Sub-Sarface Dams (SSD) [Kenia]
- Creación:
- Actualización:
- Compilador: Guyo Roba
- Editor: –
- Revisores: Donia Mühlematter, Rima Mekdaschi Studer, Brigitte Zimmermann
technologies_3340 - Kenia
- Resumen completo en PDF
- Resumen completo en PDF para imprimir
- Resumen completo en el navegador
- Resumen completo (sin formato)
- Sub-Sarface Dams (SSD): 22 de junio de 2018 (inactive)
- Sub-Sarface Dams (SSD): 7 de mayo de 2018 (inactive)
- Sub-Sarface Dams (SSD): 17 de julio de 2018 (inactive)
- Sub-Sarface Dams (SSD): 15 de agosto de 2018 (inactive)
- Sub-Surface Dams (SSD): 5 de diciembre de 2018 (inactive)
- Sub-Sarface Dams (SSD): 3 de septiembre de 2018 (inactive)
- Sub-Surface Dams (SSD): 2 de noviembre de 2021 (public)
Visualizar secciones
Expandir todo Colapsar todos1. Información general
1.3 Condiciones referidas al uso de datos documentados mediante WOCAT
¿Cuándo se compilaron los datos (en el campo)?
11/01/2018
El compilador y la/s persona(s) de referencia claves aceptan las condiciones acerca del uso de los datos documentados mediante WOCAT:
Sí
1.4 Declaración de la sostenibilidad de la Tecnología descrita
¿La Tecnología aquí descrita resulta problemática en relación a la degradación de la tierra, de tal forma que no puede considerársela una tecnología sostenible para el manejo de la tierra?
No
2. Descripción de la Tecnología MST
2.1 Breve descripción de la Tecnología
Definición de la Tecnología:
These are constructions stretching across the sand filled dry riverbed, down towards the impermeable floor of the riverbed. They are totally submerged into the ground. For example by fully covering after construction by sand. This are done along dry rivers with huge sand deposits, which has high yield potential and where water can be easily extracted. The aim is to raise groundwater tables and increase the storage capacity for water withdrawals.
2.2 Descripción detallada de la Tecnología
Descripción:
The technology is applied in northern rangeland of Isiolo County which is managed under communal management systems. The aim of technology to reduce pasture and water availability imbalances. The dimensions of sub-surface dam include: a length of water spread (103m),width of the dam (15m), width of water spread (18m), effective dam height (2m), volume of retained sand (103 x 0.5(15 +18) x0.5 x2.0 = 5098.50m3) and the volume of water that can be abstracted from the sand bed (25/100x 5098.50m3 = 1274.6.36m3).
The technology functions as underground water storage infrastructure and the typical activities include, excavation of top porous soil, excavation of sample pits within the excavated area, checking filtration rates of soil, compaction of soil on which dam liners are laid, smoothing the sharp liners along which the dam liners are laid, making grooves to anchor the dam liner, laying the dam liner, anchoring the dam liner with a mixture of cement, water proof and sand with water (motor) and finally drying of the motor and filling back of sand.
The development of Sub-Surface Dams (SSDs) was done through Cash for Work program where local labours comprising of 40-50 persons are engaged in excavation, compactions and developing the liners. Farm tools like jembe, panga, spades and human labour are required to develop the SSD. The technology improves water supply/availability, thereby extending the period of livestock grazing in areas where typically water is depleted before the pasture hence improves water access for livestock in ways that support wider management and utilization of the rangeland and as such strength the resilience of pastoralists to droughts. This effectively gives pastoral groups, an extra grazing time (typically 2 extra months), a period usually not too long to encourage land degradation through over-grazing but long enough to enable pastoralist utilize the remaining pasture in wet season grazing areas. In so doing, the technology enable balanced use of vast communal lands without livestock retreating to dry season grazing areas.
