Conservation farming on steep lands - USAid

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION LESSONS 1 37 vcry low), and the traditional soil ccnservation systems, such as draining furrows across the plowed fields, stone walls, ar?d cactus or grass barriers at the end of the fields, were not used. The mechanical logic and the development approach Tile "equipment logic." The equipment logic (8) holds that.: b There is one teclztlicctlly good solzttiort to each erosion problem. That solution is often an hydraulic or a mechanical one. It is the engineer in charge of the project conception who defines this solution, and he will use high safety margins that increase the costs. b In taking into account the general interest of the nation, the engineer will define the structures (roads, bridges, terraces, etc.), and if really necessary, he will try to weaken the resistance of the individual farmers. This engineer is "the representative of knowledge" for he comes lioln a high school. The peasants have not been to school and are, therefore, considered not competent. Conception, execution, and maintenance are different jobs shared among different people with different qualifications; these people have little dialogue. b A good project must be carried out in a slzort tirne; planning engineers rarely meet the people in charge of maintenance. This explains some repeated failures in soil conservation projects. The "development logic." This new approach must take more account of the socioeconomic constraints and the variability of the physical and biological environment. The agronomist concerned must compromise according to the way the peasants welcome the approach and the efficiency of the methods in the field. He must work for the benefit of the population and needs to go through information processes, training, and practical demonstrations in the field. It takes time to find a solution, then it is more often a biological one than a mechanical one. This route to rural development looks quite different from the previous one: b The agronomist concerned must check the farmers' points of view: How do they perceive tlie problem? Do they prefer certain solutions? There is mutual exchange of information. b The agronomist must propose cheap, reliable, and efficient methods of dispersing rainfall and runoff energy, improving soil fertility, and promoting balanced production of crops, cattle, and trees. b The agronomist must also provide a general scheme for management,
138 ERIC ROOSE allowing for reorganization of individual fields. but preparing the progressive improvement of the entire watershed managenlent in the rural coniniunity. General conclusions Research data have shown that on steep slopes there is little erosion under natural cover, but much more after clearing. There are two ways of reducing erosion under cropping: To reduce the slope steepness by different terracing systems. To increase the cover with strips of pasture and forest, rotation of suitable associated crops, and mulching. The hedges are useful because they provide both mulch and slope reduction. Different solutions have been applied by different people under different conditions with different advan:r;ges. Clearly, mechanical systems are often cxpcnsive and both space- and time-consunling. They require maintenance and do not always improve production (16). Permeable micro-dams (hedges, grass barriers, stone bunds) efficiently reduce erosion on gentle slopes in the Sudano-Sahelian zone (14, 15). This concept (hedges and progressive terracing) could also be useful on steep slopes. REFERENCES I. Durand. Ph. 1984. ~fsultats dcs cxp~rinientation2 sur Iqdrosion des sols dans la region dc Murnirwa (Burundi). Mission Foresti6re Crete Zaire Nil, Bujumbura. 