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

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

Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Develo (Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Develo) - South Africa

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:

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

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.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation

3.2 Current land use type(s) where the Technology is applied

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

Comments:

Secondary measures: management measures

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

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

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.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

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

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

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

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

Land ownership:

• communal/ village
• individual, not titled

Land use rights:

• communal (organized)
• individual

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

Income and costs

Socio-cultural impacts

Ecological impacts

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Climate and disaster risk reduction

Other ecological impacts

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

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)?

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

7.1 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