Restoration on degraded duplex soils [South Africa]
- Creation:
- Update:
- Compiler: Francois De Wet
- Editor: –
- Reviewer: David Streiff
Culprac, sodic soils, sodic sites, Brakkolle (Afrikaans)
technologies_964 - South Africa
View sections
Expand all Collapse all1. General information
1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Technology
SLM specialist:
Lyndon
013-7595300
Mpumalanga Parks Board
South Africa
1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT
When were the data compiled (in the field)?
16/06/2006
The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:
Yes
2. Description of the SLM Technology
2.1 Short description of the Technology
Definition of the Technology:
Restoration of degraded grazing land.
2.2 Detailed description of the Technology
Description:
Investigation of veld to assess situation and extent of problem, evaluating causes and making recommendations to minimise the problem.
For a large area: Take soil samples and send for analysis to determine the type of grass seeds present and to assess the chemical composition of soil.
Recommend required treatment of soil, chemical as well as mechanical and what quantitative inputs are needed.
For duplex soils the addition of gypsum (communities use manure for organic matter) is recommended. The preparation phase of the soil is very important. Add necessary components (dung, etc.) and plant the seeds. Add some rocks on top of the soil for entrapment of nutrients (nutrients and water flow are enhanced).
It is important to take the grasses from the immediate area, because it might be found that grass from another area is not adapted for the specific area.
Dactyloctenium eagyptium, Sporobulus nites, Enteropgon monostachyuns and Cynodon dactylon will be suitable for duplex soils. Digitaria eriantha will be better after the soil has improved a bit.
For branch packing (preparation of site), the branches of encroached bushes (Ghurrie bush, Acacia exofialus, nelotica) are used.
The area should be fenced off.
2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment
Country:
South Africa
Region/ State/ Province:
Mpumalanga & Limpopo Province
Further specification of location:
Mpumalanga
Map
×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:
- during experiments/ research
Comments (type of project, etc.):
From Institute for Reclamation Ecology from Potchefstroom University.
3. Classification of the SLM Technology
3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology
- reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied
Grazing land
Extensive grazing land:
- Ranching
Main animal species and products:
Dumphries - cattle
Mthethomusha & Sabiesands - game
Comments:
Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Soil erosion on lower laying duplex.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Low production of grasses - seen as an example by specialist.
Ranching: Dumphries - cattle and Mthethomusha & Sabiesands - game
Grazingland comments: Large number of cattle owners, with few cattle. Rich people will do damage.
Type of grazing system comments: Large number of cattle owners, with few cattle. Rich people will do damage.
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
Specify:
Longest growing period in days: 180; Longest growing period from month to month: Oct - Mar
3.4 SLM group to which the Technology belongs
- area closure (stop use, support restoration)
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 0.03 km2.
Mthethomusha is a MSc project for B Samson, and Dumphries is a community driven project. In Mthethomusha there's less than 2 people/km2 and in the other none.
3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology
agronomic measures
vegetative measures
management measures
- M2: Change of management/ intensity level
Comments:
Main measures: management measures
Secondary measures: agronomic measures, vegetative measures
Type of agronomic measures: manure / compost / residues, soil conditioners (lime, gypsum)
3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology
soil erosion by water
- Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
- Wg: gully erosion/ gullying
chemical soil deterioration
- Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
Comments:
Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wt: loss of topsoil / surface erosion, Wg: gully erosion / gullying
3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation
Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
- restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
Comments:
Secondary goals: prevention of land degradation, mitigation / reduction of land degradation
4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs
4.2 Technical specifications/ explanations of technical drawing
Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high
Technical knowledge required for land users: low
Main technical functions: increase in organic matter
Secondary technical functions: improvement of ground cover, increase in soil fertility
Agronomic measure: re-seeding
Material/ species: Grasses
Quantity/ density: 7kg/ha
Soil conditioners (lime, gypsum)
Material/ species: CaCo3 etc
Agronomic measure: ripping
Material/ species: 6 teeth plough
Vegetative measure: re-seeding
Vegetative material: G : grass
Vegetative measure: Vegetative material: G : grass
Grass species: Dactyloctenium aegyptium, Sporobolus nitens, Enteropogon monostachyus, Cynodon dactylon, Digitaria e
Structural measure: bunds/banks: contour
Construction material (earth): Done by tractor
Other type of management: Looking at water flow diagrams
4.3 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs
other/ national currency (specify):
Rand
Indicate exchange rate from USD to local currency (if relevant): 1 USD =:
6.0
Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:
25.00
4.4 Establishment activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Selected bush clearing (if necessary) | Vegetative | Before 1st rain |
2. | Ripping | Vegetative | After 1st rain |
3. | Branch packing (should not exclude sunlight - 50%) | Vegetative |
4.6 Maintenance/ recurrent activities
Activity | Type of measure | Timing/ frequency | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Ripping | Agronomic | After 1st rain / Once |
2. | Add organic material | Agronomic | After 1st rain / Once |
3. | Packing of stones | Agronomic | After 2nd rain / |
4.8 Most important factors affecting the costs
Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:
Depending if you need fencing or not. Fencing is 50% of costs. Chemical treatment of soil is also very expensive.