12 pp. 2. EgIi. A. 1985. LLJ cori.sen.c~tiorrles sols h I 'airic~ dc1.s trzcihocIcs agrofor~..stieres: Ic cc~s clir Ihtvc~tide~. Bulletin Research Agronomy Genibloux 20(4): 561-587 (Belgique). 3. Grcco, J. 1979. LLJ cl~j21ise c1e.s ~o1.s corrrre I i!rosiori. La rnaison rustique, Paris. France. 183 pp. 4. Grouzis, M. 1983. ~roD1hie.s cIe cl~\L*r~ificutiori err ~arrr~~olra. ~krn~naire sur In conservation des sols. EIER. O!~agadougou, Burkina Faso. 20 pp. 5. Hallarn. G, and W. Van Ca~~ipcn. 1965. Heac~ir~g rofirrtrcr.s conipluitrt.s of soil ~rosiori orr itrrerr.sivc~ furtris irr Soirti~ hii. In Pla Sentis [ed. 1 Soil Con.senw~ior~ urrrl Prohrcrivity. University of Venezuela, Maracay. 6. Heusch, B. !984. Ciriqitante arrs rle bunquetres de DRS en Afriqi~e dit Nord-UII hilatr. loth Congres International dc Genic Rural. Budapest. Hungary. 9 pp. 7. Kleen, P.. and G. Vierstra. 1985. ~orilri61rtiorr dc kc^ Reclierc/ie-Dc~~~c~lopper~icr~~art. Agricole du Sud Mali-IER-KIT. Sikasso. Mali. 30 pp. 8. Koohafkan, P., and C. Lilin. 1985. Nouvellcs orier~tutiorrs rles acriorr.~ de cotisen.ation des sols en Haiti. Cons&luences pour la formation des techniciens. CNEARC, Montpcllier, France. 7 pp. 9. Marchal. J. Y. 1979. Lkspace (1c.s tectr~iicic~r.~ cclrti CIES pery.sr~tis. Histoir: d'un pe'rirnitre antidrosifen Haute-Volta. ~Emoire ORSTOM n. 89: 245-252, Rris, France. 10. Mietton, M. 1981. Litrte anri~ro.sive CI parriciparion paysatrrre err H~itcte-Volra. GEO-ECO-TROP. 5(1): 57-72. 11. Monjauze. A. !9$2. R;novftion ntruk. &le er clispositifrles anr~nugcttie~~~s d'irrfrustruc~urc. Delegation ~enble, Service DRS Alger, Algerie. 16 pp.
Page 1 and 2:
C O N S E R V A T I O N O N S T E E
Page 3 and 4:
Foreword. ix Preface. xiii 1 Tiltin
Page 5 and 6:
CONTENTS vii Denionstration and ext
Page 7 and 8:
Soil degradation is one of the majo
Page 9 and 10:
FOREWORD xi tunities exist in both
Page 11 and 12:
xiv PPEFACE Arledge, Max Schnepf. m
Page 13 and 14:
Tilting at windmills or tighfing re
Page 15 and 16:
TILTING AT WINDMILLS 5 tions is mor
Page 17 and 18:
TILTING AT WINDMILLS 7 social issue
Page 19 and 20:
Conserving soil by stealth T. F. Sh
Page 21 and 22:
CONSERVING SOIL BY STEALTH 11 P Veg
Page 23 and 24:
CONSERVING SOIL BL' STEALTH 13 To s
Page 25 and 26:
CONSERVING SOIL BY STEALTH 15 on cl
Page 27 and 28:
Using this line of thought, we migh
Page 29 and 30:
SOIL CONSERVATION ON STEEP LANES 19
Page 31 and 32:
SOIL CONSERVATION ON STEEP LANDS 21
Page 33 and 34:
A N D P R I I N C I L E S P R O G R
Page 35 and 36:
26 TED C. SHENG and JAMES R. MEIMAN
Page 37 and 38:
28 TED C. SHENG and JAMES R. MEIMAN
Page 39 and 40:
30 TED C. SHENG and JAMES R. MElMAd
Page 41 and 42:
32 TED C. SHENG and JAMES R. MElMAN
Page 43 and 44:
34 HANS HURNl In such systems any c
Page 45 and 46:
36 HANS HURNl Peru, and many other
Page 47 and 48:
38 HANS HURNl Knowledge of place of
Page 49 and 50:
40 HANS HURNl - - w - 3 m VI m S e
Page 51 and 52:
42 HANS HURNl Figure 5. Microbasins
Page 53 and 54:
44 HANS HURNl Abstracts X, In~crnat
Page 55 and 56:
46 R. LAL lcni more precisely. It i
Page 57 and 58:
48 R. LAL Erosion procossrs. it is
Page 59 and 60:
I A. LAL of land that were once bio
Page 61 and 62:
52 R. LAL having similar interests
Page 63 and 64:
Food and Agriculture Organization a
Page 65 and 66:
