1.2 Coordonnées des personnes-ressources et des institutions impliquées dans l'évaluation et la documentation de la Technologie

Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de la Technologie (si pertinent)

Bukoba district council (Bukoba district council) - Tanzanie

Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de la Technologie (si pertinent)

Missenyi District Council (Missenyi District Council) - Tanzanie

1.3 Conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées

Le compilateur et la(les) personne(s) ressource(s) acceptent les conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées:

Oui

1.4 Déclaration sur la durabilité de la Technologie décrite

Est-ce que la Technologie décrite ici pose problème par rapport à la dégradation des terres, de telle sorte qu'elle ne peut pas être déclarée comme étant une technologie de gestion durable des terres?

Non

2.1 Courte description de la Technologie

Définition de la Technologie:

Is the excavation of a furrow along the contour line, soil embankment on either side, planting lemon grass alternating with pineapples along the bund combined with application of grass mulch, Farm Yard Manure in banana bean inter-crop production.

2.2 Description détaillée de la Technologie

Description:

Contour band combined with lemon grass, pineapples, Hyperrhamia rufa mulch and manure technology in the banana production is the excavation of a 60cm deep by 60cm wide furrow and formation of soil embankment on upper side (at smaller slope) and lower side (at the greater slope) of the furrow to improve soil water infiltration; then planting on it with lemon grass and pineapples to stabilize soil embankment combined with spreading of a 15cm thickness grass mulch across the slope while 36kg of farm yard manure applied in a furrow measured 30cm deep by 60cm wide facing the grand daughter banana sucker at the distance of 60cm from the stool. Trushline is applied to complement grass mulch while lemon grass and pineapples are harvested routinely for sale.The technology is applied on perennial cropland characterised with sub humid in tropical climatic zone. The main biophysical features are gentle slope, clay loam soil with shallow depth. The technology done manually using hand hoes to cultivate land in a mixed (subsistence and commercial) production mode. To implement the technology, it costs US$ 220.00 for establishment and US$ 2,222.65 for maintenance costs. The technology was introduced in late 2012 by TAMP –Kagera using FFS methodology.

Purpose of the Technology: The major purpose of the technology is prevented land degradation in 50 ha while increased 10% of crop and livestock production to contribute on food security and improve livelihood with sustainable land management. This purpose should be achieved by performing the following main technical functions: control
of dispersed runoff, increase in organic matter, increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…), increase of infiltration and increase / maintain water stored in soil.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: The establishment activities includes:-First is identification and demarcation of contour lines done manually using the A-frame simple made tool, the activity normally done in May. Second is construction of contour bund along the identified and demarcated contour done manually using cheasle hand hoes, fork hand hoes, spades and mattock, this is done in early June. Third is Planting lemon grass and pineapples along the contour bund done manually by spacing 30cm plant to plant (grass lemon) while pineapples are planted at 5m alternating with lemon grass; this is done in early September.
The maintenance activities included:- First is farm weeding done manually using a simple made weeding tool (kahosho); this is done twice (January and June to August). Second is Farm yard manures application done manually using baskets, spades and fork hand hoes; this is done in July. Third is grass mulch application done manually by spreading dry Hyperrhamia rufa across the slope with a thickness of 15cm to cover space between the bunds planted with bananas; this is done in late September. Fourth is desukering and detrushing of banana stools done manually using machete, local made tools (kihosho and rwabyo); this is done twice (early March and early October). Then, harvesting bananas, lemon grass and pineapples according to market requirements. Last is furrow cleaning done manually by removing soil sediments and place them on the bund side using spades; this is done twice per year at the end of each rain seasons (May and December).

Natural / human environment: The contour bund embanked with lemon grass and pineapples technology is tolerant to seasonal rainfall decrease and droughts / dry spells. However the technology is sensitive to climatic seasonal rainfall increase, heavy rainfall events (intensities and amount). In case of climatic sensitivity, the technology should be modified with planting of perennial species having strong/ tough root system such as Pinesetum purperim and Vetiva spps to stabilize soil embankment. Furthermore the construction of spillways to drain-out the excess water and reseve them in the ditches to be used in the farms later. This technology is applied by Individual / household categorized as small scale common / average land users, with importance of men and women participating equally. The land is owned individually, not titled. The Water use rights is open access (unorganized). The relative level of wealth falls under three categories; the rich, which represents 4% of the land users; owning 32% of the total area; the average, which represents 64% of the land users owning 64% of the total area and the poor, which represents 32% of the land users owning 4% of the total area. Individuals who applied the technology should value the off-farm income as 10%. The market oriented is mixed (subsistence and commercial).

