Technologies

Terasses used for hay production and grazing [Switzerland]

Terasses utilisées pour la produciton de foin et comme paturages

technologies_1193 - Switzerland

Completeness: 65%

1. General information

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

Key resource person(s)

SLM specialist:
SLM specialist:
Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Technology (if relevant)
CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland

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

2. Description of the SLM Technology

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Ancient abandonned terraces, formerly used as cropland, were rehabilitated and are used for hay production and grazing mainly without irrigation

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The ancient terraces built during the middle age had been used as cropland till the 1970. Then they were abandonned and transformed as bushlands. In the 90' the bushes were removed and the terraces are since then used as pastures and fields for hay production. They are mainly not irrigated, what gives sometimes one yield of hay and sometimes two, depending on the rain.

Purpose of the Technology: The purpose of this technology is to work with minimal inputs, as extensive agriculture.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: To establish the terraces, a company came to clear the fields from the bushes. Then he put the cows on the fields, and rented/got for free fields from other farmers, and expanded his activities.
The main maintainance is to cut the bushes growing from the terasses into the fields, mainly blackthorn (Prunus spinosa).

Natural / human environment: The cows used in these fields are a local breed (Herens), kept mostly for traditional and folkloric purpuse.

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Technology has been applied and which are covered by this assessment

Country:

Switzerland

Region/ State/ Province:

Valais

Specify the spread of the Technology:
  • evenly spread over an area
If precise area is not known, indicate approximate area covered:
  • 0.1-1 km2

2.6 Date of implementation

If precise year is not known, indicate approximate date:
  • 10-50 years ago

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Specify how the Technology was introduced:
  • through land users' innovation

3. Classification of the SLM Technology

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

Grazing land

Grazing land

Extensive grazing:
  • Ranching
Intensive grazing/ fodder production:
  • Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing
  • cow
Comments:

Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Bushes are growing into the fields, climate is changing and

Ranching: Yes

Cut-and-carry/ zero grazing: Yes

3.4 Water supply

Water supply for the land on which the Technology is applied:
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
Comments:

Water supply: rainfed, mixed rainfed - irrigated

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

  • cross-slope measure
  • Minimal input agriculture

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

agronomic measures

agronomic measures

  • A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
vegetative measures

vegetative measures

  • V2: Grasses and perennial herbaceous plants
structural measures

structural measures

  • S1: Terraces
Comments:

Main measures: vegetative measures

Secondary measures: agronomic measures, structural measures

Type of agronomic measures: better crop cover, manure / compost / residues

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

chemical soil deterioration

chemical soil deterioration

  • Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
biological degradation

biological degradation

  • Bh: loss of habitats
  • Bs: quality and species composition/ diversity decline
Comments:

Main type of degradation addressed: Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content, Bh: loss of habitats, Bs: quality and species composition /diversity decline

Main causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub), other human induced causes (specify) (The land was abandoned)

3.8 Prevention, reduction, or restoration of land degradation

Specify the goal of the Technology with regard to land degradation:
  • prevent land degradation
Comments:

Main goals: prevention of land degradation

4. Technical specifications, implementation activities, inputs, and costs

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

Technical specifications (related to technical drawing):

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: moderate

Technical knowledge required for land users: high

Secondary technical functions: improvement of topsoil structure (compaction), increase in organic matter

Better crop cover
Material/ species: Grassland

Manure / compost / residues
Material/ species: Manure

Aligned: -contour
Vegetative material: G : grass

Slope (which determines the spacing indicated above): 20%

Terrace: forward sloping
Vertical interval between structures (m): 1
Spacing between structures (m): 20

Change of land use type: From bushland to extensive grassland

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

CHF

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

1.0

Indicate average wage cost of hired labour per day:

200.00

4.3 Establishment activities

Activity Timing (season)
1. Clearing bushes

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 Clearing of the bushes ha 1.0 8000.0 8000.0 100.0
Equipment Tractors Machine 2.0 207000.0 414000.0 100.0
Equipment Tractor material Machine 3.0 46000.0 138000.0 100.0
Other Other 40000.0 100.0
Other Farm Farm 1000000.0 100.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 560000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 560000.0

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

Activity Timing/ frequency
1. Cutting hay
2. Maintainance, looking at the cows, clear bushes
3. Clearing Bushes, looking at the cows, manuring

5. Natural and human environment

5.1 Climate

Annual rainfall
  • < 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
Agro-climatic zone
  • semi-arid

Thermal climate class: temperate

5.2 Topography

Slopes on average:
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms:
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitudinal zone:
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.

5.3 Soils

Soil depth on average:
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil):
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
Topsoil organic matter:
  • medium (1-3%)
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 medium
Soil drainage/infiltration is good

5.4 Water availability and quality

Availability of surface water:

poor/ none

Water quality (untreated):

good drinking water

5.5 Biodiversity

Species diversity:
  • high

5.6 Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation of production system:
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income:
  • 10-50% of all income
Relative level of wealth:
  • average
Individuals or groups:
  • individual/ household

5.7 Average area of land used by land users applying the Technology

  • < 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
Is this considered small-, medium- or large-scale (referring to local context)?
  • medium-scale

5.8 Land ownership, land use rights, and water use rights

Land ownership:
  • group
  • individual, titled

5.9 Access to services and infrastructure

health:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
education:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
employment (e.g. off-farm):
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
markets:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
energy:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
roads and transport:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
drinking water and sanitation:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good
financial services:
  • poor
  • moderate
  • good

6. Impacts and concluding statements

6.1 On-site impacts the Technology has shown

Socio-economic impacts

Production

fodder production

decreased
increased

animal production

decreased
increased

risk of production failure

increased
decreased

land management

hindered
simplified
Water availability and quality

demand for irrigation water

increased
decreased
Income and costs

diversity of income sources

decreased
increased
Comments/ specify:

More subsidies through ecological subsidies

workload

increased
decreased
Comments/ specify:

No water pipers needed

Socio-cultural impacts

cultural opportunities

reduced
improved
Comments/ specify:

More Herens cows

Ecological impacts

Biodiversity: vegetation, animals

plant diversity

decreased
increased

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

Climate-related extremes (disasters)

Climatological disasters
How does the Technology cope with it?
drought not well

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

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

1

Comments:

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

Comments on spontaneous adoption: This technology is with irrigation by many other farmers

There is no trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Natural food produced (cheese, meat)
Biodiversity increase
Traditional landscapes
Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Natural food produced (cheese, meat)
Biodiversity increase

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?
Low productivity
Sensitive to drought
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view How can they be overcome?
Low productivity
Sensitive to drought

7. References and links

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

Links and modules

Expand all Collapse all

Modules