In the process of the landscape level participatory planning with the communities: i) they identified different challenges, including need for decommissioning certain water points that they consider are contributing to over grazing and also attracting other communities, hence drive frequent conflicts, secondly, ii) they mapped areas in the rangeland where there is mismatch between water and pasture availability, most of these areas are in wet season grazing areas. So the next discussion was on what strategic water infrastructures that will enable herders to graze for 2 -3 extra months to enable them utilize the grass before they migrate to the traditional dry season grazing areas. So by design, the technology should only yield water that can allow settling for those extra months, not longer to the detriment of the rangeland
The technology was instrumental in fostering both balanced utilization of land and strengthening sustainable use of the vast rangeland by ensuring that herders utilize available pastures in the wet seasons grazing areas before moving to dry seasons grazing areas. The water stored through the technology stays longer, in this case study, the water lasted for 5 months after the end of the rainy season .
The area receives bimodal rainfall, long rain in March-May and short rain in November-December. With changing seasons/climate, the dry seasons can last up to 1 year in case of rainfall failure. Typically, dry seasons are 6-7 months (May- November).
Normally, the water is depleted within 2 months after the rainy period. The technology is also cheap and easy to understand and construct (especially in areas with clay as the underlying impermeable material) with a possibility of the communities to be taught how to identify suitable site and the entire process of construction. However, in areas without clay soil, the excavation of clay and transportation can be labour intensive and expensive.
2.3 Fotografías de la Tecnología
2.5 País/ región/ lugares donde la Tecnología fue aplicada y que se hallan comprendidos por esta evaluación
País:
Kenia
Región/ Estado/ Provincia:
Northern Kenya
Especifique más el lugar :
Garba Tula, Isiolo County
Map
×2.7 Introducción de la Tecnología
Especifique cómo se introdujo la Tecnología:
- mediante proyectos/ intervenciones externas
3. Clasificación de la Tecnología MST
3.1 Propósito(s) principal(es) de la Tecnología MST
- mejorar la producción
- reducir, prevenir, restaurar la degradación del suelo
- adaptarse al cambio climático/ extremos climáticos y sus impactos
- mitigar cambio climático y sus impactos
- crear impacto económico benéfico
- crear impacto social benéfico
3.2 Tipo(s) actuales de uso de la tierra donde se aplica la Tecnología
Tierra de pastoreo
Tierras de pastoreo extensivo:
- Semi-nomadismo/ pastoralismo
Comentarios:
Communal grazing area that is shared by 2 and more pastoral groups
3.3 Información adicional sobre el uso de tierras
Provisión de agua para la tierra donde se aplica la Tecnología:
- de secano
Densidad del ganado (si fuese relevante):
Fluctuates, depending on seasons and pasture availability
3.4 Grupo MST al que pertenece la Tecnología
- pastoralismo y manejo de tierras de pastoreo
3.5 Difusión de la Tecnología
Especifique la difusión de la Tecnología:
- aplicada en puntos específicos/ concentrada en un área pequeña
Comentarios:
Sub-Surface Dams are only suitable in areas along the river, with suitable density of sand deposits
3.6 Medidas MST que componen la Tecnología
medidas estructurales
- S5: Diques, hondonadas, estanques
3.7 Principales tipos de degradación del suelo encarados con la Tecnología
otros
Comentarios:
Mismatch of pasture and water resources - there are areas where pastures are plenty but surface rain water is depleted earlier than pasture.
3.8 Prevención, reducción o restauración de la degradación del suelo
Especifique la meta de la Tecnología con relación a la degradación de la tierra:
- prevenir la degradación del suelo
- reducir la degradación del suelo
Comentarios:
The SSD technology increase water availability is period immediately after the rain, hence ensuring better pasture utilization and more sustainable use of land.
4. Especificaciones técnicas, actividades de implementación, insumos y costos
4.1 Dibujo técnico de la Tecnología
4.2 Especificaciones técnicas/ explicaciones del dibujo técnico
The SSD has initial excavation works. The construction of the SSD was constructed by 50 laborers. The area of excavation is subdivided into 45 square chambers of 4X2.3X2.2= 20.2M3 (not to scale). Each of the chambers were excavated by 5 laborers. The estimated time for excavation as per the plan was estimated to be five days. Excavation and transportation of the clay from the clay pit was estimated to take an approximate of five days while the compacting of the clay will follow one week later, and laying out of the concrete and refilling of the sand for another week. The liner will then be finally placed. In summary, the excavation of sand takes 5 days, and the excavation of clay soil takes another 5 days while concrete placing, compacting of clay as well as putting of liner and refilling of sand takes 10 days.