5. Natural and human environment
5.1 Climate
Annual rainfall
- < 250 mm
- 251-500 mm
- 501-750 mm
- 751-1,000 mm
- 1,001-1,500 mm
- 1,501-2,000 mm
- 2,001-3,000 mm
- 3,001-4,000 mm
- > 4,000 mm
Specifications/ comments on rainfall:
Summer rainfall
Agro-climatic zone
- semi-arid
5.2 Topography
Slopes on average:
- flat (0-2%)
- gentle (3-5%)
- moderate (6-10%)
- rolling (11-15%)
- hilly (16-30%)
- steep (31-60%)
- very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
- plateau/plains
- ridges
- mountain slopes
- hill slopes
- footslopes
- valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
- 0-100 m a.s.l.
- 101-500 m a.s.l.
- 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
- 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
- 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
- 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
- 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
- 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
- > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Comments and further specifications on topography:
Slopes on average: Gentle for Sabiesand and Dumphries and moderate for Mthethomusha
5.3 Soils
Soil depth on average:
- very shallow (0-20 cm)
- shallow (21-50 cm)
- moderately deep (51-80 cm)
- deep (81-120 cm)
- very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
- fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter:
- low (<1%)
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 low
Topsoil organic matter: E-horizon expose in most cases
Soil drainage / infiltration is poor because there is a lot clay underneath E-horizon
Soil water storage capacity is very low in a degraded state
5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology
Market orientation of production system:
- subsistence (self-supply)
- commercial/ market
Off-farm income:
- 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
- very poor
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:
Population density: < 10 persons/km2
Annual population growth: > 4%
100% of the land users are rich (People from Sabie Sand).
100% of the land users are poor (Dumphries, Mthethomusha).
Off-farm income specification: Impression - not sure. Sabiesands and Mthethomusha: both eco-tourism, going well (game increasing) and Dumphries just cattle. Parks board (Sabiesands) employ people from the community.
Market orientation of production system: Subsistence (self-supply) for Dumphries and Mthethomusha and commercial / market for Sabiesands (eco-tourism)
5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights
Land ownership:
- communal/ village
- individual, titled
Land use rights:
- communal (organized)
- individual
6. Impacts and concluding statements
6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown
Socio-economic impacts
Production
fodder production
fodder quality
animal production
Income and costs
farm income
Socio-cultural impacts
community institutions
SLM/ land degradation knowledge
Comments/ specify:
Broad awareness for groups, schools, community
Ecological impacts
Water cycle/ runoff
excess water drainage
Soil
soil moisture
soil cover
soil loss
Climate and disaster risk reduction
wind velocity
Other ecological impacts
soil fertility
biodiversity
6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown
reliable and stable stream flows in dry season
downstream flooding
downstream siltation
groundwater/ river pollution
wind transported sediments
6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view |
---|
Job creation to community |
Better quality grazing available |
Initially getting attention - tourism with game |
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view |
---|
Dung available (organic matter) |
Provide income - people live on land |
Job creation (1 time and eco-tourism) so ongoing How can they be sustained / enhanced? If you could do it on bigger areas it will be better |
4 weeks (per ha) to implement |
No maintenance (no costs) Not depended on rainfall |
6.8 Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks of the Technology and ways of overcoming them
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view | How can they be overcome? |
---|---|
Mechanical problems: not ripped deep enough you can experience problems | |
Need input from outside | |
Depending on knowledge from experts - expensive - need sponsor, from Government/other. | |
Laws not enough, slight increase of awareness under the farmers |
7. References and links
7.2 References to available publications
Title, author, year, ISBN:
First report - 2001
Links and modules
Expand all Collapse allLinks
No links
Modules
No modules