2.3 Photos de la Technologie

2.5 Pays/ région/ lieux où la Technologie a été appliquée et qui sont couverts par cette évaluation

2.6 Date de mise en œuvre de la Technologie

Si l'année précise est inconnue, indiquez la date approximative: :

• il y a moins de 10 ans (récemment)

2.7 Introduction de la Technologie

Spécifiez comment la Technologie a été introduite: :

• par le biais de projets/ d'interventions extérieures

Commentaires (type de projet, etc.) :

In 2012 TAMP -Kagera in collaboration with Bukoba District council Identified the land degradation existing in the area. The cause of these problems were earmarked by interactive thems btm SLM specialist and communities. In particular Butulage community was recomended to aplly this technology and the implementation started in April 2012.

3.1 Principal(aux) objectif(s) de la Technologie

• améliorer la production
• réduire, prévenir, restaurer les terres dégradées
• créer un impact économique positif

3.2 Type(s) actuel(s) d'utilisation des terres, là où la Technologie est appliquée

Commentaires:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): The major land use problems were soil erosion by water, low soil water infiltration, excessive soil nutrient mining and high loss of soil moisture.

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): The major land use problems were low productivity and BXW.

3.4 Approvisionnement en eau

Approvisionnement en eau des terres sur lesquelles est appliquée la Technologie:

• pluvial

3.5 Groupe de GDT auquel appartient la Technologie

• agroforesterie
• Amélioration de la couverture végétale/ du sol
• gestion de l'irrigation (incl. l'approvisionnement en eau, le drainage)

3.6 Mesures de GDT constituant la Technologie

Commentaires:

Type of agronomic measures: better crop cover, mulching, manure / compost / residues
Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -graded strips

3.7 Principaux types de dégradation des terres traités par la Technologie

Commentaires:

Main causes of degradation: soil management (Cultivation along footslpoes.), crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (Continous production of bananas without nutrient replacement.), droughts (The area experiences a long dry season of more than 6 months.), population pressure (Increased population presure on land forced cultivation in the area with long dry seasons.)

Secondary causes of degradation: poverty / wealth (Weath people keeps animals exeeding carrying capacity to graze on the hill and accelerates soil erosion by water down the footslope)

3.8 Prévention, réduction de la dégradation ou réhabilitation des terres dégradées

Spécifiez l'objectif de la Technologie au regard de la dégradation des terres:

• prévenir la dégradation des terres
• réduire la dégradation des terres

4.1 Dessin technique de la Technologie

4.2 Informations générales sur le calcul des intrants et des coûts

autre/ monnaie nationale (précisez):

Tanzanain shiling

Indiquez le taux de change des USD en devise locale, le cas échéant (p.ex. 1 USD = 79.9 réal brésilien): 1 USD = :

1700,0

4.3 Activités de mise en place/ d'établissement

	Activité	Calendrier des activités (saisonnier)
1.	To plant lemon grass seedlings	march & september
2.	To plant pineapples seedlings	March & SEptember
3.	To dermacate the level mark using a Frame.	January and June
4.	To dig and excavate soils from the ditch	February and August
5.	To spread the excavated soils along the ditch on the upper side.	February and August
6.	Purchase of hand hues
7.	Purchase of machete
8.	Purchase of kohosho
9.	Purchase of sickles

4.4 Coûts et intrants nécessaires à la mise en place

	Spécifiez les intrants	Unité	Quantité	Coûts par unité	Coût total par intrant	% du coût supporté par les exploitants des terres
Main d'œuvre	Labour	ha	1,0	258,76	258,76	100,0
Equipements	Tools	ha	1,0	17,06	17,06	100,0
Matériel végétal	Seedlings	ha	1,0	263,63	263,63	100,0
Engrais et biocides	Compost/manure	ha	1,0	864,35	864,35
Coût total de mise en place de la Technologie					1403,8
Coût total de mise en place de la Technologie en dollars américains (USD)					0,83