4.3 Información general sobre el cálculo de insumos y costos
Especifique cómo se calcularon los costos e insumos:
- por unidad de Tecnología
Especifique unidad:
chamber
Especifique la moneda usada para calcular costos:
- dólares americanos
Indique el costo promedio del salario de trabajo contratado por día:
3.5 USD per day
4.4 Actividades de establecimiento
Actividad | Tipo de medida | Momento | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Removing sand over dyke and man-days for excavating and transporting soil to dam site | Otras medidas | 21 days for 45 casual labourers |
2. | Building and compaction soil in dam wall | Estructurales | 3 days for 45 casual labourers |
3. | Supplying water for compaction | Otras medidas | 0.5 day for 45 casual labourers |
4. | Back-filling sand on dam | Otras medidas | 1 day for 45 casual labourers |
5. | Supplying water for compacting clay in dam wall | Otras medidas | 2 days for 45 casual labourers |
6. | Compacting soil and placing liners | Otras medidas | 12 days for 45 casual labourers |
Comentarios:
The construction of SSD was done through “Cash for work” which is participatory process that involves community mobilization, identification of beneficiaries and formation of “Cash for work” committees, registrations and verification of beneficiaries and implementation/supervision of the work.
4.5 Costos e insumos necesarios para el establecimiento
Especifique insumo | Unidad | Cantidad | Costos por unidad | Costos totales por insumo | % de los costos cubiertos por los usuarios de las tierras | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mano de obra | tools - jembe, spade etc. | pieces | 80,0 | 5,33 | 426,4 | |
Mano de obra | Removing sand over dyke and Man-days for excavating and transporting soil to dam site | per day | 945,0 | 4,0 | 3780,0 | |
Mano de obra | Building and compaction soil in dam wall | per day | 135,0 | 4,0 | 540,0 | |
Equipo | Supplying water for compaction | per day | 22,5 | 4,0 | 90,0 | |
Equipo | Back-filling sand on dam | per day | 45,0 | 4,0 | 180,0 | |
Equipo | Supplying water for compacting soil in dam wall | per day | 90,0 | 4,0 | 360,0 | |
Equipo | Compacting soil and placing liners | per day | 540,0 | 4,0 | 2160,0 | |
Costos totales para establecer la Tecnología | 7536,4 |
Comentarios:
As stated, the cash for work approach means that people get paid 4 USD per day for working on SSD until completion. There are phases where people participated in preliminary phases in meetings and consultation without payments but the actual work was done on cash for work basis.
4.6 Actividades de establecimiento/ recurrentes
Actividad | Tipo de medida | Momento/ frequencia | |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Training of communities to manage and maintain the structures | Estructurales | yearly |
4.7 Costos e insumos necesarios para actividades de mantenimiento/ recurrentes (por año)
Especifique insumo | Unidad | Cantidad | Costos por unidad | Costos totales por insumo | % de los costos cubiertos por los usuarios de las tierras | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mano de obra | Labour for site protection and maintenance of hygiene | per site | 10,0 | 100,0 | 1000,0 | |
Indique los costos totales para mantenecer la Tecnología | 1000,0 |
Comentarios:
Water User Associations on the sites are trained on the management of the structures on behalf of the community e.g. on the protection of structure and hygiene maintenance.
4.8 Factores más determinantes que afectan los costos:
Describa los factores más determinantes que afectan los costos:
Distance of the sub-surface dam from villages, extent of destruction by floods and human activities
5. Entorno natural y humano
5.1 Clima
Lluvia anual
- < 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
Especificaciones/ comentarios sobre la cantidad de lluvia:
because of the climate change, the rainfall is becoming more erratic.