56 D. W. SANDERS vation standpoint.
Page 67 and 68:
58 D. W. SANDERS In practice. this
Page 69 and 70:
60 D. W. SANDERS ing simple gully c
Page 71 and 72:
62 D. W. SANDERS cct approaches hnv
Page 73 and 74:
64 RAYMOND E. MEYER in an agricultu
Page 75 and 76:
66 RAYMOND E. MEYER way? Is anyone
Page 77 and 78:
68 RAYMOND E. MEYER preferred solut
Page 79 and 80:
International activities of the Soi
Page 81 and 82:
72 JERRY HAMMOND tance to foreign c
Page 83 and 84:
74 JERRY HAMMOND sent professional
Page 85 and 86:
Sustainable agricultural developmen
Page 87 and 88:
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMEN
Page 89 and 90:
z SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPM
Page 91 and 92:
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMEN
Page 93 and 94: SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMEN
Page 95 and 96: 1 SLJSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOP
Page 97 and 98: - taining aid maintaining conservat
Page 99 and 100: SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMEN
Page 101 and 102: Assessirig economic benefits of soi
Page 103 and 104: Table 1. Annual land and labor ~rod
Page 105 and 106: ASSESSING ECONOMIC BENEFITS 97 BEFO
Page 107 and 108: ASSESSING ECONOMIC BENEFITS 99 BEFO
Page 109 and 110: ASSESSING ECONOMIC BENEFITS 10 1 -
Page 111 and 112: ASSESSING ECONOMIC BENEFITS 103 tar
Page 113 and 114: ASSESSING ECONOMIC BENEFITS 105 b D
Page 115 and 116: Institutional constraints soil cons
Page 117 and 118: INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS TO SOIL C
Page 119 and 120: that human beings are rational and
Page 121 and 122: developed societies to less develop
Page 123 and 124: A N D P R A C T I C E S P R O J E C
Page 125 and 126: 118 N. W. HUDSON not to extrapo!ate
Page 127 and 128: 120 N. W. HUDSON the focus on semia
Page 129 and 130: 122 N. W. HUDSON e:eJ Bench Terrace
Page 131 and 132: 124 N. W. HUDSON a grass tha: can b
Page 133 and 134: 1 126 N. W. HUDSON Even if these de
Page 135 and 136: 128 N. W. HUDSON it to try to elini
Page 137 and 138: 130 ERIC ROOSE from individual farm
Page 139 and 140: 132 ERIC ROOSE grcssivc terracing w
Page 141 and 142: 134 ERIC ROOSE Groupcment Europecn
Page 143: 136 ERIC ROOSE development of crops
Page 147 and 148: Conservation of cr
Page 149 and 150: 142 DONALD B. THOMAS Pererztrinl cr
Page 151 and 152: 144 DONALD 8. THOMAS of teff (Eragr
Page 153 and 154: 3 DONALD B. THOMAS ter content, fre
Page 155 and 156: 148 DONALD 6. THOMAS Experimenz:iI
Page 157 and 158: A review of watershed development p
Page 159 and 160: 152 8. C. JOHN until another is in~
Page 161 and 162: 154 B. C. JOHN required. In Korea,
Page 163 and 164: 156 6. C. JOHN trated in seven subw
Page 165 and 166: l!j8 B. C. JOHN tifying the full-ti
Page 167 and 168: Of'thc bur prc!jccts, Ethiopia had
Page 169 and 170: B. C. JOHN mental cffect on iiny co
Page 171 and 172: 164 B. C. JOHN are available or can
Page 173 and 174: Demonstration and extension of soil
Page 175 and 176: 168 JEROME E. ARLEDGE arc always in
Page 177 and 178: 170 JEROME E. ARLEDGE not ncccl the
Page 179 and 180: Soil taxonomy and stees lands Thoma
Page 181 and 182: 174 TI-IOMAS E. CALHOUN ET Al.. irr
Page 183 and 184: 176 THOMAS E. CALHOUN ET AL. lands
Page 185 and 186: ' '9 LYNDEN S. WILLIAMS and BOB J.
