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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 7, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management (CACILM I)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 816, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Kazakh Research Institute for Soil Science and Agr (Kazakh Research Institute for Soil Science and Agr) - Kazakhstan', 'template': 'raw'}

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:

Early irrigation of fields and pastures to retain soil mоisture during the dry season in Southern Kazakhstan (in the frame of CACILM).

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology was implemented in Sadu Shakirov village (Talas district of the Zhambyl region). During the Soviet era, 2’105 hа of irrigated arable lands and 66’408 ha of irrigated hayfields were at the disposal of the village. Water for their irrigation was supplied through the 12 km long canal "Sharuashlyk" from the Talas River. The village lands are located at the end of the canal. In the past few years, over abstraction of irrigation water by water users further upstream and a decrease in the water level of the Talas River have led to a sharp reduction of the water flow in the canal, resulting in the cessation of irrigated husbandry and the degradation of irrigated lands. Irrigated arable lands were abandoned and used now for year-round livestock grazing. The exploitation of the canal stopped, and it became worthless.
The situation is further worsened by the impact of global climate change on the Talas’ local climate (decline in precipitation, increase of yearly average temperature, autumn and spring frosts, droughts in summer). The reduction in the number and quality of forage crops due to shortages in irrigation water had a negative impact on stock-breeding and the well-being of the local population.
The problem has been solved by the public association “Kogal Sadu Shakirov Village”.
The canal’s 12 km length and 5 floodgates were restored to supply water to the area and to artificially retain soil moisture conditions through off-season irrigation during the pre-seeding period when most of the water users upstream don’t need water for irrigation.
The off-season irrigation allowed for the improved growth of grass on pastures. It accumulates soil water storage (1.5-2m in deep), which is used by crops in spring or early summer.
90ha of fallow lands were moistened by local communities in the 1st year. A part of them is used to cultivate fodder crops for supplementary feeding of cattle in winter (in spring, 60ha were sown with Lucerne), and the remaining area was used as natural hayfields. As a result, the hay harvest increased from 3.5 to 5 c/ha.

Purpose of the Technology: The purpose of this technology is the reduction of land degradation and desertification through the accumulation of moisture storage in the root zone of the soil during spring and autumn.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Establishment activities include:
1) Reconstruction of the 12km canal, 5 floodgates and the furrowing in the fields.
2) Creation of sown pastures through sowing of forage crops: preparation of soil and Lucerne seeding, definition of irrigation norms. Field training for rural inhabitants in the technology.

Natural / human environment: The village is located in the plain desert region in the foothills of the Southen Kazakhstan. The highest average temperature is +45C in July, and the lowest average temperature is -41C in January. The average rainfall is 300 mm/year. There are 5-10 days per year with dust storms. Hard sand and semi-hard sands occupy up to 60% of the area.

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 projects/ external interventions

Comments (type of project, etc.):

The method of irrigation during autumn and winter was used in the arid zone for vineyard irrigation. A project within the framework of the UNDP Programme on Adaptation to Climate Change on Community Level (ACCCL) in Kazakhstan has been implemented in the described area since 2009.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts

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): climate change leading to aridity, lack of water resources

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): lack of water for irrigation of pastures and fields, increase in aridity

Mixed: (eg agro-pastoralism, silvo-pastoralism): Yes

Other grazingland: Livestock grazes after the autumn corn and lucerne harvest

Future (final) land use (after implementation of SLM Technology): Grazing land: Gi: Intensive grazing/ fodder production

Livestock density: 1-10 LU /km2

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

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

• mixed rainfed-irrigated

Comments:

Водопотребление: смешанное богарно-орошаемое, смешанное богарно-орошаемое

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• irrigation management (incl. water supply, drainage)

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: vegetative measures, structural measures, management measures

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -linear

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content

Main causes of degradation: disturbance of water cycle (infiltration / runoff) (Reduction in the water flow of irrigation canals during the irrigation season)

Secondary causes of degradation: droughts (Number of days with atmospheric aridity reaches 140-150 days per year), governance / institutional (Lack of a clear agreement with Kyrgyzstan with regard to water use)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Основная цель: снижение деградации земель

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

tenge

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

147.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Selection of a place and method for crop sowing on pastures	March
2.	Reconstruction of the 12 km canal	March
3.	Repair of five (5) special floodgates for water flow regulation	April
4.	Making irrigation furrows (5 km)	March

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	Selection of a place and method for crop sowing on pastures	persons/day/ha	5.0	33.4	167.0	100.0
Labour	Reconstruction of the 12 km canal	persons/day/ha	80.0	300.0	24000.0
Labour	Repair of five (5) special floodgates for water flow regulation	persons/day/ha	4.0	759.5	3038.0
Labour	Making irrigation furrows (5 km)	persons/day/ha	2.0	735.0	1470.0	100.0
Equipment	Machine hours (canal)	hours/ha	9.3	2107.52688	19600.0
Equipment	Machine hours (gates)	hours/ha	6.3	630.0	3969.0
Construction material	Cement, overflow pipes, concrete plates	ha	1.0	1102.5	1102.5
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					53346.5
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					362.9

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 2 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Hay harvesting	Several times during the vegetation period
2.	Soil preparation (planning, plowing, harrowing)	April/once every 5 years
3.	Lucerne sowing on abandoned degraded pasture	April/once every 5 years
4.	Agreement on the irrigation norms and regulations	April/once every 5 years
5.	Water-retaining irrigation	September-November/annually
6.	2. Подготовка почвы (планировка, вспашка, боронование)	Апрель/1 раз в 5 лет
7.	Согласование норм полива и его регулирования	апрель/1 раз в 5 лет
8.	Влагозарядковый полив	Сентябрь-ноябрь/ ежегодно