Commentaires:

Duration of establishment phase: 12 month(s)

4.5 Activités d'entretien/ récurrentes

	Activité	Calendrier/ fréquence
1.	To weed by hand with small kihosho	Late Jan & July
2.	To ditrush and desucker bananas with huge Kihosho	Feb & August
3.	To plant beans	March & September
4.	To spread mulch alternating with trashes between the bunds.	late March and September
5.	To apply manure selectively on the spoted banana stools	february & August
6.	To harvest and market lemon grass	monthly
7.	To harvest pineapples and market them.	routrrnly
8.	To remove sediments from the ditches	atwice before rain season.

4.6 Coûts et intrants nécessaires aux activités d'entretien/ récurrentes (par an)

	Spécifiez les intrants	Unité	Quantité	Coûts par unité	Coût total par intrant	% du coût supporté par les exploitants des terres
Main d'œuvre	Labour	ha	1,0	264,71	264,71	100,0
Matériel végétal	seeds	ha	1,0	117,65	117,65	100,0
Autre	Hyperrhamia rufa	ha	1,0	180,15	180,15
Coût total d'entretien de la Technologie					562,51
Coût total d'entretien de la Technologie en dollars américains (USD)					0,33

Commentaires:

The total length of the bund is 175m per hector, the banana stools to be applied manures are 1111 stool per hector.

4.7 Facteurs les plus importants affectant les coûts

Décrivez les facteurs les plus importants affectant les coûts :

The most determinate factor affecting the cost is Farm Yard manures US$ 441.18 which is the maintenance cost especially for soil nutrient maintenance.

5.1 Climat

5.2 Topographie

Indiquez si la Technologie est spécifiquement appliquée dans des:

• situations convexes

Commentaires et précisions supplémentaires sur la topographie:

Altitudinal zone: 1501-2000 m a.s.l. (ranked 1, the Karagwe -Ankolean mountaions) and 1001-1500 m a.s.l. (ranked 2, foot valley along lake Ikimba)
Slopes on average: Getnle (ranked 1) and flat (ranked 2, some of the fields the between space find to be more 8m)

5.3 Sols

Si disponible, joignez une description complète du sol ou précisez les informations disponibles, par ex., type de sol, pH/ acidité du sol, capacité d'échange cationique, azote, salinité, etc.

Soil depth on average: Deep ( Burreal premises found in the fields claimed to be more than 100cm before reaching the rocks or gravels)
Soil texture: Medium (ranked 1) and fine/heavy (part along the lake Ikimba shores is typical loam soils)
Soil fertility: Low (The farms have been established more than fifty years ago, while banana productivity declining continously)
Topsoil organic matter: Medium (Soil colour is a bit black)
Soil drainage/infiltration: Medium (ranked 1) and poor (ranked 2)
Soil water storage capacity: Medium

5.4 Disponibilité et qualité de l'eau

Commentaires et précisions supplémentaires sur la qualité et la quantité d'eau:

Ground water table: 5-50m (three shallow wells fond in the area)
Availability of surface water: Medium (Entire north border of the catchment laid on Lake Ikimba)

5.5 Biodiversité

Commentaires et précisions supplémentaires sur la biodiversité:

Earth worms, butterflies, black ants and ari spaces easily found in the catchment.

5.6 Caractéristiques des exploitants des terres appliquant la Technologie

Indiquez toute autre caractéristique pertinente des exploitants des terres:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Relative level of wealth: rich, average, poor
4% of the land users are rich and own 32% of the land.
64% of the land users are average wealthy and own 64% of the land.
32% of the land users are poor and own 4% of the land.

Off-farm income specification: The off-farm income for the land user who applied the technology is less than 10%. This is because applying the technology has opportunity cost (in terms of materials and time) of absconding from investment and maintenance in off-farm activities.