Indique el nombre de la estación metereológica de referencia considerada:
Isiolo
Zona agroclimática
- semi-árida
5.2 Topografía
Pendientes en promedio:
- plana (0-2 %)
- ligera (3-5%)
- moderada (6-10%)
- ondulada (11-15%)
- accidentada (16-30%)
- empinada (31-60%)
- muy empinada (>60%)
Formaciones telúricas:
- meseta/ planicies
- cordilleras
- laderas montañosas
- laderas de cerro
- pies de monte
- fondo del valle
Zona altitudinal:
- 0-100 m s.n.m.
- 101-500 m s.n.m.
- 501-1,000 m s.n.m
- 1,001-1,500 m s.n.m
- 1,501-2,000 m s.n.m
- 2,001-2,500 m s.n.m
- 2,501-3,000 m s.n.m
- 3,001-4,000 m s.n.m
- > 4,000 m s.n.m
Indique si la Tecnología se aplica específicamente en:
- situaciones cóncavas
5.3 Suelos
Profundidad promedio del suelo:
- muy superficial (0-20 cm)
- superficial (21-50 cm)
- moderadamente profunda (51-80 cm)
- profunda (81-120 cm)
- muy profunda (>120 cm)
Textura del suelo (capa arable):
- áspera/ ligera (arenosa)
Textura del suelo (> 20 cm debajo de la superficie):
- áspera/ ligera (arenosa)
Materia orgánica de capa arable:
- media (1-3%)
5.4 Disponibilidad y calidad de agua
Agua subterránea:
5-50 m
Disponibilidad de aguas superficiales:
pobre/ ninguna
Calidad de agua (sin tratar):
agua potable de buena calidad
¿La salinidad del agua es un problema?
No
¿Se está llevando a cabo la inundación del área? :
No
5.5 Biodiversidad
Diversidad de especies:
- elevada
Diversidad de hábitats:
- elevada
5.6 Las características de los usuarios de la tierra que aplican la Tecnología
Sedentario o nómada:
- Semi-nómada
Orientación del mercado del sistema de producción:
- mixta (subsistencia/ comercial)
Ingresos no agrarios:
- menos del 10% de todos los ingresos
Nivel relativo de riqueza:
- promedio
Individuos o grupos:
- grupos/ comunal
Nivel de mecanización:
- trabajo manual
Género:
- hombres
Edad de los usuarios de la tierra:
- personas de mediana edad
5.7 Área promedio de la tierra que pertenece a o es arrendada por usuarios de tierra que aplican la Tecnología
- < 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
¿Esto se considera de pequeña, mediana o gran escala (refiriéndose al contexto local)?
- gran escala
5.8 Tenencia de tierra, uso de tierra y derechos de uso de agua
Tenencia de tierra:
- comunitaria/ aldea
Derechos de uso de tierra:
- comunitarios (organizado)
Derechos de uso de agua:
- comunitarios (organizado)
5.9 Acceso a servicios e infraestructura
salud:
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
educación:
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
asistencia técnica:
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
empleo (ej. fuera de la granja):
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
mercados:
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
energía:
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
caminos y transporte:
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
agua potable y saneamiento:
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
servicios financieros:
- pobre
- moderado
- bueno
6. Impactos y comentarios para concluir
6.1 Impactos in situ demostrados por la Tecnología
Impactos socioeconómicos
Producción
producción animal
manejo de tierras
Disponibilidad y calidad de agua
disponibilidad de agua para ganado
Impactos ecológicos
Reducción de riesgos de desastres y riesgos climáticos
impactos de sequías
6.2 Impactos fuera del sitio demostrados por la Tecnología
disponibilidad de agua
6.3 Exposición y sensibilidad de la Tecnología al cambio climático gradual y a extremos relacionados al clima/ desastres (desde la percepción de los usuarios de tierras)
Extremos (desastres) relacionados al clima
Desastres climatológicos
¿Cómo es que la tecnología soporta esto? | |
---|---|
sequía | bien |
Desastres hidrológicos
¿Cómo es que la tecnología soporta esto? | |
---|---|
inundación general (río) | bien |
Comentarios:
The technology copes very well with floods as the construction is embedded in the sand and thus very well protected.
