Technologies

Combating of invader plants and bush packing [South Africa]

technologies_1373 - South Africa

Completeness: 73%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:

Meyer Schalk

Gauteng Department of Agriculture

South Africa

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 756, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)', 'text': 'Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Develo (Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Develo) - South Africa', '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

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

Awareness raising
approaches

Awareness raising [South Africa]

To make the people aware of veld degradation, rehabilitation & the participation of the people

  • Compiler: Belly Mpoko Malatji

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The combating of Invaders to preserve water resources & the rehabilitation of the bare ground by means of brush packing to prevent soil erosion.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology is applied in areas under the 'Working for Water' projects that are run by the National Department of Water Affairs in South Africa, in the fight to combat invaders exhausting our valuable water resources. Catchment areas are fields that are infected by invader species on riverbanks, and catchment areas that extract enormous amounts of water out of the system. The trees (Black wattle - Acacia meansii) are cut or ring barked. After the trees are felled, large areas of bare ground are exposed. In order to prevent soil erosion until the natural succession processes are completed and the area is in equilibrium with the rest of the environment, soil needs to be stabilised and sometimes also rehabilitated.
These exposed areas must first be treated with a follow-up to prevent the coppice, re-growth and seedlings from growing again. Sometimes in agricultural grazing areas, the bare areas are re-seeded with natural climax grasses, and in urban areas left to be stabilised by successional species, or pioneers and aveads etc. The small branches of the felled trees are packed on bare areas, after the re-seeding to stop the topsoil from eroding. This reduces the off-flow and flow speed of the rainwater, lowering the raindrop impact, increasing the moist regime and preventing wind erosion. The thick stumps are either used for firewood or for the charcoal industry, as well as packed in windrows horizontal with stream flow.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

South Africa

Region/ State/ Province:

Gauteng

Further specification of location:

Gauteng

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If the Technology is evenly spread over an area, specify area covered (in km2):

2.0

If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 1-10 km2
Comments:

Total area covered by the SLM Technology is 2 km2.

2 Sites at Krugersdorp, one along a public rood where no development is done yet & the second at Kenmeare Kloof that divided two residential areas. Elandsfontein is bits & pieces that scatters over several farms.

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 technology was experimented by the University of Potchefstroom and also applied at other typical Working for Water projects in the country and technical advise by experts of Water Affairs.

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

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:
  • Ranching
  • cattle
Comments:

Main animal species and products: Not many cattle, people still poor - average

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Tremendous bush encroachment by wattle species or other similar invaders like blue gum trees, the area has no further land use after the bush encroachment.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): The problem is similar, no land use in encroached areas, the trees are to close and no grasses grow underneath for cattle to feed on, and the bush provided shelter for criminal activities.

Constraints of settlement / urban: Preventing of fires in the dry trees

Constraints of recreation: Preventing of fires in dry trees/area

Number of growing seasons per year: 1
Longest growing period in days: 210; Longest growing period from month to month: Oct - Mar

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • improved ground/ vegetation cover

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

vegetative measures

vegetative measures

  • V4: Replacement or removal of alien/ invasive species
management measures

management measures

  • M2: Change of management/ intensity level
Comments:

Secondary measures: management measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

soil erosion by water

soil erosion by water

  • Wt: loss of topsoil/ surface erosion
  • Wg: gully erosion/ gullying
chemical soil deterioration

chemical soil deterioration

  • Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
water degradation

water degradation

  • Ha: aridification
Comments:

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Wg: gully erosion / gullying, Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Ha: aridification

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

{'additional_translations': {}, 'content_type': 'image/jpeg', 'preview_image': '/media/fb/7/fb76275e-fa6b-4185-bff9-c4dd1468c3a0.jpg', 'key': 'Technical drawing', 'value': '/media/1a/6/1a61b91a-a18d-46a4-90d8-e7c8eab8bb16.jpg', 'template': 'raw'}
Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Clearing of alien plants
Working for Water

Gauteng

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high

Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate

Main technical functions: control of raindrop splash, control of dispersed runoff: retain / trap, control of dispersed runoff: impede / retard, control of concentrated runoff: retain / trap, control of concentrated runoff: impede / retard, control of concentrated runoff: drain / divert, reduction of slope length, improvement of ground cover, increase of surface roughness, increase in organic matter, increase of infiltration, increase / maintain water stored in soil, water harvesting / increase water supply, water spreading, sediment retention / trapping, sediment harvesting, reduction in wind speed, increase in soil fertility

Secondary technical functions: reduction of slope angle, improvement of topsoil structure (compaction)

