation of the total costs of maintaining the Technology:

2750.0

	Specify input	Unit	Quantity	Costs per Unit	Total costs per input	% of costs borne by land users
Labour	Clean outlet of water point	days	1.0	450.0	450.0
Labour	Control catchment and line	days	1.0	450.0	450.0
Equipment	Showel	item	1.0	150.0	150.0
Construction material	Tab	item	1.0	500.0	500.0	100.0
Construction material	Gravel bed around water point	kg	20.0	20.0	400.0
Construction material	replacement of tubes	m	200.0	4.0	800.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					2750.0

4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Cost for tubes and cement, i.e. the distance of the next suitable spring to the pasture area
LAnd ownership: state owned land rented to the Pasture Union

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• convex situations

5.3 Soils

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

Yes

Regularity:

frequently

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

cattle and livestock grazing is a male task, animals at home are taken care by women

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:

• communal (organized)

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)

Comments:

water is owned by the pasture user union

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Water availability and quality

Income and costs

Ecological impacts

Climate and disaster risk reduction

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

Comments regarding impact assessment:

none

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 rainfall		decrease	moderately

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
cold wave	not well at all

Comments:

Water points need to be closed during winter time, otherwise the tubes will get destroyed due to freezing.

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:

As land users did not bear the full costs they benefit strongly from the beginning

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 10-50%

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

20 water points have been established that are used by more than one village herds

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:

The project subsidized the construction of water points. Livestock breeders from other districts have participated by observing the use of technology

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
Improved water management has improved livestock production by controlled grazing and access to water at daily pasture points.
Transporting livestock from steep valley locations to water drinking points was previously labour intensive, a farming activity which has improved due to dedicated water points.
Water quality at drinking points are can also be used by farmer and herders.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Erosion by livestock has reduced as livestock grazing is more controlled compared to before project interventions.

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?
Water points and farms are remote. As such construction requires machinery and transport of materials to upper pasture zones are a challenge.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Investment costs are still considered to be too high to be fully borne by pasture users	Pasture User Union have been formed which collects fees. The unions help save money for technology investments.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

n/a

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

Disaster RIsk Management in Tajikistan

URL:

https://www.caritas.ch/de/was-wir-tun/engagement-weltweit/klimaschutz-und-katastrophenpraevention/