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)

The Transboundary Agro-ecosystem Management Project for the Kagera River Basin (GEF-FAO / Kagera TAMP )

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

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - Italy

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

1.5 Reference to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Approaches (documented using WOCAT)

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Napier grass strips control soil erosion on annual and perennial cropland on moderately-angled to highly-angled slopes.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

Napier grass is native to the tropical African savanna, where one cultivar is also known as Uganda grass or elephant grass. In Uganda, extensive natural Napier grasslands grew on the fringes of tropical forest until quite recently, the grass being used as mulch for coffee plantations and, later, banana plantations. Its use as cut fodder is more recent.

Napier grass strips as a conservation technology was introduced to members of Farmer Field Schools in Mwizi sub-county by Kagera TAMP field facilitators. Its extensive rhizomatous root system coupled with dense, leafy clumps makes it a quickly establishing vegetative technology against soil erosion by stabilizing the soil and checking surface runoff.

The technology is watershed oriented, with grass strips planted on the upper side of "Fanya Ju" trenches to enhance runoff checking and sediment retention. Mulching is also used to reduce direct impact of rain-drops that otherwise loosen the top soil and worsen the process of surface erosion. When established, grass strips form a continuous hedge along the contour, 0.5m to 1.0m high, regularly cut to provide fodder for livestock or for mulch. The strips are 10m apart.

Purpose of the Technology: The grass strips protect the land from surface erosion, progressively checking the speed of surface runoff, trapping sediment and increasing infiltration. Over time grass strips lead to the formation of terraces.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Napier grass is propagated from root splits, canes with 3 nodes or from whole canes. In the soil excavated from a shallow (0.30m to 0.60m) fanya ju trench, the planting material is planted 0.15m to 0.20m deep with splits planted upright, three node canes planted at an angle of 30-45 degrees while whole canes are buried in the furrow 0.60m to 0.90m apart. The root splits and canes are usually spaced 0.50m to 0.60m along the contour. Root splits generally take more labor to prepare and to plant but result in quicker establishment and earlier and higher forage yields. Once the crop is well-established the original planting material type generally has little effect strip characteristics.

The grass strips are maintained by regular harvesting to a height of o.3m or lower depending on the amount of rain.

Natural / human environment: Maintenance is simple and cheap. Hand hoes and pangas are the only tools used in establishment and maintenance. A little manual labor is all that is required for establishment and management. Stands can survive for decades when well-maintained, but because of its rapid growth and high yields, Napier grass requires regular application of nitrogen (N) phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) in the form of farm yard manure, readily available in Mwizi from the livestock that feed on the grass. While pests and diseases that attack the Napier grass exist, it has not yet been observed to be a problem.

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.):

It was initiated by Uganda siol and water pilot project in 1994

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• create beneficial economic impact

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):

• Agroforestry

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): There was erosion and plant/crops were growing stunted. The soil was dusty.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): There was low crop production per unit area, crops were washed away by runoff.

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

Type of cropping system and major crops comments: Coffee is planted in banana plantation

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

Comments:

Cropland: Ca: Annual cropping

3.4 Water supply

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

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• improved ground/ vegetation cover
• cross-slope measure

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Main measures: vegetative measures

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -graded strips *³

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

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

Main causes of degradation: soil management (Continuous cultivation), other natural causes (avalanches, volcanic eruptions, mud flows, highly susceptible natural resources, extreme topography, etc.) specify (Steep slopes facilitate the speed of v), population pressure (Land is subdivided into small pieces and is left to rest.)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Ug Shillings

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

2600.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Cutting	wet season
2.	Transporting
3.	Planting

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	200		7.0		100.0
Equipment	Tools	200m	1.0	2.0	2.0	100.0
Other	Grass cuttings	200m	1.0	8.0	8.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					10.0

Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 1 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Slashing	2 times a year

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	200 m	1.0	5.0	5.0
Equipment	Tools	200m	1.0	1.0	1.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					6.0

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: Handhoes and pangas are used in daily activities.

Costs are calculated for grass strips for 5 strips of 30metres

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

There is cheap hired labour and the slope is not so steep

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Altitudinal zone: 1501-2000 m a.s.l. (It its the highest parts of the district)
Landforms: Hill slopes (ranked 1, technolgy applied across the slope) and footslopes (ranked 2)
Slopes on average: Gentle (ranked 1, shoulder slopes are gentle), hilly (ranked 2, hill sides are steep)

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: Shallow (ranked 1, at the upper end of the slope), very shallow (along the hill slopes, ranked 2,) and deep (in the valley)
Soil texture: Medium (cannot form a crumbling ribbon)
Soil fertility: Medium (can support plant growth)
Topsoil organic matter: Low (colour change to brownish)
Soil drainage/infiltration: Medium
Soil water storage capacity: Medium (crops can still grow during the dry season)

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Water quality (untreated): Poor drinking water (treatement required, water in valley only for livestock)

5.5 Biodiversity

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
Difference in the involvement of women and men: no difference
Population density: 10-50 persons/km2
50% of the land users are very rich and own 40% of the land.
30% of the land users are rich and own 50% of the land.
20% of the land users are average wealthy and own 10% of the land (have enough food,good housing).
Off-farm income specification: All land users do not get off farm income
Level of mechanization: Manual work (the terrain of the land do not allow animal traction and mechanised cultivation )
Market orientation: There is no specialization

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:

• individual, not titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Other socio-economic impacts

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

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 known

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

Comments:

By planting Calliandra alongside the grass strips

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:

Grasses are used to feed livestock and mulching. It requires low labour.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• > 50%

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

10

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

• 11-50%

Comments:

20% 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: 2 families have applied the technology with external support

80% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

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

Comments on spontaneous adoption: The technology was initiated by 2 land users and only 8 have adopted

There is a little trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: There is still need for community sensitization and material support

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Land users are already sensitized How can they be sustained / enhanced? Continuous sensitization
There is high demand for animal feed and mulching How can they be sustained / enhanced? Estabkish more grass strips
Planting materials are available How can they be sustained / enhanced? Leaving some grasses to overgrow

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?
Low adoption of the technology	setting demonstrations
Low turn up at training sessions	Forining farmer groups like Farmer field schools

7.1 Methods/ sources of information