Market orientation: Mixed (the banana production diveded into commecial banana for local brewing and indigenous varieties for food purposes)
Level of mechanization: Manual work (hand hoes used during establishment and maintanace of anual croping, while simple hand tools used to mantain perianeal croping)

5.7 Superficie moyenne des terres utilisées par les exploitants des terres appliquant la Technologie

5.8 Propriété foncière, droits d’utilisation des terres et de l'eau

Propriété foncière:

• communauté/ village
• individu, sans titre de propriété

Droits d’utilisation des terres:

• communautaire (organisé)
• individuel

Droits d’utilisation de l’eau:

• accès libre (non organisé)

5.9 Accès aux services et aux infrastructures

6.1 Impacts sur site que la Technologie a montrés

Impacts socio-économiques

Production

Revenus et coûts

Impacts socioculturels

Impacts écologiques

Cycle de l'eau/ ruissellement

Sols

6.2 Impacts hors site que la Technologie a montrés

6.3 Exposition et sensibilité de la Technologie aux changements progressifs et aux évènements extrêmes/catastrophes liés au climat (telles que perçues par les exploitants des terres)

Changements climatiques progressifs

Changements climatiques progressifs

	Saison	Augmentation ou diminution	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
températures annuelles		augmente	pas connu

Extrêmes climatiques (catastrophes)

Catastrophes météorologiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
pluie torrentielle locale	pas bien

Catastrophes climatiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
sécheresse	bien

Catastrophes hydrologiques

	Comment la Technologie fait-elle face à cela?
inondation générale (rivière)	pas connu

Commentaires:

The technology is tolerant to seasonal rainfall decrease, droughts / dry spells while is sensitive to seasonal rainfall increase, heavy rainfall events (intensities and amount). In case of sensitive the planting Guatamala grass is the best modification to ensure more stability and can be use as mulch grass to reduce the costs of Hyperrhamia rufa.

6.4 Analyse coûts-bénéfices

Quels sont les bénéfices comparativement aux coûts de mise en place (du point de vue des exploitants des terres)?

Quels sont les bénéfices comparativement aux coûts d'entretien récurrents (du point de vue des exploitants des terres)?

Commentaires:

The short term returns (annual farm income) is slightly negative compared with establishment costs; while the long term returns (cumulated increments) is difficult to comment at this (juvenile) stage. The short term return compared with maintenance costs is positive; while the long term return is still early to give any comments.

6.5 Adoption de la Technologie

• 1-10%

Si disponible, quantifiez (nombre de ménages et/ou superficie couverte):

36 households and 100% of the area covered

De tous ceux qui ont adopté la Technologie, combien d'entre eux l'ont fait spontanément, à savoir sans recevoir aucune incitation matérielle, ou aucune rémunération? :

• 91-100%

Commentaires:

9% of land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
33 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
Comments on acceptance with external material support: 3 host farmers of FFS were provided with inputs to be applied for technology implementation in three sites with average of 0.2ha.

91% of land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
33 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support
Comments on spontaneous adoption: 30 House holds applied the technology in their own farms either participating in FFS or seen it in their neighbors' fields.

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology
Comments on adoption trend: There is a trend towards spontaneous adoption simply because in a two year period, twicw as much adopters are encouraging.

6.7 Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités de la Technologie

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Efficient use of rain water in crop land production.
Reduced workload for farm maintenance especially weeding and general farm cleanliness.
Increased crop productivity to ensure food security and general livelihoods.
Easy and low cost of establishment, especially use of soils as readily available materials.

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Availability of grass mulch in the communal lands.
Efficient utilization of land, especially planting lemon grass and pineaple are of multipurpose. e.i soil stabilization and commecial produce.
Low establishment costs i.e. US$ 187 mainly as medium labor costs to excavate the furrow manually, which can be affordable to average farmers using household members.

6.8 Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques de la Technologie et moyens de les surmonter

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue de l’exploitant des terres	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
Still BXW can infest well nourished and cleaned banana in the farms were technology is applied.	To abide on the cardinal rules of BXW contol.
High costs of manures.

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
The technology can be applied on the flat to genlte slope, otherwise stones and other materials should be applied to strengthen the band.	Use materials with tough roots such as vetiva grass and elephant grass to stabilize soil embankments.
The agronomic costs has high costs especially soil nutrient which requires manures.	More emphasis on vegetative soil cover plants, especially leguminous plants with ability to fix nitrogen while trash-lines should increase biomass and contribute to organic matters.
It is not worth to reduces soil erosion when you think of mulch grass costs i.e. US$ 441.18 per hector.	Use better crop cover such as muccuna spps

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information