Page 187 and 188: out of the conservation office to a
Page 189 and 190: 182 LYNDEN S. WILLIAMS and BOB J. W
Page 191 and 192: 184 LYNDEN S. WILLIAMS and BOB J. W
Page 193 and 194: 18t LYNDEN S. WILLIAMS and BOB J. W
Page 195 and 196:
Elephant grass for soil erosion con
Page 197 and 198:
190 GRANT W. THOMAS visibility to c
Page 199 and 200:
192 GRANT W. THOMAS siderably lower
Page 201 and 202:
C A S E S T U D I E S A N D C O U N
Page 203 and 204:
198 CARL G. WENNER for soil conserv
Page 205 and 206:
200 CARL G. WENNER yields arc frequ
Page 207 and 208:
TO2 CARL G. WENNER Figure 6. Terrac
Page 209 and 210:
204 CARL G. WENNER ing traditions.
Page 211 and 212:
206 CARL G. WENNEH prograrii of fie
Page 213 and 214:
208 TED C. SHENG caused a dilemma f
Page 215 and 216:
Table 1. Specifications and applica
Page 217 and 218:
Table 2. Maior tvues of protected w
Page 219 and 220:
214 T. C. SHENG 1 produced on the p
Page 221 and 222:
216 M. G. DOUGLAS (such as I;~nd. l
Page 223 and 224:
218 M. G. DOUGLAS green manures, an
Page 225 and 226:
220 M. G. DOUGLAS marker ridges, in
Page 227 and 228:
apidly, prvduce protein rich leaves
Page 229 and 230:
224 M. G. DOUGLAS fruit trees plant
Page 231 and 232:
226 M. G. DOUGLAS b The social, pol
Page 233 and 234:
The Eppalock catchment project: A s
Page 235 and 236:
230 D. W. SANDERS to build a feelin
Page 237 and 238:
232 D. W. SANDERS quarters. Staff r
Page 239 and 240:
234 MIEN-CHUN LlAO ET AL. Bccausc o
Page 241 and 242:
236 v \ A0 ET AL. a broad, V-shaped
Page 243 and 244:
238 MIEN-CHUN LlAO ET AL. Bahiagrii
Page 245 and 246:
240 MIEN-CHUN LlAO ET AL. Figure 6.
Page 247 and 248:
Soill conservation in Peru Jeffrey
Page 249 and 250:
244 JEFFREY VONK rnation and educat
Page 251 and 252:
246 JEFFREY VONK l'liird, the lest-
Page 253 and 254:
,248 DAVl NATHAN BENVENUTI this obl
Page 255 and 256:
250 DAVl NATHAN BENVENUTI that thes
Page 257 and 258:
252 DAVl NATHAN BENVENUTI 8 percent
Page 259 and 260:
28 Watershed management in Java's u
Page 261 and 262:
256 ACHMAD M. FAG1 and CYNTHIA MACK
Page 263 and 264:
258 Act-IMAD M. FAG1 and CYNTHIA MA
Page 265 and 266:
260 ACHMAD M. FAG1 and CYNTHIA MACI
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
266 FREDERICK CHARLES TRACY ing sig
Page 273 and 274:
268 FREDERICK CHARLES TRACY The cha
Page 275 and 276:
270 RAFAEL A. VELOZ and TERRY J. LO
Page 277 and 278:
272 L. DARRELL I'IOR'TON the IBM pe
Page 279 and 280:
Sail and water conservation on stee
Page 281 and 282:
SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION ON STEE
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Jerome E. Arledge Director (retired
Page 289 and 290:
CONTRIBUTORS 285 James R. Meini~tn
Page 291 and 292:
Absorption terraces, 120 Acacia tre
Page 293 and 294:
INDEX col1scrv;ltion juslific;~tion
Page 295 and 296:
- INDEX Indonesia crop residue use
Page 297 and 298:
Peruvian crop yields. 2541 pineappl
Page 299 and 300:
INDEX Sustainability, soil conscrva
show all

Conservation farming on steep lands - USAid

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?