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

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

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

No

Comments:

-

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

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

The Zero-Waste Pig Farm or Moo Lum is the integrated management of pigs in pens with the use of microorganisms that lead to the safety of pork products. This technique has become beneficial, as the pig waste can be used as organic fertilizer that produces no pollution to the community.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

-The Zero-Waste Pig Farm or Moo Lum is the integrated management of pigs in pens with the use of microorganisms that lead to the safety of pork products. This technique has become beneficial, as the pig waste can be used as organic fertilizer that produces no pollution to the community.
Pig farming in a community generally causes unwanted waste products: pig manure with its strong odor, and polluted water. This causes conflict about the use of land in the community too. The management of the ‘Zero-Waste Pig Farm’ or ‘Moo Lum’ is an alternative practice which greatly reduces the environmental problems caused by traditional pig farming. There are two key elements of the Zero-Waste Pig Farm or Moo Lum management: one is the pig farm and the other is the waste.

A. Pig farm management: housing and feeding.
Housing: pig houses should be built in dry areas, not-to-be-flooded with rainwater in the rainy season. Locally available materials should be used, such as bamboo, grass, etc. The pig house should have good ventilation. Pig pens, on the other hand, should be on bare soil with no cement. In each pig pen there should be a pit, 60-70 cm deep, while the floor of the pig pen one should be covered with rice husks, sawdust or coconut coir. Feeding: Pig raising involves pig food management with concentrated and fermented foods. The raw material is selected from non-chemically treated materials that have gone through processes with use of herbal powder mixed with bio-fermented water. This is the technique to promote animal health and to prevent animal diseases. The pig types in the farm are the popular species of Duroc CLD, Landrace and Large White, from when they are weaned (at about 1 month old).
B. Waste management: Lay the husks or any organic materials on the bottom of the pit in the pen, divided into two layers (about 30 cm thick for each layer), then put salt and bio-fermented solution. Each week, apply the bio-fermented solution to improve the efficiency of the decomposition of pig waste. After a cycle of pig feeding one will get an amount of compost from the pigpen hole. The objective of the zero-waste pig farm or Moo Lum technology is to produce safe pork products through the production process of an environmentally friendly animal farm without pollution and then obtain quality pig manure compost to be used quite beneficially in the organic production process. The zero-waste pig farm or Moo Lum technology processes are as follow:
1. Build the pig houses on an unfloodable area with good ventilation.
2. Build a stall about 4 x 4m wide which can hold 8 pigs.
3. Prepare the stall.
4. Choose the breeds of pigs that are popular.
5. Select the food for the pig obtained through non-chemical processes.
6. Apply bio-degradable pesticides on the floor. Feed the pigs with bio-fermented water. When the pigs get sick, they are treated according to the symptoms with herbal medicine.
7. Take care of them.
The benefit as commented by the users of this technology are as follows:
The user can establish a pig farm in a community with no odour and no flies swarming around. The organic fertilizer from pig manure will improve the quality of the soil in the area, which will benefit the user even further. Another saving is reduced labour from the various cleaning operations needed under conventional management.
However, there are some limitations, as some processes of the technology take unusually longer time. The pork products are not widely known as a ‘safe pork products’ as there is no standard set for such farming by the government. Finally, there is often a shortage of pig food; there should be more production of pig food in the community.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

2.4 Videos 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

Indicate year of implementation:

1969

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:

• more than 50 years ago (traditional)

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:

• as part of a traditional system (> 50 years)

• study tour

Comments (type of project, etc.):

-

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
• create beneficial economic impact
• create beneficial social impact

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

Comments:

-

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

Comments:

-

3.4 Water supply

other (e.g. post-flooding):

• for livestock,pond

Comments:

-

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• integrated soil fertility management
• waste management/ waste water management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

no waste /environmental friendly activities

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

normal pig farm make more pollution to community and environment.

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• reduce land degradation

Comments:

pig manure compost for soil improvement

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify how costs and inputs were calculated:

• per Technology area

other/ national currency (specify):

Thai Baht (THB)

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

32.0

4.3 Establishment activities

	Activity	Timing (season)
1.	Moo Lum management	2 times a year
2.	Moo Lum pig waste management	2 times a year

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	1Moo Lum management	man	210.0	300.0	63000.0	100.0
Labour	2.Moo Lum food management	man	60.0	300.0	18000.0	100.0
Labour	3.Moo Lum waste management	man	300.0	300.0	90000.0	100.0
Labour	4.Housing	man	120.0	300.0	36000.0	100.0
Construction material	1.Housing material	โรง	1.0	84000.0	84000.0	100.0
Other	1.pig food	animal	90.0	3800.0	342000.0	100.0
Other	2. breeding pig	animal	90.0	1500.0	135000.0	100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					768000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					24000.0

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

-

Comments:

-

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Moo Lum management	2 times a year
2.	Moo Lum food management	2 times a year
3.	Moo Lum waste management	2 times a year

Comments:

-

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	1.Moo Lum management	man	210.0	300.0	63000.0	100.0
Labour	2. Moo Lum food management	man	60.0	300.0	18000.0	100.0
Labour	3. Moo Lum waste management	man	300.0	300.0	90000.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					171000.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					5343.75

If land user bore less than 100% of costs, indicate who covered the remaining costs:

-

Comments:

-

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

ค่าแรง

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• concave situations

Comments and further specifications on topography:

ราชบุรีเป็นจังหวัดทีมีเทือกเขาใหญ่น้อยเป็ นอันมาก โดยเฉพาะทางด้านตะวันตก ของจังหวัดมีเทือกเขาตะนาวศรี เป็ นแนวยาวกันเขตแดนไทยกับพม่า ทางตอนกลางของจังหวัดมีทีราบลุ่ม แม่นํ าแม่กลอง ซึงเหมาะแก่การเพาะปลูก และทางด้านตะวันออกเฉียงใต้เป็ นทีราบตํา ซึงได้รับอิทธิพลจาก การหนุนเนืองของนําทะเล

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.

-

5.4 Water availability and quality

Is water salinity a problem?

No

Is flooding of the area occurring?

No

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

-

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

-

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

-

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, titled

Land use rights:

• individual

Water use rights:

• individual

Specify:

-

Comments:

-

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

Comments:

-

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

Soil

Other ecological impacts

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

Specify assessment of off-site impacts (measurements):

-

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 well
seasonal temperature		increase	not well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Biological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
epidemic diseases	not well at all

Comments:

ระบุสัตว์ตายมากขึ้น

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:

-

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• 1-10%

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

15 families

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

• 0-10%

Comments:

-

6.6 Adaptation

Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?

Yes

If yes, indicate to which changing conditions it was adapted:

• changing markets

Specify adaptation of the Technology (design, material/ species, etc.):

An appropriate breed of pig for Moo Lum. Management system amended to reduce odor.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Adaptation of the availability of local materials reduces the cost.
The waste of a pig farm is organic fertilizer.
Safe food products
Environmentally friendly and not disturbing the neighborhood
Is able to establish a pig farm in the community.
Makes their farming occupation sustainable.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Make more forms of land use possible.
Easy technology, easy to adopt.
The technology is adapted to locality.
Community accepted and credited.

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?
Takes longer time than ordinary pig farming.	Do more research
The products from the technology are not well known.	Do more PR, by public and related sectors.
No guarantee for the standard of the products from this technology esp. the public sector	Public sector should consider to set up the standard to make confidence inside and outside country.
Increase locally feeding crop production ,so need more area/farmers to produce	Gathering farmers into groups /needs more community participation

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
-

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

-

Available from where? Costs?

-

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

-

URL:

-

7.4 General comments

-