Change of land use practices / intensity level: No grazing for first 3 years after reseeding

Control / change of species composition: Follow-up - eradication and control of regrowth

Author:

Schalk Meyer

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Rand

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

6.0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

5.00

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Cutting of trees Summer
2. Packing of branches Before winter (wind) & spring (rain)

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 Cutting of trees and packing branches persons/day/ha 500.0 30.0 15000.0 100.0
Equipment tools ha 1.0 500.0 500.0 100.0
Plant material Seeds ha 1.0 125000.0 125000.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 140500.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 23416.67
Comments:

Duration of establishment phase: 0 month(s)

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Where reseeding took place the grazing must be maintained 3 years after planting / 3 years

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

Comments:

The total implementation of the technique: Costs of chemicals & tools, labour for the whole project, the cutting of the regrowth and the treatment of it (follow-up) and the packing of the branches.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labour: The work team of 25 people is very expensive/costly. Chemicals for the invader eradication treatment is 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
Specify average annual rainfall (if known), in mm:

600.00

Agro-climatic zone
  • sub-humid
  • 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: Also rolling

Landforms: Hill slopes at Krugersdorp

Altitudinal zone: 1542 m a.s.l.

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):
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
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 depth on average : Very shallow at hillside at Krugersdorp more predominantly and shallow at more farm soils at the plains of Elandsfontein.

Soil fertility is medium in plains and low in hillsides

Topsoil organic matter: Not very fertile, no grasses to enhanced biomass

Soil drainage / infiltration is medium for the soil of plains of Elandfontein (not so compacted - better drainage) and poor for Krugersdorp (hillside highly compacted)

Soil water storage capacity is medium for Elandsfontein (less compacted) and low for Krugersdorp (more compacted)

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • subsistence (self-supply)
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • poor
  • average
Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Population density: 50-100 persons/km2

Annual population growth: < 0.5%

40% of the land users are average wealthy and own 30% of the land (Elandsfontein, upcoming farmer).
60% of the land users are poor and own 70% of the land (Communities that is not fully commercialized).

Off-farm income specification: Family members are working in the city, to provide for the family (the children and brothers etc.)

Market orientation of production system: Subsistence (self-supply) for Elandsfontein: workers that are living on the farm

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

  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha

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

Land ownership:
  • communal/ village
  • individual, not 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

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Where reseeding was done the bare soil will be replaced with grasses

fodder quality

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Where reseeding was done the bare soil will be replaced with grasses

Income and costs

farm income

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Better grazing for cattle and selling of fire wood

diversity of income sources

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

Selling of wood for fire wood & charcoal to charcoal industry

Socio-cultural impacts

community institutions

weakened
strengthened
Comments/ specify:

Training and job creation

SLM/ land degradation knowledge

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

Better technologies and experience

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

surface runoff

increased
decreased
Quantity before SLM:

90

Quantity after SLM:

30

excess water drainage

reduced
improved
Soil

soil moisture

decreased
increased

soil cover

reduced
improved

soil loss

increased
decreased
Climate and disaster risk reduction

wind velocity

increased
decreased
Other ecological impacts

soil fertility

decreased
increased

biodiversity

diminished
enhanced

conserve water resource while reducing invader bush

decreased
increased

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

reliable and stable stream flows in dry season

reduced
increased
Comments/ specify:

No Wattle's to extract water, reduced runoff

downstream siltation

increased
decreased

wind transported sediments

increased
reduced
Comments/ specify:

Soil is stabilized

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?
Short-term returns:

very positive

Long-term returns:

very positive

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?
Short-term returns:

slightly positive

Long-term returns:

slightly positive

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

Comments:

There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Elandsfontein: prevent soil loss

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Improve farm soils - control overgrazing
Elandsfontein: Improve grazing capacity

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Rotational grazing and rest for first 3 years after rehabilitation
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Prevent soil loss

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Packing of branches correctly and maintained - preventing of veld fires (wood from burning)
Reseeding of perennial grasses that enhanced grazing capacity and biodiversity

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Correct seed mix & seeding method; preventing from grazing and veld fires
Conserve water resource

How can they be sustained / enhanced? Eradication and control of invaders

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?
Labour intensive No recommendations
Time consuming No recommendations
Expensive No recommendations

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Business plan and work reports from government officers / officials & NGO's like universities

Available from where? Costs?

Gauteng Department of Agriculture

Title, author, year, ISBN:

NGO's and Universities

Available from where? Costs?

Gauteng Department of Agriculture

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules