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

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

The Transboundary Agro-ecosystem Management Project for the Kagera River Basin (GEF-FAO / Kagera TAMP )

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

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO Food and Agriculture Organization) - Italy

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

Bukoba district council (Bukoba district council) - Tanzania, United Republic of

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:

Application of Thatch and Hyperrhenia Rufa grass mulch in banana and coffee plantation to reduce soil erosion, improve soil fertility and moisture and ensure high productivity

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology is applied in coffee and banana fields in the sub humid climate. The technology objective is prevention of land degradation specifically nutrient improvement, erosion control, soil moisture and soil health (soil's living organisms) improvement. The materials applied are very variable perennial grass from 60-240 cm high. Panicle loose and narrow up to 50 cm long, with slightly spreading or contiguous racemes with shortly hairy or nearly glabrous spikelets 3.5-5 mm long. The materials are spreaded to 15cm thickness, manually across the slpoe, once per year, at the beginig of short rains.

Purpose of the Technology: The purpose of the technology is to retain moisture content in soil by promoting water infiltration during and after the rains, promoting water holding capacity through decay and formation of organic matter. Grass mulch control soil erosion by intercepting raindrops (splash erosion) that detach soil particles. Grass mulch technology improves soil nutrient through grass decomposition.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: There is no establishment activities for the technology only maintenance activities (operational activities) are required once a year.
Maintenance activities include collection of mulching grasses -The grass is cut and collected by household or hired labor. The quantity of grass required per hectar is 1,500 cubic metre equivalent to 375 bundles.
To spread/apply mulching grasses -Grass is spread manually across the slope preferably to 15cm thickness. Dry grasses are spread across the slope with thickness of maximum 15cm. It is recommended to apply mulch grass around 15cm from the banana trunks.This is done once annually before the onset of short rains (during Augost and September)

Natural / human environment: The technology is applied on coffee/banaana fields. The Rainfall is 1000-1500mm, the subhumid climate (temp 26 -30 degree centigrade) and two growing seasons. The technology is meant for soil water evaporation contol and is tolerant in dry spell season while sensitive to excessive rains.

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:

• 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)

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:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Soil erosion, excessive soil water evaporation, fertility decline and reduced organic matter content

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Excessive weed invasions and reduced productivity

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:

• rainfed

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• improved ground/ vegetation cover

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Specification of other agronomic measures: Grass mulching

Type of agronomic measures: mulching

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Secondary types of degradation addressed: Bl: loss of soil life

Main causes of degradation: soil management (Cultivation along the slope), Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts), land tenure (few farmers own grassland), poverty / wealth (Peasants are not able to purchase grass mulch)

Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub), disturbance of water cycle (infiltration / runoff) (Poor soil cover), droughts (There is soil water evaporation)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

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

• prevent land degradation
• reduce land degradation

Comments:

Secondary goals: mitigation / reduction of land degradation

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

Specify currency used for cost calculations:

• USD

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Collection of mulching materials	May-June
2.	Application of mulching materials (spreading)	June-August
3.	Weeding	July and January
4.	De trashing	February and September

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	Collection and Apllication of mulching materials	persons/day/ha	16.0	1.5625	25.0	100.0
Construction material	Mulch	ha	1.0	117.0	117.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					142.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					142.0

Comments:

per hectar of land protected; cost of purchasing 375 bundles of grass and their spread to be $0.3 per bundle and 20 mandays at $ 1.2

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Cost of purchasing mulch grass is the most determinate factor. Mostly due to long distance to fetch the grass and the scatered nature due to degradation and encroachment by tree planting.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Indicate if the Technology is specifically applied in:

• convex situations

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Slopes on average: 6.25%

Altitudinal zone: 1194 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 fertility is low - medium

Soil drainage / infiltration is medium

Soil water storage capacity is medium

5.4 Water availability and quality

5.5 Biodiversity

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Indicate other relevant characteristics of the land users:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users

Difference in the involvement of women and men: De trashing commonly done by men, collection and application of mulch commonly done by women

Annual population growth: 0.5% - 1%

20% of the land users are rich and own 40% of the land.
80% of the land users are average wealthy and own 60% of the land.

Market orientation of production system: Coffee is purely for commercial while banana is for both subsistance and commercial

Level of mechanization: Cultivation is done at establishment phase, another farming systems limits mechanization

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

Water use rights:

• open access (unorganized)
• communal (organized)

Comments:

The technology is highly adopted by well to do farmers, either having off farm source of income or old farmer after achieving reasonable savings. This is because the communal range land has encroached by protected forest.

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

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

Water cycle/ runoff

Soil

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

6.2 Off-site impacts the Technology has shown

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	well

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Meteorological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
local rainstorm	not well
local windstorm	well

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	well

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

	How does the Technology cope with it?
reduced growing period	well
	not known

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the maintenance/ recurrent costs (from land users' perspective)?

Comments:

No establishment costs, recurrent costs for mulching Technology for three years consecutively, can increase productivity in two folds and be maintained for more than ten years.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• > 50%

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

1766 households (68 percent of land users in stated area)

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

• 91-100%

Comments:

1766 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support

Comments on spontaneous adoption: There are farmers who apply dried banana leaves and pseudo stem as mulch.

There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

Comments on adoption trend: The adoption is moderate simply because of increasing cost of mulching grasses compared to produce farm gate price increase. Furthermore the labour force is dominated by the elderly.

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Increase in soil moisture especially during the dry season How can they be sustained / enhanced? Perform regularly maintenance activities
Reduced weeds How can they be sustained / enhanced? Apply mulch grasses at the depth of 15 cm twice a year for the first 3 years consecutively
Fertility increase How can they be sustained / enhanced? Soft loan of livestock to be provided to farmers

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Esy to implement and maintain How can they be sustained / enhanced? Promote extended use of the technology (knowledge sharing)
Multiple ecological benefits: improved soil organic matter, soil moisture and soil biodiversity How can they be sustained / enhanced? Educate farmers on diversified mulching materials and systems e.g. intercropping, cover crops, minimum tillage
Prevent soil erosion How can they be sustained / enhanced? Combine other conservation technologies e.g. contour construction with mulching.

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?
Does not stay longer, it can persist for one season, hence requires twice application	Apply the correct quality and quantity material.
Not readily available to all farmers simply because range land has been allocated to well to do farmers.	Land tenure system and land use planning should be revisited
Increased manual labour (cutting, transportation spreading)	Plant grasses like vertiva

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Grass mulch available only to farmers with grassland	Other measures should be encouraged (use of chopped banana,pseudo stem, leaves and sheaths)
Degradation of grassland	Promotion of SLM Technologies for grassland conservation

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.3 Links to relevant online information

Title/ description:

Kagera TAMP project website

URL:

http://www.fao.org/nr/kagera/en/