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	Hay harvesting	persons/day/ha	10.0	500.0	5000.0	100.0
Labour	Soil preparation (planning, plowing, harrowing)	persons/day/ha	10.0	40.83	408.3
Labour	Lucerne sowing on abandoned degraded pasture	persons/day/ha	10.0	40.83	408.3
Equipment	Machine use	hours/ha	0.6	578.33333	347.0
Plant material	Seeds	kg/ha	20.0	91.85	1837.0	50.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					8000.6
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					54.43

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: Tractor (seeder), Excavator, bulldozer, trucks

The expenses for restoration of 12 km irrigation canal and the reconstruction of 5 floodgates were distributed on 60 ha of pastures sown by crops.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

The amount of material expenseses depends on the lack of local community’s own agricultural machinery, remoteness from district and regional centre, as well as from production sites (construction materials, seeds) very much that leads to higher costs for fuels, working hours, transport lease and etc.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

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 is low

Soil drainage / infiltration is good

Soil water storage capacity is low

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Availability of surface water: In the summer, the water practically does not reach the Talas River (the water is withdrawn for irrigation further upstream

Water quality (untreated): Ground water is good drinking water and lower stretch of the Talas River is for agricultural use only.

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Aridity in the region causes a relative poverty in the species composition of flora and fauna.

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Population density: < 10 persons/km2

Annual population growth: < 0.5%

8% of the land users are rich and own 50% of the land.
75% of the land users are average wealthy and own 45% of the land.
16% of the land users are poor and own 4% of the land.
1% of the land users are poor and own 1% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: More often than not, no activity is implemented outside the area, except for private transportation if motor transport is available.

Market orientation of production system: Self-sufficiency in meat and milk production and mixed for the sale of natural products, private trading.

Level of mechanization: Tractors are used for seeding and harvesting of forage crops, small plots of lands requiring manual labour and animal traction is used rarely, mainly for livestock grazing

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
• individual, titled

Land use rights:

• leased
• individual

Water use rights:

• communal (organized)
• leased

Comments:

Land lease for 49 years, rent is paid for water-use in irrigation.

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

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	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

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

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	not well

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:

In future it is expected to increase water-retaining irrigation areas and income by more than 2-3 times

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 11-50%

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

28 households in an area of 5.6 km2 (10 persons/ km2)

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

• 11-50%

Comments:

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

4 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: Many locals, wishing to introduce the technology on water retaining irrigation, would face material difficulties, so they may search for support from different sources, including initiators and practitioners

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: The trends in increased acceptance of the technology may not be considered significant, since many local inhabitants still have doubts due to the expectation of a reduction in the amount of water flowing into the Talas River due to increasing overuse by consumers upstream.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Reduction of soil degradation, dust storms How can they be sustained / enhanced? The continuation of lucerne sowing for 5-6 years as well as the expanansion of crop field areas
Improvement of soil fertility How can they be sustained / enhanced? The continuation of the work
Improvement of forage stock How can they be sustained / enhanced? Material support and joint efforts, equitable labor and income sharing is required
Improvement in the standard of living How can they be sustained / enhanced? The continuation and expansion of the application of the technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Reduction of land degradation (wind and water erosion, loss of humus etc.) How can they be sustained / enhanced? Strict application of the technologies corresponding to guidance and instructions
Off-season irrigation restores sowing of lucerne which considerably improve soil quality How can they be sustained / enhanced? The practice of enriching the soil with nitrogen and other nutrients through the sowing of lucerne may be continued as one of the most efficient counter measures against these natural-climatic conditions, leading to the expansion in size of crop fields and an improvement in soil quality.
Improvement of local population’s adaptation to climate change How can they be sustained / enhanced? Further raising of population‘s awareness, informing and demonstrating the environmental, economic and social benefits derived from the application of this technology
Improvement of institutional links and integrity of local community How can they be sustained / enhanced? Joint and equitable decisions with regards to financial, documentary and assorted other issues

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?
Overuse of the Talas river upstream by other land users and a reduction in water flow to the canal.	Clear agreements on the provision of water with corresponding persons and organizations
Expensive lucerne seeds, construction materials and leased agricultural machinery	Joint solution involving other land users, who have needed machinery or more opportunities, followed by recalculation and reimbursement of expenses after harvesting

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Expected lack of water in the Talas River for irrigation	The conclusion of an agreement with territorial bodies with regards to managing water resources with clear stipulations and conditions for water release, regardless of overuse of the Talas river upstream.
Expected lack of means to realize the technology among land users, who wish to introduce this practice	To seek support from local community (initial methodological and material assistance), the state (subsidies, microcred), international organizations, etc.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Report on the project " Irrigation of fields and pastures in the autumn an early spring as an adaptation mechanism of sustainable water resources use in South Kazakhstan (Autumn irrigation)"

Available from where? Costs?

Anuarbek Ospanbek, Kazakhstan, Zhambyl region,Talas district, Sadu Shakirov village, Konayev str., house.21; Gulnara Bekturova, Kazakhstan, Almaty, +7 705 5678499 gbekturova@mail.ru

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Water-retaining irrigation as an effective method of adaptive accumulation of moisture in the soil in the face of increasing aridity." Published with support from GEF Small Grants Programme / UNDP, Almaty, 2011 (brochure)

Available from where? Costs?

Gulnara Bekturova, Kazakhstan, Almaty, +7 705 5678499 gbekturova@mail.ru

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Review of projects in the framework of the "Adaptation to climate change at the community level in Kazakhstan" (GEF SGP), Almaty, 2010 (brochure)

Available from where? Costs?

Gulnara Bekturova,Yekaterina Yuschenko, Stanislav Kim