6.4 Análisis costo-beneficio
¿Cómo se comparan los beneficios con los costos de establecimiento (desde la perspectiva de los usuarios de tierra)?
Ingresos a corto plazo:
positivo
Ingresos a largo plazo:
positivo
¿Cómo se comparan los beneficios con los costos de mantenimiento/ recurrentes (desde la perspectiva de los usuarios de tierra)?
Ingresos a corto plazo:
positivo
Ingresos a largo plazo:
muy positivo
Comentarios:
The technology has limited running and maintenance costs once its done fairly well.
6.5 Adopción de la Tecnología
- 1-10%
De todos quienes adoptaron la Tecnología, ¿cuántos lo hicieron espontáneamente, es decir, sin recibir incentivos/ pagos materiales?
- 0-10%
6.6 Adaptación
¿La tecnología fue modificada recientemente para adaptarse a las condiciones cambiantes?
No
6.7 Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades de la Tecnología
Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del usuario de la tierra |
---|
The technology created opportunity to graze in wet season grazing areas for an averge extra 2 months period after rainy seasons. The technology has provided additional water that gave herders extra days to graze in wet season areas and utilize the pasture that would have been unutilized due to water constrains. In so doing, the land users utilized the pasture without retreating to traditional dry season grazing areas. |
The extra grazing months has reduced overall livestock mortality during droughts and also improved resilience of pastoral community. |
The distance travelled and effort required to access water was reduced. Community members reported reduced distances covered and time spent in search of water for livestock. In some instances the distance reduced from 12-15 Km to 3 Km. Community members also mentioned reduction in conflict incidences over water resources in some areas due to adequate supply of water as a result of construction of water infrastructure. |
The balanced utilization of the grazing area through SSD water provision, enables herd to graze in wet season grazing for slightly longer period and utilize pasture optimally, this however, does not mean that during that garzing period, there will be overgrazing. The volume of water available restricts the number of animals sustained by the grazing area. |
Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave |
---|
The technology has created an opportunity to optimally use the grazing area and overall reduced land degradation. The technology Improves access to water for livestock in ways which promote more sustainable management of rangeland resources and as such strengthening the resilience of local communities. |
The validation process prior to construction of the SSD is draws critical lessons of identifying and agreeing on where to construct the SSD in a way that fit within broader sustainable rangeland management in a manner that ensured sustainable and efficient utilization of pasture and browse resources in targeted areas. The increase in water supply allowed livestock to graze additional 2-3 months in target areas before shifting to dry grazing areas where previously they migrated before exhausting the pasture and browse resources due to water scarcity. The dry season grazing area is towards Merti, in Kom and Sabarwawa where there are deep boreholes, under, lock and key and only opened during dry seasons. In typical year, the dry season period is about 7 months. But when one rain season fail it goes to about 11 months. |
6.8 Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos de la Tecnología y formas de sobreponerse a ellos
Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos desde la perspectiva del usuario de la tierra | ¿Cómo sobreponerse a ellas? |
---|---|
When the construction season for SSD is not well planned, there is likelihood/risks of the dams being washed away by flash floods. | Better planning and timing of the development of SDD, just slightly before the onset of rainfall. |
7. Referencias y vínculos
7.1 Métodos/ fuentes de información
- compilación de informes y otra documentación existente
7.3 Vínculos a la información relevante disponible en línea
Título/ descripción:
Promoting resilience by influencing water infrastructure development in community managed rangelands of Kenya
URL:
https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2014-088.pdf
Título/ descripción:
Balancing water infrastructure in community-managed rangelands in the arid and semi-arid lands of Kenya
URL:
https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2014-089.pdf
Vínculos y módulos
Expandir todo Colapsar todosVínculos
No hay vínculos
Módulos
No se hallaron módulos