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

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

Kathmandu University (KU) - Nepal

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

District Agriculture Development Office, Sindhuli (DADO) - Nepal

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

1.4 Declaration on sustainability of the described Technology

Is the Technology described here problematic with regard to land degradation, so that it cannot be declared a sustainable land management technology?

No

2.1 Short description of the Technology

Definition of the Technology:

Oyster Mushroom Farming Technology is the cultivation of oyster mushrooms as a food source, economic source, and as primary compost, to increase the quality of soil and help upgrade living standards of local farmers.

2.2 Detailed description of the Technology

Description:

The technology is carried out in Kamalamai Municipality, Sindhuli District, Janakpur, Nepal. The Pennsylvania Department Of Environmental Protection (DEP), other regulator agencies and the community are at charge. Oyster were identified as being both economically viable and suited for local cultivation. Nepal Agriculture Research Council (NARC) and a few private organizations are the major resources centers for supplying the quality spawn to the farmer/growers.

Purpose of the Technology: The main purpose of this document is to provide uniform instructions and operating procedures for the use or disposal of mushroom compost (as soil amendment or conditioner). Another basic purpose is use of mushroom as food and income source for local farmers.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Best Practices for Environmental Protection in the Mushroom Farm
Community (1997) was developed as a result of realization among authorities of Pennsylvania DEP, to help people to understand that farms are operating according to the highest environmental standards, and will help improve coexistence with nearby residents, through environmental regulation. This implemented a mushroom farm development for specific operations with the natural resource conservation. The member co-ordination, knowledge, and experiences are critical in establishing the practices as workable and rational means to meet the goal of environmental protection and agricultural operation.

Natural / human environment: Mushroom Farm Environmental Management Plan (MFEMP) is designed to prevent pollution or danger of ground or surface water on common health, by helping in maintaining/improving the condition of soil, and prevent the pollution of surface water, groundwater and air, as well, at little or no cost. This technology helps local farmers to increase soil fertility and act as a good income source in small scale.

2.3 Photos of the Technology

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

2.7 Introduction of the Technology

Comments (type of project, etc.):

This practice was performed by American mushroom institutions in 1997 and earlier 1984.

3.1 Main purpose(s) of the Technology

• improve production
• create beneficial economic impact

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

Comments:

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Low productivity of land, soil erosion, water scarcity, cultivation of land slopes, tillage resulting in soil loss.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Infertility of land, having to use fertilizers and pesticides, scarcity of water for irrigation, having to plow farm seasonally and repeatedly.
Constraints of recreation: Dark and moist environment is necessary.

Number of growing seasons per year: 1
Longest growing period in days: 75; Longest growing period from month to month: January-March

3.5 SLM group to which the Technology belongs

• integrated soil fertility management

3.6 SLM measures comprising the Technology

Comments:

Type of agronomic measures: cover cropping, mulching, manure / compost / residues, zero tillage / no-till

3.7 Main types of land degradation addressed by the Technology

Comments:

Main causes of degradation: soil management (soil erosion, low productivity of land, tillage), overgrazing (Fodder for domestic animals such as cow, buffalo, goat etc.), change in temperature (Uneven rainfall, long dry or cold seasons)
Secondary causes of degradation: crop management (annual, perennial, tree/shrub) (terrace farming problems), deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires) (Use of timber for burning), over-exploitation of vegetation for domestic use (Only required vegetation was used), poverty / wealth (Medium to large scale production costly for local farmers)

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

4.1 Technical drawing of the Technology

4.2 General information regarding the calculation of inputs and costs

other/ national currency (specify):

Rupees

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

90.0

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
Construction material	Straw	unit	1.0	15.0	15.0	100.0
Construction material	Container	unit	1.0	990.0	990.0
Construction material	Fuel	unit	1.0	125.0	125.0
Construction material	Stove	unit	1.0	770.0	770.0
Construction material	Plastic	unit	1.0	10.0	10.0
Construction material	Cutting Machine	unit	1.0	300.0	300.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology					2210.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD					24.56

4.5 Maintenance/ recurrent activities

	Activity	Timing/ frequency
1.	Method of cutting straw	dry season
2.	Warming the straw	dry season
3.	Harvesting the mushroom	dry season
4.	Maintainance of mushroom	dry season

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	Method of cutting straw	persons/day	1.0	150.0	150.0	100.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology					150.0
Total costs for maintenance of the Technology in USD					1.67

Comments:

Machinery/ tools: plastic bag,water storage tank.

4.7 Most important factors affecting the costs

Describe the most determinate factors affecting the costs:

Labour should be managed properly.

5.1 Climate

5.2 Topography

Comments and further specifications on topography:

Landforms: Flat surface is needed.

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 water storage capacity is medium: Mushroom need water daily two times.

5.4 Water availability and quality

Comments and further specifications on water quality and quantity:

Availability of surface water: May face scarcity of drinking water in dry seasons.

5.5 Biodiversity

Comments and further specifications on biodiversity:

Found mostly in eastern region, and almost in the western parts as well.

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: There is no difference in involvement of men and women in this technology, both can be involved.
Population density: > 500 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 3% - 4%
15% of the land users are rich and own 20% of the land.

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

Land use rights:

• open access (unorganized)
• individual

Comments:

It is found that this technique is used even by people with little amount of land.

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

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 known
local windstorm	not known

Climatological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
drought	not well

Hydrological disasters

	How does the Technology cope with it?
general (river) flood	not known

Other climate-related consequences

Other climate-related consequences

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

Comments:

The technology could be made more tolerant by keeping the room dark and warm (22-28 degrees), and carry out cultivation in almost all seasons (except winter).

6.4 Cost-benefit analysis

How do the benefits compare with the establishment costs (from land users’ perspective)?

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

Comments:

Yes, this technology can give both short-term returns and long-term returns.Positive result because it is the best type of production for the environment and economic resources.

6.5 Adoption of the Technology

• single cases/ experimental

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

3 households covering 32 percent of stated area

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

• 11-50%

Comments:

2 land user families have adopted the Technology with external material support
By government point of view almost all members of a village and city, both can cultivate this technology. 1 land user families have adopted the Technology without any external material support. Comments on spontaneous adoption: Without external support also this technology can be carried out.
There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology. Best Practices for Environmental Protection in the Mushroom Farm Community

6.7 Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities of the Technology

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
It is used as vegetable.
Waste water management
It is used as manure
Good income source

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Erosion and sedimentation control
Surface water and stormwater management
Economic purpose
Nutrient management for substrate utilization
Integrated pest management

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?
Place for growing	All locals do not have spare rooms or sheds for mushroom cultivation. This proves to be a huge disadvantage as they require dark room and moist conditions.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Less theoritical knowledge	Locals should be made aware about growing technologies that can help increase their quality of life.
Place for growing	Rooms or shed may not always be available. Providing darkness during can be a problem.
Seasonal problem	Room temperature required is 20-30 degree Celsius.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information