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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1037, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Environmental Land Management and Rural Livelihood Project', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1212, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Aga Khan Foundation (AKF) - Switzerland', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

20/07/2016

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2.1 Short description of the Approach

In this approach the inclination of pasture land and its effect on the spread of sun and shadow is used to identify different periods for grazing. This simple approach will raise awareness and provides biological aspects in pasture management. In this approach the vegetation cover of the pasture is linked to the position of the sun. This is specific to mountain areas, where in one location vegetation periods can differ in two spots although they are in the same location.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Considering pasture's geographical location and its inclination to the sun is identified as an important element of devoloping rotational grazing plans. Because of the mountainous geography of the area, within certain pasture areas one part can be sun inclined and the other is shadowed. This is effecting the vegetation growing process, since on the sun inclined part the vegetation is growing faster compared to the other where sun is reaching later. Communities in the past did not take this into consideration and grazed in both areas at the same time. This leads to degradation in the areas where vegetation did not grow properly. On the other side if the areas inclined to the sun are not grazed in time they dry up.
The main objective of this approach is to apply an ecosystem based adaptation approach in pasture use, with vegetative periods for different areas and locations. By applying this approach communities will be enabled to organize grazing plans correctly and to prevent pasture degradation.
The implementation period will start from the planing phase up to the implementation of the pasture plan. Mainly livestock owners and the PUU management is involved in the implementation of this approach. Pasture users will be mobilized according to the grazing plan, in which part of the pasture when to graze with taking into consideration the position to the sun. Beside land users, the local government is also involved to ensure sustainable use of this approach as one of the techniques in prevention of pasture degradation.
Based on the existing traditional community knowledge and experiences the communities identify the geographical location. Based on this knowledge while developing the grazing plan for the year in a meeting in a participatory manner they do community resource mapping, where the location of resources is provided. After preparing the community resource maps, especially with focus on pasture resources they mark the plots according to assigned attributes. Based on these attributes, where the important features is pasture exposition, a timeframe for grazing for each plot is set up.
Livestock owners are very much in favor to implement this approach as a simple method to prevent degradation and raising awareness on importance of periodic and systematic use of pasture lands. It was not well perceived well by some individual livestock owners, who abused the absence of grazing plans and benefited from early use of grazing without considering the degradation of the pastures.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• traditional/ indigenous

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The main aim of this approach is to set up clear timeframes for grazing in different plots of the pasture. When the pasture plot is sun inclined this will define the grazing time earlier, because the vegetation grows faster and bigger. On the other hand the pasture plot which is in the shadowed part is grazed later after winter, because the grass should reach a certain height before grazing.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	self-mobilization	Land users and their community structure is traditionally aware of this approach and consider it in their planning process.
planning	self-mobilization	Once a community initiates its pasture plan they take this approach into consideration.
implementation	self-mobilization	The plan is developed in a participatory way with involvement of all stakeholders and agreed on. The grazing location within different timeframe is implemented by the responsible person according to the plan.
monitoring/ evaluation	self-mobilization	Community leaders or PUUs management assign responsible people to follow up on the approved grazing plan and follow up on the progress by reporting to them.

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• land users alone (self-initiative)

Explain:

This is a specific grographycally bound approach, where land users themselves take initiative.

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

No

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

No

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• no

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

No

Comments:

Communities themselves follow up according to their plan.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

No

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

no special budget is required to implement this approach

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

No

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• none

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• voluntary

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

Were other incentives or instruments used to promote implementation of SLM Technologies?

Yes

If yes, specify:

Some people usually try to graze in those plots which are exposed to sun and the vegetation is growing earlier. Especially farmers who are limited in fodder crops start grazing earlier. They are provided with some incentives to balance fodder and livestock number and are not permitted for earlier grazing.

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

The approach does not require technical knowledge in implementing SLM technology. It therefore is simple and mobilized communities can sustain it for a long time once practiced successfully.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
cost effective, simple to apply and produces good effects
simple techniques, easy understandable, based on traditional knowledge
can be applied in big areas

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
traditionally practiced and adapted to local conditions
cost effective and easy to document and provides evidence based results in a short period of time
could be replicated in all other mountain areas

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
not considered within other factors, like meteorological	Research could be applied to study it on scientific evidence.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
If overall pasture management is not planned properly and managed chaotically, the uncontrolled use of this approach can easily contribute to pasture degradation.	It should be well documented as it is a simple and effective approach in degradation prevention.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Pasture and Livestock Management Plan of PUU Soyru, 2015

Available from where? Costs?

from community, free of cost